Big post-conference boost for Labour
The first poll conducted since Gordon Brown’s speech has some good news for Labour. The YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 41% (-3) LAB 31%(+7) LDEM 16%(-4). It was conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday, with the fieldwork starting after Brown’s speech.
The poll shows an impressive 7 point jump in Labour’s support, putting them over 30 for the first time in months and resulting in the lowest Conservative lead since way back in April (though perhaps it’s a sign of how much things have changed that a poll showing the Conservatives 10 points ahead is now considered a fantastic advance for Labour).
Does this mean the corner has turned and Labour are pulling things back? It could do – nothing’s impossible – but right now it’s probably more likely to be a passing conference boost. To see how ephemeral they can be we only need to look at the Lib Dem score in this poll. The YouGov poll conducted after their conference put them up 4 points to 20%, their highest score for years. This poll puts them back down at 16%, where they were before the conference season began. We’ll know the real position after all three conferences and all three conferences bounces have come and gone.
Filed under: Labour, Voting Intention
Interesting, but as you say whether there is any major impact will only be able to be assessed a couple of weeks after the Tory conference.
However given the apparent potential that Labour’s conference would actually make people less likely to vote for them which there clearly was in the run up to the conference season then it is still a very welcome boost.
Lbaour should enjoy being in the 30’s. They will be back in the 20’s again next week.
Do you think these conference polls have any worth Anthony? All they tell us is that with wall to wall, one sided coverage a party gets a boost, which drops or disappears the next week as the show moves on. It really seems like a bit of a waste of money to me?
GIN – well, they give us some short term idea of whether conferences went down well or not. As to whether they are a waste of money – depends if they sell papers or not!
You’d have to be pretty sad to buy a newspaper for opinion poll results wouldn’t you? Oh wait a minute, us political anoraks are quite sad….
It’s all been said above and shows the power of media airtime – the Liberals are back down after a week / the Socialists are up (mostly i would imagine from previous Labour supporters) – and the Tories are down – but still in the 40’s / in 1 week everything will be back to exactly where it was 3 weeks ago – ho hum !!
What I think these polls may give an indication of is the floating vote.
We can expect a bounce for most parties at Conference time, but if it’s say 10%, ( On current polls 2% for the Libdems, 3% for Labour and 4% for the Tories) then it may show that most people have made up there minds.
Last week the LibDems were up 20% (16% to 20%) and this week Labour are about 30%, that may well suggest that there really are a lot of people out there prepared to change there votes.
Oh and Anthony there is also a MacConference in mid October in Perth. With it finishing on the 19thth that will be only a fortnight before Glenrothes so a good time for a boost if we get one.
Peter.
Yes I agree that this is probably no more that a “post-conference boost”, we will see for certain (ha ha) after the Tory event.
Although I am and always have been interested in politics, and have some “core values” etc, certain things can swing my opinion from one party to another, so I certainly wouldn’t ever vote for someone who can’t differentiate between “there” and “their”, just a friendly Scot-to-Scot hint!
arf,
BW
Perhaps Peter, but even IDS got a polling boost after he turned up the volume, so it really does make you wonder how much we can take from these polls….
labour up seven!!!!!
come on in two or three weeks the conservatives will be back in a twenty point lead or so in the polls bye bye gordon this happend before during foot and they failed to win the following election
mm yes Labour are 10 points behind, what was Major on in the build -up to 1992? plus points of course!
I think this poll reminds us how many floating voters there are and that a massive win for the Conservatives is not inevitable.
My guess is that come October Labour will actually poll on average around 25% and in April 2009 24%. But I still wouldn’t even like to guess what will happen a year later afterwards, the economic and political situation is too unpredicatable to make such a long term serious-minded guess.
Labour has form on overselling its successes, so any gains will soon be tempered by scepticism. I already hear Brown’s speech being marked down from ‘did enough to secure his position’ to ‘didn’t say anything substantial’ as the details of announcements contained within it are picked apart into meaninglessness.
So unless the Conservatives do spectacularly badly in Birmingham I suspect Brown is now even less likely to survive to the election. Paradoxically this may mean Conservative electoral fortunes may be helped by a bad week – but would they consider engineering a muted conference?
Weighted Moving Average 44:27:17. Brown has this fatal habit of doing things that look good at the time to the tabloids and unravel later. But the resignation of Ruth Kelly and the deconstruction of some of Brown’s more blatant lies in the speech would not have had time to impact this poll.
