← Pendle (all cycles) · 6 May 2021 cohort

Pendle 2021

Local elections held 6 May 2021.

12 ward races
33 seats
2 unfairly awarded seats
6.1% of seats unfairly awarded

Each race compares the marginal winner's share of valid ballots to the proportional quota — the share they'd need under any common proportional method. How the numbers are derived →

If votes were counted by party

Across the 12 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 33 seats had been shared out in proportion to votes received (how, with caveats). The Δ column is the actual seat count minus the proportional seat count — positive numbers are parties First-Past-the-Post over-represented; negative are parties it under-represented.

PartyVotesVote %Seats won% of seatsProportional seatsProportional %Δ
Conservative Party34,12948.2%1854.5%1648.5%+2
Labour Party23,25932.9%1030.3%1133.3%-1
Liberal Democrats12,71018.0%515.2%618.2%-1
Independent5490.8%00.0%00.0%0
Green Party1300.2%00.0%00.0%0
Total70,777100.0%33100.0%33100.0%0

Vote share vs seats won

The top bar is each party's share of votes cast in this council. Below, one square per seat, coloured by the party that won it — first the actual First-Past-the-Post result, then what a proportional method would have produced from the same vote totals. Divergence between the bar and the actual grid is the indictment of the method.

Vote share
Actual seats
Proportional seats

Council composition: what this election replaced

The 2021 cycle was an all-out election — every seat was contested. The two opencouncildata snapshots below show the council immediately after the 2021 election (current) and on the eve of it (2020), so you can see what the result replaced.

Current (2021)
Previous (2020)

Wards in this council

Sorted with the largest gap below the quota first. Click any ward to jump to its full result.

Race results

Fence and Higham · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 51.5% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +1.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 990

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Newman B.Liberal Democrats51051.5%+1.5 ptsElected
2Hartley C.H.Conservative Party48048.5%

Electorate 1,975 · EC ward code E05013207 · Back to ward index

Waterside and Horsfield · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 45.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +20.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,502

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Sutcliffe A.Conservative Party81318.0%54.1%+29.1 ptsElected
2Lord D.E.Liberal Democrats78017.3%51.9%+26.9 ptsElected
3Harrison D.Conservative Party68715.2%45.7%+20.7 ptsElected
4Nixon J.A.Conservative Party67214.9%44.7%
5Mann A.R.Liberal Democrats66114.7%44.0%
6Wildman B.Liberal Democrats52511.7%35.0%
7Iqbal M.Labour Party3197.1%21.2%
8McBeth C.I.Independent491.1%3.3%

Electorate 5,653 · EC ward code E05013210 · Back to ward index

Bradley · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 46.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +21.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,058

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Iqbal M.Labour Party1,66518.1%54.4%+29.4 ptsElected
2Aslam M.Conservative Party1,62517.7%53.1%+28.1 ptsElected
3Sakib M.Labour Party1,41615.4%46.3%+21.3 ptsElected
4Kaleem M.Conservative Party1,38115.1%45.2%
5Mahmood H.Conservative Party1,37515.0%45.0%
6Khan S.Labour Party1,30714.2%42.7%
7Clamp D.R.Liberal Democrats2052.2%6.7%
8Hoyle J.M.Liberal Democrats2012.2%6.6%

Electorate 6,330 · EC ward code E05013203 · Back to ward index

Barnoldswick · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 50.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +25.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,951

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Whipp T.Liberal Democrats1,13819.4%58.3%+33.3 ptsElected
2Purcell J.Conservative Party99917.1%51.2%+26.2 ptsElected
3Adams M.Liberal Democrats98016.7%50.2%+25.2 ptsElected
4Purcell H.Conservative Party85614.6%43.9%
5Mills J.M.Liberal Democrats83814.3%43.0%
6Goulthorp C.Conservative Party69911.9%35.8%
7Clouston E.Labour Party3435.9%17.6%

Electorate 6,740 · EC ward code E05013200 · Back to ward index

Earby and Coates · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 51.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +26.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,105

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Carroll R.Conservative Party1,16618.5%55.4%+30.4 ptsElected
2Goulthorp M.Conservative Party1,11117.6%52.8%+27.8 ptsElected
3Whipp D.M.B.Liberal Democrats1,08517.2%51.6%+26.6 ptsElected
4Carter C.Conservative Party1,04316.5%49.6%
5Land S.L.Liberal Democrats79412.6%37.7%
6Hartley K.Liberal Democrats76412.1%36.3%
7French R.Labour Party3515.6%16.7%

Electorate 6,611 · EC ward code E05013206 · Back to ward index

Barrowford and Pendleside · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 52.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +27.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,249

