South Norfolk

[stb12]

South Norfolk

[beacon]

With all other things being equal, the standing down on Richard Bacon will help the Tories. He had a reputation in the constituency and local party of doing very little.

[Pete Whitehead]

	Con	Lab	Lib/LD
1974	44.7%	27.5%	27.3%
1974	46.2%	30.8%	22.6%
1979	55.2%	28.4%	16.3%
1983	54.8%	13.9%	31.3%
1987	53.9%	13.6%	32.5%
1992	52.8%	19.3%	25.6%

	Con	Lab	LD	Ref/UKIP	Grn
1997	41.1%	26.2%	27.2%	4.7%	0.8%
2001	43.2%	25.0%	28.3%	1.5%	1.9%
2005	44.5%	23.6%	29.0%	2.9%
2010	50.1%	13.3%	28.7%	3.9%	1.9%
2015	55.6%	18.0%	7.8%	13.4%	5.2%
2017	59.2%	30.3%	7.7%		2.4%
2019	56.5%	23.4%	17.0%		3.2%

[johnloony]

7: Ind, SDP, five main parties

www.southnorfolkandbroadland.gov.uk/downloads/file/7046/statement-of-persons-nominated-notice-of-poll-and-situation-of-polling-stations-south-norfolk

[froome]

I've just caught up with all the results from the Eastern region, and this one looks the most surprising to me. A Labour gain of nearly 3,000, so much higher than in neighbouring S.W. Norfolk. Where does Labour's vote come from in this constituency?

[Davıd Boothroyd]

This is my educated guess, but the boundary changes have made South Norfolk a lot more urban a constituency. There are several outer Norwich suburbs (Easton, Costessey, Cringleford), and the towns of Hethersett and Wymondham along the A11. One of the characteristics of both of these areas is that there has been a lot of recent major housebuilding in them. And that means an unusually large number of young homeowners who have mortgages. That's precisely the sort of voter who would be Tory in any normal election, but were very likely to go over to Labour in the context of 2024.

[batman]

There are 8 wards which now have a Labour councillor, but Labour do not hold any wards outright. The wards concerned are Old Costessey, New Costessey, Harleston, Hethersett, Stratton, N Wymondham, Loddon & Chedgrave and Cringleford; however, New Costessey ward remains part of the Norwich South constituency, and I think a bit of Old Costessey now is, too. So David is basically right about where Labour's strength comes from. I am guessing that Labour's vote remained at a similar level to that seen in the local elections in these wards, but that the anti-Labour vote was much more split, allowing Labour to be some way ahead in these areas, and that the party polled decently in other areas too.

[jamie]

The interesting question is why South Norfolk is more Labour than basically any equivalent seat elsewhere? A rural largely middle class commuter seat that was near 50/50 in the EU referendum is not the sort of seat that went Labour by 6% even earlier this month. It might not go Tory, but I can’t think of any seats like it that went Labour.

[batman]

Norwich has quite a bit of demographic pull and as we know is a very poor city for the Tories in recent times (their tenure of Norwich North was dependent on the non-Norwich city areas in that seat). We have seen a similar phenomenon in quite a few exurbs in other parts of England, but in some cases it's resulted in a narrow Tory hold (e.g. SW Devon, E Exeter & Exmouth) rather than a Labour gain. You will find other examples of exurb or partly-exurb seats which have also gone Labour, I'm sure, though it's true that it's hard to think of one in southern England. I think that as David says this seat is less rural than it used to be.

[rr]

Jul 26, 2024 21:30:06 GMT batman said:

Norwich has quite a bit of demographic pull and as we know is a very poor city for the Tories in recent times (their tenure of Norwich North was dependent on the non-Norwich city areas in that seat). We have seen a similar phenomenon in quite a few exurbs in other parts of England, but in some cases it's resulted in a narrow Tory hold (e.g. SW Devon, E Exeter & Exmouth) rather than a Labour gain. You will find other examples of exurb or partly-exurb seats which have also gone Labour, I'm sure, though it's true that it's hard to think of one in southern England. I think that as David says this seat is less rural than it used to be.

I think the seats around Reading must be contenders...

Also Oxford.  Started to become a very left-wing city in the mid 1980s but the ex-urbs in Vale, Cherwell and South Oxon remained Tory (Botley, Cumnor, Hinksey, Wheatley,  Kidlington).  Over time, however, the city's influence over its county appears to have spread -  these started to fall to Lib Dems in particular, to the point that places like Cumnor were unassailable by the early 2010s (even when Vale went back to the Tories).  

That creep into the ex-urbs now seems to have spread out to the whole county!

