Hayes & Harlington

2015 Result:
Conservative: 11143 (24.7%)
Labour: 26843 (59.6%)
Lib Dem: 888 (2%)
Green: 794 (1.8%)
UKIP: 5388 (12%)
MAJORITY: 15700 (34.8%)

Category: Very safe Labour seat

Geography: Greater London. Part of the Hillingdon council area.

Main population centres: Harlington, West Drayton, Hayes, Yeading.

Profile: A West London seat covering Heathrow airport, which is both the major source of employment and a major political issue, due to the threatened building of a third runway to the north of the existing airport in the area of Sipson and Harmondsworth (the site of the detention centre used for asylum seekers detained pending deportation from Heathrow). This is historically an industrial residential area, housing for those working on the railways and Grand Union canal and in the light industries that grew up in the 1920s and 30s, aviation and broadcasting. A majority of the population is from ethnic minorities and there are large Muslim and Sikh populations here.

Politics: This is normally a Labour seat - it was won by the Conservatives in 1983 after the defection of the previous Labour MP, Neville Sanderson, to the SDP and held by the Tory right-winger Terry Dicks (famously described by Tony Banks as a "pigs bladder on a stick") until 1997. Since 1997 it has returned to form as a safe Labour seat, represented by serial Labour rebel and left-wing ringleader John McDonnell.


Current MP
JOHN MCDONNELL (Labour) Born 1951, Liverpool. Educated at Great Yarmouth Grammar and Brunel University. Former trade union officer. Contested Hayes and Harlington 1992. GLC member for Hayes and Harlington 1981-1986. Deputy leader of the GLC from 1981-1985 until he felt out with Ken Livingstone due to his support for setting no rate in the face of government rate caps. First elected as MP for Hayes and Harlington in 1997. Shadow Chancellor since 2015. McDonnell was previously one of Labour`s most rebellious MPs, reliably opposing top-up fees, foundation hospitals, 90-day detention, the war in Iraq, the renewal of Trident. In 2007 he attempted to contest the Labour leadership but, despite persuading rival left wing candidate Michael Meacher to stand down in his favour, he was eventually unable to secure enough nominations to appear on the ballot paper. Upon the surprise election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader McDonnell was elevated to the position of Shadow Chancellor.
Past Results
2010
Con: 12553 (29%)
Lab: 23377 (55%)
LDem: 3726 (9%)
BNP: 1520 (4%)
Oth: 1461 (3%)
MAJ: 10824 (25%)
2005*
Con: 8162 (25%)
Lab: 19009 (59%)
LDem: 3174 (10%)
BNP: 830 (3%)
Oth: 1214 (4%)
MAJ: 10847 (33%)
2001
Con: 7813 (24%)
Lab: 21279 (66%)
LDem: 1958 (6%)
BNP: 705 (2%)
Oth: 648 (2%)
MAJ: 13466 (42%)
1997
Con: 11167 (27%)
Lab: 25458 (62%)
LDem: 3049 (7%)
Oth: 639 (2%)
MAJ: 14291 (35%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005

Demographics
2015 Candidates
PEARL LEWIS (Conservative)
JOHN MCDONNELL (Labour) See above.
SATNAM KAUR KHALSA (Liberal Democrat) Contested Hayes and Harlington 2010.
CLIFF DIXON (UKIP) Contested Hayes and Harlington 2010 for English Democrats.
ALICK MUNRO (Green) Doctor.
Links
Comments - 533 Responses on “Hayes & Harlington”
1 2 3 11
  1. According to the Times Guide to the House of Commons Hayes was once described by George Orwell as: “one of the most godforsaken places I have ever struck. The population seems to be entirely made up of clerks who frequent tin-roofed chapels on Sundays and for the rest bolt themselves within doors”.

  2. I hope that the Labour leadership will find a way to get Parmjit Dhanda to become the Labour candidate in 2015. John McDonnell is an embarrassment to the Labour party, and should not be re-selected. NEC need to take action where necessary.

  3. Bob

    You’re becoming an embarrassment to the Labour Party with your nonsensical comments on here.

    I forgot to add this seat will be a Labour hold in 2015. It’s a forgone conclusion.

  4. Labour had a couple of opportunities to centrally act against him in the past but they never took them for some reasons.

