Morley and Outwood
2010 Results:
Conservative: 17264 (35.34%)
Labour: 18365 (37.59%)
Liberal Democrat: 8186 (16.76%)
BNP: 3535 (7.24%)
UKIP: 1506 (3.08%)
Majority: 1101 (2.25%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 19956 (50.2%)
Conservative: 10172 (25.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 4030 (10.1%)
Other: 5570 (14%)
Majority: 9784 (24.6%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 8227 (19.4%)
Labour: 20570 (48.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 6819 (16%)
BNP: 2271 (5.3%)
Other: 4608 (10.8%)
Majority: 12343 (29%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 9829 (25.6%)
Labour: 21919 (57%)
Liberal Democrat: 5446 (14.2%)
UKIP: 1248 (3.2%)
Majority: 12090 (31.4%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 12086 (26.3%)
Labour: 26836 (58.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 5087 (11.1%)
Referendum: 1359 (3%)
Other: 529 (1.2%)
Majority: 14750 (32.1%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Current MP: Ed Balls (Labour) born 1967, Norwich. Educated at Nottingham High School and Oxford University. Former financial journalist and close advisor to Gordon Brown as Shadow Chancellor and Chancellor, he was a close ally of Gordon Brown during his premiership. Economic Secretary to the Treasury 2006-2007, Secretary of State for Children and Schools 2007-2010. Shadow home secretary 2010-2011, shadow chancellor since 2011. Elected as MP for Normanton in 2005, his seat was abolished in the boundary review, despite legal attempts to have the boundary commission recommendations overturned. In March 2007 he was selected to fight the Morley & Outwood seat in place of the retiring Colin Challen. Unsuccessfully ran for the Labour leadership in 2010. Balls is married to Yvette Cooper, the MP for Pontefract and Castleford.
Antony Calvert (Conservative) Wakefield councillor 2004-2007. Partner at Curtin & Co, a public affairs and community consultation company.Ed Balls (Labour) born 1967, Norwich. Educated at Nottingham High School and Oxford University. Former financial journalist and close advisor to Gordon Brown as Shadow Chancellor and Chancellor, he remains a close ally of Brown. Economic Secretary to the Treasury since 2006. Elected as MP for Normanton in 2005, his seat was abolished in the boundary review, despite legal attempts to have the boundary commission recommendations overturned. In March 2007 he was selected to fight the Morley & Outwood seat in place of the retiring Colin Challen. Balls is married to Yvette Cooper, the MP for Pontefract and Castleford.
James Monaghan (Liberal Democrat) Born Wakefield. Small businessman. Leeds councillor. 
David Daniel (UKIP) 
Chris Beverley (BNP) Educated at Leeds University. Leeds councillor since 2006. Contested Yorkshire & Humberside region in 2004, 2009 European elections. Morley and Rothwell 2005. Writes a regular column for the newspaper of the German NPD party.2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 91230
Male: 48.7%
Female: 51.3%
Under 18: 22.8%
Over 60: 18.4%
Born outside UK: 2.6%
White: 97.7%
Black: 0.2%
Asian: 1%
Mixed: 0.6%
Other: 0.4%
Christian: 76.6%
Full time students: 1.9%
Graduates 16-74: 14.1%
No Qualifications 16-74: 32%
Owner-Occupied: 76.1%
Social Housing: 16.4% (Council: 14.7%, Housing Ass.: 1.8%)
Privately Rented: 5%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 16.8%
Jay Blanc
“The odd thing about some Conservative reaction seems to be that they are making the same mistakes as Guido… Deciding that the best way to attack Ed Balls will be to play up his connections to Gordon Brown. Missing out that Gordon Brown is becoming less and less relevant to current politics as time goes on. This is a combination of “Absence makes the heart grow fonder”, and “meet the new boss, same as the old boss” sentiments. Attacks now on Gordon Brown are not only a waste of time, but generate a image of spitefulness.”
