Liverpool Riverside
2010 Results:
Conservative: 4243 (10.94%)
Labour: 22998 (59.27%)
Liberal Democrat: 8825 (22.74%)
BNP: 706 (1.82%)
UKIP: 674 (1.74%)
Green: 1355 (3.49%)
Majority: 14173 (36.53%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 15965 (56.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 7540 (26.5%)
Conservative: 2594 (9.1%)
Other: 2365 (8.3%)
Majority: 8425 (29.6%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 2843 (9.1%)
Labour: 17951 (57.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 7737 (24.8%)
Green: 1707 (5.5%)
UKIP: 455 (1.5%)
Other: 498 (1.6%)
Majority: 10214 (32.7%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 2142 (8.4%)
Labour: 18201 (71.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 4251 (16.7%)
Other: 909 (3.6%)
Majority: 13950 (54.7%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 3635 (9.5%)
Labour: 26858 (70.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 5059 (13.3%)
Referendum: 586 (1.5%)
Other: 1997 (5.2%)
Majority: 21799 (57.2%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Current MP: Louise Ellman(Labour) (more information at They work for you)
Kegang Wu (Conservative) born China. Managing Director of ChinaDirect UK Ltd. Former university lecturer.Louise Ellman(Labour) (more information at They work for you)Richard Marbrow (Liberal Democrat) born 1974. Educated at de Ferrers High School and Liverpool University. Former research scientist. Liverpool City councillor since 1998. Contested Liverpool Riverside in 2001 and 2005.Tom Crone (Green)Pat Gaskell (UKIP) Peter Stafford (BNP) 2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 90081
Male: 48.2%
Female: 51.8%
Under 18: 18.1%
Over 60: 17.6%
Born outside UK: 9%
White: 88.4%
Black: 3.2%
Asian: 2.3%
Mixed: 3.4%
Other: 2.8%
Christian: 69.5%
Jewish: 0.7%
Muslim: 3.4%
Full time students: 21.8%
Graduates 16-74: 21.5%
No Qualifications 16-74: 31.4%
Owner-Occupied: 39%
Social Housing: 40.1% (Council: 16.2%, Housing Ass.: 23.9%)
Privately Rented: 17.5%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 20.9%
Incredible Pete.
Any ideas how the 1955-1997 Blackpool seats would have voted in 2010.
I assume three figure majorities for Labour in both seats.
I also believe that Labour would have held the pre-1997 Brighton Kempton and the Tories might just have won the pre-1997 Brighton Pavilion (as the Green / Labour areas are in the parts annexed from Kempton).
I think you are probably right about the Blackpool seats, though I don’t have figures. I’m sure you are also correct about Brighton Kemptown, but think probably not re: Pavilion. Possibly at best they would have been second behind the Greens in the old Pavilion, but they were too far behind for that deficit to be all contained entirely in that one ward
Thanks to Douglas for his recommendations. Thanks to the wonders of Google street view I have just enjoyed a virtual tour of those two pit villages he mentioned and can confirm they are grim. Anyone who enjoys these places should have a look at Aylesham in Kent
Thanks Pete as always for your scholarly work re the old Liverpool constituencies. Can we have Liverpool Scotland back please?
Seriously though, it does rather surprise me that even Woolton would have had a plurality in 2010. Labour is never remotely near winning the ward municipally.
Also enjoyed looking at Smokey Jones’s comments before the votes were cast…………is he still here in another guise?
“I think every ward in Liverpool would have given Labour a plurality in 2010 with the possible exception of Church ward which would have been very close.”
One of the most incredible statistics about the election.
I recall that Pete once proposed a constituency based on the old wards of Aigburth, Grassendale, Woolton, Allerton, Church and Childwall.
What would the result have been for that? And in previous elections if possible?
As Pete explained AV would be bad for UKIP and other minor parties.
Under an AV system the Conservatives will position themselves one inch to the right of the LibDems to attract centrist voters while expecting to hoover up rightist voters after the first count.
While Labour will position themselves one inch to the left of the LibDems to attract centrist voters while expecting to hoover up leftist voters after the first count.
So AV will be good for centrist establishment politicians but bad for anyone who has traditional party or alternative views, including possible the LibDems!
AV will encourage the process of the political establishment becoming increasingly similar across the big parties and also increasingly detached from ordinary life.
