Labour and Conservatives both suffer in first post-expenses poll
The first poll since the Telegraph began reporting the details of MPs expenses suggests the public are taking a plague on all your houses approach (or at least, a plague on both your houses, since the Liberal Democrats haven’t suffered).
The topline figures, with changes from Populus’s last poll, are CON 39%(-4), LAB 26%(-4), LDEM 22%(+4). Other parties are at 13%, up four points (though it’s worth noting that this isn’t some sort of unprecedented boost which that might imply, Populus have quite often had “others” up at 12% over the last year).
This is the first poll of 2009 to show the Conservatives below 40%, and leaving aside ICM, who always give them a higher level of support, it is the highest level of support the Liberal Democrats have recorded since 2006. It is the highest figure Populus have given them since 2005. It’s tempted to ascribe this solely to the expenses scandal, though it’s worth remembering that this is also one of the first polls since the government’s defeat over Gurkhas, an issue that the Liberal Democrats lead upon.
The poll was conducted between Friday and Sunday, so after the Telegraph had begun publishing Labour expenses, but prior to them turning the focus onto the Conservatives. Whether that means the Conservatives will suffer more damage in coming days is debatable, given that the public already seem to be putting just as much blame on them as the government. Asked specifically if “all the parties were as bad as each other”, 86% of people agreed. 79% of people also rejected the defence that MPs were acting within the rules, agreeing with the statement “if MPs had any integrity they would never have claimed for the cost of many things they did”.
Finally Populus asked their regular question of asking the public to rate the party leaders out of ten. Gordon Brown’s rating stands at 4.47, down from where it was at the end of last year when it got up to 5.04, but substantialluy above the depths it reached in the summer of 2008. David Cameron stands at 5.39 the highest of any Tory leader since Populus began the question 6 years ago. Nick Clegg is at 4.71, his highest figure so far and now above any score that Ming Campbell achieved, though Charles Kennedy was more positively regarded.
Filed under: Populus, Voting Intention
I suspected the Conservatives would get high 30’s low 40’s in the latest Poll due to the expenses, my bet is they will bounce back and its finally good to ee the Lib Dems polls going up, its about time due to the Gurkha issue, Labour still doing very badly.
Interesting that the Conservative rating is down given that the poll was carried out before the Telegraph began publishing their claims.
@ Freddie
Maybe im wrong, it may just be a blip in the polls, another couple of polls will reveal if it is.
i told you all a few days ago not to rule out the tories falling back due to having there nose in it but not much real change in the long run and a return to normal polling will come soon but be awere the lib dems could beacome the second party at the next GE in 2010 as the labour party falls to bit.
BNP must be laughing their socks off.
From what I’m seeing on the news looks like this is going to hit the cons very hard, although there may be stuff to come from the lib dems, it seems as if they’ve firmly moved on from lab to cons atm and it sounds very bad….and just by numbers the lib dems should in theory come out much better. Have to wait and see, but this looks like it’s going to go well for the lib dems, and to a lesser extent the traditional total protests greens/raving etc
There is an opportunity for Cameron here-when DT publishes the rumoured further Tory expenses abuses tommorow, he must start sacking the worst offenders.
show time colin the public will get what they want a cleaner parliment and a govenment that should claen our pig of a parliment clean of all phoneys and robbers caoron and gordon bewaere the lib dem will be back again!
i’ve just looke at my monthly average and ts changed alot
CON 384
LAB 194
LD 42
OTH 30
CON MAJ 118 NOT 166 WHICH WA PREDICTED LAST NIGHT
If David Cameron is true to his original statement, then several large Tory heads should roll. This is quite a test of his stated resolve. Will he have the courage to do the deeds?
SOORY CAORON SHOULD READ cameron and yes i would like to see all mp’s sign a register that stats they should all claim a maximum of £2k per year for office and no scond homes for mp’s who live less than 100 miles radius from the house of commons
I’m looking forward to the first poll after all the Telegraph stories are published; that’s probably after the EU elections…
Interesting that the Conservatives should suffer so much before any of their details came out. Suggests that if Cameron actually acts to remove those who are the worst offenders, regardless of status, then he could possibly gain those points back. On the other hand, perhaps people are bored of him just talking and want to see what he actually stands for.
Very good poll for the LibDems, puts them right amongst it and well in with a chance of main Opposition if they can continue their push while Labour continues to stuggle.
I’m looking forward to the first poll after all the Telegraph stories are published; that’s probably after the EU elections…
2nd home allowance only for those representing the Northern Isles and the Hebrides…
I reckon “none of the above” must have got a boost too.
Jack – the euro & local elections themselves are likely to have a significant effect. Most recent local elections have seen a Conservative boost afterwards, presumably from the halo effect – looking like winners.
If it’s anything like the last election we’ll also see a temporary boost for whatever minor party does well, UKIP or the BNP probably.
I expected Labour to reap most of the whirlwind on this one, purely because governments tend to take the flak when politics in general is being scorned. This result has surprised me, and tonights revelations don’t look great for the Tories although I doubt they will suffer unduly. What I think might worry Cameron more would be intense media interest in his front bench team’s string of second jobs. To be fair to him, he did try and alter this, but his lack of courage in forcing this through does not bode well for his firmness of resolve when he gets to No 10. It’s open season on politicians, and while they need to wake up and recognise the public mood, I suspect a great deal of damage will be done to the many perfectly decent parlimentarians in the process.
This expenses thing will hit the Liberals in due course, although they enjoy the advantage that :
a) no one seriously expects them to form the next government
b) most of their number are entirely unknown
I wouldnt worry, this expenses thing debate shall start shifting onto the solutions rather than the current shock stuff. Although it is worth noting that the DT got its claims wrong in regards to Grove, he didnt home-flip at all, he merely moved family home and therefore was obliged morally to realign the status of this second home. Just worth noting that many of the DT claims are perhaps speculative deductions rather than actual proof; its damn unhelpful what the DT is doing- it will cause a whitewash so that actually corrupt MPs can escape by the change of focus from indvidiauls under scrutiny to what is now sadly the case where its a case of ‘look they are all at it’, its the rules that are at fault.
I am disapointed that the DT is engaged in all of this, as it would have been more condusive to proper debate had this been released in full at the parliamentary agreed June date, then it would be properly investiaged by legal experts and univerally by journalists with MPs having a chance to explain individual issues. Now it is a case of take the DT’s word for it.
I think Brown is going to be booted pretty soon and now, which will throw everything up in the air much as a landmine throws up body parts.
soon and now? That’s the whisky typing.
Dean,
What we would be getting in June would be the edited version and much of the apparent abuse we have seen wouldn’tave been detected.
Peter.
As a minority of us said recently, the recent polls where only good for the Tories, not great – I guess 50pts is a long way off now ITT.
Just seen newsnight and the real damage the the Cons could be the reminder of Tory Toffs, just cos it did not work in Crewe don’t think it won’t impact in a GE.
My fave was Ollie (too busy with my other jobs to be shadow Chancellorbut I will take a lesser role) Letwin and his 2 grand for swimming pool repairs.
Alec is right second jobs will become an issue as the media decide the Cons have had too easy a time of it.
What price Cable chancellor after the Election with Cammo his boss?
Peter,
Spot on. They were going to have their addresses blanked out, so the second home scams would not have been revealed.
Surely, if the taxpayer furnishes, pays the mortgage interest and council tax etc etc on a second home, the proceeds should be returned to the taxpayer when the house is sold (less whatever deposit was paid by the MP – unless we pay that as well!)
