Richmond Park
2010 Results:
Conservative: 29461 (49.71%)
Labour: 2979 (5.03%)
Liberal Democrat: 25370 (42.81%)
UKIP: 669 (1.13%)
Green: 572 (0.97%)
Independent: 84 (0.14%)
Others: 133 (0.22%)
Majority: 4091 (6.9%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Liberal Democrat: 23801 (46.7%)
Conservative: 20152 (39.5%)
Labour: 4728 (9.3%)
Other: 2297 (4.5%)
Majority: 3649 (7.2%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 20280 (39.5%)
Labour: 4768 (9.3%)
Liberal Democrat: 24011 (46.7%)
Green: 1379 (2.7%)
UKIP: 458 (0.9%)
Other: 478 (0.9%)
Majority: 3731 (7.3%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 18480 (37.6%)
Labour: 5541 (11.3%)
Liberal Democrat: 23444 (47.7%)
UKIP: 348 (0.7%)
Green: 1223 (2.5%)
Other: 115 (0.2%)
Majority: 4964 (10.1%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 22442 (39.5%)
Labour: 7172 (12.6%)
Liberal Democrat: 25393 (44.7%)
Referendum: 1467 (2.6%)
Other: 379 (0.7%)
Majority: 2951 (5.2%)
Boundary changes: : Minor changes to bring constituency boundaries in line with ward boundaries. Boundary changes transfer part of the Beveley Ward from Richmond Park to Kingston & Surbiton of around 2000 electors to the North of New Malden station.
Profile: An affluent, middle-class suburban seat, characterised by desirable period houses, large gardens and huge property prices. The seat includes East Sheen, Mortlake, Richmond, Ham, Kew, Barnes. Petersham as well as the vast Richmond Park itself, and part of Kingston upon Thames and Coombe to the South of it.
The Richmond Park seat was created in 1997 from the merger of Richmond and Barnes and part of Kingston upon Thames, leaving the Kingston MP and former Chancellor of the Exchequer Norman Lamont to go on his doomed run up to Harrogate. Along with Twickenham and Kingston and Surbiton it formed part of a wedge of Liberal Democrat strength in South-West London until falling to Zac Goldsmith in 2010.
Current MP: Zac Goldsmith (Conservative) born 1975, Westminster. Son of Sir James Goldsmith, the billionaire financier and founder of the Referendum Party. Educated at Eton. Environmental activist and editor of The Ecologist.
Zac Goldsmith (Conservative) born 1975, Westminster. Son of Sir James Goldsmith, the billionaire financier and founder of the Referendum Party. Educated at Eton. Environmental activist and editor of The Ecologist. First elected as MP for Richmond Park 2010.
Eleanor Tunnicliffe (Labour) Educated at Cambridge University. Backed Jon Cruddas in 2007 deputy leadership election.
Susan Kramer(Liberal Democrat) born 1950, London. Educated at St Paul`s and Oxford University. Former Vice-President of Citibank and Director of International Capital Partners, a company advising on infrastructure in Eastern Europe. Stood for London Mayor in 2000. Contested London in 1999 European elections. Contested Dulwich and West Norwood 1997. First elected as MP for Richmond Park in 2005. Liberal Democrat trade and industry spokesman 2006-7, transport 2007, families and cabinet office since 2007 (more information at They work for you)
James Page (Green) Contested Richmond Park 2001, 2005.
Peter Dul (UKIP) Claims executive for an indemnity association. Contested Richmond Park 2005, South West in 2008 London assembly elections.
Susan May (CPA) Works for a housing association. GLA candidate 2000, 2004, 2008. Contested London region 2009 European election.