I know I won’t change your mind but I totally disagree. It’s since the givernment stopped going on about the last government and reminding everyone whose fault the various messes – especially the economy – are, that they have slipped in the polls. Their link-up may not be such a strong argument as if EM had put Balls there when he first became leader, but it is still a good one to remind people Balls is a Gordon Brown clone.
That won’t stop him from making life difficult for the government frequently of course!
Appointing Ed Balls shadow chancellor is a gamble for Labour.
It is the equivalent of firmly nailing their economic policy to the mast before they know which way the wind is going to blow.
Balls believes with great conviction in a policy of continued deficit spending which he believes will eventually take care of the deficit through economic growth. He is fiercely opposed not just to coalition cuts but also to the ones Darling started to propose.
If the coalition’s economic policy does not lead to strong recovery by 2013-2014 then Balls will be able to claim that his strategy has been right all along and the Tories have caused 4 years of stagnation. In such a scenario he would be a great asset to Labour’s hopes of winning a majority in 2015.
If the wind blows the other way and the coalition’s austerity medicine starts to work in turning things round, then both Balls and Labour will be left on the beach like a great bit fat deficit denying whale when the tide has gone out.
There have been some who claim that it won’t be so good for the Tories if the economy makes a roaring recovery becaus eit will shift he focus onto public services/spemding, where Labour are traditionally/allegedly (delete according to your opinion) stronger.
However, appoiting the arch-economist Balls to the frontline indicates Ed Mili is firmly basing the fight on the Economy – perhaps a gamble that it will perform poorly?
Even if we did have a very slow recovery it wouldn’t mean Balls was right to advocate high deficit spending,
although of course he will try to say so.
The economy had about a year of 3%+ growth in the run up to the 1983 election,
and the recession would only just be beginning now at the equivalent turn of 1979/80
(compared to 2010/11)
Apologies for my many typos in my last post!
Yes that’s right. But I think the coalition will need to be able to claim credit for at least a steady improvement in order to be re-elected. Another unsustainable boom would, I think, be bad.
At least in the Tory voting parts of the country, the economy felt moderately better in 1983 than in 1981.
I fully agree that Balls’ strategy would have led to ruination but good luck trying to explain that to Joe Bloggs in the street if he’s still on the dole after 5 years. That’s the risk.
The most frustrating and disheartening thing about being a government supporter today is to see the opposition benefitting so much from the consequences of what we see as their own destructive economic policies.
I wonder, however, to what extent Labour’s lead in the polls is attributed to understandable short to medium term frustration, or do the public genuinely think the coalition is going the wrong way about tackling the deficit? The challenge for the government today is to spell out constantly why all these spending cuts are necessary. I’m not sure if the message will eventually come across but there seems to be such a limited understanding of what we are trying to do at present, as was the case with the first Thatcher government. I don’t think media coverage is helping either.
I am confident that something will swing things around at some stage before the end of the parliament which will not necessarily have to involve recapturing islands in the South Atlantic.
VoteDave
I can understand your frustration. The media give fartoo much coverage to the ‘deficit-denying’ point of view as if it was plausible and the government were the ones taking the gamble.
(But the lefties would soon condemn DC and co if we lost our AAA rating even though they poo-poo its importance whilst we retain it!)
Cameron’s trump card is that he looks the part of Prime Minister.
Unless the coalition really screw up the economy, many floating voters (especially women) will look at Ed Miliband and conclude that he just doesn’t look like a credible Prime Minister. Part of Labour’s defeat in 1987 and 1992 was the fact that many floating voters just couldn’t imagine Neil Kinnock being a good prime minister, and I think Ed Miliband’s image is even worse.
I can’t see a charming, telegenic face in Labour’s top team who would be able to rival Cameron on that score. Johnson was the only one and now he’s gone.
Sorry to keep going back to 1979-81 but it is relevant.
VoteDave actually sums up exactly what Mrs Thatcher wrote about the situation in 1980
“there was such limited understanding of what we were trying to do, that we had great political difficulties”
Personally, I think we’ve started slipping because we’ve stopped spelling out our case,
but issues like votes for prisoners (and with deep regret) woolly policies on crime, are not helping.