Also, although the DT has backtracked (been leant on?) on Gordon Brown, why should the taxpayer pay ANY expenses to do with his private flat when he’s been living in Downing Street for 12 years?
Anyway, on the assumption that the dirt on the Liberals will soon be dished, I think that there will be a big shift to minor parties (including presumably SNP in Scotland) in the forthcoming elections.
Pete B,
The expenses revelations are not going to boost the minor parties at the next G.E, that is a year away and the core issues and debates will shift on soon.
Mark, the Tories always do badly when Sleaze is the main news story – Even when the Tories aren’t the ones being exposed. It really goes back to what happened in the 90’s. The fact the Conservatives dropped over the weekend, even while Labour were taking the hit shows how badly they will perform now they are in the media spotlight. Tories have the most to lose and to fear from all of this. Cameron will need to be tough and show resolve quickly to claw back some of this lost support, however many people need to be sacked/demoted he’ll have to do it.
Dean,
Sorry if I was unclear. I meant the forthcoming elections on June 4th for local councils and Europe.
I hate that word “rogue” poll – but populus are way off track with their latest poll – so far nothing bad has been thrown at the Tories over the expenses & if there were anything on the scale of the Labour expenses allegations heads would need to roll, but the Telegraph are running out of steam – they have published the worst offenders so far – that’s why they picked Labour first – lol.
Pete B
Ah, now it makes more sense to me!
Gin,
I agree D.C ought to sack one or two top names involved in order to kick the spotlight back onto Gordon Brown- create a new media story around his sacking of ‘corrup’ MPs and Browns failure to recyprocate the same act. Get the issue back on Browns indecion.
Cameron however I fear will show too much loyalty to his collegues (and school friends?).
Weighted Moving Average 43:26:19. Populus has a very slight anti-C bias (about 0.5%) and frankly I’d be surprised to find the Conservatives suffering major damage over this.
The narowing of the Labour:LibDem gap is however a major trend – on the WMA it is down from 20 in Nov to 8 now. There is a real chance that Labour will fall into 3rd place if Brown soldiers on until May 2010.
This poll, if not a rogue, is bad for the Tories. The real comparison is not with Populus’ last poll (both major parties down 4%) but with the recent polling trend. On this basis, Labour at 26% are about where they’ve been recently on other polls but the Tories at 39% are a good 5% down on the recent polls. This explains the large fall in projected Tory majority.
I think this may support Gin’s claim that financial sleaze is always a Tory problem even when it’s not them in the spotlight. And now that they are too, the next poll could be very poor for them (although that depends if anything is carried out before other factors like the Euro/local elelctions impact).
On a different point, much as I’d like to think that the LDs will make a break-through at the next GE, they are going to have to do more than just out-poll Labour to become the second-largest party. The nature of poliical heartlands is that the LDs would have to beat Labour by 5-6% and concentrate their vote. There just aren’t that many Lab-LD marginals around. Having the second largest share of the vote in 2010 would be a moral victory and strengthen the case for electoral reform but that would be it.
I don’t think the “£400 a month for food when Westminster’s in recess” story will exactly have helped Salmond or the SNP.
Clearing moats and swimming pools, £12,500 for a housekeeper, thousands for a gardener, repairing tennis courts – isn’t it gratifying to know that after the next election we’ll just have such a better class of corruption?
It’s going to be rather difficult for Cameron to discipline MPs – where does he draw the line? Presumably somewhere between his own claims over the years before his leadership push and the highest claims. And he needs to be careful not to catch any of his closest allies too.
It’s a right mess. On the one side, we have the Govt , who are more culpable because they were in a position to force through proper changes for years. And on the other, we have the Tories, who have been screaming loudest about Govt wasting tax-payers money, while at the same time snouting the system up to their eyeballs.
Logically, the only party who should benefit will be the LibDems.
Assuming there are revelations about the Lib Dems in the pipeline too, it’s possible that the ‘Other’ parties will benefit most from this in the Euro and local elections. Including, and perhaps especially, the BNP.
After that, my guess is that the polls will revert to the sorts of results we’ve been used to seeing lately. If Cameron takes charge of the situation with the Tories and is seen to act decisively, I doubt this will harm the Conservatives in terms of the next general election. As for Labour – well, it’s just one of a great many nails in its coffin.
Jim Jam,
I agree. I must admit that the extent of revelations about Tory MPs has surprised and angered me. I know it shouldn’t have but it has.
I really did assume they’d be ‘cleaner’ than Labour. Maybe the old line I hate so much; “they’re all as bad as each other” has some truth to it after all!
I still think if Cameron is as savvy as I hope he is that this can end up with the Tories shining brighter than their rivals, but he has to act soon and hard ball.
I am not suprised to see that the Liberal Democrats are increasing their poll ratings ,they alway increase by a margin of 2-3% from their poll rating from the 4 weeks prior to the actual elections in first past the post.
It is possible that they will gain even more at the European because it is proportional.
With revelations of their MPs expenses yet to come out
this should not effect their ratings as they are not deemed as The Government.
They could be the second party in the County elections with Labour being pushed into 3rd or even 4th.
Bill Furness,
LDs are already teh second party at County Council level – but Lab could well be pushed down to third or fourth – assuming they don’t get wiped out completely.
Paul H.J,
Thanks for reminding me Paul,well they will retain their 2nd position regarding their present County Council seats and increase their numbers.both at County and European level at the expense of Labour.
Will the BNP push the Labour party into 4th?
I’m not sure Cameron’s task is that difficult.
The Green Book spells out in terms, what the “spirit” of the expenses rules is at 1.3 “Fundamental Principles”.
These include :-
“Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was
necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.”
and
“Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.”
These two principles clearly should have excluded the relatively small sums expended on “Pools , patios & Tudor timbers”, and the major financial scam of profiteering on property at the taxpayers’ expense, aka “flipping”.
It is open to Cameron to interpret these rules & pronounce any case in breach worthy of discipline ( whatever that discipline may be).
At the same time this enables Cameron to highlight the utter failure of the Fees Office & Speaker Martin’s management of HoC administration.
It also invites Brown to take a similar stand.
At present, I agree that LibDems are reaping the benefit-but when their turn comes in DT ( ?Wednesday) Clegg must choose too- blame the system/the leakers/the press-or show leadership & principle.
The public are sick to death of the former choice & will reward any leader who exhinits the latter.
‘I don’t think the “£400 a month for food when Westminster’s in recess” story will exactly have helped Salmond or the SNP.’
I don’t think it’ll be noticed much in the overall swill of things. One can legitimately even be at Westminster when it’s not in session (I dont know if he was…). One can also be stocking for the future I suppose…
I believe the publication of MP’s expenses by the Telegraph to be a very good thing for british politics. It is of course no suprise that members of all fractions have been having their dip in the jampot.
Now the Conservatives have also gone down in the polling statistics but I imagine that in a week or so when the majority of the public have got over their momentary wrath, they will rise in the popularity scale again.
Hopefully the expences scandal will not influence the result of the EU poll so much that the public give their vote to politically inexperienced splinter groups as a sign of their protest against the main parties.
“or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.”
Since almost all of the rest of us use our salary to buy goods and services, that covers just about everything apart from rent and travel to and from constituencies.
If I were found guiltier than others by Cameron, i’d be quite keen to point to the excesses of those eacaping his discipline, particulary if I had to face re- or de-selection soon. Is claiming a few thousand to clean the pool really worse than claiming a similar amount to expand one’s property portfolio?
