Populus shows Tory lead back up to 9
Populus’s monthly poll for the Times has topline voting intentions, with changes from their last poll, of CON 40%(+3), LAB 31% (-2), LD 17% (-2). The poll was conducted between the 1st and 3rd of February.
Personally speaking the figures are a bit of a surprise, polls throughout January showed the Conservatives falling back and Populus tend to produce figures that are more flattering for Labour than some other pollsters. I’d expected a narrower Tory lead. With the last four polls showing Labour back in the 30%-33% range and the Conservatives still up in the high thirties or low forties, it looks increasingly like the ICM and MORI polls taken in late January were a brief blip.
As with the ICM poll at the weekend there does not appear to be any damage to Conservative support from the Conway affair, even though this poll would have been conducted over the weekend when the media were scrabbling around for other Tory MPs with various familial employment arrangements. In his commentary over at Political Betting Mike Smithson raises his theory that the Conservatives tend to do well whenever David Cameron is on the television even if it isn’t very good for the Tories. He may be right. It may be that David Cameron just acted swiftly enough to neutralise any damage to the Tory brand.
Populus asked some specific questions covering sleaze and the Conway affair. 59% of respondents thought that MPs should be able to employ family members providing (and this is the important bit) that they are qualified, they do the job and their employment is disclosed. Compare this to the ICM poll at the weekend that asked without the qualifiers and found 74% thought MPs shouldn’t be able to employ family members. The difference suggests that if you don’t specify that MPs are employing familiy members who are qualified and do the work, people’s natural assumption is they are on the fiddle, which probably says rather a lot about the public’s view of politicians!
Asked which parties are tainted by financial sleaze, 69% thought Labour were, 51% thought the Tories were and 26% thought the Lib Dems were.
Finally, on Populus’s question about whether people would trust Brown and Darling or Cameron and Osborne to run the economy if it were in trouble, Cameron and Osborne are now narrowly in the lead by 36% to 33%. With people’s perceptions of the state of the economy plummetting, this is an important factor – if Labour were still ahead then people might swing back to them as the known quantity, safe hands in troubled times. The Populus figures suggest they haven’t even got that card to rely on.
Filed under: Populus, Voting Intention
On these figures the “others” should be up by one so it will be interesting for me to see what has changed in Scotland.
In January populus had the Tories very low on 11% and the Libdems on 13%, I think the only polster to have the Libdems ahead of the Tories in Scotland.
They also showed a big lead for the SNP over Labour ( although as I have said before I just don’t believe that we are ahead of labour in terms of Westminster voting intentions) . Even with small samples any increase in the SNP lead May well indicate greater disappointment with Labour at the moment that happiness with the Tories.
i.e. It’s not “we want the Tories” but ” Anyone but Labour” if that is the prevailing feeling, I’d expect the LibDems pretty soon to start emphasising the failing of Brown and Labour over the danger from the Tories and start swimming with the tide.
On another point I was sceptical about the poll showing Labour ahead so I feel that this is possibly more accurate, but it could be we are back in to one of those periods of rapid flux that have characterised much of this year.
Peter.
Doesn’t surprise me at all. WMA 39:32:18 indeed without the ICM and I/Mori polls which were clearly rogues the WMA is 40:32:17.
More Labour Disasters will simply amplify the trend. Wendy Alexander will have to go (see http://www.order-order.com) and Harriet Harman can’t be far behind. Anyway we’ll be overdue for a Ministerial Resignation by the end of the month.
This poll will put the fear of god into Labour. Its all unremittingly bad news. Infact, I can’t see anything positive for Labour at all, really?
Cameron/Osborne more trusted to run the economy than Brown/Darling.
Labour identified with sleeze more than the Conservatives (how times change)
Labour stuck on their core vote with the pollsters that perhaps favour Labour most.
Conservatives increasing their lead, even though they have been through the Conway affair.
I’ll admit, this poll (assuming its reflected over the month) is a complete vindication of Cameron’s straegy, and I have been calling it wrong by saying its time for the Tories to get out there, otherwise they will lose the initiative to Brown. It seem’s I was underestimating just how bad Labour’s fundamental position actually is….
THERE – I told you so again in my last entry !! The Tory lead is safe as houses – obviously it will move slightly – but the trends all show “a time for change” !!
So the last lot of cheering Labourites and Squealing Tories bickering and looking for reasons for a Tory demise are proved wrong again .
Political analysts and commentators can say what they like – they are paid to do just that – my predictions are free .
Anything showing less than a 6% lead for the Tories is incorrect. This gap will grow once the Liberal bounce has depleted – which it seems to be doing already .
To Messrs :- GIN / STEVEN WHEELER / ALEC / T.JONES / MARK SENIOR.
All wrong again as usual since the rogue Labour lead POLL – Steven Wheeler even had the genius to roll out one of my predictions from 17th December – he is good though , i did recommend people cut and paste em – not been wrong yet guys .
Sadly for you guys there is nothing Labour can do now to recover in the POLLS – they have had 6 years longer than their average stint in power – come on guys – admit defeat.
I can spot a rogue POLL miles away !!
[Mike - please don't try and score points off other pollsters, this is supposed to be a place for civilised conversation about the polls, not a competition! - AW]
Unlike you Mike – the other posters do not go missing when the polls go against their predictions or should that be POLLS?
Probably worth noting that Populus had the January figures of,
Labour 33% (+1%)
Conservative 37% (-3%)
Lib Dem 19% (+3%)
Others 11% (-)
So if You compare now the the poll before the Christmas period we get.
Feb
CON 40%, LAB 31%, LD 17%
Dec
CON 40%, LAB 32%, LD 16%.
So it could well be that it was the last Populus poll that was a outlier.
Peter.
Revelations that a Labour minister of the crown talks on a friendly basis to an alleged terrorist can only help the Tories,
The Daily Mirror seems to have changed the headline at
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/02/04/poll-panic-for-tories-89520-20308843/
from “Poll panic for Tories”
to “Conservatives pledge to spend more on health and to cut txes (sic)”
LOL@MikeR. I should probably tell you I’m allied to no party, and enjoy politics for fun and competition of it. I don’t favour anybody (though at the mo I’m probably slightly biased to the Tories, because I don’t much like Brown) and call it the way I see it.
wolf – well, it could also have no effect whatsoever
I expected Conway to have a negative effect because it would re-emphasize a Conservative image of greed and corruption that they had in the 1990s and – to whatever degree – have managed to lessen.
The chap who is doing work for a constituent who the US are trying to extradite on terrorist charges doesn’t really chime with any existing Labour image of being in league with terrorists (if anything Labour are more at the other end of the scale – they risk losing some liberal supporters alientated by responses to terrorism like 90-day-detention). I can quite imagine that it won’t do Sadiq Khan any favours in Tooting, but beyond that?
I have to say this comes as a complete surprise to me. Like you, Anthony, I’d have expected *some* damage from Conway, and, given that Populus usually mark the Conservatives down a bit, I’d have expectd a Conservative lead of 0-2% in this this poll.
The danger for the Conservatives may lie in complacency. A small poll lead is likely to lead to much more hard work on their part, while a big lead may encourage them to coast along.
I’m a bit confused over the whole hoo-ha about bugging an MP. The only thing I found scandolous about it was the fact that there’s a rule saying you can’t do it. I don’t think for a minute Sadiq Khan has any sympathy for terrorism but it is possible. Senior politicians have betrayed our country before – surely the police should be able to use what ever powers they feel necessary. The guy is in police custody after all.
Anyway back to the polls. I’ll try not to rise to Mike’s bait except to patiently point out that his prediction was “regular” polls of “above 50%” for the Tories. I presuime from past form he will not try to defend his position but simply pretend it isn’t so.
I’ve been wondering about these “blips” and “rogue” polls. I’ve kind of assumed that they are due to random sampling errors but I guess another possibility is that people really do change their mind that frequently. If theres a positive Labour story in the morning and a negative one in the evening then two pollsters could get different results on the same day simply from the time of day they phoned and still both be “correct”.
Public opinion probably does fluctuate a lot in the very short term, while being more stable over the slightly longer term, particularly when people aren’t actually having to decide who to vote for.
