Chelsea and Fulham
2010 Results:
Conservative: 24093 (60.45%)
Labour: 7371 (18.49%)
Liberal Democrat: 6473 (16.24%)
BNP: 388 (0.97%)
UKIP: 478 (1.2%)
Green: 671 (1.68%)
English Democrat: 169 (0.42%)
Others: 213 (0.53%)
Majority: 16722 (41.96%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Conservative: 19786 (55.8%)
Labour: 9062 (25.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 4717 (13.3%)
Other: 1910 (5.4%)
Majority: 10725 (30.2%)
New seat: combines Chelsea from the old Kensington & Chelsea and Fulham from the old Hammersmith & Fulham seat into one new constituency, leaving stand alone Hammersmith and Kensington constituencues.
Profile: The combination of affluent Chelsea and the gentified Fulham should make Chelsea and Fulham an unassailable Conservative stronghold, perhaps at the expense of making both Hammersmith and Kensington more favourable to Labour.
Current MP: Greg Hands (Conservative) born 1965 in New York to British parents. Educated at Dr Challoner`s Grammar School and Cambridge University. Former banker. Former Hammersmith & Fulham councillor and Conservative group leader. MP for Hammersmith & Fulham since 2005.
Greg Hands (Conservative) born 1965 in New York to British parents. Educated at Dr Challoner`s Grammar School and Cambridge University. Former banker. Former Hammersmith & Fulham councillor and Conservative group leader. MP for Hammersmith & Fulham since 2005. 
Alex Hilton (Labour) born 1976. Author of `Recess Monkey` blog and founder of LabourHome. Redbridge councillor until 2006. Contested Canterbury 2005.
Dirk Hazell (Liberal Democrat) Chief Executive of the Environmental Services Association. Former Merton councillor for the Conservative party.
Julia Stephenson (Green) author and journalist. Contested Kensington and Chelsea 2001, 2005. Contested West Central 2004, 2008 London elections.
Tim Gittos (UKIP)
Brian McDonald (BNP)George Roseman (English Democrat)Roland Courtenay (New Independent Conservative Chelsea and Fulham)Godfrey Spickernell (Blue Environment)2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 99749
Male: 47.1%
Female: 52.9%
Under 18: 16.6%
Over 60: 16.9%
Born outside UK: 35.6%
White: 84.8%
Black: 5.5%
Asian: 3.5%
Mixed: 3.1%
Other: 3.1%
Christian: 67.8%
Hindu: 0.8%
Jewish: 1.5%
Muslim: 5%
Full time students: 5.8%
Graduates 16-74: 49.8%
No Qualifications 16-74: 14.1%
Owner-Occupied: 48.7%
Social Housing: 24.4% (Council: 13.6%, Housing Ass.: 10.8%)
Privately Rented: 22.1%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 10.2%
Well this is the third time you’ve repeated this statement that it would have voted Conservative in 1995 but I don’t know what evidence you have for that. The area was carried by Labour in the 1997 and 2001 general elections and 1995 was worse than those years in areas which did have local elections. It is possible because the Conservatives tend to better, mainly due to differential turnout, in Westminster local elections that parliamentary elections, but the case is hardly proven
The most recent GLA voting intention poll I’ve seen showed that the Tories were indeed likely to lose two or three constituency seats to Labour, but that their share of the vote will be pretty much unchanged compared with four years ago. If that were to happen does that mean that they would gain seats on the list to compensate for those constituency losses?
“Except that West Central should be utterly safe as a constituency whereas Enfield and Haringay has always been a marginal at best.”
My point was that you were comparing losing West Central for the Tories as being equivalent to losing the safest constituency within it whereas in fact they could lose it while still carrying Chelsea & Fulham hansomley, just as Labour could lose Enfield & Haringey while carrying Tottenham hansomely. In fact while Enfield & Haringey has been close in some GLA electins, the Conservatives have not won a p[lurality within its boundaries since 1992. Labour have won a plurality within West central in both 1997 and 2001 general elections.
I have chekced incidentally and in the local elections of 1994 the Conservatives led in West Central by 5% – 45% to 40% – a clear enough lead but hardly overwhelming and 1995 was very much worse than 1994 for the Conservatives so if the London brough elections had been held that year its certainly quite possible that Labour would have carried it.
Kieran I can’t see the Tories qualifying for fewer than 8 seats based on the list vote and given that is the number of constituencies they currently hold, then any losses would certainly be compensated for on the list. I know one Conservative voter in Barnet who has made precisely this calculation in that it is safe for him to vote against brian Coleman as long as he votes Conservative on the list
“Well this is the third time you’ve repeated this statement that it would have voted Conservative in 1995 but I don’t know what evidence you have for that.”
Casting my mind back to the initial assembly election in 1999, it was stated at that time that the only two seats the Tories went into the election notionally ‘holding’ was Bexley and Bromley and West Central.
