The UKPollingReport election guide for 2010 has now been archived and all comments will shortly be closed. The new Election Guide for the 2015 election is now online at http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide. The old site is archived at the UK Web Archive.
.

Ealing North

2010 Results:
Conservative: 14722 (30.88%)
Labour: 24023 (50.39%)
Liberal Democrat: 6283 (13.18%)
BNP: 1045 (2.19%)
UKIP: 685 (1.44%)
Green: 505 (1.06%)
Christian: 415 (0.87%)
Majority: 9301 (19.51%)

Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 19823 (46.7%)
Conservative: 12130 (28.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 8001 (18.9%)
Other: 2460 (5.8%)
Majority: 7693 (18.1%)

Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 13897 (29.9%)
Labour: 20956 (45.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 9148 (19.7%)
Green: 1319 (2.8%)
UKIP: 692 (1.5%)
Other: 495 (1.1%)
Majority: 7059 (15.2%)

2001 Result
Conservative: 13185 (29.3%)
Labour: 25022 (55.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 5043 (11.2%)
UKIP: 668 (1.5%)
Green: 1039 (2.3%)
Majority: 11837 (26.3%)

1997 Result
Conservative: 20744 (37.2%)
Labour: 29904 (53.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 3887 (7%)
Other: 1191 (2.1%)
Majority: 7170 (12.9%)

Boundary changes: loses large parts of Hanger Hill and Ealing Broadway to the new Ealing Central and Acton seat, while gaining part of Greenford from Ealing Southall

Profile: A north-west London seat, bi-sected by the A40. The seat covers Northolt, Greenford and Perivale and is mostly relatively homogenous semi-detached suburbia built in the 1920s and 1930s as a dormitory for Ealing, along with some slightly later built council housing. There is a substantial ethnic minority community, but not the degree of neighbours Ealing Southall or Brent North. There is also a substantial Polish community.

Ealing North is a classic marginal that has largely matched the ebbs and flows of the national political picture (though not one of the best bellwether seats as it remained Labour in 1970), historically it has seen some extreme swings, sometimes thanks to local issues. The new boundaries make it slightly safer for Labour and the Conservatives would require an impressive swing to come close to taking the seat, but then, this is a politically volatile area.

portraitCurrent MP: Stephen Pound(Labour) born 1948, Hammersmith. Educated at Hertford Grammar and (as a mature student after working as a seaman and bus conducter) the LSE. Formerly area housing manager of Paddington churches housing association. Ealing councillor from 1982-1998. First elected as MP for Ealing North in 1997. PPS to Hazel Blears between 2005 and 2007, when he resigned over the decision to replace Trident. Normally a Labour loyalist and a self-depreciating Parliamentary wit, Pound famously volunteered in 2003 to pilot through a private members bill on a subject voted for by listeners to Radio 4`s Today programme and quoted Dick Tuck in response to listeners` eventual decision to vote for a “Tony Martin Bill” allowing householders to use force against burgulars: “The people have spoken, the bastards” (more information at They work for you)

2010 election candidates:
portraitIan Gibb (Conservative) Educated at Bradford University. Concrete engineer. Ealing councillor since 1992. Contested Warwickshire North in 2005.
portraitStephen Pound(Labour) born 1948, Hammersmith. Educated at Hertford Grammar and (as a mature student after working as a seaman and bus conducter) the LSE. Formerly area housing manager of Paddington churches housing association. Ealing councillor from 1982-1998. First elected as MP for Ealing North in 1997. PPS to Hazel Blears between 2005 and 2007, when he resigned over the decision to replace Trident. Normally a Labour loyalist and a self-depreciating Parliamentary wit, Pound famously volunteered in 2003 to pilot through a private members bill on a subject voted for by listeners to Radio 4`s Today programme and quoted Dick Tuck in response to listeners` eventual decision to vote for a “Tony Martin Bill” allowing householders to use force against burgulars: “The people have spoken, the bastards” (more information at They work for you)
portraitChris Lucas (Liberal Democrat)
portraitChristopher Warleigh-Lack (Green)
portraitIan de Wulverton (UKIP)
portraitDave Furness (BNP)
portraitPetar Ljubisic (Christian Party)

2001 Census Demographics

Total 2001 Population: 105848
Male: 48.5%
Female: 51.5%
Under 18: 24.2%
Over 60: 16.9%
Born outside UK: 32.1%
White: 62.7%
Black: 10%
Asian: 19.3%
Mixed: 4.2%
Other: 3.8%
Christian: 58.3%
Hindu: 8.6%
Muslim: 9.7%
Sikh: 3%
Full time students: 5.3%
Graduates 16-74: 26.2%
No Qualifications 16-74: 25.6%
Owner-Occupied: 67.1%
Social Housing: 20.4% (Council: 15.5%, Housing Ass.: 4.9%)
Privately Rented: 10.4%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 8.8%

NB - The constituency guide is now archived and is no longer being updated. The new guide is at http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide

241 Responses to “Ealing North”

1 3 4 5
  1. Never realised Paddington South remained marginal in 1970.