That depends how big the “centre” turns out to be.
The Lib Dems would lose first preference votes under AV over and above the decline in their national popularity, as tactical voting diminishes in peoples’ first vote.
It’s not fanciful to think UKIP + BNP + ED could outvote the Lib Dems on 1st preferences under such a system
Barnaby – IIRC Woolton on my figures was something like 38% Labour and 28% each for LD and Conservative, so a fairly comfortable win against a divided opposition.
Richard – The statistics I work from for the 2010 results are on my computer at home but I can work out the results for my gerrymandered Wavertree seat from 1983 to 2005 (which is based on the old wards as you described )
1983
Con 26969 44.6%
All 17538 29.0%
Lab 13996 23.1%
Oth 1992 3.3% (mostly the Independent Liberal in Broad Green)
1987
All 24445 40.1%
Lab 19358 31.8%
Con 17083 28.0%
Oth 21 0.1%
1992
LD 21330 36.7%
Lab 20907 36.0%
Con 14060 24.2%
Oth 1801 3.1%
1997
Lab 27641 52.6%
LD 12122 23.1%
Con 10287 19.6%
Ref 1018 1.9%
Oth 1442 2.7%
2001
Lab 21337 55.2%
LD 10041 26.0%
Con 6832 17.7%
Oth 468 1.2%
2005
Lab 18730 45.0%
LD 16038 38.5%
Con 5424 13.0%
Oth 1449 3.5%
So a seat designed to be safely Conservative would have only been so once, in 1983 and thereafter they were third with their vote declining at every consecutive election. I assume the 1983 share itself would represent a big fall since 1979. 2010 may see the first increase in 30 years, but the boundaries will be slightly different
This might annoy Pete a bit – a survey finds that Manchester is the only British city to get into the list of the world’s top 50 cities to live in:
htttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-fails-to-make-top-50-most-liveable-cities-1699988.html
Barnaby – Labour did come within 6 votes of winning Woolton ward in 1995. They also came 2nd in 2010 and the all outs of 2004. Both were paper candidates so higher turnout helps Labour here. Labour also have more members in the ward than both LDs and Tories. The fact that the Tories won in 1994 is now amazing. I’m told they’re down to a dozen members in that ward.
There have been only three MPs for central Liverpool since 1945, all Labour – Bessie Braddock, Robert Parry and Louise Ellman
The last Tory MP for central Liverpool was John Shute who was the member during WW2 and who lost his constituency of Liverpool Exchange in the Attlee landslide of 1945
Harry – I assume you mean the city centre? Central/the middle of Liverpool would be somewhere like Old Swan…which has had lots, including the infamous Terry Fields.
As a Scot that prides himself in knowing Scotland very well (IMO!), I can say that Kilmarnock isn’t exactly a ‘shitehole’, though granted it certainly does have its rougher areas. Same goes for Airdrie, but Cumbernauld certainly does have a horrendously awful town centre.
The worst places in Scotland other than these Ayrshire mining villages mentioned earlier are, I would say, Lochgelly in Fife and Shotts and Forth in Lanarkshire. Grim grim grim. Large areas of Glasgow are very deprived but its city centre does boast some very impressive architecture, rivalling that of Britain’s other industrial cities I would say.
‘Harry – I assume you mean the city centre?’
Indeed I did – I probably did not mean the centre of Liverpool physically!
Richard. replying to your post on march 23rd.
Liverpool Edgehill, once won and held by the Liberals from about 1979 was it, comprised of some or many of those wards you mention above. David Alton that was his name.
Harry. As you probably realise if you have ever been to Liverpool, Liverpool City Centre is on the extreme western edge of the city. The river forming the boundary, and the river being the source of the importance and wealth of the whole city.
Incidentally, I have read recently that the Liverpool Customs House once generated more revenue for the government than any other source.
Like the BNP and far-left parties like Respect, British Communists and – gathering from the comments of the ‘lovely’ people who frequent this site – the Greens, UKIP are one of those parties you either love or hate – so they would definitely lose out from AV, although their current irrelevance in Parliamentary elections makes that a moot point
the interesting thing from the perspective of someone symathetic to the Lib Dems but not PR (ie myself) is how the hell the Tories sold AV to the Lib Dems as a form of PR in the first place – especially after Mr Clegg had already dismissed it as a ‘miserable compromise’ when offered by Mr Brown
Clegg would have always gone with the Tories in the first place – as so he should have after promising to cooperate with whichever party got the most votes
How many of the 30 or so wards will return a Liberal Democrat this year.
