Kensington
2010 Results:
Conservative: 17595 (50.06%)
Labour: 8979 (25.54%)
Liberal Democrat: 6872 (19.55%)
UKIP: 754 (2.15%)
Green: 753 (2.14%)
Others: 197 (0.56%)
Majority: 8616 (24.52%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Conservative: 13958 (44.9%)
Labour: 8857 (28.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 6161 (19.8%)
Other: 2108 (6.8%)
Majority: 5102 (16.4%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 18144 (57.9%)
Labour: 5521 (17.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 5726 (18.3%)
Green: 1342 (4.3%)
UKIP: 395 (1.3%)
Other: 208 (0.7%)
Majority: 12418 (39.6%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 15270 (54.5%)
Labour: 6499 (23.2%)
Liberal Democrat: 4416 (15.8%)
UKIP: 416 (1.5%)
Green: 1158 (4.1%)
Other: 279 (1%)
Majority: 8771 (31.3%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 19887 (53.6%)
Labour: 10368 (28%)
Liberal Democrat: 5668 (15.3%)
Other: 1165 (3.1%)
Majority: 9519 (25.7%)
Boundary changes: Major. The borough of Kensington and Chelsea will no longer be twinned with Westminster when deciding boundaries, so the North Kensington part of the old Regent`s Park and North Kensington seat, including Notting Hill, joins this seat, while Chelsea is hived off to form the new Chelsea and Fulham constituency.
Profile: a residential seat west of central London, recently brought into the congestion charge zone. Kensington is one of the most solidly Conservative parts of the country, the housing is largely expensive gardens squares and Georgian terraces. Kensington High street is an upmarket shopping hub, Kensington Palace is the residence of several members of the Royal Family and Kensington Palace Gardens the site of many embassies and a few private residences for the super-rich. South Kensington is the museum district, home to the Natural History Museum, the Science Museum and the Victoria and Albert and is somewhat more cosmopolitan, housing the halls of residence for Imperial College.
As well as Kensington itself the seat covers Earl`s Court, Brompton, Holland Park and Notting Hill. Earls Court is far more run down and cheaper than it`s richer neighbour and while it it undergoing rapid gentrification and contains its own areas of the super-rich such as the Boltons, there are still cheap areas of run down hotels and bedsits around Earls Court Exhibition Centre, which straddles the boundary between this and Hammersmith.
Notting Hill today is an affluent and trendy area associated politically with David Cameron and the younger Conservative set surrounding him, and more widely with the Notting Hill carnival, led by the area`s vibrant Afro-Carribean community. It is a highly cosmopolitan area, having fallen on hard times in the twentieth century and become associated with dingy flats and houses of multiple occupancy it has undergone rapid gentrification. These days while the old Victorian private houses are sought after and extortionately expensive, there is much social housing and tower blocks and there remains a large ethnic population and areas of social deprivation in North Kensington and Ladbroke Grove. Whereas the Kensington wards are safely Conservative, northern wards like Notting Barns, which includes the tower blocks of Lancaster West Estate, and Colville reliabley return Labour councillors.
Kensington and Chelsea has had a high turnover of high profile MPs. When originally created in 1997 it selected the Chelsea MP Sir Nicholas Scott, who was forced to stand down prior to the election over accusations of alcoholism after being found in a gutter in Bournemouth. The seat was instead fought and won by the former MP and famed diarist Alan Clark, making a return to Parliament having grown bored of retirement. He died two years later and the subsequent by-election returned Michael Portillo, the former Defence Secretary. Portillo spent a year as Shadow Chancellor before unsuccessfully contesting the Conservative leadership and then stepping down from politics. In 2005 the seat was won by another former minister, defeated in 1997, this time the former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind. Like Michael Portillo he briefly served in the shadow cabinet, stood for the leadership of the party, lost, and returned to the backbenches, though unlike Portillo he shows no signs of retiring from politics.