All in all, I suspect it’s a “dead cat bounce”
The BBC seems to be reporting this poll, it’s on Ceefax at any rate, I can’t find it on the website and domestic politics seem to have disappeared from the main news. I thought the BBC had a policy of not reporting opinion polls. Or does this policy go out of the window when they’re (relatively) favourable to the labour party?
Nbeale – please refrain from referring to “blatant lies” – that’s a matter off (pretty partisan) opinion, rather than polling stuff (which I personally think you do rather well).
GIN – the conference polls were important last year – they possibly made Brown think twice about calling an election (which had a disastrous knock-on effect on his ratings)
Was the Kelly resignation supposed to make Brown look Ruthless? ba-boom!
If reports are correct that she has voluntarily stepped down, this just makes Brown look weaker still (hardly possible, I know) – is she a plotter? is she really concentrating on her own constituency to ensure her reelection? How can we trust this government when there are all these questions flying around? When will they get a grip?
Surely this is another missed opportunity for Brown which only further undermines his credibility and add to his poll problems.
Ruth Kelly was one of four ministers who dodged the Independent’s “is Gordon Brown the best person to lead Labour into the next general election” poser.
For interest the others were Hazel Blears, John Hutton (who’s pretty sure he’s lost his job judging by last night’s interview)and Jackie Smith (who fancies Gordon’s job but needs to hold her seat).
On the poll – it seems to correspond with the recent ComRes poll putting the Conservatives on 39% but with a much better Labour score relative to the Lib dems. Unless DC really messes it up over the next week wuld expect the polls to settle a little bit but with Labour a little higher (28/29) and the Conservatives a little lower (42/43) than in the Summer polling.
If this is the case Gordon’s OK until Labour get thrashed at next year’s local and European elections.
He who pays the piper calls the tune. I am sure that YouGov would rather have waited two weeks before conducting another poll but the Sun newspaper is not noted for either its rationality or logic and YouGov were’nt going to pass up a pay day.
Philip J W says we cannot predict where the economy will be come April 2010. If you mean Philip that we might be in the middle of a recession or towards the tail end of one then you are right but if you think that it is at all likely that a discernable recovery will by then have fed through to the consumer then you are deluding yourself. Without a economic recovery there is no prospect of a political recovery. We have long since passed the tipping point for this government whoever is leader.
The longer Labour hang on the better it is for the Tories since it only means that the recovery will be in place well before a 2014/15 election.
[...] will no doubt be crowing that they are on 31%, the Tories on 41% and the Lib Dems on 16% in the latest YouGov poll. As Anthony Wells rightly points out, it’s probably just a conference boost. Which means [...]
That’s quite a big Labour boost.
I’m glad the Lib Dems have gone backwards again.
But in the Tories, we get the last conference!
Perhaps we have to wait and see, how it all pans out in a few weeks, but my objective opinion is things have got a bit better for the government [because the sheer scale of the turmoil has caused a few people to defer to the people in charge, whereas until now it's been easy to have a pop], and anyone who indulges in a leadership contest will look pretty silly.
But I still expect, and hope, that the Tory lead re-establishes around 15 points.
I agree with Nick Keene, and I go further.
A recovery wouldn’t even help Brown anyway, as 1993-1997 demonstrated when the Major gov’t saw over the start of the growth, yet their poll ratings did not budge.
The recovery will happen around 2010, and Labour is beginning to see the hard left rear their unpleasant heads about the economy. We’ll see if the Tories can avoid the temptations of state control and protectionism and help the UK to recover.
‘Interesting, but as you say whether there is any major impact will only be able to be assessed a couple of weeks after the Tory conference.
However given the apparent potential that Labour’s conference would actually make people less likely to vote for them which there clearly was in the run up to the conference season then it is still a very welcome boost.’
I agree with the last point – personally I always find Party conferences make me less likely to vote for that party in question, so this is good news for Labour, despite the best efforts of the Left to ruin it for them
It will interesting to see what happens at the Tory conference, which, with their new found confidence, I think will be very different from the last two in which they strived to present them as moderates in touch with modern Britain
If it is one of those conferences like 93 or 99, where the Right completely dominate proceedings (which it could well be), I can’t see the public responding too positively, and Labour might really be back in with at least a fighting chance
Last year’s knee-jerk polls (taken the day after the speeches by Brown then Cameron showed a boost (from other polls) for Brown of between 2 and 5 points, followed by a boost back to Cameron after his speech of 3 points
Con Lab LD Con
Lead
33 44 13 -11
36 40 13 -4
I don’t see any reason to think this isn’t being repeated. For any change of momentum, it will require more than just these speeches.
Those figures are from the Channel 4 polls.
