Populus show Tories dropping below 40%
Populus’s monthly poll for the Times has topline voting intentions, with changes from last month, of CON 39%(-2), LAB 35%(nc), LDEM 17%(+1). It was conducted between the 5th and 7th December. The other questions in the poll suggest similar slight movements away from the Conservatives.
Where ICM and MORI showed a boost for the Tories following the PBR and ComRes showed a collapse in the Tory lead, Populus is somewhere inbetween. The poll shows a drop in Conservative support, but Labour are unchanged and there is an insignificant rise in Lib Dem support. While the Conservatives are below the highly symbolic 40% level and it is the lowest Tory lead from Populus since March, really this isn’t a big month-on-month shift back to Labour.
It’s tempting, with polls showing things moving in opposite directions, to assume the one is the middle is most likely to be correct. That isn’t necessarily true, but when the picture has been confused until now, this would fit nicely with a narrative that the PBR was initially badly received, but now all those hideous newspaper stories about the government taking out monsterous debts and secretly planning to raise VAT to 18% have vanished, it hasn’t really damaged the government (it could also be that the Damian Green affair has reflected badly upon the Conservatives – sadly the coverage in the Times doesn’t suggest that there were any specific questions about Damian Green).
Then again, its a human failing to assume that things that fit nicely into a narrative are more likely to be true! Hopefully there should be plenty of polls over the next week or so as companies bring them forward to avoid the Christmas period, so hopefully we will soon have a far more complete picture.
Filed under: Populus, Voting Intention
I did say I was very surprised at the findings of the last poll. Although this one continues to have the Conservatives ahead, it will broadly be comforting for Labour supporters that this is not far out of line with that last poll. The feeling that the Tories ought to be doing better will continue to nibble away if subsequent polls show a similarly narrow Conservative lead.
Fascinating polling going on at the moment. We’ve been from Conservatives miles ahead because Labour look like dodos and Conservatives a little ahead because Labour look vaguely like a government again. In all this it seems not much attention has seriously been aimed at the Conservative implicit claims to be a government in waiting – if they want to win a decent majority next time simply waiting for people to get fed up with Labour might not be enough, they have to show they could do a competent job of running the country, at least as good as the incumbent.
I think the current economic troubles reminds people of the previous Government’s response to similar troubles during the 90’s. Perhaps people may see the response as better this time, as long as they think they won’t have to pay the price when things get better.
i think there is an error on the main page,the GE prediction at the top right says conservatives short by 384, which is definately not right
Well the Weighted Moving Average is 41:34:17 – I find this all a bit hard to understand but economic reality will catch up with the electorate long before any election. These Brown relaunches come and go, we are on the 3rd and I can see no reason to suppose it will work better than the other two.
Oliver – I suddenly noticed the figures were out so I was doing some emergency repair work!
So the ‘do nothing leader of a do nothing party’ message seems to have stuck. Not only has Brown marginally increased in peoples favour as the best PM for the current times but he has significantly improved as the best leader for after the next GE. It seems that Labour supporters, many with vivid memories of the last recessions remember the actually consequences of a government that they perceive to not care about their plight, are ‘returning to the fold’.
At this point I want to make a single point regarding the VAT cut and the present polls.
I suspect that this 2.5 % drop may be said to have gone to three groups: 1% held on to by businesses, 1% to the richer half of consumers and 0.5% to the poorer half.
Wealthier consumers were always going to benefit more by the cut but the rise in duty meant this has even more been the case. A good socialist party would be quick to point this out!
This VAT cut has broaden Labours appeal for the present, hence part of the reason for the present polls. But people realize that this money is just a loan. And fickle as people as can be their mood is likely to change. And it may also also prove to undermine Labour’s claim to be committed to social justice.
I made this comment on a thread last month:
“We are at a point where the initial crisis has been averted for now but before the general recession fully hits home. Labour should have been looking to hold an election as soon as possible – they had a tiny window of opportunity for December 4th but have let that pass by now.
November 11th, 2008 at 8:16 am”
If there had been a general election on December 4th the result could well have been similar to this poll.
It’s the Conservatives fortune that Brown is a gutless coward but its the Conservatives misfortune that Cameron and Osborne look well out of their depth on economic matters. Truly we live in an age of political pygmies!
I would still expect a swing away from Labour as the economy collapses over the winter but I can’t see there being much enthusiasm for a Conservative government. Cameron and Osborne will need to find an economic vision unless they want to risk relying on government incompetance.
If Brown had called a snap election I think it would have damaged him by making him look incredibly cynical, plus if I were a Tory (which I’m plainly not!
) then I’d just work out the cost of the election and point it out constantly that this is how much Brown is spending to try cynically win an election – I think that would boost the Tories numbers.
I don’t think we’d have the results like we’ve seen above. Normal political circumstances would have been abandoned for election politics, which I suppose could have gone either way.
Richard
Is it really necessary to use playground insults? Brown may be very cautious – as he should be, to avoid, as far as possible, the return of the Tories. Also, it would be madness to consider holding an election at the moment just to take party advantage of an upturn in the polls.
And I have little respect and less liking for Cameron, and agree that there is little enthusiasm for him to become Prime Minister – but I would not describe a leader who has transformed his party’s prospects as a political pygmy.
“In the next few months I can envisage a swing away from Labour because………”.
The most overused and least productive line on this board.
It will be interesting to see if the recession can be successfully ’spun’ into a positive.
My memories of the Conservative take on the last couple of recessions was that they were a necessary part of the cycle. That they ‘cut the fat’ and helped the country modernise.
Labours take seems to be that they say they are trying to minimise the impact as much as possible.
Economists could argue all day about the merits of each stance (and ultimately, whether the Government of the day has enough influence to truly influence things), but it’s not hard to see which spin is more appealing to voters.
