Manchester Central

2015 Result:
Conservative: 6133 (13.5%)
Labour: 27772 (61.3%)
Lib Dem: 1867 (4.1%)
Green: 3838 (8.5%)
UKIP: 5033 (11.1%)
TUSC: 270 (0.6%)
Others: 418 (0.9%)
MAJORITY: 21639 (47.7%)

Category: Ultra-safe Labour seat

Geography: North West, Greater Manchester. Part of the Manchester council area.

Main population centres: Moss Side, Hulme, Ancoats, Newton Heath.

Profile: The rapidly redeveloping and growing centre of Manchester. This contains the thriving City Centre itself, but also some of the blighted and troubled inner-city housing around it. These areas were once infamous for poverty and drug violence, but in recent years have seen substantial redevelopment and the beginnings of gentrification. Levels of owner-occupation remain low, with most of the residents living in private rented or social housing. The seat contains Manchester University and has a substantial student population, as well as Manchester`s Chinatown. The seat has the highest proportion of people with a Chinese ethnic background of any in the country.

Politics: A safe Labour seat with one of the largest electorates in the country. A large electorate does not, however, necessarily equate to lots of votes and the 2012 by-election had a turnout of only 18.2%, a record low.

By-Election: There was a by-election in this seat in LAB HOLD. For full details see here.


Current MP
LUCY POWELL (Labour) Born 1974, Manchester. Educated at Oxford University. Former Chief of Staff to Ed Miliband. Director of Britain in Europe from 2004-5. Contested Manchester Withington 2010. First elected as MP for Manchester Central in 2012 by-election. Shadow cabinet office minister 2014-2015. Shadow Education Secretary since 2015.
Past Results
2010
Con: 4704 (12%)
Lab: 21059 (53%)
LDem: 10620 (27%)
BNP: 1636 (4%)
Oth: 1908 (5%)
MAJ: 10439 (26%)
2005*
Con: 2504 (9%)
Lab: 16993 (58%)
LDem: 7217 (25%)
GRN: 1292 (4%)
Oth: 1258 (4%)
MAJ: 9776 (33%)
2001
Con: 2328 (9%)
Lab: 17812 (69%)
LDem: 4070 (16%)
GRN: 1018 (4%)
Oth: 700 (3%)
MAJ: 13742 (53%)
1997
Con: 3964 (12%)
Lab: 23803 (71%)
LDem: 4121 (12%)
Oth: 907 (3%)
MAJ: 19682 (59%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005, name changed from Manchester, Central

Demographics
2015 Candidates
XINGANG WANG (Conservative) Born China. Educated at Imperial College. Accountant.
LUCY POWELL (Labour) See above.
JOHN REID (Liberal Democrat)
MYLES POWER (UKIP) Born 1974, Singapore. Solicitor.
KIERAN TURNER-DAVE (Green) Educated at Manchester University.
JOHN PAUL DAVIES (Communist League)
LOZ KAYE (Pirate) Composer, musician and teacher. Contested Oldham East and Saddleworth 2011 by-election, Manchester Central 2012 by-election.
ALEX DAVIDSON (TUSC)
Links
Comments - 238 Responses on “Manchester Central”
  1. Rivers is right – preventative measures are the best option. This is why such people need encouragement to seek help. Refusing to discuss the issue only makes child abuse more likely to occur.

  2. Thank heaven the mindset of naive arrogant young gays doesn’t (yet) dominate the public arena like it dominates these pages.

  3. What an insightful contribution – I have definitely not wasted my time at all.

  4. @rivers

    ”This issue is going to become more pertinent in the future cos a growing number of people acknowledge there will always be paedophiles but with the advancement of technology it might be possible to stop them harming REAL children by providing them with (for example) computer generated child pornography.”

    The major issue with that is it would likely not be a preventative measure at all but would likely make the problem worse as it would act as a kind of gateway drug and push many more paedophiles to actually abuse children. It’s the same with people who have addictive personalities towards things like drugs i.e. if you start them off on the ‘soft stuff’ they’ll more than likely end up on heroin. It’s the same with this you give paedophiles a ‘robotic’ child (I can’t believe we are seriously discussing this btw) many more will go out and find the real thing.

    ”No it isn’t an excuse but what it demonstrates is that no amount of deterrents are going to stop them”

    There may be some people for which that is true but for others a large prison sentence probably does prevent them from abusing children.

    Also I would note that the ‘chemical castration’ that H.Hemmelig refers to is much less severe than it sounds and nothing like the type of chemical castration the state used on gay men in the 1950s. This form of chemical castration is reversible (i.e the effects stop if the person stops taking the medication) and merely acts as a suppressant of sexual desires. If people are paedophiles but don’t ‘want’ to abuse children this is an entirely sensible solution which most people would support.

