Amber Valley
2010 Results:
Conservative: 17746 (38.61%)
Labour: 17210 (37.45%)
Liberal Democrat: 6636 (14.44%)
BNP: 3195 (6.95%)
UKIP: 906 (1.97%)
Monster Raving Loony: 265 (0.58%)
Majority: 536 (1.16%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 20153 (47.7%)
Conservative: 14086 (33.3%)
Liberal Democrat: 5068 (12%)
Other: 2963 (7%)
Majority: 6068 (14.4%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 16318 (34.4%)
Labour: 21593 (45.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 6225 (13.1%)
BNP: 1243 (2.6%)
UKIP: 788 (1.7%)
Other: 1224 (2.6%)
Majority: 5275 (11.1%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 15874 (35.7%)
Labour: 23101 (51.9%)
Liberal Democrat: 5538 (12.4%)
Majority: 7227 (16.2%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 18330 (33.5%)
Labour: 29943 (54.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 4219 (7.7%)
Referendum: 2283 (4.2%)
Majority: 11613 (21.2%)
Boundary changes: the original boundary commission proposals had abolished the Amber Valley seat, moving Heanor to a new North Derby seat with Belper forming a new Belper and Ripley constituency. At review stage the Labour party`s alternative proposals which kept Amber Valley were accepted and the new Amber Valley seat loses Crich ward to
Profile: The Amber Valley constituency covers the towns of Alfreton, Ripley and Heanor and the surrounding countryside. All three towns are former coal mining areas and tend to vote Labour, but the more Conservative rural sections of the seat balance this out to an extent, making the seat a marginal.
Current MP: Nigel Mills (Conservative) Works for PriceWaterhouseCoopers. Amber Valley councillor. He was the partner of Gillian Shaw, the Conservative candidate in 2001 and 2005 who died in 2006.
Nigel Mills (Conservative) Works for PriceWaterhouseCoopers. Amber Valley councillor. He was the partner of Gillian Shaw, the Conservative candidate in 2001 and 2005 who died in 2006.
Judy Mallaber(Labour) born 1951. Educated at St Anne`s College Oxford. Worked as research officer for NUPE and at the local government information unit (more information at They work for you)
Tom Snowdon (Liberal Democrat) Born Hartlepool. Educated at Brinkburn Grammer School and Wolverhampton University. Chartered engineer. Contested Derbyshire North East 2005.
Sue Ransome (UKIP) Michael Clarke (BNP)Sam `Thing (Official Monster Raving Loony) 2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 84080
Male: 48.8%
Female: 51.2%
Under 18: 21.9%
Over 60: 21.6%
Born outside UK: 1.7%
White: 99.2%
Asian: 0.3%
Mixed: 0.4%
Christian: 75%
Full time students: 1.8%
Graduates 16-74: 11.7%
No Qualifications 16-74: 37.3%
Owner-Occupied: 75.8%
Social Housing: 15.5% (Council: 12.6%, Housing Ass.: 2.9%)
Privately Rented: 5.3%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 6.8%
The Labour vote could drop by over 10% and they might still hold it by a very small majority due to a high vote for BNP and UKIP as HH points out. But that’s probably not the most likely scenario.
Some local campaign news would be greatly appreciated please.
If Gillian Shaw hardly increased the Tory vote, perhaps her former partner may also not make much progress. However he could win on 36% as I certainly expect the Labour vote to fall to around 36%.
Which seats have included Alfreton and Holbrook, and the ward of ‘Shipley Park, Horsley and Horsley Woodhouse’?
Which seats have included Alfreton, Holbrook, and the ward of ‘Shipley Park, Horsley and Horsley Woodhouse’?
Which seats have included Alfreton, Holbrook, and ‘Shipley Park, Horsley and Horsley Woodhouse’ ward?
Which seats have included Alfreton, Holbrook and ‘Shipley Park, Horsley and Horsley Woodhouse’ ward?
For me this is a two issue election.
1st Issue. I trust Alistair Darling more than I trust George Osborne to run our crisis economy.
