Tory lead falling in latest Populus poll
Populus’s monthly poll for the Times has topline voting intention figures, with changes from last month, of CON 37%(-3), LAB 34%(+3), LDEM 19%(+2). The poll was conducted between the 7th and the 9th.
It’s always a mistake to read too much into a single poll, the normal random variation we see from poll to poll could have one drawing conclusions in any direction you wanted - for example, given their methodology is almost identical to ICM’s the 9 point Tory lead recorded by Populus last month seemed somewhat out of line and probably flattered them somewhat - in this case though the collective picture across all the polls now seems to be one of a falling Tory lead, even YouGov who in recent months have recorded the largest Tory leads have shown leads in the 6-7 point range rather than the 8-10 point leads they showed at the start of the year.
The increase in the level of Lib Dem support in this poll may be thanks to the increased publicity they received during the EU referendum debate - an exampe of the old maxim that no publicity is bad publicity, though it could equally be just a reversion to the mean after an outlier; again, Populus’s methodology is almost identical to ICM’s, so January/February figures with Populus showing the Lib Dems at 17% and ICM with them at 21% could never have been sustained. The fieldwork was carried out before Nick Clegg’s conference speech, so any boost they recieve from his first real set-piece outing won’t show up until the next polls.
Even if publicity has boosted the Lib Dems, it hasn’t boosted Nick Clegg. The average rating of his leadership is now at 4.16, slightly below Ming Campbell’s nadir (for contrast, IDS fell to 4.00 in Spring 2003.) The only saving grace for Clegg is that there were probably a large proportion of don’t knows to the question (in January it was 39%, but we won’t know till the tables come out). For the other leaders Gordon Brown remains down at 4.59 and David Cameron is up at 5.23, only marginally below his position during his honeymoon in January 2006.
On other underlying figures there is no shift back to the government either. The percentage of people dissatisfied with the government also crept up. This is a pattern we’ve seen in other companies polls too - a position where the underlying figures on things like the economy, best PM, leader approval and so on suggest no shift back towards Labour, but where the topline voting intention figures show a falling Tory lead - my guess is that the reason is that the larger Conservative leads at the end of last year were never ‘real’, they were the product of a government that appeared to be in crisis - now they have ridden that out we are seeing a more genuine position.
Meanwhile, after those contradictory polls for the Lib Dems and iwantareferendum Populus also asked a question on the EU referendum that gave people all the options - no referendum at all, a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, a referendum on EU membership or a referendum on both the treaty and EU membership. The latter was the most popular, the preference of 36% of respondents, 19% no referendum at all, 18% on just the treaty and just 16% on EU membership alone.
Filed under: Europe, Populus, Voting Intention
Anthony,
Labour are surely up 3 - rather than 1 !
Anthony, any idea what’s behind these moves? For instance, the Liberals have widely been seen to have a shocking week but yet they show movement upwards. What’s going on in the minds of those people? Any other numbers that give a clue there?
I’ve always believed that Nick Clegg would do better than Ming Campbell in terms of poll numbers, so it’s not that surprising to see the Lib Dems doing slightly better, regardless of what might have happened in the House of Commons, which most people (unfortunately) take no interest in at all.
This POLL doesn’t count because I don’t like it.
Regards
Mike R
surely there’s no great reason behind variations at this point?
We’re looking at three untested leaders (brown is untested in that capacity), a lack of distinctive policy all round and no election in sight so no reason for the public to pay much attention. In that environment it strikes me that the most minor thing might cause a swing but it really doesn’t much.
On a different note, I recall Reading that the British voters have a tendency towards the status quo - that is that if they are unsure they will tend to stick with the incumbent. This is in contrast with the Americans who will opt for change by default apparently. Does anyone know if this is true and have any figures to back it up?
Wow! Yet another rogue poll! This is starting to become a habit
Can someone help…? Showing my ignorance her, but are these polling samples taken from the same pool of respondents each time, and if so what is the pool size in relation to the poll, or are they always a random sample from the general population?
It has been a while since I have studied stats, and I accept that there is usually a +/- 3% margin of error. The question is, considering the size of the electorate, are the results statistically significant (even with the expensive modeling that pollsters employ)?
Should any poll be taken without context or is NBeales WMA a better guide to voting intentions…? Do I need to write a programme to look at second- or third-differentials, or maybe perform some time-based regression-analysis…? Or should I just wait for the May elections and draw my own conclusions…?
if labour do hit thi level in the local elections then they may just hang on to London by a few 1000 votes or so. in other areas labour should lose ground to the Con’s but in metropolitan areas labour may get some ground back off of the conservatives areas like coventry NOC after may if this poll is repeated, labour gain shefield just, the con’s may take bury and other districts on a nife edge, but london & wales wll be the areas to watch on May 1st, if wales turns on labour it could be the start of the end, the same is true for London.
I’m not sure about this poll, it doesn’t alter my basic view that the Tories are doing quite well but there’s still some way to go.
I have a real hunch that the London Mayoral election could be a cliff-hanger aswell - maybe something like 500 votes in it across the whole of London.
