Waiting for the verdict
The “email smear” story is all over the media for a fifth day. What we don’t yet know is how the public will react. We might normally expect an ICM poll around now, but pollsters do not normally conduct polls over the Easter bank holiday weekend in case it skews their sample. YouGov’s poll for the Sunday Times would also normally be mid-month, but it was done early in April. The next scheduled poll we can expect is ComRes in the Independent on Sunday, which I would expect to see this coming Sunday, though if we are lucky a newspaper will have taken the opportunity to commission an ad hoc survey to find how the public have reacted to the scandal.
What should we expect? Well, given the level of media coverage it’s reasonable to expect that this will have a large effect, but it is not a certainty. Damian Green’s arrest, for example, was given huge media play for a few days, before the polls received it had no effect whatsover – it was a Westminister village story people didn’t care about. Similarly the Jacqui Smith expenses row didn’t seem to have much effect, perhaps because it was cancelled out by a successful G20 summit, or perhaps because the public assumed that politicians from all parties were on the take.
That may be the vital factor in how the public respond to the story – will it be seen as the Labour party making up lies to smear their opponents, or will it be seen as politicians in general making up lies to smear their opponents. If the former, then one would expect it to damage Labour, if the latter and people think all the other parties are probably just as bad, then perhaps not.
Even if people aren’t unduly worried by the story itself, it may have a wider affect upon the party standings anyway, since it will build into the image of a dying government, interested only in arguing with itself and smearing opponents. Currently Labour’s defecit in the poll is around 10 to 13 points, compared to 20+ points last Summer. Despite (or perhaps because of) the economic crisis Labour are doing better than they were a year ago – apart from the economy the difference is that back then Labour were horribly divided, fighting one another over the leadership. If this story moves public perceptions of the Labour government back towards seeing them as divided and incompetent then we’ll see their figures drop. We’ll know by Sunday (and hopefully before!)
Filed under: Labour
It has to have an effecton labour… surely?
I think most of those who’re annoyed by this were not Labour supporters already. How many Labour supporters will care that greatly to turn away from them?
Its the floating voters labour has to worry about and if they are seen as being in their death throws then people will not vote for them. Its going to accummulative. Drip by drip labour will be seen as incompetent and tired and will reap what they sow. The conservative lead to increase surely.
Indeed, for how many people will this be the straw that broke the camels back. It seemed to me that back in the summer that labour’s support dropped to the mid and low 20s more because of internal party bickering than anything else.
I’d imagine that as this is concentrating on attacking another party (seen as something all parties do) rather than attacking factions within their own party it will have a lesser effect. I’d bet on a 14 point Conservative lead.
I can’t see Labour dropping much below 30%; after all, turkeys don’t vote for Christmas. New Labour has manufactured a core vote that relies on their remaining in power – public sector, welfare, etc.
The warring factions within aspect has surfaced as well, though, with various Labour ex-ministers complaining in the media about having been subject to similar tactics from the Brown cabal before.
Anways, the next poll should be a fun one and if it’s “no change” I’ll be verily disappointed.
While this issue may not have a large immediate impact on party support in the next polls, it will probably have some negative affect on Labour. Timing may be an issue sicne we have the budget next week which could skew things again. Hope we have at least one poll before budget.
Whatever the short-term impact, there will be a longer-term effect which will be felt in full next month in the run-up to the County Council and Euro elections. That will be the damage to Labour party morale and the (un)willingness of party workers to go out and sell Labour to the voters on doorsteps. This will almost certainly lead to diminished turnout for Labour, even if it does not produce active converts to other parties.
Expect turnout in some regions / areas to drop well below 30% on 4th June. That could lead to Labour dropping below the psychologically significant floor of 20% in the Euros nationally, even if they do not actually lose many MEPs.
The reaction from some Labour ex-ministers in recent days suggests that Brown’s grip on the party leadership has been weakened by this affair. A rout in June could well cause that grip to slip.
This really is a case of who knows.
I still think that the papers are feeling its a bit of a waste commissioning a poll very soon before the budget. That is probably going to be the biggest event, despite all the recent developments, as it more directly affects people. ‘Smeargate’ will probably be seen as another Westminster Village story unless anyone more visible is directly implicated.
As much as any polls now would tell us, we’re just going to have to wait for a fortnight to get a better picture. We’ll probably get a flood of polls come the end of the month to bring us out of this drought.
I don’t think this will feed directly in to the polls. What it does it further weaken Labour’s attack options and continues to decontaminate the Tory brand.