This is a really good result (or total disaster if you ‘read’ the Mirror) for the Tories which might be evidence that we are in the ‘it doesn’t matter what the Opposition do we just hate the Government’ stage of the cycle.
As always it will be interesting to see the detailed data . . That from the ICM and Mori polls is now on their websites . To highlight the lack of importance we should pay to individual polls and subsamples , look at the Mori Scotland subsample which purports to show SNP in 3rd place behind Labour and the Conservatives .
Lab 41 Con 24 SNP 19 LibDem 11 .
The ICM comparison with how people voterd in 2005 shows LibDems only lose net 6 people to Conservatives and gaining net 9 from Labour . These are good figures and reflected in the 21% LibDem figure in this poll . Strangely the Comres figures were even better for the LibDems but were not reflected in the published figure of 17% , it will be interesting to see what Populus have
here .
Not that I wish any harm on MPs , but we’ve had relatively few Parliamentary by-elections since 2005 (only 7, excluding Sth Staffs). A good close contest would liven the debate – I don’t think I can wait until May!
This opinion result is Bull shit. The Labour party were 6 behind in the published article then they “revised” it to 9. What a load of Bull shit. Does anyone fall for this? Are you lot seriously suggesting that people want their MPs to be corrupt and to take money from the trough. Wow Wel i advise Dennis skinner to steal 50,000 grand from the public till, send out results shooting up. What a pile of BS. Thuis is voter fraud preperartilon. I have never heard of a company publishing an result then revising it. This company is a load of bull shit. It What load of utter bull shit.
Such insight! Preperartilon?
(While there seems little point actually engaging. Firstly, it’s not unusual for figures to be revised for media polls. The newspapers get interim figures so they can plan articles, then they get the actual figures when the poll is completed.
In this case though, I don’t think the figures were revised – when people originally put them up in Mike Smithson’s comments it was based on google news searches that had picked up excepts from a Times article that wasn’t fully available. The article also referenced the ICM figures from the weekend, and the Tory score in the ICM poll was mistaken for the Tory score in the Populus poll, hence the incorrect figures.)
Just to clarify point aobut Populus poll for The Times. There were no interim figures. The only figures which Populus produced were those released on Times Online at about 7.45pm last night, and which appeared on page two of the Times this morning. To ensure that everyone sees the figures at the same time, for the past three months a report on the main findings appears on Times Online ( in fact, last night the full report). So I am puzzled why there was any confusion since the figures were the same all the time. I think Anthony’s explanation is the one that makes sense.
Peter Riddell, The Times
I do not believe this opinion pooll. Every other one put labour closing the gap. Populus is owned by former reagan – bush employees, who are all deeply linked to the right wing establishment. I am sure if Murdoch was angry at the result he would ask for it to be “!revised”. I cannot see how this would need to be revised. Did they find 150 people hiding under a stone. Unless the public have now fallen in ,love with crooked MPs as a sort of lovejoy figure this poll is alot of rubbish. We are suppoed to believe the excuse that people like camerons face when he is on TV so even when he is found to have corrupt MPs people go ooooooo he has a nice face. Well what is it did people forget what looked like. .
Having just returned from a place abroad which did not sell UK newspapers I have had a bit of catching up to do. Seems to me that the polls have yet to settle down after Christmas but that overall little has changed. In fact are we not where we were this time last year? Some other points
1 Yes it is clear that whenever David Cameron is in the spotlight the Tory ratings increase which is very good news for their election campaign whenever the contest comes. Like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair,Barack Obama and the new Aussie PM Cameron connects with the voters. Brown does not.
2 I was appalled at the Conway affair. Why did the Speaker let him off so lightly? He should resign his seat immediately.
3 On the other hand let Wendy Alexander swing in the wind-she is a fool rather than a knave. Scottish Labour deserve her.
4 It’s early days but the Lib Dems are not making much progress despite the sleaze problems of the other two? Clegg still does’nt cut the mustard.
GIN I think your right, I was concerned recently that the Tories needed to change strategy but into a more pro-active, initiative-grabbing role but also agree that this poll seems to suggest otherwise. The old cliché of ‘its not oppositions who win but governments who lose’ seems to be proven to be true yet again, with the Cameron’s position being made as seemingly safe as Blair’s in his days as opposition leader.
My dad points out that Blair also had very little in the way of ’substance’ in terms of policy at this point and that it would probably do more harm than good going down that road this far from a general election – not to mention the threat of Labour policy grabbing and the steam being taken out of the actual Tory election campaign when it finally comes around. Another line of comparison is Major’s folly of waiting until the last minute to call an election which only gave Labour the time they needed to cement their lead… It looks like history is repeating itself.
I think with all respect to them, that MORI need to review at their polling methodolody. Back in November were they not showing a 1% Labour lead, while all the other organisations were showing the Tories ahead by several points?
I think David Cameron may have been looked upon favourably because of the way he punished Derek Conway by stripping him of the Conservative whip – not something that has happened to any of the Labour MPs caught up in the expenses row.
I cannot believe a word of this result. Let’s remember this seems to be indicating the tories are more popular now that they found out to have a corrupt MP taking money he was not entiled too, than they were in november when every other company showed labour was in meltdown. This is a a load of utter BS. Why did they need to revise, unless people at the times are writing detailed work on results that have not even been completed yet, then it is pretty obvious what is going on here. The new Murdoch did not like the result took the immature decisions of asking the company to change it. Does anyone seriously think after this scandal the tories would be at their highest lead since the gneral election. The excuse is people like the tory leaders face. Ehhh did people forget what he looked like are their a bunch of morons going oooh look he has nice face i will vote for him. Well what happened to those people in november.
“In his commentary over at Political Betting Mike Smithson raises his theory that the Conservatives tend to do well whenever David Cameron is on the television even if it isn’t very good for the Tories. He may be right. It may be that David Cameron just acted swiftly enough to neutralise any damage to the Tory brand.”
Are you sure a party leader has this sort of impact? The Government Department at the University of Essex conducted major research into this area and, surprisingly, found very little evidence that the personality/personal characteristics of a party leader has much impact on election results: See http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leaders-Personalities-Outcomes-Democratic-Elections/dp/0199253137
This is silly. The figures weren’t revised, you’ve had it from the horses mouth.
Thye were revised it said so on numerous respectable websites. Thye were revised.
1) Doy ou serious tythink the tories would have their biggest lead since the gneral; election now.
Since then we have had cash for perrages, november northern rock scandal, the politcal sncadlas, but whwen do the tories get their bioggest lead now Why It does not make snse
2) The figures were revised. It is said so on many respectable websites.
The “It’s the economy, stoopid” idea could explain it. Such uncertainty, yet so far not enough data to show actual significant job-losses. I no longer agree that Cameron needs to simply wait and not offer any substantial policy ideas. The lead is too soft and not nearly large enough for the mid-term.
Jordan – If history does repeat itself, then 1992 is a better comparison, when Major left it until the last minute, and then (unexpectedly) won another five-year term. Brown is perfectly capable of doing something similar – he certainly has Major’s lack of “presence” in common.
I noticed today Labour proposals regarding a contract that will have to be signed by new council tennants asking them to seek employment
I thought they introduced a law sometime ago that you had to seek active employment if want to claim benifits so im not sure whats changed
But it does send out the message as I have said before the political agenda is moving to the right and it is quite obvious to me that Labour are struggle to match the Tories when it actually comes down to policies that the people would like to be introduced and know will be carried out
I just wish Labour wouldnt keep putting forward headline grabbing initatives that decive the voters and dont deliver on and this cant be how The Labour Party wishes their party to be viewed by the public I think their support will continue to slowly fall away if they dont start to introduce policies that are honest and actually work because “Joe public” are not as stupid as they may think!
Peter – certainly not sure! My own belief is that broad party image is the most important factor in how people decide who to support and I’d expect party leaders to have a very strong influence upon how party image develops.
Can’t comment on Tony King’s book without reading it, but certainly the 2005 BES suggested leader image was a very important predictor of voting behaviour at the last election
http://www.essex.ac.uk/bes/Papers/BritainVotesjune4b.pdf
BS – sigh.
