Cambridge
2010 Results:
Conservative: 12829 (25.59%)
Labour: 12174 (24.28%)
Liberal Democrat: 19621 (39.14%)
UKIP: 1195 (2.38%)
Green: 3804 (7.59%)
TUSC: 362 (0.72%)
Independent: 145 (0.29%)
Majority: 6792 (13.55%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Liberal Democrat: 20299 (43.4%)
Labour: 15240 (32.6%)
Conservative: 8565 (18.3%)
Other: 2676 (5.7%)
Majority: 5058 (10.8%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 7193 (16.5%)
Labour: 14813 (34%)
Liberal Democrat: 19152 (44%)
Green: 1245 (2.9%)
UKIP: 569 (1.3%)
Other: 597 (1.4%)
Majority: 4339 (10%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 9829 (22.9%)
Labour: 19316 (45.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 10737 (25.1%)
UKIP: 532 (1.2%)
Green: 1413 (3.3%)
Other: 1009 (2.4%)
Majority: 8579 (20%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 13299 (25.9%)
Labour: 27436 (53.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 8287 (16.1%)
Referendum: 1262 (2.5%)
Other: 1055 (2.1%)
Majority: 14137 (27.5%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Current MP: Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat) Research scientist. Former Cambridgeshire councillor 2001-2009. Contested Huntingdon 2005.
Nick Hillman (Conservative) Former teacher, now Chief of Staff to David Willetts.
Daniel Zeichner (Labour) Educated at Trinity SChool Croydon and Cambridge University. South Norfolk councillor 1995-2003. Policy and Campaigns Officer for UNISON Labour-Link and member of Labour’s National Policy Forum. Contested Mid Norfolk in 1997, 2001 & 2005.Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat) Research scientist. Former Cambridgeshire councillor 2001-2009. Contested Huntingdon 2005.
Tony Juniper (Green) born 1960, Oxford. Educated at Oxford School and Bristol University. Environmental campaigner and commentator. Former executive director of Friends of the Earth, Special Adviser to the Prince of Wales` Rainforest Project and a Senior Associate with the Cambridge University Program for Industry.
Peter Burkinshaw (UKIP) 
Martin Booth (TUSC) Theatre nurse.
Old Holborn (Independent)2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 100785
Male: 50.2%
Female: 49.8%
Under 18: 16.4%
Over 60: 16.5%
Born outside UK: 19.2%
White: 89.5%
Black: 1.4%
Asian: 3.7%
Mixed: 2%
Other: 3.5%
Christian: 57.1%
Hindu: 1.1%
Jewish: 0.8%
Muslim: 2.4%
Full time students: 24.1%
Graduates 16-74: 40.7%
No Qualifications 16-74: 16.3%
Owner-Occupied: 52%
Social Housing: 24.3% (Council: 18.1%, Housing Ass.: 6.2%)
Privately Rented: 17.7%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 8.1%
Labour have managed to lose approx 10% of the vote for three elections running here.
A good Conservative performance in the sort of area they looked dead in at the 2005 election.
Would the Tories have won this version of the seat in 1992?
Yes I should think so. Labour majority was 580 and I imagine the Tories would have been ahead by more than that in Trumpington
Perhaps the Tories could now move seriously forward here – if they do the work.
Labour should have recovered a bit in this seat against 2005.
Byelection coming up in the LD CC seat of East Chesterton , I expect a LD hold with Conservatives dropping to 3rd behind Labour but we will see .
‘ a good conservative performance’
are you taking the *&^%?
to get 25% of the vote in a seat the tories would have won in 1992 is appalling – especially in the context of a night in which the tories did win seats where they had fallen short in in 92
the woeful conservative performance in seats such as this are why they were unable to form a majority government
despite all their credentials cameron has yet to persuade the urban middle classes that the conservatives are their natural home – a problem maggie never had
This is not really an urban seat, but effectively it is that kind of demographic – up to a point.
The Tories did do well in urban seats where it is private sector dominated – Putney, Richmond Park, Battersea, Acton, etc.
25% of the vote is a poor result in itself – but in the context of recent results, it is a credible base.
Swings between all three parties have been high and rapid here, and the Tories are not a total irrelevance in that any more.
It does depend how you’re comparing. Relative to 2005 (and it seems reasonable enough to compare a result with the previous election) it certainly was a good performance, I dont think many expected they would advance by that much and beat Labour into third. Considering that their vote is no higher than in 1997 it could be seen as a poor result, but I think it’s unrealistic when you have seen this huge advance by the LDs since then which inevitably will have taken a number of potentital Tory voters. The Tory share has not recovered relative to 1997 in Colchester or for that matter Watford. BUt in those case it hadnt fallen into the mid-teens before rising again. So I think it is a reasonably encouraging result though I doubt they’re likely to win in the foreseeable future.
I dont understand, Joe, how this is not an urban seat?
Technically, yes it is,
I was answering it rather sloppily assuming the points raised earlier were about large urban areas.
I thought in Watford the Tories had edged a point or so above 1997 – doing a bit of a guess.
Not much, but physologically above the election which was rock bottom nationally (if not there).
phsycologically
sorry terrible spelling – not sure that is right either.
This is the sort of seat where there is often a large divergence in the Tory performance based on a liberal middle-class perception of whether of not the current Tory leader can be classed as “moderate” or “extreme”. The Tories did very badly here when Hague and Howard were leaders but with Cameron being judged to be a “moderate” Tory leader they suddenly surged back into second place against expectations.
‘The Tories did very badly here when Hague and Howard were leaders but with Cameron being judged to be a “moderate” Tory leader they suddenly surged back into second place against expectations.’
Shawn’s point still stands though
The Tories certainly did do better in these types of seats under Cameron than they did under Howard or Hague but they never reached the level they were at in the 80s and early 90s – and ultimately that cost them the election
25% is a pretty poor result in a seat the Tories would have won in 1992 – although the even greater drop in Labour support over the last two elections might make it seem adequate