Milton Keynes North

2015 Result:
Conservative: 27244 (47.2%)
Labour: 17491 (30.3%)
Lib Dem: 3575 (6.2%)
Green: 2255 (3.9%)
UKIP: 6852 (11.9%)
TUSC: 163 (0.3%)
Independent: 112 (0.2%)
MAJORITY: 9753 (16.9%)

Category: Semi-marginal Conservative seat

Geography: South East, Buckinghamshire. Part of the Milton Keynes council area.

Main population centres: Milton Keynes, Newport Pagnell, Olney, Hanslope.

Profile: Milton Keynes is the biggest planned newtown in Britain, effectively the only "new city", the town is built on a characteristic grid of roundabouts with a central shopping and leisure district. The town is almost all built since the 1960s, and has a younger population than most of the south-east. The northern seat is the more rural, taking in the small villages to the north of the town itself.

Politics: Both of the Milton Keynes seats are Con-Lab marginals. They were created (as Milton Keynes North East and South West) in 1992, in an unusual interim Parliamentary boundary review that split the existing Milton Keynes seat into two.

Current MP
MARK LANCASTER (Conservative) Born 1970, Cambridge. Educated at Kimbolton School and Buckingham University. Former director of the family fireworks company. Huntingdonshire councillor 1995-1999. Contested Nuneaton 2001. First elected as MP for Milton Keynes North East in 2005. PPS to Andrew Mitchell 2010-2012, Government whip 2012-2015. Junior Defence minister since 2015. A Lieutenant Colonel and bomb disposal officer in the Territorial Army, he has seen active service in Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan.
Past Results
Con: 23419 (43%)
Lab: 14458 (27%)
LDem: 11894 (22%)
UKIP: 1772 (3%)
Oth: 2345 (4%)
MAJ: 8961 (17%)
Con: 19674 (39%)
Lab: 18009 (36%)
LDem: 9789 (20%)
UKIP: 1400 (3%)
Oth: 1232 (2%)
MAJ: 1665 (3%)
Con: 17932 (38%)
Lab: 19761 (42%)
LDem: 8375 (18%)
UKIP: 1026 (2%)
MAJ: 1829 (4%)
Con: 19961 (39%)
Lab: 20201 (39%)
LDem: 8907 (17%)
Oth: 675 (1%)
MAJ: 240 (0%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005, name changed from Milton Keynes North East

2015 Candidates
MARK LANCASTER (Conservative) See above.
EMILY DARLINGTON (Labour) Educated at Concordia University. Associate at NESTA and former special advisor to Alistair Darling.
PAUL GRAHAM (Liberal Democrat) Born Leighton Buzzard. Educated at Exeter University. Lecturer.
JENNIFER MARKLEW (Green) Educated at Aberystwyth University. Accounts administrator.
DAVID MORTIMER (Independent) Postman.
Comments - 79 Responses on “Milton Keynes North”
  1. Were Newport Pagnell and Olney in Buckingham to 1983, Milton Keynes to 1992, and Milton Keynes North East to 2010?

  2. Yes!

  3. mark lancaster is in a relationship with caroline dinenage

  4. According to today’s “Daily Telegraph” , Conservative Membership in MIlton Keynes fell from 520 in 2010 to 264 in 2012.

    This raises an issue as to what effect low/high party membership has on Westminster election results. Has this been researched?

    It would be of interest to know what membership other political parties have in Milton Keynes in order to assess the likely result at the next General Election.

  5. I wouldn’t have thought the raw numbers would be that significant, all things considered. A small but highly active membership could trump the reverse. I think Nick Palmer mentioned that in Broxtowe Labour managed with a small number of highly effective campaigners between 1997 and 2010.

  6. I agree in general with the point that a small cadre of active members may be more important than a large but less active membership. But I doubt whether such a core of active members would let the toal membership in a seat roughly halve in a couple of years.

    Nor is there currently exactly a great wave of enthusiam for any of Conservatives, Labour or LibDems in terms of joining up to be an activist.

  7. Newport Pagnell and Olney were in Buckingham 1885-1983, Milton Keynes to 1992 and the North seats since

  8. One of my cousins who works in Childcare is married to somebody who works as a primary school teacher here so here is my 2015 forecast:

    Con 34
    Lab 32
    LD 14
    UKIP 13
    Others 7

    (The LDs are strong in Newport Pagnell at a local level)

  9. The LDs really thought that with their local government strength (greater at the time) they had a chance in NE Milton Keynes when the seat was formed. Instead, Labour edged 2nd place & then got a huge tactical as well as political vote to win in 1997. They haven’t recovered as they have in certain seats (e.g. St Albans) and the inclusion of Wolverton has made Labour somewhat more credible in general terms in the constituency.

  10. I’d be slightly surprised if UKIP are as high as A Brown suggests – I live in this constituency and in general it doesn’t feel like a UKIP friendly territory.

    I’ve said before that I think this constituency is trending Tory if anything – there has been significant new-build (of good quality) over the last few years in a number of areas (Broughton, Redhouse Park, Monkston Park) which seems unlikely to harm them.

