Ward by ward: How Croydon voted on May 3

The full breakdown of voting results from the London Mayoral and Assembly elections on May 3 are now available through the London Elects website (you need to scroll well down the page for the link to the ward scores).

But here, so that you don’t have to go to the trouble of digging out the Excel form and trying to compare the numbers, we have listed the voting for the three leading candidates for the London Assembly candidates – Steve O’Connell (Conservative), Louisa Woodley (Labour) and Abigail Lock (LibDems) – for each of Croydon’s wards.

  • Addiscombe: LibDems 277; Cons 1012; Lab 1490
  • Ashburton: LibDems 200; Con 1412; Lab 1177
  • Bensham Manor: LibDems 145; Con 535; Lab 2166
  • Broad Green: LibDems 161; Con 519; Lab 2227
  • Coulsdon East: LibDems 358; Con 1680; Lab 529
  • Coulsdon West: LibDems 212; Con 1624; Lab 613
  • Croham: LibDems 405; Con 1543; Lab 1029
  • Fairfield: LibDems 243; Con 1183; Lab 1013
  • Fieldway: LibDems 51; Con 308; Lab 826
  • Heathfield: LibDems 189; Con 1818; Lab 776
  • Kenley: LibDems 242; Con 1828; Lab 623
  • New Addington: LibDems 83; Con 445; Lab 705
  • Norbury: LibDems 202; Con 916; Lab 1899
  • Purley: LibDems 265; Con 1807; Lab 715
  • Sanderstead: LibDems 246; Con 2203; Lab 545
  • Selhurst: LibDems 139; Con 461; Lab 1895
  • Selsdon & Ballards: LibDems 246; Con 1991; Lab 555
  • Shirley: LibDems 211; Con 1835; Lab 1030
  • South Norwood: LibDems 240; Con 736; Lab 1867
  • Thornton Heath: LibDems 138; Con 547; Lab 2010
  • Upper Norwood: LibDems 181; Con 849; Lab 1827
  • Waddon: LibDems 183; Con 933; Lab 1239
  • West Thornton: LibDems 121; Con 527; Lab 2140
  • Woodside: LibDems 176; Con 667; Lab 1633

There was also one addition “ward”, postal votes, which were given as a Croydon total, rather than allocated to the relevant wards.

  • Postal votes: LibDems: 1717; Cons: 11802; Lab: 9136

CROYDON TOTALS:  LibDems: 6631; Cons: 39181; Lab  39665

Points to remember:

  • This was all off a 38 per cent turnout by the disillusioned electorate.
  • This is the first time ever that Labour has out-polled the Conservatives across Croydon in the Assembly elections.
  • The LibDem vote collapsed, the coalition government’s junior partners paying the price of having a taste of power.
  • On the basis of these ward results, Croydon Council would be made up of 40 Labour councillors and 30 Conservatives.
  • Inside Croydon: Living life on the fringes of Croydon. Post your comments on this article below. If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, email us at inside.croydon@btinternet.com

About insidecroydon

News, views and analysis about the people of Croydon, their lives and political times in the diverse and most-populated borough in London. Based in Croydon and edited by Steven Downes. To contact us, please email inside.croydon@btinternet.com
This entry was posted in Abigail Lock, Addiscombe, Ashburton, Broad Green, Coulsdon East, Coulsdon West, Croham, Fairfield, Fieldway, Heathfield, Kenley, London Assembly, Louisa Woodley, New Addington, Norbury, Purley, Sanderstead, Selhurst, Selsdon & Ballards, Shirley, South Norwood, Steve O'Connell, Thornton Heath, Upper Norwood, Waddon and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Ward by ward: How Croydon voted on May 3

  1. You will forgive me for pointing out that if you are just looking at the Croydon section of the votes, that the FibDems didn’t finish in the top 3. Nor did Whooping Winston. Take a bow GORDON ROSS!

    • It’s a fair point.

      In truth, we were only paying lip service to all the other parties by even bothering to include the LibDems, since we felt that the figures illustrating their utter collapse at the polls was worth highlighting. As Andrew Pelling suggest, they even risk wipe out in previously steadfastly orange Sutton. Croydon, at council and parliamentary level, remains a two-way battle.