The problem is , there’s a lot of it about.
john tt
I don’t understand the relevance of your second para.
I was not refering to what MPs spend their salary on -but what expenses they wish to reimbursed by the taxpayer.
I repeat, The Green Book tells them what they must not claim for-ie anything that is not” necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.”
Now of course this is subject to interpretation to a degree-but Cameron is Leader of the Party-he is entitled to interpret & act accordingly-that’s what leadership is all about-putting his judgement on the line.
It’s the same for Brown-he did it this morning by supporting Speaker Martin following yesterday’s circus act in HoC-now we can all decide if we agree with his judgement or not.
In my view the “Nuremburg Defence” is simply not available to MPs:-
a) becauseof the Green Book’s “Fundamental Principles”
b) Because the Fees Office has chosen to ignore these “Fundamental Principles” in some instances.
@ Bill
If it is to be any party to displace Labour into 4th, it will be UKIP, not the BNP, however, Labour being completly destroyed could actually be a bad thing for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, lets look at it this way.
If Brown and Labour get knocked down into fourth place a leadership challenge will probablby happen, if Labour get a new leader it coul just save them from complete destruction in the next GE, my hope, labour does badly in the euro-elections but just well enough for Gordon Brown to stay as leader. Aslong as no leadershp challenge happens Cons are still in Landslide territory and the Lib Dems still could gain alot of the Vote from Labour.
[...] European Parliamentary elections, now just three weeks away, should now be entirely discounted. The latest polls shows both Tories and Labour taking a -4% hit (and that was conducted a few days ago – since when a [...]
Colin – most of us pay for our everytijng out of our salary apart from business travel. Most will therefore think that anything in excess of that is excessive. The job is in two places, so travel and basic accommodation is part of the renumeration package, but everything else falls into the “improper personal financial benefit” category.
I can’t see how anyone can discipline anyone else unless a commonly accepted line is drawn. That’ll be quite tough, given that some very senior people have made significant claims.
I don’t understand why offers to pay the money back only happen at the latest possible moment.
I think Tebbit’s exhortation to vote for a minor party in protest (I wonder which one?) was disgraceful. You kip if you want to Norman, but don’t turn this into an anti-Europe crusade.
john-I just think that The Green Book + reasonableness & common sense gives the right answer.
Its not rocket science-many many private sector employees spend their working week away from “home” and are re-imbursed for the cost of their accomodation whilst away.
I agree with you about the late paying back syndrome which seems to be in the air on both Labour & Tory sides now. I still don’t think these people understand the public mood.
I heard Tebbit on BBC tv-he said dont vote for any of the main parties-ie abstain. When pressed to say who he would vote for he said anyone but BNP.
He didn’t identify UKIP.
If he did Cameron would have had to act against him.
Actually I think Tebbit has a point.
john-I just think that The Green Book + reasonableness & common sense gives the right answer.
Its not rocket science-many many private sector employees spend their working week away from “home” and are re-imbursed for the cost of their accomodation whilst away.
I agree with you about the late paying back syndrome which seems to be in the air on both Labour & Tory sides now. I still don’t think these people understand the public mood.
I heard Tebbit on BBC tv-he said dont vote for any of the main parties in the EU election-ie abstain. When pressed to say who he would vote for he said anyone but BNP.
He didn’t identify UKIP-The Greens are a “minor” Party.
Actually I think Tebbit has a point.
Ivan –
“I really did assume they’d be ‘cleaner’ than Labour”
I’ve no idea why anyone would think that. The Cameron front bench is stuffed full of wealthy people earning very nice incomes on second jobs, (including many with unholy links to somewhat disgraced city firms). The Tories open sell access to Cameron (£50,000) and Osborne (£25,000) through their fundraising club system, and they are still accepting nearly £2m pa from an umbrella organisation used to hide individual doneors names.
Colin – he’s an avid “out of Europ”ean. He’s hardly a stalwart of the Green party, and of course he’s going to advise against the BNP.
Cost of accommodation whilst away – yes. Almost every MP has claimed for more than that, though, so what is “reasonable” leaves the line drawn at a low enough level for almost everybody to be disciplined.
Comparing with private sector makes it even worse – most private sector companies require receipts and justifications for every last quid, and would almost certainly fire some-one for claiming decor “On The House.”
“Cost of accommodation whilst away – yes. Almost every MP has claimed for more than that, though, so what is “reasonable” leaves the line drawn at a low enough level for almost everybody to be disciplined.”
john-I’ve just read the Green Book in detail-it’s all there in black & white-plus as I say the Fundamental Principles.
It just has to be applied. The Fees Office haven’t-or even worse have been complicit in accepting claims outside the rules.
Yes the lack of need for receipts until very recently has not helped.
Some MPs have chosen not to exploit allowances-many have not “flipped” their way into property profits & CGT evasion.
Its up to the Leaders of the parties-they can take your line & say it’s all too difficult-or they can try & lay down some discipline. We shall see.
Re Norman-I think your commentary & that of the Press is innaccurate.
He did not advise people to vote for UKIP-he said vote for any minor party other than BNP.
Given that this is for the meaningless & very poorly attended EU elections, I think that is a good idea for a warning shot across the bows of the Westminster elite.
Colin,
(pehaps unusually) I am at one with John TT on this.
It is not quite enough to say that the Green Book is there to be followed, since it assumes a greater level of “allowance” than should be acceptable.
In the private sector, not only would the majority of these claims have been disallowed, but in many cases they would form grounds for dismissal (especially if one’s perfromance has not been up to par and the employer is looking for valid grounds to reduce costs).
The main difference between MPs and most people who travel on business is that MPs are required to be in the same two places on a regular basis, rather than peripatetic, so it actually makes more sense for them to have two permanent bases – one at Westminster and one in their constituency. Logically, they should either be provided with accommodation in central London at public expense, or an allowance with which to obtain their own.
If one compares that to the Green Book, then you can see that there is still a “gap” even if MPs had been diligent in following the “spirit” and not just the “letter” of the rules.
This inevtibaly damages trust in the sytem and the reputation of all MPs, even those who have been abstemious or parsimonious, and gives succour to the pathetic posturing of parties liek teh BNP.
Which brings me on to Lord Tebbit – he has probably over-stepped the line this time, and Cameron should discipline him publicly. He for one cannot hide behind the excuse of his precise words rather than the overall impression he undoubtedly created. Even if he had intended people to understand they should abstain he was wrong. But many will have taken his statement as encouragement to vote BNP, not UKIP.
As long as there are not revelations about the likes of Clegg, Huhne or Cable then this was always going to work out for the Lib Dems. Not only because they have far fewer MP’s but also because they can play their favourite role of painting the two main Parties as two sides of the same coin and not real change.
I think the fall in the Tory lead even before the expenses revelations is probably about right. There was a sense that after the budget and after Brown becoming such a figure of ridicule that the public were getting a bit uncomfortable with the Tories being given a smooth ride to government. It really doesn’t play well with the British electorate when you get politicians saying “when we win the next election….” 12 months away from it.
That said, given that most people associate the expenses scandal with all Parties anyway I don’t see the Tory lead dropping much more even after the latest revelations, especially as Cameron seems to want to take the lead on the issue much more than Gordon Brown. I also take a different view to most Labour-minded people in that I think once the campaign starts and the debate moves onto major policy then I think the Tory lead will actually increase and not contract as some have predicted.