If the world recession theme sticks, then it may take quite a while for the good will gained by the Government to wear off. How long ‘quite a while’ is will be interesting to see.
The polls which indicate a narrowing of political seem so out of touch with the UK population. The UK public are so fed up with Gordon brown and his sidekicks. There is going to be a 15% tory victory at the next election. GB is the most unpopular PM in history, fact. The man is considered disgusting, slimey, dishonest sneaky, the list goes on. And Im not a Tory voter. Its time the polls started recipricating public opinion as at the moment they are so out of touch. Its not rocket science to realise Cameron will be the next PM by a landslide! best regards
JohnH
Brown has run away from elections throughout his career. Fact. As Prime Minister he should have called an election last year but bottled it. He should IMO have taken a big risk and called an election for December 4th and I think it’s in Labour’s interest to call an election asap in the Spring. Will he? I doubt it though I expect Mandelson etc will be telling him to do so. True leadership requires courage and the willingness to at times risk everything and it’s clear to me that Brown doesn’t have it.
Cameron is I fear a case of style over substance. I never had much hope that he would be that good as PM but I am surprised at how feeble he has been recently. I have a horrible feeling that he is keeping Osborne as Shadow Chancellor because to replace him with Hague, Davis, Clarke or Fallon would make him (Cameron) look lightweight in comparison.
Compared to the politicians of the 1980s and 1990s we do now have political pygmies.
May be this and indeed the previously reported poll is reflecting the change in media reporting. As Anthony said in response to an earlier comment of mine, polls always reflect the media view. Consquently as the range of subjects attracting the headlines (not all economic e.g. Baby P and Mathews) have shown Government positive action rather than either inaction or wrong action, Labour gains a little. How far that is retained or changes after other events, e.g today’s parliamentary manoeuvres we shall see but in my view I doubt if any polls will be meaningful until after Christmas and probably in mid January.
The polls are “back to normal”, so to speak. Both main parties in the 30s, and the LDs in the 15-20% region.
Iain McCulloch – which, more reliable, measure of public opinion are you using to compare opinion polls to, pray?
David D
Yes, the media do surely have some influence on the general political atmosphere – even if Labour supporters tend to think they are predominantly right-biased, and Conservatives are sure they are all covert socialists. And there was a ludicrous swing from praising Brown in his first few months to rubbishing him – so that whatever he said or did was mocked or distorted, and he personally attacked with childish insults. (Clever Tory propaganda, eagerly taken up by a lot of the media).
It was only the seriousness of the international economic situation that made these rather shallow political games look like a completely inappropriate response, and gave Brown the chance to show his strength – and to show the danger of underestimating him.
I don’t know what the polls will do over the next few months, nor does anyone else (not even Anthony!) I’d guess that they will continue to show a lot of volatility. But I’m sure that the outcome of the next general election cannot be predicted so far ahead – in present conditions almost anything could happen, politically or economically, before May 2010
At a time like this the electorate need and deserve to be taken seriously. Ministers and shadow ministers must show some genuine leadership, and spell out their policies and future aspirations as fully as possible, and be as honest as possible about the dangers – and also their limitations – over the coming months. The conservatives have not earned a victory at the next election by convincing the electorate of their superior policies, but have hoped to get there by default; it remains to be seen whether Labour deserves to be defeated.
Maybe the people with mortgages are of the opinion that the Tories would do what they did in the last recession when they themselves set interest rates – nothing. There are 5 million or so on tracker mortgages at the minute and some of those will be paying the least amount for their mortgages since they bought a home – they will account for a few % of the electorate and it only needs a few of those to like what they see to change the outcome of a GE. If Brown has any sense he’ll call an election while things are bad!
The Green affair won’t have done politicians in general any favours – why on earth should an MP’s office be out of bounds to the police unless they get special permission when our own homes aren’t? Politicians should not be and are not, above the law and the perception that their offices are somehow above the swift arm of the Law does not rest easy with public opinion. Any politician who bangs on about special rights for MP’s on these matters is a little out of touch and will do absolutely no good for their own cause. I don’t recall the Tories being too outraged when some of Blair’s cohorts were visited by the police in the early hours of the morning and taken from their homes regarding cash for peerages investigations.
This is going to be a difficult time for Cameron/Osborne because they have backed themselves into a corner – the economy is in a mess and going to get worse and what they are suggesting isnt going to help people right now and thats all the majority of the electorate care about. Unfortunately for them, however wrong it may be, the votes are not in what can get the level of debt down quickest, the votes are in what helps people the most now, not in a few years.
What a cock up for the opposition that an unpopular Government in the midst of recession is polling a similar figure to that achieved at the last G.E. It says more about the quality of opposition that it does about Brown – they should take note before it’s too late.
Iain McCulloch probably never hears anyone defend Brown because they don’t want to be subjected to a boring diatribe like that one.
Of course our PM isn’t really Gordon Brown any more but Lord Mandelson. Perhaps that’s why the polls are all over the place.
I still can’t see Brown calling an early GE with results like this. Brown will want to see Labour ahead in the polls before he’ll risk it and its hard (but not impossible) to see that happening.
Many commentators believe that in a GE campaign with equal media coverage for the main contestants Cameron will gain ground so Brown will want to see a good lead in the polls for Labour before he’ll call a GE.
I’m still backing a 2010 election.
Tracker Mortgage votes
Baffling, all I can say.
The UK has fallen from the 5th to the 6th largest economy, falling below France, and is forecast to fall to 7th below Italy and yet people still support Labour on the economy.
It’s hardly “gutless” of Gordon Brown not to call an election at the moment. I hardly think that would be what the country would want. It would be seen as inappropriate & unneccessary. No wonder it is Tory supporters who are clamouring for a snap election or talking up the prospects of one. I challenge Richard to say honestly that, if he were Mr Brown, he would call an election at the moment. No, didn’t think so.
