First Poll since Cameron’s Speech - UPDATED
The first poll since the Conservative party conference shows a shift in support to the Conservatives. The YouGov poll for Channel 4 has voting intention figures of CON 36%(+4) LAB 40%(-3) LDEM 13%(-2). The poll was conducted yesterday afternoon and evening and this morning, so after David Cameron had finished his speech.
Like the YouGov poll for Channel 4 after Brown’s speech this is a snap poll with a somewhat sample than a normal YouGov poll (though, I hasten to add, it isn’t actually that small.) It’s also important to note that it was taken immediately after Cameron spoke, when he was still splashed all over the newspapers and new bullettins (actually, most of it would have been before today’s papers), so you would expect him to get a boost… on the other hand the YouGov snap poll showing a Labour lead of 11 points straight after Brown’s speech was backed up by a normal full size YouGov poll a couple of days later that also showed an 11 point lead.
UPDATE - Populus’s poll has figures of CON 36%(+5), LAB 39%(-2), LDEM 15%(-2). This too was apparantly conducted after Cameron’s speech. There is also an ICM poll to come, and one for the Independent which will presumably be by ComRes.
UPDATE 2 - Here’s another - ICM have figures of CON 38%(+5), LAB 39%(nc), LDEM 16%(-3). Like YouGov this one was conducted after David Cameron’s speech, on the 3rd and 4th October.
UPDATE 3 - Bizarre. The Guardian was orginally reporting that their poll showed a 1 point Labour lead, but now they’ve changed the story to say the figures are CON 38%(+5), LAB 38%(-1), LDEM 16%(-3), so neck and neck. Presumably the earlier story was based on interim figures, since it had a sample size of something like 977, while the final story refers to the sample size being 1,008. The poll was conducted on the 3rd and 4th October.
Where does this leave a November general election? Thanks to boundary changes a 4 point lead would end producing about the same majority as Brown has now, less than that would be a lower majority - at neck and neck Brown would lose his majority entirely. It is perfectly possible that a meagre lead could be eroded during an election campaign, either by a drift of Labour support towards the Lib Dems, who are unlikely to stay as low as this once they have the guaranteed news coverage and election brings, or by the campaign itself. Labour could easily do worse than the uniform swing result predicted by these figures thanks to the new incumbency boost of the Conservative MPs who were first elected in 2005, or if there are differential swings in the south of the country or in marginals. A lead of this size certainly isn’t enough for Brown to be sure that he will maintain his majority, or in fact win an overall majority at all.
Obviously there is a very good chance - a probablity even - that this is a Conservative conference boost that will decline, but if you were Gordon Brown would you want to gamble your government on that assumption?
Not calling an election wouldn’t be painless either though. The election speculation has reached the point that much of the media now assumes that Brown has pretty much decided he will call an election. If he now doesn’t call one, especially if it becomes clear he isn’t calling one after the Conservatives show an increase in the polls, it’s going to look very bad. One of the major positives in Brown’s public image, if not the major positive, is that he is seen as strong - the big, tough, brave leader who can be relied upon. The perception that David Cameron giving a speech is enough to make Brown run away and hide has the potential to severely damage perceptions of Brown as a strong, brave leader.
The actual fuss over him not calling an election would be a temporary thing that would pass - he’ll have a week of being laughed at and called frit in the Commons, but he’ll cope - but if real damage is done to underlying perceptions of Brown as a strong figure then that’ll last, and that’ll hurt.
There will be more polls over the weekend, who knows what they’ll show. Either way, it’s going to be a tough decision for Brown.
Filed under: ICM, Populus, Voting Intention, YouGov
I wasn’t polled by YouGov this week…..
Its clearly still quite volatile and I think that we may not see an election soon, but then, who knows - probably not even Gordon!
T Jones:
Well done with your report and thanks for sharing the unofficial news with us!!!
It’s not a huge increase for the Tories - not as big as the increase following Brown’s speech and therefore their polling of 36% is almost certain to return to 34% by next week. For Labour, another 40% poll has got to be good news and for the Lib’s I think more likely to be 16% next week rather than 13.
No election for sure on these figures, It will return to pre conference levels pretty soon and the pre conference Labour lead of 5 points will probably rise to 6 and hold around that.
Probably the worse result for Brown, noy really conclusive enough to call really!
Richard - I’ll try and get the others before they are released,just to keep you chaps in the forefront of polling issues.
You say that the Lib Dems dropped two but Channel Four news said they were unchanged. Did yougov do a poll after the one after Brown’s speech?
T Jones, well done and thanks, it’s great to see this site being used to beat all those other blogs out there.
Not sure this is relevant but the post strike doesn’t seem to be winning any hearts and minds for the union. Normally anti-union feeling is good for the Tories. Can’t understand why Brown hasn’t leant to the CWU to deal - this is what undid Callaghan. Of course Brown is a union man - unlike Blair who wasn’t. Of course Blair had Prescott to mediate - and Brown has just taken Prescott’s official car away.
