Thanet South
2010 Results:
Conservative: 22043 (47.99%)
Labour: 14426 (31.41%)
Liberal Democrat: 6935 (15.1%)
UKIP: 2529 (5.51%)
Majority: 7617 (16.58%)
Notional 2005 Results:
Conservative: 18928 (41.1%)
Labour: 18074 (39.2%)
Liberal Democrat: 5857 (12.7%)
Other: 3216 (7%)
Majority: 854 (1.9%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 15996 (38.8%)
Labour: 16660 (40.4%)
Liberal Democrat: 5431 (13.2%)
Green: 888 (2.2%)
UKIP: 2079 (5%)
Other: 188 (0.5%)
Majority: 664 (1.6%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 16210 (41.1%)
Labour: 18002 (45.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 3706 (9.4%)
UKIP: 501 (1.3%)
Other: 1012 (2.6%)
Majority: 1792 (4.5%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 17899 (39.8%)
Labour: 20777 (46.2%)
Liberal Democrat: 5263 (11.7%)
Other: 1049 (2.3%)
Majority: 2878 (6.4%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Current MP: Laura Sandys (Conservative) journalist and businesswoman, trustee of Open University Foundation and the Civic Trust and chair of openDemocracy. Sandys is the daughter of Duncan Sandys, the former Conservative MP and Defence Secretary.
Laura Sandys (Conservative) journalist and businesswoman, trustee of Open University Foundation and the Civic Trust and chair of openDemocracy. Sandys is the daughter of Duncan Sandys, the former Conservative MP and Defence Secretary.Stephen Ladyman(Labour) (more information at They work for you)Peter Bucklitsch (Liberal Democrat) Contested Dartford 2005.Trevor Shonk (UKIP) Delivery driver.2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 89990
Male: 47.5%
Female: 52.5%
Under 18: 22.3%
Over 60: 26.9%
Born outside UK: 5.3%
White: 97.7%
Black: 0.3%
Asian: 0.6%
Mixed: 0.8%
Other: 0.5%
Christian: 73.9%
Full time students: 2.7%
Graduates 16-74: 15%
No Qualifications 16-74: 32.9%
Owner-Occupied: 71.9%
Social Housing: 11.9% (Council: 6.2%, Housing Ass.: 5.7%)
Privately Rented: 12.9%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 9.5%
Bullshit.
Who in the cabinet has said that “inflation is always purely a monetary phenomenon?” (the definition of monetarism).
Anthony told you to stop smearing Tories with lies, Tim.
You’re the one talking bullshit
How does describing the Tories as monetarists equate to smearing them?
I didn’t realise there are still so many Labour councillors in Thanet (May 2007).
I thought the Tories had won with a bigger majority.
I’d have thought Thanet could be quite a likely council to go straight from Con to Lab control in all out elections (although may be not).
Recent discussion on this thread drifted away from the Pfizer closure to things like the Natural Law Party. Which is a pity given the economic difficulty Pfizer moving away willl cause Thanet and East Kent generally.
To be fair, the Tories seem to have done more than Labour to address this problem. David Willetts, the Science minister, visited after the Pfizer closure was announced, and I believe this is part of a Cabinet initiaive. Laura Sandys has visited the Pfizer site alongside other local MPs who have consituents working here, Julian Brazier and Charlie Elphicke.
Stephen Ladyman used to do a good job as advocate for Thanet South, but didn’t receive similar backing from a Labour Government which seemed almost bigottedly anti-Kent, as part of the South East, despite the string of marginals they had here (and don’t forget that if seats can swing hard one way, it is presumably possibly for them to swing equally hard in reverse).
Government ideas seem to include encouraging University of Kent to take over some of the Pfizer site. How does this match up with the Government’s general policy on HIgher Education?
Pfizer have gone to Cambridge, presumably because they want to be by a really top rank university. Why then should other high-tech employers want to come to Thanet rather than Cambridge, given that Kent are not currently, or currently envisaged to be, in the same league as Cambridge. Actually, they did intend to be in the same league when they set up in the 1960s,but it didn’t work, not least because they retreated into arts and over-popular white collar professional courses, notably law and psychology.
There was a reaaly top level university in East Kent in the College of Agriculture at Wye (in next door Ashford constituency), which was taken over by Imperial College. But Ashford converted the college to run (Cheaper?!) business courses and then closed it down. Agiculture was directly relevant to Pfizer because of veterinery pharmaceutical products etc.
Pfizer’s move to Cambridge illustrates the big problem in UK Regional Policy. True, there are differences in wealth between Regions; but there are bigger differences in wealth between regional centres like London, Cambridge or Salford and peripheral places like Ramsgate, Burnley or Lowestoft. There are a lot of votes to be won by the party which replaces current crude regional politics, largely playing on regional prejudices, with more sharply targetted (therefore more cost-effective and probably cheaper) encouragement of investment in places like Sandwich, Stoke and Wigan which are potentially well-situated, particularly in relation to transport links, but which are currently underperforming.