    @Cheesus

    ”paedophiles can’t stop being paedophiles – that’s just how they’re wired.”

    This is not my field of expertise but I think in many cases it can be treated. Sometimes the sexual attraction to children can be traced back to a specific traumatic event in their own childhood i.e. getting sexually abused themselves. If you can identify the cause I think therapy can be quite sucessful.

    On the other hand there are people with naturally psychopathic personality types in many cases these paedophiles will kill the child should they be given the chance to abuse. Here I would agree with H.Hemmelig, there is no other option other than to lock these people up (the ‘chemical castration’ wouldn’t work as they wouldn’t take the medication) whether in a prison or a mental hospital because they pose a serious risk to the most vulnerable in society.

    Something huge does need to be done though as the child abuse statistics in this country are absolutely shocking: apparently it’s as bad a 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 8 boys will be abused by the age of 16.

  5. “the mindset of naive arrogant young gays”

    Wow. I’m surprised to see that comment on here, even more surprised to see who it came from, and I regret that anyone should post it.

  6. I dont know if Peppermintea went to the same school as me but so far since I left 3 teachers have been arrested for child pornography

  7. Ironically, the logic of Cheesus’ belief – that they can’t help it and can never be cured – would result in even more severe punishments such as life or capital punishment, as even castration wouldn’t prevent it and they’d just keep kidnapping and touching etc.

    Matt W – that’s hardly a surprise.

    In the past 2 years alone, 228 teachers, 98 cllrs, 89 priests and 13 social workers have been convicted of CSE in England & Wales. 154 await trial as at July 2017.

  8. Incidentally, one of Kilroy’s latest books, Abduction – which he says is based on fact – details obese lesbian social workers abducting children, gay men having sex in public and a lot of other ‘nonsense’ he came across on the Left in his time in politics.

    I found his denial that he’s tanned to be the most outrageous claim in the Mail and Guardian interviews he gave:

    http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/sep/23/robert-kilroy-silk-returns-interview

  9. I’m old enough to remember when Robert Kilroy-Silk was a highly-respected, apparently left-of-centre Labour MP who specialised in campaigning on human rights issues, and was thought to have a great future.
    At that time the idea that he would make the political journey he eventually made would have seemed extremely far-fetched. It all started when he got a column on the Times, resigning from Parliament in order to concentrate on that. The MP who was elected in the by-election, George Howarth, is still there 31 years later.

  10. It’s not about curing paedophilia because that will never happen, but about managing it. I suspect there are a lot of people who go through life with such thoughts but never act on them. I think they need help to cope with their thoughts because I can imagine many of them find it stressful and upsetting.

  11. Cheesus
    “I suspect there are a lot of people who go through life with such thoughts but never act on them. I think they need help to cope with their thoughts because I can imagine many of them find it stressful and upsetting”

    Your 100% correct and I’d suggest to others to look such things up, paedophilia is their innate sexual orientation which (the enlightened amongst us know) is no more a choice than what your skin colour is. Now to reemphasise that doesn’t make it acceptable in the slightest and a great many of them know this so they live their life hating themselves, many suffer mental breakdowns, self harm and commit suicide because of the thoughts that they have thus for those that actively seek help (and haven’t yet broken the law) they should receive help to manage otherwise its just a matter of time before they crack and they end up harming themselves or others.

  12. Pepps
    “The major issue with that is it would likely not be a preventative measure at all but would likely make the problem worse”
    Perhaps all I advocate is research on the issue but at present the media sensationalism from the usual suspects would be ridiculous “POLICE FUND SICK CHILD PORN DISTRIBUTION” and before you know it the whole project has been abandoned and there would be a very high chance everyone involved would have their careers ruined thus we repeat what we are doing which as you correctly point out is accomplishing squat all in terms of protecting children, indeed things are arguably getting worse.

    Also for the record I don’t buy the “gateway drug” argument at all, there is literally no evidence for it and never has been.

  13. Barnaby – although to be fair to Kilroy, in his very first para in that interview he points out that he still holds all of the liberal positions that the Guardian loves and which they praised him for as a young new MP.

    He simply makes the point that they have shifted – not him, in that he doesn’t believe men have the right to have sex in public and to point this out is deemed homophobic. His infamous para re Arabs (as his daughter points out) is now agreed with by most people, Party Leaders and Heads of State.

