Dartford
2010 Results:
Conservative: 24428 (48.78%)
Labour: 13800 (27.56%)
Liberal Democrat: 7361 (14.7%)
UKIP: 1842 (3.68%)
English Democrat: 2178 (4.35%)
Independent: 264 (0.53%)
Others: 207 (0.41%)
Majority: 10628 (21.22%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 19309 (42.7%)
Conservative: 18725 (41.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 4623 (10.2%)
Other: 2541 (5.6%)
Majority: 583 (1.3%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 19203 (41.1%)
Labour: 19909 (42.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 5036 (10.8%)
UKIP: 1407 (3%)
Other: 1224 (2.6%)
Majority: 706 (1.5%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 18160 (40.6%)
Labour: 21466 (48%)
Liberal Democrat: 3781 (8.5%)
UKIP: 989 (2.2%)
Other: 344 (0.8%)
Majority: 3306 (7.4%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 20950 (40.3%)
Labour: 25278 (48.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 4827 (9.3%)
Other: 943 (1.8%)
Majority: 4328 (8.3%)
Boundary changes: Only minor changes, with Dartford losing Horton Kirby and South Darenth, while gaining the hamlet of Hodsall Street.
Profile: The last seat in Kent before Greater London, Dartford is a former industrial area that is now largely a commuter town. The town is undergoing rapid expansion with large scale housing projects around the Bluewater shopping centre and Ebbsfleet, which will be served by the high speed Channel tunnel raillink. Dartford itself contains strong Labour areas like the Tree and Temple Hill housing estates, but is balanced out by outlying Conservative supporting areas like Joydens Wood and Longfield.
Following the 2010 election (and Labour holding onto former bellwethers Chorley and Luton South) Dartford is the country`s strongest bellwether seat, having returned an MP from the party that went on to win the election since 1964.
Current MP: Gareth Johnson (Conservative) born 1969. Educated at Dartford Grammar School. Solicitor. Former Bexley councillor. Contested Lewisham West 2001, Dartford 2005. MP for Dartford since 2010.
Gareth Johnson (Conservative) born 1969. Educated at Dartford Grammar School. Solicitor. Former Bexley councillor. Contested Lewisham West 2001, Dartford 2005
John Adams (Labour) Educated at University of Wales. Journalist and former Bank of England regulator. Contested Ashford 2001, Brentford and Ongar 2005.
James Willis (Liberal Democrat) Account manager.
Richard Palmer (UKIP) Born Sheffield. Formerly worked for the Air Ambulance Service.
Gary Rogers (English Democrat) born 1967. Taxi driver.
Stephane Tindame (Independent) Self-employed customs agent
Ernie Crockford (Fancy Dress) Retired civil servant.2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 91782
Male: 48.9%
Female: 51.1%
Under 18: 23.5%
Over 60: 19.7%
Born outside UK: 5.7%
White: 94.7%
Black: 0.8%
Asian: 2.6%
Mixed: 1.2%
Other: 0.7%
Christian: 73.7%
Hindu: 0.7%
Muslim: 0.7%
Sikh: 1.1%
Full time students: 2.5%
Graduates 16-74: 13.9%
No Qualifications 16-74: 27.9%
Owner-Occupied: 74.9%
Social Housing: 15.9% (Council: 12.5%, Housing Ass.: 3.4%)
Privately Rented: 7.1%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 6.1%
Indeed. Dartford looks to have ended its bellwether status which it’s enjoyed since 1964, in that Labour could gain a large majority in Parliament and still not gain the seat now. Why it’s behaved so differently from Gravesham would be interesting for someone with local knowledge to explain, since the seats appear to have strong similarities. Is one slight factor the larger non-white vote in Gravesham? I still wouldn’t imagine it’s that significant even so.