John – When the debate kicks off properly, how can the tpries or any MPs bang on about cutting waste when they’ve already been seen to have feathered their own nest eggs so spectacularly?
If you sack half the civil servants to cut waste, that’s one thing, but it’s not going to look good if you’ve claimed off the state for your own private servants.
I did make this point before, but there will be other “revelations” to come from the press. It seems that the Liberal Democrats will be in the firing line tomorrow.
The full details will be published in July. Expect the vultures to gather! Besides, I may not be alone in finding that it is rapidly becoming “democracy by the press”.
Difficult to extrapolate on trends when all may become mired.
I suspect the bigger dangers for Cameron are a general lack of belief in all politicians (contrast to the upswelling of hope in 1997 that Blair rode particularly well) along with a wider media scrutiny on political funding issues in general. As I said earlier, there are lots of Tory issues still out there regarding second jobs, party fund raising, accepting cash and giving honours to people who consistently refuse to confirm UK residency etc. I always believed these issues would kick off at some stage but thought it would probably be after the GE, but now I suspect there is a danger that these issues will gain a higher public scrutiny than before. As Cameron’s regular line is he’s new and ultra clean, this will hurt him.
On a wider point, his reaction today to this story is indicative I believe of a Cameron government. He has had ample opportunity to nail the expenses issue among his own MPs and has completely failed to do so, only blustering about disciplinary action once the DT breaks the story. Do I believe this reaction is genuine? Of course I don’t – if it was he would have made absolutely clear to his party months ago and in private what he expected, and the money would be back in the public coffers alread. The next 5 years will again be characterised by ceaseless reaction to headlines. Oh dear.
Well Cameron has just played a blinder, announcing that Shadow Cabinet ministers with dodgy-sounding claims will all repay the money.
If Brown wasn’t so washed up and apparently clueless, he’d have done the same thing only sooner.
James – I absolutely disagree. If he had arranged this quietly six months ago, along with a vigorous camaign to reform expenses, and today announced the fact and it was all done and dusted and the money repaid – that would have been a blinder. If he had forced his shadow cabinet to give up second (and third and fourth) jobs that would been another positive sign. Merely reacting to events once you have been caught with your hand in the till is ultimately unimpressive. It’s one of the worst aspects of Cameron’s approach to politics – remember the photo shoot in the Arctic? He share’s this approach with Blair, and it’s why we are in such a mess now. I see great disappointment ahead for the British voter, as with 1997.
To back up my previous point, can we all agree that Harriet Harman has done exceptionally well to ask the House authorities to set up a system for the repayment of excessive expenses claims? She did this a full hour before Cameron made his announcement (which funnily enough only seems to apply to his front bench), so we can all laud Harriet for ‘playing a blinder’?
Somehow I think not.
I read an article the other day which points out that in some ways MPs’ behaviour reflects that of a large segment of society, since most people with paid expenses try to squeeze as much out of them as possible, coming up with all sorts of excuses why it’s justified, such as (a) everyone does it, (b) it doesn’t harm anyone, (c) big companies are so wealthy they can afford it, and so on, etc.
@ Alec – his response is infinitely more decisive than Brown’s and that’s what will count. While Brown has mithered and apologised and blamed “the system” without actually doing anything, Cameron has taken action. That will play better with voters, for obvious reasons.
As for your 1997 comparison – I don’t think voters have anything like the (in retrospect quite absurd) expectations of the Tories that they had of New Labour in 1997. Nobody thinks the Tories are going to usher in some sort of new Golden Age. And, after 11 years of Labour, it’’s just as well that the Tories aren’t attempting to promise one because cynicism would surely be the only response. As far as I can see, people just want shot of Brown and this government and 40+ per cent evidently think the Tories will do a more competent job. Low expectations, certainly, but rather more realistic too.
James – you’re quite right about Brown dithering, although to be fair, at least he saw this coming and got on Youtube to announce something, however crass that was. However, this doesn’t mean ‘he’s playing a blinder’. It just means he’s crawling out of the hole a little faster than the others.
Alec is right and Radio reporters are already asking why react now and not months ago to Tory spokespeople (Theresa May did not know how to respond); let’s see if this is the line on TV news particularly BBC and ITN (Dave’s friends)
This could be the tipping point in the media. Whilst they will never lay off GB we may see more scrutiny of the Tories.
They may come through the scrutiny well but there must be a doubt?
You miss the main point regarding Cameron’s instructions to his party. Cameron is more than likely to be the next Prime Minister and will be able to dole out the positions for his party. Thus he can enforce his position. Any Conservative opposing his command will soon regret his or her actions from the backbench.
Brown, on the other hand, is a dead sheep with no ability to enforce such a response. Most Labour MP’s are facing oblivion or are in seats that are safe ( a diminishing amount to say the least) and with Brown dropping like a stone in the polls, will ignore any edict. Those on the way out will take what they can before shown the door. Brown knows this. That is why he will not issue the same call. The refusal of the Labour ranks, articulated by the Speaker, would only make matters worse.
Cameron has played a blinder and Brown has no response that will not play worse than the current debacle.
@ Alec – fair enough. I’m having a hyperbolic Tuesday.
@ Jim Jam – wishful thinking, IMO. MPs from all parties are involved in this (Lib Dem revelations presumable coming next) and obviously the same criticism can be fielded at all the parties. But the bottom line is that only one of those parties is the current government and it’s the man that the current government shoehorned in as Speaker who has abjectly failed to get a grip on this. I can’t see Michael Martin surviving calls for his resignation this time round.
Another thought I have is the surprising article by Poly Toynbee openly stating Labour needs to ditch Brown and go with Alan Johnson. Its not a winning strategy, but a damage limitation one. He’s come out of the expenses debacle rather well, and has solid working class roots, in a nice contrast to Cameron. Might be interesting.
I would also want to record my admiration for a number of MPs who have been utterly honest in the face of an easy to abuse system. John Mann and Dennis Skinner spring to mind, but I’m sure there will be many Tories and others who are fundamentally decent.
Colin
“Given that this is for the meaningless & very poorly attended EU elections, I think that is a good idea for a warning shot across the bows of the Westminster elite.”
Unfortunately, though many agree with you, the elections are not meaningless. Granted, the EU parliament seems to have only one power – to dismiss the Commissioners – which they used a few years ago to little effect, but it is important to the many who oppose Britain’s UK membership to make their feelings known.
I agree with those who think that the minor parties will do very well in the EU and Council elections. Even more voters will abstain from voting for the major parties, and some will switch their vote. The fly in the ointment is rife electoral fraud, which make results even more unpredictable. Perhaps there should be a poll question that asks “Do you intend to commit electoral fraud”?
Doonhammer you make a very interesting point.
I thought Cameron was impressive & demonstrated real leadership today.
Yes all the party leaders have waited too long on this, but post DTrevelations , DC has been most positive-and recognised what is now blindingly obvious-the Fees Office have totally failed to use the Green Book in accord with it’s Fundamental Principles-so the Party will have to do the job.
As you say Doonhammer it may be difficult for GB to respond similarly-even if he wanted to-if you agree with La Toynbee he is incapable of that sort of deftness anyway !
There is more for Cameron to do:-
When does his Scrutiny Committee start getting cheques from Davis et al?.
When does he stop wealthy MPs claiming second home allowances?
but his edicts on “Flipping” & CGT hit the button precisely.
Next up is the outcome of the Kelly review underway-it needs to nail this topic for once & all-Cameron said he has spoken to Kelly so presumably is happy at the way it is going.