Well all this is very exciting for us poll wonks but isn’t it really a complete non-story? Effectively, the polls (if the C4/Yougov one is representative and it seems likely that it is) now show the same position as before any of the conferences a month ago. The sudden appearance of a double figure Labour lead was a red herring and we are now back in a position where the Tories are doing abysmally for a party that has been in opposition for 10 years, and Labour is doing OK but not well enough to make an early election worth the risk…
Jonathan - yep, there was one for the Telegraph inbetween
I tend to agree with Richard. I think Labour holding at 40 is good news for Brown if backed up by other polls. What will be particularly significant I believe will be any underlying issue and character scores - if Cameron’s ratings have moved, it’s better for the Tories, although still not brilliant, but if these underlying issues are still running heavily labour’s way then I doubt there will be much long term damage to the Labour lead. [I'm not talking about the 11 point lead here - I never saw that as a reliable indicator - I suspect Labour by 5 - 8 points is about right].
I bet the Conservatives are glad their conference came after Labour’s!
The Times has a very similar poll from Populus showing a 3% Labour lead (Lab 39, C 36, L Dem nobody cares about the Lib Dems).
Richard, I am not entirely sure you can expect the Labour of figure to hold at around 40% and the lead to stabilise at around 5-6%.
If Brown doesn’t call the election he will be called a coward, the honeymoon period will be over and the stong decisive image he has cultivated will diminsh.
This is also the first time sice Camerons honeymoon period when the Cons had a reasonable lead that he has really acted like a leader of a united party, sold policy and himself.
I think the playing field will level more than 5-6 points.
Latest announcement - Populus Poll has Lab 39% Con 36%
Well, actually the LibDem seats could be important because it seems that is where most of the seats gained in a notional November election will come from, if these polls are correct. It may be these few seats that give Gordon Brown a sensible majority or not, or an increased majority or not. btw I think it highly unlikely Labour will take seats overall from the Conservatives unless the Labour vote share at least 40% or so.
13% is pretty lousy, last time the centre party got this sort of vote share was 1979, with guess who coming to power.
Latest - Guardian/ICM poll
Lab 39% - Con 38% 1 point. Election over.
It gets better
The Grauniad,s ICM poll is showing L39 C38
May be not surprising given the similarity and differences in the polling techniques of ICM ans Populous, but they are also reporting that Labour private polling is showing the Tories doing still better in marginals.
Odds on a hung parliament anyone???
Where are these poll findings from the marginals wasn;t this the story in 2001 and 2005 as well?
Jake - it’s only reported as being in Labour’s private polling, there is nothing publically available.
Sixsix says: ‘it gets better’ and ‘odds on a hung parliament anyone?’.
Is this what the Tories are reduced to - after 10 years in opposition, getting overexcited when a poll shows that they are only slightly behind the government…
Latest BBC News 24.
Guardian/ICM poll published tomorrow is not 1% lead for Labour.
Its neck and neck, dead even,
ChrisC staunch red by any chance?
ChrisC
The point is that GB has allowed election talk to run out of control. He is now faced with the prospect of calling an election where he could see the Labour party in a tiny majority or even minority government situation. That will not do his leadership reputation much good
On the other hand he could back down and go back to plan A for spring 08. That will not do his leadership reputation much good.
A reputation for strong decisive leadership is hard won and easily lost.
Yep ChrisC. If your a Tory conference season has been good.
Labour did far better in the marginals in 1992, cutting the government majority to just 21 on a swing of only 2%.
Currently the Tories were 4 or 5% ahead in the polls Labour would win more seats, but if the Tories are performing better in the marginals, this situation could at least be equalised if not reversed.
Guardian confirms L38 C38
It gets beter…
The Guardian website has Labour and the Conservatives level on 38%, but that might just be a typo…
Lib Dems on 16%. They’re being squeezed like a lemon.
Menzies Campbell, probably a lovely old bloke, with some great stories. But leader?? He is I’m sure a Gent, but he is a liability.
Though keep him there please, after GB’s cynical Iraq photo opportunity and more spin, I so hope he gets his dues.And Menzies Campbell eill help the tories as the only party able to oust him. He is Blair using blairite methods without the looks or charisma. And as for that Ed Balls, what an apt surname as thats what he talks.
Adam:
I can’t really see anyone of any intellect saying Brown is a coward if he doesn’t call an election on these polls! It would not really have been very clever to come out and say there is definitely NOT going to be an election when some polls were showing 11% leads, even if they were perceived to be wrong.
More likely people would say he has very bad judgement if he were to call a G.E with the knowledge that polls are suggesting he would not increase the governments majority!
Of course the Tories and media will spin that story but that doesn’t seem to work too well these days, so I would say that tomorrows claims of cowardice will be next weeks fish and chip paper!
You could well be right that the polls will level during the next few weeks to a percentage or two less than I suggest.
On a serious note, it is good that the country has serious political debate, the key to success is presentation and not spin and policies that stand the test of time and scrutiny.
I await with interest the scrutiny of just how Osborne thinks he can rake in an EXTRA £3billion from Non Dom residents to fund the I.T giveaway - It’s just not going to happen - he’s got his figures wrong!!!
Time will tell which party gets it right!