“We’ll see if the Tories can avoid the temptations of state control and protectionism and help the UK to recover”
In essence, this is the defining difference.
Will state intervention ameliorate the situation and shorten the period of recession, or make it worse and prolong it?
The USA doesn’t seem to have much choice.
“Nbeale – please refrain from referring to “blatant lies” – that’s a matter off (pretty partisan) opinion,”
But so often with Gordon it is not john-it is a matter of fact.
It is facts that caused The FT, The Forum on Private Business, & Adam Bolton ,amongst others to challenge assertions in the speech.
It is facts available at a click on Google which demonstrate that his claims of “ownership” for elements of UK suffrage are innacurate.
These things do matter, and they can be distinguished from the half truths and spin which all politicians-not least Gordon Brown-place on interpretations of their own and their opponents achievements and policies.
And lets not forget that the wife of Gordon Brown’s predecessor expressed a view on Gordon’s little weakness in terms as stark as Nbeale!
If Labour’s Poll improvement declines it will be in part because-as so often with this man in the past-the cold light of day reveals much to “pick apart into meaninglessness” to quote thomas.
This will happen regardless of any Tory effect.
What the latter turns out to be remains to be seen-but Cameron & his team have a huge opportunity now to convince the public that they are not what Brown, Harman & Blears so increasingly & deperately try to portray them as.
It is an oppotunity they cannot afford to shirk.
He isn’t a liar Colin.
Nor did Mrs Blair say so.
A spin-artist/con-man, (as is Cameron et al) but not a liar.
Nor is he a former drug-abuser.
Now, we can either join an unpleasant ranting blinkered ranting match, or cool it and discuss rationally.
I prefer the latter, but I suspect you chew the same hay as The Oracle.
“The USA doesn’t seem to have much choice.”
No it certainly looks that way-and watching the Congressmen grill Paulson & Bernanke on US tv channels is riveting.
They are clearly caught between the rock of what these two are telling them, and the hard place of their constituents outrage at the bankers of Wall Street being bailed out whilst thousands get their houses repossesed.
This is incredible stuff-but it isn’t just for the USA.
If TARP doesn’t go through-or does go through but doesn’t function in unblocking credit, this will knock on worldwide.
I believe the factors shaping the nature of our downturn,-or perhaps the severity of our recession-are to be found as much in Washington as anywhere right now.
“Now, we can …. discuss rationally”
That is what I tried to do by siting the instances I have read , and which convince me.
It is facts rather than opinions which we should concentrate on -as I have tried to distinguish in my post.
“I suspect you chew the same hay as The Oracle.”
Oh boy!!
If John Hutton and Ruth Kelly are no longer in the Cabinet, then it leaves just Jacqui Smith who look set to be defeated.
Actually this poll, which shows Labour support can rise (if not enough) appears to back what I have long suspected – that the Lib Dems are likely to face quite a severe squeeze at the next General Election between those who want a new government, and those who want to prevent it.
However, there remains quite a large group of floaters, I think, and the Tories still need to do a bit more to keep them for the election.
Anthony King maked some interesting points yesterday from YouGov’s Daily Telegraph Poll of last week.
Of 19 “problems facing the country”-Tories were ahead in 18 as “best to handle”
But “None of them” or “Don’t know” only fell below a third in 1 of the 19, and was 40% or more in 9 of them.
So the point in Joe James’ last paragraph is well made.
I cannot believe that Hutton will be sacked. He is one of GB’s best Ministers & has done a great job on energy from a terrible hand of cards.He also did much of the work on Welfare reform for which Purnell is now being praised.
I didn’t hear this about John Hutton – I find it hard to believe he will be dropped, and is probably someone from the right of the party who needs to be kept on side.
I did hear something extraordinary about Anne Moffat being in the cabinet, but can’t believe that’s true.
‘I cannot believe that Hutton will be sacked.’
Neither can I – and if it were to happen Labour might as well throw in towel altogether
Hutton is one of the only figures in the cabinet who have performed their job well over the last year or so, and doesn’t deserve to see his repuation decline as the rest of the government collectively destructs
Whilst not a leader in any sense, he seems to be a much more sensible figurehead for the right of the Labour Party, than the horrendously overrated Charles Clarke and the exceptionally quiet Alan Millburn
Brown needs him in the government, not out
On the usa election, Obama seems to have had a boost from the Wall Street quake – largely (I think) because he has a more measured attitude than McCain (who has gone a bit OTT with his reaction)
I don’t think anger or outrage helps anyone here – what happens next is so difficult to call, and depends as much on reviving confidence as on the material effects of the different “options” of lending or swapping.
