Faversham and Mid Kent
Notional 2005 Results:
Conservative: 21971 (51.1%)
Labour: 12475 (29%)
Liberal Democrat: 6827 (15.9%)
Other: 1701 (4%)
Majority: 9496 (22.1%)
Actual 2005 result
Conservative: 21690 (49.7%)
Labour: 12970 (29.7%)
Liberal Democrat: 7204 (16.5%)
UKIP: 1152 (2.6%)
Other: 610 (1.4%)
Majority: 8720 (20%)
2001 Result
Conservative: 18739 (45.6%)
Labour: 14556 (35.5%)
Liberal Democrat: 5529 (13.5%)
UKIP: 828 (2%)
Green: 799 (1.9%)
Other: 600 (1.5%)
Majority: 4183 (10.2%)
1997 Result
Conservative: 22016 (44.4%)
Labour: 17843 (36%)
Liberal Democrat: 6138 (12.4%)
Referendum: 2073 (4.2%)
Other: 1536 (3.1%)
Majority: 4173 (8.4%)
Boundary changes:
Profile:
Outgoing MP: Hugh Robertson(Conservative) (more information at They work for you)
Candidates: Hugh Robertson(Conservative) (more information at They work for you)
Ashok Rehal (Labour)
Dave Naghi (Liberal Democrat) Maidstone councillor. Contested Faversham and Mid Kent 2005.
Tim Valentine (Green) Psychology professor.
Sarah Larkins (UKIP)
Hairy Knorm (Official Monster Raving Loony)
2001 Census Demographics
Total 2001 Population: 85543
Male: 48.7%
Female: 51.3%
Under 18: 23.3%
Over 60: 20.9%
Born outside UK: 4.3%
White: 98.2%
Black: 0.2%
Asian: 0.6%
Mixed: 0.7%
Other: 0.3%
Christian: 77.3%
Full time students: 2%
Graduates 16-74: 17.4%
No Qualifications 16-74: 28.2%
Owner-Occupied: 75.2%
Social Housing: 16.1% (Council: 10%, Housing Ass.: 6.1%)
Privately Rented: 5.4%
Homes without central heating and/or private bathroom: 5.7%
“An unlike others (Michaels Ancram and Spicer for example) he never compromised his pragmatic and moderate beliefs”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe Michael Spicer ever had “pragmatic and moderate beliefs”, at least in the way Tim means.
I thought Michael Spicer was a protege of Cecil Parkinson, and pretty eurosceptic?
‘I thought Michael Spicer was a protege of Cecil Parkinson, and pretty eurosceptic?’
Hee became a derugulating, free-market-advocating, tax-slashing, hang ‘em, flog ‘em Eurosceptic backbencher although he started his Parliamentary career in 1974 as a staunch Heathite, somewhat to the left of Ted Heath himself!
Not too dissimilar to the journey taken by Michael Ancram, from one wing of the party to the other
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe Michael Spicer ever had “pragmatic and moderate beliefs”, at least in the way Tim means.
I remember talking about this on the Worcestershire West thread; as a student at Cambridge, and during the Heath era, he was closely identified with liberal Toryism, being a founder-member of PEST – but trimmed his sails during the 1970s.
I think regional government doesn’t neccessarily need to start off with a coherent identity; it can gain one over time, or you can allow each region the same powers, but allow them to organise their own internal structure – so a region could devolve most powers to county level if that is what its residents wanted.
‘he was closely identified with liberal Toryism, being a founder-member of PEST – but trimmed his sails during the 1970s.’
He didn’t so much trim his sails as completely change his political alignment – the one thing the Michael Spicer of 2008 has in common with that of 1974 is that they were both members of the Tory Party – all similarities end there
A bit like John Bercow in reverse
‘I think regional government doesn’t neccessarily need to start off with a coherent identity’
I think regional government is a complete non-starter and I dread to think how much money the government might have spent trying to implement it had the North East not rejected even so much the idea in their referendum
The North East referendum was typical New Labour and has probably killed English devolution for a generation- which it was always intended to. They didn’t offer any devolution from London, just to take powers away from local councils and people saw through it. And the fact remains, we DO have regional government and have done for years, health authorities, police authorities, tourist boards, learning and skills councils, innumerable joint boards for managing waste, public transport, development and the environment spend billions of pounds of our money a year. Then there are the government offices for the regions. We HAVE regional government in England but it’s wasteful, opaque and horribly undemocratic. Elected assemblies with real authority to run those services would be vastly cheaper than the current arrangement of layer upon layer of quangos with different patchworks of regional boundaries that no-one understands – and would bring much-needed democratic transparency to the process.
Hello I am the UKIP prospective parliamentary candidate for the next general election and will be contesting the Faversham and Mid Kent seat. The conservatives do not have any manifesto or agenda that differs from the Labour policies currently in use, whereas we at UKIP are not only seeking withdraweral from the EU (£6.5 bilion membership cost for next year) but are punishing convicted criminals with more appropriate sentancing (not 4 years for murder) and other ridiculous sentances. please visit the UKIP website for a complete manifesto.
Sarah Larkins
If I get elected I will keep my expenses down to a bare minimum and will publish a full detailed expense report every month, after all all businesses have to show detailed accounts so why should MPs be any different ?
We could have done with a report of the County Council and European election results in relation to this seat.
Given the Labour debacle in the elections for Kent County Council, the LibDems may well overtake them for second place. And Sarah Larkins, thanks for posting, will be heartened by the strong UKIP showing in Kent: she can reasonably expect to keep her deposit next time.
The Greens concentrate elsewhere in East Kent, which is perhaps surprising. There are a considerable number of environmentally concerned people in this seat, for example there is a very classy farm shop (well, actually a sort of cross between a farm shop and Fortnum and Mason’s in a shed) called Macknades in a former hop farm in Faversham. And Faversham is very keen on preserving, and opening annually for people to visit, its ancient town houses. But perhaps such concerns illustrate well the voting potential the Greens are sacrificing by moving to the left.
Are the Monster Raving Loony Party intending to stand again?
But there is little doubt that the Conservatives are going to hold Faversham and Mid Kent.
The CC results here:
Con 14172 55.9%
LD 4024 15.9%
Lab 2572 10.1%
UKIP 2533 10.0%
Grn 1732 6.8%
Ind 190 0.7%
NF 131 0.5%
I just commented on Havant that there can be few starker examples of the collapse of Labour support amongst the white working class, but there may almost be such here. Maidstone SE was a Labour held CC seat in 2005 where they fell to 15% of the vote. At least in this case they kept third place, behind UKIP.
You are right that UKIP could do well here. They did in fact beat Labour in all the divisions that they contested except for Faversham where they were 2 votes behind. UKIP only contested 4 of the 7 divisions which are wholly or partly within this seat and came second in 3 of them and with an average 16% of the vote
The Lib Dems have selected Dave Naghi here
Which seats have included Sutton Valence? I know it was in the ‘old’ Medway constituency until 1918
It was then in Maidstone until 1983 when it wsa moved into this seat
‘It was then in Maidstone until 1983 when it wsa moved into this seat’
Would that have been Faversham or Mid Kent? (The two seats were of course originally separate, though I believe the 1997 merger changed the boundaries)