Comments on: Streatham

By: Barnaby Marder

Barnaby Marder — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 09:01:00 +0000

That’s clearly correct Peter, even in 1997 it was clear that the Tory vote in Coombe & Kingston Hill was to be weighed rather than counted. It was also clear that Jenny Tonge carried Tudor as well as Canbury but the Tories undoubtedly still enjoyed something of a lead in the Kingston-upon-Thames part of the constituency.

By: Dalek

Dalek — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 08:40:53 +0000

“The only London boroughs carried by the Conservatives in 1997 were Bromley, Kensington & Chelsea and (rather paradoxically) Kingston.”

Yes..I would agree with Kingston.

I calculated that Richard Tracey would have held Surbiton by around 160 and Norman Lamont Kingston by around 700. This is because the Southern part of the old Kingston Upon Thames constituency was much more Liberal and the Northern part of the old Kingston Upon Thames constituency was much more Tory.

The knock on effect would have been that if it had not been for the boundary changes, Jeremy Hanley would have lost Richmond & Barns by far more than 2951 (perhaps 6500 – 7500 on a smaller electorate).

By: Joe James B

Joe James B — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 23:46:16 +0000

Interesting about Kingston.Of course, that’s totally logical but it’s strange when you think about it compared to how few other places.
As I’ve said, though, the swing was higher I think in the Kingston wards of Richmond Park
compared to Richmond Borough,
but still more Tory.

By: Pete Whitehead

Pete Whitehead — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 23:33:29 +0000

Indeed they did as they did also in Westminster, but it is more noteworthy in the context of what we are discussing that they did not ever win the popular vote in local elections even as they were winning a majority – they never have done in fact, at least since the borough was expanded in 1964 (unlike Bexley which Labour did carry in 1964 and 1971 and were very close in 1994 and 1998).
The only London boroughs carried by the Conservatives in 1997 were Bromley, Kensington & Chelsea and (rather paradoxically) Kingston. In 2001 they ‘gained’ Havering, but lost Kingston

By: Barnaby Marder

Barnaby Marder — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 23:15:32 +0000

Thanks for the explanation Pete. What you say about Croydon is true, but it’s worth noting that Labour did outpoll the Tories in the popular vote in that borough in both 1997 & 2001 in the general elections.

By: akmd

akmd — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 23:02:07 +0000

Yes, I think most of us can agree that last year was as close as they are ever going to get in winning this seat. The boundary changes will put it well out of their reach. If Streatham Hill is put in the seat, they would at least still be in second place notionally.

By: Joe James B

Joe James B — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 22:54:04 +0000

I didn’t realise there was a swing as high as 4% to the Tories in Bexley in 2002, but noticed it was a similar distortion to Croydon.

Nevertheless, it seemed an odd place to revert from Conservative to Labour in 2002, even though that was only the start of a very long way back.
It seemed just the sort of place that the Tories would recover first.

On Streatham, I think there are some posts before the last election suggesting the Lib Dems could be a serious threat.
Those look like “Plopwell” predictions now.

By: Pete Whitehead

Pete Whitehead — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 20:33:17 +0000

Labour’s gain of Bexley in 2002 had noting to do with local reasons and everything to do with the ward boundary changes which had been enacted for those elections. There was actually a swing of nearly 4% from Labour to Conservative in Bexley in 2002 and the Conservatives outpolled Labour by 42% to 33%. basically Labour had succeeded in getting their ward boundary plan adopted by the LGBCE which resulted in them being able to win a number of wards by very narrow margins (eg Colyers and Lesnes Abbey, both of which were essentially succesors to Tory held wards but which had Labour voting areas added) while the Tories piled up large majorities in most of their wards. Even so their wafer thin majority depended upon them still being able to win in places like East Wickham, which is indeed pretty unthinkable now – indeed they hardly seem able to challenge in Crayford these days.
Of course in Croydon also the Conservatives easily outpolled Labour in the popular vote in 2002 and agaiin Labour won a majoirty due to a more efficient distribution of their vote. The same thing happened also in 1994 and 1998 so in fact for 12 years Labour had a majority in Croydon without ever having won the popular vote

By: Barnaby Marder

Barnaby Marder — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 20:21:16 +0000

In fact Labour GAINED Bexley in 2002, the Tories having taken control in 1998 after a period of NOC. But it must have been for purely local reasons, as it certainly wasn’t replicated in the general election of 2005, when David Evennett easily took Bexleyheath & Crayford from Labour.
Vis a vis Croydon, Labour’s problem there is that both Fieldway & New Addington are 2-member wards. If Labour takes the Tory seat in the latter, it still leaves the Tories with a majority of 2, since all their wards are 3-member. There are no straightforward further gains & Labour would need to take 2 seats in Waddon, or maybe one in Ashburton (a longer shot) to take control. That is certainly possible but would still require a decent swing and I am not 100% confident at this stage, not yet. If anything I reckon Labour’s easiest gain in 2014 looks like Redbridge where the actual swing required is quite small, requiring only the outright winning of the currently split wards and a partial victory in Hainault; Croydon & Merton could be cliffhangers even if Labour is enjoying a fairly decent national lead at that point (though Labour would certainly fancy winning half the seats in the latter).

By: akmd

akmd — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 17:28:19 +0000

I agree that including Clapham Town in the Clapham Common seat makes things better for the Tories. It is also better for Labour’s prospects in Battersea & Vauxhall as that ward was the only one with a decent Tory vote and adding Larkhall in its place tilts it even further in their favour.

I was actually referring to 2006 being a bad result for Labour rather than 2002. I certainly can’t see them winning Bexley again in the near future although at least their prospects there are rosier than those in neighbouring Bromley where I struggle to see where we can make any gains. Ealing was won handily last year while Croydon is a likely gain in 2014 and will surely become reliable for Labour in the long term.