It will be interesting to see how the Polls respond to this-
Has “Tory Toffs out of touch” reared it’s head again?-
Will ” Angry Cammo sorts it out” resonate?-
Does Gordon have an ace card up his sleeve?
It’s all a bit like “The Weakest Link” tv show.
Pete B-
When MEPs stop milking taxpayers for expense entitlements which would make the Daily Telegraph need a Special Edition…….when MEPs start recognising that they are accountable to the people who fund their ridiculous gravy train-……when EU starts taking fiddling, fraud, waste, & profligacy seriously, recognises it’s lack of democratic legitimacy, and stops sacking financial whistleblowers from it’s Audit Office, and starts listening to them….then I just might begin to think that it’s so called “Elections” have some purpose.
PAUL-HJ
” But many will have taken his statement as encouragement to vote BNP, not UKIP.”
No they wont-well not if they listened to what he said they wont, rather than relying on heresay.
He said -don’t vote for BNP.
I just cannot understand how you can make the statement quoted.
He wants Conservative voters ( and Labour voters) to vote for “minor parties” -excluding BNP-in the EU elections as a protest-thats what he said-I watched him say it on BBC TV News.
“When the debate kicks off properly, how can the tpries or any MPs bang on about cutting waste when they’ve already been seen to have feathered their own nest eggs so spectacularly?”
Well I’m talking about actual substantive policy not just the slogans which are used 12 months before the election.
“you’re quite right about Brown dithering, although to be fair, at least he saw this coming and got on Youtube to announce something, however crass that was”
Eh? A year ago Brown didn’t even vote on whether to remove the John Lewis list whereas Cameron introduced a three line whip on getting rid of it. Before his YouTube appearance Brown had rejected Cameron’s request for a meeting of the leaders to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. I’m struggling to understand how you think Brown saw this coming while Cameron is only reacting to events? Past records seem to suggest the exact opposite.
having just seen a comment from daves h.q via e-mail it seams as if he will sack any member of his party for a clear abuss of the system andany candidate who fails to abide by the tories new rules
When will Cameron stop his Millionare MPs from having second jobs, If you are elected as an MP you should act as one, not just use it as a title and a way for new chandeliers and to get you moats cleaned free off charge at our expense…
The LibDems expenses are small compared to the other two parties!
Let’s have another poll; I get bored with the above partisan comments. I liked this best when it was analysis of polls and implications…
(And yes, I know I indulge but only in response to irritant people who wish fulfil and think that’s analysis…)
@ Bill
The Lib Dems did take quite abit of the cake themselves, so to speak, but yes, compared to Labour and the Conservatives, the Lib Dems must be looking like saints, the full details in the telegraph tomorrow will be worth a read.
Anthony – apologies if I’m wrong or this was covered earlier in the thread, but you say that this poll “is the highest level of support the Liberal Democrats have recorded since 2006″. Didn’t they get 22% in April’s Ipsos MORI poll?
John – I was actually talking about his particular eruption – there’s no doubt I think that Brown got wind of a major media investigation and tried to position himself.
Overall however, I would side with the analysis on The World Tonight on BBC R4 which highlights Brown’s attempts to get something changed about this, compared with Cameron coming late to this particular story. Ben Brogan says a similar thing at the DT. Brown may have been ineffective in this, but he saw the problem long ago.
I’m not partisan about this and I’m not saying anyone in particular comes out of this well, but for those who think Cameron has demonstrated his leadership qualities I am suggesting that he is only demonstrating better short term media manipulation skills than Brown – Brown on Youtube vs Cameron today. Cameron missed this issue, like he has missed many others. He has good short term tactical skills but strategically he is most often all at sea, and this will trip him up rapidly once in government.
What will also be very interesting in terms of the effect on polls will be the economic numbers. Very quietly over the last few days, and largely buried by the expenses shambles, there has been a string of much better news on the UK economy. It looks like the Q1 GDP figures will be revised upwards and Credit Suisse are already saying that the UK recession could in fact already be over. I think that’s a bit bold, but if Darling regains some credibility and things turn out not as bad as expected – what then for the polls?
Warren – no, you’re right. It’s only equalling their highest. I must have missed that one when scanning down the list.
The Lib Dems will not be affected as much becausehey have less MPS in the Commons and the vast majority of those already publish their expenses on the web, albeit not in receipt by receipt format. These expenses seem to be mostly taken up by staff costs…
Also, some of the most persistent campaigners within parliament for transparency come from the Lib Dems, but they were rebutted by the speaker, Michael Martin. I would not be surprised if they put on more points.
@Warren It is the first time the Lib Dems have polled 22% since July 2005 from POPULUS. Incidently, this was their first poll after the election where the Lib Dems gained 23%.
Lib Dems have polled 22% four times since February this year.
Despite this poll I think that any negative long term impact will solely be for Labour. Cameron has come across in the media since this poll as being more firm and decisive on the issue than Brown, in my opinion.
Important is the fact that the minimum wage is set to rise by a mere 7p an hour while Brown has spent £6000 of their taxes on having one of his homes cleaned.
Also due to the increase of duty this rise in the minimum wage will effectively be nothing. For this and other reasons and am becoming increasingly confident that Labour will see a drop of at least 30% of votes in at least half of the seats that they presently hold.
Thus only a relatively small increase in Cons and Lib Dem vote would see Labour losing about half of their seats.
Anthony, can you point us to an actual detailed breakdown of the Populus poll anywhere? The Times story doesn’t have a link to it and if you go to Populus’ own website, “most recent poll” takes you to their April one. It’s very frustrating, because we can’t possibly know how that 13% for “others” is broken down otherwise. It’s allowing both UKIP and the BNP to crow about it when one or both of them may not be justified in doing so. By the way, if I was either of them I would not get too carried away when the subject of the moment is abuse of allowances. UKIP are pretending that their problems in this respect are limited to their two extreme cases who’ve got into legal trouble, but anyone who has followed them knows that their fondness for Brussels gravy is pretty institutionalised across most of their MEPs, Nigel “Ruthless-Not” Farage most definitely included, having written in 2003 “in these days of cheap travel it is easy to fly to Strasbourg for £40 and to be reimbursed for £700 from the European Parliament”. (see here: http://216.92.176.211/ukip-general-issues/38343-prospective-mep-list-selection-2.html) And whenever a BNP scumbag gets onto a local council, you can be sure that an expenses “issue” is never very far behind.
@ Alec – “He has good short term tactical skills but strategically he is most often all at sea, and this will trip him up rapidly once in government.”
I think it’s precisely the fact that in recent years government has become all about political “tactics” and “strategy”, rather than just running the country competently, that so many voters are turning away from Labour.
Surely it’s partly Brown’s long established reputation for plotting and scheming (against members of his own party as well as the Opposition) that’s behind his incredible unpopularity.
I think some of the liberal element will be raising a glass or two to a showbiz bust up this morning!
@James – I think we agree in part. Like Cameron, Brown thinks tactics all the time, which results in silly ‘initiatives’ and sound bit announcements. Where they both seriously lack is in the overall strategic direction that makes government hang together. Essentially its government by headline. My disappointment it that Cameron has copied Blair, who was the master of this. I’ve said many times before that he has no underpinning principles other than following headlines. It will end like New Labour and Brown. My concern for the Tories is that their honeymoon will be very short, and looking at the crop of new MP’s they are likely to have their popularity will plummet very soon after the next GE.