Anthony Spot on.
Look at his slogan ‘ the strength to change’. He will now look weak and indecisive. The second; he’ll have to wait till 2009/10 now. Can he really present himself as a ‘new PM with a new Government’ promising real change. Of course not.
If he backs down now this will not just be a short term tactical setback but a major strategic defeat.
Still I don’t see how he has any choice.
‘On a serious note, it is good that the country has serious political debate’
Beg to differ - whatever our individual politics are, I think the dreadful aspect of this entire conference season and ensuing debate is the almost complete lack of clear policies, beliefs and heartfelt opinions. It’s actually all about spin, focus groups and poll watching - there’s not a principle in sight, on either side. It’s great for us poll geeks, but we should remember - politics is about representing people and running the country - it shouldn’t just be about manipulating public opinion through the media.
Given that these are actually polls on Cameron’s speech I’d say a 4% Labour lead in the yougov poll is more than enough to tempt Brown to sound the srarting gun for a snap election.I’d expect the immediate Tory bounce to start to slide once the media glare of the Tory conference ends.
I agree with you Richard, entirely. I will not call GB a coward, but your assertion that, that is the way it will be spun, is correct. He will be smeared as one and for the interim, the mud will likely stick. Interesting to note Labour are saying the gains have nothing to do with DC and only the inheritance tax. Hmmmm probably a bit of both. GB will recover, and Labour will no doubt try and repudiate the Non dom claims. will they add up to 3 billion? unlikely, certainly not from any Labour perspective, regardless of fact, but that is for the future and Brown in the short term will likely suffer. If labours own polling in the marginals is showing tory strength I guess it’s fair to say it aint gonna happen….. Yet, anyone for spring??
No doubt the Con’s will also try in the mean time to add meat to the Non Dom claims. Labours continuos “figures don’t add up” mantra is getting very worn though. I thought Blair was a breath of fresh air and genuine, he turned just like all the rest, maybe DC is also just a power hungry PR man, though I hope not and am willing after to this week to scratch the surface and see. Good though to see an opposition on the attack rather than being submissive. The country needs a good fight, real debate. Massive majorities do the country no favours and close polling will force Labour to try an enforce real change rather than talking much, taxing more with very little change in some areas and others seriously on the slide.
At the end of the day I am a floating mercenary, I want the best for my country, wife and kids and will give my vote to whoever, I think can deliver that best without any loyalty to party lines. I have been Con - Lab and am now very much looking at Con, even if the Inheritance tax figures don’t add up to make 1 million, raise it to 500K and the other policies on beneift claimants who can’t be arsed to work, crime, small government, and less nanny state have still got me hooked……. For now.
Brown’s Iraq stunt did a lot of damage - a mistake Blair wouldn’t have made. Sure Blair span, but at least he knew how!
I think the polls in a week will be more interesting, once the dust has settled.
Is it me or does there seem to be a lot more anti government feeling than the polls would seem to show? Or are the wingers just more vocal?
“Brown’s Iraq stunt did a lot of damage”
one off media blips rarely do any sort of damage at all.They may sway a poll or two for a few days but it rarely lasts.Look at the short Tory poll lead of October 2000 during the fuel protests.Once voters had to vote for a government a few months later these ‘issues’ tend to fade away like April snow.The only impact of these snap polls on Cameron’s speech will be to Tory Party morale,which is important for the party but not to the average voter.How many people will remember the party conference if they step into the poling booths in 6 weeks time?
Seems to me that a lot of waverers have gone back to Labour.
Really, though, the Tories ought to be, and need to be, significantly ahead in the polls.
They won a fair few of those southern marginals last time and I don’t see them gaining much in the north.
Alec
What democracy always has been and always will be and what democracy should be are not the same things, to say the least.
There is good debate and there is a difference between the two main political parties. This is the whole point of dialectic ’self enslaving’ ‘divide and rule’ democratic politics. But these marginal differences operate within a ‘New World Order’ Masonic framework.
To my understanding they always have.
Democracy is about keeping those in power and control, in power and in control, by just moving a few MPs about the place every few years.
The BBC in particular are not representing or even driving public opinion they are dictating it word by word, action by action, hour by hour.
It is estimated that as little as 15 thousand votes out of 40 million can decide which parties hacks get the limos and expense accounts.
You and me may think we have a mind of our own, which we do. Its just that, what we believe we understand by using it, is completely CONTROLLED by BIG BROTHER as are the minds and lives of all of our politicians.
I’m getting a bit confused here - on the BBC’s 10 o’clock news, they said the closest poll was neck-and-neck, yet on the BBC news website they’re saying there was a 1% Labour lead in that poll.
I don’t know why the polling agencies can’t just release their final figures instead of causing these problems.
The Tories have had a predictable bounce in the polls following a successful conference which in turn has followed an equally predictable bounce in the polls during Brown’s honeymoon period that in the normal course of events would and still might be expected to last until about Christmas. What does that tell us about the result of any early November poll? NOTHING. Remember opinion polls only show us an snapshot taken at a particular moment which is why Labour supporters are right to say it might change in a week’s time but Gordon doesn’t have a week and he has seen in the last few days how effective a campaigner Cameron is likely to be come an election and how quickly things can change given the volatility of public opinion. The odds on Brown calling an election must be 60-40 against. Anyone care to disagree?