I think it is significant not least because it is mostly Sikh which is an overwhelmingly strong Labour demographic still and influences a number of wards in Gravesham. However these were I think mostly in Labour’s hands already. The strange thing was the Conservatives winning here in 2005 while failing in Dartford (and all the other Kent marginals)
Yes that was strange, & I’ve yet to see a convincing explanation for it. I know that one area, Shorne, is particularly overwhelmingly Conservative & perhaps they just got their vote out better there and in their better parts of Gravesend & other tiny villagey bits than Labour in Northfleet & their stronger parts of Gravesend. Even so, it was distinctly odd. The result does put the seat back, even if a bit faintly, on Labour’s target list, but it will need to be a big national Labour win for it to fall. One disadvantage the Tories will have is that Adam Holloway will no longer have first-time incumbency, but that won’t make that huge a difference. Of course, the boundary changes will be of great importance in North Kent & can make or mar Labour & the Tories alike.
As I had suspected the reported figures on the council website were incorrect. They had counted all votes cast, rather than averaging out the votes for candidates in multi member wards. Gravesham has a mixture of three and two member wards with one single member ward. This means they are counting votes in three member wards three times. It happens that Labour won most of the three member wards while the Conservatives won most of the two member wards. This means that not only did the Conservatives win a sizeable plurality of votes (between 1,500 and 2,000 depending on whether you take highest vote or average vote) but they won an absolute majority of votes. The same thing happend in 2003
That would be different then & the result is more easily explicable.
I would imagine the new developments around Bluewater and Greenhithe will only help to make this seat more Conservative in the future.
Pete,
please could you do an estimate of how
the 2010 General Election would have looked
on the 1950/51 Dartford seat?
Not sure this can be unscrambled from the reverse scenario you have calculated.
As it happens I have figures I worked out recently as part of a series I am doing on the 2010 election on old boundaries in London (since the dominant element of that Dartford seat was Erith & Crayford it is included)
Con 29082 43.3%
Lab 22648 33.7%
LD 8432 12.6%
BNP 2280 3.4%
UKIP 2168 3.2%
Grn 303 0.5%
Oth 2211 3.3%
Thanks for the prompt reply – I suspected you might have the figures Pete.
Well here we see a substantial swing to the Conservatives – both parties are of course down compared to 1950/51 in the national vote.
I think in 1950,
Labour won by 38,000 to Conservatives 24,000
and in 1951
it was 40,000 to 27,000
and IIRC no Liberal candidates.
Anthony no doubt is very busy, since there’s a by-election in Castle ward in his borough tomorrow. Looks safe Tory on paper.
If Labour win the next election and lose this seat what would be the longest lasting bellweather?
It seems very very highly likely that Labour WILL fail to pick up this seat regardless of the outcome of the next generel election.
With Gravesham also having completely ceased to be a bellweather now, I’m not at all sure that any of the old bellweather’s are still applicable as such.
I suppose you could make a case for the ‘Basildon South and whatever it’s called’ seat though. It proved to be an important bellweather in 1992 and also in 2010. It will probably also be again next time.
On current boundaries maybe Worcester (obviously it used to be more rural and tory)
The old Conwy seat in North Wales used to be quite a reliable bellweather,
others i can think of would be gloucester, bedford, swindon and nowadays hove
also stevanage, crawley, northampton north, corby, loughborough, stafford, warrington south
I agree with Shaun. Labour will probably never win Dartford again and expect barely any Labour recovery in the other Medway seats at the next election (although the Labour vote could recover in Gravesham somewhat).
I wouldn’t say Warrington South by any means. We may be beginning to confuse bellweather with ‘marginal’.
Warrington South could easily vote Labour in a year of Tory victory. Maybe Corby could as well.
Meanwhile, Stafford looks a bit too Tory to me, and I would expect it to be held at the next election even if Labour gains seats overall.
Northampton North, Warrington South, Hove, Bedford and Corby are too weak for the tories relative to labour, Stafford too strong.
Stevenage is a good example, as is Loughborough.
N Swindon is even at the moment but trending tory too quickly to be a good candidates.