Colin – how is it that offering to get the chaps to pay bak £20k between them (not each) demonstrates “leadership?” When a £400k mortgage can pass the smell test (£20k per annum interest all allowable and OK by The Leader)
James – I don’t think “spin” was ever going to be the same as sleaze as a by-word for Govt unpopularity. There’s a big difference between tactics or “wordmanship” and being completely two-faced (which is what Brown appeared to be by bottling the election)
@John TT – very good point. In terms of impact on the polls this could well unravel for Cameron, to a degree at least. His claim for £24K mortgage interest denotes a huge second home, bought by a man worth millions who presumably has done this as an investment part funded by the tax payer. He won’t be alone in this, but this morning the BBC has been qustioning why a few hundred pounds on light bulbs is immoral but extending a property portfolio on our expense is not. Even Anne Widdicombe implicitly criticised Cameron on this score. I don’t think this is where Cameron wants to be, and there is a very personal element to this for him if the media searchlight moves on.
John tt
Whatever you say the general perception this morning is that Clegg and Cameron get it whilst Brown is playing catch up and Speaker Martin does not get it at all.
Bad luck this scandal will not change the scenario of a looming Labour electoral disaster.
Great reception for Camerons stance across all the media this morning. Even the BBC seemed to give it a positive spin!
I like the way Labour have been painted as being on the back foot (even though I’m not sure they really are on this) in almost every paper. It makes the Tories appear to be leading the way on an ‘issue’ so goes some way to fighting Labours ‘do nothing’ attacks of late.
A thrashing of Labour at the Euros, and the positive glow it imbues, should see my prediction of hitting 50% in the next few weeks still a good possibility.
john-
By leadership I mean the opposite of this :-
Speaker Martin is responsible for the House authorities who draw up , and manage the operation of the Green Book rules. for all MPs.Through the gathering storm of public outrage Martin has , first attempted to circumvent FOI legislation on transparency, then to emasculate data ordered under FOI, then call in the police because of a leak, then continue to rail against the media & any MP who dares to be contrite about this whole mess. T
The Fees Office under Martin has utterly failed to do the job required of it-ie throw out these claims-so Cameron decided they are a waste of space & produced his own rules for his MPs including “no more furnishings” , no more “flipping”, CGT liability & disclosure requirements. That is leadership.
Gordon Brown has fiddled & faddled with this whole thing, constantly being evasive , & party political-finally playing catch up-he has not required anything of his MPs-he has supported Speaker Martin throughout.
That is the opposite of leadership.
Now -your point about whether mortgage interest on second property should be allowed or not-Cameron was asked at his Press Conference about this. His reply was that he awaits the Kelly Review for a fundamental relook at the principles.
You may not be happy with that-I may not be-but the Kelly Report will make reccomendations for all MPs-not just Tory ones & I think he is right to defer to its findings.
We can take up cudgels again when Kelly reports & MPs vote on it. I fully expect that you & I will be of the same opinion about mortgages on large “second homes.”
@ Alec – I disagree with you on Cameron but there’s little point in arguing the point as neither of us will be convinced by the other. The bottom line is that all one can ever do is vote for the party that seems best at the time one is voting. Right now, it seems clear to me and , presumably, 40+% of voters that the current crop of Tories is preferable to the current government. 5 years down the line, who knows, but we can all worry about that then. I’ll take a chance on the Tories over the certainty of more New Labour catastrophe any day of the week
One up to Clegg-he will insist second home property profits go back to the tax payer.
Ahead of Cameron-on a different planet to Brown-he gets it.
On the second jobs issue. Why shouldn’t MPs have a second job? Isn’t one of the problems in politics the ‘career politician’? These are people who have never been in the employ of a private company yet go around setting rules that seriously affect day-to-day business.
Wouldn’t it be better for MPs to spend time in the private sector to actually understand what is happening? Perhaps if they spent a day stacking shelves at ASDA and then realised that a fifth of what they just earned goes to the treasury they would understand quite why people are so angry with these expenses.
Out of interest – is Gordon Brown still PM? I haven’t seen him for a few days, when his CD seemed to be skipping on “it’s the system’s fault, not ours”.
if they spent a day stacking shelves at ASDA
Good idea – the non-exec directorships however don’t really give much insight as to “what’s really going on” – that type of second job is part of the great con, along with “you should all aspire to own vast country piles, therefore let me keep mine tax free” and other nuggets that the “elite” offer as common sense.
Brown’s suggested all receipts during the four years of this govt should be passed over for re-appraisal. As long as it’s done before the next election, it should raise more than the £20k from the Tories and the £13k from Hazel Blears.
Has more aof a smack of fairness than Cameron’s “let’s give back £20k between us and don’t do it again” approach.
(and £41k from Phil Hope) It’s all adding up, eh? We’ll be able to pay a bit off the national debt at this rate.
NEW POLL:
Populus/The Times
“The Tories are put on 34 per cent, against 25 per cent for Labour and 20 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.
This leaves 21 per cent spread between the Scottish and Welsh nationalists, the UK Independence Party, the British National Party, the Greens and tiny fringe groups.”
Mark M – as John says, I think you need to look at what these second are. They don’t add to real world experience. In you look at the history of them it’s interesting that the number of second jobs held by MPs of any political party increases as they look to be entering government, and drop sharply once they are in opposition. Its about companies gaining access to decision makers. Holding these posts is unacceptable. I still think this whole area, along with second homes interest payments and equity gain, will blur the Tories current perceived lead on this issue. As I said earlier, some Tory backbenchers are already openly criticising Cameron’s approach and pointing to his enormous wealth etc. There is a long way to go before this issue settles.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/peter_riddell/article6275933.ece
Populus/The Times
Euro voting intention
Con 34%
Lab 25%
Lib 20%
UKIP 6%
Green 5%
BNP 2%
So, if UKIP + Grn + BNP = 13%
… and total “Others” = 21%
… then are the SNP/PC on 6% – 8% ?!?
Surely that is impossible? Scotland only accounts for about 8% – 9% of the Great Britain electorate!!
Are the SNP on about 66% of Scottish Euro voting intention? Even I must express profound skepticism.
Now that all three parties expenses have been exposed by the Daily Telegraph and have been/are been poured over by the media what do people think will be the impact on voting intention when the next polls are conducted and then released presuably in the coming days?
Go for it Alec.
I agree with ITT this time ,though, except for the 50% bit that whether fair or not the BBC (less Sky though) have ran on GB trying to catch up to DC. Was surprised with Nick Robinson on last nights 0900 news in his summary mentioned light bulbs and CGT but strangely no mention of the Chandeliers, manure and moat repairs (post Mc Bride boldness perhaps)
Snow on C4 challenged May on whether the types of claims meant the Tories are still nasty.
This is the main question in my view will this issue precipitate a mood swing over the coming months about the Tories regarding Toffs and out of touch etc etc.
FWIW – I think it may well but not enough to stop their victory but enough to stop a landslide.
Whilst we know 34% is an ethemeral number it does suggest around 1/4 of Tory support is not solid and that a different ‘catastrophe’ could impact close to the GE.
Hope for straw clutchers yet!
Scotland is 8% and Wales about 5% and lets not forget Northern Ireland at 3%.
So the non England percentage is 16%, of which Scotland and Wales make up about 70%.
So 6 to 8% of the UK vote from 16% of the Countries is about 40-50% outwith England.
Given that none of the UK parties stand in NI which makes up a third of that then the SNP and PC coming in with between 25-35% in their areas would be roughly consistant with a 6% share of the total UK vote.
