|
|
|
Stone
|
|
gain
from Conservative
|
|
NEW SEAT
|
|
0 ( 0.0%)
|
|
24,859 (46.8%)
|
|
21,041 (39.6%)
|
|
6,392 (12.0%)
|
|
0 ( 0.0%)
|
|
782 ( 1.5%)
|
|
|
|
68,242
|
|
53,074 (77.8%)
|
|
NEW SEAT
|
|
NEW SEAT
|
|
15,079 (27.1%)
|
|
31,156 (56.0%)
|
|
16,077 (28.9%)
|
|
7,554 (13.6%)
|
|
0 ( 0.0%)
|
|
854 ( 1.5%)
|
|
|
Conservative
|
|
66,426
|
|
55,641 (83.8%)
|
|
|
-9.2%
|
|
+10.8%
|
|
-1.5%
|
|
+0.0%
|
|
-0.1%
|
|
+2.7%
|
|
-6.0%
|
|
|
|
|
The recent boundary changes gave Staffordshire a 12th seat, and this tersely named rural constituency is it. Stone is constructed from equal portions of three previous seats, which have one thing in common - they are overwhelmingly Tory. Yet, as in many of Britain's boundary changes, the Conservatives may have gained a seat only to lose the war - the creation of Stone has drained the Tory majorities in neighbouring seats. This is annoying in Stafford (which could become marginal), but potentially disastrous in Staffordshire Moorlands. Stone, however, will be a plum seat for the Tory candidate, who can count on a five-figure majority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,632
|
16.22
|
9.03
|
180
|
|
|
6,878
|
19.81
|
11.17
|
177
|
|
|
5,160
|
14.86
|
11.25
|
132
|
|
|
4,991
|
14.38
|
14.70
|
98
|
|
|
225
|
0.65
|
10.45
|
6
|
|
|
2,889
|
8.32
|
2.81
|
296
|
|
|
1,729
|
4.98
|
8.01
|
62
|
|
|
6,236
|
17.96
|
15.25
|
118
|
|
|
548
|
1.58
|
7.13
|
22
|
|
|
7
|
0.02
|
10.17
|
0
|
|
|