Well Dartford remains one of the truest belwethers by the correct definition of the term having won by the party which formed the government at every election since 1964. It may be well that the record will be broken in 2015 but there are few other contenders and clearly seats like Stafford and Hove are not since they were held by the Conservatives throughout the 60s and 70s. Bristol NW is a good candidate having been won by the part which won the national popular vote at every election since 1966 (It didn;t vote for the party which went on to form the government i February 1974, but then neither did the country at large). Calder Valley remains an excellent belwether and if you take it to be the linear successor of Brighouse & Spenborough, then it has been held by the governing party since 1960
Another pair of seats which lost their joint bellwether status in 2010 was the 2 Luton seats. They had voted for the winning party at every general election since the Tories won in 1950, irrespective of whether or how the town was divided. Just as Dartford looks safe for the Tories now, it’s very hard to see either Luton seat voting Conservative in the future, despite the narrow Labour win in South. If the Tories couldn’t win South in the propitious circumstances they enjoyed in 2010, they will be lucky to win it ever again. That does however depend on boundary changes – if Dunstable or other neighbouring areas were to be put in with Luton, then the Tories might well be back in business. One other once reliable bellwether was Bolton E, which even voted Conservative in a 1961 by-election when they were in office, only to boot them out in 1964 when Labour came to power, but if one considers Bolton NE to be its linear successor, it blotted its copybook in 2010, having already done so as Bolton E in 1979. As Pete says, changing demography & boundaries means we’re running out of bellwethers a bit but I wouldn’t be surprised, if I rack my brains all afternoon, I might think of one which is a good contender. The US incidentally no longer has a reliable postwar bellwether state, though Tennessee has been fairly reliable until it voted for McCain in 2008.
Enfield N, since its formation in 1974, has always voted for the party which formed (or led) the government since then. It may however lose its bellwether status before long.
Above I was discussing what we would predict to be a strong future bellweather.
Its remarkeable that Tennessee is such a bellweather in the US. Presumably it has now drifted way out of the democrats hands
Bristol NW must be a good shout.
“Calder Valley remains an excellent belwether and if you take it to be the linear successor of Brighouse & Spenborough, then it has been held by the governing party since 1960″
I always thought that Calder Valley is the linear successor of Sowerby, and Batley & Spen the linear successor of Brighouse & Spenborough.
That is quite true, but it wouldn’t have worked as well with Sowerby
It does illustrate a problem though identifying long term belweethers as Barnaby discussed in that boundaries have changed so much it isn;t always possible to say that such and such a seat has behaved similar to the nation over a long period. For example the two Swindon seats were mentioned – of course these have only existed since 1997 and before then Swindon was never a belwether seat being more or less safely Labour up until 1983. It does look like they may have the potential to develop in that way as does for example Milton Keynes South, but again alot depends on the approacg taken by the boundary commission at each review. This has had the effect of preventing Southampton Test for example from continuing as a belwether as it had done from the 1950s to the 1980s. So Calder Valley has only existed since 1983 but has been a very good belwether during that time and it does continue a tradition in that area from Brighouse & Spenborough which also had a good record for the last couple of decades of its existance
‘Its remarkeable that Tennessee is such a bellweather in the US.’
It’s not any more – it didn’t even back its own senator against George W Bush in 2000 and Obama didn’t come close to taking it in 2008 – and has no chance in 2012
Ominously it is also one of a handful of states to still have a fully functioning electric chair.
Ohio is the ultimate bellweather in the US
Missouri used to be but that’s now fairly safe for the Republicans
I’d say Florida or maybe Nevada is probably the closest bellweather in the US – maybe even New Mexico too
Bristol NW is a good shout – as is Enfield North
Maybe Watford too – although the lIb Dems have got themselves involved there complicating things and it stick with Labour throughout the 70s so maybe not
I would have thought Stevenage or Crawley but neither have been seats in their own right until the 70s and 80s so you can’t count them
I wasn’t aware Calder Valley was the successor to
Watford did vote Conservative in 1979 of course, defeating the later-to-be-famous Tony Banks who was Labour candidate. It did vote Labour in 1970 though. It’s perfectly possible that Labour could take it again if current polls are borne out even if the LDs continue to control the local (not in any way coterminous) council, as seems very likely for the foreseeable future.
Missouri isn’t yet a write-off for Obama in this election though Romney remains a favourite at the moment. I still think certain types of Democrat could win Tennessee in a good Democrat year, though Obama doesn’t have a chance there.
