Eltham
2010 Results:
Conservative: 15753 (37.54%)
Labour: 17416 (41.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 5299 (12.63%)
BNP: 1745 (4.16%)
UKIP: 1011 (2.41%)
Green: 419 (1%)
English Democrat: 217 (0.52%)
Independent: 104 (0.25%)
Majority: 1663 (3.96%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 16431 (42.2%)
Conservative: 13257 (34.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 6528 (16.8%)
BNP: 911 (2.3%)
Other: 1777 (4.6%)
Majority: 3174 (8.2%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 12105 (34.3%)
Labour: 15381 (43.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 5669 (16.1%)
BNP: 979 (2.8%)
UKIP: 1024 (2.9%)
Other: 147 (0.4%)
Majority: 3276 (9.3%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 10859 (32.1%)
Labour: 17855 (52.8%)
Liberal Democrat: 4121 (12.2%)
Green: 706 (2.1%)
Other: 251 (0.7%)
Majority: 6996 (20.7%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 13528 (31.2%)
Labour: 23710 (54.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 3701 (8.5%)
Referendum: 1414 (3.3%)
Other: 1075 (2.5%)
Majority: 10182 (23.4%)
Boundary changes: Loses part of Woolwich Common and a small part of Glyndon to Greenwich & Woolwich and part of Plumstead to Erith and Thamesmead. Gains part of Middle Park & Sutcliffe, part of Eltham West (including the Ferrier Estate), most of Kidbrooke with Hornfair and an insignificant part of Shooters Hill from Greenwich & Woolwich.
Profile: A south-east London seat in the borough of Greenwich. Eltham is the more Conservative part of Greenwich – in fact it was a Tory seat from 1975 when Peter Bottomley won a by-election in the then Woolwich West until 1997. Parts of the seat like New Eltham are largely suburban commuterland with more in common with areas like Bexley. There is also a large amount of open green space here, such as Oxleas Wood, Shooters Hill and Avery Hill park, now a campus for the University of Greenwich.
The suburban parts of the constituency though are balanced out by the large proportion of council estates such as Middle Park, Page, Horn Park, Coldharbour and the horrendous Ferrier estate, currently being emptied of residents prior to its eventual demolition and planned replacement.
Current MP: Clive Efford(Labour) born 1958, London. Educated at Walworth Comprehensive. Former London taxi driver. Greenwich councillor 1986-1998. Contested Eltham 1992. First elected as MP for Eltham in 1997 (more information at They work for you)
David Gold (Conservative) born 1972. Educated at Royal Holloway. Development director at Brighton College, former business consultant and aide to William Hague. Contested Brighton Pavilion in 2001, then the first openly gay Conservative candidate selected in a winnable seat.Clive Efford(Labour) born 1958, London. Educated at Walworth Comprehensive. Former London taxi driver. Greenwich councillor 1986-1998. Contested Eltham 1992. First elected as MP for Eltham in 1997 (more information at They work for you)
Steven Toole (Liberal Democrat) Born Ashington. Educated at Newcastle University. Liberal Democrat advisor on environmental and transport issues. Contested Erith and Thamesmead 2005.
Arthur Hayles (Green) Retired civil servant.
Ray Adams (UKIP)
Roberta Woods (BNP) Educated at University of Greenwich. IT analyst. Contested London assembly list 2008. Contested London in 2009 European election.
Mike Tibby (English Democrat) Andrew Graham (Independent)2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 87579
Male: 47.7%
Female: 52.3%
Under 18: 23%
Over 60: 20.7%
Born outside UK: 12.3%
White: 86.7%
Black: 5.8%
Asian: 3.7%
Mixed: 2%
Other: 1.7%
Christian: 66.7%
Hindu: 1.2%
Muslim: 2.8%
Sikh: 1%
Full time students: 5.7%
Graduates 16-74: 19%
No Qualifications 16-74: 30.6%
Owner-Occupied: 59.3%
Social Housing: 32.8% (Council: 27%, Housing Ass.: 5.7%)
Privately Rented: 5.6%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 8.4%
In light of ‘The Iron Lady’, is the Tory Assoc here wet? Bottomley previously then Gold, whereas 3,075 voted BNP/UKIP/EngDem. Would a Thatcherite have won here?
That should be 3,175. 1 more than the 2005 notional majority in fact.
I too have thought that a more right leaning candidate may have been able to make this seat Tory again by a very narrow margin. The reality is that Eltham’s demographics are slowly changing (as many have commented on here before) so this seat, even in its new form, will not be as Conservative as it was years ago. I also think credit needs to be given to Clive Efford who clearly chimes with his constituents and probably has a similar backgound/profession to many of those he represents.