Charles Hill (Independent)2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 106256
Male: 48.1%
Female: 51.9%
Under 18: 21.2%
Over 60: 17.4%
Born outside UK: 24.5%
White: 88.2%
Black: 1.2%
Asian: 4.9%
Mixed: 2.5%
Other: 3.1%
Christian: 64.4%
Hindu: 2%
Jewish: 1.3%
Muslim: 3.4%
Full time students: 5.9%
Graduates 16-74: 48.4%
No Qualifications 16-74: 12.3%
Owner-Occupied: 66.6%
Social Housing: 12.2% (Council: 5.2%, Housing Ass.: 6.9%)
Privately Rented: 17.2%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 7.4%
They are somewhat different characteristics.
I think Richmond has swung back to the Tories because it has more City and business people rather than older Liberals and their offspring.
Plus I think organisation has been a problem in K&S.
Maybe they were more shocked by the initial loss in 1997 and were ill prepared to fight back
whereas in Richmond we had been fighting the Liberals closely for many years.
‘Plus I think organisation has been a problem in K&S.
Maybe they were more shocked by the initial loss in 1997 and were ill prepared to fight back
whereas in Richmond we had been fighting the Liberals closely for many years.’
I think there’s some truth in that although I would have thought the demographic change in K&S has been greater than here
There are certainly more immigrants in K&S, albeit largely middle class ones, but such groups don’t tend to vote Tory (not yet anyway)
I also think Ed Davey probably has a significant personal vote and I suspect the Tories still haven’t recovered from their appalling choice of candidate in 2001 – which arguably cost them any chance of recovering sufficiently in 2005-10
I’d suspect them to have a good chance at the next election though
What was wrong with the Tory candidate in 2001?
Someone called Tom Harris. He didn’t do as badly as the Tory candidate in Kingston & Surbiton. There was a big anti-Tory swing in many London constituencies in 2001 (excluding the Romford area).
‘Someone called Tom Harris. He didn’t do as badly as the Tory candidate in Kingston & Surbiton.’
It was the Tory candidate in K&S I was referring to
They picked former Dover MP David Shaw who had a reputation as a robust right-winger coupled with a dislikeable demeanor
The Lib Dem majority rose from 56 in 1997 to over 15,000 in 2001 – turning as once true blue Tory seat in the suburbs into one of the Lib Dem safest in the country
I’m not sure why the Tories performed so badly under Shaw but even in 2005 and 2010 whilst doing better their vote hasn’t really picked up – and Ed Davey has looked fairly safe ever since although with the Lib Dems still flatlining in the polls he could have his work cut out at the next election – presuming he stands of course
This is David Dimbleby giving the Kingston & Surbiton result on election night in 2001: (remove the extra t from http)
htttp://bit.ly/rXjZSH
This “nice” Lib Dem consensus again that
of course David Shaw was dislikeable.
As if ED is in a position to talk – although
I wouldn’t raise that on it’s own.
Nevertheless, the LDs did appear to succeed
in making him out as an unpopular candidate.
I wasn’t involved in the situaton in K&S,
but heard about it.
It’s certainly not as nice as either of the two Richmond borough seats (Kingston’s riverside is certainly nowhere near as pleasant as Richmond’s). The nicest bits of Kingston are in Richmond Park while what’s left is pretty drab suburbia for the most part with some more pleasant older housing in Surbiton and Kingston itself.
I think the Lib Dems will be all right in this seat. The boundary changes won’t effect them too much. Even with a swing to Labour (Norbiton will almost certainly be won by them), I can see the LDs hold on by 3-4,000 at the next election. If Ed Davey does not stand (unlikely IMO as he’ll only be 50 in 2015), then it will be closer but I think the Tories will find this seat difficult for at least another election.
‘Nevertheless, the LDs did appear to succeed
in making him out as an unpopular candidate.’
I think David Shaw succeeded in doing that himself
He certainly didn’t need any assistance from the Lib Dems
yeah..right
Amazingly David Shaw MP’s website is still running. Apparently he was one of the first, if not the first, MP to have a website.
ht tp://shaw.users.netlink.co.uk//dsmp.html
I hope AKMD you’re right in saying that Labour will “almost certainly” win Norbiton next time around, but I’d be wary of being that certain at the moment.
