2015 Result:
Conservative: 25225 (52.1%)
Labour: 12606 (26%)
Lib Dem: 6129 (12.7%)
Green: 1986 (4.1%)
UKIP: 2476 (5.1%)
MAJORITY: 12619 (26.1%)

Category: Safe Conservative seat

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

Main population centres: Wimbledon, Merton, Raynes Park.

Profile: Wimbledon is most associated with the Wimbledon Tennis Championships, based in the north of the constituency near Wimbledon Park. The areas around the park and Wimbledon Common are affluent, leafy suburbia and are heavily owner-occupied. The south eastern parts of the constituency in South Wimbledon are grittier and less affluent.

Politics: Generally a Conservative seat, although it is capable of being won by Labour in their very best years 1945, 1997 and 2001.

Current MP
STEPHEN HAMMOND (Conservative) Born 1962, Southampton. Educated at King Edward VI School and London University. Former investment banker. Former Merton councillor. Contested North Warwickshire 1997, Wimbledon 2001. First elected as MP for Wimbledon in 2005. PPS to Eric Pickles 2010-2012, Under-Secretary for Transport 2012-2014.
Past Results
Con: 23257 (49%)
Lab: 10550 (22%)
LDem: 11849 (25%)
UKIP: 914 (2%)
Oth: 825 (2%)
MAJ: 11408 (24%)
Con: 17886 (41%)
Lab: 15585 (36%)
LDem: 7868 (18%)
GRN: 1374 (3%)
Oth: 691 (2%)
MAJ: 2301 (5%)
Con: 15062 (37%)
Lab: 18806 (46%)
LDem: 5341 (13%)
GRN: 1007 (2%)
Oth: 893 (2%)
MAJ: 3744 (9%)
Con: 17694 (37%)
Lab: 20674 (43%)
LDem: 8014 (17%)
Oth: 979 (2%)
MAJ: 2980 (6%)

*There were boundary changes after 2005

2015 Candidates
STEPHEN HAMMOND (Conservative) See above.
ANDREW JUDGE (Labour) Born Salford. Educated at University of Kent. Barrister. Merton councillor since 1995. Leader of Merton council 2001-2006. Contested Wimbledon 2010.
SHAS SHEEHAN (Liberal Democrat) Born Lahore, Pakistan. Educated at Rosa Bassett Grammar and University College London. Former advertising planner. Richmond councillor 2006-2010. Contested Merton and Wandsworth 2008 London election, Wimbledon 2010, London list 2012 London assembly election.
PETER BUCKLITSCH (UKIP) Contested Dartford 2005, South Thanet 2010 for the Liberal Democrats.
Comments - 107 Responses on “Wimbledon”
  1. Re: this area being suitable for a liberal challenger. Apparently this seat is a Green target seat.

  2. that’s total pie in the sky. they have absolutely no record of even the slightest success here.

  3. For Labour’s long term prospects in Wimbledon I would disagree with the comments about an ever increasing asian population . Wimbledon has always been multi-cultural as is most of London and large parts of the surrounding home counties. Economics are far more important than race when it comes to winning elections, without paraphrasing James Carville. With increasing house prices even in Canon Hill, North Morden and Merton Park it is unlikely Labour will ever win this seat again, without boundary changes. It’s unlikely the Conservative core vote will get eroded by UKIP in Wimbledon, as Wimbledon is not only multi-cultural but tolerant. With far less social housing than many constituencies most people moving into the borough are affluent naturally Conservative voters and the indigenous population who can afford to stay in Wimbledon haven’t been as reactionary as those in constituencies in east London and Essex. It is a safe Conservative seat with the only prospect of anything different long term being a concerted effort by Lib Dem to build support amongst more moderate Conservative voters and squeeze Labour in an ABT campaign as James Baillie mentioned earlier and as has been successfully implemented in Twickenham and Kingston & Surbiton – which are very similar constituencies to Wimbledon in terms of demographics.