Well you say that Missouri is not yet completely written off for Obama, but the present average Republican lead in the state is 7.3% which I would suggest puts it well out of the race.
People seem unable to believe the polls in the US showing the race still neck and neck. They make this presumption that Obama’s ratings will ‘inevitably’ go up as polling day apporaches.
So states where Obama marginaly leads now we are told he will ‘certainly win’. States where he is marginaly behind we are told he will ‘probably win’ and states like Missouri where he is quite well behind we are told are ‘too close to call’.
People seem unable to reconcile themselves to the possibility that Obama might only just scrape in to a second term, let alone that he might actually lose.
As it is, I predict Obama to win. But it’s going to be very very close indeed and states like Missouri will not be won by him. Ohio is the key bellweather, I think.
Current polls in the marginal states however are generally very bad for Romney. He is now an average of several percentage points behind in Virginia, Ohio & Florida, and a slight lead for Romney in N Carolina has now become a slight lead for Obama. This is the average of the polls, not just isolated ones. National polls still show a close race but there seems to be some evidence that Romney is piling useless huge leads in a few states such as Utah & Oklahoma & not doing what’s needed in the swing states. If Obama devotes some time to Missouri, it could still be close, but he may decide to write it off & concentrate on holding what he already has. I predicted some time ago that Obama would lose Indiana but nothing else, and that’s what the polls are currently suggesting too.
I’m not sure if Indiana will be the ONLY state to change hands when the election itself comes. I personally still have high hopes for Florida and North Carolina and Virginia. I’m also surprised that Colorado and New Hampshire are still so close on paper given how well Obama is doing in these marginals.
The present average leads in some key marginals according to ‘Real Clear Politics’ is presently as follows:
Florida – Obama +3.1
Colorado – Obama +2.5
Michigan – Obama +8.6
Nevada – Obama +4.2
Missouri – Romney +7.3
North carolina – Obama +1.0
Ohio – Obama +5.2
Virginia – Obama +4.5
New Hampshire – Obama +1.0
It certainly points to the Obama victory I always expected, but not by any means a certainty yet.
‘People seem unable to believe the polls in the US showing the race still neck and neck. They make this presumption that Obama’s ratings will ‘inevitably’ go up as polling day apporaches.’
I certainly have a problem believing the current polls
Romney is head and shoulders the weakest, most inept, dislikeable, clueless, out of touch and uncharismatic candidate the Republicans have picked for decades
George W Bush might have been an idiot and a pretty dire President but at least he had some kind of charm and appeal
Romney has none of that – I find the fact the Presidential race whilst not exactly in the balance, is still an unforgone conclusion, amazing but I guess that just underlines the difference between this country and the US – where a candidate as utterly awful as Romney still has appeal
Similarly I imagine many Americans would wonder what possible appeal Ed Miliband has – he scores pretty badly on likeability, charisma etc. etc. as well.
Is it only me who finds Obama rather unlikeable as well?
‘I’m not sure if Indiana will be the ONLY state to change hands when the election itself comes. I personally still have high hopes for Florida and North Carolina and Virginia’
I’d say Indiana certainly and North Carolina and maybe even Florida too – as Romney is clearly courting the jewish vote
Still, there’s a good montrh to go so that could change – which was the point of my original post
I’m sure in ’96 Clinton had pulled way ahead of Bob Dole at this stage – but then he had Newt Gringach and his ‘Contract with America’ Republicans largely to thank for that
“Is it only me who finds Obama rather unlikeable as well?”
I do too. I can’t quite see the appeal to be honest. He’s billed as being very down to earth, but the clips I saw of his ‘visionary speechmaking’ just made him sound like he was stuck in the 1930s, using some very odd phrases and language that seemed a little old fashioned.
He’s completely failed to live up his hype and I would say that his inexperience is painfully evident-covered up to some extent by the fact that he’s generally no worse than other world leaders when you line them up.
Perhaps it reflects a general trend of declining quality in leaders around the world?