I’m very confident that we will manage it. Norbiton is our strongest area in the borough by a long way. We had a presence in the ward until last year and it was the only ward in the borough won by Ken in 2008. While Labour-leaning voters in Surbiton Hill may still be willing to lend their votes to the LDs, I can’t see that happening in Norbiton and we should recover there strongly in the next local elections. I’d even be willing to go down there to help out!
I couldn’t speculate on that in detail, but it did rather look like the General Election turnout pushed Labour out there in 2010 and they should have a much better chance in 2014.
” ANDY JS
This is David Dimbleby giving the Kingston & Surbiton result on election night in 2001: (remove the extra t from http)
htttp://bit.ly/rXjZSH
”
Well there we have the authentic voice.
David Dimbleby himself says on that tape that the Lib Dems “put out leaflets saying the Conservative candidate was a thug”.
But he was aleady muddling up the parties in his commentary which sadly he did even more in the 2010 coverage.
I link the Tories’ good performance in Richmond Park to their performance in Putney and Wimbledon with which it has more in common. K&S round to Carshalton has a slightly different demographic, although before the election I thought it would be the other way round with the Tories doing better in the Sutton seats.
Yes, the more ordinary suburban areas of Kingston, Surbiton, and Sutton, and indeed Twickenham would have been the Tory strongholds until the LD threat became serious
whereas the wet liberals and champagne sanctimonious types would have resided more in RIchmond
until that area became so very wealthy and City money.
Yes and you are now more likely to find those “wet liberals and champagne sanctimonious types” in those other four areas that you mentioned.
I wonder if Twickenham has imported that type of demographic from Richmond as a result of such people being priced out from there?
I don’t think Sutton has many of those kind of voters at all. It seems, instead, to have a bit of a transplanted Cockney culture but with a bit of a non-white minority. I still think in many ways its inhabitants are rather similar to those of, say, Romford or Sunbury, but their politics are very different at the moment. Local LD activism & the perception that they are locally competent is perhaps the main reason.
Yes I think the profile of a seat with LD strength can be more subtle and somewhat more complex than the stereo type of sactimonious liberal etc.
I think the Lib Dems would struggle to make new inroads into the Sutton type of demographic now, from a clean sheet of paper,
even if they were doing better nationally,
because it’s not really their type of area,
but because they are already there (and have squeezed the Labour vote for so long)
they already have credibility and obvious relevance.
If one goes back a few years, perhaps to the Alliance strength years, or perhaps 1994 when the LDs started winning their way back from the collapse of the Alliance in 1988-92
you would also find pockets of strength in very suburban areas such as parts of Bexley (or Chase Cross in Romford)
but those would not be the sorts of places they would do well now even if they were hypothetically doing better.
I agree that Kingston and Surbitons LD strength may be helped by those more Liberal voters moving here since being priced out of Richmond and Kew which has now become a popular location for city workers.
Barnaby is right about Sutton, much of it seems more downmarket than many of its neighbours and does seem to have something in common with Romford and parts of Bexley. So I find it suprising that the Lib Dems are still popular here.
I thought the majority of Sutton & Cheam was more upmarket than most of its neighbours such as Carshalton & Wallington and Mitcham & Morden. Is that not the case?
‘I thought the majority of Sutton & Cheam was more upmarket than most of its neighbours such as Carshalton & Wallington and Mitcham & Morden. Is that not the case?’
Not really as it’ds an uneasy amalgamation of Cheam, which probably is more affluent and middle class than muich of iys neighbours and Sutton, which is much more downmarket than neighbouring seats and more like a mini Croydon
It’s not surorisung that the Lib Dems do well in the former, although I agree with Joe in that their success in the latter is a little harder to explain because it’s noyt the type of place where the Loib Dems do well in nowadays and at a glance one might suspect it to be a Labour/Tory marginal
The Lib dems did well to hold this in 2010
“I agree that Kingston and Surbitons LD strength may be helped by those more Liberal voters moving here since being priced out of Richmond and Kew which has now become a popular location for city workers.”