The LibDem vote is less volatile than would appear from looking at poll results.
In the South West and in Scotland there are entrenched MP’s in rural constituencies. Voters in these constituencies do not seem to pay much attention to Tweedledum and Tweedledee battling it out week by week at PMQ.
I’m much troubled by the thought that many who voted for Thatcher and Blair (but who didn’t live in their constituencies) did so on the same basis as Big Brother. They backed winners.
The LD’s don’t get many votes that way, only from their core supporters and, where they are the challenger, from tactical voting. Tactical voting (or negative voting as I prefer to call it when I do it myself)has long been popular in all parts of Scotland except around Glasgow.
Where the LibDems succeed in taking a seat there are usually a combination of local circumstances unrelated to national trends and national issues.
A “Good” candidate, constituency issues, local government strength, past campaigning, an out of favour incumbent or none, a small majority especially for a government party losing popularity and formerly also a National Liberal history are all adduced as excuses for a Liberal win. It usually takes two or more of these, and national trends don’t make that much difference.
Fluffy - the phone polls (that is, ICM, Populus and ComRes) are collected by dialling random phone numbers, so they are taken afresh from the population as a whole (or at least, those with a landline) each time a poll is conducted.
The 3% “margin of error” is the statistical significance of the poll in relation to the size of the electorate. Specifically, given a sample size of 1000 (Populus is actually normally 1500 or so), and the electorate of 40,000,000 or so (though once its gets up to that sort of magnitude the size of the population doesn’t really make a difference), you can be 95% confident that the true result is within plus or minus three percent.
(As a caveat, the margin of error are a bit of a polite fiction - the stastistical formulae they are based upon are assuming a true random sample. Polls aren’t a true random sample, a proportion of people don’t have phones and, more importantly, the large majority of people refuse to take part when contacted. On top of that the stratification of the sample by region and the weighting of the sample would make a difference to an actual margin of error. In short: all polls have random sample error, you can’t really quantify it, just remember it’s there)
Sorry - but I don’t just don’t believe that the Tory lead is 3 - just like I don’t believe its 11
as Comres reported 2 weeks ago. IMHO I think the real picture is somewhere in between - maybe 6-7.
This weeks Budget may provide some more fuel for opinions to change and I’m sure we’ll see some more polling in the few days after the Chancellor has spoken.
So far no great surge of ‘rogue poll/outlier’ comments etc. I’m sure this will come, but it is interesting to see such relatively large poll movements, so perhaps this poll is at one end of the margin of error? Anthony’s comment is spot on -
“..in this case though the collective picture across all the polls now seems to be one of a falling Tory lead..”, and this is what should frame the debate. The key issue is whether this is the result of the Government no longer being in crisis or whether there is something more positive going on about Brown. The underlying numbers don’t appear to suggest this yet, but underlying sentiments may follow headline polls. I expect Labour will have a bad night in May, (although they may well hold London), but this will be of little relevance to a GE as it will almost certainly be based on differential turnout. It’s clear that for whatever reason Cameron has not decisively established himself as credible PM material in the minds of many voters. It’s also highly likely that he will not now achieve this prior to the next GE, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is bound to lose. As some of us have said for a considerable time now, it’s all to play for, and the Tories will have to work extremely hard if they are to become the largest party, let alone form a majority.
Well, Labour had regular bad nights during local elections when they were 10%+ ahead in the polls, I don’t see them having a particularly good night when they are trailing in the polls. All this poll tells us is the Tories are ahead- we already knew that. What it doesn’t show us is what was being predicted on here during the whole of the autumn and winter- a total Labour collapse.
The true picture is the voters don’t like any of the parties very much at the moment.I suspect that may be slightly more alarming for the main opposition than it is for a third term, mid term government.
I should add the prediction of a Labour collapse was being made by people in the comments section, and not by Anthony himself.
KTL - “I’m sure we’ll see some more polling in the few days after the Chancellor has spoken.”
Almost certainly, the budget almost always produces a flurry of polling.
Arnie - made me laugh! Not as much as Mike ‘the orifice’ Richardson’s own posts, mind, but all the same…
Alec and Brian Swift - I think you are both spot on. Even if the true Tory lead is 6/7/8%, Cameron should be truly worried about not establishing a solid double figure lead at this point in the parliament. The press has been pretty much unrelentingly positive for him and hostile to Labour and yet he (Cameron) still looks nowhere near an overall majority next time.
It’s interesting that both Populus & ICM ( with similar methodology) now have LibDems in the region of 20%. This is significantly different from YouGov’s 16%. Which is correct makes a big difference.
I suppose the fact that posts here ( & commentary in The Times) are focussing on margin of error, just emphasises where we’re at-it’s very close with ( as Alec says) all to play for.
…All the same, the Conservatives must be scratching their heads -Cameron ahead in the leadership ratings/Cameron+Osborne ahead of Brown+Darling/Real inflation rising rapidly/Times Poll today shows widespread fear of falling spending power/House prices falling/LibDems receive universal lambasting for their EU abstention…..and yet they see Lab & LibDem up & their own result down.