Current MP: Sir Malcolm Rifkind(Conservative) born 1946, Edinburgh. Educated at George Watson`s College and Edinburgh University. Advocate and QC. Contested Edinburgh Central 1970. Elected as MP for Edinburgh Pentlands in February 1974 where he served until his defeat in 1997, during that time serving as a junior minister in the Scottish office 1979-1983, minister of state in the foreign officer 1983-1986, secretary of state for Scotland 1986-1990, secretary of state for transport 1990-1992, secretary of state for defence 1992-1995 and foriegn secretary 1995-1997. After his 1997 defeat he was given a knighthood in John Major`s resignation honours and served as President of the Scottish Conservative party. He stood again in Edinburgh Pentlands in 2001, but in 2005 moved to the safe Conservative seat of Kensington and Chelsea. Following the 2005 he joined the shadow cabinet as shadow work and pensions secretary, intending to contest the party leadership following Michael Howard`s resignation. In the event he recieved little support and dropped out of the race prior to the first round of voting. He stepped down from the shadow cabinet following the leadership election having failed to be appointed shadow foriegn secretary, the only role which he wished to be considered for. Rifkind has indicated he will contest the Kensington seat at the next election, rather than seek nomination for the new Fulham & Chelsea constituency (more information at They work for you)
Sir Malcolm Rifkind(Conservative) born 1946, Edinburgh. Educated at George Watson`s College and Edinburgh University. Advocate and QC. Contested Edinburgh Central 1970. Elected as MP for Edinburgh Pentlands in February 1974 where he served until his defeat in 1997, during that time serving as a junior minister in the Scottish office 1979-1983, minister of state in the foreign officer 1983-1986, secretary of state for Scotland 1986-1990, secretary of state for transport 1990-1992, secretary of state for defence 1992-1995 and foriegn secretary 1995-1997. After his 1997 defeat he was given a knighthood in John Major`s resignation honours and served as President of the Scottish Conservative party. He stood again in Edinburgh Pentlands in 2001, but in 2005 moved to the safe Conservative seat of Kensington and Chelsea. Following the 2005 he joined the shadow cabinet as shadow work and pensions secretary, intending to contest the party leadership following Michael Howard`s resignation. In the event he recieved little support and dropped out of the race prior to the first round of voting. He stepped down from the shadow cabinet following the leadership election having failed to be appointed shadow foriegn secretary, the only role which he wished to be considered for. Rifkind has indicated he will contest the Kensington seat at the next election, rather than seek nomination for the new Fulham & Chelsea constituency (more information at They work for you)
Sam Gurney (Labour) TUC policy officer.
Robin Meltzer (Liberal Democrat) TV producer.
Melan-Zahra Ebrahimi-Fardouee (Green)Caroline Pearson (UKIP) 
Eddie Adams (Alliance for Green Socialism) 2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 116478
Male: 48%
Female: 52%
Under 18: 17.8%
Over 60: 15.4%
Born outside UK: 45.5%
White: 76.2%
Black: 8.2%
Asian: 5.2%
Mixed: 4.4%
Other: 5.9%
Christian: 60.4%
Hindu: 1%
Jewish: 2.2%
Muslim: 9.3%
Full time students: 8.6%
Graduates 16-74: 51.1%
No Qualifications 16-74: 13.5%
Owner-Occupied: 42.1%
Social Housing: 27.8% (Council: 8.5%, Housing Ass.: 19.3%)
Privately Rented: 24.9%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 13.6%
Being a chicken runner wont do Osborne’s image any good.
Nor will having a Conservative Chancellor as MP for Westminster and Kensington do the Conservatives much good.
The Cosnervatives need to broaden their appeal not look as if they’re only interested in the ultra rich.
Sorry to interrupt a good yarn, but George Osborne’s Cheshire seat is NOT being abolished-despite the insistance of the media that it is.
The Tatton name dissapears, but the changes to the consitutency are relatively minor. The new Northwich seat is essentially the old Tatton seat with the addition of Abbey, Alderley and Northwich West wards and the loss of Wilmslow.
Certainly there is no reason why Osborne should have any difficulty being adopted for that new seat if he wanted to. It is Weaver vale that is abolished.
I’m not saying that Rifkins will not indeed retire to the Lords. Having turned down a job in the cabinet, that would now make sense for him. But I’d have thought the most likely outcome would be for Mark Field to contest the seat in his place rather than Osborne.