You’ve had it from the political editor of the Times that they weren’t. Mike posted the wrong figures to start with for reasons that have been explained, it’s pretty obvious if you read the comments there. Other sites would have sourced the figures from Mike. Unless you either accept the bleeding bloody obvious, or come up with evidence compelling enough to outweigh Peter Riddell then I’m going to stop giving you the benefit of the doubt and decide you just trolling.
BS has been all over Tory home being abusive.Just ignore him. His mum will be home soon and he will have to tidy his bedroom and do his homework.
On a more positive note,’the Peter Riddell’. Excellent.
Don’t always [ie.usually] agree with him about Mr Brown but I love reading his articles, give what he says serious thought and have the greatest respect for him.
Just goes to show that it is possible in politics to respect those you do not always agree with.
Was that the blog equivalent to name dropping Anthony? Very cool.
You have to say that this is a Good poll for the Tories but why is there such wide variation in the Poll results at the moment ? As for IPSOS-Mori they should really look at their sampling procedures because they are miles out of line with all the others.
Conway doesn’t look to have hurt the Tories at all – probably because DC acted so quickly.
There is a lot of negative sentiment about the economy at the moment – within the papers, tv and just people’s views generally . I wonder if this pessimism is being picked up in the polling results at the moment. If this is so, this “pessimism” will continue to hurt Labour until economic sentiment turns the corner which maybe 6,9,12,18 months away – who knows?
I was on PB last night and that is what happened. They were betting each other on the outcome for fun, got impatient, started googling and were posting incomplete sentences.
You know this already – I know.
I think the Tories are doing well, but I do suspect not quite as well as at the end of 2007.
We need to move the agenda on to a positive program for government (the trick is without giving too specific details away).
Northern Rock is linked to other economic problems, and Brown’s hands are not clean – but there is limited mileage in implying that the government should have done a better job running a bank – that’s a very socialist thing to suggest.
I note that David Davis has called Gordon Brown a “liar” on the basis that there has been a breach of Brown’s pledge to protect MPs from having their communications intercepted. There was I thinking that the Tories might have learned their lesson about trying to jump on the bandwagon of opportunity without thinking. There is no evidence that ministers were aware of what happened only that some unnamed officials may have known there were issues. (Probably the same unnamed officials who have made a career recently out of leaking useful information to the Tories).
There are only two issues here. Firstly, the legality of the police decision to bug the MP’s conversations with the prisoner and secondly, the question as to whether MPs should be exempt from bugging. Neither of which, I must say, is a matter of national interest.
Davis’ attempt to try and fabricate some kind of pseudo scandal out of this hardly supports the image that the Tories are allegedly trying to portray of a party readying itself for government. Cameron will be furious about this and I await Davis’ embarrassing apology within the next few hours. And to think that some within Tory ranks actually wanted this clown to be their leader.
As for the Populus poll, it simply serves to remind us that the polls remain volatile. In the same way that the Tories need to do more than rely on Labour gaffes, the government need to do more than rely on the likes of Conway and his ilk. Ultimately while these scandals make for good copy, they are froth and will not make a jot of difference to how people vote in a GE in 2009 or 2010. Of much more significance is the damage to the government’s reputation for economic management over Northern Rock (whether you in fact believe that damage is justified or not).
I amk not being a troll. There was a clear cased that the times itself reported it as 37 for the tories but the poll was revised the evidence is on the politcial betting website in the comments and links. Someone linked to the exact artcile and quoted specifically the tories on 37. That cannot have been guess work. I cannot accept that tories would be better than they were in november when no other company has even suggested such cased. There has been anger at the tories not support for them. I will come back with further evidence for this to proove I am not trolling,. We have to watch out that these results are not fixed.
3:30 Please do not be offensive to me. You are not acting like lady. I was not offensive to anyone i replied offensively to people who wre offensive to me.
I have reas on the PB website that numerous people had found search terms that indicated the tories were on 37. Is it really likely that the tories would be on 40. What a load of BS.
I can’t help wondering if BS was surprised that the Tory lead fell in the wake of Peter Hain’s troubles?
4:36 It did not fall it stayed up. Labour went up to lead of 1 after new year due to good press, then the hain scandal hit and the tories went up to 6 now we are expected to think a tory scandal would cause support for the tories to rise by 3. I think that is fantasy land. I can smell fish.
For god’s sake. Look, it’s this comment here, Andy Cooke did repeated searches on the Times website before the article was live and found two quotes from the article, one said “The Populus poll, undertaken over the weekend puts Labour on 31…” the other said “the Tories on 37 per cent, down three points”. Andy concluded that Populus were showing CON 37%, LAB 31%.
Once the full article became available we were able to see that the second quote in full was actually “This contrasts with an ICM poll in The Sunday Telegraph, done on Wednesday and Thursday, which put the Tories on 37 per cent, down three points”. The quote could never have referred to the Populus poll anyway, since if the Tories had been on 37% they would not have been down three points.
Incidentally, I’ve noticed some similarly crackpot comments on politicalbetting and ConservativeHome from people who are almost certainly you claiming MORI showed a 1 point Labour lead and then revised their figures. This is also utter nonsense, MORI showed a 1 point Labour lead, and are still showing a 1 point Labour lead. The figures are here.
That’s your lot, no more troll food.
Thanks for that call me a crackpot and then ban me from commenting. So what is it insult somene and then don’t allow them to reply. Thta is not honourable. I could just as easily say you a creackpot.
It seems to me that the last two polls have cancelled each other out in terms of influence; one relatively good poll for Labour, and now one for the Tories. I’m surprised they’ve generated so much comment.
I wonder if Cameron may be benefitting from the Obama effect. ie Obama’s key theme is ‘Its time for change’. The more he is on TV saying this in the news clips we see, the more that ‘message’ will filter into the mind of the UK electorate and think the same.
john t t – Maybe your right, but Major’s unexpected win was down to the then leader of Labour being an absolute twat who no one wanted as prime minister. You may say the same as Cameron, but at least he has appeal. Kinnock (spelling?) didn’t and so I think your wrong in thinking Brown has any chance of bringing Labour another term in power.
Nick Keene:-
” I was appalled at the Conway affair. Why did the Speaker let him off so lightly? .”
When Martin heard of Camerons action in withdrawing the whip he said ” Hasn’t Derek suffered enough”
Speaker Martin & his wife have very nice trough tickets themselves. Speaker Martin -with his handpicked Committee- is responsible for blocking accountability & transparancy on Allowances& Expenses.
He is part of the problem-not the solution.
Cameron today is reported to have issued this edict:-
“All front bench Tory MPs must name their staff, reveal the number of staff they employ, the position they fulfil and whether they work in Westminster or the constituency. If a Member of Parliament employs a member of their family, they should be separately declared, within a salary band which should also be declared.”
Well done for taking a lead-but why just Front Bench.What about the Backbenchers? And what about the rules on “second home” Allowances?
People like Conway & Winterton must be made to understand that if they want access to taxpayers money they either account for their use of it -or they don’t get it.
And actually-why the hell do MPs need £150k + pa on top of their salaries to carry out their tasks?
Great Poll result for DC & very bad for Labour.
Adrian I do agree with what you say but that momentum seems to be gathering pace quicker in the U.S.than it is here (admittedly they are actually engaged in an election at the moment)
I was supprised when Gorden Brown started using the word “change” so much in his early speaches as P.M.(not so much now)I thought he would have used the words “build on and improve on” much more often maybe it was because he would only be able to use change at the start of his premiership not at the next genral election (if he does people will really be scratching their heads)where as Cameron will be really stressing to the people change is needed
As I have said before I dont see a contest when they go head to head thats when I think you will see the real swing to the Tories
Well that was fun – NOT ! The absurd left wing ramblings of BS – and people on here were actually responding to him !!
There seems to be the odd comment that i only appear on here when there is a good Tory POLL – not true , anyone wanting to check will see that i appear after all POLL results – all are worth commenting on by me . It’s just a shame that certain individuals are offended by my accurate predictions .
I , as you know have no political agenda one way or the other – it does’nt take a genius to see the direction of British politics in the next 2 years – bar some kind of catastrophe in either of the 2 main parties .