As for Mr McCulloch I was under the distinct impression that this was a site devoted to comment about opinion polls. If he wants a site devoted to anecdotal evidence he should start one.
If I can just add to my comment earlier.
I wasn’t being political by saying ‘baffling’, more that I am baffled by the continued support.
The facts are
1) the pound has collapsed over the last few months and this has resulted in the UK economy going from 8% larger than France’s to 14% lower
2) Our recession is predicted to be longer and deeper than other major economies
3) Despite highly optimistic forecasts, we are still expecting to reach over £1 trillion of government debt
4) Labour continues to poll well in economic matters
Perhaps I need to add in a point 5, that might explain this
5) Despite 1, 2 and 3, the Conservatives missed the chance to turn that into a solid platform from which to attack Labour and are now paying the penalty.
What should have been fairly simple has been complicated by the Tory failure to word questions correctly (the attack should not have been on the recession, rather it should have been on our weak position, over-reliance on cheap debt and the effect that borrowing will have on future taxes).
Mark M
I think both you and the Conservatives have it wrong because you ignore the fact that this time it is a World recession and everyone (except the Conservatives) knows this. And the more the Conservatives ignore this the more it looks like they have no idea what is happening and look lost.
Barnaby – If he wants a site devoted to anecdotal evidence he should start one.
Why, when there is the glory of http://ukblindassertionsreport.blogspot.com/ ?
Gary Gatter
I accept it’s a global recession, and I don’t blame Labour for causing it. I also believe that the Conservatives know this too.
Their mistake has been in trying to blame the recession on Labour, where they should have been saying ‘Ok, we know it’s not your fault, but why are we so poorly placed going into this?’.
It’s a bit like blaming the whole Titanic disaster on the designer, when actually it was only his fault that there were not enough lifeboats aboard.
It’s not his fault the ship crashed, but more people than necessary suffered because of his decisions.
Now, of course, it’s not for me to say whether this is true. We might well come through this downturn quickly and with as little pain as possible, thanks to Labour. Or we might have a deep depression. We don’t know.
However, the Conservatives line of attack should have been as set out above. As you say, they got it wrong and are looking lost.
the pound has collapsed over the last few months and this has resulted in the UK economy going from 8% larger than France’s to 14% lower
There is a good reason why serious economists use PPP figures for international comparisons! On the same basis, Iceland would have been incredibly rich…until… Similarly, the Italians wet themselves back in the 80s when the lira/sterling rate briefly meant that GDP in lira was higher than that of the UK, if you counted an estimate of the output of the Mafia.
Meanwhile, my prediction, eh? Wrong. However, I would point out that it’s more or less consistent with a declining underlying trend in the Tory lead masked by screaming volatility. And Populus is still a low-Tory house.
there is a view that people who aren’t committed to one particular party cast their vote for one of three reasons. These are the people who actually determine the result, not the core support but the switchers.
The three reasons are;
It’s time for a change; people think the government is tired and the want something new. This has clearly been the prevailing mood for the last year or so. It also was at the core of why the SNP won in 2007 and removed the coalition after eight years.
Let us Finish what we’ve started; Yhe second term defence often used when a government has done well or is still looking quite fresh, or indeed when there are still negative feelings about their predessors.
Nows not the time to change; Sometimes seen as the last possible defence of a failing government but also used in difficult times. Stick to wjat yu know a tried and tested team, don’t take any risks.
Right now the so called turbulence in the posts could well be a shift from ‘Change” to ” Stick” with people who felt that Labour had run it’s course now reticent to give the tories a chance becauseof the economic climate.
We’re also probably seeing a recovery in the labour core support as people who fear for their jobs look to the governement and a labour one in particular to intervene in a way that they think the Tories wouldn’t.
is it enough to keep Labour in power, I doubt it but it does give them an outside chance and a potential window of opportunity.
If Brown can make the summer within 5% of the Tories and holds the vote at the Euro’s and even given the poor local results of the last year or so looks like he is slightly recovering then he could “Shoot with the shoots”.
If he can point to soem form of recovery all be it limited in the autumn (the first Green shoots of recovery) then he could go for Oct/Nov and claim;
“I,ve got us through the worst but there is still more I need to do don’t risk the Tories”
If he goes without good news or to early it will look like cut and run and he will lose, If he goes without recovery at the last date he will lose and ironically if he goes late but there has been a firm recovery then he might still lose because the “Now isn’t the time to change” argument will be diluted and people may be back to looking for a change.
So as an outside bet Late Oct 2009, if the economy and particularly house prices stabilise in the summer. But the tories to win with a majority under 20…..
Peter.
Apologies,
My auto spell checker was off so the last post was even worse than my ususal for spelling etc.
Peter.
This seems to me a realistic prediction for the next election and most certainly the most realistic recent poll.
I would say that the Lib-Dems in their current incarnation may also fail to increase their vote much beyond this reading predicts as they usually do during elections.
Hi there. The economy may have shrunk compared to France’s as the exchange rate fluctuates, but our Purchasing Power Parity GDP, should be largely unaffected since the PPP of the pound to the dollar was calculated at about 1.5 , roughly where it has fallen to.
With this poll contributing to a potential outcome where the Conservatives are 30 seats short of a majority, I think the LibDems must be rejoicing that they are still being written off.
This poll has the Tories roughly where I might have expected from Populus. What will please the Tories is their slight slip in support to the Libs rather than Labour.
A few weeks ago I predicted Labour would have apoll or two showing a slight lead. I still think that could happen but I now suspect it won’t.
If I was a Tory I’d be a lot happier than I was a month or so ago.
Sorry Anthony I didn’t mean to diss your blind assertions blogspot.