They need to find out why pretty soon, just in case some of Brown’s Centre Right policies start to work & become popular!
Anthony, thanks for your quick response. To add to your analysis of the failure to capture a truly random sample, you should add the modern tool known as the answer phone.
Just try to get me to answer my phone. Any phone!
Final question. Am I correct in my recollection in that Populus’ polls have (historically) had a Labour bias? If so, and taking into account the +/- 3% variance, does this imply YouGov’s analysis appears pretty close-on…?
Personally I am not surprised that the Tories’ lead is slipping as we are beginning to see the re-emergence of some incoherence over Europe.
While I think that the call for a referendum with no alternatives may appeal to elements of their core and any residual UKIP voters, it will turn off many LibDem/Labour voters who might have been thinking about voting conservative…
Mr Editor - My post was a scarcastic in the point that usually when a poll like this comes out it is rubbished.I noticed a few others have expressed the same opinion,at least you haven’t deleted their posts.
Keep up the good work.
Colin’s observations re the LD support are extremely relevant here. If this poll is accurate, (big if, but lets assume), it becomes one of a pattern that strongly suggests the impact of a strong LD showing hits the Tories much more so than Labour. This should not come as a surprise to anyone - it’s one of the reasons why we have a 60 seat Labour majority on 36% of the vote, and was the explanation for Blair’s massive earlier majorities.
In terms of politics, it backs up the argument that Cameron has failed to cement his position as the obvious choice for next PM. I have no great empathy for Nick Clegg, but I’m pretty sure he will make life very awkward for Cameron and he is the LD leader the Labour party most wanted.
On an objective and non partisan view of current UK politics I beg to differ somewhat with our esteemed host - notwithstanding poll leads and great economic uncertainties, at this point I think I’d still rather be Brown than Cameron, although I’ll happily admit this could be a mistaken view, as unlike Mike R, I’m a mere mortal.
Alasdair-I disagree.
The incoherance on EU is with LibDems.Who wants to withdraw from EU?-certainly not Cons-the in/out referendum was of real interest only to UKIP.
Every time the public are asked about their attitudes to EU they say ” stay in but stop giving them more power over UK law”.
This was the whole point of a referendum on Lisbon-it’s what the public want.
LibDems have lost all credibility on EU-their policy was membership with no qualms or reservations -and they would not speak in favour of it.
As for Labour-words fail me on their conduct of that debate.
Having said all this I must concede that in a list of UK voters’ current priorities, EU does not feature.Perhaps it will as ,over time,they hear more & more the refrain ” we can’t do that-it’s against EU regulations”.
As I’ve been saying, the problem for the Conservatives is that they are still to set out a coherant narrative. Policy announcements, such as they are, appear to have no overall coherance. People are ready to hear what the Conservatives have got to say, but so far, they aren’t really hearing anything from them. The Tories still have time, but I really think that after the local elections Cameron needs to begin developing a clear idea in the publics mind, of what he stands for.
I’ve never understood where many of the more Conservative supporting contributors to this blog get their perception that the Labour vote is on the verge of collapse. Polls show that this is not going to happen any time soon. Personal experience also supports this.
I agree with a contributor above who sees that recent polls show only that voters are put off by all three mainstream choices at the moment.
This is problematical for the Tories. They should be miles ahead by now given the sustained negative coverage of the government over the last 6 months. Something is going on out there - or rather has happened - and its repercussions are not at all favourable to the Conservative Party.
For all the bluster following Iain Duncan Smith’s misguided report on breakdown Britain, through to the frankly shambolic Lisbon Treaty referendum campaign, it seems that voters are no longer prepared to look automatically at the Tories as an alternative government. It’s almost as if they are waiting for Labour to up its game, rather than listening to what the Conservative proposals are.
The only analogy I can come up with is to liken contemporary polls to the mid-point in a middle-distance track event. Sure, someone is “leading” the race at the moment as the Tories undoubtedly are, but we all know the strongest runners hang back and overtake in the final lap. Labour could well surge through any superficial Tory lead in an election campaign once concrete policies are properly specced out. Particularly if the Conservatives fall into the yawning “breakdown Britain” or “anti-EU” trap once more.
I fear this is the prospect awaiting Cameron’s Tories in the run up to the next General Election should things not change soon. He needs to up his game and modernise further; or be doomed to be the next defeated Tory leader if these polls are anything to go by.
I wonder what those issues will be that are “against EU regulations”. I can’t foresee any that will materially afect my life or stymie my endeavours.
I reckon if you’d added a further option - Would you like referenda on the Treaty, EU Membership, and added a further one (such as di-establishment of the C of E, or “English Independence”), then that would have been most popular.
People like referenda (especially journalists!)- they give us a chance to air our opinion, and I think that explains the popular call for one on Europe, rather than any real fear that we are all about to made to suffer the metaphorical jackboot.
Yet again more of these outlier POLLS have got the wets all a fuddle.As I was saying the other week,these POLLS are actually done by the BBC and it is all a conspiracy by the establishment to keep the will of the people,which is naturally the Conservative Party,out of office.When the real POLLS ore even the WMA POLLS are taken into account,all will show I am right about the POLLS.