    What would the figures for Brent be?

    Assume a 10% Labour majority in Wembley North, 25% Labour majority in Wembley South, as South will have had far more demographic change.

    15% Lib Dem majority in Willesden East and 15% Labour majority in Willesden East.

  2. Probably about right for the Wembley seats (i’d make it slightly under 20% in South with the LDs second).
    The Willesden seats are perhaps not as divergent as you might think. Remember that a substantial part of Willesden East is now in the Hampstead & Kilburn seat and shorn of Teather’s personal vote, Labour would have been well ahead there in 2010. Also Willesden West included some areas which subsequently became part of Brent East and which were relatively strong ground for the LDs and Teather, such as Willesden Green. I’d put the LD lead in East at about 5% and the Labour lead in West not higher than 10%

  3. Is this the constituency that has swung most from the Conservatives since 1987?

  4. Paddington North used to be the seat of Brendan Bracken in the 30s and 40s – one of Winston Churchill’s closest companions. He was rumoured to be Churchill’s illegitimate son on account of him carefully covering up his Irish ancestry.

  5. If you’re trying to do that, being called Brendan wouldn’t help I guess.

  6. Pete – v interesting re levels of Council housing. Lpool West Derby interestingly was a Tory seat when over 70% Council housing stock. Even in the 1991 census it had the highest proportion of housing of any UK seat without central heating (43%).

  7. Barnaby – touche. Apparently Bracken’s story was that he was an orphan from the Australian outback. I’m not sure that someone from an Irish Catholic background (who was open about it) would have been selected by the Conservatives in the 1920s – indeed being a Catholic full stop back then was something of a barrier.

  8. Which London constituencies would ahve changed hands if the 1970 votes had happened this year?

    At a guess:

    Con gain from Lab
    Harrow W
    Brent N
    Ealing N
    Westminster N
    Ilford S
    Streatham
    Croydon N
    Mitcham
    Lewisham W

    Con gain from LibD
    Twickenham
    Kingston
    Sutton
    Carshalton
    Hornsey

    Lab gain from Con
    Putney
    Battersea

    Lab gain from LibD
    Bermondsey

  9. What are the Commision thinking by moving Perivale to what is now most of Brent North?

    I think the proposals for Ealing Council area are some of the worst in London.

    Perivale has strong links with Greenford and Northolt. Although i know Perivale and Alperton are now very similar it shuold still be with Greenford and Northolt.

  10. “Which London constituencies would ahve changed hands if the 1970 votes had happened this year?”

    Mitcham & Morden (Lab)

    Would have been Labour in 1970. I can see why you might have through it would have been Tory (the Mitcham seat being won by over 5000 by the Conservatives) but that included Wallington and excluded Morden. Radio Times 74 list M & M as a Labour seat.

    Dulwich & West Norwood (Con)

    Likely to have been Tory in 1970 because Dulwich was Labour by 895 and Norwood by 613. The combined seat excludes some of the more Labour areas further North form both seats.

    Brentford & Chiswick (Too close to call)

    Had a Labour majority of 513 in 1970. The Radio Times pages for the Feb 1974 election listed Brentford & Isleworth as Conservative but the addition of Hounslow West may have tipped the seat in Labour balance.

    Ealing North (Lab)

    Might have been won by Labour in 1970 as it had a Labour majority in 1970. Boundary changes in 1974 helped the Tories, 1983 helped Labour through the removal of a safe Tory Ealing Ward, 1997 reverted more or less to the 1974 boundaries and 2010 reverted more or less back to the 1983 boundaries so I think Labour would have won the current Ealing North in 1970.

    Putney (Too close to call)

    Wandsworth Putney had a Labour majority of 1300 but included what was then a very safe Labour ward that is now a Tory ward in Battersea. Its possible the removal of that ward in 1974 (and the constituency has only had very minor changes since) would be significant but more likely a Labour majority of a couple of hundred.

    Westminster North (Con but only just)

    I agree that the Conservatives would have won Westminster North but Labour were ahead in the sum of the Paddington seats by around 500 votes and the Northern part of St Marylebone is not really that Tory. St Johns Wood is largely balance by Church Street.

