Luton South
2010 Results:
Conservative: 12396 (29.36%)
Labour: 14725 (34.88%)
Liberal Democrat: 9567 (22.66%)
BNP: 1299 (3.08%)
UKIP: 975 (2.31%)
Green: 366 (0.87%)
Independent: 2813 (2.23%)
Others: 75 (0.18%)
Majority: 2329 (5.52%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 16577 (42.8%)
Conservative: 10877 (28.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 8732 (22.5%)
Other: 2560 (6.6%)
Majority: 5700 (14.7%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 10960 (28.2%)
Labour: 16610 (42.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 8778 (22.6%)
Green: 790 (2%)
UKIP: 957 (2.5%)
Other: 823 (2.1%)
Majority: 5650 (14.5%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 11586 (29.4%)
Labour: 21719 (55.2%)
Liberal Democrat: 4292 (10.9%)
UKIP: 578 (1.5%)
Green: 798 (2%)
Other: 378 (1%)
Majority: 10133 (25.8%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 15109 (31.4%)
Labour: 26428 (54.8%)
Liberal Democrat: 4610 (9.6%)
Referendum: 1205 (2.5%)
Other: 832 (1.7%)
Majority: 11319 (23.5%)
Boundary changes: very minor. Luton South loses around 200 voters in Barnfield to Luton North.
Profile: Luton was historically a manufacturing town, originally for hats (hence the nickname of Luton Town football club, based in the constituency) and more recently for Vauxhall cars and Electrolux. The Vauxhall car plant closed in 2002 and the fast growing London Luton Airport, the hub of EasyJet`s operations and is becoming a far more inportant part of the local economy – Luton reportedly has the highest proportion of taxi drivers per head of anywhere in the UK.
The constituency has a high proportion of ethnic minorities, in the 2001 census over a quarter of the population was non-white and there is a large Muslim population that could have a political impact.
Until it was surprisingly retained by Labour in 2010, Luton South had been one the most reliable bellwether seats in the country, having been won by the party that went on to form the government in every election since 1951.
The former MP, Margaret Moran, announced she was stepping down after being criticised for the Daily Telegraph for claiming £22,000 in expenses to treat dry rot in her second home, not before provoking a wide range of anti-sleaze candidates, including TV personality Esther Rantzen.
Current MP: Gavin Shuker (Labour) Born Luton. Educated at Icknield High School and Cambridge University. Runs a local church.
Nigel Huddleston (Conservative) Born 1970, Lincoln. Educated at Robert Pattinson Comprehensive School and Oxford University. Management consultant.Gavin Shuker (Labour) Born Luton. Educated at Icknield High School and Cambridge University. Runs a local church.
Qurban Hussain (Liberal Democrat) Educated at Bedford College and Luton University. Former Labour councillor, defected to the Liberal Democrats in 2003. Luton councillor. Contested Luton South 2005, Eastern region in 2009 European elections.
Marc Scheimann (Green) Educated at St Columba’s College. Computer consultant. Former councillor. Contested Luton South 1997, 2001, 2005. Contested Eastern region 1999, 2004, 2009 European election.
Charles Lawman (UKIP) Engineer and surveyor. Contested Luton South 2001, 2005.
Tony Blakey (BNP) 
Esther Rantzen (Independent) Born 1940, Berkhampsted. Educated at North London Collegiate School and Oxford University. Television producer and presenter, most famous for presenting That`s Life from 1973 to 1994. Founder of the charity Childline, she was appointed CBE in 2006 for services to children.
Stephen Lathwell (Independent) Born Luton. Educated Bedford Modern School and University of Hertfordshire. Innovation Engineer.
Joe Hall (Independent) Born Luton. Educated at Icknield High and Oxford University. Formerly worked for Save the Children.
Steven Rhodes (Independent) Born Dublin. Former radio presenter on BBC Three Counties Radio.
Frank Sweeney (Workers Revolutionary)
Farak Choudhury (Independent)2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 97341
Male: 50.5%
Female: 49.5%
Under 18: 25.8%
Over 60: 15.7%
Born outside UK: 20.8%
White: 71.6%
Black: 5.5%
Asian: 19.6%
Mixed: 2.2%
Other: 1%
Christian: 57.9%
Hindu: 1.8%
Muslim: 17.4%
Sikh: 0.6%
Full time students: 7.7%
Graduates 16-74: 15.7%
No Qualifications 16-74: 31.1%
Owner-Occupied: 67.1%
Social Housing: 16.2% (Council: 11.9%, Housing Ass.: 4.4%)
Privately Rented: 14.2%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 8.4%
It is extremely odd, and a social phenomenon of longstanding, that Dunstable, which is part of the built up area of the city of Luton, should be so hostile to it.