Just reading the BBC, the government says there is nearly “universal global consensus” for the need for a stimulus package. Ok, but which is it? Universal or global?
It’s a bit like the Global Europe Summit they had recently, where Germany didn’t show up. It seems that Labour has been briefed to use the word ‘global’ whenever and wherever possible, and not necessarily when it is applicable.
It is interesting that two polls have now put the tories below 40%. the big rallying cry of tories on this page was that they were steady above 40 interesting to see if this trend continues and we see the two main parties staying in the 30s
The polls are jumping about a bit but one thing is clear is that the Tories have got their economic strategy hopelessly wrong. This is why I think we have seen a clear narrowing of the gap and I think it is exposing the weakness that is evidenced by some of the partisan posts on this board – that of assuming victory because of Brown’s unpopularity. That might be possible if Cameron was himself hugely popular but I don’t know anyone who is enthused by him or who has high hopes for him were he to be PM. Given these uncertain times a leader who isn’t liked may prove a winner as Thatcher did so many times before.
That is a good point Stephen; I am a Labour supporter but, like many, think that Brown does not have Global (sorry Mark M) appeal. But I think Cameron is just the same, in the sense that people do not like him much as a person, always looked a bit like a second hand car salesman to me. Maybe the next election will be much more about policies.
Please let me repeat a prediction I made on the wrong message board. (Green one)
Hung parliament and Cable for Chancellor after the GE, whoever takes most seats.
I am not a Lib Dem by the way.
Only chance for Conservatives to win outright is to ditch Osborne and then depends for who. Clarke – tainted and old,Grayling good but unknown, Hammond too wimpy , Hague – why would he. Anyone else, Willets perhaps but the ‘dissembling’ past may hurt him.
Stephen and Gary Gatter
I dissagree with you about Cameron.
In my opinion he is generally well liked by the electorate and his likeability (as measured in polls) is always miles ahead of Brown. And let’s be fair, in spite of his background he often seems more in tune with the man on the street than GB.
I still see him as a plus for Tories and I predict that in a GE campaign , when he has equal coverage, you will see this reflected in the Tory vote.
Is this starting to feel like the run up to 1992?
Heading into a recession, a third term government with a new leader/PM trails in the polls to an opposition with a leader who has on the face of it transformed his Party, but who can’t seal the deal with the electorate, possibly because he is viewed as “not one of us” or trusted on the economy.
After the opposition lead is whittled away through the winter to low single figures and the PM takes a gamble on a spring election a year before he has to. Wins narrowly.
KTL-I agree with you.
But we both have to face the implication of the Polls , which currently indicates that Brown has become more “re-electable” , the more we slide into recession.
I would put forward ideas as to why this has happened: -like:-
Very slick media management post Mandelson now providing Sky plus BBC favourable stories & coverage on everything the Government trots out.
A geographically split country with a “client state” in the North & Scotland retrenching to Labour whilst SE/Midland/Wales & SW remain Tory.( How many job losses do the Public Sector dominated North/Scotland face?)…( check out the Populus regional breaks)
…but unless the effect of these two different voting “blocks” into HoC seats is incorrectly translated by the recent Polls, we have to face the message from them
Cameron has spoken about the economy today-& got star billing on both Sky & BBC. – because he has called Brown’s “Borrow & Spend your way out ” ,
“profoundly wrong” and a “massive mistake”.
Both chanels were therefore able to show Brown responding by saying Cameron would not support people through the recession etc etc.
Now which of these two “images”/”versions of events” do people buy?
At least Cameron is sticking to his guns-and can now quote a slightly more substantial figure than Angela Merkel as leaning towards his approach:-
Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the Chinese central bank. said today that “overconsumption and a high reliance on credit is the cause of the US financial crisis” and “the US should take the initiative to adjust its policies, raise its savings ratio appropriately and reduce its trade and fiscal deficits”.
Well that’s what a real Socialist thinks-and he should know since his people paid for our credit binge with the sweat of their cheap labour.
Populus figures for Scotland are;
Labour 46%, Tory 15%, LibDem 10%, SNP 29%, Others 0%.
his is unlikely to be true, but i wouldn’t find it strange overall, still labour recovering and doing well with the SNP a strong second, but in this poll it is the Tories who seem to have suffered more from the Labour rise. the Libdems are still also rans.
If Labour voters are returning to the fold you would expect the SNP to go down not the Tories although as these figures can only ever be broadly indicative it may well just be a Tory lite sample.
As is usual the labour lead in Scotland for the next election is strong going from a UK lead of 40 to 31 (+9) to a 56 to 16 (+40),
On the economy and next election Browns UK leads of +7 and -2 become +31 and +10. On the satisfied questions the Uk figures of 25%, 25% and 35% become 45%, 24% and 22% strong evidence that if it looks close at the election Scots might rally to Labour.
On the Dg affair Scots pretty much see it like the rest of the UK ie most are not really that fussed.
Peter.
“It’s hardly “gutless” of Gordon Brown not to call an election at the moment. I hardly think that would be what the country would want. It would be seen as inappropriate & unneccessary. No wonder it is Tory supporters who are clamouring for a snap election or talking up the prospects of one. I challenge Richard to say honestly that, if he were Mr Brown, he would call an election at the moment. No, didn’t think so.”
Barnaby, if I was Gordon Brown I would have called an election last autumn as he was pushed to do by the likes of Balls and Alexander. Instead he backed away from it just as has from big decisions throughout his career. I said after Glenrothes that he had an opportunity of an election on December 4th, if he had gone for that I think we would now have a hung parliament. Yes, it would have a big gamble but that’s what leadership sometimes requires. Even if the Conservatives had won narrowly they would then have to deal with the economic mess.