We may not see a Tory increase. What we may see a hardening of Tory support. I’d be surprised if Brown is not damaged.
Of course, sadly some will believe the lies because……………
‘there’s no smoke without fire’.
I think the polls will show no impact on the recent scandal – I think in fact they may show improvement for Labour (don’t hold me to that, but I bet some will). The public will be looking on what affects them on a day to day basis and this obviously doesn’t – the recent promisimg news on the economy should and I believe will (eventually) carry more weight!
Personally, I think the Cons will start to be punished if they insist on pushing this – the public will see this as something that should not be top of their agenda and why are aren’t concentrating on putting an alternative argument to the economy?
I have become less & less convinced that a single given poll outcome can be said to reflect a specific event.
Having said that I would be quite surprised if Labour don’t suffer as a result of this episode , Brown’s perceived role in it , and the way he handled it.
At a tangent, this event, plus the revealing “street” photos of recent policing tactics, is an indication of how Blogs and communications technology of all sorts is changing the way people are being informed…and are informing themselves.
Chris (ta!) The second part of your first para runs counter to the prevailing idea that if people’s confidence improves, then so will the prospects of a tory victory. (ie, “we’ll be OK , so there’s little risk in a change)
I don’t hold to that myself, but I do doubt whether the voters will ascribe any improvement to the efforts of Brown/Darling, or be able to draw a negative conclusion as to what would have happened if Tory wisdom had prevailed over the last year and a half.
Colin, the Hillsborough tragedy of twenty years ago to-day was the most cctv-d sporting event in history, though no-one had mobile phone cameras or recorders.The difference to-day would have been that the evidence of many of the victims fighting for their lives after 3.15pm would have been overwhelming, and justice might well have been done during the inquest (which let the Police off the hook by insisting that all 95 were dead by 3.15, and therefore that the barring of 44 ambulances from the pitch by the police was irrelevant.)
Apologies for being off topic, but we are in a blogging world now in which mis-carriages of justice ought to be more difficult. No wonder the police wanted to make a criminal offence of photograhing a police officer.
Economic improvements do come with black linings. I expect house prices to start to rise in the Autumn. That’s good news for the Gov’t. Unless it leads to a rise in mortgage rates.
An improvement in the exchange rate will please holiday-makers. But not exporters.
The only certainty re economic news is the sad rise of unemployment. Unfortunately for the Gov’t – that is the indicator that Joe Public most understands.
Funny when I saw this story and the fuss made about it, I thought “silly season starts early this year” – there’s a recession on, you know, and this “smear” stuff is important? People will have forgotten about it soon enough. Being out of a job – you don’t forget that so easily.
I don’t think the scandal will increase the Tory vote much, but a few more Labour supporters will probably abstain. In 1997 I still voted for the Conservatives despite the fact that I knew that they had to go, but if there had been a scandal like this I would probably have abstained (I doubt I would have been able to overcome the tribal instinct and actually vote Labour).
intrest rates could go up but not to the levels of the late 80’s and early 90’s, the big thing will be un-employment some predictions have put the high water mark at some stage next year maybe at 3.2-3.5 million if this happens it could be the end of the road for labour and also intrest rates are low if they start to go up fast this could also swing mind towards other parties lie the lib dems or tories mostly tories but, scotland cold be the big question mark, how will all this go down up north, the next poll will be very intresting. on the matter of the e-mails spin must have gone to far to make up lies about people. theconservative lead should go up but don’t count on the lib dems falling back. in ref to house prices they seam to be falling slower now but still falling 2-4% down by the end of the year the only good news hear is houses are selling again.
johntt @ 2.46 pm
Indeed so- I agree.
I don’t know whether you read Alice Miles in The Times today-but it is a salutary read.
It is taken up in a Guido Fawkes piece on his Blog today-also well worth a read.
The Blogosphere ( is that the correct term?) does seem rather restricted to anoraks of various sorts-but when, as in the case of Guido/emails or YouTube/Police brutality, it is taken up by MSM it has tremendous power to puncture officialdom’s obfuscation, and inform the general public.
Whether the general public show signs of changing their attitudes as a result of such revelations only the Polls will tell……or not as the case may be !
Keith, Yes the smear stuff is important. McBride has been employed by Brown for a long time. Either he knew what the man was like, but approved of his approach, or he is completely lacking in judgment. Either way it doesn’t make him a man I want to be prime minister. But I don’t know how much effect this will have on the average voter.