You will see that my prediction of POLLS showing the Conservatives at least 18% ahead,will be showing by the end of the month.This will lead to 25 years in government where all POLLS will show that there will be a 30% lead for the Conservatives.
If this doesn’t happen then it will be a coup by the BBC/Fleet Street/man on the grassy knoll alliance who are keeping them out.
If you have been reading my POLL predictions you will realise that I have never got any one of the POLLS wrong,and even when the coupists managed to rig every POLL for three months last year,I just told you the POLLS would eventually show for me to be right.
I look forward to more POLLS in the future,as long as the alliance do not take over the country and rig the POLLS again.
Mike “The Orifice” Atlas.
PS.All the above is supposed to be light hearted and not a personal attack.
The Conservatives still have no coherent idea about where they stand on the EU. It is easy for them to whip up anti-EU sentiments - partly because of their anti-EU media friends, but also because neither of the two main parties have consistently explained the true position. They continue to present all changes in the EU as a “victory” or “disaster” for the UK, rather than as tinkering with a necessary but unwieldy organisation that benefits all of us but can never be a perfect fit with any of its members’ individual needs.
As a thought experiment, imagine that Cameron had negotiated the Lisbon Treaty. He would have sold it hard as a victory for the UK, burying for ever the idea of a constitution and streamlining the mechanism for an enlarged EU.
In fact he saw it (as Labour did over Mastricht - or however you spell it) mainly as an opportunity to damage the Labour party and rally his own troops. A conservative government would have run miles from having a referendum on a technical treaty which even most MPs have probably only a fairly hazy idea about. It could only possibly have been treated as a way of kicking the government - and, having been lost, would have left us in a very difficult position in our future relationships with our European partners. This is just negative wrecking tactics - something that Blair should have foreseen when he slipped a referendum promise into the 2005 manifesto as an apparently easy way out of the dilemma then facing all the EU over the rejected constitution.
Although the anti-EU tone of much of the media is damaging, and the antics of the Conservatives inevitably unhelpful, I would blame Labour even more than the Conservatives for allowing the EU to be used as a football for UK politics, and for not making a clear case for the advantages we gain from membership. But however exciting the phony row about a referendum (and the damage the LibDems brought on themselves) may seem to the conservatives, it will quickly fade from public memory as the non-event it always was.
(And roll on a few more “rogue” poll results as the government and politics generally get back to real issues)
“All the above is supposed to be light hearted and not a personal attack.”
Come on then, take your bow whichever regular it was.
john tt.
“I wonder what those issues will be that are “against EU regulations”.
This may ( or may not!) interest you:-
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/pressrelease.aspx?pressreleaseid=69
The thing which I find most upsetting is the appalling lack of real debate in UK on the nature & effect of EU structures & process.
The subject is reduced to sound byte phraseology-the classic example of which is the term ” Eurosceptic”.
This word is flung across The House & our TV screens as a term of abuse-a state of being beyond the pale…and yet Euroscepticism is the default position of a majority of the British Public !
And when did scepticism in respect of politics become undesirable ?-it is an absolute prerequisite for any sane person who has an interest in the subject.
If our MPs think that agreeing to keep receipts for spending anything more £25 of our money is the answer to the public’s scepticism -no cynicism, about them, they should think again.
The lack of accountability, transparency, and reasoned objective debate in our political system is a disgrace.That it is better than pertains in EU tells you all you need to know about that organisation.
GIN-I agree with your last sentence-spot on.
“Iain Duncan Smith’s misguided report on breakdown Britain,”
That gives me hope that the Conservatives are on the right lines.
BenM, I’ve never understood this idea that the Tories need to be at a certain point in order to win the next election. What is this point and who decides when they reached it? And what point in political history are we setting it against? Surely, all the Tories need to do, is to be far enough ahead on polling day?
I don’t think either party has a particularly coherent position because the electorate’sposition remains extremely incoherent and extremely mushy.
For the Conservatives, it wouuld be foolish to risk alientating people who might otherwise give them the benefit of the doubt. Ideological, consistent, or even indentifiable policies are simply not part of the ‘new politics’.
Alec.
I would agree with most of what you say @ 7:51 am, save that headline figures do not lead underlying results - rather the other way round.
People may be blown along with the prominent
issue of the day ['the noise'], but whether you are considered to good handlers of the economy or a good leader/an idiot etc is harder to shift.
These pictures are built up over a series of events, not just one.
Underlying figures can be more illuminating on the direction you might be headed, rather than the headline figures, which can show where you have just been.
For instance,
if you are not trusted on the economy and the economy looks bad…
If there is a security crisis and your leader is not considered strong…
True, polls can lead a media narrative which might help to create a line on a new story, but if that narrative goes against peoples’ long underlying perceptions, it may not take hold on its own.
Lyton Crosby has a theory that you look at a poll two weeks or so after an event to see what you are left with. In many cases, the underlyers will tell you if you have caused deep damage and will show vulnerabilities that top figures will not.
I was just thinking that, if the Feb to Mar Poll trend shown by Populus is repeated in the next ICM Poll, that may show a Labour lead.