2nd Issue. The less influence Rupert Murdoch has on UK affairs the better.
Everything else is insignificant
Cons Gain= 500 maj
Oh well Derek, looks like Gordon’s got your vote
Yes I would urge Labour supporters as well as Conservatives to stick to the point of this site, not explain why you’re voting Labour. There are clearly other sites for that. Nevertheless I welcome your support Derek if you are doing so.
My grandmother and numerous aunts, uncles and cousins still live here.
Amber Valley isn’t going to be an easy seat for the Tories to gain. For one thing, some of the Tories’ best areas are being moved out of the seat. Secondly, this is a bread-and-butter seat where Derek Taylor’s post above is quite typical of the way people think. This is one of those bellweather places where it’s the economy, stupid, and whether the Tories can gain it will depend crucially on their perceived ability to manage the economy. The public sector is a relatively important employer here, but so are the hundreds of small industrial and manufacturing companies that are clustered around the M1 and A38.
My hunch from family on the ground, both here and next door in Ashfield, is that the BNP challenge is waning, and that conversely UKIP will do pretty well.
If forced to make a prediction I would pretty much agree with Shaun. With things moving back the Tories’ way nationally I think they will squeak it.
H.Hemmelig – I mentioned you, along with 2 other Tory supporters on this site, in dispatches as someone who makes intelligent comments on seats & sticks to the point of this site, in contrast to certain other contributors (not necessarily Tories by any means) who refuse to, preferring instead to rubbish polls & make entirely political points unrelated to polling at all. Sometimes you make partisan comments but the great majority of the time you make a good, intelligent, contribution to this site.
As I’ve stated under Banbury, I am inclined (sadly) to agree with Shaun and you, but it would not take much of a dilution of the Conservative lead for this seat to remain Labour. Hedging my bets here at the moment……..
IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL WITHOUT LOCAL CONTRIBUTIONS
oh well…:
LAB 1800
Well H.Hemmelig seems to have strong local links, even though IIRC he lives in London.
Thanks for your kindness Barnaby. Just to say though that although I will vote Conservative I am not easily pigeonholed as a loyal Tory and prefer to regard myself as an independent. Due to my utter loathing of Boris I voted for Ken in 2008, for example.
I am relatively pro-European and against a cap on immigration, but will vote Tory in the hope that they will take the deficit seriously and adapt their rhetoric on the above issues to a more pragmatic stance in power.
On this seat, I agree it wouldn’t take much improvement in their national fortunes for Labour to hold on.
This comment is objective and not partisan – l have to say that Judy Mallaber is quite poorly regarded locally. She is pretty invisible and still has the air of north London champage socialism about her. The lack of an effective Tory challenge has meant that her poor local reputation has not really damaged her in the past 2 elections – but this time it could well be decisive.
And finally, another potentially decisive factor is the fact that there is a relatively small, yet very motivated, hunting and shooting vote in Amber Valley, arising from the area being next to the Peak District.
To some extent this explains the Tory vote holding at 35% or so in 2001 and 2005.
Admittedly quite a few of these voters will be in the western and southern wards that have been moved out of the seat. But some will remain within it, like my uncle, with an axe to grind about hunting. Could be decisive in a very close result.
Are UKIP not standing here? BNP should hold their deposit. Close Lab v Tory fight.
No UKIP candidate as far as I know – I’d expect BNP to get 8-10%
I don’t think so, as I said the feeling on the ground is that the BNP won’t meet those kind of expectations. Maybe 5%.
If UKIP don’t stand, their vote will either go to the Tories or stay at home. Without them the Tories will win more easily, maybe 2000 majority.
C gain maj 2000
Lab Hold
Maj 1900
Sue Ransome is standing here for UKIP.
The OMRLP candidate seems to be calling himself Sam ‘Thing (note the apostrophe) and apparently wants to introduce a hexagonal 99p coin.
Con maj 750
Surprising to see now UKIP candidate here. Maybe the Tory candidate is an arch Eurosceptic.
Which seats have included the towns of Alfreton and Holbrook?