RICHARDW:-
“In 1997 I still voted for the Conservatives despite the fact that I knew that they had to go, ”
Yes I knew that too-and not being “tribal” voted for Blair because I believed him!
@RichardW
Interesting as I abstained in 1997 but am usually a tory voter.
I dont think this will have much effect on the polls but will make it a bit harder for GB to close the 10pt gap over the next year.
I also dont think it will help the Tory’s get much above the 40% as it again showed them to be a bit childish rather than statemen.
I’m also sceptical as to whether this will have a huge impact on Labour’s support. I think it’s getting near to what you might call the ‘core’ level and people who are pretty solid Labour won’t care about this. What might change is voters who classed themselves as only probable to vote Tory changing to more certain. So we may see the headline Tory figure improving by 1 or 2 points.
I’ll be interested to see if it has a +ve effect on Tory support, as opposed to a -ve on Labour’s. My feelings are that if Cameron can’t move towards and above 45% at this point he may struggle to get an overall majority – at 40 -42% I still see a chance of a Labour recovery, to an extent at least.
As a leader Brown has developed an extraordinary ability to get into better positions and then shoot himself in both feet. There is a definate switch in the economic mood music, which after G20 should have helped him but I can’t see anything other than a Labour fall in the next round of polls now, although I wouldn’t bank on this being a long term dip.
A possible effect that polls won’t reveal is the impact of this sort of scandal on the rank-and-file Labour Party members who are expected to do the grunt work in election campaigns. A lot of those people tend to be fairly idealistic and decent (eg my parents) and some of them will find it hard or even impossible to campaign with conviction if they feel that their party is dirtied by its leadership. I don’t know how much such campaigning affects voting – its purpose mainly seems to be to get the party’s voters out rather than to win new voters. But if it’s hit by the Sleazegate business then the knock-on effect might be a decrease in voter turnout for Labour.
Have to wait for the General Election itself to find out about that one, I guess.
Personally I think this will have a 1-2% change in the vote (although we have no way of seeing it through standard variance before the budget kicks in) – more importantly will be the rifts that have started to emerge as they did with the last Tory gov.
This I think is more likely to destabalise a Gov. The more it did with the Tories the more individuals tried to hang on the their own seats and showed less party spirit. The same will happen here unless something drastic happens.
It’s interesting how the same thing is happening with this government as with John Major’s government towards the end of its term in 1996-97, which is that despite everything it’s rating is improving as an election approaches. The Conservative rating improved from an average of about 25% in 1995 to 30% in 1997 for the Conservatives despite a lot of bad news, and similarly Labour’s rating of about 30% is higher than it was a year ago. The only explanation must be the natural supporters are more likely to support their party the closer the election gets.
Andy
Re your last post I think that is a good observation. In my view both major parties have a core vote of 30 points apiece rather less than used to be the case. Tribal loyalties are not what they were but a considerable section of the population still has a vested interest in seeing one or other of the parties flourish.
I admire people who vote against their own economic self interest but some of them have such chips on their shoulders that they can be irritating to argue with or even if of my political persuasion make for rather uncomfortable bedfellows.
At the moment with no polls to discuss we are all fishing or getting hacked off with Chris Newley’s refusal to answer perfectly straight forward questions . However we need a batch of polls to inform us not just a single poll which might just be one of those dreaded outriders-you never know.
I think it will have an effect because it appears to have been so calculated but Labour don’t deserve to be tarnished by this ’sleaze’ fiasco. I think most people should know the Tories are just as bad but don’t need to directly employ mud-slingers (although a few spin doctors for good measure eh Dave?) because they have sleaze machines working constantly in the tabloid press and the Torygraph.
Andy Stillwell – you forget one very important difference between John Major’s Government in 1995-97 and Brown’s now. The economy was doing well and unemployment (and the deficit) were decreasing. That is certainly not the case now.
As has been said each party has a core vote of approximately 30%. The Tories proved this in 1997 and 2001.
Michael Foot’s efforts ensured Labour’s vote fell to 27.6% in 1983, but that was an extreme case.
@Wolf I find that totally inappropiate and very very offensive – Antony please remove this idiots comment
my comment earier today was based at this govenment, but for wolf to say that the hillsborugh desater is like what gordon brown is doing is compleately wrong and i to feel that this comment should be removed from this site, do not think portraying 96 dead people is a comical reason for saying anything.
Andy Stidwell
So are you saying Brown is better than Foot?
I would have thought it otherwise!
I agree with Stuart. I’m pretty sure Wolf’s comment about Hillsborough crosses a line.