    But he always hated the far Left, so I’m not at all surprised that he chooses to rehash some of the municipal madness he witnessed in Merseyside during his time here. As the recent BBC4 docu showed, the problem for the far Left is that they thought rights applied to any minority group – which is why they allowed PIE into the precursor of Liberty.

    As Frank Field noted, “They were sick people in the Party and they used liberation struggle to weed their way in, when of course most socialist voters in the ’70s would have gladly strung pederasts up.”

  14. I tend to agree with Rivers10 re predisposition; but, of course the problem with that stance, is that the gay rights’ movement over the past 40 years has sought to deny that pederasts are any part of the gay community. Contrary to fact ie in Lpool alone the managers of 5 gay clubs, gay youth orgs have all been charged with assaulting minors and/or the possession of child porn (as well as all of the teachers, priests and so on who clearly choose professions where they’ll be in daily contact with minors).

    Unlike the Woolfenden review which listed gay men into 3 groups: effeminate; pederasts and normal gay men (the categories were in fact provided in evidence by gay man Peter Wildeblood who witnessed all 3 groups).

    Where Rvers10 is absolutely wrong is his claim re gateway drug, that “there is literally no evidence and never has been” There simply is. In fact over 200 experts when Howard was Home Sec – although probably before Rivers10 was born.

    In fact to claim there is literally no evidence for anything is almost always wrong, by definition.

    I’m all for pardoning historic crimes if they were based on discriminatory law ie a 26-year-old man was charged but would not have been had his 18yo partner been female.

    But what I’m not in favour of (and thankfully neither is the Home Office), is the Tatchell stance of saying all gross indecency charges in that period were discriminatory. They simply were not. A man and a woman having sex in public would have been charged also (800 were) – so the fact that 12,000 gay men were was not discriminatory. Unless you’re stating that we should accept outdoor sex because its part of the gay community lifestyle?

    That, of course, is the illogical of gay rights. Stonewall’s claim was such behaviour was due to the fact that gay men could not marry. Now they can what is the stance – that promiscuity is a right because it’s more prevalent than amongst others?

  15. “paedophilia is their innate sexual orientation which (the enlightened amongst us know) is no more a choice than what your skin colour is.”

    What jaw-dropping arrogance to claim that you as a childless 20something are so much more enlightened on this matter than those who are actually parents and double your age.

    Have you not considered the possibility that it is you who is somewhat unenlightened at the moment, something which will naturally change when your own kids come along. Only then will you appreciate the nature of the bond between parent and child, and the reason why the so-called Daily Mail approach to paedophiles predominates and always will despite the best efforts of people like yourself to ridicule it. The vast majority of gay people don’t reproduce and will therefore always be pre-disposed to the same somewhat clinical and unemotional view of this which will similarly always grate with the majority of society who have their own children and grandchildren.

  16. “Stonewall’s claim was such behaviour was due to the fact that gay men could not marry. Now they can what is the stance – that promiscuity is a right because it’s more prevalent than amongst others?”

    An excellent point. A common defence for gay paedophiles in the past was the repression/disgrace they were subjected to, and the unwillingness of society to enable them to form normal loving relationships. That defence is now dead. The gay community needs to ruthlessly root out the seediness which has always accompanied sections of it, not least because it tars the vast majority of gay people with the same brush.

  17. So, Hemmy… what you’re saying is that he’s letting reason dominate over emotion – and you mean that as a criticism? Quite a charge coming from a Tory!

    As regards your own opinions on the subject, I recommend watching the Brass Eye episode about paedophilia (if you haven’t already) – if that doesn’t highlight how hysterically you’re behaving, nothing will.

  18. ‘Have you not considered the possibility that it is you who is somewhat unenlightened at the moment, something which will naturally change when your own kids come along’

    Nice to see you have returned – where have you been hiding? Actually, and as I’ve already mentioned already, the fact that you have children probably means you are unable to approach the issue objectively – you even mention that gays are (supposedly) predisposed to approaching this in a clinical and unemotional way. The right usually pride themselves on being rational, not allowing emotion to influence their opinions or decisions – that is supposedly the domain of idealistic lefties. I guess that’s a load of rubbish as well, as you are proving beyond all reasonable doubt.

    Society is evidently not in a position of being able to approach this issue without hysteria, and I completely understand that, but I’m sure the day will come when that will no longer be the case. Of course, nasty little right-wingers will try to portray gay people as being sympathetic to child abusers like they did back in the 1980s.

  19. Let’s not kid ourselves, Cheesus, the right and left are both prone to letting emotions pollute their decision-making. And, for that matter, so is the centre – I confess I may have overestimated Emmaunel Macron, for example, because I was just so excited to see a centrist doing well in an age of increasing polarisation.