It’s worth remembering that Kingston has a university and thus there are plenty of academics and students in the area which are a demographic that has particularly swung to the Lib Dems.
Twickenham also has a sizeable amount of these people along with a number of people that work in the media industries and also seems to have become a net importer of LD voters from Richmond Park.
I had thought about that AKMD – the effect that students/lecturers must have in keeping the LDs one step ahead (albeit a big step) of the Tories in Kingston while the most Tory parts of Kingston have been placed in this seat.
Indeed. Some of those areas will move into Kingston and Surbiton if the proposed boundary changes are approved and those changes will certainly help the Conservatives but still won’t be quite enough. I can see the LDs holding on by 2-3,000 votes at least and possibly more than that depending on how much of the LD vote goes to Labour.
Speaking of boundary changes, I hope a more satisfactory alternative is found for the seats in this borough as the proposed Richmond & Twickenham looks quite unwieldily at the moment.
While we’re waiting for Feltham & Heston, two comfortable Tory holds in nearby Coombe Vale
Coombe Vale
Con 1340, 1308.
Lib Dem 908, 778.
Lab 526, 502.
Green 122, 108
UKIP 70
CPA 94, 76.
Con HOLD
From Twitter
Richmond Park constituency, Kingston council.
I’ll percentage them with changes against 2010 later.
By the way, the Lib Dems put out a last minute leaflet with spelling mistakes.
I’ve percentaged the figures,
using average vote per candidate method,
which is the recognised method – like those officially published which I’m comparing them to in 2006/2010.
However, there may be a small discrepancy making the single candidate parties add up to the base on my 2011 figures.
By-election
Dec 2011 May 2010 May 2006
Con 44.9 42.9 49.4
LD 28.6 36.7 28.8
Lab 17.4 10.0 7.8
Grn 3.9 7.8 9.0
UKIP 2.3 – -
CPA 2.9 2.6 5.0
That’s a good result for both the Conservatives & Labour. It’s a larger increase in the Labour vote than in Surbiton Hill, which ostensibly should be a rather better ward for Labour, and with the Labour vote clearly rising at the expense of the LDs, it’s a much easier Conservative hold than expected by many. Congratulations to the band of Labour Party workers who continued to work in this difficult cause despite the rival attraction of Feltham & Heston not far away.
I find this local by-election more interesting than Feltham and Heston. A good Tory result here in a sense of fighting off the LDs.
I wonder why there was such a large gap in the two LD results. Any reasons?
Perhaps one of their candidates is a former LD councillor for the ward? I don’t know. But I know a man who does.
And what spelling mistakes were they Joe? Always like to know stuff like that.
Maybe Barnaby. Or maybe just an alphabetical thingn as Robin Hood suggests can cause differences (on the Feltham and Heston seat).
Also just seen that the turnout was as high as 43.08%, very respectable given the weather & time of year.
ht tp://www.aldc.org/elections/by-elections-commentary/2645/16/12/2011/Time_to_reflect#.TutlX1wVxVU.twitter
Hilarious.
“Nice”
They “just don’t get it” (to coin a phrase).
Indeed, that “commentary” you link to singularly fails to identify the great big elephant in the room.
One sentence says something like “we tried hard to squeeze the Labour vote, but it went up, and the result was that the voting Labour let the Tories in.”
Well….DUH! Does the author not understand that almost everyone of a left-leaning disposition knows that in the 2010 General Election it was those who voted Lib Dem who let the Tories in?
The smarter Lib Dems surely must see that, post-coalition, their campaign narrative must be completely re-thought. Running a pre-2010 “winning here” campaign, focusing on looking nice and squeezing Labour, is likely to fail spectacularly, which looks like what must have happened in Coombe Vale.