Sally - I only said they ‘may’ follow - it is odd that headline numbers are at odds with the underlying factors, but this could be down to the LD support affecting the positions of the two main parties.
“As I’ve been saying, the problem for the Conservatives is that they are still to set out a coherent narrative. Policy announcements, such as they are, appear to have no overall coherance.”
The above from GIN is spot on. Lord Howe is now leading Cameron’s third review of taxation policy. Frankly, this is nonsense and if an opposition leader needs continuous reviews even before he has reached number 10, while criticising the PM for indecisiveness I think he’s clearly struggling. Reviews are what governments do - oppositions criticise while projecting 5 solid key policies and hammer them home. Cameron is from a marketing background, and it shows.
Nothing is decided yet, but late last year many of us thought, whether we liked it or not, it was far too early to write off Brown. He may well lose, but he may well not. BenM is right - people are waiting for Labour to up its game.
For what its worth [and much though I enjoyed it] I didn’t really believe the last Populus. Bearing in mind this pollster doesn’t usually say much to excite a Tory and more often provides some comfort for Labour, the last result was remarkable.
This one seems more business as usual.
Looking back to October, when Brown had all before him and comparing it with now, after the fuss of recent events has died down, being on average about 5 points ahead with the best regarded leader looks like a reasonable position to me.
Real progress, but [because of the electoral maths] work to do.
Mike “the Orofice” Atlas,
If your’e really trying to emulate our esteemed Oracle you need to pay more attention to your punctuation as it *is’nt* the way he would have done it or *had’nt* you noticed that. Dead give away!
Anyway where is the real Mike? What are your real predictions? I’m going to stick my neck out and say WMA is 3-4 points by the end of April with the possibility of a couple of red numbers after the budget. Anyone else prepared to make a guess/prediction/divination?
Colin - that link is to an extremely partisan version of the so-called effeects of the EU on our daily lives. The EU’s policy is to have “soaring electricity bills”?
Can’t take it seriously, I’m afraid, and I burst out laughing when I read that I won’t be allowed not to take a holiday!
I do agree re accountability - I’d abolish expenses completely and replace them with a pay rise - that might cut down the amount of not very green travel to un-necessary meetings that takes place, as well as form-filling and abuse.
The scare-mongering puts people off even more.
The usual poster is still watching Mike’s “Tick Tock” clock.
Steven W - the only thing I pay attention to is the POLLS.
GIN,
You maybe right. In part.
We are but two years away from a possible General Election and there still is no consistent, solid narrative from the Conservative Party at present.
This makes them extremely vulnerable. There are already murmerings in the press (and on ConservativeHome I notice) at the relative underperformance of the Tories in polls. The Conservative Party has a lead, but most observers think it just isn’t enough.
I remember there being at least one poll on the cusp of the 2005 General Election which showed the Tories in the lead. This evaporated as soon as the manifestos were published and it was clear the Tories had reverted back to a reactionary platform. This is where my athletics analogy comes in.
I guarantee this: Labour and the Lib Dems WILL publish manifestos thick with pledges on Public Services, Education, Crime and the Economy. All areas which affect voters real, every day lives and experience. Will the Tories? I can’t imagine they’d repeat the foolish 2005 manifesto; but really, who knows? Will they fall for the temptation to pledge a post ratification referendum on the Lisbon Treaty? How will they couch their language on immigration?
My own feeling is they should downplay these 2 particular areas or ignore them altogether and concentrate on the economy, schools and hospitals. History is not kind to those who wish to keep banging the EU or immigration drum.
But as I say, where is the narrative? What would the Tories really do differently?
Here perhaps is the crux of the issue. In many areas Labour has carried on where the last Conservative administration left off. Perhaps the main reason why the bureaucratic mishaps of the past 6 months haven’t holed Labour below the waterline is the idea that the Tories would have done nothing differently.
It must be a mind-numbing conundrum for the Party leadership. It desperately needs clear blue water but cannot shake off its past. Which is why Mr Cameron is right to carry on modernising. It is the Party’s only hope.
There have been “clear blue water” speeches from Cameron, but they’ve been lost amid the noise od debate re Europe and Northern Rock (which should have been an open goal for Osborne with all the experienced ex-Chancellors on his side).
Local / Co-operative provision of education was onesuch - I expect some sort of “devolution of service-provision” will feature over the next year or two.
Cameron would do well to carry on “modernising” while at the same time appeasing those who are calling for the re-introduction of the poll tax and other such vote-losers.
Colin - I agree that the other parties are also inconsistent on Europe, and I think that all parties (and not just in the UK) use the EU as a scapegoat for anything unpopular (part of the reason it has such a bad image). My point was that the anti-EU stuff the Tories fall back on only works for them, not for switching LibDems, who may be confused, but are not generally hysterically suspicious of Europe…
What is more, we are all still waiting for Cameron’s big idea of what to do if he gets his referendum and they vote against the Lisbon treaty. What shall we replace it with?