It’s easy to get angry but to be angry with the right person at the right time, and for the right purpose and in the right way – that is not easy. (to quote a very old man)
I believe Osborne meant it when he said that making money out of other people’s misery is a function of capitalism.
I’ve heard it in other ways from eminent capitalists, for instance that capitalism’s success depends on the regular failure of some of its participants.
The way Brown spun it was to imply that Osborne approved and encouraged the concept of misery for profit, whereas he specifically said “no-one takes pleasure from the fact”.
Brown didn’t “lie” there, he twisted the remark. Reprehensible a trait common to all politicians and many journalists.
I would think Cameron ought to be advised to do another speech without notes or lecturn, given he is capable of it. That looks superb on telly and was one of the reasons (the other bein the inheritance tax pledge) why the Conservatives were able to head off the election that would have spelt doom for them last year. Polly Toynbee acknowledged, I think correctly, in her recent column, that Cameron’s conference speech last year was one of the most significant ever delivered- even though critics gave it only a cautious welcome it was of immense tactcial significance.
Was Brown’s speech like that? No, I don’t think so. I think it was something new, and did show he should never be underestimated. I thought it was very good, but I doubt it will herald a seismic change, although a swing of this magnitude is huge- the problem is that even with a massive boost Labour is still 10 points behind.
I think these figures are pretty close to what I expect the outcome of the next election to actually be. I can’t see the Tories polling above low forties, and I can’t really see Labour polling less than 30%, and 16% or perhaps a touch higher feels right for ther Lib Dems at the moment.
I still find it interesting that the ‘conference bounce exists’; anyone got historic figures showing the regular size of the swing (yes, I recognise that the swing will vary over years)? Thus what would we be the average size of the Conservative swing over, say, the last decade? Does the bounce last longer if you are the last conference?
It’s probably a bit of an urban myth beyond a few weeks, but there are some cases where it seems to have had an effect.
In 1986, a successful Tory Conference seemed to be the turning point after quite a bad mid term trough (Westland and aftermath – although split between Labour and the Alliance).
In 2007 both parties had good conferences, but perhaps the Tories benefited from being last.
I suspect it is a bounce, but short term. And perhaps a bit longer if you are last. Was the Tory 1986 one last? (Just wondering if there are fair generalities which can be made here)…
I support the Tories but have been braced for some slight improvement in the government’s standing as the economic downturn takes hold. It’s easy to take pot shots at the people in charge when the bad news is speculative.
Well the 1986 one lasted and took hold for the 1987 election (mainly the economy), but if the Conference had been a miserable affair the chances of a sustained poll lead might have been a lot less good.
The financial turmoil and the political malaise are definitely the two big factors influencing the polls at the moment, but I’m not sure that either alone is capable of providing any reliable insights into why the polls are moving as they are, nor am I sure what insights can be provided when they are combined except to say that we should expect the unexpected.
The problem with financial problems is that it polarises between the haves and have-nots, some becoming more cautious while others become more radical.
Depending on how the conferences are recieved relative to each other the cautious and the radical could split any party base or unify around any party.
Everything depends on whether personality or policy is deemed more important in the country at large and which party is considered stronger in that area.
And it is in this that the Conservatives have everything to lose, especially going last. Cameron&Co can’t try to beat the experience of Brown, while they are unwilling to have such an openly contested debate on the issues as the LDs had.
So how do the Conservatives show they are stronger in either personality or policy than their two competitors? In both respects they lose by comparison – all that is left is for the leadership to undertake a damage limitation exercise, and at a time when they should be feeling more confident than ever (having topped 50% for the first time under this leader before the season began).
The way I see it Birmingham can only go wrong for Cameron. He has a fine balance to find between rousing the troops and treating the outside world with due seriousness. Overpitch to either audience and he will suffer in the polls, say nothing and the audience will start to look elsewhere.
” The way I see it Birmingham can only go wrong for Cameron”
Really thomas?. As Mike Smithson says on political betting.com Brown has given Cameron so much ammunition he can hardly miss. In each of his two conference speeches to date Cameron has-whether you like him or not- shown a masterful touch and having kept a low profile recently as inevitably happens to any opposition leader during the summer recess he is going to come across as fresh and uncontaminated goods.
Rousing the troops last year did the Tories no harm so I can’t see why it would fail this time.
Nick (and thomas)
Strangely, I find myself agreeing with both of you.
Cameron has nothing to gain in his speech, apart from a repeat of last year, and everything to lose if his touch deserts him. Given his classical education, that is most unlikely. He exudes charm and class, whereas Brown seems to have improved his performance by reading (not very good) books on presentation skills .