Sometimes we can’t see how nasty something is at first glance.
In very bad taste but everyone’s capable of such things occasionally. Some of these sick jokes circulate via text amongst friends I’ve noticed.
If you see it for what it is you may wish to retract it Wolf?
I think quite a lot of people voted courageously against their own personal interest in 1979 as they saw the wider benefits, and although it would be very difficult, the benefits would come later.
It is probable that a recession does – net – damage the government. It may have been small in 1992, but one could find seats within the 14.1m Tory votes where they did do relatively poorly.
But one reason why I’d expect Labour to end up with about 33% is there is a core vote for them, but also a recession does lead many people to look to the state, and for all the efforts the Tories have made to focus on the domestic agenda, there will be people who’ll think Labour is the party to help, regardless of how we got into this debt bubble.
Some posters may not like this, but I suspect the Tories will win a majority, but it won’t be a total disaster for Labour either.
Others will be quite high – 10%?
This could mean – could – that the Lib Dems get absolutely slaughtered, in the squeeze.
I’m not expecting a big effect in polling from the Smeargate thing but I think it will confirm in peoples minds a very negative view of Labour which will make their decline irreversible. So the longer term effect is extremely corrosive for them.
I think that McPoison’s smears will indeed have a major effect on the election, but not now, but later.
In my opinion, the critical development will be that after McPoison’s very public elimination, Brown will find it harder, if not impossible, to brief against other Labour politicians. They say that revenge is a dish best served cold, and there are all too many Labour MPs who will delight in serving that dish to Gordon. He received three servings today, and I believe that in the coming months, it will be a frequent dish served to the occupant of No 10.
I don’t even attempt to predict who will give Gordon his unpalatable menu, but I am sure that there will be plenty of individuals queueing up to heap servings on Brown’s plate.
What the effect will be on the Labour vote, it’s harder to say. If Brown continues to cling onto No 10, I think that the effect will be detrimental to Labour, but if the previously spineless members of the PLP manage to evolve spines and kick Brown out, then all bets are off. Would a new leader, go for a quick election campaign to take advantage of any early bounce. Brown didn’t have the guts to do that, but Johnson might.
in 1997 i voted for the first time i was very tempted by Blair but having spent the lst 4 weeks campaigning for the local mp at the time voted conservative (you might call it a personal vote) she lost indeed i have only voted for a winning candidate once in my 12 years of voting sadly.
I think smeargate (why does everything have to be a gate now) will have an effect people are talking about it it is not so much they are digusted that politicians will do this to each other after all since nu labour in the 90s it has been happening very publicly (and probably before) but more that it was done from a government office. i would expect a con lead of 17% at the next poll
Anthony
Whereas the remarks about Hillsborough from Wolf have no place on this site will you please apply equal stricture to those contributors who describe others as ‘cretins’, ‘idiots’ and the like.
@ onthejob – “why does everything have to be a gate now”
Yeah (even though I used it too). If it’s not a -gate, it’s a “war on …”.
We need new, better, shinier, spankier terms.
PS – agree re: Wolf’s comment. Totally out of order, and totally wrong as well.
Slightly off-topic but I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that whoever wins the next election will be voted out at the following election. Consider the painful medicine that will need to be administered (with no prospect in a first term of any end in sight), the likelihood of rising interest rates to control inflation, no money to sweeten the pill for disadvantaged groups and a growing energy crisis.
Two provisos to this. First, it ignores the possibility of another Falklands-type episode rescuing the then government. Second, if that government takes the opportunity to radically reform politics – electoral reform, reformed upper house, updated procedures in the lower house, reduced number of MPs, control of expenses, restriction on spads, fully-devolved government in Wales and Scotland with elimination of the West Lothian issue – they may go down as a real reforming government and get releected despite the pain.
@James Ludlow
I agree. We do need better terms. If Watergate happened now we’d call it Watergategate. I don’t know what we’d call it though.
@Leslie
An incoming Conservative government has the advantage of ‘nor our mess’ and so could carry on for a second term providing they manage to reform enough to convince the electorate to give them more time. There’s unfortunately going to be very little scope for reform without massive spending cuts. I think people need to accept that front line services are likely to suffer but that we cannot go on as we are (reasoning – we’re not going to see 06/07/08 level tax revenues again for a long time and even that wasn’t enough to cover Labour’s spending).
Remember when Labour said not a penny more money without reform? They were right. Now all we need is a government willing to put those words into action.