      We did include the link to the full results on the London Elects site for everyone to drill down into the figures for their own ward or party performance. And we apologise if, in our haste to put some of the figures out there, we focused only on the winners. In the words of David Coleman, who cares who’s third?

  2. Gavin Barwell, the MP for Central Croydon, has been in touch to say that he believes that the Croydon Council seat situation, based on these results, would in fact be 37-33 to Labour over the Conservatives.

    He may have a point: there’s a lot of detail lost in the large number of postal votes, where it is impossible to ascertain exactly the outcome at ward level.

    If Barwell is correct, it means that at the next Croydon Council election the outcome of a single ward will determine who controls the Town Hall.

  3. mraemiller says:

    It makes me laugh that so much effort has been gone to to make the form of AV+ by which the Assembly is elected statistically fair … but when they actually get there the only powers London AMs have are blocking powers and it needs 66.6% + 1 of them to block anything.

    We were told at the AV referendum that 50% +1 is wrong, so how can 66.6% + 1 be right?

    Basically the Assembly has no point except as a talking shop unless the Mayor goes completely insane

    Also does anyone actually understand the system for calculating the 11 top-up seats?
    When I looked at the results as given on wikipedia they didn’t seem to add up to me.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Assembly_election,_2012

    I dont know why but looking at the numbers I was instinctively aware of a sharp difference between the percentage of top up votes you get and the number of seats it translates to and I’m not sure even now how this works.

    But okay here goes…

    If Labour gets 41.1% of the vote that gives them 11 * 41.1/100 = 4.521 top up seats
    If Conservatives get 32% of the vote that gives them 11 * 32/100 = 3.52 top up seats
    If Green get 8.5% of the vote that gives them 11 * 8.5/100 = 0.935 top up seats
    If LibDem get 6.8 % of the vote that gives them 11 * 6.8/100 = 0.748 top up seats
    so how does it work out at
    Labour 4 seats (rounded down from 4.521?)
    Conservative 3 seats (rounded down from 3.52?)
    Green 2 seat (rounded up from 0.935?)
    LibDem 2 seat (rounded up from 0.748?)

    How is this possible? Well, it must be the 5% threashold.

    If we add up all those parties with votes about the threshold their votes come to … 88.4%
    so let’s put that number in and do it again …

    If Labour get 41.1% of the vote that gives them 11 * 41.1/88.4= 5.114 top up seats
    If Conservatives get 32% of the vote that gives them 11 * 32/88.4 = 3.981 top up seats
    If Green get 8.5% of the vote that gives them 11 * 8.5/88.4= 0.961 top up seats
    If LibDem get 6.8 % of the vote that gives them 11 * 6.8/88.4= 0.846 top up seats
    that would give us
    Labour 5 seats (rounding down from 5.114?)
    Conservative 4 seats (rounding up from 3.981?)
    Green 1 seat (rounded up from 0.961?)
    LibDem 1 seat (rounded up from 0.846?)

    This confused me a lot so I read the small print and I’m counting the top up votes as separate to the other votes which is why it doesn’t work. The actual formula used to calculate the top up seats is

    Total number of votes won
    ________________________________
    Seats already won (both Constituency and London-wide seats) + 1

    A remarkably unique formula to my mind. Basically you can skew the results of an AV+ result quite substantially by making different subjective decisions about whether the “+” part of the calculation (where people vote only for a party) should be separate to or contained with the constituency vote counts. But surely if you use the constituency votes and the top up party votes together to calculate the top up seat allocation, that is akin to counting the constituency votes twice?

    Can someone explain to me how this system is either logical or democratic, because I’m completely baffled.

  4. mraemiller says:

    Oh well, I don’t suppose they call it a “Modified” d’Hondt Formula for nothing.

    The other point is, of course, that choosing one Mayor at the top of the tree to rule the whole of London is effectively turning the whole of London into one giant constituency, which is useful to Conservative and Labour as it means that the small parties will never get a look in …

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s