St Helens North
2010 Results:
Conservative: 9940 (22.31%)
Labour: 23041 (51.71%)
Liberal Democrat: 8992 (20.18%)
UKIP: 2100 (4.71%)
Socialist Labour: 483 (1.08%)
Majority: 13101 (29.4%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Labour: 24122 (57.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 8733 (20.8%)
Conservative: 7794 (18.6%)
Other: 1282 (3.1%)
Majority: 15388 (36.7%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 7410 (18.9%)
Labour: 22329 (56.9%)
Liberal Democrat: 8367 (21.3%)
UKIP: 1165 (3%)
Majority: 13962 (35.6%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 7076 (18.8%)
Labour: 22977 (61.1%)
Liberal Democrat: 6609 (17.6%)
Other: 939 (2.5%)
Majority: 15901 (42.3%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 8536 (17.3%)
Labour: 31953 (64.9%)
Liberal Democrat: 6270 (12.7%)
Referendum: 1276 (2.6%)
Other: 1195 (2.4%)
Majority: 23417 (47.6%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Current MP: Dave Watts(Labour) (more information at They work for you)
Paul Greenall (Conservative) West Lancashire councillor.Dave Watts(Labour) (more information at They work for you)John Beirne (Liberal Democrat) Educated at Parr High School. Hairdresser. St Helens councillor since 1990. Contested St Helens North 1992, 1997, 2001.Gary Robinson (UKIP)Stephen Whatham (Socialist Labour) 2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 98680
Male: 48.6%
Female: 51.4%
Under 18: 23.5%
Over 60: 20.9%
Born outside UK: 1.8%
White: 99%
Asian: 0.3%
Mixed: 0.4%
Other: 0.2%
Christian: 87.1%
Full time students: 2.6%
Graduates 16-74: 13.9%
No Qualifications 16-74: 35.2%
Owner-Occupied: 68.7%
Social Housing: 24.4% (Council: 20.3%, Housing Ass.: 4.1%)
Privately Rented: 3.7%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 13.1%
This seat has one of the highest proportion of people describing themselves as Christian, along with several others in Lancashire. I suspect the reason for this is the large number of Roman Catholics here, not only those descended from Irish immigrants but also ‘indiginous’ English catholics. It’s a shame the census takers didnt differentiate between the various Christian denominations, as they did in Northern Ireland
I wonder if David Watts was the inspiration of The Jam’s song of the same name – probably not.
I’m sure many Labour MPs wish they had a majority like David Watts does though
In the Newton constituency in 1979, the Tories polled 30,125 votes – and lost by 11,341.
Why was that seat so over-sized?
I see, jusging by some of my previous posts we are struggling to find worthwhile things to say about this constituency
I think the reason that Newton had become so oversized by 1979 was that it included alot of the ‘New Town’ housing around Warrington. Slightly the largest element of that old seat went to Warrington North but in total six seats recieved territory from its abolition (Worsley, Makerfield, Leigh and both Warrington seats plus this one). Newton-le-willows itself ofcourse is in this seat
Clle John Beirne has been selected for the Lib Dems here – again.
Aggregate votes from the 2008 local elections;
Lab 9206 37.0%
LD 8603 34.6%
C 6362 25.6%
Oth 689 2.8%
That’s a better Tory result than I would have expected.
Labour are surely very safe here.
Results from yesterday’s by-election from this seat:
Parr ward
Lab – 48% (-15)
LD – 31% (+5)
BNP – 10% (+10)
Ind – 6% (+6)
Con – 3% (-8)
Green – 2% (+2)
Lab hold
Negative result for virtually all the parties really, especially Tory and BNP.
I would say especially for Labour for whom this is historically one of the safest wards in England – I dont remember seeing the Labour vote on less than 60% in this former mining area. The Tory vote has always been minimal and looks to have been squeezed by an effective LD challenge. Not sure how it can be construed as negative for the BNP or the LIb Dems either.
I agree that to call it a negative result for the BNP doesn’t make sense. On the contrary I would have thought Nick Griffin would be quite pleased about it as he attempts to win a seat in the European Parliament in this region in June. Personally I think pretending the BNP have done badly when they’ve done well only encourages more people to vote for them. I think we’ve seen that in Burnley in recent years.
Perhaps I should explain my reasoning.
Labour – bad result in view of losing 15% but not all that bad to still garner nearly half the votes at a time when we’re in the worst global recession in living memory and people are losing their jobs left right and centre, especially in old industrial areas like St Helens.
LD – good result prima facie but disappointing (for them) in the sense that they didn’t take it or get closer to taking it.
BNP – 10% in a ward that is supposedly this party’s most fertile ground is not all that impressive when compared with the 40-odd% from nowhere results achieved in similar wards in Copeland and Carlisle.