I vaguely know a young black guy who lives in Eltham and has lived in the neighbourhood all his life (he is early 20s).
In his early secondary school days he recalls significant racial tension and BNP activity locally, and a large amount of racially-motivated violence.
Ten years later and Eltham has changed significantly. Not only are the racial tensions much calmer and the BNP much less active, the racial mix has also changed enormously. I think it’s quite likely that the non-white population in the 2011 census will be something like 65%.
I do not believe this seat was easily winnable by the Conservatives in 2010. If anything was wrong with David Gold it was that he was an A-list carpetbagger. A local Andrew Rosindell type candidate might have been able to win, but more because of his local credentials than his right-wing views.
The new Eltham seat will be a challenging notional hold for the Tories in 2015 if the demographics continue to shift against them at such a rapid pace.
Lancs Observer
“In light of ‘The Iron Lady’, is the Tory Assoc here wet? Bottomley previously then Gold, whereas 3,075 voted BNP/UKIP/EngDem. Would a Thatcherite have won here?”
No, and most probably no (see my comment above).
In the 1980s, Eltham Conservative Association was known as quite Thatcherite. This made life very uncomfortable for left-wing wet Peter Bottomley, who was very glad to finally be able to escape to Worthing in 1997.
In Alan Clark’s diary, he describes how he got his own back on Bottomley for slagging off his friend Ian Gow by sending the chairman of Eltham Conservatives a little-seen local press cutting in which Bottomley described himself as “basically a good Liberal”. The constituency chairman aparently erupted in rage and Bottomley was worried about being deselected.
In the 80s I recall that both the local Conservative & Labour parties here had high memberships & were thought to be well organized, well above average for London in Labour’s case. I don’t know if this is still considered to be true.
This seat is rather similar to the former (Greenwich) Woolwich West. There was a noteworthy Labour survival there in 1970, just as in 2010, one of a number in London (Putney & Brentford/Chiswick were amongst the others, and one might also mention Norwood). That’s an interesting parallel considering the demographic change which this area has seen in the intervening 40-plus years, as H.Hemmelig says.
I take it that HH means that this seat will be 65% white rather than 65% non-white?
I am fairly confident that Labour will hold Eltham despite the better boundaries for the Conservatives. As well as the demographic change, Clive Efford does seem to be a popular MP and as long as he continues to stand, I don’t think he’ll ever lose. Tories will have a better chance in nearby Erith but even that will be tricky if Labour sees a significant recovery.
Yes Pete, I meant 65% white. Driving around the area even that seems a bit high, but such appearances can often be deceptive.
AKMD – I agree with you on Eltham, but I do not think Labour have much chance in the new Erith. The river wards including East Thamesmead will continue to improve for the Tories due to gentrification and new housing developments. Away from the river, there’s no indication that Bexley won’t continue to be a desert for Labour in the forseeable future.
“basically a good Liberal”
And his wife was basically a good ‘Blair Babe’ 10 years too early.
And his niece was basically a good Cameroon 5 years too early.
If the Conservatives hadn’t had their candidates in Eltham, Tooting, Hammersmith and Westminster N (possibly Hampstead as well) handpicked by Cameron and instead had chosen a good local councillor what would the results have been?
Its possible that not only did the ‘Cameron Project’ fail in the areas it was meant to succeed in it was actually actively detrimental to them.
And if David Davis had been Conservative leader then they might have won some of those constituencies as the local Conservative parties would have been doing things the way they wanted without leadership interference.
AKMD may be right, Eltham will be very tight. It will be one of the more interesting seats to watch in the next GE. I predict that both Labour and the Tories will be campaigning hard here. I don’t think that demographic change has happened to a great extent in Bexley so adding wards from Sidcup may just tip this into the Tory column but I think this very much depends on who we choose to stand against Clive Efford.
I agree with HH – Erith does seem to be slowly moving over to the Conservatives but I dont think that Labour are completely out of the picture there as they still have some strong support.
Richard, although I am a massive fan of Davis I dont think he would have been able to win the election for us in 2010. Cameron is a good leader who has managed to help the party move away from the image which caused the Tories to lose in 1997 so badly. I wholeheartedly agree with your point about choosing local candidates in seats that are high up the target list unless there is HQ candidate whose background/attitudes fit in well with a particular target seat.
Gold may have been a strong candidate and may one day make a good MP but he would not be my first choice for a seat like Eltham.