If those POLL results from Scotland mentioned by someone else above are correct and the Tories are steaming ahead in there too , knocking the SNP and Liberals back , we are in for some interesting political times even sooner than i thought – i mentioned that would happen a while back , but i was pillaried for that comment too !!
Anthony will have to let BS keep posting.
On the last thread we were accused of doing a ToryHome.
Only fair to have a LabourHome a day.
On Davis calling Brown[?] a was a bit taken aback myself.
Not comdemning it out of hand.
Just thought there better be a good reason.
It seems there is.
Sky News are reporting that their sources have said that Jack Straw did know about it in December, even though he has told the House of Commons he didn’t.
The story is on their politics page.
Gordon has hastily announced they will may start using intercept evidence.
Could be cynical and say it is a distraction from the other story. Or maybe they have so much of it in the back room of downing street, they might as well use it.
Can’t put their old tapes on ebay.
a liar…
anthony- please tell (BS seeker) he is talking total BS his self, this poll is very bad news for labour but one thing is right in what (BS seeker) said and that’s the amount of money being spent by MP’s plus exspenses, it’s to much and most MP’s would not be bothered if a 20% pay cut was impossed as they would still make more money then you or me
that clocks out of sink again i posted my e-mail at 8-18pm
Sorry Sally as posted by several people on pb.com your story re Straw is false and I suggest you eat humble pie and withdraw the liar accusation .
Please SallyC I wouldn’t want BS at my LabourHome – or anywhere else – but it’s easy enough to scroll past him.
I think I’ll hibernate for a while, and hope the political weather changes for the better – green shoots and all that.
I meant to add – can this website’s strange clock fast forward us into spring, or can it only time-travel an hour or two into the future?
It’s permanently on continental time because I like long bright evenings
The polls vary mainly because of sampling error. As I have repeatedly explained, although the normally quoted error is +/-3% in fact the 90% confidence intervals are about +/-5% so 1 poll in 10 will be out by more than 5%. Reading detailed trends into individual polls is a mistake.
Just in case it wasn’t in the UK News, it could be election time up here if the SNP lose the budget vote tomorrow.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7229224.stm
If nothing else we’d get lots of polls…..
Peter.
Suddenly and for no apparant reason this site has degenerated into a welter of childish abuse and infantile expression usually found only in a primary school playgound. So -although nobody will miss me -I too am going into hibernation in the hope that things can only get better. Farewll for now from me then to the likes of Peter Cairns and Mark Senior with whom I have enjoyed many a joust in the last 12 months.
I will miss you Nick .
NIck,
So long and thanks for the fish….
Peter.
In fairness I think there was only one culprit – I think we all did very well in staying adult about it
. I have to admit I can be pretty bad at falling into that trap sometimes. I just count billy goats now.
Why shouldn’t MPs be allowed to employ family?
The point is it needs to be a qualified apppointment, not hidden, and for doing real work.
To say people shouldn’t just because they are family strikes me as unfair and over-regulation.
We need to see how the polls settle a bit if we’re looking at the effect of scandals….
Of course MPs should be allowed to employ family – they can be the most obvious (and probably most loyal) helpers. But once something goes wrong, as it obviously did in the case of Conway, the media hunt like a pack of wolves, and any sense of proportion goes out of the window until they move on to another story.
Obviously any payments made from taxpayers money should be properly recorded and open to scrutiny – and this wasn’t the case, so it invited fiddling by the few who are too greedy. But I hope MPs will resist a panic move forced on them by the wolfpack, and will devise a sensible system that leaves both them and us satisfied.
The reason that the public did not react to Conway was because it was seen as corruption as such in their eyes – as the use of family members is acceptable in the commons by all parties . On the other hand – all the stories coming out the other side of the house are constant and touch on corruption by the information being witheld .
Cameron also did the right and honourable thing by criticizing & punishing Conway . Brown , like Blair hangs onto his naughty colleagues till the bitter end – the public don’t like it and start to link Brown into the same habits as if he is condoning it all . Whether he is or not !
First line should have read “NOT seen as corruption” – by depest apologies for my typing error .
I think the damage from Conway will be to politicians and Westminster in general rather than specifically the Tories.
Most people will accept that out of 650 MP’s only a dozen or so are really cheating the system and that they could be in any party.
However the other thing the public also believe is that almost every other MP knew what was going on and looked the other way.
It’s a sort of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” mentality, where you can be pretty sure that someone is breaking the rules but if you don’t report him he won’t report you, so it just continued until someone gets caught.
I think there is also a perception that the level of expenses and the flexibility MP’s are allowed are not acceptable and that for years it’s been one rule for them and another for the rest of us, with MP’s putting there own interests ahead of ours.
I don’t necessarily agree with that view but I think it is pretty much the public perception and it’s a “Plague on all your houses” attitude that means the party of the person in power isn’t as important as “they are all at it”.
Peter.
This is Peter Ridell’s comment on Speaker Martin’s approach :-
“the review announced by the Speaker appears more glacial in its pace, though wideranging with a “root-and-branch examination” of allowances, and an important caveat about “building its options for reform on the existing regime”. The review comes in two parts: first, on how MPs’ pay is fixed by July, and, then, on expenses and allowances by the autumn. ”
Note the “important caveat”.
Note the membership of Martin’s Committee of timeservers & insiders.
Where in the real world outside Westminster can you claim up to £250 in “expenses” without any receipts? This just typifies the problem-the enormous body of MP’s “Allowances” has grown too big, and they should not be policing it themselves.
So far only Cameron & Clegg have shown any leadership on this issue-but neither has gone far enough.
Speaker Martin’s Club will not provide the answer-as someone here once mentioned in another context-Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.
Mark Senior you are quite right.
My mind is clearly too suspicious.
On consideration, I can see.
There is no proof he was a liar.
It seem that his senior officials were informed about a press story.
These officials were informed about a breach of a fundamental doctrine that the the PM told parliament was still fully in force.
Press story V breach of fundamental democratic principles???
Which do you tell your boss about?
On reflection all is clear.
Sally , a fair apology , well done .
Thanks Mark…
And I don’t know if I should venture into the fray again….but The Sun [?? I know, I know!] is reporting that when Jack Staw was told about the press interest in ‘the interviews’, he was told they were asking about the ‘interview’s being bugged’. Which IF TRUE does make his claims that he had not heard about ‘the bugging from senior officals’ less than…gallant.
He had heard that the press had heard, but hadn’t heard it really was happening from senior officials, even though it appears they knew.
I think that is right?
Or maybe not…some news reports say the officials about the bugging from a second report from the press rather than ‘offically’…????
I will shut up now….
Anyway..no proof ..etc..
Been an intersting day in Scotland.
Sally C,
Yeah, i thought it might be close and to be honest i wasn’t happy about the concessions to Margo McDonald.
That’s not because of her being ex SNP but rather that where as the Tories over police numbers or faster business rate cuts or the Greens over more money for public transport were pushing on policy she was pretty much blackmailing the government for local advantage.
I don’t know how much Alex’s bit of brinkmanship worked but The Libdems, Labour and the Greens all abstained. It’s covered here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7229507.stm
Everybody is of course spinning for all they are worth but i think the SNP are the clear winners and the Tories are pretty happy. I found this quote from the Tories particularly stinging,
“Today is historic – not because of what (the SNP) has done, but because it marks the final humiliation of the Scottish Labour Party.
“A year ago they were a party of government. Today they are not even fit to be called a party of opposition.”
I think like it or not by abstaining both labour and the Libdems have made it look that they were scared of an election and I suspect that will boost the SNP’s standing. The next set of Scottish poll figures will be interesting and with a bit of luck one of the Sunday’s may have commissioned one on the possibility of an election.
Much as I personally dislike the Tories I suspect the two happiest men tonight might be Alex Salmond and David Cameron.
Peter.
Anyone seen PMQ’s today? What on Earth has got into them?
That was the worst performance from them so far. Cameron’s first question was “How many reviews has the government had?” Which isn’t exactly the most taxing question to rebuff in the world. His second was “Are we keeping A-levels?” which he repeated half a dozen times even though GB answered it the first.
Despite that Brown still looked like he was under pressure. Tony would have kicked arse
. Just my humble opinion of course – what do you guys think?