    In 1979 the Tories won Paddington but the notional for Westminster North was only just over 2000, so that would equate to 1500 Con maj in 1970.

    Romford (Con)

    Romford is interesting because Labour won Romford by over 2000 in 1970. I think Pete has allured to Upminster being formed from the more Tory parts of Hornchurch and the more Labour parts of Romford (hence the Conservative victory in Romford against the trend in 1974).

  11. Brentford & Isleworth would definitely have been Conservative in 1970. The addition of Hounslow West wouldn’t have been as harmful to their prospects then as it is now

  12. I’ve actually worked out notional results for every London constituency (current boundaries) for every election going back to 1945. I was planning to publish my findings around now with maps and everything but have rather been overtaken by the Boundary commission proposals, which have a rather more urgent call on my time now

  13. he

  14. Heston & Isleworth had a Conservative majority of 4599 in 1970 and Brentford & Chiswick a Labour majority of 513 in 1970.

    Pete has commented before that if both these constituencies existed today Brentford & Chiswick would now be much more Tory than Brentford & Isleworth as a whole (the reverse of 1970) and Heston & Isleworth would now be a safe Labour seat.

  15. Indeed not only that but the old Feltham would be a better seat now than Heston & Isleworth.

  16. This article suggests this MP is republican.
    I wonder whether his majority would have been this large if that was known.

    h ttp://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/politics/republicans-provoke-labour-7444317.html

  17. How many London constituencies would have had different results in the 1970 London elections and the 1970 general election?

  18. It is difficult to say with certainty, but looking at the GLC results, I’d say the Conservatives likely carried the following seats which were held by Labour in the general election:
    Ealing North
    Acton
    Brentford & Chiswick
    Puney
    Norwood
    Dulwich
    Lewisham North
    Woolwich West
    Romford

  19. Pete, I could give you details of the London seats I did just after the 2010 election using the old boundary review rules, trying to second guess the boundary review that never was. I only got round to doing London and the Met counties, but here are the changes I thought about for London;

    I’ve put in brackets how I think they would have gone in 2010.

    Ealing would be paired with Hounslow, the new seats would be:

    Ealing Central and Acton (Con)_
    Ealing West (Lab)
    Heston and Southall (Lab)
    Hounslow East (Con)
    Hounslow West (Lab)

    Camdon would go back to the old Holbon and St Pancras and Hampstead and Highgate seats.

    Westminster would be paired with Brent, with the new seats being:

    Brent Central (Lib Dem)
    Brent North (Lib)
    Cities of London and Westminster Con)
    Kilburn and Regent’s Park (Too close to call)

    The Tower Hamlets/Newham pairing would be brought back, but the Poplar and Canning Town seat would just take the two Canning Town wards from Newham, not Becton.

    The big changes would be in South London.

    Bromley would go back to 3 seats on it’s own (Beckenham, Bromley and Chilstlehurst, Orpington).

    Lewisham would be paired with Southwark. New seats:

    Depford and Rotherhithe (Lab)
    Lewisham East (Lab)
    Lewisham West (Lab)
    Southwark North (Lib Dem)
    Southwark South (Lab)

    And Lambeth would be paired with Croydon. New seats:

    Croydon East (Con)
    Croydon North (Lab)
    Croydon South (Con)
    Herne Hill and South Brixton (Lab)
    Streatham and Norbury (Lab)
    Vauxhall

  20. Presumably you meant Lab rather than Lib for Brent North.

  21. Would Ealing have needed pairing on the old system? It sounds like if you added all of Heston to the mix the three ealing seats would end up quite oversized. I agree with most of what else you propose, though I don;t like names like Southwark South, Hounslow East etc. Herne Hill and South Brixton could just be called Norwood. I personally always favoured trying to break the Harrow/Hillingdon gerrymandered link so would have gone for a Hillingdon/Hounslow link and a Brent/Harrow one. Not sure on the numbers though

  22. A Croydon-Lambeth pairing is a bad idea.

    The Commission’s proposal of pairing Croydon and Sutton makes a lot more sense.

  23. “It is difficult to say with certainty, but looking at the GLC results, I’d say the Conservatives likely carried the following seats which were held by Labour in the general election:
    Ealing North
    Acton
    Brentford & Chiswick
    Puney
    Norwood
    Dulwich
    Lewisham North
    Woolwich West
    Romford”

    The GLC elections on April 9th pointed to a Conservative general election victory.

    So what happened between then and May 18th which convinced Wilson to call the general election?

    Was there a large scale move in the opinion polls between the two dates?