I don’t think that the “email smear story” will have much direct effect on voting intentions. It’s just another story in a whole line of them.
However, I do not think an important point has been put forward. It appears that Brown’s political adviser in Downing Street was doing things, i.e. keeping a watch on potential personal weaknesses of Conservative politicians, that should properly be the role of party employed workers in Labour’s Party Headquarters. As we all know, Labour as a Party is struggling financially, because of lost membership and atrained relationships with trades unions. One suspects that a party that has been in office too long has become neglectful of the need to differentiate between tasks that should be done by party officials and ones that are the role of government paid civil servants or advisers.
By drawing attention to limits beyond which government paid staff cannot advnace Labour’s party interests, the current minor scandal will have the indirect effect of weakening Labour’s resources for the next election, with consequences for the effectiveness of their campaign and hence votes cast.
In response to Leslie, I am not so sure that a new Government in 2010 would be a one-term Government:-
Firstly, it seems to me that we are likely to get a Conservative or Conservative-Liberal Government in many ways not dissimilar to the National Goverenment that was voted in follwing the 1931 economic crisis. And that Governmnet was easily re-elected in 1935. Incidentally, such a repetition alarms me given how appallingly ineffective the National Government was at addressing the economic problems of the 1930s. Specifically, it did not see the overwhelming need to invest, however tight the budgets available: I am greatly alarmed that current economic debate is about whehter to “cut” or spend the nation’s way out of trouble, whereas the desperate need is to divert spending from current expenditure, e.g. on pensions and what are in effect luxury services, to investments that will produce clear returns on capital.
Secondly, the electoral system is currently rigged so that even a substantial Tory lead will yield no overall majority. If, as appears likely, the 2010 election leads to a Conservative government depending on some sort of LibDem support, then at the following election the Tories will be able to claim that their failures were due to lack of an overall majority. The LibDems, as in 1979, will have a tough time to justify their support for a minority Government.
Thirdly, I think it likely that, if they lose office, Labour will collapse. Their party machine is in a far worse state than in 1979, their membership base has imploded, and they have lost any idelological roots. And after Labour has spent generations out of office between 1931 and 1945, 1951 and 1964 and 1979 and 1997, what sensible left-wing person would want to repeat the exercise of a political lifetime in the wilderness? The consequence is that even if the Government has a poor record in 2015, the opposition may well be in an even worse mess.
Fourthly, and following the previous point, all the major parties (including the LibDems) are contaminated by recent economic disasters. The answer has to be a new political grouping (although whether Westminster has thrown away so much power that new political party must focus away from the UK level, e.g. at influencing NATO and the EU, is a relevant question). Whether such a new movement could generate enough support to win a 2015 General Election is doubtful: it might take longer. I am alarmed at what directions such a new political grouping might take, but on a psephological site I am saying what I might dimly see in an opaque crystal ball as an actual possibility, not what I would prefer to see.
Andy Stidwell referred to Michael Foot’s performance in 1983. I think it arguable that Labour’s 1983 Manifesto, which had at its core an Alternative Economic Strategy to regenerate industry, is the only major party manifeso in recent times that has NOT been a “suicide note”.It was possibly the only manifesto since the North Sea OIl windfall that did not propose plans destroying the UK’s economic future for short-term political gain. As the events of the last year show. This has some pretty grim psephological implications for the electability of practicable political programmes in the UK system.
A Tory government got re-elected in 1983 although the first term was a hard slog for the country, and had higher taxation than they wanted.
But maybe the long stretches of office for either party are over – but only time will tell.
We have to go back 33 years to 1974 to find a government that lost it’s first election as incumbent.
First time governments normally have three advantages on their side. Firstly, they can blame almost everything on their predecessors. Anything unpleasant is the fault of those horrible people before. Indeed, governments try to keep this one going past their first time, though it starts to wear thin
Secondly, when it comes to an election they’ve got a powerful and easy message: “let us finish the job”. You chose us to do something, give us the time to get it all sorted.
Thirdly, their opposition is normally still in no fit state to take over again. It takes time for the public to forgive and forget what ever reasons they had for throwing them out, and in recent history, they have tended to really fall apart after losing power.
Of course we could see a period of government rapidly bouncing back and forth, but a first term incumbent government does have advantages.
Frederic makes a very pertinent point about the use of civil servants to do party work. This is one aspect of the current affair which may still have more to run – especially given the latest news on Damian Green’s arrest on spurious allegations.
If there is greater scrutiny over the work of special advisers, then the distinction between promoting the government vs promoting the governing party may cause a few more upsets in the months to come.