“Mystery poster” - funny is once, drop it now (and I was being polite, I know full well who it is since I can see your IP address)
BenM - the polls from the 2005 campaign are here, the one you are thinking of was the MORI poll just before the campaign that showed a 5 point Tory lead. It was almost certainly a rogue, since it was conducted simultaenously with polls by Populus, NOP, ICM and they all showed Labour ahead by 2 or 3 points.
For what it’s worth though, the poll was done after the Conservatives had pitched their tent on very traditional Tory issues. They released their immigration policy in January 2005 (and it never really went away - Michael Ashcroft’s private polling throughout the campaign showed that what people recalled about the Tory message was immigration, even when they weren’t actually talking about it) and the policy on travellers in late March shortly before these polls. Both appear to have had some positive effect on Tory support, but likely put a limit on the overall level of support they could obtain by re-inforcing the image of being the “nasty party”.
Well I certainly agree with you BenM that the Tories need to develop a clear narrative. I’ve already said that. I don’t think that means the Tories have got to announce loads of policies, but I do think they need to start coming up with their central idea/theme, around which all their policies will flow. Its an abstract idea, but its very important, because people need something very clear to associate with the Conservative Party.
But as far as the Tories needing to be a certain number ahead now, to be assured victory, I don’t subscribe to that idea. I think a lot of this comes from what happened when we had our last change of government; 1997, or rather the years leading up to that change, 92-96. But this a VERY differant time and I just don’t believe the period now is comparable with that mid 90’s period. A better period to compare to may be the 1970-1974 period. It seems to me we have two very evenely matched parties and the arithmatic look likely to lead to a hug parliament/minority government of some sort. Who has the biggest lead will be important in determaning who gets the first shot a forming that administration.
Anthony, regarding our mystery poster, can’t you see the email addresses of all posters? We have to leave our e-mail address before we post a reply?
Boot-straps, boot-straps, boot-straps for sale! Nay offers, any coffers. boot-straps for sale!
A debate - albeit benign - about an election. [Today, mister, or never, mister.] Boot-straps today!
My personal opinion is this: given the growth of multi-channel TV and internet gambling, I have a nasty suspicion the pollsters (and their clients) are playing “Two-hand Texas Hold-’em”. We will not know until a proper poll!
In light of this, could anyone offer another solution/scenario…? If possible, with an argument that dose not reply directly to me as a contributor but adds to the non-partisan ethos…?
Many thanks….
Alas it’s easy to leave a fake email address, and also in my experience telling an idiot he’s an idiot won’t change anything.
GIN - yep, I can see everyone’s email address but it’s easy to put a fake one or set up a fake one. Depending on your ISP though your IP address is normally constant (obviously some change, some have both a home and work one, some people accessing the net through the same ISP have the same one…but you can normally tell).
(Oh, and Gordon Brown gets the first shot at forming an administration in a hung Parliament. It doesn’t matter who has the most seats, the incumbent Prime Minister remains PM and can try and form a government if he wants to. The Queen only calls the leader of the largest party once the sitting PM resigns)
Thanks Anthony.
I didn’t know that (about the PM getting the first shot at forming an adminstration, regardless of who gets the most seats) I guess over the next few months we’ll all have to start reading up on hung parliaments and minority adminstrations so that we’re all clear on what will happen in the (likely) event that no party has a majority in 2010.
John tt 2.05pm
The summary is not the whole document-the link says so.
THe summary does not say ” I won’t be allowed not to take a holiday!”-it says holiday in lieu of pay is debarred.
The summary does not say “soaring electricity bills””-it says “Higher household electricity bills”. It does not say this is EU “policy”-it says this is amongst the effects on our lives.( you need to read the document to understand the reasons-one is the implementation of ETS , which I agree with, the other is the closed energy market, which I object to).
The Document says -repeatedly-that the effects are simply listed - not described as “good” or “bad”-that is for you to judge.
I find it interesting that you should need to misquote for a particuular effect.
Facts cannot be partisan-but objection to their disclosure always is.It is for you to judge whether this document lists effects of EU legislation or not.
I profoundly disagree with MP salary increases “in lieu” of expenses.Expenses are ( correction-should) be incurred as and when neccessary-salary is a fixed cost.It should be paid at the appropriate rate-which has no connection with expense levels.
The Leader ratings….
Obviously, the rating for each leader tends to be higher from within their party rather than without.
GB’s rating is 4.59 overall and yet 6.27 from Labour supporters.
I assume the leader rating is taken from those who might be discounted from the voting intention part of the polling because of likelihood of voting [or lack of it!]. Nonetheless since this poll attributed 34% of voting share to Labour, I would assume they still represented a significant proportion of the whole polling group.
Is GB suffering a normal or an unusual differential between these groups?
I would expect [possibly wrongly] that because DC has taken the Tory Party ‘on a journey’, some of whom might be still be ‘reluctant travellers’ that his ‘in party’ and ‘outside party’ ratings would not share the same disparity.
Whilst this question of interest to me, it might also be natures way of telling me I have too much time on my hands.