The Liberal Party must their seat.
Could the Conservatives come second in Wotton (with the Lib Dems in third place)?
There are five candidates standing in Woolton ward.
Take a look at the full list of candidates at http://www.liverpool.gov.uk
I believe present day Central and Riverside wards have been in
Exchange until 1974
Scotland Exchange until 1983
Riverside since 1983
Man banned from seeing his MP – by a Judge.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/09/23/liverpool-man-banned-for-criminal-menacing-of-city-mp-louise-ellman-100252-29472606/2/
Another Lpool LibDem Cllr has defected to Labour. This leaves 1 LD City Cllr in this seat.
Paul Clein who lost his Greenbank ward seat last year (was a Cllr for 20yrs & LD Cabinet Member for Education for a decade) has left the LibDems. His wife, Cllr Jan Clein is the last LibDem Cllr in this seat due up for re-election in May.
Seats like this illustrate why it is highly unlikely that Labour will do as well as UNS would predict.
This is down to the national swing being almost entirely Lib->Lab (with a small Lib to Con contribution).
This means that Lib/Lab marginals will go Lab, usually with a much bigger swing than is neccessary. Con/Lab marginals have (almost by definition) a low Lib vote and these lib voters are not tactical voters, and so one would expect the Lib->Lab swing to be rather lower than nationally, so less Con seats will be lost to Lab than expected.
Finally In Con/Lib marginals a large Lib->Lab swing will obvs. only help the tories.
In short expect Labours natural advantage to all but dissapear in 2015. Its vote distribution wont be as good.
You may have a point, I’ve set 30 odd gains from the tories in England as a realistic benchmark for Labour.
Labour could very well disproportionately stack up its vote in Merseyside, the NE and London.
However I don’t necessarily agree there will be a large LD>Lab swing in LD vs Tory seats with an LD incumbent restanding.
“Con/Lab marginals have (almost by definition) a low Lib vote”
There are scores of Con/Lab marginals with a Lib Dem vote of 15-20% or higher.
If the Lib Dems lose 25-50% of their vote to Labour in those seats then the Tories would be completely screwed.
Only if you make the assumption that almost ALL of those Lib Dem votes will automatically be going to the Labour Party-not an assertion that I’d be entirely comfortable making.
And only if you assume that the Tories will not be able to make headway into voters that voted Labour last time. We’re forgetting that there are scores of people who usually vote Labour who would be more inclined to vote Conservative if the party were talking about the things they care about and not things like gay marriage, electing the Lords, boardroom quotas and many other chattering class obsessions!
Both electing the lords (although the upper house does need some work done on it) and boardroom quoats are profundly unconservative policies!
(Lets focus on where we agree!)
I’d remind Joe that this isn’t a forum just for Conservative supporters, so whether we agree on policies or not isn’t actually relevant to this site.
Apologies Barnaby, ill try to keep it more psephological (sp???).
And I will entirely ignore Barnaby and continue to say what I mean.
Getting quite annoyed now with constant attempts to rule peoples innocent observations out of order. Especially when, as in this case, it is entirely in order!
There are two by-elections in Liverpool today: one in the Riverside ward and the other in the Allerton & Hunts Cross ward (which is in the Halewood & Garston constituency).
Riverside ward by-election result: Labour 1,424, Green 163, TUSC 115, LibDem 81 Tory 70, 6 spoilt papers.
Looking at the ethnicity of the Tory candidate here:
We here so so much about trying to parachute black and/or muslim candidates into seats, largely, but not exclusively, from the left but surely a much bigger issue is the Chinese community. In huge parts of the country (especially from my seat, Durham City) the Chinese community is larger than the former.
Why is it we never here about unrepresented chinese (/other east asians)?
The cynic in me would say that it is because they aren’t loud and monothically labour but perhaps that is unfair.
Liverpool Riverside 2015 most likely
Lab 65.8 (+6.5)
LD 13.7 (-9)
Con 10.6 (-0.3)
Grn 5.7 (+2.2)
Others 4.2
Lab maj ~ 19000
Turnout 50.9 (-1.2)
Labour 75
Liberal 8
Con 8
OTHER 9