  4. kingston & surbiton is more middling in terms of income. all the wealthiest areas in the borough are in richmond park.

  5. Con hold, majority 10,800.

  6. I’d be surprised if the majority was that high but this will certainly be an easy Con hold.

  7. Well it’s a majority of about 20%, which I think is doable and which I’ve seen others predicting here.

  8. Con Hold, maj. 7500

    I think Hammond himself will be a factor and he will do less well than the Conservatives nationally, he isn’t visible locally except at elections and he has had bad press with expenses, familial employees in his constituency office, use of chauffeur driven cars and suspicion of pedalling influence for defence firms.

  9. Nationally I think Labour will lose more seats to SNP than Conservative will lose to UKIP, but I think the UKIP vote could be more damaging for the Tories because it would likely let in a labour candidate even if not enough to give a UKIP MP. Where as in Scotland where Tory MPs are rarer than panda cubs at Edinburgh Zoo, The SNP vote will result in either an SNP MP or Labour just holding.

    Conservative 290

    Labour 281

    Lib Dem 37

    SNP 25

    UKIP + Others 17

    Lab – Lib minority coalition with Confidence and Supply arrangement from SNP

    With another election likely within 2 years

  10. swap the snp & lib dem figures and that’d be closer. personally, l don’t think the tories can win as many seats as that. especially if the lib dems get 37.

  11. And additionally another election will only be possible in two years if the new parliament comes to its senses and ditches the appalling Fixed Term Parliaments Act.

    Rarely can a piece of legislation have been so ill considered with its twin aims of just propping up the coalition and delaying any rendezvous with the electorate for the maximum possible period.

    |Labour fell back horribly in this seat in 2010 which was marginal in 2005 – surely they’ll recover a bit.

  12. The potential is there for the Tory majority to be hit disproportionately hard here. Hammond’s personal vote will be no bigger than 2010, if indeed as big. Meanwhile if a smaller party doesn’t seriously aim for 2010 LDs, it could put Labour in a position to squeeze them as hard as anywhere.

    Presumably that LD vote is what the Greens are eyeing up when they talk of “targetting” this seat. Third would not be impossible, though that would presumably limit the reduction in Hammond’s majority.

    As for fixed parliaments, it was an extremely rare act of political genius from the LDs. It undoubtedly did what it was supposed to for this Parliament (that the party has miserably failed to take advantage of the past year does not change the facts that a snap election would have buried them, and that they had and still have the opportunity to take credit for the recently-improving picture). Meanwhile the question of getting rid of the Act creates a political dilemma for the next government – particularly if that government needs LD or SNP support to function.

  13. Shas Sheehan’s campaign literature says Lib Dem is the only alternative to Hammond in Wimbledon as she actually did come 2nd in 2010.
    I think fixed terms aren’t an issue, if a motion of no confidence is lost and no alternate coalition can be formed which can win a vote of confidence within 14 days..
    In my opinion Cameron personally got more out of the coalition than anyone else, he tied Lib Dems to the bomb, he prepared a ready made scapegoat for not being able to implement more radical tory policies and he got a large number of Lib Dem MPs to nullify the effect of any potential backbench tory revolts.
    Lib Dems will find their time in government costly at the polls and they didn’t get the key piece of reform, away from the first past the post system that a 3rd party so desperately needs.
    Even so I think their collapse in parliamentary seats will not be as bad as their loss in the popular vote (% of national vote) so I still believe they will be the biggest minor party, although SNP will be a significant player too.
    UKIP will make a breakthrough the tory defections have legitimised them and Carswell and Reckless have both been quoted as saying they want to change UKIP from within. Presumably to root out the “loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists” Cameron spoke about. I think they will get a handful of elected MPs as well as the 2 defectors, but not the “dozens” that Farage’s propaganda is foreseeing.
    I think in it’s current incarnation Lib Dems could never be in government with UKIP which rules out a blue, orange and purple rainbow coalition. But given Sturgeon’s recent alleged remarks about Miliband, I guess one can’t rule out that they would support a minority Con-Dem coalition on a confidence and supply basis. That is likely to be the 1st option on the negotiation table, as I still think Conservatives will be the biggest party in a hung parliament.
    For SNP long term the more damage they can inflict on Labour the better as Labour are their natural competitor in Scotland and maybe Sturgeon doesn’t mind a Conservative led government in Westminster if Cameron can deliver on the Home Rule pledges made after the independence vote. English votes for English Laws would mean Conservative laws for England, forever.