We should learn more when the populus tables go up in the next day or two, but based on the above Times/Populus figures i’d say that for Scotland we might see;
Lab 26%, Con 23%, LibDem 14%, SNP 29%, Green 4% UKIP 2% BNP 1%, Christian Vote 1%. All +/-3% ( +/- 1% for parties under 5%)
The sleaze and expenses effect might well boost the SNP and LibDemsas labour and the tories seem to be the ones caught in the searchlight. Although Cameron’s performance may well have helped the tories escape the worst.
Peter.
Alec
It’s a fair point, and Andrew Lansley (I think it was) £24,000 for 12 days non-exec directors job didn’t quite equate to shelf-stacking. Still, it shows he is at least acutely aware of problems facing private companies.
If I could put my cynical hat on, it would be far better if MPs spent more time in their second jobs as they then have less time to spend damaging the country.
Cameron does need to remain strong if his backbenchers start criticising him. It has been an encouraging start from him (especially contrasted to the PM) and if he continues to stand up for taxpayers’ interests I don’t see it harming him in the long run.
Stuart,
While 21% for “others” may appear high, this is actually much lower than the 35% achieved in 2004 (which included 16.9% for UKIP).
Don’t know if you have had a look at the Euro-elections part of this site, but if you do, you may notice that “others” includes a bit more than SNP / Plaid, UKIP, Greens and BNP.
Excluding Ulster (different system), there are more than 10 choices on the ballot paper in eevry region – ranging from 11 in Wales to 19 in London.
With so many others to choose from, a combined score of 10% excluding those “others” who already have MEPs is not unlikely.
Mark – you may be right, but as I said previously, Cameron has a great deal more to lose than Brown. Once you put yourself forward as ‘the change’ anything that challenges this perception in the minds of voters will hurt you a lot more. If this widens into a general media investigation of second jobs and party funding it will hurt Cameron. For example, last year he recieved £1.7m from the ‘Industrial Council’. This is a shadow grouping that does nothing except channel money into the Tory party, without detailing where the money originates from. It has been deemed to be ‘within the rules’, but if Cameron wants to convince, that defence is simply not good enough. As he approaches power these questions will get louder and I expect he will face problems.
Richard – I would anticipate Labour continuing to scrape the bottom, a drop of some sort for the Tories, but some good poll numbers for the LD’s and ‘others’.
POLLS ??
I heard on some thread somewhere that a number of polls are being carried ou over the next few days ?
does anyone know who we are expecting?
As a Labour supporter, I’m dismayed. Hate to admit it but Cameron has clearly shown why there can now be little doubt that he will be in no 10 in 13 months time (or less?)
GB has been noticable by his absense, and the Labour party scramling to catch up yesterday (dispite being given a 3 day head start) was embarasing
From a polling point of view, I think that there are no winners in all of this(from the main parties), but Labour are the biggest losers, then the Lib Dems (having lost their high horse), and then the Tories.
I’ve been advocating leaving GB alone to finish off his term, but sad to say that there is no leadership at the moment, and in order to stop the rot, I think that the time has come to fold.
Who’s for a GE?
ADAM C
“…. but sad to say that there is no leadership at the moment, ”
“there are no winners in all of this(from the main parties), but Labour are the biggest losers,”
In a nutshell-totally agree with you-this is now the Paralysed Parliament .
I am for a GE before we all become comatose.
Nick Clegg is right, any profits from second homes should go back to the treasury.
The LibDems have come out of this mess very lightly.
If Labour are still in this mess in a couple of months I think a change of leader becomes inevitable – it may not save them but in the absence of anything else they may as well give it a go
Alec – Seems fair that if he starts to go back on either ‘change’ or ‘transparency’ then he certainly has a lot to lose. Perhaps we’ll start to hear about some of this ‘change’ that he intends to bring about in other areas soon.
Interestingly, Iain Dale had as his quote of the day the other day
“I was elected by you to give a lead and I am now doing just that.” – David Cameron in an address to the Conservative Parliamentary Party today. Stark contrast to the PM who was neither elected as leader of the Labour party nor is providing much leadership.
Leadership is the skill of knowing what to say, when to say it, to who(m) and how. It’s virtually part of the curriculum at any decent public school. Brown quite often slips up on each of the four elements, and sometimes all of them simultaneously. Cameron has a sure-footedness on this issue, simply because of his education.
Mark – I think Brown is effectively finished, as you imply. I has many qualities, but effective leadership is not one of them, and he instead relies on the worst of his qualities too often. Sadly, Cameron is a lightweight, but more worryingly, fundamentally dishonest. The Mirror asked him some serious questions yesterday about Lord Ashcroft, and whether it was right to take money from someone who refuses to confirm his UK based status or otherwise. Cameron refused to answer and tried to laugh it off. He will only act when the searchlights are upon him. His new intake of MPs will shift the parliamentary party decisively to the right.
I have little doubt that he will win the next election (just a small doubt) but I actually think that long term these are dangerous times for the Conservatives.
Alec,
But wasn’t Brown’s platform back in 2007 that he was the change ? Does anyone believe that now ? Would that not come back to haunt him should “change” be an issue at the GE ?
While there is some merit in your argument that Cameron was a part of the system, “change” is never going to hurt Cameron since he is manifestly different from Brown (even if there are some similarities with Blair !!). The more it is raised, the more evident it becomes what it is the country needs to change from.
On the very different issues of external interests and party funding, any muck-raking may just about win back some sympathy for Labour, but don’t be too hopeful. It is also probably unwise to make any linkage between the two.
Firstly – it is increasingly evident that career politicians have not served us well, so it is in the interests of our democracy that MPs have both outside experience before entering parliament and maintain outside interests once elected. There is also no evidence that such interests have been abused / misused in recent years.
Secondly – both on the question of party funding and income from outside interests, the blatantly politically mishandling by Brown last month reveals another aspect of “bash the toffs”. This is puerile and is no more likely to succeed at a general election than it did in Crewe. In his usual cack-handed fashion, Brown has managed to muddy the waters, and so prevented an issue worthy of debate from being properly discussed.
john-yes effective communication is a key element of leadership I agree.
But a leader needs to have something to communicate, and many other qualities too, not all of which are only to be found in a public school education.
Your assertion prompted me to do some research ( they usually do!)-a fascinating subject.
Alec :-
“His new intake of MPs will shift the parliamentary party decisively to the right. ”
That sounds interesting-could you provide the link to the data please.
“it is increasingly evident that career politicians have not served us well,”
Paul-there has been some fascinating correspondence in the Times over the last few days on MP’s-as perceived by their constituents.
One writer took up the notion-recently floated by an MP-that they should have salaries equivalent to that of GPs.The writer set out the training & education required to qualify as a GP, compared with the “qualifications” required to be an MP.!!
Another correspondent compared the qualifications of his middle aged GP with those of the 22year old who Labour tried to parachute into Erith & Thamesmead and asked by what criteria the latter should enjoy the same salary as the former.
“a leader needs to have something to communicate”
Colin,
If there’s nothing to communicate, a good leader will say nothing. I’ll shut up now if you will!
Colin,
“Alec :-
“His new intake of MPs will shift the parliamentary party decisively to the right. ”
That sounds interesting-could you provide the link to the data please.
I should allow Alec to reply but just happened to be reading this piece at the time so;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6195107.ece
For John TT/Alec etc it’s probably scary stuff but It sounds like good news to a right winger like me!