  20. “Actually, and as I’ve already mentioned already, the fact that you have children probably means you are unable to approach the issue objectively”

    Well over 50% of people have children at some point in their lives, so by your reasoning the majority of the population are and always will be unable to approach this issue objectively.

    Happily it does mean that those such as yourself and Rivers who believe that human rights of paedophiles should be prioritised ahead of the human rights of innocent children will never prevail.

  21. Bit disappointed to see HH who I regard highly resort to accusing other contributors of prioritising pedophiles rights above children when he well knows Rivers et al are good people who dont believe anything of the such

  22. Not wishing to get involved in this rather grubby argument (for once), but it’s way over 50%. Latest stats I saw were that around 80% of British women will have had a child by their 45th birthday.

  23. This is of course reduced from say the 1950’s but is still a very significant number.

  24. ‘Bit disappointed to see HH who I regard highly resort to accusing other contributors of prioritising pedophiles rights above children when he well knows Rivers et al are good people who dont believe anything of the such’

    Yes, it is pretty clear to me that he has no interest in having a serious discussion and is only interested in trying to smear people. For someone who has children this is very disturbing, and I have no interest in pathetic tit-for-tat.

  25. The guy who argues that the police should provide paedophiles with HD 3D child p0rnography is being painted as the voice.of reason here.

    Just think about that

  26. Okay, clearly that is wrong. On an instinctive level it makes me feel a little sick. On a practical level, it gives the wrong incentive – get yourself on the register and they give you legal child porn! It rewards immoral behaviour, and is thus itself an immoral plan.

    Rehabilitation is important, but this wouldn’t work as rehabilitation.

  27. Even if Rivers10 now realises that he shouldn’t have done so, the only logic of his suggestion is that it’s a usual or acceptable trait which therefore must be dealt with by society in the form of public expenditure.

    I suggest he watches the very informative docu on Broadmoor that was on Ch5 tonight.

    In fact the expert Prof who treated these ‘patients’ says we should in fact use chemical castration a lot more than the dozen or so we do at the moment.*

    It also catalogued the cases of the regime under liberal governors who released a poisoner in the 1970s – who guess what, went on to poison 70 people and murder two other colleagues and a child murderer who escaped and committed another child murder within hours!

    * incidentally, I think it’s the word castration that means even people in favour of tough sentencing shy away from; but, in fact, today all it means is high doses of testosterone inhibitors – which are in fact also used by the NHS to treat prostate cancer in older men and by private medics for baldness.

    To the person who said ‘we’ as a Country castrated gay men as a punishment in the 1950s – that’s simply false. Aversion therapy was an awful treatment on the NHS, but no gay man was ever castrated as a sentence. In fact that was unlawful (with the exception of the criminally insane). But the oft-quoted Turing example is probably why this confusion arises. Apparently men convicted of gross indecency were able to avoid a custodial term by agreeing to other options, one of which was a course of drugs to inhibit libido, ie the effective equivalent of chemical castration in that it meant men couldn’t ‘perform.’

  28. “On an instinctive level it makes me feel a little sicI’ll
    Who’s being emotional Now 😛 ?

    No need to be though. Cool, clear reason is all that’s needed. In an age where se xual content is so widely available online , people find themselves needing to turn to the ever more extreme for gratification , with many partners pressurised to love some of these out in real life.
    Extrapolating that to those who have such desires for children is therefore really stupid.

  29. Allow me to point readers to these three recent comments from Cheesus, aimed in my direction-

    “I am not, and thus am able to approach such issues with a level head rather than rambling on about castration like some sort of nutcase.”

    “Of course, nasty little right-wingers will try to portray gay people as being sympathetic to child abusers like they did back in the 1980s.”

    “Yes, it is pretty clear to me that he has no interest in having a serious discussion and is only interested in trying to smear people.”

    ie it’s perfectly OK for him to call me a nutcase and a nasty little right winger but somehow it is me who is “trying to smear people”.

    And of course claiming that homophobia is all the fault of nasty right-wingers is in itself a smear, as highlighted in this charming little story from as recently as yesterday

    https://order-order.com/2017/07/31/labour-councillor-invokes-wrath-god-gay-row/

    One reason certain people and religions think it’s OK to throw gay people off tall buildings is the tolerance a minority of gay people show towards paedophilia, highlighted extremely well on these pages. You guys need to wise up or it will be you hurtling off Blackpool Tower in a decade or two.