    As we discussed in the H&H thread of the 2010 GE guide, there must be a 3-4% split “Con in local elections, McDonnell in GE” vote looking at 2010 results when both elections were held in the same day.

  5. Yes, such an embarrassment……….
    I wouldn’t mind being embarrassing like that myself.

  6. Barnaby, please stop being rude and justify how my comments are being nonsentical – you are just making things up and trying put others down.
    I would wish for Ed Miliband to get rid of him – so much that McDonnell has done, firstly by withdrawing the whip permanently meaning he will be deselected. Parmjit Dhanda is a man born in this constituency, Indian man, very intelligent and former MP – Ed get rid of McDonnell, and bring Parmjit in. Labour would hold the seat, it would be like what happened to Bob Spink in Castle Point. Tories or McDonnell won’t win.

  7. I won’t dignify that by a reply, other than to say that to accuse me of being rude is quite nonsensical. You have endlessly indulged in personal insults since you have started using this site – for what purpose I still can’t understand.

  8. Bob

    While I would normally welcome new blood to this site, your contributions thus far have been heavy on hyperbole and ramping up of Labour’s expectations with little knowledge or understanding of the seats in question. Unless you start to ease off from making endless predictions for an election that is two years away and actually discuss things like local election results and demographic trends (the sort of information this site was intended for), I think you should take your views elsewhere as you really are adding nothing of value to this site at the moment.

  9. AKMD, do you own this site? No. I am simply looking for the polls and I will not be going elswhere. I will continue to make comments here. If you look at all my comments, then you will realise your latest comment is just utter drivel.

  10. It is clear to me that AKMD is basically Barnaby Marder in disguise.

  11. Bob reminds me a little of Arjun back from when I first came across the site, what must be an eerie seven years ago

  12. As far as I know, I have never met AKMD, but I can assure everyone that he/she is not the same person as me. I have never used a code name or anything like that on this site.

  13. Very well said AKMD

  14. Quite right, AKMD.

  15. It is actually slightly surprising that the Tory vote is still 29% here – although the swing in 2010 was very disappointing – almost nothing.
    Perhaps though that offers the Tories some hope in other seats over the years.

    I was in the Heathrow Villages ward on Tuesday, in Cranford Park.

  16. This ten minute clip features a lot of personalities from the 1983 election, such as Neville Sandelson, Roland Moyle, Christopher Price, Russell Kerr and George Cunningham:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJySoYFoTe8&amp

  17. I was surprised, given that he publicly supported the Tories at one point, to read that Neville Sandelson rejoined the Labour Party before his death. Evidently Tony Blair was right-wing enough for him.

  18. Alot of old SDPers ended up as Tory supporters – Finkelstein, Streeter, Grayling

    I don’t really see the correlation

  19. and Stephen O’Brien too.

  20. Also Anna Soubry.

    It seems to me that it was generational, with most of the SDPers ending up in the Tories being younger activists who had joined the SDP as students.

    Many older members went back to Labour and some ended up being very influential players within New Labour – Roger Liddle and Polly Toynbee being good examples and there are others too.

    Much of the even older generation – certainly Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams – would have certainly moved back to Labour in the mid 1990s had they not attained such a seniority that they felt they owed their loyalty to the Lib Dems.

  21. The only name whicj really stabds out is Grayling – as he has a reputation as a right-winger – although his disgusting refusal to reverse the parole boards decision to release child killer Tracey Connelly shows that he’s not as tough on serious crime as he would have the public believe, believing five years to be an adequate sentence for infanticide

  22. I have to say, even as a person who would doubtless be described as a hand-wringing do-gooder by some, that that decision caused me at the very least to raise my eyebrows. The seriousness of that offence surely merited a much longer term.

  23. (I do a helluva lot of good, but never wring my hands.)

  24. Ah, I see another MP Bob has bad blood towards.

  25. I agree with Tim and Barnaby.

    Torturing an innocent, defenceless baby to death and robbing him of the whole life which lay ahead of him is surely one of the very worst crimes imaginable.

    I’m speechless that she didn’t get life.

    To be honest I’ve always thought that Grayling was a slimy wanker and this confirms it. At least Ken Clarke was honest enough to say what he really believed, rather than pretending to be some kind of hard man without walking the walk.