    A Brown is right about the significant level of LD strength in Newport – this surprises me somewhat, as there are some affluent pockets of Newport but much of it is pretty average 1970’s/early to mid 1980’s build, which ranges from pleasant enough to really fairly average. From drinking in many parts of NP regularly I’d have had this part of MK North down as a Con/Lab marginal.

    I don’t have the knowledge to make a detailed prediction but I’d be surprised if the Tories lost 9% here.

  11. I guess the sizeable black and Asian populations here (likely to rise in the future?) haven’t so far worked in Labour’s favour if they’re now nearly 9000 votes behind the Tories.

  12. Maybe the high moral tone of the current member does not gel with some in light of his linkage with Caroline Dinenage (MP for Gosport) and others…

  13. Maybe so…..but to be honest I doubt that most voters will know who their MP is, let alone what they’re getting up to. Neither MP is particularly high profile and I’ve not been aware of much in the local media about it.

  14. CON HOLD MAJ: 3%
    CON 36
    LAB 33
    LD 15
    UKIP 10
    GRN 5
    OTH 1

  15. The above is surely wrong – UKIP might poll 5-6% perhaps but 10% I really doubt. Quite where these additional Green votes are coming from is a mystery to me……you seem to be projecting around 1.2m additional Green votes nationally, at a time when there is no polling evidence and they’ve got a far more ineffective leader than they had previously.

    I don’t say this lightly as I don’t have detailed psephological knowledge either, but I really don’t see the point in putting predictions on tens of seats which are just pointless speculation… adds nothing and just spoils any decent discussions on threads?

  16. This constituency has been becalmed since last December.. Maybe it needs a posting like this:…

    To remind us all that both are committed to family values…

    or this romantic one from the Daily Mail:

    Oh, swoon…

    She had better fit him with an ankle bracelet based on his previous tendencies to “wander”…

  17. The UKIP candidate for Milton Keynes North is now 20 year-old David Reilly following the resignation of Stuart Moore:

  18. It won’t make any difference which party people vote for as they have all agreed for austerity to continue after the election. I fear a grand coalition being formed which preaches austerity for everyone except themselves while they socially & financially destroy the UK following George Osborne’s austerity policy which hasn’t balanced the budget deficit but it has doubled the national debt.

  19. comments policy? this is a polling site not a site for moaning about political parties.

  20. Also a grand coalition is just not rational. The two big parties have their fault but they’re not insane enough to deliberately bring about their own annihilation.

  21. CON hold 3000-3500

  22. Conservative Hold. 4,000 maj

  23. Two inconvenient facts for Labour.

    Firstly the Tory majority here is now 9,753 or 16.91%.

    Secondly, this is one of the seats Labour needs for an overall majority in 2020. It’s target number 91. They need 94.

  24. The reason the Labour vote went up here is because the was a much bigger LD vote for Labour to tap into compared to Milton Keynes South.

  25. What have been the past equivalents of Broughton ward? (in which Milton Keynes village is situated)

  26. “Does anyone know how to get the results by ward. I want to find out how it broke down in olney ward”

    That information is not available because by law the votes from different wards have to be mixed together before the result is announced. Various people do estimates based on extrapolations from local election results.

    It’s a ridiculous rule which is probably designed to stop people finding out for certain how a particular area voted, and the only reason for that must be that some paternalistic idiot in the past thought it might “look bad” if it could be conclusively demonstrated that a town had voted one way by a small margin but then a village in the same constituency had voted overwhelmingly the other way causing the balance to be tipped against sentiment in the main settlement.

  27. I didn’t pay much attention to the result here in May. Given Labour’s weak performance in MK South, they didn’t do terribly here. Their share of the vote went to 30% and they kept the swing to the Conservatives down. I was half expecting the Tory majority to cross 10,000.

  28. The aborted boundary changes were going to move ‘Eaton Manor’ and ‘Whaddon’ in to Buckingham.

    This was odd because ‘Eaton Manor’ and ‘Whaddon’ were not adjacent to each other and were strongly linked to Bletchley.

  29. I can’t give any detailed psephological analysis here, although I was slightly surprised to see Labour at 30% – people are right to mention Wolverton which is rather down at heel (although even there there is significant new development). Stantonbury itself is not great but some of the suburbs within (Bancroft, Blue Bridge) are quite pleasant residential estates.

    Other than that, with maybe the exception of some average areas of Newport and Campbell Park, the constituency is really pretty good for the Tories. I’ve perhaps underestimated Labour support but from what I can see this constituency will continue to trend Tory.

  30. On first viewing you would think that a Central Milton Keynes seat should be good news for Labour, in that they would combine the strong Labour wards in the centre of the town like Woughton & Fishermead, although in the same token they would almost certainly lose the more Labour-friendly wards on the outskirts like Bletchley and Wolverton

    As things currently stand, the Labour vote is too poorly distributed in Milton Keynes to see them winning in any of the proposed three seats

  31. I do not believe Milton Keynes overall has a high enough electorate for three Milton Keynes seats in any case. Even though the electorates of the existing Milton Keynes North and Milton Keynes South are among the highest by constituency in the UK, they do not have enough ‘extra electors’ for a third seat to be formed, only a half-seat which would end up being combined with ultra-Conservative Buckingham. This would be particularly true if the number of seats in the House of Commons was reduced to 600 rather than kept at 650.