I hope he has a coach, but I pity whoever that is in that despite his (in my opinion) inherent desire to do some good, Brown is not in the same league as Cameron when it comes to oratory, and lacks the degree of humility that enables good people to learn easily.
I concur with the views in the last two posts by john & Nick-but also think that Cameron is vulnerable in one area specifically-the economy, and particularly the current crisis.
The Economist today criticises the Tory team’s lack of economic experience, and also Brown’s assessment of his own record.
But Brown has done his speech, He said Labour is “pro-enterprise, pro-business and pro-competition” but that the “new times” need a “new settlement” in favour of the consumer-ie more regulation of banks.
He said “there would be no regulation at all to protect homeowners.” under Cameron.
So he neatly bestrides the pro-business / pro-consumer divide just at the time when, in USA , citizens are outraged that their taxes are bailing out banks who clobbered poor housebuyers.At the same time he prepares the ground for accusations of ravening freemarketeers who steal the widow’s mite ,if Cameron says the “wrong thing”.
In USA the credit crisis appears to have swung the polls towards Obama.What McCain & Obama say & do about it over the next few weeks will be critical to their fortunes.
I think the same may be true for Cameron-Brown as the incumbent is where he is for good or ill, but Cameron has it all to play for.
expect Brown to do his cabinet resuffle on the day Cameron gives his speech.
I believe that the electorate doesn’t support the tories due to anything that they have done, but to Labours unpopularity and therefore these big tory leads are fragile. Whether this bounce will last we will have to wait and see
Anthony. any idea when we’ll be seeing this months Guardian/ICM poll?
Paul
I suggest you read the article by Anthony King mentioned by another contributor.
I’m suprised people feel that the current financial crisis has helped boost Obama in the States. A quick check on a US polling site shows him only back to where he was prior to McCains ‘conference’ bounce (introduction of Palin etc)
link
In fact, given the astonishing unpopularity of Bush and the Republicans in general, I’m amazed it’s so close at all! This should have been a walkover for the Democrats but they cant seem to even break a five point gap. I don’t want to sound too ‘ORACLE’-like but my prediction, a shock, McCain to win!
…On THIS poll, after a whole week of fairly positive coverage for Brown and not a peep from the Conservatives, all it musters is 31%. Not looking good for Labour.
I am pleased the Tory’s are on 41% after Labour’s saturation coverage.
Perhaps that is now their core vote?
I also think the large poll leads for the Tories are artificial. Brown’s speech was very good and well aimed. It has certainly bolstered him – probably for the medium term.
The reason why Tory leads are so fragile is because this economic downturn is a direct result of their policies, and that the Tories have already pitched their tent on the “free-market” side of the fence with the current role John Redwood is in. That puts them firmly on the wrong side of history now.
Labour should attack this with aplomb. Pointing out that Redwood proves the Tories are for the same but with “go-faster stripes” has the benefit of being true as well as reminding voters that the Conservative Party has no clue how to handle this crisis.
GIN – they normally do the fieldwork over a weekend and release around Tuesday, so I’d expect they’ve delayed it for a week and it will turn up on Tuesday.
jontt
I can agree with you on one thing . Gordon Brown has an inherent desire to do some good. Most politicans of all stripes do and it always drives me nuts when people suggest that they have dark and sinister motives for their policies. Whilst I come from the opposite political spectrum to Mr Brown I suspect that if we sat down for a pint of beer in a quiet country pub one day we would probably find ourselves agreeing that we had the same ends in mind just not the same means.
I believe Gordon Brown is an honourable man on a mission to do what he can to help the poor and disadvantaged in society. He does I think understand that a society has to create wealth before it can spend it but somewhere along the line he has as chancellor lost control of the situation by allowing our public and private finances-both credit and debt -to get out of hand. The consequences are only now becoming apparant leaving a legacy for the next generation to bear for which they may not easily forgive us.
I’m not actually that unhappy with some Labour revival.
If Labour had gone into freefall the Tories would have got complacent (still a lot of work to do to make sure that 117+ seats is actually delivered when the time comes),
and the LD vote may have risen.
This poll is further evidence that this election is going to be a two party contest – it will focus on those who want a change of direction, and those that want to prevent it and stick with Labour,
and this is one the Tories can win.
The LD vote is interesting. It is true that if they’re vote only just dips below 20% they can buck the trend in many seats. But if it falls further into the teens, there could be a tipping point where a lot of them lose their seats.