Stephen…. Personally I thaught Cameron raised a good point about reviews…and A-Levels. Brown didn’t answer either question. Cameron’s question was “are A-Levels here to stay?” and GB’s answer suggested… only until 2012, Therefore the answer being ‘No’….without actually saying it, in true GB style! Reviews cost money and are a short-term way of showing that you are doing something about a problem when in fact you are just buying time before you have to become accountable! …….not what tax-payers want!
GB didn’t answer the first question, Cameron had to tell the country that he had already had 52 reviews… that’s one every four days of Brown’s premiership!
Steven-At first it did seem odd-but then the familiar Cameron tactic emerged- ie to portray GB as indicisive & incapable of answering a straight question.
Thus-Answer is n reviews-one every four days- i.e. no decisions , just reviews-eg are A Levels to stay or not?-answer yes till 2012 when there will be a (wait for it) review…..yes but will A levels be kept-no straight answer-QED/Job done.
Whilst recognising the tactic, I don’t like it .I would much rather hear forensic questioning of policy.Brown is vulnerable to this because he starts to spew out platitudes & does avoid straight answers.
Trying to make a fool of him can be an unedifying spectacle IMHO.
I would be interested to know from Peter Cairns if the Tories’ Westminster prospects in Scotland are largely a function of their performance at Holyrood, or does the Cameron factor have any influence?
Still Cameron seems to be on a role so I guess he feels it’s paying off?
Colin,
Holyrood or Westminster? It’s hard to say.
I don’t think that today’s events in Holyrood will have done them any harm, but I suspect it will have strengthened their existing vote rather than brought them that many new ones.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see them open a gap to overtake the Libdems who certainly will have been hurt by today. I wouldn’t be surprised to see ( in Holyrood) it go from about 14/14 and 12/13 to more like 12/16 and 12/16.
I think Labour having had the SNP accept the Labour amendment and vote for it, only to have Labour then abstain in the vote on a budget that contained their amendment, just looks like a farce.
There is a headline to that effect in tomorrows ( Thursday 7th) Scotsman with a picture set from the chamber of Alex laughing his head off and wendy with her head in her hands.
Even though I’ve expressed my sympathy for WA here before I think this has really been another nail in her coffin but in this case if this was her strategy she only has her self to blame.
Interestingly I think that one of the effects of the last six months or so has been a shift away from UK news dominating events to more scottish issues and I’ll give you an example.
Every Wednesday they go live on Radio Scotland at the start of the lunchtime news to PM’s questions.
Today the started with the first question and then before Brown had fully answered the announcer cut in and said,
” We’ll go back to that if there is anything interesting” and that’s the last we heard of it.
Now granted it wasn’t a big news day at Westminster and it was the Scottish budget and a potential election, but it does seem to suggest that right now England is another country.
Now that might seem like a very nationalist statement and me being partisan, but I genuinely believe that there is with a more proactive administration in Holyrood a greater focus in Scotland on Internal rather than UK affairs.
Having said that it would probably change if a UK election was close.
In addition and I am slightly cautious about saying this as an outsider but having read much of the discourse on this site and others over the last few weeks I feel that there is a real mood of anger in England at the moment, almost a sense of a nation that feels under siege and turning inward.
Issues like sleaze, race, tax, benefits and government inefficiency all seem to come across as if people just don’t believe that anything is going right at all.
If that is true and Cameron can tap in to it Like Obama, then I am actually starting to think he can win.
In contrast although Scots seem to be more worried about the economy right now north of the border there is a more positive mood.
So to sum up, I can’t say which has more influence on Tory fortunes, but it doesn’t matter because they are performing well in both parliaments.
What is perhaps more important is the divergence in politics between the two countries.
Peter.
Anthony. Have BPIX given up polling? Nothing since October.
I think the reviews question was a good strategy actually- but DC should have followed it through. The image of a PM who simply sets up reviews instead of taking decisions backs up the image he is trying to give to Brown. Whether he landed the blow or not is another matter, but I htink the idea was good.
Peter-
thanks-most interesting.
Colin
Collin – there was a more recent one (November I think) but the Lib Dem score was never published so it’s not in my tables. They were never regular, they are just when the Mail on Sunday feels like doing a poll.
Lukw – It’s a strategy that anyone who’s been in a bad marriage will recognise – if he makes decisions without consultations, he’s a control-freak, yet if he carries out consultations, he’s a “ditherer”. As an approach to PMQ’s that doesn’t work for me, but it seems to be working for the Tories.
As an example of the former, the decision to give the Bank of England independence was made without consultation.
The best strategy for Brown would be to rise above “tactics” and carry on “dithering”. Many people would have appreciated a bit more dithering by Blair before he sent the ships to Iraq.
Cameron’s criticism of Brown for conducting reviews is solely about scoring party political points. I have no problem with that; he is leader of the Opposition and if that’s what he wants to do that’s his choice. Let’s not pretend though that there is some great point of principle here.
The chief criticism of Blair and subsequently Brown is that frequently policy was formulated on the no 10 sofa and there was never any consultation or analysis taking in the views of experts, professionals and other vested interests. The purpose of a review is to do just that. If Brown doesn’t have a review he is called a Stalinist control freak and if he has one he is called a ditherer. This is the politics of the schoolyard.
As Colin says I would also be much more impressed if Cameron engaged in some proper forensic criticism of policy (he has plenty of material!) rather than seeking simply to maintain a barrage of negativity designed to win him power by default as the next best option. That may very well work (and he is entitled to take that option) but, in my view, it greatly reduces the prospects of Cameron achieving a big majority because he is not going to generate a positive reason for voters to go out and vote Tory. Blair’s success in 1997 was that it wasn’t just about giving people a chance to give the Tories a bloody nose but people were enthused positively about his programme for government.
Missed this poll. Peter Cairn is correct: “Anyone but Labour”!
One likes the idea of an open-forum, but one is surprised by some of this particular topic’s vitriol. Has Rooster infiltrated it…?
Hi John tt and Arnie. I agree with what you are saying. At the moment cameron hasn’t actually announced anything of real interest. Not saying brown is perfect, but personally I like a PM who understands statistics and reads.. what are those things called…? Books. Now if only we could get the press to do the same!
I guess I would disagree with Arnie that it is okay. I get a bit sick of the pointless point scoring at PMQ.
Just a little point to Peters addition above. Having lived in Edinburgh for years it used to drive me crazy when they would always switch from newsnight or PMQs to a holyrood debate. While I agree that these are interesting times in Scottish politics, I used to get particularly irritated when they would switch over from an interesting debate on foreign policy environmental issues on newsnight, to some parochial issue or tedious holyrood debate. But maybe that was more of a reflection of poor political leadership…
Just going back to GB at PMQs. He has a habit of using strange “shorthand” descriptions which can be confusing. The most often quoted is “Liberals” when he is refering to the LibDems.
Yesterday, when he was blasting Cameron with his usual list of good things from NuLab, which Conservatives don’t agree with , he said something like-” We believe in education for the many-(pointing at DC) and not for the few”.
I thought-blimey when did Michael Gove announce that most children will not receive an education under a Conservative Government?-this will not be a vote winner!
Colin – I think Cameron’s policy is “to build more good schools”. I wondered whether this policy was to replace the one where more “not very good” schools were to be built!
Brown has a few habits and verbal tics – if he changes too many though, he’d give the impression that he was taking voice/presentation technique lessons (not a good idea if it leaked) – I actually think he’s reading books about it, but without a mentor to get him to filter out instructions like “smiling gives a positive impression”. That’s a misunderstanding.
Re Brown’s reviews/PMQs.
It does smack of putting off until tomorrow what you can do today and is indicative of political cowardice.
It is an effective Tory line that seems to be hurting Gordon as is it underlining an impression HE has already given the public [non-election etc].
I accept it would be better if PMQs was more forensic/constructive – but the format, Gordon’s non answers and the Speaker do allow for it.
This week in reply to Clegg’s question about finger printing kids in school, Gordon ASKED,’Do you agree with CCTV?’
There is a REAL issue with ‘avoidance’ created by reviews which is impossible to articulate within the constraints of PMQs.
Think it goes like this…
Decide what you want to happen.
Set up a review body with people who are on your side.
Looks like you have taken soundings.