  32. Can you show me a link proving that Milton Keynes Central will be a proposed constituency for the next election, then, please? I cannot find any reference to a hypothetical Milton Keynes Central constituency anywhere outside of this website, even in Electoral Calculus.

  33. It would be interesting if Buckingham is really carved up what would happen to Bercow.

  34. ‘It would be interesting if Buckingham is really carved up what would happen to Bercow’

    If I recall correctly, in the past he’s indicated he’d step down as Speaker after 8/9 years, or two terms, which would take him to the end of this Parliament.
    I assume he’d therefore stand down as an MP at the next election.

  35. Milton Keynes counts as the South-East region. It is the most northerly point of it. The Boundary Commission started from the regions in constructing seats last time, and will almost certainly do the same next time (despite the Forest of Dean).

    Therefore there will 2 seats based on MK, with probably two (or possibly three depending on whether MK is still rapidly expanding) wards shifted into the neighbouring seat, which realistically can only be Buckingham.

    Last time they recommended Eaton Manor and Whaddon. This is where they will start from next time.

    Logically it might be better to link Olney & Newport Pagnell with South Northamptonshire, but they won’t do that because Northamptonshire is in the Midlands (and Cambridgeshire is in East)

    There will for the same reason certainly continue to be a Buckingham seat.

  36. MK is of course a unitary authority, so there’s no reason in principle to link it with Bucks rather than Northants or Cambs. This is just due to “regions”.

  37. Unitary or not, Milton Keynes is a Buckinghamshire town as all but the administrative Jacobins would understand it.

  38. R+T 2005 notional here was:

    Labour 37.3
    Tory 36.2
    LD 20.6
    Other 5.3

  39. I see that this seat is Number 93 on Labour’s target list. It is demographically very much the sort of seat that Labour would need to win to become the Government. At present, their chances look doubtful.

    It appears that the post-2005 boundary review made comparatively little difference to the paprty percentages here. Is there any reason to believe that a future boundary revew would be different in this respect?

  40. Not in this case, since Milton Keynes North will not likely be altered that much by the upcoming boundary changes-it is Milton Keynes South that will see more significant modification here because its electorate is much higher.

  41. Electoral calculus is just that: a calculation.

  42. I have always thought of Milton Keynes being entirely new. It was all part of the Buckingham constituency until 1983 where 75% of the city formed a new MK constituency, then in 1992 the city (including the wards that remained in Buckingham) were divided into 2 new constituencies. The last aborted review then created a third MK’s constituency once again linked with Buckingham.

    However, some of the communities in both MK’s constituencies are long established with Victorian/ Edwardian terraced streets.

    I assume that these small towns were swallowed up into the MK’s conurbation?

  43. The place that stood out were the dense terrace houses in Wolverton in Milton Keynes North, did not look like Milton Keynes at all.

  44. Bletchley existed before 1967, it was where the government’s code-breaking headquarters were located during WWII.

  45. Maxim
    Its an interesting area, we’re both certainly in agreement on recreating a MK NW and MK SE seats but the exact wards included will be very important.

    My own MK NE seat is very similar but rather than Woughton and Central contained Stantonbury.

    Ultimately both proposals work, while I obviously prefer my own boundaries (I admit for wholly partisan reasons) the two things I’ll be looking out for in MK is that Woughton and Central are paced in the same seat, as far as I’m concerned separating them like they are at present makes no sense.

    Second that whatever boundaries are planned avoid a cross authority seat between Aylesbury Vale and Wycombe which is totally unnecessary.

  46. Can’t remember the exact nationals for my proposals but I remember the Tory majorities in both cases.

    In MK NE the Tory majority leapt up to 29% making it a clear safe seat that Lab would struggle to win even in a landslide.

    MK SW on the other hand would see the Tory majority fall to just 4% on my boundaries making it a prime Lab target.

  47. Indeed as I said your MK NE contained Woughton and Central (which I placed in SW) and didn’t contain Statntonbury (which I placed in NE)

  48. @Maxim @rivers10 I don’t get how you make the rest of Bucks work without adding a rural ward to Milton Keynes South West to top up its size. Essentially if you don’t add a rural wards and move The Risboroughs, Icknield, Hadenham and Stone into Aylesbury it is physically impossible to draw the three seats in South Buckinghamshire (too many electors left over).

    What I ended up having to do was confining Aylesbury entirely to the Aylesbury Vale authority by stretching it east towards Pitstone. Then I added Great Horwood to Milton Keynes South West allowing Buckingham to keep the problem wards of Icknield and The Risboroughs making the final seats actually possible to draw.

    I would be interested to see what other people have done as Bucks is a real problem area. Most of the rest of South East is quite simple due to the lack of huge urban areas with stupidly sized wards, Kent and East Sussex need a cross county seat though. I will post my full plan in a bit.

  49. But that leaves Buckingham at 75,019 and Aylesbury over quota at 79,687…

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)