Tories advised to focus on ‘purple patches’ in next election

“PURPLE PATCHES” are the next big electoral challenge for Tories and Labour, analysts have warned.

It has been claimed that the handful of constituencies in the south of England – which are geographically in the blue wall area but have the socio-economic characteristics typically found in red wall areas – could hold the key to the next election.

The analysis, produced by Gabriel Milland, a polling expert at Portland Communications, has been scrutinised by both the major parties.

He refers to these seats as “purple” because they have a mixture of red and blue traits but also because “these are often places where Ukip [which adopted purple] and the Brexit Party did well, and where Leave got above its national vote share in the 2016 referendum”.

Around 20 “deep purple” seats are those that voted Leave by more than 52 per cent and where the Tories have a majority of less than 10,000, according to his analysis. Light purple seats have slightly larger Tory majorities.

“There are purple patches all over the south and east of England, especially in coastal towns with high levels of deprivation. A lot of these seats were won by Labour in the 1990s and 2000s,” Mr Milland told The Sunday Times.

“Places like Peterborough, Stevenage and Hastings. It’s a mistake to believe that the whole of southern and eastern England is like Tunbridge Wells.”

Voters in purple patches are disproportionately in favour of the Rwanda strategy, which will see illegal immigrants sent to the African nation, making them more likely to vote Tory.

The analysis comes amid concern that traditional blue wall voters could be drawn to the Lib Dems in the wake of the partygate affair.

Last week it was reported that Boris Johnson had been “airbrushed” from Conservatives’ by-election campaign literature, with leaflets and online advertisements not mentioning the Prime Minister. Tory MPS have warned that activists in some Conservative-held seats are refusing to campaign for the party because of disaffection with its leadership.