80-20 by next tuesday
Well the Weighted Moving Average is now 35.3:39.8:14.9 a (theoretical) Lab Lead of 4.5. In practice I think Camilla Cavendish in The Times today is quite right: “Proximity to power dulls the wits. That is the only explanation I can offer for why Gordon Brown’s speech generated so many positive headlines on Monday of last week; although 36 hours later almost every journalist I spoke to had privately come to see it as barren and dishonest…By the end of last week, almost no one was saying any longer that Mr Brown was a conviction politician. Labour seemed intellectually exhausted. And an unattractive streak of ruthlessness was showing through.” When and how this is reflected in the polls remains to be seen. But I think we have a step change here, and a balloon - which was very hard to understand - is rapidly deflating.
The point with Browon backing off will be he will not be able to stoke up speculation for an eelction again if he goes ahead without suffering damage. You cannot cry wolf twice, as I said elsewhere/
It is not these polls that count but the next set.Obviously GB doesn’t have this time to wait unless…..it’s now Nov 8th.
Me thinks, Brown may have missed his best window of opportunity, Economists predict, in the main, a stagnating economy. Browns supposed economical nous may fade and popularity with it. As as you rightly say lukw (is that supposed to be Luke- W is next to E on keyboard!) crying wolf will not work. He would have been far better advised to keep election plans quiet until after conservative conference. The spotlight and attention on them would not have been so bright, his lead no doubt may have been larger as the Cons wouldn’t rush out key policy announcements and they may have had the annual swipe at one another. The election plans/commitees needed for a snap election, could have began in earnest from today by going for a Nov 8th election, giving him the same time as he’s had for a Nov 1st. They say the invasion of Iraq was the best recruitment tool for Al Queida. I feel parallels, the speculation of a poll the PM has allowed to run and run has been the biggest publicity and attention drawing mechanism the conservatives have had in ages. Hindsight… what a beautiful thing.
The ICM poll is from a telephone survey - quite large errors in the data. The YouGov poll is the most reliable. Labour having a 4 point lead immmediately after Cameron’s speech is a good thing for Labour and Brown.
Adam 8 - The Conservative Conference bounce will recede by the end of next week.A bit like Labours has this week.Labour will be back to 5-8% in front and the election will be back on.
A day is along time in politics.A week….16th October election announcement day?
You may be right of course, but I doubt the smart money, will back it. Much more chance the spring. Oct 16th means we could be at the ballot box on Nov 8th. Nov 8th likley cold grey and wet, not a great day to get them all turned out and 1 million (alegedly) who can’t vote. But the main reason I think He was so keen to announce next Tuesday for Nov 1st, was Wednesday is scheduled for the debate on the EU referendum or lack there of. Not something the PM will likely enjoy considering the maifesto promise (regardless of our individual views), and certainly something the Sun newspaper will deride Brown over and promote Cameron on. Tuesday without the need for the wednesday debate or not at all for now is where my money is at and from the polling, I would be mighty suprised, but we shall see, as you say a day is a mighty long time.
If I were Brown I would take the gamble that this is a temporary boost for Cameron in light of the conference speech and it isn’t enough to overturn the Labour lead - so I would call an election, predicting 5 point Labour leads within days.
Of course, Brown isn’t a gambler.
It will be interesting to see the full regional breakdown of these polls and if the odd swing to Labour among women has reversed. I had a look at the full results for the 01/10 poll by Yougov and it seems to have the SNP on 39% and Labour at 38% in Scotland (although as ever the sample size is small).
Much as I would love a figure like that I find it hard to believe. It’s got the Tories on 14% and the LibDems on 9%. Last election in 2005 the shares were ( with gain loss compared to this poll)
Labour 39.5% ( -1.5%), Conservative 15.8% (-1.8%) LibDems 22.6% (-13.6%) and SNP 17.7% (+21.3%).
Given that the Libdems stronghold is in rural scotland ( I actually have charles Kennedy as my MP) the SNP vote doubling and the Libdem vote halfing within two years is quite remarkable.
It could well be that this election is being seen as Labour v the SNP with not just the LibDems but also the Tories getting squeezed.
It will be interesting to see if the poll breakdown after Camerons speech see tory gains or if Tories look at it tactically and the SNP is the gainer.
Peter.
When the polls taken immediately after Brown’s speech showed a 11 point lead they were rightly regarded with some perspective by seasoned political analysts. Likewise, these polls taken immediately after Cameron’s speech should also be taken with a pinch of salt. What they show us is the high water mark for each party. Unless the Tories are able to convert this into a permanent shift to, at the very least, level pegging, the position remains that the Tories are in dire electoral straits.
As to whether Brown will call an election in the next week, we need to see how the polls level out. Admittedly Brown does not have that much time but I would not be surprised to see the polls in the Sunday papers return to pre conference levels, i.e. a Labour lead of 5-6 points. This recent batch of polls which is being spun as a disaster for Labour shows Labour’s share of the vote at between 38 and 40 points which would be plenty good enough. If I were Brown and I had a further batch of polls and private polls showing a lead of 6 points or more, I would do what the Tories most fear and push the button.