Avoid a Green Paper [and Parliamentary involvement/interference?].
Decision endorsed.
If it goes wrong, say ‘not your fault’
-only ‘followed the advise of the review body’.
Boom,boom.
Peter.
Thank you for the reply.
I can’t say I am a great follower of Scottish Assembly politics, but Alex’s fun and games seem to have caught the eye of the Engish/National press.
No wonder.
I felt a pang for Wendy. Odd, but true.
It has made her look even more down trodden
The ‘Smiling Assasin’ looks like a nightmare of an opponent.
So unpredictable…they couldn’t be sure he wasn’t going to do it…whilst telling a jokeat the same time.
Political multi-tasking.
The most favourable news report [for Lab]I have seen down here, was one by CH 4, saying their small ‘victory’ lay in avoiding an election when they were doing so badly in the polls!
Otherwise it it portryed as a SNP and Tory coup. The absention looked weak.
The Odd Couple marriage [me and you, so to speak] has been to topic of discussion for some time. There is a thread on Tory Home. The heading is along the lines of ‘At what price?’…which reflects most members Unionist tendencies [mine included]. The theory that we want to ditch Scotland to help us rule over England for a thousand years…humbug.
But I am often a little confused as to why people think the Tories and SNP can’t at least work together. My understanding[?]of the SNP is that you are a fairly broad church of political opinion, having some centre-rights in your midst, rather than a solidly left wing party.
Is your dislike current or old, personal or political?
Is the problem that we don’t hate you, but you still NEED to hate us?
Or do you still WANT to?
Clearly aims will eventually diverge. Annabelle may want to satisfy the appetite for independence with a light lunch. Alex is clearly a three course meal man!
The Lib Dem position is almost never covered in our media.
They suffer from the same problems as the English Lib Dems, only worse. Your posts would suggest they are in particular trouble. Can’t say I have seen a report that covers them, it is all Lab, SNP, Tory.
You are right in suggesting there is ‘a mood’ in England – but I suspect this is overplayed a little if you take your view from poltical websites.
There is, as in Scotland a feeling of an economic cloud but…
The Tories in partcular, feel that the Government and individuals are not prepared for it and that there is as yet, no certainty of clear cut victory.
Labour supporters feel under seige in a way that we recognise from the end days of the Tory Government [not an attempt at point scoring, it may not be the end - we only knew it when it happened, but the feelings are much the same].
The Lib Dems are depressed because there are problems that the new leadership has not yet resolved. Clegg seems to me to be doing OK but he just can’t get heard above the throng.
I note going back to PMQs that he asks perfectly reasonable questions in prefectly reasonable manner – but Gordon is not the least bit phased.
In short… England would be a lot more cheerful if we stopped talking…
john tt-The Tory policy on schools as I understand it is to free up the supply side so it can respond to local need.NuLab is obviously implacably opposed to that.
On education it includes supporting greater discipline & teaching by ability groups.
I am in favour of all these things.
If your first paragraph implies that the last Conservative Government allowed School Infrastructure to decline , I can only sadly agree. Correcting errors of the past is a good thing to do.-GB has been engaged in so doing since he became PM !!
OK Mr Cameron, decide now re the Police report draft that came out to-day? We need the answer now!
Silly, isn’t it?
Brown will prevail in any contest between knee-jerk policy announcements versus deliberations before decisions.
Labour supporters on websites that are hostile to them perhaps do seem “under siege”, but they are a small minority of the 33% or so who continue to say “Labour” to the pollsters. Hardly the same as 1992-1997.
Colin – The selling off of playing fields was one of the worst things, then there was the out-sourcing/down-grading of school dinners.
NuLab (Now there’s another strange “shorthand description!)
is certainly in favour of responding to local need, improved discipline and teaching by ability groups – the differences lie in where the money comes from and whether those who spend it should be politically accountable. The aims are the same.
John tt
“Where the money comes from” is a BIG question which rears a number of very ugly heads in today’s papers.
Schools are financed “off balance sheet” by PPP contracts.This is controversial a) because they are said to be overly expensive & b) because the Private Sector Partners have undertakings from the Government which look like State Guarantees of the PPP entity debt.
GB’s most famous PPP flagship-THe London Underground aka Metro Net went bust. Ruth Kelly has just announced that the Government picks up the debt-£2 BILLION. DoT said” It’s a riddle of contracts to be honest-THey don’t yet know what the total cost to the public will be” !!!!!!!!!!
Today the National Statistics Office declared Northern Rock effectively a Public Corporation because it’s management is ultimately in the hands of THe State.All its Liabilities now count as Public Debt-probably taking Public Borrowing in breach of on of GB’s rules.
PPP is not on the Government Balance Sheet-it is said to total at least £100 BILLION-presumably all with comfort letters enjoyed by the relieved Partners in MetroNet.
It’s not only the citizens of UK that have binged on credit-so has their Government. At least the citizens can tell how much they owe-unlike their Government.
The £2bn “debt” is a projection of cost over-run, not the current state of play (which is more like a hefty £750m). Rather like the NR guarantees (ie not realised), the figures are distorted to make a point stronger.
Unfortunately, we had binged too long on not spending capital sums on maintenance and upgrading. I’m not sure, but you seem to be making an argument for a centralised system of funding and management.
The PPP seems to be a nudge (sounds like fudge!) towards a fully privatised sytem, where forward-funding and concomitant risk is rewarded by increaases in capital value. Negotiating such a disposal would be something of a challenge, but I agree that the “partners” should not be the (slow, inefficient) suppliers as well.
With education, a system of direct grant to co-operatives (Cameron’s idea) is not too dissimilar from the city academies, but vewry both are very different from the crumbling Tube network .
On a totally different note. Has anyone seen the Archbishop of Canterbury’s latest coments about Sharia Law in the UK?
Absolute insanity in my view. Who get’s to decide what religion someone is? I can change my religion daily if I choose (or make a new one up!).
At the risk of being depressed are there any polls on this kind of thing which we could look at?
Sally C, john tt:
Yes, this site does seem to have more than its fair share of contributors who are not just Tory supporters, but use the site to score points against Labour (and especially George Brown). Yes, there are occasional anti-Tory rants too, but less intrusive I think. No use crying about this – even though it is strictly speaking against the intention of the site as a place for “neutral non-partisan discussion”.
The only thing I really don’t like is when “discussion” so often turns into fairly crude abuse – such as the frequent assumption that everyone must agree that the government consists of a collection of liars and incompetent and corrupt idiots – rather than a group of, on the whole, honourable people doing their best for the country (even if misguided in their policies, as seen through Tory blue spectacles).
JohnH – (or the opposition a bunch of greedy toffs for that matter) That is precisely why politics is such a turn-off for people. There are at least two “posts of resignation” in recent threads on this site, the reasons being the frustration that one can’t have a respectful debate with people who have a different view-point – such debates are more trouble and involve thinking, and research into the issues under discussion, but it’s far easier for some simply to put fingers in ears and just start yelling.
Having said that, this is one of the best sites in the “respectful” stakes, and that’s why I continue to visit and engage.
ability group teaching:
In my own (teaching) experience – and from what I know of secondary schools in several parts of the country – almost all “academic” subjects, in almost all schools, are and always have been – taught in ability groups. (There may well be some subjects where it is, educationally, a positive virtue to have “mixed ability” groups – such as in form or tutor groups). There is virtually no disagreement on this.
Where there is a strong disagreement (with a minority of doctrinaire Tories) is on the very different matter of streaming – and on their even more extreme attachment to Grammar schools.
john tt
Yes, I agree with everything you said – in your posting at 4:05 pm, anyway! (by the strange time zone inhabited by this site).
I have strongly disagreed with (most) Tories – and most Liberals – on almost everything throughout my adult life. But there are many I respect. There are some who I “hate” – but only in the sense of being appalled by their views and actions. I can even (through clenched teeth) recognise that Thatcher was one of our great Prime Ministers, even though I abhor most of what she did to our country.
It would be asking too much to expect any of the “usual suspects” here to say even that much about G.B. as being one of the greatest Chancellors.