IHMO the Tories need to sort out what is really popular ( such as cutting inheritance tax) over expensive gestures such as ’saving’ sub post offices. There’s a difference between a Beresford who cut spending and a Lord Hanningfield who appears to think we’re still in the 1950’s with Churchill as PM.Perhaps each Tory MP could sponsor a post office - i’m sure with their big allowances they have plenty of spare cash.
Wolf-
yes they do-but not much “sorting out” is required.
We know what the public’s priorities are-there are Polls to tell us.They don’t change much.
IPSOS/MORI of Feb 2008 gives the main ones in order of importance as :-
Immigration
Crime
NHS/Health Care
Economy
Education
Defence
Housing
Morality/Individual behaviour
Taxation/Inflation
Drugs
Environment
The first six were of relatively significant importance.I probably have a reasonable sense of their policy principles ( but not necessarily methodology) on five of those…..but then it’s not me they have to inform & convince.
What formla do the polling companies use to convert their actual returns into percentages? I am interested in how they profile the population given that the census is so far out of date
What do they say - “Criticism is the Highest Form of Flattery” - THANKS Guys !!
Now for the serious stuff - glad to see that the Tories on here are still not running for the hills after yet another “rogue” POLL - but i am disappointed in the Labour & Liberal followers who have been grasping at some straws from this POLL.
The figures speak for themselves and back up my earlier predictions :-
Firstly - let’s look at the “ROGUE POLLS” since 6/10/07
Populus on 6/10/07 had a Labour lead of +2% (everyone else had an average Tory lead of +5%)
Ipsos Mori on 23/10/07 had a Labour lead of +1% (everyone else had an average Tory lead of +7%)
Populus on 4/11/07 had a Labour lead of +1% (everyone else had an average Tory lead of +7%)
Ipsos Mori on 23/1/08 had a Labour lead of +1% (everyone else had an average Tory lead of +6%
Those alone are VERY obvious indicators of the main ROGUE POLLERS - This latest POLL is from Populus !!
_____________________________________________
There is NO loss of Tory lead in the POLLS - you just have to take the last 44 POLL results since 6th October 2007 including this latest ROGUE POLL to see the following :-
Conservative = average POLL 40.11%
Labour = average POLL 33.9%
Liberal = average POLL 15.7%
Average Tory lead over 44 POLLS = +5.9%
_______________________________________________
Just in the last 7 POLLS over the last month (including the latest ROGUE POLL) the average figures are as follows :-
Conservative = average POLL 39.3%
Labour = average POLL 33.9%
Liberal = average POLL 17.3%
Average Tory lead over the last 7 POLLS = +5.9%
________________________________________
So - unless everybody else is looking at something different to me , the figures show a steady and continuing steady gap between Labour and the Tories , only the Liberal POLL has risen slightly over the last few weeks.
Whoops - slight miscalculation - the Tory lead is actually +6.2% for the last 44 POLLS - a better result than first shown .
These above results compared show a slight Liberal advance at the cost of about 0.5% split between the Tories and Labour - the rest coming from the “Others”
Whoops again - must be the time of night / the Labour average on the 7 POLL average should read 33.4% which would tally up to the 5.9% gap i have shown
How about some more predictions Mike? Your last ones were for February. I’ve already stuck my neck out - care to look into your crystal ball to see if I’m right?
It’s difficult giving anymore predictions at the moment apart from the ones still standing - just to update you Steve - i forecast a continued Tory lead , which will increase dramatically after the May elections nationally and in particular London - once they hit all the headlines in the media with their wins.
Do you want a result for London ? I can even predict the headlines leading up to the election there ?
Colin
Apologiews, I mis-read through my tears of laughter . The actual line was :
“Higher household electricity bills, more wind turbines; Soaring water bills.”
The EU is apparently to blame for eveerything that may or may not appear to be wrong - the price of a football ticket, the Northern Rock crisis. It is a thoroughly biased list of gripes that has no objectivity.
Abolishing expenses might be a bit off the wall, but it wouldn’t be nearly so offensive as what we have now. And not open to abuse. Who’s to judge what is a “properly” incurred expense? Why not simply gauge how much expense should be occurred by an individual, pay it and let that person get on with it.
The system is wasteful and corruptible - my idea would put responsibility into the hands of the individual.
The only abuse that could occur would be if an MP stopped travelling to and from the HofP. In some cases that w=might be good for us all!
John tt
“no objectivity”
Through my tears of laughter I see Black Pots & Kettles!
“Who’s to judge what is a “properly” incurred expense?”
Whoever has the Rule Book with which to audit them.It’s done in the Private Sector all the time.This isn’t rocket science.
We now learn that the new £25 rule doesn’t relate to “The Food Allowance”-a fixed monthly entitlement of £400 which only saw the light of day this week!
These people are at it big time. It has to stop.
The second homes Allowance is the biggy though-they will fight like hell to hang on to that-who else gets the taxpayer to pay their mortgage-even as in one (Tory) case where their isn’t one.
Pleased to see that “senior” MSPs are to “review” the expenses scandal unearthed by the EU Court of Auditors-though they still refuse to release the damning report to public gaze as it would be a “breach of confidentiality” …and this is our money remember.!!