It’s my opinion that it’s in Labour’s interests to have an election as quickly as possible in the spring. Perhaps in April after the March budget. You might think I’m playing some party political game in calling for an early election but I’m not, just giving my honest opinion. I would be quite happy for Labour to wait until June 2010 as that would mean a landslide defeat for them. The economy is going to decline far more than predicted and Brown and Darling are going to look complete incompetants in a year’s time when their planned growth doesn’t occur.
Obama,Brown et all, move over.
Cameron,Merkel and the Governor of the Chinese Central Bank, now that is what I would call an economic dream team.
Hope the rest of the world are listening to them.
I’m not sure who “et al” is-but your bracketing of Obama & Brown is interesting.
Obama has just announced a massive public spending programme-roads, hospitals,bridges etc to create jobs by more borrowing.
Brown massively increased public spending in UK between 2001 and the 2008 PBR, when he announced a SLOWDOWN in Public expenditure because we had borrowed too much.
You have to laugh really.
[...] poll shows no change in Labour support, but a drop in the Tories’ of 2% and a 1 point rise for the LibDems. This is following the [...]
There is a significant difference between Obama and Brown:
Obama is going to increase borrowing in order to improve infrastructure.
Brown is increasing borrowing so that people can continue shopping.
Colin-Sorry ,forgot to enter John McCain in your dream team as according to ConHome during the presidential election the Conservatives were going to follow closely to what McCain was successfully showing America was the right economic way forward.
Just seen Labours hero Osbourne on Newsnight, no wonder the Brown/Darling to Cameron/Osbourne gap is widening. In the end I felt sorry for him for him as he couldn’t answer any of the questions and had to revert to the “Browns recession, lots of borrowing “for every single question. In the end even Paxman said it was not worth asking any more questions as he was getting no answers.
He then asked him is the reason the gap is wideng because he couldn’t even fix the Conservative finances roof when the sun was shining.
At the end of the very robust interview, by the look on Osbournes face, I thought he was going to lay one on Paxman.
It was classic tv politics.
Any sign of the next poll. If it is Yougov, and the lead has decreased, will they join the ever growing number of pollsters that are showing Labour bias?
Iain McCulloch – I have aksed everyone of voting age I know who lives in my house who they are voting for at the next election. They all said they were voting Labour. I can’t understand Iain how they can still have the Conservatives still in front, when the information in front of me has it as a Labour landslide.
Recent polls do collectively suggest strongly that the Conservatives are between 39 to 42% and Labour between 32 and 35%
Due to the most recent poll and the nature of the most recent media coverage I estimate that Yougov’s poll will show Labour on 35% and the Conservatives on 41% and Lib Dems 16%
Labour under Brown begun by appearing to be complacent, then came a period of near panic and finally with help from his wife and other supporters and advisors they appear to be very focused coming out with a raft of economic policy decisions. And it is now the Conservatives that appear complacent and idealess.
Talking about ideas I thought that calling the Queen’s speech slimmed down was rather a cunning phrase to use.
I don’t expect any significant change this month. But come January????????????
Meanwhile almost everyone who understands economics thinks that Brown is a busted flush. the UK’s Credit Default Swaps are trading at 121 bps (!!!) McDonald’s are at 78bps. You can fool some of the people….. etc…
Eventually economic reality will sink in to the electorate. but 99% of the voters won’t know what a CDS is. Sadly, they will when the lose their jobs because of the excessive risk premium placed on UK debt.
ALmost everyone who understands economics knows that the polls reflect a growing sense that the Conservative Alternative (AKA TINA) involves saying how much they care, but still allowing the recession to run its course.
In other words, do nothing, learn nothing from the last recession, and let old-style capitalism resolve the problems.
Osborne versus Paxman – it was the pity in Paxman’s eyes – that must have hurt.
Step away from the partisan argument…
I shall have to watch Newsnight on the iplayer if it’s available. I’ve always felt Osborne is an electoral liability as shadow chancellor.
He may be a good politician but surely the last 5 years has shown you need someone with a PhD in economics running the exchequer (Cable) rather than a man with a PhD in Labour History (Brown), a 2:1 in Modern History (Osborne) or a Bachelor of Laws (Darling).
It has only been those people who understand economics that were giving warnings as early as 2003 that we were heading for a major crisis.
The level of debate on the grave economic problems,and the differing ideas about how to address them is very poor at a political level in this country.
The sound byte packaging of hugely important policy decisions is clearly aimed at voter appeal rather than voter education.
Phrases like “do-nothing”-countered by “economic crimes” are really pitched at a soap-opera level of communication.If this is the sort of messaging which swing voters in this country require in order to form opinions, it’s a sad reflection on our education system.
One has to ignore the politicians & TV at present, and read the serious Press to get any objective analysis of what is going on.
Excluding interest rate falls, which do not fall within the Governments authority, and Bank recapitalisation , I have yet to see credible evidence that any of Brown’s counter-recessionary policies show signs of working.
I do not want to be told that TINA-because the serious Press discusses alternatives all the time.
The Times leader today concludes “The Conservatives have now set out a powerful and coherant argument on the economy.The hard part will be sticking to it”
That, in my book, is a warning to Cameron to ignore Mandelsonian sound bytes about “do-nothing callousness”, to cut out the temptation to respond in kind-and to spell out some detail. It just might be that as the electorate sees the reality of 2009 emerging from behind the present Government rhetoric more of them might start to expect their Government to adopt the belt-tightening which they will have to adopt.
Cameron needs to keep saying what he would do on Monetary Policy too, since everyone & their dog seems to believe that this is the key area-although I didn’t see it, sounds like Osborne didn’t do a very good job.
The other thing which would not go amiss is a recognition from politicians of all persuasions that , given the horrendous nature of the global recession now being indicated, there is a limit to what they can do to stop the chickens coming home to roost after our decade of binging on credit.