My old maths teacher used to teach advanced algebra to the brighter ones, and basic algebra to the slower ones in the same room using the same blackboard. Worked fine. The more advanced “group” got bigger as the slower ones caught up. Being in the same room held no-one back, since the teacher enjoyed pushing us. Also, he never had to be a “crowd-controller” before a teacher.
John H – By the way, “George” Brown??? A freudian slip if ever ! Maybe if he changed his name….
Hmm, George Brown…oops, just showing my age!!!
John tt
I have a number of disagreements with your assertion at 3.33pm
However in view of JohnH 3.42pm & your own 4.05pm I will decline to respond.Those two posts make me quite confused about what is considered a “respectfull” debate-not to mention an informed one.
In that context why is use of phrases like “greedy toffs” and “doctrinaire Tories” for example considered acceptable to you & JohnH?
And who are “the usual suspects”?.
If I am one will you do me the courtesy of telling me-& explaining what I am suspected of?
Thanks
Colin
Alasdair
I share your view.
Fortunately the PM & opposition leaders have affirmed the primacy of UK Law.
One wonders about the leadership of the CoE these days-a Poll on the subject would indeed be interesting.
Colin:
Springing to the defence of john tt (who I am sure doesn’t need any assistance): if you re-read his posting you will see that he was saying that those who dismiss Tories as “greedy toffs”, rather than criticising their policies in a rational discussion, are being equally guilty of reducing political discussion to childish insult-swapping.
On the other hand, “doctrinaire Tories” (a phrase I used) – rather than pragmatic ones – is a reasonable description of a political postion, and even if you don’t agree, it is not intended as an insult. (There are plenty of doctrinaire socialists too – and I wouldn’t agree with most of them on many topics).
As to the “usual suspects”, that was also my phrase, not john tt. And in reply I will only quote the old adage: “If the cap fits, wear it”!
Alastair
I did.
I couldn’t help wondering if it was part of some larger theological discussion, the point of which had been missed. Vicars usually go on a bit.
Otherwise… bit odd???
Hi folks. Yes I would like to know more of the background to this civil-Sharia business. Thankfully the political parties seem to have seen sense on this one.
Any chance of some data on this area Anthony?
Alasdair
Sorry about incorrectly spelling your name….
JohnH
I can’t say GB was one of the greatest Chancellor’s of all time – because I do not think he was. I believe he has been irresponsible.
My judgement of him is not because he is a Labour Chancellor. I wish it was that simple.
For the record -
If you were to ask me if the Tories made mistakes. Yes they did. Colin has expressed his regrets in your discussion and I agree.
I do not say I disagree with all new Labour has done.
There are some on in their ranks I can admire. One of my political hero’s is Tony Benn. I do not always agree with him. Far from but – I believe him to be one of the most honourable, thoughtful and engaging men still on the political stage.
The other ‘Tony’ does not arouse in me the same feelings of warmth, but it would be churlish not to acknowlegde he was a PM of outstanding political skills.
But on Gordon Brown, we will have to disagree – profoundly
John H
Thanks-your final para doesn’t answer my question-but that was your choice.
Sally C
Your comments about political “opponents” one admires is a really interesting one.
Mine would include:-
Tony Blair-Northern Ireland & Political Skill.
Frank Field-Integrity
Gisela Stuart-Honesty & Integrity ( Lisbon Debate)
Charles Clark-Decency & Honesty
Vince Cable-Clarity of thought & Profesionalism.
Norman Baker-Dogged determination-everything an MP should be.
Colin.I fail to understand why “political skills” should be a source of admiration. It can certainly be a means of disguising policies which are seriously flawed. Tony Blair used these skills to take us into war on a false prospectus. Ernie Bevin is recognised as one of our greatest Foreign Secretaries and his political skills were so poor that the opposition in the House always gave him a sympathetic hearing. Hitler’s political skills were extraordinary – enough said!
Collin
How to explain my sneeking admiration for TB?
He was of course,as you say the master of spin,
But he persuaded me to vote for him in 1997, so I can only retain some small vestige of self respect by attributing that aberation to his superb political skills in persuasion !
Actually he was a consumate “persuader”-and when we all at last sussed him out , he effected that slightly world weary shrug of the shoulder, and the self deprecatory smile which showed he didn’t take it all too seriously-then he just walked away from it.
Politicians who take themselves too seriously are a bore-and TB didn’t so he wasn’t.
Colin,
I agree with your assessment of Frank Field.
You may have seen an article in The Telegragh concerning the mounting dissatisfaction with Mr Martin/Mr Speaker.
After suggesting ways of removing him [almost impossible apparently] they suggested a replacement…..Mr Field.
For Northern Ireland alone Blair deserves respect. All sides knew he was manipulating everyone, but they let him. (BTW it was Hain’s water rates threat that finally shifted them!). Not that lasting peace is guaranteed there yet.
Colin – I made several assertions at 3.33 yesterday and I’d be happy to hear your viewss on them. I’ve never described anyone on this site in pejorative terms, and for what its worth, you wouldn’t feature on any list of nuisances anyway.
john tt
I agree with your first sentence-and appreciate your last.
That’ll do!
A quick word on Rowan Williams.
Bonkers.
I did think for a minute whether his words might suggest something different when read fully in context but know, it’s right there, he thinks that one set of laws applying to everyone is “dangerous”. You couldn’t make this up notwithstanding the fact that he is supposed to be leader of the Church of England. I’m not even sure the looniest of Labour councils circa 1983 would have suggested such a thing.
Even if we do give Catweazle the benefit of the doubt as to what he meant, he was catastrophically stupid to think that his words wouldn’t be interpreted in this way. Being a man of the cloth doesn’t excuse him from having the sense to express himself properly particularly as he has seen fit to comment on other political issues (Iraq etc) that do not immediately fall within his remit.
have now had a look at the field work and if this poll was repeated at a GE the conservatives would win with 356-360 seats and labour would finish on 220-225 seats with the lib dems losing the south west and parts of wales to the CON’s which will put them on 32-33 seats. in scotland it’s different the conservatives will only gain two seats but the lib dem will lose 4-6 seats 5-7 seats final total labour are still losing ground they are on 33% in scotland with the SNP on 34% at this level it won’t finish them off but they may be out of power for a few elections, unless they come up with somthing which has not been stole from the lib-dems or the conservatives. the elections in may this year will show if the main three parties are improving or not, the conservatives must gain seats off of labour at a rate of 2-3 per council and the lib dems must gain back ground off of lab and CON at a rate of 1-2 seats per council labour must not lose more than one seat per council for them to have a good night, wales may be their down fall.
Stuart , as we have said many times , the subsamples for regions and age are of no use to make deductions as to how they will behave in a real election . These subsamples are not individually weighted and vary wildly from month to month . The 14% for LibDems in Wales/South West is clearly a freak low score just as in the previous Populus poll the 23% in the Midlands was a freak in the other direction .
Your comments re May locals are reasonably sound though I think Labour will do rather better than you anticipate in terms of seats lost , they are defending seats last fought in 2004 which was a bad year for them anyway , a performance no better than in 2005 or 2006 should actually see them make a small number of net gains .
Just picking up on some comments re Northern Rock.
The Office of National statistics have said that all or part of the NR money has to be included in the public balance sheet. This means the Chancellor’s famous Golden rule has been blown to smitherines.
I wonder how Mr Darling will dress this up in his budget in a months time.
Go here for the full story
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/
Re respecting politicians of other persuasions:
Blair will go down in history as a great PM – maybe not in the same league as Thatcher or Churchill, but certainly as good as Attlee, Wilson and MacMillan. Despie the Iraq war, which will be a historical blemish, he did have several major achievements to his name, and it would be churlish to gainsay them.
It is already clear that Brown will not be a “great” PM. His record as Chancellor is now coming under greater scrutiny, and may not look as good as was generally acknowledged. Which proves Enoch Powell’s point about politial careers. Brown would have a better reputation if he had retired to the Lords in 2005.
Frank Field for Speaker ? Actually a great idea since he is a man of integrity and well respected by all parties.
FWIW – I agree with Colin re Vince Cable – LDs have missed a trick ther e- and have always had respect for Tony Benn and Dennis Skinner – even though I disagree profoundly with tehir politics.