    Or were the Conservatives believed to be doing much better in London than the country as a whole? Something which turned out to be the complete opposite in the general election.

  24. Pete, Heston and Southall would not include the Elthorne and Norwood Green wards which would go to Ealing West. Ealing West is bassically the current Ealing North plus these wards, with Cleveland ward going to Ealing Central and Acton (hence the change of name).

    The Hounslow parts of the seat would just be the 3 Heston wards, meaning it only makes a net gain of 1 ward compared to the current Ealing Southall, bringing its electorate to about 73,000.

    I considered alternative pairings of Camdon/Westminster, Brent/Harrow and Hillingdon/Hounslow, but it would be pointless to involve Harrow and Hillingdon when the high electorate of Holbon and St Pancras can be dealt with by having 2 whole Camdon seats, and the oversized Hounslow seats can be dealth with through a pairing with Ealing.

    Plus a Hays and Heston seat wouldn’t be popular if it includes residential areas to both the north and south of Heathrow airport.

    I thought about alternative arrangements for the 5 seats in Ealing/Hounslow:

    Brentford and Heston
    Easling Central
    Ealing East and Chiswich
    Ealing West
    Hounslow and Feltham.

    But that would have led to more broken local ties.

    I couldn’t think of more suitable names for the Southwark and Hounslow seats, and I really struggled to come up with a name for Herne Hill and South Brixton. Norwood wouldn’t be suitable because most of the Norwood area would be in the Streatham and Norbury seat.

  25. Well the South Norwood and Upper Norwood areas would be but then they have always been outside the Norwood seat but it is more or less that seat which you’re recreating and it was a good enough name from 1885 until 1997

  26. Pete is right.

    Neither Upper Norwood nor South Norwood are actually part of “Norwood”, despite their confusing names. They are both an intrinsic part of Croydon, whereas Norwood proper is intrinsically part of Lambeth, with a bit of smudging into Dulwich.

    This is one of the pitfalls of trying to draw arbitrary boundaries in areas you do not know the first thing about. I think it would be impossible for me to sit in south London and come up with a convincing proposal for constituency boundaries in Walsall just by looking at the map. Likewise you cannot sit in Walsall and draw boundaries in south London that way without knowing the idiosyncracies of the areas involved.

    Actually I think the boundary commission have done a pretty good job in south London. It is north of the river where most of the bad proposals are.

  27. I agree on the last point, excepting of course Croydon Central & St Helier, but it was a horrendously difficult job in London – unfortunate that the region wasn’t allocated 69 seats as that would have made things a lot easier

  28. Well even under the previous more relaxed guidelines, it was never possible for the boundary commission to avoid the odd badly cobbled together constituency resulting from the odds and ends of all the other mostly sensible proposals.

    Croydon Central and St Helier is the only really bad seat in their south London proposals, but it does not compare with the horrors of Chingford & Edmonton or Romford & Dagenham, etc.

    And also some previous errors in south London have been put right. For example getting rid of the hideous Lewisham West & Penge.

  29. Richard, you are right in saying that a seat with residential areas both north & south of Heathrow wouldn’t be popular, but that’s just what is being proposed in the shape of the mooted Feltham & Hayes constituency.

  30. On the nomenclature aspect, I’d agree about the pitfalls of naming Hounslow seats as “Hounslow West” and Hounslow East” given these are already distinct names pertaining to areas of Hounslow (and of course have Tube stations bearing these names). Chiswick, for example, would gladly absolve itself of any “Hounslow” aspect (think Windsor trying to get its own postcode so as not to be associated with Slough!). Heck, I try to get away with “Whitton borders”!

    Brentford and Heston would be nonsensical. Heston is more closely aligned with Cranford and Hounslow West, whereas Brentford could be a likely candidate to tie in with South Ealing, especially the part around, and to the north of, the A4. Chiswick in this regard could extend out to the edge of Acton (Bollo Road area). However, this all looks rather fanciful and I suspect the Boundary Commission has done a fairly decent job even if it means the London Borough of Hounslow would now have four different constituencies.

  31. It seems that Mr Pound will be consulting his doctor after his earlier protests that he did not fall asleep during the Commons debate on our troops work in Afghanistan was shown to be lies.

    It seems Mr Pound has been receiving a lot of hate mail over night accusing him of disrespecting the troops.

    I don’t know why Mr Pound couldn’t just be honest and apologise. We all know that shadow ministers have to work hard. It wouldn’t be the first time that MPs had fallen asleep in the chamber.

    If-as I expect-it is found that there is nothing medically wrong with Mr Pound, he’s going to have a lot more apologising to do. Opponents will surely then be entitled to accuse him of trying to desperately find a medical excuse to cover up his initial misdemeanor. Making the whole thing much worse.