“the effects are simply listed - not described as “good” or “bad”-that is for you to judge”
It would be a more digestible 18 pages if it weren’t so one-sided. For example, the 58-hour a week limit on “trainee” (ie junior) doctors is presented as a threat to patient care because it means “fewer training hours”! Apparently patients had a much better chance if they were treated by doctors working round-the-clock!
Colin
“Pleased to see that “senior” MSPs [MEPs?] are to “review” the expenses scandal unearthed by the EU Court of Auditors-though they still refuse to release the damning report to public gaze as it would be a “breach of confidentiality” …and this is our money remember.!!”
I don’t understand why this hasn’t been leaked. Someone public spirited must have access to it. For God’s sake, photocopy it and distribute it to the press. Post it on a website. Deposit it in the House of Commons library. Anything. We the taxpayers have a right to know how our money is spent.
Paul Smith - the weighting targets are mostly drawn from the National Readership Survey. MORI and YouGov also use the Office of National Statistics for age and gender targets (the ONS publish annual estimates for population, presumably drawn from the census - if 5% of people were 20-24 7 years ago, around about 5% of people will be 27-31 now)
The detailed data from this poll is now on the Populus website .
Peter Cairns is always interested in the Scottish subsample figures ( smaal though it is ) . Lab 36 SNP 35 LibDem 15 Con 12 Others 2
The net changes for those who voted in 2005
LibDem to Con net 10 voters to Con
LibDem to Lab net 13 voters to LD
Labour to Con net 26 voters to Con
Poll used to say that the scores were right + or - 3%. Is that still the case (in which case the numbers are unchanged), or are polls more accurate now? Or, alternatively, do pollsters now accept that the margin of error cannot be so accurately calculated?
Colin - Kettle point taken, though I haven’t gone out of my way to go on an obsessive 18 page rant about how glorious the EU is and then added a claim that “we do not seek to pass judgement”.
Nor did I quote a right-wing think tank poll as though it were carried out by some-one independent.
I still see no analytical reason for leaving MPs to pay for their own lunch out of their own wages. Most in the private sector don’t get subsidised for travelling to and from work.
I meant “for NOT leaving MPs to pay for their own lunch”
Stuart - the + or - 3% is the standard margin of error based on a sample of 1,000 (actually it’s 3.1%, but there goes). If a poll has a larger sample size then technically the margin of error is smaller - a poll of 2000 has a margin of error of around + or - 2%.
The figures are based on a genuine random sample, so they are a polite fiction. In reality Ipsos MORI and YouGov don’t use random sampling, and the phone pollsters don’t achieve a genuine random sample because of non-response and non-contact bias (the majority of people they ring don’t end up being interviewed). They were somewhat misleading anyway, since they always implied that sample error was the only source of error, and otherwise polls were accurate when in reality there were all sorts of other potential sources of error.
I can’t speak for pollsters in general, but personally speaking: no, margins of error cannot be that accurately calculated.
Phil C
It was leaked -which is why we know it exists-but we are unable to know the detail.
MEP Chris Davies ( LIbDEm)-a member of the MSP’s Budget Control Committee -along with all his fellow members was shown the report in a locked room-sworn to secrecy -& unable to take copies.
He went to the Press & told them ( us) that widespread abuse of expenses had been found totalling £100 million pa-including payments to employees who don’t exist. ( thats fraud in my book)
Davies was castigated by his fellow MEPs-A Spanish MEP said “Passing information to the press is a misuse of information and a misuse of parliamentary obligations.”
Don’t look for whiltleblowers from the Court of Auditors-they get sacked by the likes of former Commissioner Kinnock.Look at the cases of Marta Andreasen, Dougal Watt & Paul Van Buitenen-the latter brought about the resignation of the infamous Santer Commission-he still got sacked.
THe EU Accounts have never been ratified by it’s Auditors-Fraud , Financial incompetence & waste are rife. If it was a listed company it would have been de-listed long ago & be bust by now, with it’s senior management in clink.
There was more accountability & transparency in The Kremlin than exists in the Institutions of The EU. But anyone who dares to suggest they be more “open” is vilified as Anti Europe/Eurosceptic/Disloyal/Right wing/ etc etc.
Stalin would be proud of the lot of them.
including payments to employees who don’t exist. ( thats fraud in my book)
Mine too. Why does that money go through the hands of the
M(E)P? Why not pay (and tax) the individual direct? The employing Member would still effectively have the status of “manager” of the PA, still choosing who works, and even what they are paid, but not handling the cash.
Talking of Fraud and Europe’s increasing powers, if that Societe Generale chappie had been forced to use up his annual leave, his handiwork would have been un-covered a lot earlier. He never left his desk.
Such behaviour should arouse suspicion amongst auditors in any event.
[...] is, in fact a policy. You’d expect a hammering in the polls, right? Well, apparently not if Monday’s Populus poll is to be believed: the Tories are down three on 37, and the comrades and the LibDems are up three and two points [...]
One thing I like about this messageboard is the fact that most of the threads go off at a tangent,oh and the oracle,his predictions and his justification for them.
Again,keep up the good work.
ps Anthony,twice isp bitten,thrice shy