And to my regret the Conservatives have chosen to argue for all the various public spending cuts out of pure necessity rather than arguing about the principal behind various benefits in the first place.
EMA is a perfect example.
EMA was a barely disguised bribe brought in only 2-3 years ago, especially targeted on Labour’s core ethnic vote in the inner city. It has the added advantage of suppressing youth unemployment figures.
I fundamentally disagree with my taxes being used to enable 16 year olds to buy dope and get pissed on a Friday night, under the auspice of bribing them to stay at school. We got on fine before EMA was introduced in terms of sixth formers being able to maintain themselves in education so I don’t see why things are any different today.
I have never heard the government say this, although most Tories must think it. The line is “of course EMA is a good idea but we need to save money and target it better”. Maggie Thatcher never ceded the principle of the argument to her opponents in this way and I think the coalition might regret doing so on some policies.
Have to agree with HHemmelig on EMA from my experience/opinion in Scotland despite being critical of other coalition policies.
It certainly needs to be reformed/replaced somehow.
Thanks A Brown.
If only our MPs were more bi-partisan.
In return I will say that in the main I think Labour did quite a good job on the NHS and the coalition would be better off leaving it alone rather than embarking on another pointless reorganisation. The political risks if it goes wrong are enormous. Many Tory MPs are said to privately agree.
Priority number one should be the economy.
Actually, HH, EMA was in place by 2003. I know this because I was eligible to receive it when I was at sixth form. I was an art and design student at the time (although my degree is in history!) and I found the extra cash very useful in buying materials as well as helping with travel costs. I will admit, however, that there were people at my sixth form who showed up solely to get their EMA and didn’t really care much about studying. They were very much a minority though as many of my peers were serious about further education and those who could get EMA were very grateful for it.
I share your reservations over the coalition’s NHS reforms. Thatcher was very careful indeed with how she handled it so as not to alienate the electorate. If the coalition’s reforms backfire, then they will suffer for it dearly at the ballot box.
I must say I have grave doubts about the NHS reorganisation and I have little confidence in Lansley.
I would say that organisational changes are almost always more difficult and more costly to implement that initially expected.
I would ahve thought that a better idea would have been to get the present system working more efficiently and economically. Starting with pay cuts on the higher paid ‘professionals’, ‘managers’ and ‘executives’.
But it isn’t an issue I can claim any real knowledge over and it is one in which Cameron feels deeply about.
The NHS is an issue which I think is closely related to one’s personal experiences. I’ve noticed some people have an almost mystical worship of the NHS because of their personal experiences of it. Cameron seems to be one such, doudtless because of his son.
While I’ve had no complaints about my NHS experiences members of my family and others people I know have had at times very poor treatment so I’m about as likely to get all dewy eyed about the NHS as I am about Tescos.
Joe
BTW I’ve never taken any offence at any of your comments.
I do think its necessary that the Conservative leadership receive some ‘over-harsh’ but constructive criticism. Complacency was a factor in not getting a majority, though the coalition is much better for the Conservatives long-term than a small overall majority would have been.
In partial defence of Osborne as Shadow Chancellor (but criticism of the Cameroons limited world outlook) the economic outlook from Notting Hill and Westminster was better than for the country as a whole.
The parts of the economy which were doing well – public sector, financial services , property development (notice how this was concentrated on ‘city living’ not suburban family homes), retail and leisure spending – were concentrated in urban areas and in particular London.
There was a lot less economic optimism in northern towns like Morley. This was shown in the local election results of 2008, though immigration and 10p tax also played a part (they themselves linked to the economy).
I’d love to see annoying Balls decapitated here in 2015.
A just retribution for 5 years of talking the economy down, when it picked up.
But not sure I’d prefer a big majority like 5,000+ or
him having to go through recounts.
I’m not sure this seat will remain intact though.
If Labour had to win, I’d have preferred Colin Challen. I wonder if he stood down because he wanted to, or that he didn’t want to be challenged by Ed Balls for the nomination.