The Lib Dems need to accept that they will lose borrowed Labour votes back to Labour, and instead concentrate on winning tactical votes from Tories
(i) in Lib Dem vs Tory marginals where the Lib Dems are incumbents
and (ii) in Lib Dem versus Labour marginals
Coming rather late to your discussion threads with regard to the current Richmond Park and Twickenham seats, I would expect the former seat to elect a 100% slate of Conservative Councillors in 2014.
The signs are not good for the Liberal Democrats in Richmond Park when we consider that in 2002 the Conservatives gained 16 seats and the Liberal Democrats 5 seats. In 2010 the Conservatives gained 17 seats and the Liberal Democrats 4 seats, albeit by slender margins.
Ham, Petersham & Richmond Riverside Ward is now a knife edged marginal and if a swing were to occur from the Liberal Democrats to Labour, then the Ward will no doubt fall to the Conservatives. I suspect that the demographic changes in the other parts of the seat are now spreading into that Ward.
However, it is Twickenham which offers a far more interesting battle in 2014.
Will the Labour Party gain seats particularly at the Western end of the Borough?. Is Heathfield now their best chance of gaining a seat or two? This is a strange Ward with one polling district ‘jammed’ at both ends with Hounslow Borough Wards – Hounslow Heath and Hanworth.
As to Whitton, the demographics are similar to Heathfield and the Conservatives recorded their lowest percentage of votes here when compared to other Richmond Borough Wards. The two Conservative candidates who were not elected similarly recorded the lowest numerical polling figures across the entire Richmond Borough.
There were three Independent candidates last time who together with a higher turnout, probably ‘skewed’ the results somewhat.
If Labour worked these two Wards and if the Liberal Democrat vote swings to Labour, then these two Wards could be very interesting indeed. Hampton North could be another interesting Ward, again different from the typical Richmond Ward.
One would not like to predict Twickenham Riverside and North Twickenham & St. Margaret’s. Will these two Wards return to type and elect three Liberal Democrats or will the Richmond ‘effect’ influence the voting in these two Wards??
I agree that the 2014 locals in Richmond are going to be very interesting indeed. As you say, the rather contrived Ham, Petersham & Richmond Riverside ward is very marginal these days (presumably because of the Richmond Hill area). Were this latter area to be removed and the ward was restored back to Ham & Petersham, I think the LDs could probably hold on although I’m not sure if this area has seen the sort of demographic shifts that have occurred in Mortlake which was a rather similar sort of area although perhaps the addition of Barnes Common may have been a greater factor in recent results that particular ward. The LDs also still have a councillor in Kew, an area that was one of their long-standing areas of strength on this side of the borough but it now seems that the pro-Tory trends seen elsewhere on the Richmond side have been replicated here too. I wouldn’t rule out a LD comeback here but further demographic trend will make their task harder.
As for the Twickenham side of the borough, I certainly think Labour have a good chance of being in the running for the Heathfield and Whitton areas and also West Twickenham which was traditionally one of their strongest parts of the borough. None of the three have seen the sort of demographic change that has been taking place in the areas making up the Richmond Park seat. I would guess that this is because that these areas are further out away from the city and contain less desirable housing and amenities. They are rather similar in character to wards in nearby Hounslow which are generally good territory for Labour. If the party is successful in gaining seats in this part of the borough, then the LDs chances of regaining the council are finished. I also think the Twickenham wards closest to Richmond could well move further into a pro-Tory direction though St. Margarets may remain mostly LD for a while longer at least. This borough will definitely be one of the most crucial areas to watch in 2014.
I’d have thought we could make Whitton 3 Con.
I’m surprised that the Conservatives have found it so hard to do so up to now. It isn’t classic LD territory on the face of it.