Conservatives – they lost three-quarters of their previous vote and scored 3%. Say no more.
Green and Independent – fairly decent showings all told but irrelevant in the context of my brief analysis.
I hope that elucidates things a little.
The reasoning is that you are seeking to spin a poor result for Labour as a good result.
Let me quote back at you something you rightly said in relation to Blaenau Gwent just today:
“I think you misunderstand the aberrant nature of Welsh mining seats, Joe. Most of the ultra-safe seats stacked up vast majorities irrespective of the national picture”
This ward is not Welsh, but it is a mining area of similar social makeup and also historically a Labour voting monolith of similar proportions. It wont do to say Labour did well to get nearly hald the vote here. As I said I have never seen them below 60% in Parr and more often it would be towards the 70% level and more. Think Easington. This is a ward that would have given Labour vote shares of 80% plus in general elections recently
“Labour – bad result in view of losing 15% but not all that bad to still garner nearly half the votes at a time when we’re in the worst global recession in living memory and people are losing their jobs left right and centre, especially in old industrial areas like St Helens.”
Although Labour lost 15% from its 2008 position which happened to be its worst in living memory.
You seem to be forgetting, Pete, that Labour have spent twelve years in government making decisions that, over time, will naturally piss a lot of people – especially the core support – off. There’s a world of difference between the way a community like Parr or Ebbw Vale feel toward a Labour Party in opposition and a New Labour government, but like Joe James B you totally fail to “get” these communities living as you do in your Home Counties ivory tower. That Labour have never before spent so long in office, and such a spell’s cumulative electoral effects, also seem to escape Richard.
If either respondent thinks I’ve sought to “spin” this result as positive for Labour then I suggest they re-read my initial posting in this thread, where I declared the result “negative” for all the parties, including Labour.
And I note rather less has been said on the Tory side about the result in Rainhill — a Tory seat in their previous days of pomp and one in which they polled very well until only recently. More evidence of Dave’s Glorious Revolution?
And by the way, when will Gordon be apologising for the mess he has got us into?
I tried to comment on the by election here before, but it seems to have been blocked, this may be due to my description of the Lib Dem campaign here. If so I wonder why Jamie’s comments were allowed.
I actually read the comment before it vanished though at the time I didn’t have the time to respond. I certainly don’t remember it containing anything contentious so I suspect there’s been some system failure rather than a deliberate deleting by the editor. I’d recommend re-posting, M.I.S.T.
Ok ta Jamie, the Lib Dem leaflets contained the usual “its a two horse race” stuff and had a bar chart showing them in second place and neck and neck with Labour, while we were miles behind. I think that most people who saw this thought that the Lib Dems were the only party that could beat Labour and so voted for them.
The fact of the matter is that we had finished second in 2008 while their vote very nearly halved. The bar chart they were using was one of the number of councillors in total, not vote share in that ward or the town. In 2008 our vote increased across the town while theirs fell. They might as well have used a bar chart of the average height of party members.
The other factor was a lack of man power, we just couldn’t deliver the amount of material that they and Labour could.
The only upside as far as can see was the poor performance of the BNP. I’ve always taken a lot of pride in the fact that they haven’t done well here.
I think its a shame that the Lib Dem’s tactics (which seem to be very similar wherever the particular election is) are not able to be dealt with in the manner they deserve – as MADE IN ST HELENS says, lack of manpower in places like St Helens is obviously a factor, but what about Conservative literature? Does that not show the true election figures?
Not at first, by the time we did it was too late. Lesson learnt
Council by election in Moss Bank Ward last night, Lib Dem hold but substantial increase in the Labour vote at the expense of the Lib Dems, our vote got squeezed. Lib Dems still have a large majority in the ward (469).
The Euro results show all of the big three losing votes, but by losing slightly less than the Lib Dems we retake second place. I can’t see Labour losing this many votes for the general but it is possible that enough of the large UKIP vote at the Euros will transfer to us that we could retake second from the Lib Dems.
The Labour Party – 10695 (19,870)
Conservative Party – 5967 (7,899)
Liberal Democrats – 5742 (8,055)
United Kingdom Independence Party – 5670 (5,472)
British National Party – 3876 (3,047)
The Green Party – 2151 (2,100)
English Democrats Party – 1158 (850)
The Conservatives should certainly take second place in this constituency where they have siginifcant pockets of support in Rainford and Windle – St Helens South is more likely to see the LDs retain a clear second place
UKIP have announced their candidate here, Gary Robinson who is 29 years old and from the Haydock area of the constituency. They won’t affect who wins the seat but could stop us from over taking the Lib Dems. My own guess is that they could also hurt Labour in some of the most working class areas, but not to any great degree.
http://www.sthelensreporter.co.uk/st-helens-news/Garys-UKIP-challenge.5713428.jp
Any idea when the Conservatives are selecting here?