  30. “Robberbutton”
    “The guy who argues that the police should provide paedophiles with HD 3D child p0rnography is being painted as the voice of reason here”

    Seriously quote back to me exactly when I mentioned the words “HD” or “3D”? You’ll find those words never once appeared, also you omitted the key point COMPUTER GENERATED aka no actual children involved. What you have done is engaged in the classic tabloid-esque sensationalism I mentioned, that I’m somehow in favour of providing paedophiles with a bespoke product just for the hell of it.

    I know this is probably too much to ask some people here but re-read my posts, I didn’t even say this was a good idea I just said more research needs to be performed cos the current approach is clearly failing

  31. HH
    Your better than your last few posts, the assumption that just cos I’m not a parent I have no empathy towards children is plain daft. My sister had her first child a little over a year ago and once her maternity leave ran out and she had to return to work I became the primary babysitter while I was unemployed after leaving uni and feel I’ve developed quite the bond with the little twerp, I confess it probably doesn’t match up to the bond between parent and child but I know that my primary aim here is protecting children not engaging in pointless virtue signalling.

    Its the exact reason why I’m against a punitive penal system in general, its why I feel the war on drugs has failed, its why I don’t believe in the death penalty etc ALL the evidence suggests it makes things worse to act all tough when a more measured response goes further towards actually protecting people. I just seek more research on this area as well where the current system is clearly failing.

    As I said earlier if you insist on maintaining the current system against any evidence that there are better alternatives then your priority is not protecting children its protecting your own sensibilities.

  32. How nice to see Robberbutton take a break from stirring his cauldron (or whatever he does) to contribute here. He’s been sorely missed.

  33. OK rivers I’ll take you at your word. You’re in favour of researching providing indecent images of children to people who derive gratification from such, provided they’re 2 dimensional and with an upper limit pixel count tbc.

    Unless you’re suggesting this is researched using lab rats your case control trials will need to provide at least some of these images to some of the paedophiles you recruit to the study

    Does that make you one of “the more enlightened among us”?

  34. Robberbutton
    “Does that make you one of “the more enlightened among us”?”

    Judging by the pedantry lacing that post and your objection to the very notion of basic preliminary research then yes it does make me the more enlightened, certainly more so than you at least no offence intended.

  35. ‘One reason certain people and religions think it’s OK to throw gay people off tall buildings is the tolerance a minority of gay people show towards paedophilia, highlighted extremely well on these pages. You guys need to wise up or it will be you hurtling off Blackpool Tower in a decade or two.’

    So, let me get this straight – I am arguing that people who are sexually attracted to children, but haven’t abused children, need some kind of mental help in order to deal with their thoughts – and this means that I am tolerant of paedophilia, and will be thrown of buildings in a decade or two for suggesting that we don’t just castrate people willy nilly.

    Whatever makes you sleep at night buddy.

  36. Anyway, that incident with the councillor in Harrow shows that homophobia isn’t restricted to the right. Of course an evangelical would be homophobic. And I’m sure many right-wingers have more in common with people like her than they’d ever care to admit, given their often staunch opposition to her ‘kind’ being allowed to move here in the first place.

  37. Rivers: the pedantry was more a commentary on your rather eccentric defence that it was OK because it isn’t 3D.

    It is reasonable to hypothesise that access to material will eventually make those desiring by it bored and more extreme forms of gratification. (based on behaviours observed in adults attracted to adults). As a result, more children could be exposed to harm.

    Using terms like “basic preliminary research” raises the question of what said research is. It ultimately will require a pilot of this suggestion and data collection to examine the number of resultant victims compared against a cohort without access of the material, from which statistical equations can be derived to provide confidence intervals to determine any significant difference between the two.
    Given that exposure to indecent images of children may make pedophiles more likely to harm children, I don’t think an ethics committee would or should grant this basic preliminary research approval.

    However as you are more enlightened than me, you may have solutions to the difficult questions my closed mind makes me ponder.

  38. Robberbutton
    See in that last post you raise a series of very legitimate concerns (many of which I have considered myself) and ultimately all this would have to be taken into account before any program was piloted, personally given the way our country is ran I’m actually kinda glad that we are clearly not going to pioneer this issue, instead another country will no doubt take the plunge before us and we can then examine the results of their pilot.

    If you had just raised these concerns rather than reverting to hyperbole and the very clear insinuation that I’m some kind of paedophile enabler I wouldn’t have had an issue, I take absolutely no offence to disagreements of opinion especially over issues I’m not 100% sure of myself, it was your frankly stupid accusations about “HD 3D porn” that dragged the whole conversation into the gutter and indeed is what drags far too many discussions about contentious issues in this country into the gutter, rather than pointing out real issues you deign to resort to petty insults, pedantry and hyperbole, this s both stupid and totally pointless.

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)