No wonder the Polls are tight & confusing.
The country is polarised.
One group are seeing their mortgage costs plunge by hundreds of pounds a month, whilst another group are watching their income plunge by hundreds of pounds a month.
The Populus Poll reginal sub-sets show The North & Scotland with Labour leading Cons by 45% to 28%-and The Rest Of the Country with Cons leading Labour by 45% to 28%
One wonders if it is actually possible at present for Cameron to communicate with The North & Scotland-or for Brown to communicate with The Rest of the Country.
Colin, The Times did ends their article with what you quoted, but the meat of their message was better summed up by :
“The logical extension of fiscal restraint over the next two years is to refuse requests for life support from businesses, big and small. The Conservatives will be arguing for the Government to stand by while industries fold and jobs disappear. ”
In other words “do nothing” (but say it in a way that doesn’t remind people of the collapse of whole communities in the last recession (s).
Apologies if that seems partisan – just trying to push the notion that polarisation has replaced consensus, and I’m interested to know to what extent that will firm up or soften public opinion.
john-you simply make my point by saying “In other words “do nothing””
It is no such thing-nor do I think that was the meat of their message.
There message is-Cameron has a point, but Brown won’t let him make it by simply saying “they will do nothing-we will do lots.”
Businesses will fold-can Brown save them all?-of course not.
People will lose their jobs-can Brown stop them all?-of course not.
On the Daily Politics today Caroline Flint was asked why NR was in the vanguard of reposessions, ie acting counter to Government policy of “helping hardworking families”, whilst being owned by same Government….her reply?…that some mortgagees had very high levels of total debt and constituted unnacceptable risk for the Bank.
Alleluliah-an honest answer-we can’t save them all.
I would say that was being honest-not “doing nothing”
Cameron has outlined the things he would do countless times-as he did today at PMQs when pressing a massive increase in the current tiny loan guarantee scheme.-and still Brown says “they would do nothing”-it’s ridiculous .
Back to The Times Leader today-you choose your bits & I’ll choose mine:-
“Mr. Cameron’s position is good economics.There is a growing danger that a rising fiscal deficit in 2011 will be met by the return of inflation &, therefore rising interest rates.This is likely to mean not just higher borrowing but also higher borrowing costs. The combination could severely jeopardise the future growth of the British economy….But the politics will not be easy.Labour will inevitably and understandably paint the Conservatives as the “do-nothing” party.
Politics today is being conducted in a pathetic condescending fashion at a time of enormous & complex economic difficulties.The consensus you seek is not possible in the world of our Prime Minister, for the only consensus he wants is agreement with his policies to tie the opposition to failure if that is to result, and exclude them from credit if success results.
That is why we never ever have objective economic discussion in HoC.
The recession will polarise society john-it’s inevitable when you get winners AND losers.And not even GB can stop all the pain.
Economically is not the same as politically. We had plenty off good economics from Thatcher, Lawson Clarke and co.
It would make economic sense to do all kinds of things that would cause immense damage to society and culture.
As a result of TINA, whole communities closed down and a generation of benefit dependents was born.
Every time an election came round, interest rates and taxes were cut and Labour was portrayed as “same old Labour”. You’re clearly not of an age to remember the condescension and shallow personal rubbish of those times. The braying in the House etc. Nothing’s changed there.
The Times made it very clear what their view is :
“The Conservatives will be arguing for the Government to stand by while industries fold and jobs disappear”
It won’t do Cameron any good at all to claim that his plan of action amounts to more than “standing by” Letting the markets decide is what he’s about.
Your last remark is remisiscent of Osborne’s speech on failure being part and parcel of successful capitalism.
Or “price worth paying”.
It isn’t perceived unfairness that will polarise – it’s a matter of Ideology versus Pragmatism.
I’d be very happy to have cross-party consensus. It doesn’t require them to agree on anything completely. If Cameron wants to believe the Old Way is the best for now, though, that’s his electoral folly.
I can see history has taken an indelible toll on your outlook john.
Well maybe it’s the same for all of us-
My little list includes the DEA & The National Plan; Prices & Incomes Policy ( first hand industrial experience of that little beauty as a young FD!); In Place of Strife, The Winter of Discontent, “Making the pips squeek/ howls of anguish from those rich enough to pay over 75% on their last slice of earnings”.-and the net result of it all-the IMF.
I think your super-imposition of Thatcherite evils onto David Cameron is silly-I might as well say that Brown will turn into Michael Foot , which would be equally stupid. Both assertions would be pure prejudice.
I’m more interested in sensible discussion of today’s policy alternatives rather than living in an embittered past.
Not much chance of it in the present political environment though..
Roll on the General Election when they will all have to use sentences of more than three words, and answer questions properly.
I don’t think they ever answered straight questions with straight answers.
Cameron’s trying the Thatcherite cap on for size, not I.
Labour used to be hampered by their adherence to ideology – I think Cameron’s making the same mistake.
Ytour “lillte list” reminds me of Peter Lilley !
“Ytour “lillte list” reminds me of Peter Lilley !”
Is it possible to get copies of the “The Political Guide to everyday words and phrases” ?
Is that by Gilbert and Sullivan?
No-he of Foy and Hartlepool I think- Gordon has a well thumbed copy-you see it every PMQs, all in shreds & tatters with the covers missing.
Poor old Woolies-looks like there is no buyer for the business.
30,000 people looking at a bleak future.
What’s your view john?-do nothing?-do something?
Polls effect-none?-some?
Colin – surely as it is a private company and it is not profitable enough in the free market no interference is necessary?
These companies come and go in the free market so no favours or help should be given to them.
We live by the free market so should companies should die by them?
Well I was just interested Tony.