Peter,
If there had been a 2007 GE (obviously now unlikely)is it true that your leader Salmon was seriously considering standing against G.Brown in his Fife constituency?
Arnie yes if Labour “rapidly” returns to 5/6% lead. But there may have been a tipping point this week and Cameron may gain momentum. The Tories may shortly be ahead in the polls but even if not it may be unrealistic to think Brown has time. He is going to lose a lot of face and is unlikely to want to defer a decision not to hold the GE very long.
The realists will agree with you Arnie, the Tories don’t actually want the election, the worst case is a reduced Labour majority, Hung parliment, outside bet, Cons winning is not worth entertaining. I just don’t think though the pendulum will swing that much before Brown would need to make an announcement. The spotlight on the whole political process is bright. Cameron is out on the streets today on the news with the Tory banner wavers and no doubt the cons will keep themselves in the limelight and the publics mind until the time GB would need to call. We are all forgetting the Cons had a reasonable points lead up until a few months ago. If the Brown bubble has burst (remains to be seen), 5-6 points in the next week is lot with the cons staying in the limelight. Not forgetting the margin for error in these polls. Brown is not stupid, he will not march over a precipice. maybe I will eat my words shortly, but if the Labour private polls in the marginals hold any credence and do indicate relative Tory strength, It’s too big a gamble. he has waited 10 years for the job, is it really worth the risk, and it is a risk. If he returns with a reduced majority, the in fighting will ensue.
I think Brown will take so much flak if he backs off now there might be some lasting damage. The truth is, the Tories have pulled a rabbit out of the hat. It may not save them in the longer run, but it is impressive neverthelss.
My name is Luke and the first time I posted here I causially typed it and missed the ‘e’. However, I decided to remain Lukw for consistency
I have said all along that Brown would be a fool to call an election, he has so much to lose and so little to gain. Now though he’s trapped in a real lose-lose situation: call a risky election where he could lose everything he’s worked for, or be branded a coward and have to climb-down from the edge. I think he’s tried to be “too clever by half” and its good to see such crass manipulating of the trigger of our democracy backfiring.
I’m quite hopeful now that a poll in one of the Sundays could have a Tory lead even. I also think that comparisons to Brown’s bounce rapidly deflating may be incorrect. Brown’s speech was initially received well but quickly got put down and humiliated in the press as a plagiarised copy from America, courtesy Bob Shrum. In-between the immediate bounce and the lower weekend polls the media narrative had changed. The plagiarism backfired IMO.
The same has not happened this week. The only backfiring has again been on Brown, the press are increasingly positive towards the Tories and turning against Brown. Therefore I see no reason for a major lift back towards Labour this weekend.
Now whether this turnaround is the beginning of a new upwards climb by the Tories, a blip or something else is uncertain yet. But the biggest change of all could be a changing mood in the media - and a climbdown over the election could feed into this narrative. In which case we could be entering a new phase for our politics in a new paradigm.
It looks (to me) that David Cameron’s speech did somewhat more for his party’s fortunes, even temporarily, than did Gordon Brown’s. It could also have been the smell of tax cuts in the air, though.
If this sort of thing happens in an election, Gordon Brown needs a bigger, steady lead in the opinion polls than I previously thought, just in case Cameron says something people want to hear that he can’t rebut or ignore.
It’s not looking like November after all that excitment.
I almost feel sorry for the Lib-Dems, at the moment they’ve gone from getting squeezed on both sides to being completely marginalised and ignored.
I don’t believe Cameron even mentioned them or Ming once in his entire speech. There is one thing worse in politics than getting attacked and that is getting ignored. To be treated as irrelevant can be the real insult.
If there is no election then Brown will be embarrassed but the real losers could be the Lib Dems as the media will have no obligation and almost no reason now to report on them.
I wonder if we could even get a poll putting them on single digits in the next few months.
Okay Reason’s Why Brown won’t go
1. A november election will depress labour - bad for Brown
2. The Polls are volatile clearly the 10 point leads were wrong (but probably so are the neck and neck)
3. The million or so disenfranchised (will come back to haunt Brown - in the long run)
4. He could have longer if he went in 2009 2 plus 5 where as he may only get 5 if he goes know
5. Is it only us hacks who have noticed that he may call an election
Why Brown might go.
1.It’s been built up to such an extent that he would look foolish and probably destroy the brown bounce
2. Labour are geared up
3. The tories until this week have been in disarray
Still reckon it’s 50/50
RICHARD :-
Making predictions of a return to a Labour lead is wishful thinking indeed .
ALEC :-
Wishful thinking on your part too !! Ain’t gonna happen
ADAM 8 :-
Can’t agree more with you about Ed Balls , a complete waste of space (he is very worried about losing his seat at the next election because of boundary changes)
MERSEYMIKE :-
You say the Tories are not gaining in the north - you obviously did’nt hear about the Tory winsd and gains in the 9 Sunderland by-elections or the comments of people in the streets of the northern town of Blackpool in favour of the Tories !!