And in any case, the idea that being MP for Westminster and Kensington would in any way preclude anyone from holding the post of Chancellor is perhaps amongst the most absurd anyone has made on the site.
Surely George Osbourne will be adopted for the Northwich seat which he’d comfortably hold
As Shaun says it is essentially the same seat he currently represents with commuter town Wimslow replaced with the more working class Northwich
It’s not a change likely to affect his chances of getting electedx if adopted as the Conservative PPC – which surely he will be
I think Guido Fawkes was hinting that Osborne would rather like to move seats, using the boundary changes as an excuse.
As Richard loves pointing out, as one of the famous “Notting Hill set”, Osborne’s main home is in Kensington constituency.
Osborne’s London home is not in the Kensington constituency. It is in Westminster North. Not that he lives there at the moment anyway given that he is in 11 Downing Street.
The Guido story is complete rubbish. Osborne is staying in Cheshire.
In the end you’re probably right.
It depends how much influence CCHQ has, but often local associations prefer to select a local champion to a national figure. Dick Tracey beating Norman Lamont in Kingston & Surbiton being a prime example. In Richmond in 1983, Leon Brittan won the nomination by the skin of his teeth.
Interesting that Osborne’s London home is in Westminster North. He must have been particularly disappointed that his party did not win that seat. I wonder where he lives exactly? I’m guessing that he’s in Bayswater.
I think a lot of us were bitterly dissapointed AKMD. Its a case in which the ‘fasionable candidate’ is not always the best.
If the story is that Osborne MIGHT use the boundary changes to move closer to London, well thats not completely out of the question I’d have thought, even though I’d still say it was highly unlikely.
If the boundaries were as radical as some suggest then fair enough, but the minor changes don’t really justify it unless as has been said above, he lost the nomination there which I wouldn’t have thought he’d particularly want to encourage.
I’d still bet on him standing in Northwich on balance. But if he has got an eye on moving because its more convenient for him-regardless of boundaries-then I wouldn’t entirely rule it out.
I thought that rules were in place to specifically prohibit so called ‘chicken running’. If Osborne stands in Northwich then he would hardly lose that seat. Obviously there will be much change to the provisional boundaries when the revised recomendatons are unveiled so I don’t know why people are worrying over boundaries which will be severely changed come 2013.
I suspect Osborne will stay put. I don’t know what the boundary changes that are proposed up there are but Tatton is so safely Tory that there is unlikely to be anything that bad, especially given that the surrounding areas are all pretty blue as well.
No idea what Rifkind will want to do. He’ll be getting on for 70 by then. There are certainly older MPs around than him. If he does stand down then you’d expect Mark Field to go for it, and as Guido also speculates, it could even be one for the return of Boris?!
Regarding how much influence CCHQ has, I suspect these days it is quite a bit but we shall see. After all, we are talking about the same Association that selected Alan Clark!
“I thought that rules were in place to specifically prohibit so called ‘chicken running’”
Are there? What are they?
Not sure the rules would apply with a set of boundary changes this big anyway, as people would technically no longer have seats to run from!
“After all, we are talking about the same Association that selected Alan Clark!”
Not entirely, as Clark’s seat included Chelsea and excluded North Kensington.
According to press reports, in the late 1990s the Chelsea half of the association was dominated by “moderates” and old money, whilst the South Kensington half was right-wing ideological Thatcherites.
Apparently most of Clark’s support came from the moderate Lady Dowagers of Chelsea, whilst the Kensington wards supported more right-wing and less well-known candidates. Of course they are the wards which remain in this constituency, although it’s now 15 years later.
I wonder if those divisions between Kensington and Chelsea remain the same today or are they both on the same page now?
Chicken-running can be a dangerous business anyway. Sometimes it’s clearly correct – for example, Peter Lilley staying with the Harpenden part of his St Albans seat in 1997 – but we all know about Iain Sproat’s disastrous attempts to analyse the boundary changes. Perhaps sillier still was Michael Stephen, who was elected for the Tories at Shoreham in 1992 but then decided that the redrawn Worthing E & Shoreham was too risky for him. He couldn’t get another seat, and his successor Tim Loughton had no difficulty in successfully defending that seat, which of course he still holds with the greatest of ease.