Gordon has been insisting that Cameron has a “do nothing” policy and that he would “stand aside” & let the recession “take it’s course” without “helping people”.
I have been puzzled by this characterisation of Cameron’s stance & so have waited to see how Brown would differentiate his approach when a large group of people actually faced job losses-what would he do that Cameron wouldn’t?
Sadly the first such of note & magnitude is poor old Woolies.
No doubt I shall find out in due course, but the stance you have outlined would not be what I would expect to hear-since I think that Cameron would hold the same view-and Gordon says that would be “do nothing”.
It’s all very confusing isn’t it?
BY the way Tony, I think most people would be surprised at your description of Woolworths as a “come & go” company!
It is 100 years old and a national institution.
I was actually being scarcastic and showing what would happen if the free market was cut loose.
In the free market people are objects used to make money. To free marketeers they come and go and can hired and dropped at a moments notice. I heard today that some of the Woolies employees will find out they will be losing thier jobs the day the store runs out of stock, in some instances that will be meaning getting turned away from the store when they go into work, this information was given on Radio 5 by a very upset manager.
A free market is only hindered by regulation and government intervention.
Which party has only very recently complained about how much regulation there is in the British system which is strangling the free market.
The most ironic is my hero was using the British banking system as one where we should have less regulation to stop the strangling of the free market.
The polls are gradually turning against the party of the free market, who’s idea, wether they blurt it out in public then told to keep stum,of a policy in the recession is to say it is good for the country as it will get rid of the less profitable companies.What happens to the people who work for these less profitalbe companies….join the poor sods from Woolies.
It shows you how much the Conservative idea of how the country should deal with a recession is appreciated, when the people they are blaming ,have increased the lead on who is best to get the country through it.
As the recession gets worse and Darling tries to make it shallower, will Osbourne actually come up with something concrete rather than the repeated answer of blaming Brown?It is against the Conservative idea for part nationalisation of private companies and government intervention, but surely times have changed, surely they should adapt thier stance to relate to the changing times.
At least this question will be answered, because surely he cannot go month on end stating nothing concrete.
Yes Tony-all fine rhetoric-but you didn’t answer my question-what will Gordon do, which Cameron will not do, to save the jobs at Woolworths ?
By the way how do you feel about this assessment by The Times’economist writing in The Telegraph?:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3703785/Gordon-Brown-must-blame-himself-not-the-USA.html
or this assessment of Darlings efforts ,just reported on BBC TV News:-
http://www.newsweek.com/id/172613
Cameron has put forward different policies too-mainly monetary, some fiscal.
You see Tony these things are not clear cut-there are different views -not all of them in agreement with GB-it’s annoying I know-but thats the way it is because it’s a complicated subject & nothing like it has ever happened before.
Who knows who’s right-?-but it might not be Gordon might it?
Perhaps it would be a good idea to have the Election then we could get down to some sensible debate ?
I didn’t say it was clear cut, I was saying that a free market without constraint holds no protection for the individual.No did I say Gordon was right, I was pointing out that the pro-active reaction to the downturn is coming from Darling and the reactive is coming from Osbourne.
I would welcom an election, maybe then Osbourne would have to produce policy and not hide behind the anti-brown rhetoric.It was quite an eye opener his interview on Newsnight last night.Virtually all his answers when questioned about what he would do was “Well I wouldn’t have done what the government has done” but then struggle to say what he would have done.
As stated in the polls, the country does seem to trust Brown/Darling more as the weeks go on with the situation we are in, which is quite a revelation as we keep getting told is the Brown recession.It can’t be long if they keep increasing the lead in this subsection of the poll before it starts to move the poll headline.
Could you explain how the Business Loan Underwriting initiative proposed yet again by Cameron at PMQs today is “reactive” Tony?
These exchanges become as fraught as those at PMQs if the English Language is not used as we all understand it.
If-as mooted by The Telegraph-the initiative is taken up by the Treasury-does it then become “pro-active” in your Lexicon-or does it stay “re-active” because Cameron & Osborne suggested it?
Your silence on the Woolworths redundancies presumably indicates that Brown’s policy would likely be the same as Cameron’s?
If so that at least gets rid of one bit of the sound-byte straw men.
GARY GATTER wrote – it’s a world recession and is not just the UK – he forgot to mention that it was Britain and the USA that caused the world recession and it’s Britain that is paying the heaviest cost due to terrible mismanagement of the economy in general.
For all doubters – this peculiar little closing of the gap in the POLLS is going to be a very short lived episode – and if put to a real general election it would still be a landslide for the Conservatives – whenever it’s called !
One positive point with all these recent blips in the POLLS showing a narrower gap – is a lot of the left leaning contributors to this site who had disappeared , have now suddenly reappeared – Bless !
It shouldn’t be Govt policy to prop up lame duck companies that have saddled themselves with hundreds of millions of pounds of debt.
Hopefully those outlets will be re-fitted and put to good use by a not-so-lame retailer who can get as many of the unemployed as possible back into work.
The best thing the Govt can do to help that is not to pile in with good money after bad. As far as I know there was no question of Govt intervention to propo up Woolworths.
Come the election, the question will be about the extent to which Govt policies have worked, and lots of hypothetical argument about how much worse/better things would have been with Osborne and Cameron at the tiller.
That’s blindingly obvious, and quite different from helping out the banks, starting with Northern Rock, which Darling and Brown did in the face of befuddled opposition.
“It shouldn’t be Govt policy to prop up lame duck companies that have saddled themselves with ….. debt. ”
What about people?
Of course Govt should support “lame duck” people who have saddled themselves with debt.
Who thinks not?
Life deals blows to people.
I agree with Tony about Osborne on Newsnight.
Osborne – “£681bn is too much for government to spend”
Paxman – “So how much is ‘not too much’?”