While there are similar phenomena elsewhere (eg Oadby & Wigston) they are nothing like as strong.
Can anyone explain why? This has always baffled me.
I imagine it’s one town thinking they are better than the other. Dunstable is definately more ‘upmarket’ than Luton and therefore do not want to be linked to the town. It could also be about identity with Dunstable being rapidly built up much later than industrial Luton and therefore want to make sure that their identities are kept separate. Or it could just be outright snobbery!
The same could be said for Basildon and Billericay in Essex. I’m sure Billericay would rather be joined with Brentwood on a local and national level rather than Basildon.
Didn’t people in Windsor want to change their postcode to disassociate themselves with Slough?
A truly disgusting catalogue of forged invoices, multiple claims for the same item and house flipping from Labour’s thief of the week:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/08/margaret-moran-mp-expenses-court?INTCMP=SRCH
Of the many failures of the Conservative leadership was their inability to damage Labour’s reputation during the expenses scandal.
‘Labour Thieves’ should have become a big a slogan as ‘Tory Sleeze’ became in the 1990s.
Well, obviously it was because some of them were at it as well. Neither party had a monopoly on wickedness, and of course those who were villains like Moran (and yes, her behaviour was disgusting) were at the very worst balanced by those who were totally scrupulous (such as her neighbour Kelvin Hopkins).
“obviously it was because some of them were at it as well”
Except they weren’t ‘at it as well’.
There was plenty of expenses troughing or attempts at it on all sides but one party has had the monopoly on court cases and byelections.
Yes I know two Conservative peers were jailed but they’re not as prominent as MPs.
What the Conservative leadership has failed to do is distinguish between greed and theft.
Perhaps they weren’t aware of the difference or perhpas they didn’t think it important.
Whatever the reason its a failure on their part.
“Of the many failures of the Conservative leadership was their inability to damage Labour’s reputation during the expenses scandal.”
It is also unlikely that Labour will repay the favour by failing to attack the Tories sufficiently when these “Tory paedophile” allegations come fully into the open.
They will be able to hang the “Tory paedophile shame” label on the party and use it to reheat the fading spectre of the hated Thatcher.
That is if they can escape without damaging allegations about people from their own side….but from names circulating on the internet it definitely seems like the Tories have a lot more to lose here.
In that interview with Phillip Schofield yesterday you could tell from David Cameron’s face that he can see how this could dwarf even the expenses scandal in terms of potential seriousness. In certain circumstances it might even bring down the government.
Tom Watson – the Titus Oates de nos jours?
I doubt labour will attack the tories over the paedophile issue. It would backfire terribly as its clearly making politicising a terribly serious criminal event.
It clearly isnt a tory / labour issue in the same way the expense abusers werent symptomatic of labour in general they only let themselves down (a much less serious issue but same principal applies)
The present attempts to fabricate some ‘Tory peadophile’ scandal is completely and utterly preposterous.
It all adds weight to my own previously expressed opinions that people ACCUSED of sexual offences should not be allowed to have their names published until after they have been found guilty in a court of law.
The way in which Labour activists have enthusiastically taken up the hobby of linking Conservatives names to abuses in a speculative manner-knowing full well that most people automatically believe those allegations even if they are later shown dnot to be true (no smoke without fire after all) is a national scandal.
The law needs to be changed on this.
I have to confess however, I was amused to see a BBC report on David Cameron’s warnings against a ‘gay witch hunt’. I’m trying to imagine what a gay witch might look like.
Peter Tatchell has been a complete arse as is usual. (And im very pro gay rights)
Shaun
Under your proposed change to the law, the Jimmy Savile allegations couldn’t have been made public (as he hadn’t been convicted and now never can be).
The public would I think have been very sceptical about changing the law as you propose even before the Savile scandal….now, there’s no chance of that happening.
There’s no way that any of us can know whether the allegations about politicians are “fabricated” or “presposterous” without them having been properly investigated, which they now will be.
What is a big worry though is that it will be turned by greedy lawyers into a big compensation-grabbing exercise, as already seems to be happening in the Savile case.
It is also disturbing that the “paedophile” label is being used to tar very different levels of offences with the same brush. To me, a consensual sexual relationship with someone who is slightly underage (as John Peel and Alan Clark have been accused of), whilst still wrong and illegal, is nowhere near deserving of being equated with the rape and ritual, sadistic abuse that is alleged in the Savile and North Wales cases. Yet the media are intent on muddying it all into one giant scandal.