Mark Senoir-
it would be very intesting to see what happens in the north say north yorkshire northwards as this is a labour hartland area and most places north of this are solid labour areas if seats are lost in this area it would be a big hint of things to comes, beacuse as you head south you start coming back into conservative areas like Linconshire, east leicestershire and south nottinghamshire & south derbyshire, but on the other hand if lbour gain seats in the south then it could be the start of a fight back in key areas lost in 2003 & 2005 to the lib dems and conservatives, but most intresting will be Wales where all the councils are (all out) for election this year, if things go into a nose dive for any of the three main parties this would be a good sign for PC & OTH’s who are hoping to gain ground on the top three, but as things stand the south is very hostile to labour but the north is actuly showing an up trend for the big two of labour and conservative,the main seats to watch hear are Bolton, Bradford & bury, Barrow in Furness may also show a move to LD or Conservative labour will hold their vote hear maybe
KTL-
if darling is a man of the people he would drop tax by 1P in the pound, and scrap death tax, but in respect to northern rock he will ask the people of the UK to pay for another botch up, even the Dome, cost us less than northern rock billions of pounds of our money has paid to keep the rock from going overboard and we will only see about 10% to 20% return on what was spent on it come back to us the tax payer!!!, at the budget no majory changes 5P on a pint, 10-15P on a pack of fags, 5P on a 750ml wine bottle and the cut in income tax held so another bite out of your walet by Darling & Brown (mostly brown i think still, ow well no change their then
best chance of a labour gain in the local elections 2008 (sheffield ony 1 or 2 seats needed hear to win should be labour but don’t rule out the LD taking back control currntly NOC)
AW- well donr the clock’s right now
Frank Field for Speaker ?? Who suggested this and what’s the relevance to this current debate ?
But as it’s been mentioned – why should there be ANOTHER Labour Speaker – the election of the current incumbent Michael Martin breaks all the non official cross party agreements about alternating between parties about the choice of speaker.
In the past few decades, the Conservatives have not stood against Speakers seeking re-election, regardless of their previous political affiliation. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have stood against ex-Conservative Speakers, but not against ex-Labour ones. Most recently, in 2001 and 2005, the only major party to oppose the ex-Labour Speaker Michael Martin was the Scottish National Party.
This also shows how CLOSE Labour and the Liberals are as parties – virtually one and the same .
Really you could actually add the Labour and Liberal POLL results together to read as Conservative 40% Lib/Lab pact 48% – there is a misconception in this country that we have 3 main parties – we actually have 2 , with the third element being disruptive and using tactical politics to help it’s ally .
So ! To finish my point – let’s get back to honourable politics and elect a non Labour Speaker as is the gentleman’s agreement already in place – not Frank Field !
STUART GREGORY :- said “it would be very intesting to see what happens in the north say north yorkshire northwards as this is a labour hartland area and most places north of this are solid labour areas if seats are lost in this area it would be a big hint of things to comes, beacuse as you head south you start coming back into conservative areas like Linconshire, east leicestershire and south nottinghamshire & south derbyshire”
Once again we have the misconception about the breakdown of party following in England – why is it always thought that the north is a no go area for the Conservatives and they would struggle to gain in the north ?
Cumbria , North Yorkshire , Teesside , Tyneside , Northumberland , West Yorkshire , Lancashire are all in the north of England and currently have full control of councils & MP’s across the regions mentioned above and have made considerable gains at the last election – in my own area of Stockton South (so called Labour heartland in the North East) the Labour majority was halved at the last election and is all set to become a Tory seat again at the next election . The local council now has a Tory majority even though independents delayed the process for a few years.
Yes – for the Conservatives to win comfortably at a GE they would need more seats in the North – but that’s not such a “big hill” to climb as may pundits who live in the South of England on here realise !!
Once again Mike you are peddling falsehoods . The Conservatives do NOT control Stockton Council or any of the neighbouring councils of Middlesborough , Redcar/Cleveland or Darlington . Stockton is Lab 22 Con 13 LibDem 8 Others 13 .
Stockton South only has a very slim chance of being a Conservative gain at the next GE , the results in last May’s locals were just not good enough to make it very likely .
Had a look at the Populus figures now they are up.
For Scotland we Have Lab 33%, SNP 34%, Con 19%, LibDem 10%. I doubt we would beat labour and I think the 19% shows a genuine Tory lift although not enough to get them more than one or two extra seats.
If the LibDem 10% is correct then no Clegg bounce and if anything a decline.
Interestingly Brown still seems far more trusted in Scotland and particularly on the economy. Where as the UK figure on who best to deal with the current economic outlook is 34% to 33% for cameron over Brown, in Scotland it is 20% to 61% with three times as many Scots backing Brown as Cameron.
So if Broewn goes for his record and stability it may well still play well in Scotland to the SNP’s cost even if Charles Clark is right to suggest that it won’t be enough in a UK context.
Given that both the SNP and Tories go good headlines over the Budget and both labour and the LibDems were laughed at, plus Wendy’s troubles (apparently Brown down graded her constitutional convention to a working party without even telling her) the next set of Scottish figures should be interesting.
Peter.
Hi Peter , how are you , as I have said before I don’t think anything can be deduced from these tiny subsamples . How do you explain the Scottish subsample in the last Ipsos Mori poll which had SNP down in 3rd place with only 19% .
Mark,
I’d explain it as being at odds with this one and the three that went before that all had the SNP in he low thirties.
In effect I’d pretty much say what I said when Labour appeared to jump ahead of the Tories in mid January.
“It doesn’t look right because there doesn’t seem to have been anything in the news that would have caused that much of a jump”.
The January figure had the Tories at only 7% and I didn’t believe that either.
It’s not that I only post figures I like ,Ii don’t post ones I am not convinced give an accurate view. When dealing with the little that you have, often in Scotland’s case samples below 100, you need to be fairly relaxed and follow the longer trends rather than getting excited about every poll.
That’s probably why I tend to yawn when this blog goes in to a frenzy when the parties positions switch by a few % and people start talking about it as if it’s Armageddon.
Peter.
Hi Peter , I agree with you . I have come to the conclusion that very little if anything can be read into these sub samples by region or age , the results are far too variable and based on too small unweighted sample .
Mark,
If what you wrote is you agreeing y then you misread what I wrote.
I don’t think that very little can be read in to them, I think they can tell you a lot, but when you get a score that is a change of about 5O% from the last score, like Tories from 10% to 15% you ignore it.
What you look for is a continuing pattern and movement over time, and where there is a clear and sustained difference in Scottish and UK ( particularly South east) which could indicate the different tactics to be used come and election.
Peter.
Peter , then we will have to agree to disagree , if you take Populus figures for Wales/South West for example the LibDems go from 24% in Jan to 14% in Feb . The trouble is there is no continuing pattern from poll to poll and between pollsters . The tendency is as always to believe the figures that agree with our preconceptions and ignore those that don’t .
Mark,
Peter makes a very valid point about the regional breaks being useful for identifying how different policies / tactics play in different parts of teh country. Equally, his point about volatility is clear. One simply has to accept that there is a higher margin of error in the smaller samples.
On the other hand, if there are slow but steady trends over time, then this information is useful and can be deployed in an election campaign.
As Peter noted, a 50% shift from one month to another needs to be taken with a inch of salt – unless the figure then stabilises at the new leevl – in which case one should look to see if there is any likely causal event which could shape the changed response.
If one were to see a “jump” in SNP & Tory results, with corresponding falls in Labour and LD scores, in Scotland over the next few polls, then, even if the numbers settle back after a while, it would be possible to deduce this as an effect of the Budget debate. If on the other hand the reverse were true, then I think we would be scratching our heads for an explanation.
Paul,
In a way it’s about cause and effect.
If two things happen at the same time it may be that they are linked but it might be a coincidence.
If however you see a change and there is an associated event that could be an explanation then it is more likely ( though not certain) that there is a link.
The danger is when two things happen at the same time and we assume that there must be a link.
Peter.
has anyone seen any new polls comeing out of the wood work i have not-very odd but hopefuly we’ll see a few this weekend YOUGOV-COMRES & ICM still have not reported this month, A.WELLS could retirer at this rate.
Stuart – the wait is almost over! I’m expecting some tomorrow.