LAB HOLD – but not by much.
Pete not far off the mark. respect Pete. strong incumbent not quite strong enough.
‘strong incumbent not quite strong enough’
Also, didn’t the boundary changes here improve the Conservatives’ chances? Amber Valley has always been a marginal regardless of boundaries
No the boundary changes improved Labour’s chances here as they did also in Erewash and Derby North though only in the last named did it enable them to hold on. Strong Tory wrds from all three seats went into the creation of the new, safely Tory Derbyshire MId.
Indeed Mid Derbyshire is made up of five wards from Amber Valley Borough Council, three wards from Derby City Council, and four wards from Erewash Borough Council, thus there are 12 wards in total in that constituency
I see the BNP polled 7% here. They seem to have managed to increase their vote in most seats below the radar and in a close election.
Good prediction by Pete.
It looks like the Tory vote is about half way up it’s 1997 losses,
and the Labour vote is above the 1980s.
The seat looks smaller so the rather low numerical votes slightly threw me.
This result declared very late.
Amber Valley declared very late – it was in the daytime on Friday, at the same time as Morecambe and Lunesdale which I’m pretty sure counted on the second day.
I assumed Amber Valley did so too, but apparently that is not the case.
Judy Mallaber kept demanding recounts,
even though the majority was not that tiny.
Maybe there needs to be some kind of guide or written advice for returning officers because sometimes you get a seat with a tiny majority which hardly recounts at all – such as Cheadle in 2001 when the majority was 33 but was declared about 4 hours after polling ended – and then other seats have lengthy recounts going on for hours when the majority is more than 500 votes such as this one.
Good point.
She was getting her advice from Campbell and Balls perhaps.
It will be interesting to see what happens next in this seat, given its history.
The 1979 result was similar to that of 2005, with Labour defending a notional 6,000 majority. Having gained this new seat with a 9% swing in 1983, Phillip Oppenheim massively increased his majority in 1987. I wonder if Nigel Mills could now do the same.
The 1987 landslide in Amber Valley occurred largely because the unpopular and extremely left-wing leader of Derbyshire County Council was the Labour candidate. There will be no big Tory majority here in 2015 unless Labour are stupid enough to nominate a similar candidate, or in the unlikely event that they implode nationally.
Amber Valley is a perpetual marginal seat, which should now tilt more to Labour than it did in the 1980s because the boundaries are more tightly drawn around the three main towns and the Tory rural areas have mostly been moved out of the seat.
Judy Mallaber was not well regarded locally. She started off with the disadvantage of being a Blair Babe from London, and never really established a profile either locally or nationally. Joe’s description of her behaviour, demanding endless recounts, does not surprise me.
In short I think Labour might have held this with a better candidate, and have a good chance of winning it back. As with many of our predictions it depends how well the coalition is viewed at the next election.
HH has explained it better than me,
with more local detail.
Although the idea of a loony left council in Derbyshire does slightly surprise me – the Labour Party seemed to have pretty good and pragmatic leaders locally in the Midlands even during the 80s,
as far as I know.
Yes Judy Mallaber sounded as though she was becoming a bit of a joke a the count, if that’s the word.
People were despairing she would ask for another one after she went through literally 3 or 4 spoiled papers as if that would have turned it round,
and there was a pile of local election votes still not counted.
Normally a recount only occurs if the apparant majority is less than the number of spoilt ballots
Not really. It occurs basically whenever the result is close enough for a returning officer to deem it reasonable to accede to a request for one.
To me it is a bit of a waste of everyone’s time for returning officers to be allowing a recount when the margin between first and second is over 500 votes. Unless a whole load of uncounted ballots have been discovered, or the initial count was appallingly inaccurate, I don’t see how a recount could make any difference to the outcome.
Re the implications of the forthcoming boundary review for this seat, my view is that it wont make much difference to its political balance. I don’t see the commission expanding the seat westwards to bring it up to the quota as that would involve taking wards from Derbyshire Dales which is the most undersized seat in the county and consequently needs to retain all the territory it can. Consequently an expansion northwards or southwards seems more likely, with the latter probably the more sensible option.