“UKIP …. won’t affect who wins the seat but could stop us from over taking the Lib Dems. My own guess is that they could also hurt Labour in some of the most working class areas, but not to any great degree.”
UKIP will take votes from the LDs as well. Admittedly not a huge number in this seat. I would be confident of the Tories retaking second place here next time as they ahve a solid base of support unlike in St Helens South. The LDs do also have some significant pockets of local strength but this is less likely to be caried over into general election voting patterns – in other words while Rainford will vote Tory in both local and general elections, Newton le Willows will vote LD in the locals but Labour nationally.
This could create some interest (more than usual anyway) in terms of the local elections being held on the same day, as Labour only need to gain 2 seats in order to gain control of the council. It will be easier for them to make these gains on a general election turnout and therefore this may present one bit of good news for Labour on what might otherwise be a depressing night for them. We have discussed elsewhere the seemingly peculiar phenomenon of Labour gaining councils in 1979 as they were suffering a defeat in the general election, but of course given the context of three bad years of local elections preceding those of 2010 it is not sop surprising.
St Helens may well be one of a handful of councils (and Liverpool may be another) which flashes up as ‘Labour Gain’ in May 2010.
I think UKIP have a fair chance of saving the majority of their deposits at the next election (assuming they don’t put up a lot of candidates in those seats where they are very weak).
Matt- soon, can’t say any more than that.
Pete- you are right about the council here, Labour may well take at least one seat from the Lib Dems, it could come down to whether we take our target council seat from them. If UKIP put candidates up in the local elections it would confuse things even further.
I think that Liverpool council will go Labour again, and that Woolton ward may well be a Con gain from the Lib Dems, although it may be the year after. If this happened there would be at least 5 parties on the city council.
Any idea when Tory PPCs are being selected in St Helens x2, Lpool x 4, Knowsley and Bootle? I’d heard it was today? I know Matt has asked and St Helens tory said soon 2 months ago.
Paul Greenall, a councillor in West Lancs, has been selected as the Tory candidate here. A lady called Val Allen has been selected in South.
The remaining Merseyside selections will take place in the new year.
I went down to Norwich North with Paul and am very pleased that he will be our candidate. He was selected as candidate for one of the Skem wards at the county council elections this year, and I believe that he leafletted the entire ward on his own – twice. He also came over to help out with a council by election earlier this year when we really needed the help.
As he lives in an adjoining constituency I would hope that there are no complaints about him not being local enough. He is also a good public speaker, I would suspect that he is more than a match for Dave Watts who doesn’t seem to get much practice at Westminster…
Glad to see the Tories have now selected all of their Merseyside seats. Although strikes me as odd that they select Birkenhead, Bootle and 2 Lpool seats where they poll 6% before Hyndburn which they could win.
The Lib Dem Candidate has already attacked the Tory candidate for not being local.Although the LD candidate has had something of a troubled few months himself.
I think the Moss Bank by election showed Labour can get their support out and Labour gained a LD seat in Haydock in 2008.The contest here will be between the LDs and the Tories for second place. I remember a time when the Tories were a very clear second in both St Helens seats.
“The Lib Dem Candidate has already attacked the Tory candidate for not being local”
He was born in Kirkby and is a West Lancashire councillor, so he is hardly from the other side of the country!!
“I remember a time when the Tories were a very clear second in both St Helens seats.”
I expect they will come a clear second in this seat this time but not in South.
I agree Pete – I think 25% is achievable
Lab Hold= 9,000 maj
*He was born in Kirkby and is a West Lancashire councillor, so he is hardly from the other side of the country!!*
Coming from St. Helens, I can assure you that that counts as parts foreign. It’s quite insular in many ways.
Lab Hold 11 300
Lab maj 11,000
Lib Dems are having all sorts of problems in St Helens at the moment.The LD candidate used to get in the press on a near weekly basis but that has largely ceased as the Lib Dems now run the council ,and it’s difficult to criticise your own council.
Labour maj 13’000
are all the parties going to keep their deposits at this one?
LAB HOLD
3 LD Cllrs here have been delivering ind Moss Bank News, without any LD name or logo. The Moss Bank and Haydock cllrs are quoting as saying they aren’t sure whether they’ll remain in the LDs, due to tuition fees & the VAT increase.
Tory Paul Oakley (Candidate here in 2005) has defected to UKIP.
The MP here, Dave Watts, has been elected today as the new Parliamentary Labour Party Chairman