Returning specifically to East Kent, serious questions need to be asked not only to change research emphasis towards the ciences and technology (engineering training and reseach in Kent is howlingly conspicuous by its absence) but also to support institutions positiviely whilst they improve their quality. Which does not mean cutting humanities research. There are a number of authors, historians etc. who live in Kent whose work contributes heavily to the UK economy. After all, Ian Fleming used to be a regular at Sandwich golf course (c.f. “Goldfinger”).
An aside, the Tory idea of double summer time would be bad for this constituency. Having clocks an hour behind those in France and Belgium is good for day tourism means that people coming over to shop feel that they get here nice and early: people don’t care as much about getting back late as at having to get up early. This applies even more to business people coming to the UK from Europe for a one day meeting.
This is a critical time for Thanet South in relation to economic and business regeneration. Whether or not the current administration get it right will make a considerable difference to the result in this area next time.
Getting back to matters appertaining to South Thanet, this result while certainly a poor one for Labour was less bad than those seen in other Kentish seats which were in any way a Lab-Con battleground, and this is now clearly Labour’s 3rd best seat in the county, and one which the party could aspire to win if in a national lead over the Conservatives of about 8% or more. Of course the swing required would be somewhat higher if the incumbency effect (and Labour’s loss of it) is present and it remains to be seen whether the boundary changes leave intact a seat which is in any way competitive.
It would be a mistake for anyone to assume this seat is safe – it can clearly swing quite violently.
The new MPs in Kent will surely note that – although it seems they may have a bit less influence when a government changes. For a slightly remote part of the country – it seems to vote heavily on national issues,
but I may be incorrect.
Thanet Tory candidate, Payim Tamiz, 21, has been expelled from the Party due to his sexist Facebook group and postings about girls in Thanet. It’s too late for him to withdraw, however.
If he gets in anyway and the council goes to NOC
with a 1 seat difference between Con and Lab, then he could call the shots.
Con and Lab equal
+ him
I meant to say
I don’t see any reason why he’d get elected now. I certainly wouldn’t vote for him and I doubt I would be the only one.
I would have said the same if it was a Labour candidate that did something like this.
Yes, could be interesting. Always is when a story breaks after postal voters have voted.
This was one of Labour’s less poor results in 2007 & I wonder how much capacity the party has for improvement in this particular district.
“I don’t see any reason why he’d get elected now. I certainly wouldn’t vote for him and I doubt I would be the only one.”
The Labour candidate for Kidsgrove was arrested for assault before the local elections last year and Labour said that if he was elected they would not accept him in their group.
He won. Labour accepted him into their group!
The charges were I think also dropped.
This Thanet case is also quite interesting because it comes just days after the Labour candidate in Ynys Mon made some pretty disgraceful comments on a similar forum.
The point is that ALL parties have some candidates that just self destruct in the glare of an election campaign. Theres nothing you can really do about that. It happens. But to try and make such sweeping partisan points about the conservative party’s ‘judgement’ as Labour have done is the utmost hypocrisy. I don’t see anyone from Labour criticising the ‘judgement’ of the Ynys Mon party for selecing their candidate.
I was making no such partisan points, Shaun. I said in my earlier post that I would have had exactly the same reaction if it was a Labour candidate or indeed any candidate. The candidate for Kidsgrove should not have been allowed to stand until the charges against him were resolved. That his Labour group accepted him anyway despite earlier statements to the contrary is rather suspect though.
The Isle of Thanet constituencies have been re-drawn to form ‘Herne Bay’ and ‘Margate & Ramsgate’.
I would assume that the compact urban ‘Margate & Ramsgate’ would be much stronger for Labour than either of the two current seats (which both include more rural territory).
I think that ‘Margate & Ramsgate’ would have a similar majority to Hastings & Rye (1000 – 2000), and would be a bell weather marginal.
Be careful about comparing Ramsgate and Margate to Hastings and Rye. To us in East Kent and Sussex they have very different cultures.
One thought here not about the boundaries but about the name. Should this seat be “Margate, Ramsgate and Sandwich”?. Not least, as Pfizer is closing its site here, actually at what was once Richborough Harbour (read up your First World War history), Sandwich is being actively promoted as an opportunity for industrial investment, which would actually benefit run-down Ramsgate as much or more than the golfers, sailors etc. of Sandwich town. Including Sandwich in the mane might not have much political effect, but if it helps build economic prosperity it would be a good idea.