If, in future, the Labour party has to rely on its own resources to promote itself, then its current financial straits may well lead to it flagging at elections.
There is another aspect too. Part of the damage from this affair is not just that Downing Street is using staff paid from public funds for party advantage, it is that these activities appear to be focused on promoting the interests of the PM and his coterie only. That is why so many in the Labour Party are equally upset by this affair, and hence it damages the Labour Party both politically and practically. The former will be reflected in the opinion polls, the latter will be revealed at the (empty) ballot box.
I think that is right.
Most new governments go “oh look at all this mess we’ve found in the books”.
The Tories in 1983 were able to point to a number of indicators showing recovery had started and inflation in particular was under control – although still not German standards.
They would be unlucky not to have some visible signs of recovery by 2014/5. (it it’s them that is).
As insightful as all your comments are we need a few polls.
Anthony, cant you drum them up somehow doing a rain dance equivalent?
polls…. must.. have… polls..
I’d be surprised if the next lot of polls show much deviation from the current UKPR average. Some polls specifically for the Euro election would be welcome.
i’d put my money on a poll coming out tonight or on saturday night and not before or inbetween
For all yearning for a poll – there is a YouGov poll for Compass on Taxes published yesterday. No voting intention questions, but some interesting questions on tax policy.
Unsurprisingly, lots of people seem to think it would be a good idea to raise taxes on other people. Funny how the questions are never couched in ways which give the impression that the respondee might have to pay more.
On Andy’s point about Euro Election polls, it would also be helpful to have some historic poll data from 2004 (say Jan – July) showing where the polls stood in the run-up, the actual result, and what happened to the polls after the result. I suspect, but cannot prove, that these would show that the 16% recorded by UKIP was a flash in the pan, neither picked up beforehand, nor reflected after the event.
Data from 1999 would also be interesting to support (or disprove) my theory that in both 1999 and 2004 Tories “won” the euro-elections while being well behind Labour in the polls. If so, then the omens for Labour this year cannot be good.
fully agree with dean thmson.
the current prediction as highlighted by my-self in an earlier post point to a total 3.3-3.5 million out of work by the middle to end of this year and a slowing and eventual peak of 3.8-4 million out of work not to say the 1 million or so on inverlidity benifits of which half should be in work anyway.
I see Brown apologised. Good for him, to be fair he has both apologised and sacked the chap who did it which is the right thing.
It’s very politically inept though as the apology has just whacked the story back to the front pages and top stories.
I would have done it either at the time (prefereable) or not at all.
“polls…. must.. have… polls..”
i can post my percentages from canvassing returns if you like!
ONTHEJOB- its a bit dry for polling at this point
so do you want analyse them then wet the appetite a little bit
ONTHE JOB- to little data about no chance untill the weekend
There’s a poll! There’s a poll! A yougov poll! ITV reports on Telextext today but I can’t find it on yougove’s site. But it exists!
fair still by my figures it had me way ahead of labour where is this you gov poll?
Still can’t find it. The salient points in the Telextext report are:
“A third of Britons do not trust any of the countries politicians [...] Of the remaining two-thirds, more said they trusted Tory leader David Cameron to keep his word (21%) than Prime Minister Gordon Brown (12%). The Queen was voted the most trusted person in the public eye [...]“
country’s not countries
I need more coffee!
James – countries’ would have been ok (there are more than one), and I’d have excused a missing apostrophe anyway.
@ John – in this context “the country’s politicians” = Britain’s politicians so not more than one country.
But thank you for being forgiving of missing apostrophes.
@James – Sorry I’m going to agree with John TT – It doesn’t happen that often – The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland(commonly known as the United Kingdom, the UK, or less accurately Britain) is a constitutional monarchy located off the northwestern coast of continental Europe. It is an island country, spanning an archipelago including Great Britain, the northeastern part of Ireland, and many small islands. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK with a land border, sharing it with the Republic of Ireland. Apart from this land border, the UK is surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean, the North Sea, the English Channel and the Irish Sea. The largest island, Great Britain, is linked to France by the Channel Tunnel.
The United Kingdom is a unitary state consisting of four countries: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
But guys guys – I mis-transcribed the Teletext and the Teletext original words were “the country’s ….”
And now I’m off to my first ever Pedants Anonymous meeting. Anyone care to join me? There will be apostrophes in abundance, as well as biscuits.
I’m right behind you James, heading for the custard cream’s.