“GIN – they normally do the fieldwork over a weekend and release around Tuesday, so I’d expect they’ve delayed it for a week and it will turn up on Tuesday.”
They ought to delay it until the week after next, when the dust has settled after the conference season is over.
Nick – Well said!
I think the UK’s debt habits/problems are cultural, and would have been just as bad if not worse under a Tory chancellor.
The French are apparently weathering the storm much better than we are on account of their extremely strict credit controls and (cultural) caution – it makes for sluggish growth, but the trade off is less pain during downturns.
JJB, I’d be interested to know why conservatives fear the LDs so much and are so intent on returning the country to a polarised two-party system which has so regularly and spectacularly failed throughout the years. Why do you think this is in the public interest?
Considering the growth of floating voters and fall in total membership numbers it would seem to me that this is recognition of a general desire for a different way of politics, even if it is no endorsement for the LD party platform.
The anger over ongoing expenses scandals, spin and sleaze is damaging for our system of government which can hardly help improve engagement with and participation in the decision-making process. Whatever partisan affiliation individuals have we should all be concerned about levels of disillusion, apathy and the growing gulf between representatives and their constituents.
The two-party system leads to a reductive choice between two equally undesirable options and creates to a breakdown in debate with divisive policy outcomes, as seen over the issue of the Iraq war when both major parties were in favour.
The truth remains that Hobson’s choice is no choice at all – pity the Americans.
Portillo put it quite well last night -
it’s not a British crisis, or a Word crisis.
It’s an American and British crisis.
(don’t always agree with him).
Sooner or later we need to have a higher rate of saving in both countries.
JJB – It is a World crisis – many of the poorest countries in the world are still suffering from not having their bad debts written off by profligate lenders.
That is true – but it’s best to bypass aid to people who have specialist knowledge and can help put in place measures which are sustainable.
Claire Short was a good International Aid Secretary.
This is all interesting speculation but I still think if we get a poll 2 weeks after all the conferences are over and the dust has cleared the Tories will still be 20 points in front of Labour. We shall see…..
And if the Tory lead bounces back to about 20 and Labour lose the Glenrothes by election where will that leave GB within the Labour party ?
Leadership talk will bcome rife once again.
“Sooner or later we need to have a higher rate of saving in both countries.”
Quite right but the whole economy has become geared towards consumer spending. Not only are people not saving enough but they are also borrowing too much to fund even more spending.
The economy needs to be fundamentally rebalanced which will lead to a lot of pain in the short term.
Thanks Anthony.
Andy, ICM haven’t missed a month with their ICM/Guardian poll since 1987, so they have got to do one before September is out.
I would love to know what Gordon Brown is doing in the USA ?? His party claim that he is there to sort out the world economy – then why are’nt the rest of the world there ?
This i am afraid is another example of what he did last year by going to Iraq during the Tory conference – this time trying to look like a world statesman and going off to the USA.
If I was the PM (which is somewhat unlikely), I would send David Milliband crawling out of Downing Street on his hands and knees, in the reshuffle.
That’s got to go down as one of those classic cringe making speeches.
‘This i am afraid is another example of what he did last year by going to Iraq during the Tory conference – this time trying to look like a world statesman and going off to the USA.’
MIke doesn’t every Head of Govt. try to look like a world statesman, especially just ahead of his opponents Conference. Normal politics to me…
“the whole economy has become geared towards consumer spending. Not only are people not saving enough but they are also borrowing too much to fund even more spending”
Hmm, who’s to blame for that?
“This i am afraid is another example of what he did last year by going to Iraq during the Tory conference – this time trying to look like a world statesman and going off to the USA.”
I think there is plenty of practical work to do in New York on reforming the international financial architecture, though what influence Brown exerts and whether he can exert it to any positive effect remains to be seen.
Mike’s criticism is entirely misplaced. Any suggestion that this financial crisis will go away on its own is complete wishful thinking.
“Any suggestion that this financial crisis will go away on its own is complete wishful thinking”
Really? I’m beginning to think that letting some of the more profligate banks go to the wall and leaving ourselves with a rump of well managed and slightly more cautious ones going forward might not have been such a bad idea!
As it is it seems that we’ll all have to fork out billions/trillions in order to save who? How many people will be saved from repossession because of the financial ‘bail out’? I still have to pay my mortgage whether or not my particlar bank goes bust!
I think Ivan might be correct, but I haven’t come to a definite view on this.
I’m also very sceptical about stopping short selling – surely it is a legitimate function of the market.
Ivan-I have considerable sympathy with that view.
Watching US TV just now demonstrates that Main Street USA pretty much shares your view too.