Whatever we think though, this is going to get much bigger and it will be on the news for a long, long time.
It seems to me that the entire concept of life-long anonymity is something which may become almost impossible to enforce in the era of modern communications.
Completely agree.
Any kind of anonymity is impossible with the internet.
It’s regrettable in many ways, because – for example – in the past someone could commit a crime, serve their time in prison, and then come out and do their best to start a new life if they had the motivation to do so, by moving to a different part of the country or start a new life in another country like Canada, Australia, etc. And they’d be very unlucky to be recognised by anyone from the place where they committed the offence.
Shaun is largely correct – there has been a very clear attempt by elements within the Labour Party and some of their media friends to foment a ‘Tory paedophiles’ scandal over recent weeks.
On the other hand, though, most Labour spokespeople have said that Mr Cameron acted appropriately when confronted by the list handed to him by Phillip Schofield, including Chuka Umunna on Question Time last night. I certainly don’t want to see this issue trivialised, as it would be if an attempt were to be made to make it into a party political issue. Obviously, the Conservative Party as a party hasn’t been abusing children – the Conservative Party should be criticized, if it is to be criticized, for the actions it takes as a party and as part of the government, not for the alleged actions of any individual members of it. And unless and until a trial or an inquiry were to take place, I’m not interested personally in anything Schofield or others have to say on this subject. Yes there will be bad taste jokes going around – there always are when this kind of thing is reported or happens – but when there are so many grounds for attacking the Conservatives (and of course even if they were perfect in all other respects) I do hope that no-one tries to make political capital out of it. Quite apart from it being wrong, it would fail.
Noble and correct sentiments Barnaby but unfortunately not shared by many of the leading members of your party.
Trying to make party political capital out of the suffering of children must be just about as low as you can go in what is always a pretty grubby business.
I think that we are being a little unfair on lab I haven’t heard them mention it in a party political manner.
Really?
The member for West Bromwich E
having taken this up a little too enthusiastically.
and now out of depth.
h ttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tom-watson-mp-a-top-minister-1417353
h ttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20067409
ht tp://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/11/rob-wilson-attacks-tom-watson-on-child-abuse-claims/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rob-wilson-attacks-tom-watson-on-child-abuse-claims
Ed Miliband should show some leadership and sack this member.
But this is symptomatic of other things since the General Election.
Having nearly bankrupted the economy and with no ideas about how to put things right,
adopting Lib Dem style tactics instead.
Sad for democracy in the wider interest – as I believe in having two parties offering competing policies.
I would say that Yvette Cooper’s statement today reflects the Labour outlook
Yes exactly
Well this is what Tom Watson said yesturday:
“I see the pushback has begun in some sections of the media. The same people who dismissed the hacking allegations.Suspect they’ll regret it.”
It was striking to compare Cameron’s immediate ordering of an investigation into the McAlpine claims to his compete lack of action on cases where sex abuse has been happening during his premiership:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20220556
That’s a fair comment.
It seems these grooming gangs are operating with the same impunity today that Jimmy Savile and the childrens home abusers had in the 70s and 80s. They were protected by their celebrity and their power….these abusers are protected by political correctness.
It seems that the McAlpine fiasco has put the future of Newsnight heavily in doubt. I for one would regret its cancellation. Despite their faults and leftish bias, it and Channel 4 news are the only half-decent, non-dumbed down news programmes left.
Not only would having investigations into that child abuse be the morally right thing to do it would be politically astute as well.
Miscounduct and tolerance of child abuse by the police and public services in Labour areas during a Labour government is only going to damage one side.
Yet Cameron seems terrified of being accused of being a racist by metropolitan leftists.
The same type of metropolitan leftists who were eager to libel McAlpine.
At some point though a Labour politician will accuse Cameron of not showing interest in current child abuse becuase he doesn’t care about northern ‘plebs.
I think it’s probably fair to say that Cameron would prefer not to indulge in the same kind of ultra-partisan antics that the more gangsterish elements of the Labour party (eg those linked to some unions or local parties in parts of Scotland and the north of England) are happy to indulge in. I am not sure this is a bad thing, though.
Re. Newsnight, its demise is long overdue. It has become a lazy, self-indulgent and tired programme and the BBC should scrap it and start afresh with a completely new team of producers and presenters.
Allowing yourself to be used as a punchbag by not returning any blows isn’t a good thing.
Voters ultimately prefer politicians who are strong and have self respect.
