Comments on: What are TfL hiding?

By: Anthony Wells

Anthony Wells — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:23:24 +0000

GD - nope, the results to the online questionnaire are in this report and neither the questions or the number of responses match.

By: GD

GD — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:45:07 +0000

Is it possible that these are consultation responses dressed up as opinion polling? Has MORI done the processing and then allowed it to be released in a misleading manner?

See the online questionnaire and comparison with the statement on the press release.

Bob Worcester’s successors have, in effect, released their own voodoo poll results. It is therefore misleading to say that ‘The polling was commissioned as part of Transport for London’s consultation on emissions based charging proposals’; although it certainly wouldn’t fall within the BPC’s remit.

By: Sally C

Sally C — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:21:33 +0000

New ICM poll for the Guardian seems to be showing
con 37 [n/c] Lab 34 [-1] Lib Dems 21 [+1].
This is compared to the last Guardian ICM poll rather then the last ICM poll.
We have commented on The Guardian’s variation in the past.
Not sure waht we make of it.
Compared with the last ICM for ?? whoever, Labour are up 2.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/feb/19/polls

By: Richardr

Richardr — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:15:10 +0000

If it was a taxpayer funded poll, would not a freedom of information request be granted?

By: Sally C

Sally C — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:51:21 +0000

If it is a taxpayer funded poll then the details should be released to the taxpayer.
What sort of information would it be in the taxpayers interest to hide?

With all the other media commentary about the Mayor, it would be in the pollsters interests not to be associated with anything that is not seen to be transparent in the usual manner.

By: Annie

Annie — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:44:10 +0000

TFL is using public money to commission data to find out what the public thinks in order to justify policy decisions it takes on the public’s behalf. In that sense its data is our data and we have every right to see it and determine whether it has been validly collected and honestly used. It’s very different from a commercial company keeping data secret to protect decisions made for commercial reasons. While this might not be a technical breach of the current BPC rules (or indeed the Market Research Society’s rules) perhaps those rules should distinguish between public and commercial polling. Because polling by public bodies when published can only ever be for (small “p”) political reasons. And in that context it can never be the right of public bodies to mislead or misrepresent the data.

By: john t t

john t t — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:25:59 +0000

If Gilligan says he didn’t read that e-mail, then we must suppose he didn’t. However, if he had read it, I wonder whether he would have changed/diluted his story? It wouldn’t have been the first time if he hadn’t. It’s a shame Dr David Kelly didn’t have the chance to clarify his statements to Gilligan before they were turned/twisted into a “scoop”.

This of course distracts from the issue : what is a political figure doing trying to suppress poll results? One can understand someone not wanting to arm the enemy, but this exposure does far more harm than could be done by releasing the tables.

By: Anthony Wells

Anthony Wells — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:11:34 +0000

Ta Mike

By: Mike Smithson

Mike Smithson — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:04:38 +0000

Anthony,

The comment that you refer to from me that it was “my understanding” that there were some additional political questions in the poll was going further than I knew to be the case and I emailed Andrew Gilligan at just after 7pm on Sunday evening to make that clear. Unfortunately Gilligan did not read my message before he wrote his story for last night’s Evening Standard and this quote from me appeared.