Anthony’s projection for the proposed Margate and Ramsgate is : -
Conservative 22273
Labour 17283
LibDem 7927
UKIP 3075
Conservative Majority 4980
This redistribution makes this seat Labour’s best prospect in East Kent, as Dover takes in a couple of safe Conservative wards from Folkestone and Hythe. The new seat would on current polls be well within Labour’s grasp.
The way things are going in Europe, the Conservatives could be put at additional risk here if the UKIP vote increases. I notice that Anthony’ UKIP projection is considerably higher than in the old Thanet South. Whilst projections for minor parties need to be treated with care because of the selective basis on which they stand in local elections, this proposed redistribution does indeed look good for UKIP.
Dalek’s initial comments appear right.
Laura Sandys must be disappointed by these proposed boundaries.
I agree with all that, except that while Laura sandys may be disappointed she must not be very surprised as there was a certain logical inevitability about the linking of Ramsgate and Margate. Indeed most amateur boundary proposals I had seen before the release of the BC’s own proposal had envisaged something similar. Indeed she might be slightly relieved at the rather strange decision to include Sandwich and to exclude some wards from Margate such as Garlinge and Westbrook. That has probably added at least another 1,000 votes to her notional majority. This will be though not only Labour’s best prospect in East Kent but, statistically speaking, in the whole of Kent
Baffling why the Commission have left Sandwich in Margate and Ramsgate rather than including the whole of Margate. Sandwich is in Dover District and should sit there. You can move a ward to Shepway and the 2 Districts then nicely provide 2 seats, and there’s a more sensible seat in Thanet.
We still have to find a satisfactory answer for Canterbury and Faversham though (Ashford isn’t a problem).
It looks like matters are hotting up on the Margate and Ramsgate constituency – according to below:
http://thanetlab.blogspot.com/2011/11/laura-sandys-are-you-serious-about.html
A Labour councillor in the South Thanet constituency has resigned the whip on Thanet District Council.
This follows a Conservative councillor in the North Thanet constituency resigning the whip in December.
So the ratio is now Conservative 26, Labour 25, Independents 5
In terms of the electoral impact, the Conservative councillor who resigned is from a safe Conservative ward and the Labour councillor who resigned is from a safe Labour ward.
In terms of the impact with the boundary review and the collapse of Liberal Democrat support in this area in particular, it makes the contest between Conservatives and Labour a lot tighter than Anthony’s initial projections would suggest.
Well Labour took control of the council after the Tory resigned the whip. So now that its gone back the other way, I wonder if control of the council could change also? If so, the Labour leader would surely be the shortest serving council leader in the borough’s history.
“it makes the contest between Conservatives and Labour a lot tighter than Anthony’s initial projections would suggest.”
Why?
As it happens during the Feltham & Heston by-election I found myself in a greasy spoon with Laura Sandys & 2 Tory party workers (I must say I was impressed that one had come down all the way from St Helens to help) and I can confirm that she is very worried about the boundary change. I’d never met her before but her late brother was a barrister in my father’s chambers before the latter became a judge. (Laura’s views are infinitely more left-wing than those of her brother!)
Since the boundary changes effectively halve her majority, I’d be surprised if she were entirely enthusiastic about them!
Oh well, thats the way it goes. Overall the boundary changes are potentially very good. The bigger picture and all that.
In the circumstances of 2015, I don’t think the Tories have to worry about holding Margate & Ramsgate. They are pretty much guaranteed to win by a few thousand unless their national prospects deteriorate substantially.
One fly in the ointment for the Tories in Kent could be this daft Boris Island airport. Fortunately, as the hedge fund manager on newsnight said last night, it is purely a gimmick for the mayoral election and will be quietly dropped shortly thereafter.
If not then a clutch of North Kent marginals would be very vulnerable to Labour.
I agree. I worry about the effect a major development would have politically in the Thames Estuary.
I hope H.Hemmlig is indeed right and that this is just a short term gimmick to get us successfully through the mayoral lections and then we can drop it before it does us any damage in Kent. If that turns out to be the case, then Boris will have played a blinder!
Regardless of the political impact, anyone with half a brain can see that in practical terms the project is a non-starter. Ted Heath’s plan to do this in the early 1970s sank under the weight of the massive costs and impracticalities (Andy Beckett’s book on the history of the 1970s gives an excellent history of the proposed Maplin Sands airport project). This proposal will have a similar fate.
Boris will be fine without gimmicks like this.
The fact remains that London does need expanded airport space somewhere. I dont pretend to know the area well enough to know where this expansion should take place, but it has to somewhere.
I completely agree.
In the end the government will follow the Sherlock Holmes method, that is to eliminate all the possible schemes that absolutely won’t work, and then whatever we’re left with, however unpalatable, will be what we have to do.
I’ve a sneaking suspicion we’ll come back around to the Heathrow 3rd runway in the end.