GO – “I can’t say”
JP – “Well what level of spending would you say isn’t too much?”
GO – “I don’t know, we’ll need to see”
JP – “Then how can you say £681bn is too much?”
GO – “It just is”
I agree with Osborne that it is too much, but it would have been nice if he’d given an indication as to whether he was looking at £500bn, £600bn, £650bn or whatever. There’s no point in saying what something shouldn’t be if you don’t give an indication as to what it should be. Very poor show, and he continues my worries that he could well cost the Conservatives the next election – he just isn’t a chancellor.
If he’d said £661bn, that would at least have been consistent with the opposition to the recent £20bn tax cuts.
The hypotheticals are going to dominate the argument for years.
As an example :
I read Colin’s linked article in the telegraph which claimed our regulators could have stepped in and said no to the CDS’s, the smelly asset backed securities from the USA, the 100% + LTVs, and everything would have been fine.
If such intervention had occurred there would have been massive oppostion from the Conservatives to “over-regulation driving away our successful financial services sector.”
Osborne would have been advocating allowing banks to determine their own risk policies, and quoting Redwood’s report in support.
Camerons call for an election campaign over christmas and new year (election jan 7th) is bizarre. Has there ever been a Christmas election?
Perhaps too much partisan stuff above and history but good news is we have clear blue (maybe red) water which is going to play out as we approach the GE.
I suggested on Tuesday before the Paxman interview (such a sage) that Cam needs to ditch Osborne to have any chance of outright victory. This is not bias from me but a judgement on how he is viewed by the electorate as being out of his depth and out of touch. If the Prime Minister is not a great Economist which Cam isn’t they can get away with it if their Chancellor is perceived well (Thatcher had Howe and Lawson; Blair had Brown) Problem for Cam is 2 fold; first, to not stand by Osborne he will be seen as caving in and disloyal but he should ignore the short term downside and probable poll numbers impact, be decisive and shuffle him soon to give the new person a chance to become known. Bigger problem for him is who to replace Osborne with.Any Tories got any thoughts on who should be Shadow Chancellor?
“The hypotheticals are going to dominate the argument for years.”
Yes I think that is lergely true-though economists will no doubt write the definitive story in due course.
Some questions are reasonably easy to posit an answer for though:-
Man goes into shop & buys TV set.
TV was reduced in price two days ago from £100 to £60 as a Sale discount, and again this morning by £1.30 to £58.70 following a VAT reduction of 2.5% pts.
Did the man decide to buy the TV as a result of hearing about the store’s discount sale-or because of hearing about the VAT reduction?
In answering you can give a probability rating to either factor.
James -
John Redwood seems to be the man who is rated highest among Tories on the economy.
I saw a ‘Daily Politics’ a while ago where they had Ruth Kelly, John Redwood and Vince Cable as guests. Kelly was completely hopeless and just repeated government spiel about ‘taking action necessary’ but that’s hardly surprising as she’s not an economy person (some might say she’s not any kind of person, but I digress).
Redwood made good sense and came across well especially considering he was sat next to Cable who, as I’ve said before, has a PhD in Economics and knows far more than Osborne, Darling, Brown and Redwood combined. Unfortuantely, he’s unlikely to get into the exchequer unless there’s a ConLib coalition.
The chancellor really should have a background in either finance or economics as it is too crucial a post to leave to lawyers (Darling) and historians (Brown/Osborne).
“I agree with Osborne that it is too much”
And me-I wonder if he had read this ? !!
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3078296/the-true-extent-of-britains-debt.thtml
Paul Smith – 1909/1910. Parliament was prorogued on the 3rd December 1909, polling began on the 15th January 1910, so whatever passed for an election campaign in 1909 was happening over Christmas.
Prior to 1918 voting in general elections lasted a couple of weeks, in the late 19th century there don’t seem to be any when the voting period extended over Christmas itself, but before that I can’t find the actual polling dates so it could have happened.
The problem with allowing economists to run things is simply that, on economic matters, they are invariably wrong about almost everything.
The benefit would be that they are not prone to telling lies, but we’re cross-threading now and getting into the realms of allowing “experts” to decide everything.
Colin – the answer is that the store would have left the discount at 40% off and pocketed the difference. No shopper ever considers the VAT when shopping.
“on economic matters, they are invariably wrong about almost everything.”
Oh great john-I’ll stop worrying about debt then-one wonders why Paxo got so het up about it -let it rip eh?
“No shopper ever considers the VAT when shopping.”
That is the right answer-disqualifying you from ever working for The Treasury. The good news is the German Treasury will employ you like a shot.
The treasury people know that a 2.5% cut wouldn’t bring people out to the shops as a headline, but the effect of the measure is to put £18bn into the economy. That will have its own effect, not entirely related to the rather simplistic “it’s only 13p off” analysis.
The general rule of the economist is to disbelieve the prediction until you have understood the explanation, and even then remain sceptical.
I believe that is remarkably similar to the general rule of the psephologist.
…something called the scientific method, I daresay.
Mark – Nice to see you enjoyed the interview of Osbourne as well. Anyone can answer questions by saying that what the government is doing is wrong.
You look a complete fool when asked what he would do to reply…”I don’t know”.
Cameron wants his mate to become chancellor, no wonder the polls are pointing to an increase in the Brown/Darling,Cameron/Osbourne lead on the current economy.
On a personal note I wish Osbourne could be interviewed every day.
“this peculiar little closing of the gap in the POLLS is going to be a very short lived episode”.
“Hello is that John McCain, what is it like to be president”
“What do you mean you are not president The Oracle said you where going to win and he never gets his predic tions wrong,he told us dozens of times”
As someone who runs a charity the VAT reduction has reduced the cost of buying services – which will be true for all businesses