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Crossley L.Conservative Party1,66824.7%74.2%+49.2 ptsElected
2Lionti C.Conservative Party1,51622.5%67.4%+42.4 ptsElected
3Ahmed N.Conservative Party1,17317.4%52.2%+27.2 ptsElected
4Nike S.F.Labour Party6159.1%27.3%
5Turner K.Independent5007.4%22.2%
6Oliver R.A.Labour Party4626.8%20.5%
7Hannah-Wood P.J.Labour Party4096.1%18.2%
8Berry P.A.Liberal Democrats1782.6%7.9%
9Roach J.M.Liberal Democrats1301.9%5.8%
10Vickers K.J.Liberal Democrats961.4%4.3%

Electorate 6,022 · EC ward code E05013201 · Back to ward index

Marsden and Southfield · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 54.1% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +29.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,161

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Adnan M.Conservative Party1,25719.4%58.2%+33.2 ptsElected
2McGowan N.Conservative Party1,18518.3%54.8%+29.8 ptsElected
3Howarth K.Conservative Party1,17018.0%54.1%+29.1 ptsElected
4Ammer M.Labour Party88513.7%41.0%
5Latif M.K.Labour Party84913.1%39.3%
6Tennant Y.M.Labour Party78512.1%36.3%
7Thornton K.I.Liberal Democrats1201.9%5.6%
8Foster D.H.Liberal Democrats1191.8%5.5%
9Church C.Liberal Democrats1121.7%5.2%

Electorate 6,150 · EC ward code E05013208 · Back to ward index

Vivary Bridge · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 54.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +29.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,341

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Albin D.Conservative Party74418.5%55.5%+30.5 ptsElected
2Lockwood D.Conservative Party74318.5%55.4%+30.4 ptsElected
3McGladdery K.Conservative Party73018.1%54.4%+29.4 ptsElected
4Clegg D.Liberal Democrats49912.4%37.2%
5Thomas M.E.Liberal Democrats40310.0%30.1%
6Thomas H.P.Liberal Democrats3598.9%26.8%
7Foat D.K.Labour Party2766.9%20.6%
8Wrigley A.M.Labour Party2696.7%20.1%

Electorate 5,480 · EC ward code E05013209 · Back to ward index

Brierfield East and Clover Hill · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 54.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +29.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,528

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Ashraf N.H.Labour Party1,58120.8%62.5%+37.5 ptsElected
2Ali Z.Labour Party1,38918.3%54.9%+29.9 ptsElected
3Ansar E.Labour Party1,38118.2%54.6%+29.6 ptsElected
4Stone M.Conservative Party1,12214.8%44.4%
5Khan M.Conservative Party1,06014.0%41.9%
6Munir S.Conservative Party78610.4%31.1%
7Haigh D.J.Liberal Democrats2663.5%10.5%

Electorate 6,399 · EC ward code E05013204 · Back to ward index

Brierfield West and Reedley · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 65.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +32.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,162

This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Hanif M.Labour Party1,56236.1%72.2%+38.9 ptsElected
2Iqbal Y.Labour Party1,41732.8%65.5%+32.2 ptsElected
3McCormick P.A.Conservative Party68215.8%31.5%
4Akbar S.Conservative Party51311.9%23.7%
5Land K.T.Liberal Democrats1503.5%6.9%

Electorate 4,498 · EC ward code E05013205 · Back to ward index

Whitefield and Walverden · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 62.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +37.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,864

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Mahmood A.Labour Party1,95122.7%68.1%+43.1 ptsElected
2Ahmad F.Labour Party1,86221.7%65.0%+40.0 ptsElected
3Anwar T.R.Labour Party1,80020.9%62.8%+37.8 ptsElected
4Ahmed M.Conservative Party96511.2%33.7%
5Mehmood A.Conservative Party92910.8%32.4%
6Ayub I.Conservative Party7909.2%27.6%
7Howarth P.T.Liberal Democrats1661.9%5.8%
8Marti A.I.Green Party1301.5%4.5%

Electorate 6,585 · EC ward code E05013211 · Back to ward index

Boulsworth and Foulridge · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 64.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +39.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,062

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Cockburn-Price S.E.Conservative Party1,49824.2%72.7%+47.7 ptsElected
2Cockburn-Price D.Conservative Party1,36222.0%66.1%+41.1 ptsElected
3Butterworth N.Conservative Party1,32921.5%64.5%+39.5 ptsElected
4MacDonald A.J.L.Liberal Democrats6069.8%29.4%
5Cox E.Liberal Democrats5579.0%27.0%
6Roach G.Liberal Democrats4687.6%22.7%
7Wicks S.Labour Party3655.9%17.7%

Electorate 6,351 · EC ward code E05013202 · Back to ward index