The Congressmen trying to respond to the Paulson/Bernanke Rescue Plan know that only too well, and will get lynched back home if they leave Washington without making this a package of help for Main Street as well as Wall Street.
They all seem intent on making the package reflect this-hence the cliff-hanger!
BBC screened a fascinating Andrew Neil programme last night on the causes & implications of the whole thing.
There is “blame” everywhere-Feckless borrowers/Irresponsible lenders/Worthless Credit ratings/Growth driven Government credit policies/Inadequate Central Bank supervision…and even the possibility of Criminality following the FBI investigation.
It just seems that , in the West, the growth of our economies now relies on domestic consumption of imported consumer goods, financed by low savings levels and high personal debt.
The alternative model of high savings & low personal debt.( used to be called “prudence” I seem to remember)
=recession.
And that-so it seems-cannot be countenanced , so the whole merry-go-round has to be kept in motion-and we need the Banks to keep it in motion.
ICM out;
Con 41% Lab 32% Lib 18%
Another poll showing a modest Labour bounce.
Now, lets see what bounce the Tories get after their confernece.
It’s true the bail-out doesn’t solve any of the structural problems, but neither will letting them fester.
The lack of transparency which has let people like Hank Paulson be appointed to a political positions from their financial/military/other positions in the US presidential system exemplifies the lack of accountability and the lack of independence of the post holders.
Who was the prime advocate for the invasion of Iraq? Gen Colin Powell. Who has designed the bailout of the financial markets? one of the men who designed it.
The problem is the presidential system itself.
I don’t see any reason why the Tories should expect much of a bounce from their conference. They have been deafeningly quiet throughout this financial crisis and I believe that is for the simple reason that they know the electorate associates them with the kind of indulgent lax regulation which leads to the sheer gluttony we have seen in merchant banks these past twnety-five years.
There just isn’t the voracious appetite for a Tory government out there. Just a wish to pillory Labour for their capitulation to wrongheaded “free-market” dogma (which many Tories are still wedded to). A conference hall stuffed full of the way-out-of-touch blue-rinse brigade won’t stretch the Tory lead out to 20 points again.
“It’s true the bail-out doesn’t solve any of the structural problems,”
I think you may be absolutely right thomas.
There is much comment that selling their doubtfull debts to the taxpayer may clean up balance sheets of these banks, but it doesn’t fill the hole in their capitalisations.
The massive re-capitalisations now required, will entrench & enhance the losses sustained by common stock holders.
And that’s where the losses should land-with the holders of risk capital in these companies.Then the stock-holders can decide whether they want to continue approving their directors’ remuneration packages-or even their emloyment contracts.
That’s the way it ought to work.
Well Ben, the 2007 Tory conference certainly helped change the political weather…. I personally think its a given that we’ll see a 4-5% bounce for the Conservatives this time next week.
Ben “They (the tories) have been deafeningly quiet throughout this financial crisis” Absolutely true! I’m not sure I agree with your reasons for this but I find it baffling all the same.
“A conference hall stuffed full of the way-out-of-touch blue-rinse brigade”
Hmm, Methinks it may be you who is out of touch here, the membership of the Conservative party has changed a lot in recent years. You only have to look at recent polling breakdowns on this site to see that Tory support is stronger in the lower age groups as, of course, is that of the Lib Dems.
I suspect it’s the Labour party who are struggling to fill a hall with young faces for the cameras these days!
Judging by last week, they are struggling to fill a hall full stop
Past history is often irrelevant. I give this example just to put any Tory jitters in some perspective –
In November 1976, at the depths of the IMF crisis, the Gallup poll gave the Tories a 25% lead, and the County elections in May 1977 were terrible for the government (left with just Durham outside the Mets).
Yet the Tory lead gradually shrank and averaged 2% in the final quarter of 1977.
They still won the election in 1979.
Joe James B. It remains very debateable,however, as to whether the Tories would have won an election called in 1978!
Ah – I did a description of that elsewhere.
Forgive me if I post it again here.
I suspect Labour would have won in the late summer/early autumn but it was risky…..
LAST TIME – Tory/Labour leads in 1977-79
Forgive the old posts below, but Graham has raised an interesting question about what would have happened if Jim Callaghan had called election in 1978.
–
According to Bernard Don’hue, Callaghan’s decision was a considered one, even if it turned out to be a disaster.
He had been privately advised that although Labour had regained a narrow, fairly steady, but still intermittent lead in the opinion polls, they would be beaten in marginal seats in the Midlands.