T JONES :-
You too are saying that Labour will be back with an 8 point lead by the end of the week - wishful thinking - Brown has done so much damage to his credibility this week over talking of and election & the spin in Iraq thast he will not recover .
ARNIE :-
You say that the Tories fear an election / the truth is Labour actually fear an election as they know in their heart of hearts and their own private POLLING that the British public have lost faith in them - plus Labour can’t afford an election
PHILIP THOMPSON :-
Glad to see you have perked up now that the Tories are doing well in the POLLS - just as i predicted you would / you should remain strong like Cameron !!
I of course have only a few days for a Tory lead in the POLLS or my head is on the line with my prediction for the past 3 months of a Tory lead in the POLLS by the end of the first week of October and no call for an election till 2009 / 2010.
Keeping my fingers crossed for all those doubters !!!
Never thought Brown would call an election - why would he? He has two more years to continue the country’s solid economic performance and now he has flushed some policy detail from the Tories (for the first time since Cameron took over) he can concentrate on showing the electorate its weaknesses - particularly on the IHT issue that the press have so loved. All Brown needs to do is hammer home the point that it means giving the 1% of millionaires in the country £250,000 while the 90% plus whose estates are worth less than £300K get nothing. Without wishing to sound like Mike Richardson, I predict a small but steady lead in the polls for Labour for the next couple of years and a 4th election victory with a similar majority to now. The slight caveat I suppose would be the press - if they continue to fawn over Cameron it may make a slight difference but time will tell…
Off topic but BBC Parliament is replaying the 1987 Election coverage now. If I remember the BBC Gallop poll got their predictions badly wrong on their exit polling.
Are there still polls for the weekend now? They should be as interesting as the current ones. I always assumed that the polls overestimated Labours position by about 3% but is that old thinking now? Was it closer to about 1% (above what Labour achieved) last election?
Gary - there doesn’t seem to be a YouGov poll for the Telegraph which had been suggested, this poll seems to have been a YouGov poll for both C4 and the Telegraph. I am still expecting a ComRes poll, and there is still apparently a YouGov poll in the Sunday Times. I would not be surprised if there is also a new MORI poll.
The polls don’t over-estimate Labour’s lead by that much these days. At the last election there seemed to be a small residual bias towards Labour - all the polls were well within the margin of error and you can’t point at any individual pollster and say they were too pro-Labour, they all got it right. As a group, however, all the errors fell on the Labour side of the actual result. If there was no bias we should have expected some pollsters to err on the side of the Conservatives, some to err on the side of Labour.
It is probably only a question of a fraction of a percent these days, and methodology has again improved since 2005 (ICM’s methodology, for example, should now be slightly more favourable to the Conservatives), so the residual bais is probably a percentage point or less, not worth getting het up about.
Chrisc Your figures are slightly wrong. The threshold is about to be £325k, so the increase to £1m will yield £270k to estates worth £1m or more. That yield tapers to zero for estates worth £325k or less. Similarly, teh changes to Stamp duty will mean a cut of £2500 for those who can afford a £250k first-time purchase, tapering to a zero cut for those who can afford “only” £125k or less for their first-time purchase.
As ever, the details of the policies are ignored in favour of the effect of them on public perception.
The perception that the IHT is a double tax is completely at odds with the fact that estates have grown so much because of house price increases, not earnings increases.
I apologise if this all sounds a bit pro-Labour, I only mean to point up the variance between the perception and the facts.
Surely one big danger of a November polll is that weather/cold/dark evenings will be worse the further north you go. So those more likely to be put off voting because of the weather are voters in Labour’s heartlands in the North and Scotland.
Will that benefit the Tories?
I see I’ve been quoted in the above stream and classified as a Labour supporter - this is an error, and I believ irrelevant in this blog, which is meant to be a non partisan discussion of polls.
Three observations;
1) Although I haven’t seen the recent poll details, I understand cameron still trails Brown on the strength issue. I still maintain that until and unless the relative perceptions of Brown and Cameron change, the Tories are in trouble. I always remember John Major’s line on Kinnock in ‘92 - when the voters actually get into the polling booth they will have to think who they want to run the country…This attack was very powerful, and worked, and is something the Tories will fear all the way to polling day.
2) If I was a Tory supporter I wouldn’t get too cocky just yet. I don’t feel that Cameron’s bounce had much to do with his speech - it was low key, and not a real vote shifter. The real mover was the IHT move on Monday. There is a great deal of uncertainty about the sums, nt just from Labour, but also the Treasury and a host of city experts, many of wwhom say its a leap in the dark. If the underlying polls ratings on things like economic competence, trust etc aren’t going your way, you are more likely to lose an arguement over a potentiaally flaky tax policy. Once again, remember Labours Tax Bombshell from 92? It worked, not because it wwas true, but becasue people trusted mahor more than Kinnock. The same trick was tried in 97, but made Major look foolish, because the country now trusted Blair more. Brown will attack the IHT policy mercilessly as a fatally flawed policy , and in the minds of many voters the charge will stick.