‘I thought that rules were in place to specifically prohibit so called ‘chicken running’. If Osborne stands in Northwich then he would hardly lose that seat. Obviously there will be much change to the provisional boundaries when the revised recomendatons are unveiled so I don’t know why people are worrying over boundaries which will be severely changed come 2013.’
I think so as well – it has a 13500 majority over Labour. I reckon the Tatton seat will probably go ahead as proposed even though changes in the rest of West Cheshire are likely in the final review so I guess the current Eddisbury MP Stephen O Brien might have to stand down in return for a peerage, with the Weaver Vale MP relocating there.
As for Rifkind I guess he will retire.
Osborne has no electoral reason to move south. As others have said, the proposed Northwich would be a safe Conservative seat. It contains 60% of his current seat plus Northwich and some add-ons from Eddisbury and Macclesfield. His notional majority would be 13,545- just less than a thousand down on his majority in Tatton.
George Osborne will surely stand in Northwich.
We already have Iain Duncan Smith’s seat in great jeopardy due to the proposed boundary changes. The government would be much poorer without his efforts to make important changes to the welfare state.
I can’t believe Michael Stephen thought Worthing East & Shoreham wouldn’t be safe for him in 1997.
That’s a far worse misjudgement than anything Iain Sproat ever did.
“I thought that rules were in place to specifically prohibit so called ‘chicken running’”
In the Labour Party I know there are but I don’t think in the Tory Party there are any-and indeed there should not be any in my view. It is for candidates and associations to decide for themselves, so there is no place for centralised rules here.
“so I guess the current Eddisbury MP Stephen O Brien might have to stand down in return for a peerage, with the Weaver Vale MP relocating there”
But why? Stephen O’Brien’s Eddisbury seat is mostly recreated as the new Winsford which would also be entirely safe. It is Weaver Vale that is abolished. Why so eager that the Weaver Vale MP survive the boundary changes.
I note that you do not name the Weaver Vale MP. You will note that neither do I. I suspect thats because like me, you have no idea who the Weaver Vale MP is and can’t be bothered to look
Seems unlikely that they would be selected in favour of either Osborne or O’Brien in either seat that includes a majority of their existing associations.
“I can’t believe Michael Stephen thought Worthing East & Shoreham wouldn’t be safe for him in 1997. That’s a far worse misjudgement than anything Iain Sproat ever did”
If true then yes. But that particular misjudgement is just SO wacky and ridiculous that you have to question it. And if he couldn’t work out that a Worthing East and Shoreham seat would be utterly safe, you wonder what business he has being an MP in the first place. After all, he will doubtless face tougher questions than that one at some point!
Iain Sproat by contrast was faced with a prospective seat that actually was considered a good Tory prospect and decided to move there. It later turned out that the figures were hopelessly wrong. Perhaps he should have suspected as much, but not entirely his fault I’d have thought.
I can help you there, A Cairns & Shaun – I happen to know who every MP is, without looking it up. It’s Graham Evans (C)
Well done barnaby. Go on, be honest, did you have to look it up? We’ll know if you’re lying
It usually takes me a couple of weeks after a general election to learn the new MPs – even longer with the large turnover in 2010. But I always get there in the end. Some have the same names as celebrities, such as Jonathan Edwards (E Carmarthen & Dinefwr, Plaid Cymru) and Chris Evans (Islwyn, Lab), some actually ARE celebrities of sorts (e.g. Louise Bagshawe, now Mensch, Gloria de Piero & Esther McVey), some were known to me before such as Mark Reckless & Bob Blackman, and an amazing number of new Tories seem to be called either Andrew or Mark ! If my party holds Feltham & Heston today, I shall have no additional difficulties because I have been acquainted with Seema Malhotra for some years. So, Shaun, no I didn’t have to look it up. And unlike some I can spell all of them correctly too!
………..and of course in any general election you get retreads, such as Chris Leslie, Stephen Twigg & Jonathan Evans in the last intake. That helps a little.