Presumably the fieldwork for the expected Comres poll in the IOS this Sunday will be too early to pick up the impact if any of the decision to drop charges against Damian Green and the subsequent pressure on Jaquie Smith reflected in many of the papers today.
A shame because by the time a new poll emerges, any such impact will have been lost in the post-budget haze. I’d like to think that the electorate have an opinion on the shambles revealed by this episode but I doubt we’ll ever find out what it is.
I agree. The next memorable polls will show the reactions to the budget.
Personally, I think such events as budgets, and policy announcement events like autumn conferences, lead to polls which are more indicative of voting intention than polls that take place after the release of a new morsel of scandal.
People have never trusted politicians – my elderly grandmother never believed a word of what she was told during the war, so the more things change, the more they stay the same. Whiter than white? Fat chance!
If they’ hav’e b’iscuits I’l'l c’ome t’oo, but’ ‘I’m ‘only drinkin’g ‘green tea’ at’ th’e momen’t so’ ‘I’ hop’e ‘they can ac’comodate ”””’
John TT – well, custard creams certainly aren’t whiter than white – more yellower than yellow. (But a good chance of fat !)
As to accuracy of polls taken immediately after “events” – whether they be scheduled major announcements or scandals – the main interest is to see how the event in question has been perceived. A budget bounce may be no more likely to be sustained than a scandal slip. The real question is whether they provide the turning point for the trend line, and that never really becomes apparent until several months later.
While we afficionados feed on polls, we must never forget that the only ones which can truly be said to reflect voting intention – as opposed to voting propensity – are those conducted during an election campaign. Moreover – don’t expect any national polls taken in May to give anything more than a broadbrush indication of the likely outcome on 4 June – unless they specifically ask whether, and, if so, how, people intend to vote in the European Elections.
If memory serves me well, Labour were far ahead in the national polls in both 1999 and 2004, yet lost by a wide margin to Cons in both elections.
Correction – that should be “voting inclination” rather than “voting propensity”.
Though perhaps in some places “propensity” may be more applicable – especially those where postal ballots enable certain individuals to “vote early, vote often”.
The rumour mill is saying that a certain J—— S—- will be forced from office over the weekend re: the Damian Green business. If that turns out to be true, there’ll be a veritable chaos of cats loose among the pigeons. We’ll need even more polls …
I don’t think JS will be sacked by Brown. He will defend her in the teeth of all criticism.-he has to at this late stage in the Parliament.
Falconer was on R4 this morning saying that the CPS ruling on what sort of leaked material actually constitutes grounds for prosecution was “new law”….ie JS was operating to existing understanding of the law…that is her defence.
RE the Budget, I just wonder if GB/AD will want-or even need-to put all the bad news ( ie forward projections for Borrowing , Tax & Spend ) in the spotlight now.
They could delay the worst bits till the November PBR.
I read a quotation from a “Treasury source” in the Times the other day to the effect that they are considering which of the two presentations should contain what material.
“a new morsel of scandal.”
I have no idea whether the next poll will reflect the latest mishaps for this administration-but I do think that to characterise these events as a new morsel of scandal is to misunderstand their context , and therefore their potential for permanent loss of electoral support.
The “morsels” of scandal which afflicted Major’s last administration were many & various-Sexual misconduct ( Mellor, Yeo-Major himself) ; Cash for Questions ( various) ; Perjury ( Aitken)
But it was the cumulative effect of Tory behaviour in stark contrast to Tory “Back to Basics” policy ( or at least what people perceived to be the intent of that theme) which destroyed Major’s credibility .
By the same token , the central tenets of Brown’s leadership :-
“I am a conviction politician. Call it “the driving power of social conscience”, call it “the better angels of our nature”, call it “our moral sense”, call it a belief in “civic duty”………..Moral Compass “,
which are increasingly being seen as incompatible with the way he actually conducts his politics.
How important this disparity is to people, remains to be seen-but it finished Major.
I don’t know how far this is relevant to the current exchanges but I did hear that AD was NOT planning to publish any forecast for the PBR as it would reveal too much, i.e. how bad things are going to be. The counter argument is obviously that it would effectively allow the Tories to avoid publishing their future plans in any detail.
I’d be more than surprised if JS loses her job this weekend. She has a major day in the Commons on Monday and it will be how she performs there against Rottweiler Grayling that will determine her fate. If negative that can surely be lost in the Budget publicity!