  14. Predicting 17 SNP seats is ignoring the polls, it’s possible that even predicting 25 is the same. Can anybody list the constituencies that they think that the SNP will win – ?

  15. Why would English votes for English laws mean a permanent Tory majority, when Labour were well ahead in seats in England in three of the last four elections? Also, the SNP will never vote to prop up a Tory Government, unless they want all their shiny new MPs to be out of a job in 2020. Whether the SNP would prefer a Tory win as a matter of strategy is kind of irrelevant, as they can never vote that way.

  16. NT- it would be easier to list the seats SNP are not CURRENTLY favs& on course to win.

    There are 13 where they are NOT favourites ( based on forecast models/Bookies/professional pundits)



    Of these, those last two, IMO are the only seats where the SNP probably unlikely to win.

  17. Ignore my last post…

    NEIL TURNER. ..- it would be easier to list the seats SNP are not CURRENTLY favs& on course to win.

    There are 16 where they are NOT favourites ( based on forecast models/Bookies/professional pundits)



    Of these, those last two, IMO are the only seats where I would say SNP are very unlikely to win.

    And you could add


    as ones not going Nationalist. So 18 where SNP not clear favourites.

  18. If true, then this doesn’t leave Labour with many MP’s in Scotland

  19. I would say they are least likely of all to win Orkney and Shetland. Low yes vote and the no vote virtually united behind the Lib Dems due to the other no parties being incredibly weak in that seat.

  20. which paisley seat did you mean? l have a feeling that, despite his higher majority, douglas alexander may be even likelier to lose than jim sheridan. l freely admit, however, that l could be talking out of my arse re scotland.

  21. I think England is a naturally conservative country, the Tory %age share of the vote holds in low 30’s even in their bad years, the same can’t be said for Labour’s vote. Also in 2005, the Tories won the popular vote but lost on first past the post as there were just too many seats to swing in one go from 2001. I think without 80 – 90 Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs voting it would have been quite hard in most parliaments even those that had a UK Labour majority to get socialist laws through parliament.
    I am not Scottish and I don’t live in Scotland so I can’t say whether the polls or the press coverage is accurate but what I would say is, even though it was a single issue the referendum showed nearly 45% of Scots supported the SNP on that issue. The %age support wouldn’t need to anything near that figure for there to be a good representation of SNP MPs in the parliament on May 8th 2015.

  22. Con by 11000

  23. Conservative Hold. 9,000 maj

  24. The Conservatives are almost up to their 1992 level here- Labour a tad above it but way down on 1997 and 2001. Probably the best parallel is the 1979 result when Sir Michael Havers managed a 26.6% majority over Labour with the Liberals in third on 15.2%.

  25. A surprisingly good result for UKIP to hold their deposit in a seat with these demographics.

  26. If Martin Whelton is around some time, I’d be interested in seeing the individual ward results for the Wimbledon constituency.

  27. l’ve seen them elsewhere. lt seems the Tories outpolled Labour in every ward, even Cannon Hill & Abbey fairly clearly.

  28. http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/2200/wimbledon?page=3&scrollTo=264604.

    On our rival site. Think Abbey would’ve been more neck and neck than the 4% lead given the postal votes added; Cannon Hill probably slightly smaller as well which showed an 11% lead.