3) Anthony - do we have any comparable poll data from previous years conference seasons? How abnormal aree these rapid swings, or is it just the time we live in?
Alec, there is no uncertainty over the IHT sums, the uncertainty is over the Non-Dom source of £3.1bn. My fuigures above are correct and not controversial. Osborne has said that non-doms who would rather come aboard the british tax system and forego their status would be welcome.
It follows that if the non-doms all did that, then the £3.1bn would be found from the general income tax fund, which, if he is right, will have swollen by the necessary amount. Discussion of details of policy isnot in my view the best way forward for Cameron to establish a lead, either short or long-term. The attacks on Brown’s integrity and character, and the pointing up of general New Labour waste and failure lose their effect when a new Tory Policty is run up the flagpole to distract the floaters.
John T
You’re quite correct - the issue isn’t with IHT but the non doms means of paying for it. Despite what anyone says, there are real doubts about how much this will bring in. Osborne’s sums may in fact be quite correct, but the point is that if the underlying poll numbers are running Brown’s way, Labour can hype up the uncertainty over this and effectively destroy Tory credibility on the whole issue of financial competence. I never seriously thought that if the Tories won in 2001 or 2005 they would ever slash public spending, but this is how Labour very successfully attacked them - the polls told us that voters didn’t trust Tories with public services so the attacks worked.
What I expect to happen now will be some major Labour annoucements on IHT, in the context of wider budget proposals, and an all out assult on the non doms issue. The non doms/IHT policy isn’t a discussion group idea they can discard once it looks messy - it’s now a central part of Tory policy that must stand infinite scrutiny. Unless polls show increasing trust in Cameron as an individual I think this policy will crack (in strictly electoral terms) along with any Tory credibility, and we may all be saluting Brown’s strategy of flushing out rushed Tory policies with talk of an early election.
Don’t take this to mean this is what I want - it’s all about what the polls say.
I’m most interested in the rapidity pf the turnaround; who says it wont go another way at the next poll? I think what is most interesting is the loosening of ‘party secure’ voters; it should give politicians nightmares.
Alec - look at the historical section on the sidebar for past polls. I think things are more volatile at the moment, but then again, there are an unusual amount of polls because of the possiblity of an election. There are normally very few polls during conference season.
Apparently the likelyhood of Tory Voters to Vote is stronger than Labours voters hence the bounce and level of support. I’d be interested still in the raw unweighted figures.
Alec - It’s hard to know whether the media are using Brown to have a (for them) welcome election, or whether Brown is using the media to as you say “flush out” Tory policy. Whichever, both appear to have been successful!
On the IHT, no matter where the funds come from, it’s a policy that can’t be reneged upon. I wonder whether Osborne will come to regret apportioning a £3.1bn tax cut so high up the earnings scale? Raising threholds further down could have persuaded many more to float over
John T
I think that what you say is correct on two points.
Firstly although IHT is unpopular because it’s seen as double taxation, it is quite right that it should be treated as a capital gain and taxed accordingly.
The issue isn’t whether it is fair to tax property but rather whether people who own property want to be taxed. The first is morally justifiable but it’s also electorially maybe a very bad idea.
Equally it is better to raise general tax thresholds that to cut IHT. Raising the tax threshold to say £9,000 would give everone earning £9,000 or more £800. Cutting IHT gives almost all people in the £8,000-£10,000 band nothing.
But how many people on £8,000-£10,000 would vote Tory even with a Tax cut, and would it ever be enough to unseat Labour where there are significant numbers of people earning that much.
In a way that’s whats odd about the LibDem 16% tax plan.
A party that only a year back was for raising thresholds and which criticised Browns changes that cut 2p of the basic rate while abolishing the 10% band, is now for cutting 4% from the basic rate.
4% off the basic rate gives someone on £9,000 about £150, but it gives anyone earning over £39,000 about £1,400. Hardly fair taxation or redistrubution.
But then it was thought up when Cameron was in tha ascendancy and the LibDems were leaching support to the Tories.
Of course the thing about cutting IHT for the Tories is that it will go down best with people who think they might be hit in the future and that tends to be middle income voters where prices are high who may well have a second home or have used their equity to get in to RTB.
Those people are demographically clustered in and around London, and thats where The tories have to turn it around if they are to have any chance of winning an election. Fair or not it’s very much a specifically targeted policy to maximise votes where they need them.
Peter.
I have worked out my predictions for a general election result based on the last 2 POLLS if it were called this week . My calculations consider the normal 3% under estimate the Tories get in POLLS , the under estimate in the POLLS currently of the Liberals & the flow back from Labour to the Liberals.
SCENARIO 1 :- ICM/Guardian
Cons 41% / Labour 32% / Liberal 19% = Con Maj. 38
SCENARIO 2 :- Populus / Times
Cons 39% / Labour 33% / Liberal 18% = Hung Parliament - Conservatives majority party
Peter - ironically enough, I am personally part of Cameron’s target audience in that case. It’s doesn’t win my vote yet though.