  26. Wasn’t she sentenced indefinitely to at least 5 years? This was in 2009, so she’s only served 4 years. The worst part was that her conviction was for “causing or allowing death”, as opposed to murder.

    Very disgusted by the Parole Board’s decision.

  27. Neil – she was given five years. She had already served two years before sentencing, so has actually served six (she was turned down at her first parole hearing last year)

    As far as I can tell Grayling has no powers at all to overrule a parole board decision to release (if the parole board recommend moving someone to open conditions it’s a recommendation to the SoS, if they decide to release, I think their decision is absolute. If can be challenged through judicial review, but only over an error in process, like not giving proper reasons).

    Furthermore, she was given an indefinite sentence for reasons of public protection, so the parole board could only consider if she was a risk to the public. How foul her crime was could not legally be part of their decision, as she’s already served the five years that formed the punitive part of her sentence.

    Basically your beef should be with the judge who sentenced her, but even there, the Attorney General at the time, Baroness Scotland, did use her powers to review the case and consider whether the sentence was unduly lenient. She decided not to send it to the court of appeal because the judge’s ruling was sound, has considered the seriousness of the case, and she felt there was no possibility of the Court of Appeal upholding the appeal and imposing a longer sentence.

  28. At least she hasn’t been granted anonymity – at our expense of course – which in all likelihood means that – if the tabloid press keep up their – in this case commemdable – work of not lketting people to forget about it – her life will become a living hell

    When justice fails defenceless babies murdered by the most vile of the vile, people can’t be condemned for wantinh vigiante justice, and i sincerely hope the rest of her life is as miserable as she made her sons

    You do wonder how the judge who sentenced her, the parole board who freed and grayling who hasn;t even had the decency to make a public statement on one of the mostr reviled crimes in the history of UK, have come to their conclusions and it’s just more evidence that those in positions of authority life in a completely different world to the rest of us

  29. “The only name whicj really stabds out is Grayling – as he has a reputation as a right-winger – although his disgusting refusal to reverse the parole boards decision to release child killer Tracey Connelly shows that he’s not as tough on serious crime as he would have the public believe, believing five years to be an adequate sentence for infanticide”

    He hasn’t reversed it? I was very much expecting him to do so.

  30. Actually, given what’s going on at the moment, it wouldn’t be a bad time for the tabloid press – namely The Sun – to show that they can be a force for the good – as they iften do in such cases

    Naming and shaming the members of the parole board who decided this monster poses no threat to society might be a good start

  31. ‘He hasn’t reversed it? I was very much expecting him to do so’

    No he released a kurt statement saying the parole board’s decision is final – and left it at that

    I think Hemelig’s assessment of Grayling is spot on – he’s a disgrace

  32. IMO all those found guilty in the case should have received whole life tariffs and considered themselves fortunate to live in a country where more drastic punishments aren’t available.

  33. Tracey Connelly is a Londoner and will sadly therefore find it quite easy to live anonymously, much more so than elsewhere in the country where communities are more close knit. Most Londoners don’t know their neighbours, and many people are foreign citizens who don’t follow the news.

  34. ‘IMO all those found guilty in the case should have received whole life tariffs and considered themselves fortunate to live in a country where more drastic punishments aren’t available.’

    I totally agree – as do many people who are waaay to the left of me on crime

    Yet the only petrson who coiuld have avctually done it, the judge, thought five years appropriate – underlining my point about out of tpuch threse people are

    The judge should be named, shamed and sacked – as Sharon Shoesmith originally was, before an equally out of touch tribunal thought otherwise

  35. Maybe we should elect the judges as well as the police commissioners

  36. I thought the judge’s name was on the sentencing remarks, but it isn’t. Anyway, it was His Honour Judge Stephen Kramer QC, and as I mentioned, the Attorney General at the time already reviewed the case and essentially upheld his sentencing decision.

    Besides, the longest determinate sentence the judge could have imposed was 14 years (which would have meant being eligible for parole after 7), so realistically it would be difficult to have sustained a tariff of above 7 years.

    (That is, sustained it in law at appeal – I’m certain a longer sentence would have had extremely wide public support, but that’s not how the law works!)

    To bring things back to psephological matters, Judge Kramer was the Liberal candidate in Twickenham in both the elections of 1974.