Cameron increasingly comes across as weak and insecure.
I wonder if Pete thinks any the worse of Luton now that Bedfordshire was the only Labour pcc win in southern England?
It is incredible that Labour won Bedfordshire but not Humberside.
It is rather remarkable. Labour failed to take a seat they probably would have wanted to win in Biggleswade at the same time as they won in Beds as a whole. There must have been a very high Labour majority in the 2 Luton seats, and a very comfortable one in Bedford.
More than a suspicion, I’m afraid, that ethnic factors played a role in the Bedfordshire election
I wondered before the election if the Conservatives having a Sikh candidate might prompt a reaction in Luton.
I didn’t see the breakdown of the vote by council authority but I see that turnout was higher in Luton (20.2%) than in Central Bedfordshire (16.1%).
It’s usually the opposite
Andrea
Are the results detailed by local authority anywhere?
Indeed Andrea that looks significant
I think the problem was that there was an EDL candidate which enabled Labour to mobilise the muslim vote to a greater extent than might otherwise have been possible. The background of the Tory candidate may have put off some muslim voters but they would not have been all that likely to vote Conservative anyway. As to whether I now think worse of Luton, there wasn’t much scope for my opinion of the place to go lower
Richard
Some councils published the figures by council area (at least first preferences). The ones I have seen so far:
West Yorkshire (look at Wakefield council)
Humberside (look at East Riding Council twitter feed)
Nottinghamshire (look at Rushcliffe Council website for first prefs by district)
Leicestershire (look at NW Leicestershire council website)
Sussex (Brighton coucil website)
Kent (Dower council)
Dyfed Powys (Pembrokeshire council)
South Wales (Neath)
Essex (Chelmsford)
Suffolk (Suffol Coastal)
Cambridgeshire (East Cambridgeshire)
Northumbria (Sunderland)
West Midlands (Birmingham)
In addition to those I have seen detailed breakdowns for Thames Valley (Aylesbury Vale) and Hampshire (Southampton)
It has to be said that Nadine Dorries was most likely a factor here as well.
It was reported on the news yesterday that several hundred spoiled ballot papers contained comments about her TV antics.
Good point – I did wonder if that might have been a factor as well. She really should have been out getting out voters. Barnaby mentioned a by-election in Bigglewade which the Conservatives held (that is in the Beds NE seat) but there was another in a ward within the Mid Beds seat where they lost very badly to an Independent
I caught a few minutes of I’m A Celebrity this morning – for some reason my wife likes trash TV on while she’s feeding or changing the baby.
It reinforced the fact that Nadine Dorries made a colossal error of judgement going on there. I don’t know how she thought she could have a serious conversation about abortion reform sitting around a camp fire next to a shirtless Eric Bristow.
Surely its not unreasonable that Muslims in Luton would want to vote against a candidate who has expressed such hostile views towards them?
PPC vote by council area
Stage I
Luton: Lab 12,398 Rashid 5,297 Con 4,476 Carroll 3,173 LD 2,394
Bedford: Con 8,552 Lab 7,142 LD 4,280 Carroll 1,646 Rashid 1,285
Central Bedfordshire: Con 13,198 Lab 8,407 LD 4,531 Carroll 3,856 Rashid 1,494
So Labour got 44.7% in Luton, 31.2% in Bedford and 26.7% in Central Beds.
Con polled 41.9% in Central, 37.3% in Bedford and 16.1% in Luton
LD had 18.6% in Bedford, 14.4% in Central and 8.6% in Luton.
Carroll. 12.2% in Central, 11.4% in Luton and 7.2% in Bedford
Rashid got 19.1% in Luton, 5.6% in Bedford and 4.7% in Luton
Second preferences
Luton: Lab 3332 Con 1629
Bedford: Lab 2,137 Con 1,696
Central Bedfordshire: Con 2,549 Lab 2,542
So stage II
Luton: Lab 15730 Con 6105
Bedford: Con 10248 Lab 9279
Cetral Bedfordshire: Con 15744 Lab 10949
Thanks for these figures Andrea
Am I correct that the Bedford unitary authority area is a larger one than the constituency of that name?
Yes, Barnaby. There are 3 Bedford wards which are in Nadine’s land
Yes much larger – Labour would have been very clearly ahead in the constituency on those figures
I se Andrea had already partially replied. IN addition to the wards in Naidne’s seat (c. 11,000 voters) there are another 32,000 voters in NE Beds as well as the 69,000 which are in the Bedford constituency itself, so not far off 40% of the total borough