Given that the constituencies are based on the boroughs, I’d have thought it would be fairly simple matter to find the notional 1995 result by adding up the 1994 local election results and making a guess. I’d have thought the large Tory leads in Westminster and Kensington/Chelsea in 1994 would have more than countered Labour’s lead in Hammersmith/Fulham.
But by all means, let us say that there is doubt.
Reading further down, I see that Pete has already done those exact calculations.
I would be surprised if the voting between Labour & Conservative is close this year in the Hornsey & Wood Green constituency, Shaun. So much of the Lib Dem vote is ex-Labour and before the LDs started their “thing” in the area Labour built up a very large lead over the Tories. Otherwise I agree with much in your analysis.
I agree Barnaby. But then again, I don’t think any of us are under the impression that Enfield and Haringay will be particularly marginal this year either.
There is a by-election here in (Fulham) Town ward on 12th July.
The swing to Labour could give an indication of their chances of taking control of the council in 2014.
Well the result is in:
Conservative 768
Labour 416
LD 331
UKIP 39
A swing of something like 7%+ to Labour, which would make the council overall interesting certainly if repeated in wards further north. It’s a very safe Tory ward indeed these days but even in the heady days of the Nick Raynsford by-election it was already regarded as safe, along with Palace ward. I am not sure however how similar the present-day Town ward is to its incarnation before 2002.
It lost a small area to Palace Riverside and gained a large part of the old Eel Brook ward (which perhaps accounts for some of the lingering LD strencth there)
Thanks Pete. Well Eel Brook (I always thought the Borough had some odd ward names, since it also had Wormholt & Starch Green) was a Lab/Con marginal until the LDs got into the mix some years later, so unless that was a more Tory part of that former ward there is clear further demographic strengthening for the Tories in this area.
Is Fulham Palace Road located in the Town ward?
Only a short section to the south Andy. Mostly it’s in Palace Riverside ward but to the north sections are in Fulham Reach & Hammersmith Broadway wards – so it’s much more Tory in the south than in the north, like the borough as a whole. There is also a section in Munster ward, also a very safe Tory area & Tory-inclined since the late 70s I’d say.
Thanks Barnaby.
I used to know someone who lived in Eel Brook – it was a Con gain from Labour in 1990
but I think split between LD and Lab in 1994 .
sorry can I just clarify which wards have taken over Eel Brook? Town,
and….?
Fulham Broadway perhaps?
It looks to me that about half the area went to Town with the southern quarter (between Parsons Green and Eel Brook common) going to Parsons Green & Walham and the northern quarter to Fulham Broadway
I’m a little surprised that this constituency is less ‘middle class’ than Kensington.
In 2001
Strangely Richard I’ve been thinking about that too, partly because I’m on an assignment which is close to the constituency boundary between the 2. One thing I’d say is that even in deepest, truest blue Chelsea you will find the odd council estate – there’s one in Royal Hospital ward for example, and there is a little council-built property in Stanley, and of course a large amount of social housing in the more marginal Cremorne; and the same remains true even of the safest Tory wards in Fulham too – I found a council-built estate just off the Fulham Palace Road, in Palace Riverside ward, with something like 100 units. Only Redcliffe & Hans Town wards are completely devoid of the odd anomalous council estates, as far as I can see. But in the WHOLE of the South Kensington area, throughout Queen’s Gate, Courtfield (which is partly in Earl’s Court) & Brompton wards, I don’t think you’d find even one council-built residential property. There’s hardly any at all anywhere in Kensington proper either, so the whole of the South of the Kensington constituency, except for Earl’s Court ward, is almost wall-to-wall ultra-exclusive owner-occupied houses and flats. Obviously the North of the seat redresses the balance to some extent, and there are 4 wards which currently have Labour councillors (and may well be won outright by Labour in 2014), but overall I can see why the social composition of the Kensington seat would be even wealthier taken as a whole than this one, even though this seat has gone a huge way upmarket in the last generation. Also, Kensington & South Kensington is a much larger area in terms of residents than Chelsea is; if we include Redcliffe which is mainly in West Brompton there are only 5 Chelsea wards, of which one is marginal-ish & the other 4 are hugely safe Conservative, but even if we exclude Earl’s Court, if we take Kensington proper and South Kensington together, and then add the Tory end of Notting Hill (Norland & Pembridge wards) there are 8 wards all of which are totally & utterly safe for the Tories. Labour only has a noticeable presence in Norland though there used to be a rather bigger Labour vote in Pembridge than there is today.
Perhaps the term “middle class” should be used with some caution though, Richard – the upper class is a major factor in the 2 seats, not just the upper end of the middle class. I live in Richmond, and there are a lot more genuine cut-glass accents in K&C than in my humble, common-as-much borough.