I’m sure all parties make the calculations you mention (apart from the SNP of course!), and it makes sense, but at the moment all the leaders seem to be after the moral high ground; surely it follows that raising the lowest of the thresholds to benefit the poorest working families would help Cameron far more in that respect.
John T,
It would help Camerons image but wouldn’t get him elected, which would be okay if he wanted to follow Major and IDS and go down as a nice, repected, well meaning, failure…..
but I suspect he’d rather be PM….
Peter.
I thought Major was PM? Your brain is clearly in Toronto, though I appreciate your thoughts, some of which i might well nick !
Mike Richardson: “PHILIP THOMPSON :-
Glad to see you have perked up now that the Tories are doing well in the POLLS - just as i predicted you would / you should remain strong like Cameron !!”
I was never down and didn’t need perking up, I said all along wait until the end of the Conference season. Like I said last time, I don’t know why you thought I was being divisive or down when what I said was “we haven’t had our conference yet so the current polls are not right” and that “I don’t trust local council by-elections at all”. The first was right and the second is my long-held opinion.
James: “Surely one big danger of a November polll is that weather/cold/dark evenings will be worse the further north you go. So those more likely to be put off voting because of the weather are voters in Labour’s heartlands in the North and Scotland.
Will that benefit the Tories?”
I doubt it that much. It might benefit them on a national aggregate figure but that figure is meaningless. Don’t forget that we vote in constituencies and candidates in one constituency are competing in fact against other candidates in the same constituency. A lower turnout North v South doesn’t in itself affect anything at all, so long as the lower turnout doesn’t change individual constituency results.
If it affected things it’d be based on the notion that a lower turnout supposedly helps the Tories, not North v South.
Given IHT has featured quite a bit and is seen as giving the Tories a boost, here’s my take on it:
My concern is that this proposed tax on non-domiciles could bode very bad for the economy. What happens if they say F-You and take their money elsewhere? Brown, as far as I’m aware had considered this as far back as 1995, and I suspect this is the reason he never proceeded with it. It’s time the whole IHT tax thing was unspun too (it’s not Gordon Brown’s Inheritance Tax, it was a Conservative tax, in it’s current form, introduced in 1985). All this spin has surely got people thinking they’d have to pay it, as it currently stands, when they won’t necessarily at all. I’d favour modest increases in thresholds, year in, year out, and possibly more progressive rates (10% to 50%) depending the size of the estate, but only if it made sound fiscal sense to do so. Given the non-domicile thing is potentially flawed, the costs would, ultimately, fall elsewhere. Why should people with estates valued at less than £300,000 (the vast majority) subsidise those with estates exceeding that but below £1m?
With the government itching to implement its welfare reforms and welfare to work service in particular from 2008, the Employment and Support Allowance which will replace Incapacity Benefit and Income Support for new and existing claimants, I would expect the choosing of an election period would need to be well placed particularly if you look at the demography of the claimants in labour strongholds.
The number of claimants (DWP 1st quarterly figures, 2007) follows, the number on incapacity benefits at 2.66 million of which 1.19 million are Income Support based i.e. claiming a disability premium, the number of lone parent benefits is 770 thousand and persons claiming Disability Living Allowance 2.86 million. True Income support figures appear to be closely guarded.
That is an awful amount of votes to be weary of when choosing an election time particularly should it be held in 2008.
Is the interesting thing about the latest polls the actual figure or the way they are being used? I suspect the public are getting sick of the way almost daily polls are being “spun”? This may be irretrievably bad news for Brown as it costs him the contrast of being a solid executive by contrast with his prececessor’s media presence.
Some more specific psephological points:-
1. The latest polls are not big enough to pick up the position in Scotland, where persistent rumour is that Labour’s position is bad.
2. Now that the Liberal Democrats are established as the main alternative to Labour in the North and to the Tories in the South and West, the regional figures are crucial: in fact the LibDems almost have to be treated as two separate parties. For instance, a swing from LibDem to Tory in Northern seats may cost a couple of seats as anti-Labour tactical voting becomes less efficient, but in the South and West it could deliver a swathe of LibDem marginals to the Tories.
4. If there is a “snap” election, will there be fewer minor party and “fringe” candidates? If so, will this just reduce turnout still further, or will votes go to the major parties instead? And if so, which major party or parties will gain, and which lose, from the absent candidates?
5. People are referring to the electoral implications, presumed unfavourable to Labour and particularly strong in the North. But what have psephologists actually established, and hopefully quantified, about how, other things being equal, the seasons affect voting. For instance, has anybody compared council bye-elections held immediately before and immediately after the Autumn and Spring clock changes?
Levaing aside wider political preferences, there are a number of important failings in the politcal system, including the West Lothian question and deficiencies in postal voting arrangements, that I would like to see addressed before the next General Election. If there is a snap election this cannot happen. I am also constitutionally unhappy if a General Election curtails adeqate consideration by Parliament of a Public Spending Review.
Phillip T: Most of Scotland, and a lot of Northern England can be rather wild in November which would suggest that the motivated and those with private transport will make up more of the vote than usual. In general I think their are more motivated Tories with their own transport than Labourites.