He went to his Sussex farm, I think for the August bank holiday, with the Times Books of the 1970 and 2 1974 elections, working through the results (as some of us do here) trying to work out what the results would be. He concluded something like 305 Tory seats and 305 Labour seats or something very close.
Thatcher, who could actually be quite a cautious figure on some things, wrote perceptively that if she had scraped in in 1978 and got the winter of discontent it could have broken her too.
. At the end of the summer recess [1978], Jim Lester (MP for Beeston, now Broxtowe] was telling people he’d clear out his office to avoid coming back to collect it (if the election was called at the end of the recess).
By 1979 everyone was looking at a pay policy smashed by union stupidity.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Joe James Broughton
Twickenham (& Richmond Park,Windsor)
I think the Tories would have won if the government had collapsed in early 1977. I think a lot of Tories were quite fearful that they had missed their chance as the Labour government recovered it’s standing in late 1977 and 1978 (apart from a brief Tory boost around Feb 1978). The IMF medicine appeared to be working for a while, and the air of crisis began to subside.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Joe James Broughton
Twickenham (& Richmond Park,Windsor)
I think an October 1978 election probably would have produced about 42% Labour (37.8 in May 1979) and also 42% Conservative (44.9% in May 1979) with the Liberals falling back a bit more – 12.8% (14.1 in 1979).
Jim Callaghan was probably pretty accurate in his assessment of about 305 seats each for an Oct 78 election. (Either party could have scraped it though – they’d have needed to reach 318+).
I sometimes think, perhaps the idea that Labour would have won in 1978 is a comfort blanket for those who’d like to believe the 1979 loss was only because of the Winter. In fact, I think the winter confirmed a deeper malaise that the electorate was already aware of.
But to be fair, a lot of Tories believed they would lose if the election was called at the end of the recess, and the chances of a majority were slim.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:58 am
BenM
I don’t see any reason why the Tories should expect much of a bounce from their conference. They have been deafeningly quiet throughout this financial crisis
—
Well – lets be fair here. If they had gone out with trumpets blaring, one of four things would happen.
1) Brown would steal any good ideas
2) They would be accused of playing for cheap political points and not putting the country first
3) Any potential flaws in their plan would be pounced on by Brown and Co – whether there are flaws or not.
4) It would all be blamed on conservative policies, as a poster further above stated.
Actualy…thinking about it….they’d all happen.
Poll alert acc to LDV tomorrow’s YouGOV:
LD: 20% (+4)
Con: 44% (-2)
Lab: 24% (-3)
GBs bounce gone in a flash!
Scampi – nope, that’s an old one from before the Labour conference.
Hurrah! A single point Tory lead at last! I know it’s a conference boost etc. etc before anyone reminds me, but at least it shows that not everyone has entirely given up on Labour
I think this means that there will be some proper scrutiny on the Tory party conference and that can only be a good thing for democracy. If the Conservatives come up with a coherent set of policies and the public agree with them then they deserve to win the election and although I’ll be disappointed I accept that that is part of democracy.
What would really scare me is if they are allowed to get into power based purely on a good marketing scheme and an unpopular PM. I’d like to see some proper Conservative proposals coming out over the next week (which in fairness did happen this time last year) – it’s going to be an interesting week!
“it’s going to be an interesting week!”
It’s going to be the decisive week.
Cameron has suddenly drooped in the polls after topping 50%, if he can’t regain that rating with his conference bounce then the perception will be that the tide has turned and the momentum is now against him.
The succession of conference bounces is an interesting phenomenon which has long been acknowledged internally in the formation of protocol over which party (of the main three) goes in which order: political attention is undivided and the important issues can be scrutinised better.
Anthony, I hope you’ll reserve some analysis is for comparison between the different bounces each party experienced, because it is interesting that the commentariat is now picking up and dissecting in more detail the relative effects of the season.
At this stage it seems that Clegg and the LDs have benefitted more than Brown and Labour, so we’ll have to wait and see a little bit longer whether Cameron can reimpose himself successfully on the public consciousness and, more importantly, whether or not he can regain his former position of poll dominance – having dropped 10pts so far a rebound of less than this must be considered a failure for the Conservatives.
“it’s going to be an interesting week!”
It’s going to be the decisive week. ”
Oh no it’s not–we are all nerds: in the main world no-one cares. In a week’s time it’s all forgotten for normal voters.
That depends on what happens next. If Gordon decides it’s a good idea to announce some big policy during Cameron’s speech or he pretends there’s going to be an election when there isn’t going to be one or he decides that an excellent way of distinguishing himself from the other parties is to copy everything that Osbourne says in his speech, then it could be pretty decisive.