Nick Lait deserves to be taken seriously – he is a former Councillor & surely knows the area well. But there’s no precedent for Labour winning Whitton. It does have some similarities with Hounslow South ward over the borough boundary but is still much more white-owner-occupier-dominated. Heathfield is more deprived & has at least once (although over 40 years ago) been won by Labour. I think personally as Nick implies Labour has more potential in W.Twickenham, even on its existing boundaries, which are radically different from the pre-2002 ones, than in Whitton. Although there ought logically to be a noteworthy rebound of the Labour vote in Twickenham in particular, it’s asking a lot of Labour to be serious contenders in any ward in the borough at the moment, and it would not be in the least ignominious if Labour draws another blank in Richmond-upon-Thames in 2014. Anything better than a good increase in share of the vote would be a great bonus.
What do you think will happen, Barnaby? Are the Conservatives likely to achieve an increased majority or will the LDs manage to hold their own and possibly gain a few seats? If the latter scenario does occur, where are gains most likely to come from?
I agree the Tories have struggled to get Whitton back.
I had thought it should be a relatively easy target ever since the big defeat in 1986, but it hasn’t been easy – we should have got at least split representation in 1998 and didn’t, and it has only been split in the winning years of 2002 and 2010.
I think Nick Lait touched on this a long time ago, but I was canvassing there in 2006 and it always under-delivers on polling day. (for C)
Labour should add on several points in 2014 but it’s hard to see where they can concentrate this enough to actually win seats – it’s more that point, not that they wouldn’t have done well.
Well AKMD I do think it’s too early to be sure. Of course being a senior figure in the local Labour Party I should really predict an outright Labour victory LOL but I’d tend towards further Conservative gains because of switchers from LD to Lab. After all some voters in Twickenham probably voted LD on Vince Cable’s coattails (though there was ticket-splitting) and that won’t happen in 2014; they will find their seat in Hampton N particularly hard to hold, but other split wards will be dicey for them too, as probably would be Hampton ward which should really be a Conservative target. Even Fulwell & Hampton Hill elected a Tory councillor in a split in 2002 & shouldn’t be ruled out, and as Nick Lait said there are also vulnerable LDs on my side of the river too (in fact all of the remaining ones). Probably only Teddington ward is anything like safe for them if things are going badly (are you standing anywhere Joe?).
Haven’t decided re myself.
The General Election on the same day worked in favour of the Conservatives in some wards, and in favour of the Lib Dems in others.
A leveller effect.
Thanks for your insight, Barnaby. I suppose a LD recovery can not be ruled out although demographics trends are not in their favour as we all know. I’d imagine that they’ll hold up better in their remaining London councils Kingston and Sutton but these two boroughs do have wards that Labour especially in the former. The Mayoral elections this May will give us some idea of how these areas are likely to vote in the 2014 locals.
I have a question about ward boundaries. Prior to 2002, I understand that you had Mortlake, Ham & Petersham and Richmond Hill as 3 of the wards making up Richmond council. After that period, all 3 wards were subject to major boundary changes partly in an attempt by the LDs to shut Labour out of the borough. If these wards still existed in their pre-2002 form, which parties would probably have them now?
Ham and Petersham would be LD.
(The section from Richmond Hill is pretty tiny but could make a difference in a close election).
I think Mortlake would be Conservative because of the size of the majority there.
West Twickenham would I’m pretty sure be LD.
By the way, West Twick is the ward the Tories mis-read badly in 2006, assuming it was safe because Labour were second, and that the opposition would presumably be fragmented. In fact the LD swing came from way behind (17%) and they didn’t realise what had hit them until the count.
I suppose an equally big Labour (or Con) swing could happen there,
but it looks like an LD-Con marginal for some time to come.
Local Lib Dems are kicking up a fuss over one of the Tory councillors in North Richmond apparently moving to Barbados to take up a new job and not resigning his council seat. He wasn’t been at a council meeting since November. This is one of the more marginal Tory wards in the borough so a by-election here would certainly be interesting.