London Maps

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Just found this on my computer. Must have made it a few months ago (at the very latest). Kinda self-explanatory:



Big version

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Large version

That socio-economic thingy for each LCC ward. Will do students soon.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's the ward on the Inner London map where the BNP polled relatively well- and who are its councillors etc.

Eltham West. Has three councillers; all Labour. Full results:

W. Freeman, Lab, 1429
M.R.Hayes, Lab, 1409
R.G.A.Walker, Lab, 1322
R.Woods, BNP, 976
A.J.Frost, Con, 580
C.A.M.L.Culbert, Con, 552
M.J.Hoskin, Con, 539
E.J.Cox, LDem, 371
G.P.McWilliams, Ind, 332
Y.Nicholls, LDem, 284
M.Olukoga, Ind, 281
T.R.Ward, LDem, 257

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What are the general demographics there that might explain a relatively high BNP score?

Eltham has... something of a... very, very, very... bad reputation as far as racism goes. It's where Stephen Lawrence was murdered. It's a little surprising that West was the only Eltham ward that they ran in, but then they do have trouble finding candidates.
Eltham West includes the Ferrier estate (which has, IIRC, been largely demolished now. Or will be at some point) and issues over that probably boosted the BNP vote.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What does "Asian" generally refer to? Are Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Malays, Koreans, Arabs, Iranians, etc all lumped into one giant group?

No; just what would be called South Asian in Canada.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

% student:

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Employment by industry:



Large version

[Filuwaúrdjan]

MRS Social Grade:



large version

[Filuwaúrdjan]

(above posts edited to avoid map-quoting; trying to make the thread easier to read through really).

For what it's worth, the LibDem vote in SW London isn't nearly as well-heeled as is often assumed; the richest wards tend to vote Tory these days (an interesting change from the 1980's, when the Liberals were strongest in the most middle upper class wards, while the Tories did best in the more hum-drum areas). Demographically Sutton is very like Romford (ie; overwhelmingly lower-middle class (with a few working class pockets here and there) and with a strong white-flight element).

Btw, some ward maps of the above might well be made soon.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Large version (plus important notes) here

Maps above show a model-based income estimate produced by the ONS (edit: after the cost of housing is accounted for). If some wards look "odd" it's probably because something went wrong with the model in that ward.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Results (pop. vote) by first constituency (c.2005) and borough for the 2006 elections.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Hampstead and Kilburn is indeed very marginal on the new boundaries, but much of the old Brent East vote was enthusiastic support for Sarah Teather.

There's been a large LibDem vote in Hampstead (especially West Hampstead) for quite a while and the best (ie; the most middle class) LibDem wards from Brent East. I'm quite sure that an existing strong LibDem organisation in Hampstead is why Teather went for what looks like a suicide-run in the new Central seat. They want a candidate of their own (and I don't blame them).

Interestingly enough, the parts of Brent East in which the LibDems are strongest used to be where the Tories were strongest in the '80's and '90's (though boundary changes confuse things somewhat)...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doubt it. Partly because Dawn Butler is no slouch, but also because Brent Central is about a quarter Black and they all (around 80% of them anyway) vote Labour and do not have any interest in voting for other parties (and that's a fact, not an opinion or even an assumption).

Teather got some bad news last week, btw. There was a by-election in the Stonebridge ward on Thursday and the LibDems put a lot of effort into it. Turnout was very low and the LibDems squeezed the Tory and Green votes away into hardly anything. There was also a strong Respect candidate. But the Labour vote hardly fell from 2006.
While there was never a realistic chance that Labour would lose Stonebridge the failure of the LibDems to eat into the Labour vote there is, erm, "cause for concern" because if the Labour vote in Stonebridge, Harlesden and so on stays solid, there's no way that Labour can lose Brent Central.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They wouldn't have a chance anyway. Deptford is a safe Labour seat, period. South Deptford has Green and Trot councillers now, but the north Deptford wards are some of Labour's strongest in London.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That's got to be some of the most extreme spin I've ever heard. The Lib Dems came within 10% of knocking off Labour in one their safest wards in the seat, and it's bad news for the Lib Dems? Tuh.

I'm not spinning; I just know a little bit about voting patterns in that area (I'm trying to stay as unbiased as I can with this; which isn't easy as (mainly due to the fact that she was sniffing around Brent East as soon as she heard that Paul Daisley was dying. That, and here role in the political murder of Charles Kennedy; who I like even though I'd never actually vote for him) I view Teather as being lower than vermin).

The actual result isn't bad for the LibDems (and it would be crazy to say otherwise), but it's bad news in terms of the parliamentary seat. The LibDems need to break into the Labour vote in this seat in order to have any hope of winning it, and, if the by-election is anything to go by (and it might not be), they clearly aren't doing that at the moment.

By-election results:

Labour 1432
LDem     864
Respect 247
Con       177
Green      51

2006 results (average vote)

Labour 1559
Con       572
LDem     381
Green    216
Ind        143

Turnout fell a little bit; 27% in the by-election, 28% in 2006.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Notional results for Brent Central:

Labour 50.1%, LDem 32.1%, Con 13.4%, Oth. 4.5%

(these are Wells figures as I don't have access to the Rallings & Thrasher ones. I'd be surprised if they were very different though).

I repeat; if the Labour vote in Stonebridge, Harlesden and so on stays solid, there's no way that Labour can lose Brent Central.

But this is getting a little off-topic

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would say "great map", but bearing in mind the subject... let's just say "very interesting map". Seems that NF support was a good deal more working class than BNP support is (this even with the latter being more working class inside London than outside it).

Quite interesting how those 14-18% areas are those that have quite a lot of immigrants, quite like our 9-3 in France, where the FN has (had) high vote shares. Where those areas also high-immigrant areas in 77?

Some data from the '81 census for the '83-'97 constituencies (number of households with a head born in "New Commonwealth or Pakistan).

The following had more than 8,000: Brent South, Southall, Hackney North & Stoke Newington, Tottenham

Generally the NF seems to have done well in areas that were near areas with large immigrant populations, but which were still largely white themselves.

It is also interesting to note that the areas in which the NF did well saw various non-Labour parties doing very well in local elections during the 1980's and early 1990's; Tower Hamlets (the LibDems were strongest where the NF was strongest; I checked this years ago), Shoreditch, the southern part of Newham etc.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What is the difference between the NF and the BNP?

The NF was active in the '70's, the BNP these days. More or less. Of course, there is still a NF, but it isn't far off being a joke.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The NF was more openly racist (as well as more violent) than the BNP is, but this may just be a reflection of changes in society. The remains of the NF are also more openly racist than the BNP. Most of the BNP anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because that's what fringe groups do; split (interestingly enough, a split within another London-orientated fringe party, Respect, seems increasingly possible). Don't know much about the details, don't really want to either.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Generally the NF seems to have done well in areas that were near areas with large immigrant populations, but which were still largely white themselves.

Somehow, I'm not surprised. Isn't that true of all Nazi parties in Western Europe?*

I think so; certainly is the case with the BNP.

One thing that might have boosted NF support is the unpopularity of the Labour-led administration on the GLC that year (which o/c lost power in a massive landslide; some of the seats lost didn't even fall in the 1987 General Election!).
Another thing to note is the fairly low share the NF polled in Hackney North; that area had (and has) a large Hasidic Jewish population.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Talk about White Flight...

Yeah, it's hilariously obvious really. Equally obvious is that the media have yet to pick up on it...