Just one small point – there does seem to be a tendency to exaggerate the extent of the Jewish vote in Florida. There is a jokey song, “I’m as lonesome as a Gentile in Miami”, but that really isn’t true any more, if it ever was. The number of Jewish voters in Florida isn’t that great outside of a couple of population centres, and it isn’t particularly huge anywhere – it isn’t like the New York conurbation. In any case, however much Romney courts the Jewish vote, it will stay pretty strongly Democrat as it has been for a long while now. It isn’t the GOP’s foreign policy that’s the problem – it’s the perception that the GOP is, how shall I put it, full of fundamentalist Christian nutters, and is getting more so, and thus doesn’t represent the domestic interests of Jews as Jews. The Conservative Party in Britain doesn’t have such an image, and thus has avoided the poor showing amongst Jewish voters in Britain that has dogged the GOP. Plus, the perception is that there are more anti-Israel figures in the Labour Party than in the US Democrats (and than in the Tory party here) though that is almost certainly less true than it was a generation ago.
He’s not Clinton, not even a Callaghan in the likeability stakes.
He’s not as dislikeable as many recent tory leaders though, (Im thinking of Howard and IDS in particular – I’m an enormous Thatcher fan, but she wasn’t really likeable either, admirable yes, likeable no.
Having said that Labour have had Brown, Blair and Kinnock …
It seems that despite the poll advantage for Obama mentioned above, some still think that Romney could win based on differential turnout:
w w w.dickmorris.com/romney-pulls-ahead/
That may well be his main problem yes. Obama’s supporters are less motivated than Romney’s. The race is far from over.
‘Obama’s supporters are less motivated than Romney’s. The race is far from over.’
the race is far from over but the cynic in me says that obama might be able to provide that motivation were he to run a purely negative campaign (as i think he might be tempted)
let’s face it – up against a candidate like romney, he’s got plenty of ammunition – he won’t even have to make anything up
I heard an interview with a Republican pollster on the radio this evening & he sounded pretty gloomy. He said there’s no doubt that Obama’s lead has increased by a few points in the last few weeks, and thought that it’s essential for Romney to win at least one of the debates big.
It’s actually quite a long way to go – if this was Britain it would be just before the campaign.
I suspect Obama will win by 2 to 5%.
Back to matters Dartfordian, the Conservatives held Castle ward last night, but it was a better result for Labour than in last year’s elections:
Conservative 191 43.02%
Labour 111 25.00%
UKIP 60 13.51%
Residents Association 50 11.26%
English Democrats 32 7.21%
The Conservatives dropped by roughly 13.6% compared to 2011, when UKIP did not stand in the ward, which does suggest that a certain amount of Conservatives switched to UKIP.
Not especially good news for Labour really in an area that has long been dominated by the two main parties as to get any recovery going in Dartford they really need Conservative voters to switch to them rather than going to a third party.
Indeed, a 9% swing from Cons to Labour in Castle ward.
Does anyone think Labour will ever win this seat back. I’m still shocked at the dramatic swing to the Tories in at the General Election in 2010.
I can’t see Labour winning this back even if they win with a decent majority in 2015. Anyone think this seat has gone from a bellweather / marginal to a safe Tory seat or can Labour win this back in 2020 or 2025?
It’s very hard to picture now, but things can change. I don’t think so next time, whichever of the parties is successful overall.
Perhaps ‘safe Tory seat’ is pushing it. I suppose it can now be characterised as a Tory-leaning semi-marginal- winnable for Labour, but only in landslide conditions. It is worth remembering that even in 1997, the Tories still managed 40%- about 10% points up on their national share. I certainly don’t see Labour winning this in 2015.
It’s a safe Tory seat for the forseeable future.
That might change in 10-15 years’ time if the massive demographic changes that have been affecting London eventually spill over into North Kent.
That’s the only way I could see Labour winning this back unless they win a national landslide.
It’s clear that since WWII Dartford has gradually changed from being an essentially safe Labour seat, to a bellwether by 1970, to one which Labour can only now expect to win in a landslide (though it was narrowly held in 2005). I suspect that the process will continue & that it will be a Tory hold next time even if Labour wins quite big.