    Maybe he should consider resigning from the frontbench to spend more time with his bed?

  32. Politicians tend to lie first and apologise when caught out. A sad but true fact.

  33. I believe Ealing town centre was in Enfield East from 1950-74 and this seat since then? Before then it was of course in Ealing!

  34. Ealing East only existed from 1945-1950 and was effectively replaced by Ealing South then which did indeed include the centre of Ealing and indeed most of Ealing ‘proper’ while Ealing North consisted mostly of Greenford and Northolt with only a small part of Ealing proper around Hangar Hill. Ealing South was then split between the other three Ealing seats but the town centre was put in the Ealing Acton seat where it remained until 1997 when it was then mostly moved into Ealing Southall (as at the time the town centre was mostly contained within Ealing Common ward). As of 2010 the twon centre of Ealing is not surprisingly in Ealing Central and Acton. That part of the town centre which lies north of the mainline railway would have been in Ealing North though from 1974-83 and again from 1997 to 2010, but that is not the greater part of the town centre

  35. Interesting how Ealing North had veered to the left over the last half century but neighbouring Uxbridge has veered to the left

    1955 result
    Ealing North Cons by 246
    Uxbridge Labour by 876.
    Boundary changes may have had some effect but wouldn’t explain such a difference, perhaps Pete could extrapolate the 2010 result on the 1955 boundaries

  36. Ethnic make-up?

  37. Well Uxbridge/S Ruislip & its predecessor constituency Uxbridge is far more white-dominated than Ealing North. This is even more so now than a generation ago.

  38. “perhaps Pete could extrapolate the 2010 result on the 1955 boundaries”

    Uxbridge
    Con 20622 49.3%
    Lab 11018 26.3%
    LD 6759 16.1%
    BNP 1175 2.8%
    UKIP 989 2.4%
    Grn 460 1.1%
    oth 846 2.0%

    Ealing North
    Lab 21052 48.2%
    Con 14259 32.7%
    LD 6098 14.0%
    BNP 847 1.9%
    UKIP 584 1.3%
    Grn 403 0.9%
    oth 411 0.9%

    Boundary changes have not made much of a difference in either seat. They have been fairly minor in Ealing North and while there have been majot boundary changes in Uxbridge (& South Ruislip) these are fairly electorally neutral. In fact I calculated that Uxbridge & South Ruislip would narrowly have voted Labour in 1997 but since then Labour’s support has collapsed in South Ruislip so these figures now show the old Uxbridge to be a slightly better seat than the current one. Certainly in 1955 that area wouldn’t have done Labour any harm.
    Another way to look at this is to estimate the 1955 result on the current boundaries (something I had already worked out for all the London seats)

    Uxbridge & South Ruislip
    Lab 22222 50.8%
    Con 21488 49.2%

    Ealing North
    Con 27626 48.4%
    Lab 25550 44.8%
    Lib 3871 6.8%

    The ethnic makeup of the seats is the obvious and major factor. One other factor I would suggest may be changes in housing tenure. Uxbridge back in the 1950s would have had a signifcantly higher proportion of council housing than Ealing North with large concetrations to the south of Uxbridge and in Yiewsley/West Drayton and also in Harefield. These consisted mostly of housing rather than system built estates and have been heavilya ffected by RTB, whereas some of the estates in Ealing North are of a far more brutal nature and have remained primarily in local authotiy hands (eg the Rectory Park estate in Northolt). Harefield is perhaps the part of Middlesex that has most strongly swung away from Labour in the last couple of decades (as most of the county has swung in their favour). While of course it isn’t in the current Uxbridge seat it was in the 1955 version and would have accounted for all of Labour’s majority then, so that on the 1997-2010 boundaries of Uxbridge, the Conservatives would have won in 1955

  39. Thank you Pete

  40. Census results – white British, 2001 / 2011:

    Cleveland: 54.7% / 42.8%
    Greenford Broadway: 49.9% / 25.9%
    Greenford Green: 48.9% / 26.5%
    Hobbayne: 56.1% / 38.6%
    North Greenford: 40.0% / 23.3%
    Northolt Mandeville: 58.1% / 32.9%
    Northolt West End: 58.3% / 33.7%
    Perivale: 37.0% / 20.2%

    TOTAL: 50.4% / 30.3%

    White overall, Ealing North:
    2001: 62.7%
    2011: 49.9%

  41. Some big drops in the white British population, most notably in Greenford Broadway where the figure almost halved.

1 3 4 5