‘but overall I can see why the social composition of the Kensington seat would be even wealthier taken as a whole than this one’
Wealthier yes – but not more middle class
Surely seats like this have almost as few middle class voters as do industrial Labour seats in South Wales or the North East
As Barnaby says in his post, the exclusive properties in seats like this and Kensington (at least the southern section) are way beyond what any middle class person could afford
I’d say the bulk of the electorate in a seat like this is upper class – or extremely wealthy upper middle class
Another factor which wouldn’t have an effect on the poll results is the amount of super-rich foreigners/immigrants you get in this part of London. I wouldn’t be surprised if in some wards they actually outnumbered the British
The terms “upper class” still tends to mean those from an aristocratic background. Super-rich doesn’t always mean upper class.
Super-rich is probably a more accurate description than upper class – but these people aren’t middle class
True in many ways Tim – but classless they sure ain’t!
I think one survey gave the percentage of upper class people as about 1% across the UK as a whole. I’d be interested to know what it is in this constituency.
‘I’d be interested to know what it is in this constituency.’
In the top 10 for sure
I think that you can be sure that the 2 K&C constituencies have by far the largest number of electors who would normally be termed upper-class. My guess would be that Cities of London & Westminster would be next.
I would have thought that Cities might be top as it doesn’t have any deprived areas such as North Kensington or unimpressive even though gentrified areas such as Fulham.
Don’t St James, Belgravia and Mayfair have loads of upper class people? Perhaps they’re filled with rich foreigners now.
Even the downmarket parts of Cities such as Pimlico might have some of the upper classes – didn’t Princess Anne live there?
I assume the percentage of upper class people isn’t higher than about 10% even in areas like this.
Sir Marcus Worsley, MP for Chelsea 1966-1974, and for Keighley 1959-1964, has died aged 87.
Who is the earliest elected alive former member of the house of commons?
Probably Tony Benn. I believe Ernest Millington was the last survivor of the 1945 parliament.
I thought John Freeman was still alive
Impressive that someone who joined the labour party in 1933 is still alive. He’s a Brasenose man too!
Not many labour people in Brasenose. Besides Oriel probably the most tory of colleges.
John Freeman is indeed still alive & is the last surviving member of the 1945 Parliament.
I had a girlfriend who was at Brasenose College Oxford & she (along with all of her Hungarian Jewish refugee family who came over after the 1956 uprising) was a Labour voter. I didn’t think it was a particularly right-wing college at the time though Balliol was probably the most left-wing one. King’s was easily the most left-wing Cambridge college in my day, and the most right-wing ones were Magdalene (usually referred to as an upper-class twits’ college), Corpus Christi whose ferocious Head Porter Mr Jaggard was the model for Skullion in the Tom Sharpe book Porterhouse Blue, and Peterhouse.
The oldest living former MP is Morgan Morgan Giles, born 1914, former member for WInchester.
The second oldest is John Freeman, born 1915, former member for Watford.
Brasenose had for a few years while I was there one of the highest number of applicants (2nd / 30), the very lowest number of state educated pupils (about 30-35%) and one of the poorest academic records (usually 25th or lower / 30)
The year after I suddenly we came 2nd in the Norrington table / 30 from nowhere. Wonder why:p
The most left wing college in my time was certainly St. Johns. Despite being monstrously wealthy (£300 million or so) and very pretty in parts it had a very high state intake of around 70%. Unsurprisingly some of the more modern colleges also were up there. Balliol had quite a few extremist left wingers but a lot of torys too. Incidentally I applied to Balliol but was pooled to Brasenose (I think the only person pooled to Brasense that year as we were one of the most popular colleges just not for my subject)
Wonder if any other posters are Oxbridgers (horrible term). For some reason I always imagined Hemmelig was.
I think Hemelig has mentioned that he was at the LSE but I could be mistaken. Ian R who used to post here regularly was a contemporary of the Cambridge mafia, but he has not posted for a while. David Boothroyd who also is an occasional contributor here is also a Cambridge man
Well remembered Pete. I was at LSE. I don’t think I would have enjoyed Oxbridge.
I think Kieran W went to Oxford.
Pete – when you say mafia, do you mean the likes of Howard, Clarke etc?
Yes indeed Barnaby
Very badly held up by a Co-op delivery in this constituency tonight. I have resolved henceforth to vote Conservative.
Census results, white British, 2001 / 2011:
Fulham Broadway: 59.5% / 45.4%
Munster: 66.8% / 55.2%
Palace Riverside: 70.0% / 62.6%
Parsons Green & Walham: 67.2% / 56.8%
Sands End: 62.3% / 48.9%
Town: 62.9% / 51.3%
Cremorne: 54.0% / 43.6%
Hans Town: 53.4% / 41.3%
Redcliffe: 55.6% / 40.6%
Royal Hospital: 61.9% / 54.7%
Stanley: 60.2% / 48.0%
TOTAL: 61.2% / 49.8%
White overall, Chelsea & Fulham:
2001: 84.8%
2011: 77.3%
There was a numerical increase in the white British population in Sands End from 6,054 to 6,237 although the total population of the ward increased significantly from 9,723 to 12,760.
A majority of the wards in this constituency – 6 out of 11 – went from being majority white British to minority.