Paul H-J – agree with much of your last post. However – please don’t assume that I am wishing for a swing back to Labour. While they achieved some good things in office, in the main the last 12 years have been a missed opportunity, as will the next 5 I suspect.
Colin – apologies but I can’t locate the article I read, but I think it was in the Times fairly recently. It quoted a social attitudes study among the 100 most likely Tory target seats and the issues on matters ranging from fox hunting to sexuality were far to the right of what Cameron is trying to project. This is more relevant as the right wing will be very much emboldened by the need for budget cuts. In 97, there was absolutely no prospect that Labour would revert to type in power – Blair had never believed the old left stuff anyway. I’m not sure this time however. While Cameron is a winner he will control his party. My concern is that I don’t think he will remain a winner for long after the GE, and that’s when the trouble will start.
I’m not at all scared by the prospect Ivan – a little depressed at the change of direction, but if anything it would shorten the time Labour spent in oppostion if it came about.
Thanks Ivan.
I tracked back to the survey detail & found that of the 11 questions asked, I agreed with the majority response in 9 of them.
According to The Times’ interpretation that makes me a rightwinger. That’s not my idea of “right wing”.
At least two questions had majority support for a view which I would describe as the anithesis of “right wing”.
Is a 94% view that “too many powers have been transferred to the EU ” “Right Wing”?!
I think these labels are too freely used & mean very little unless applied to extreme political opinions-none of which featured in this survey.
I think the strap line was silly.
At least these new MPS-if that is what they become- will bring fresh thinking, post trough ethics, and replace the raddled bedblockers of all persuasions with the enthusiasm engendered by a charismatic leader with a vision for the country.
I remember thinking all that in 1997-hope it’s not deja vu all over again!.
Colin,
Surely you are not going to let the facts get in the way of a good story – which is how I interpreted the Times article when it first appeared.
I think we are seeing some interesting re-positioning in the media as both print & broadcast journalists adjust to the Cameron led Conservative government which will most probably arrive within the next 12 months.
Alec is right that there is some investigation of Tory funding and personal finances going on – at The Times – no evidence of this happening elsewhere as yet (the DT campaign being purely on MPs expenses). I sometimes wonder if this is part of a deliberate strategy to appear even-handed when the Murdoch press finally dumps Labour as the election approaches.
The views are ‘right wing’ only in that they are in opposition to the prevailing views of the current alledgedly ‘left wing’ Labour party!
I suspect in the eyes of a majority of non-politisised voters they are just ‘right’ views.
@IVAN THE TERRIBLE
Exactly right!
The same goes for “Far Right”… you could just as easily regard those who use that term as “Far Left”, in simple relativistic terms.
My understanding is that the origin of these terms is that the “left” was supposed to be the “radical” wing; and the “right”, the “conservative” wing.
Then we’ve got differences in economic “left v right” and socially “left v right”, with a triumvirate of parties that are all economically “right” and socially “left”; whilst singularly being as “conservative” in their politics as possible, by virtue of pursuing lowest common denominator marketing strategies.
The obvious truth is that the establishment (both media, public services, and mainstream parties), insinuate that “left-wing” is a synonym for “morally good”; and “right-wing” is a synonym for “evil”.
With that in mind, comments that frame resistance to the EU as “right wing”, are obviously insuating that resistance to the EU is a sign of “evil”; implying that those who oppose the EU are in some sense on a kind of slippery slope to sympathy with Nazism, because the EU is supposed to be the remedy for Nazism (…I’m sure that has particular resonance for people in the former Yugoslavia).
Advocates of this “argumentum ad opprobrium” position, habitually use logically fallacious arguments to attack EU resistence.
There is nothing “right wing” about suspicion, resistance, or outright opposition to the EU, particularly in the context of a century of seeing large artificial superstates (Austria-Hungary, British Empire, USSR, Yugoslavia…) disintegrate after decades of restrictions on freedom in order to sustain themselves.
The obvious response is to say, there is no “right” and “left”; only “right” and “wrong”, in order to associate “left-wingness” with what is morally “wrong” – certainly in terms of it’s impositions on freedom of thought and expression in order to drive through sociologist-statist plans.
Clearly, there is more radical thinking outside what is currently denoted the “left” these days. They don’t really deserve the appellation on either their radicalness or their redistributiveness; and certainly not their “progressiveness”! All we see is failed social engineering projects, of which, the EU is the great Leviathan.
I remember how Tory supporters and others denigrated Tony Blair as a lightweight in the nineties. This so called lightwieght nicknamed ‘Bambi’ went onto win three elections
Interesting to see people like Alec now say the same about David Cameron. Maybe he will win three elections too…
Sorry to change the subject but does anyone know whether the police are investigating any of the dodgy expenses claims? Most of the offences so far don’t seem to break any laws, just playing the system, but Elliot Morley’s looks worthy of a criminal investigation. Is there any reason why this isn’t happening? Or is it happening but not yet in the media?
@ Bill Furness
ofcourse the Lib Dems came out of this lightly, they are a small enough party to not be too suseptable to the media, that along with the fact that only 12 lib dem MP’s claiomed for anything like what Conservatives and Labour did, and im sure if any Lib Dem claimed cash to clean out their MOAT they would be under just the same judgful glare, in comparrison, the Lib Dems are saints in this issue comparred to the other mainstream parties.
Michael,
The saintliness of the Lib Dems is purely relative. If you look at the number of LD MPs named as a share of their MPs, then multiply by 3-5 for proper comparison with Con or Lab, then the picture is not very different..
Indeed, it is possible that the LDs may pay a higher electoral price since they have often taken a “holier-than-thou” line on this issue. If there is one thing the electorate don’t like, it is hypocrites.
For all his fine words, Clegg has not yet taken any action over his MPs.
Michael
Give up this is not a beauty contest. All parties should hang their heads in shame. It is a sad time for those of us who care about politics.
I agree with the above. It will be a plague on all their houses (or moats).
So what will be the turnout? 30%?
Laz,
On average, maybe. But I see few regions exceeding this and we may well see turnout dip below 25% in some entire regions – eg London – where there are no local elections.
Paul H-J
Thanks – I guess as some areas have 20% plus postals not many will appear in the Booths!
The populus tables are finally up and the scottish figures are;
Lab 26%, Tory 18%, Libdem 13%, SNP 38%, Others 5%.
As ever it’s an itsy bitsy sample but the trend looks good for the SNP and fits well with the Notional idea that the Westminster parties are all suffering an smaller and Regional ( in our case national) parties are benefitting.
looking back over the last ten Populus times polls till june of last year the figures are predictably erratic given the samples but do confirm the UKtrend of labour recovering in the autumn only to fall back again since January.
This creates a problem because as I would normally try to see a trend between the last five polls and the five before that in the summer, the peak in the middle that starddles both samples in the autumn cancels any changes out.
Still right now I’d put us ahead and with the Speaker like the raven speaking no more we have a Glasgow By election to look foward to.
Did I mention that Michael Martins seat covers Quarrywood Rd where i was born, and Robroyston Ave where I lived until I left Glasgow aged eleven.
I am looking forward to going back.
Peter.
Peter,
Enjoy the trip down memory lane – but you may find that there is a sharp contrast between memory and the current reality.
Of course, Glasgow may not have changed as much as the places where I was born (Basra) or lived until age 12 (Beirut) .
Incidentally – don’t assume that there will in fact be a by-election. The seta does not fall vacant until 21 June, so a by-election could well be defererd until late September, and if Parliament is dissolved beforehand there will not be a by-election (probably Labour’s best hope of retaining that particular seat).