I think the budget this year may be a little different. People are expecting a bad one and will blame the gov if it is. however if it’s anything else then a collective “phew” will happen … and not a lot else. I cannot see even a strong well put together budget having much of an impact on the UK voters anymore. As many people have pointed out, the polls indicate that the greater unwashed believe that DC will be the better PM after the crisis and now even during the crisi he is the most trusted.
Personally I think we should let the queen take back all power (allow charles to abdicate so as not to upset the applecart when it’s his turn and then have the country run by William – he’s such a nice boy and he can fly a helicopter – bet GB can’t)
Colin – a bit off-topic, but Jonathan Aitken’s perjury is interesting case of misremembering, people always seem to associate it with the sleaze stories at the end of Major’s government, and assume it happened at the same time, but the libel trial was actually after the Conservatives had left office and Aitken had lost his seat.
@David D
By PBR are you referring to the deficit (the old PSBR now renamed PSNCR)? If so, I find it hard to believe that AD can make a budget speech without mentioning or publishing a deficit forecast. Surely that will just prompt worst-case speculation? And in any event it’s the basis for the revenue-raising measures.
Apologies if I’ve misunderstood what you were saying.
Leslie,
Thanks and I may have got my terminology wrong but I see that this evening in a piece on Osborne on the BBC website the following appears
“Mr Darling is likely to unveil some limited spending cuts in the Budget but plans for a full scale comprehensive spending review are thought to have been shelved. ”
I didn’t see this until after posting my earlier comment but may be this is what I had heard earlier in the week.
I’d move Jacqui Smith to Agriculture, and put Tessa Jowell in the Home Office.
@Joe James B – Your idea doesn’t go quite far enough, I’d move GB out of Number 10 and put DC in
Anthony-thank you for the correction.
I think I conflated his resignation & the revelations in the Press ( pre 97 GE I think) with his trial & conviction, which were, as you say after Major had lost.
In mitigation I think Aitken stands in the public mind along with Hamilton & Mellor as one of the triumvirate who epitomised “Tory Sleaze” at that time.
Antony – Hope your going to do something over Keir’s unrelated and partisan comment.
@ Chris Newey
Before you accuse others about “unrelated partisan comments”, perhaps you should remove your own partisan delusions about “the recent promisimg news on the economy”
Pot, Kettle.
However, I do admit it is amusing to see a New Labour sycophant attempting McPoison’s smear tactics In a thread discussing McPoison’s effect on the polls.
Chris Newey
Once again I detect to your contributions a clear case of hypocrisy….for as long as you continue to describe people who disagree with you as cretins and idiots and make the kind of inexplicable comments to which CynoSarges refers then you have no right to make any demands that Anthony censor others.
Let him who is without sin cast the first stone….
Very interesting chart in Michael Crick’s BBC blog the other day regarding the growing number of “other than Tory/Labour” MPs in parliament since 1959 and the growing likelihood therefore of a hung parliament.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2009/04/why_a_hung_parliament_is_a_goo.html#commentsanchor
Do you agree with hi speculation that the electorate swing towards the winnign party at the last minute in order to ensure an overall majoriy? It’s hard to see a mechanism for that to happen.
The BBC is leading their news with ‘a double blow for Labour’. Those radio comments are devastating for Premier Brown.
When people look back at how Labour lost power I suspect the phrase ‘death by a thousand cuts’ will be often used.
@Anthony – Please feel free to remove my note it was meant as an extension of humour posted by Joe James B in which he suggests the home secretary should move from her job to a place where shovelling manure is more in line with the role and not just an action within the current culture of Gov.
@Chris – you may wish to comment
@Anthony – again happy for you to remove this post as well
Leslie
Thank you for the link. I hednt seen that analysis before. I personall thought we would get a hung parliament in 1992. I have not put any money on the next one but would like to know the odds Vs a C majority.
c
@CharlieJ – Check out http://www.Sportingbet.com and look on the left hand side under politics.
Leslie – PBR = Pre Budget Review – which is normally held in November and at which Public spending plans are announced. It is therefore not surprising that any decision on major spending cuts should be deferred to the pBR – the only question is how far the Budget forecasts indicate the extent to which cuts will be needed.
Colin – Aitken – whom my wife knows personally – is an interesting case. He is now actively engaged in IDS’ Civil-Justice organisation which looks at the situation of the most disadvantaged in society – and which led to Cameron’s “Broken Britain” campaign last year.
One major difference between the “sleaze” of teh Major period and today is that then, in all cases the “sleaze” was personal and di not relate to misuse of office. The scandals which have rocked this government, especially the Home Office, on a regyular basis have been issues of ministerial / policy competence.