I quite agree, Joe, I can’t stand the man either, and by 2015 I am fairly sure the economy will have improved…
His constituency may not exist at the next election due to boundary changes and this may see an interesting selection fight with his wife Yvette Cooper.
Yvette wouldn’t dare stand in Ed’s way, as the leadership election showed.
She would give him a free run and find another seat, most likely with the help of a parachute.
Suppose if an early election is called under current boundaries and the Conservatives recover in the polls to take a small lead over Labour, would Ed Balls be parachuted into a safe Labour seat such as Hemsworth or Leeds Central?
Under labour party rules he couldnt do that.
And the prime minister no longer has the power to call an early general election
An early general election is still possible if
66.7% of MPs vote for one,
or the government loses a vote of no confidence.
Balls is doing the Tories a big favour – it’s very clear that Labour is failing to break out into a clear lead because every time Balls appears people know, deep down, that this is the man who was very influential in trying to pay off credit cards with more credit cards.
Much as I’d love to see this ghastly man out, I think I’d rather he clung on after a recount and remained Shadow Chancellor.
Must admit I find the strong partisan dislike of Osborne and Balls from both sides of the political spectrum quite interesting as the two men seem to have mutual respect for each other.
I think Ed Balls has a real image problem:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8972992/Ed-Balls-attacks-politicians-who-do-photoshoots-with-children-after-Ed-Miliband-photographed-at-home.html
Everything he tries to do something to dispel the image problem; it seems to backfire on him. Indeed, when Ed Balls mention photos I thought of that one where he is dressed in a Nazi Uniform and his mate has plastic buttocks over his uniform!
I actually see alot of similarities at Ed Balls media pieces and Gordon Brown’s, maybe Balls advised Gordon Brown or Gordon Brown is now advising Ed Balls?
Balls keeps harping on about how the Government needs a plan B.
But this IS plan B – fat useless cretin.
We’re trying to sort out the financial mess that his Plan A created – billions poured down the drain.
Labour have been a little uncertain of what plan B should contain. I would be interested to hear how Ed would do things differentely.
It’s basically
If you have credit card debts,
take out some more store cards,
and hope that eventually it all pays for itself.
The trouble is it’s structural – i.e. it would still be enormous with high growth for many years.
The days of >1% GDP growth are gone for a long time.
Therefore not just is Labour’s Plan B totally unrealistic, in the end Osborne’s Plan A, which was predicated on 2-3% growth returning in 2012/13, will prove to be insufficient. The fact that our AAA credit rating is once more being questioned is a harbinger of this.
Probably trying using global events as a figleaf, the government is going to have to institute a plan A-plus, including much more swinging cuts than are currently being undertaken.
Guido Fawkes has done a report on Ed Balls Tory membership at Oxford.
http://order-order.com/2011/12/23/vintage-christmas-card-from/
Ed Balls seems to have been a real Tory Boy at that time, Labour will not like the fact that Balls attended Suite and Sherry parties as a young Tory at the height of Thatchers cuts…..
While Balls was playing German Uniforms and plastic buttocks Ed Miliband would have been marching in strikes and protesting against Thatchers cuts.
“The days of >1% GDP growth are gone for a long time.
Therefore not just is Labour’s Plan B totally unrealistic, in the end Osborne’s Plan A, which was predicated on 2-3% growth returning in 2012/13, will prove to be insufficient.”
Very true.
The failure of the political establishment to understand the economic fundamentals has revealed, if we didn’t already know, what sheltered lives of privilege they live.
I must admit to some amusement that the Osborne wallpapaer business looks like its heading for bankruptcy. Perhaps its not quite nouveau chav enough to appeal to the tastes of the foreigners buying up all the prime London property.
Ed Balls is quite an asset to the Tories – even though this was a target seat in 2010.
I’m sure he’s a factor in why the Tories are still holding up relatively well.
Everytime he shows his face people have a clear and easily understood reminder of why the country got into such a financial mess.