  29. Hopefully other authorities will follow Merton in providing ward breakdowns. They were also provided at European Election. We’ve been advised that Electoral Commission guidance allows us to publish ward results. Should really be standard practice, and indeed I’d go further in giving results by ballot box. Count rules need to be modernised.

  30. Thanks Martin.

  31. It would certainly help with notionals to have breakdown by ward or by ballot box. Certainly in North America it’s typical to count smaller batches and declare partial results (including a ridiculous example in Ontario this year where a partial result was declared based on a ballot box containing only one vote!)

  32. Counting by ward or ballot box would significantly complicate and delay recounts. That’s clearly not a risk in Merton, where both parliamentary seats are safe. Aside from providing interest for a handful of anoraks I’m not sure what the usefulness of counting by ward or ballot box would be. Presumably most authorities consider it not worth the extra cost.

  33. Would it? Staff are at the polling station anyway so they could easily lock the doors as the polls close and count before telephoning through the numbers (or text/email) to a central area and then maybe even do their own recount to check. Centrally the numbers would just need to be totalled before the declaration is given. It would probably be quicker and more accurate than having to move them all to a counting centre and having them all done together.

  34. Yes of course it would, because all recounts would have to be done and recorded separately in each ward with each ward’s votes kept separate.

  35. No way would candidates accept votes being counted at multiple locations within the same constituency. Lack of venues would also prevent it and the extra security/policing cost would be significant.

  36. I think we’re the only country in the world that counts in the way we do. Everywhere else simply counts in the polling station when the polls close and send the local results to a central information centre. It would actually be quicker IMO to count in the polling stations because it wouldn’t take long for a handful of people to count a thousand votes or so.

  37. More expensive, though, presumably as you’d need to send out staff to the polling stations rather than housing them centrally, meaning more staff needing to be employed to count.

    In the counts I’ve been involved with we count by ward so those results ought to be easily obtained, although we got a ballot box of postals thrown in to the mix which may or may not have been from our ward (I’m not sure). We certainly wouldn’t count each ballot box separately, otherwise we may not have finished counting until May 9th.

  38. You would certainly need electronic counting would if it was by ballot box but I agree the count should be in one place.

    Certainly counting should in the very least be by ward.

  39. Why more expensive? You could have the same people who were manning the polling stations during the day counting the votes. That’s probably what happens in various other countries.

  40. If the old Merton and Morden seat existed I gather it would have followed a similar pattern to Brentford and Isleworth, Ilford North and Ealing Central of being a Con gain in 2010 and going back to Labour in 2015.

  41. Wimbledon, Vauxhall and Streatham CLPs all nominated Owen Smith last night. Hampstead and Kilburn went for Corbyn. London continues to perform poorly for the sitting leader.

  42. Oh, Brent Central and Romford went for Corbyn too. Romford particularly strange – the voters there certainly won’t be Corbynites.

  43. Are they really much more likely to be Owen Smithites? Anyway, it’s not really uncommon to have fairly left wing CLPs in relatively safe Tory seats.

  44. That’s correct. In such parts of the country, what Labour members there are, are often of the ‘true believer’ variety.

  45. CLPs do not in any way shape or form represent the views of the seat’s electorate especially in seats where Labour does terribly in general elections.

  46. Brighton, Pavilion is not a Tory seat so you can cross that one off.

    Nor is Bristol West.

    Nor Hove.

  47. @Maxim suburbs of Brighton in Kemptown like Woodingdean and Rottingdean would be very hostile to Corbyn too. Regardless the successor seat to Brighton Kemptown will almost certainly be much more Tory than the current seat containing less of Brighton itself and stretching much deeper into rural/small town East Sussex.

  48. Labour candidate for GE2017 is Imran Uddin.

  49. final prediction

    Conservative: 21,806
    Labour: 11,949
    Lib Dem: 7,250
    Green: 2,044
    UKIP: 703

    maj: 9,857

  50. Momentum backed candidate here has won Labour PPC selection.

    Jackie Schneider beat Elaine Harrison 154 to 147.

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)