“Cameron is a good leader who has managed to help the party move away from the image which caused the Tories to lose in 1997 so badly.”
That’s arguable.
But what isn’t is that Cameron was part of a double act, the other half of which was Osborne.
Who most certainly damaged the Conservatives both as Shadow Chancellor and chief strategist.
A Davis-Hammond or Davis-Fallon combination would have been very formidable.
I personally would have placed Clarke as Chancellor and Osbourne as Justice Secretary considering Clarke was a well liked Chancellor across the political spectrum. Osbourne has so far made the right decisions on the economy and seems to have the backing of the City. If we do end up in recession again then you may be right about him damaging the Tories but I dont think that is the case just yet.
David Gold was chosen at an open primary in the summer of 2006. Ironically the two people he defeated, Jackie Doyle-Price and Eric Ollerenshaw, were both elected elsewhere by very small minorities.
I think that Gold continued to work in Brighton after his selection and he didn’t seem to capitalise at been chosen so early in a marginal seat. That may have been his downfall rather than anything ideological.
In 2005 the Tory candidate was Spencer Drury, who is now Group Leader on Greenwich Council. He may have had more chance of defeating Clive Efford who isn’t bad, but not as good as his fan club likes to pretend.
‘A Davis-Hammond or Davis-Fallon combination would have been very formidable.’
I doubt it woukd have got elected in the first place – even with Gordon Brown and the banking crisis of 2008
The whole reason Cameron won in 2005 was because whilst Davis was probably more in touch with grassroots opinion within the party, Cameron was seen as the more electable, primarily because unlike Davis – and many of the Tory high command, except say Clarke and Hunt – he was likeable
For all his faults I still believe that no Cameron in 2005 would mean no Tory led government in 2010
@ Tim Jones
Agreed.
‘If the Conservatives hadn’t had their candidates in Eltham, Tooting, Hammersmith and Westminster N (possibly Hampstead as well) handpicked by Cameron and instead had chosen a good local councillor what would the results have been?’
That’s quite possible although I think they still would have been tight
Daniel Gold was perhaps a poor choice for a socially conservative seat like Eltham, Shaun Bailey seemed out of his depth on any issue outside his area of youth issues and Joanna Cash was simply a rotten candidate
Had they picked more suitable chandidates they might well have swung it
The notional figures for Eltham in 2005 do not make sense for me.
IMO the addition of solid Labour territory from Greenwich & Woolwich should have added 1000-1500 to Labour’s majority here. According to the notional result above, the majority barely changed.
This partly explains the poor performance of the Tories here (and their relatively good performance in Greenwich & Woolwich).
I think half the problem with the selection of candidates for 2010 was that Conservative HQ underestimated how well the Labour vote would hold up. There seems to have been a view (in my opinion)that because Labour were so unpopular nationally we would naturally benefit in places like Westminister North, Hampstead and Eltham. I thought allowing Shaun Bailey to stand in Hammersmith made sense considering his West London routes but Gold was certainly not a good choice for this seat.
The Labour vote stood up well, or increased for the very reason that they were in deep trouble.
I always doubted seats like Westminster North and Hammersmith would come off because they are blocks of opposing support where differential turnout matters more than swings.
Labour’s vote also stood up nationally very well in 1979.
I agree with HH. I questioned the notional results some time ago upthread on the same grounds and the result here and in Greenwich & woolwich did seem to justify this to some extent
The Tory candidate also had to contend with a higher BNP/UKIP vote here than in Hammersmith, Westminster North and Tooting.
Fascinating that two people who didn’t vote Conservative in 2010 are so sure that Cameron was such a great eletoral asset.
Well he didn’t work his charms on them did he!
“Labour’s vote also stood up nationally very well in 1979.”
It did but there was a big increase in the Conservative vote.
Compare with 2010 when Labour nearly collapsed but with only a small Conservative increase.
An indication there of how poorly Brown and Cameron did compared with Callaghan and Thatcher.
It really was a clash of the pygmies.
Yes of course.
I’m not sure 44.9% (43.9% UK) was ever that likely in 2010
because
much as I’d like it to be true
there isn’t that core vote for the 2 main parties that
there still was in 1979 where they could both do well
at the same time.
But I acknowledge we should have hit 40.
I think you’re a little bit disparaging about some of the increases we got though, and the candidates who did well.
Of course, we seem to be heading back towards a bigger two party vote at the next election,
although it would still be a surprise if it hit more than about 76% with the number of others,
and I also believe the LDs will hold about 15-16%.