I think the 1983 Parliament was the only one where I could name every MP
Attempting to name every MP is probably a good way of getting to sleep.
Bit like a political nerd’s version of counting sheep!!
While the post 2010 Kensington covers more or less the old Kensington Borough I have always felt that the 1974 – 1997 Kensington constituency was unfortunatly named as it did not include South Kensington, Earls Court and also southern western parts of Kensington (the boundary ran along much of Kensington High Street).
I just feel that Notting Hill may have been more appropiate.
It depends what you call South Kensington.
Earls Court isn’t part of what Londoners would regard as Kensington, it is in Chelsea, so there wasn’t any problem there as Earls Court was in Chelsea constituency.
Notting Hill would not have been a good name.
Your right that Earls Court was part of the 1974 – 1997 Chelsea constituency but before 1974 it had been part of Kensington South (and the Royal Borough of Kensington).
Chelsea gained Brompton Ward in 1955 and then several others (including Earls Court in 1974).
My point about the original Kensington Constituency that existed from 1974 – 1997 was that it excluded South Kensington and also much of Kensington itself (as its boundary ran along much of Kensington High Street). I felt that Notting Hill was appropiate because it was central to these boundaries (with North Kensington to the North and much of Central Kensington to the South).
Perhaps the name Kensington North should have been maintained and Chelsea have been named Chelsea & Kensington South.
I don’t think Earl’s Court is regarded as part of either Chelsea or Kensington – it has its own postal district & is usually thought of independently of those 2 areas.
I think there is some logic to placing it next the the West Kensington area in H & F. Similar areas due to this part of K & C being more mixed and the part of H & F being more gentrified.
“I don’t think Earl’s Court is regarded as part of either Chelsea or Kensington – it has its own postal district & is usually thought of independently of those 2 areas.”
Hattie Jacques and John Le Mesurier lived in a large house in Earley Crescent, Earls Court. Right through Hattie’s recent biography, she was described as living in Chelsea.
Well Earls court was certainly well outside the boundaries of the old Chelsea LB – that much is unarguable. I would not tend to see Earls Court as part of Chelsea, but it has now been in the same constituency as Chelsea now since 1974. Obviously areas like this are not always clearly defined and cannot be defined by ward boundaries. They may have lived on the southern edges of Earl’s court which would be close to Chelsea, ie in the West Brompton sort of area. But even so it would be stretching it. Basically north of the Fulham Road it is not Chelsea
Some people living in the northern part of the Redcliffe ward probably regard themselves as living in Earls Court.
Wikipedia state that Kensington South was consitently the safest Conservative seat from its creation in 1885 to its abolition in 1974 at every single general election -
“The constituency was created for the 1885 general election, and abolished for the February 1974 general election. In every postwar election until its abolition, it was the safest Conservative seat (excluding Northern Irish constituencies) in the country.”
I know that the Chelsea constituency was the safest Conservative seat in 1987 (which had annexed half of Kensington South in 1974) . It was just pipped at the post by Huntingdon in 1992 – 12689 (47.67%) to 36230 (49.26%) but 1997 boundary changes repositioned the new Kensington & Chelsea (that included all of the pre-1974 Chelsea, Kensington South and a small part of Kensington North) as the safest Conservative seat.
Kensington & Chelsea swung more to Labour in 1997 that some of the safest Conservative seats and were Kensington South to exist today, while it would still be a relatively safe Conservative seat it would not be as safe as it once was.
Wikipedia
Well that was what was supposed to happen Peter, but in fact because the very low swing to Labour in Huntingdon that was the safest Tory seat in the land in 1997. John Major achieved a 2% higher share of the vote than any other Tory candidate in his seat, with other very high shares (for 1997) achieved in Arundel & South Downs & Sutton Coldfield. A rather similar phenomenon occurred in William Hague’s Richmond seat in 2001 which thuse became the safest Tory seat and I think stayed as such in 2005.
Richmond was indeed the safest Tory seat in 2001, but Kensington and Chelsea was the safest in 2005.
Richmond regained the top spot in 2010.
The declaration for the Kensington by-election of 1988;
h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8E0d2zcFcVI