The plan for the county I’ve worked out would involve this seat losing the Alfreton and Somercoates division to Bolsover, making the latter Bolsover & Alfreton (or Alfreton & Bolsover; I am not sure which). To compensate for that I would have this seat gain the Ilkeston and Cotmanhay county divisions, and Kirk Hallam and Hallam Fields wards from the Kirk Hallam division.
Under such a plan (or any minor variation of it) this seat would be gaining territory very similar politically to that it was losing. Possibly Ilkeston and surrounds might be slightly more Labour than Alfreton and district, but there would not be much in it.
My plan would turn the seat into one that could be called South Amber Valley & Ilkeston with an electorate of around 77,500.
There was a recount in Blaby in 1983,
but I think it was about a possible lost deposit, not because the Alliance thought they had ousted Nigel Lawson.
(!)
Kieran’s ideas make a lot of sense. In many ways Alfreton would sit more easily with Bolsover than with the rest of Amber Valley, bringing it together with the adjoining and quite similar towns of South Normanton and Pinxton.
Alfreton is not the Labour bastion it was when the pits were open, but it is still a better town for Labour than the other 2 towns in Amber Valley (Ripley and Heanor), where the Tories can do quite well these days. As Kieran says, Ilkeston is in a similar position, not the Labour bastion it used to be, but still a Labour town.
Paticularly after Dennis Skinner’s retirement, Bolsover & Alfreton would see a much reduced Labour majority compared with the present Bolsover seat.
Certainly Hemmelig, had Bolsover included the areas I mentioned at the last GE what was already a creditable Tory performance there would have been even better. Although there are Tories in Alfreton the main boost to the Tory cause in the Bolsover & Alfreton seat I described would come from the addition of Swanwick and Ironville & Riddings wards of Amber Valley council. From a partisan Tory point of view their removal to Bolsover is not ideal (although there would be potential for a decent Tory performance in Bolsover & Alfreton it would be a surprise to see Labour actually lose the seat), but is realistically unavoidable.
Yes I would agree with all that.
Incidentally there are few more stark examples of demographic and political change in these parts than Ironville. When I was growing up nearby in the 1970s and 1980s, it was widely known as one of the biggest shitholes in Derbyshire. That it has changed so much in my lifetime that it now often votes Tory is mind-boggoling (and makes me feel old). Swanwick is also a very Conservative area these days.
On the basis of the most recent county elections the result in a Bolsover constituency gaining Alfreton and Somercoates form this seat and losing Barlborough & Clowne and Sutton to NE Derbys would be something like:
Labour 42.6%
Conservative 27.7%
Lib Dem 11.5%
BNP 10.1%
Independent 8%
Socialist Alternative 1.1%
So definitely a bit less Labour, but not massively so, especially given that much of the Independent vote at local elections would be Labour leaning.
Calculating a notional result based on local elections for this seat were it to lose territory around Alfreton and gain Ilkeston is made harder by the fact that Erewash council no longer have the 2007 district results on their website. Without the most recent results from Kirk Hallam and Hallam Fields wards I have the Tories ahead on a local election turnout by a couple of thousand. Those two wards are good or Labour and their addition could possibly have been enough to tip the balance their way last time, but it would have been tight.
Over all I just don’t see the point of moving the borders this is a well balanced seat. but we do have a high population compared to the rest of the Derbyshire constituency s but removing a town such as Alfriton would go to far in the other direction. making the remaining people’s votes in amber valley be worth far to much. the removal of Crich ward will do far now till the population changes again.
As for saying that Judy was landed in and has not made a name for her self. I was part of the labour campaign team in the area were I was often quoted “yes I know Judy” on the door step. when we went on the streets of the thee towns and more people seemed to know and talk to her as a well loved MP for the past 13 years that she is now know.
What were the wards of this constituency from 1983-97, and which districts were they from?
What were the wards of this constituency from 1983 to 1997, and which districts were they from?