  37. Is Judge Kramer related to Susan Kramer ex MP?

  38. Doubt it, Kramer is her married name, and her husband was an American banker.

  39. I’m in favour of bringing back capital punishment so naturally I detest the judge, Grayling and the whole stupid legal system in this country which allows people to commit a crime like this, and then treats the criminal like the victim.

  40. For all we know Judge Kramer might support the death penalty*, but that doesn’t mean he could have handed it down. That’s my point, the judge was just applying the law as it stood, no point blaming him. For all we know he might have personally wanted to have the woman flayed alive and nailed to a wall, but his job is to apply the law fairly and justly, however loathsome the person before him.

    (*given he stood for the Liberals I doubt it, but who knows)

  41. None of you know any of the details or why this decision was reached.
    Its very much easier to make populist tabloidesque soundings than actually look carefully at the case and why the decisions were reached,
    It appears that the partner was the instigator and she weak, malleable, and not really capable of the role she found herself in. As we don’t sterilise the ‘unsuitable’, such things may happen again.

    Generally I think the judges and the parole board are preferable to the baying mob, which is why any involvement of victims, relatives etc in sentencing is not a good idea

  42. Mike – we don’t know why the parole board reached their decision, but we do know why the judge came to his decision, because the sentencing remarks are there for us to read!

    First thing anyone should do before opening their mouths on things like this is to go and read the judge’s sentencing remarks (which these days judiciary.gov.uk are very good at putting up quickly) and see how the judge justified their decision.

  43. I think the judge was saying they were convicted of neglect,
    which however appalling,
    is
    not murder or manslaughter – but
    that to me is flawed.
    Neglect on that scale is murder.

  44. Maybe not in the law – I need to rephrase that carefully.
    but in my opinion, it should be classed as murder
    because you know where it is leading.

  45. The difference between murder and “causing or allowing the death of a child” isn’t one of intent, it’s a very particular charge.

    It stems from cases like R v Lane & Lane in the 1980s when the evidence suggests a child’s death has been caused by the parents… but there is no evidence to prove *which* parent did it, or that they were acting as part of a conspiracy. In the past people essentially got away with murder because while it could be proven one of them had killed the child, there wasn’t evidence that either of them individually had done it.

    “Causing or Allowing the death of a child” was introduced in 2004 to get round that issue, letting two or more people responsible for looking after a child or vulnerable adult who has been killed be charged with their death, even if it’s impossible to prove exactly which one struck the killer blow

  46. Thanks for that clarification Anthony – although it then follows
    that the 2004 Act has failed – and failed badly – in this case
    if I’m understanding it.

  47. I think its about time the law was changed for terrible cases like this. The liberalisation of the law in the UK is awful. The law should be written so proper punishments are given out which suit the crime. The average Joe on the street do not care about the specifics of the law, nor are they going to read up about the judges remarks on the internet. Most people who have read or heard about the case would have expected a proper sentence which suited the crime, whether that be 20 years, 30 years, life (eg never released) etc

    Whilst this judge may have acted within the remits of the law, many judges are far too lenient when they have no reason to do so.

  48. I repeat, Tim, that much of this is directed towards the wrong target. It’s the lawmakers more than anyone else who have made this baleful situation possible, far more than any judge.

  49. Guess LB Bernard would be happy to have seen the Birmingham six & Guildford four put to death by the state along with all the other miscarriages of justice that have been exposed over the years.

    Electing judges is a horrible idea. So is electing police commissioners. Look at the US justice system. Its a ghastly system full of special interests, miscarriages of justice and sensationalism.

    Changing the law based on specific cases is another ill considered and knee jerk reaction. You cannot legislate for human cruelty. Baby P was a horrible case but so was Daniel Pelka, Victoria Climbie and others.

  50. Tim Jones you cannot abhor vigilantism but at the same time give succor to vigilantes by suggesting that public know what real ‘justice’ is. It is not necessarily a consequence of the system it could be due to our innate human desire for revenge and eye for an eye and all that especially in child cases. As Steven Pinker shows our societies are less violent and cruel than at any other time in human history.

    Opinions on what justice is are like heads. Everyone has one. You either have the rule of law as objective as you can get or you don’t and as they say hard cases make bad law.

1 2 3 11
Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)