[froome]

Thanks all for some very helpful replies. I did wonder whether it was a similar phenomenon to that seen close to other similar southern Labour cities. It looks like to this might be added a latent Labour strength still existing in the small market towns such as Harleston and Wymondham, as batman alluded to. Presumably the Devon examples, which were what came to my mind, suffer from having latent strength for the Lib Dems particularly to contend with, which I assume doesn't exist here so much.

[Pete Whitehead]

Harleston is in Waveney Valley.
I think its notable that Cringleford is the most upmarket ward in all of Norfolk and South Norfolk generally has considerably higher levels of professional/managerial workers than the rest of the county and yet this is now one of the better Labour wards here. Its not just the fabled public sector middle class who benefit Labour in that respect now, with all the corporate HR and DEI types of the kind who debank customers for not aligning with their values. I don't think in a lot of respects this seat is all that different to somewhere like Rushcliffe.

[andrewp]

Simplistically, but perhaps tells a tale

In 1997 in South Norfolk.

Con (40.2) + Referendum (4.1) = 44.3%
LD (28.3) + Lab (26.1) + Green (0.8) = 55.2%

In 2024

Con (29.3) + RefUK (15.3) = 44.6%
Lab (35)+ LD (11.6) + Green (8) =54.6%

[batman]

Jul 27, 2024 7:36:39 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

Harleston is in Waveney Valley.
I think its notable that Cringleford is the most upmarket ward in all of Norfolk and South Norfolk generally has considerably higher levels of professional/managerial workers than the rest of the county and yet this is now one of the better Labour wards here. Its not just the fabled public sector middle class who benefit Labour in that respect now, with all the corporate HR and DEI types of the kind who debank customers for not aligning with their values. I don't think in a lot of respects this seat is all that different to somewhere like Rushcliffe.

forgot about Harleston being in Waveney Valley. Rushcliffe is partly an exurb seat, but it does reach very close to Nottingham city centre, so it's properly urban in some parts; it's not a bad comparison though. 

[Pete Whitehead]

Jul 27, 2024 7:39:13 GMT andrewp said:

Simplistically, but perhaps tells a tale

In 1997 in South Norfolk.

Con (40.2) + Referendum (4.1) = 44.3%
LD (28.3) + Lab (26.1) + Green (0.8) = 55.2%

In 2024

Con (29.3) + RefUK (15.3) = 44.6%
Lab (35)+ LD (11.6) + Green (8) =54.6%

It does tell a tale but still shows a trend that is quite different to the rest of Norfolk (excluding Norwich)

The equivalent figures for the other seats are Right (Con+Ref) / Lef (Lab+LD+Grn)

SW Norfolk
1997 48.3/51.7
2024 47.7/36.7 (complicated by an ostensibly right of centre Indepdent taking 14%)

NW Norfolk
1997 46.6/53.4
2024 55.6/44.4

North Norfolk
1997 40.7/59.4
2024 49.4/50.5

Mid Norfolk/Broadland
1997 45.2/54.4
2024 50.9/49.1

Great Yarmouth
1997 35.6/64.4
2024 59.9/38.8

Obviously boundary changes cloud the picture in some of these seats but the overall picture is clear of a strong trend to the right in rural and small town Norfolk since 1997 but which South Norfolk (and we can include the parts of the former seat now in Waveney Valley in this) has not participated.

[Sibboleth]

Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, which is massive, is in the constituency and explains much of the demographic peculiarities of some of the Norwich suburbs also in it; e.g. Cringleford's ratio of managers to professionals is quite something and it has an extremely high proportion of its workforce employed in the health service. If you think of it as being Norwich's Harborne then it makes much more sense as a place.

[YL]

Wards in this constituency by percentage (of those in employment) in "professional occupations":

Cringleford 40.6
Hethersett 27.6
Brooke 26.1
Poringland, Framinghams & Trowse 24.6
Old Costessey 24.0
Mulbarton & Stoke Holy Cross 23.8
Rockland 23.7
South Wymondham 23.7
North Wymondham 23.6
Forncett 22.6
Easton 20.5
Central Wymondham 20.4
Loddon & Chedgrave 20.1
Newton Flotman 19.9
Thurlton 19.1
Hempnall 18.5
Stratton 15.7

Constituency 23.9
England & Wales 20.3

For comparison, none of the South Norfolk wards in Waveney Valley is above 17% on this measure.

Cringleford is the 47th highest ward in the country for this measure (counting the City of London as a single ward, because Nomis does). A lot of those above it are in Oxford or Cambridge or are middle class areas of large cities; among areas already mentioned as comparisons we have Harborne and two Rushcliffe wards (Lady Bay and Musters). I wonder what the top ward on this measure to vote Conservative was? (In 2019 might it have been Cringleford?)

This does reinforce the impression that Cringleford is to a considerable extent really a professional middle class suburb of Norwich (note that it is close to UEA as well as to the hospital) but it is not very typical of the constituency.