More on Ipsos MORI’s 6 point lead
The tables for Ipsos MORI’s poll are now up on their website, so we can dig about and see what’s actually happened.
Regular readers will know that the big difference between MORI and other pollsters is that MORI do not politically weight their sample. All the pollsters including MORI weight their samples by known demographic figures like age, gender, social class and region. All except MORI also use political weighting, normally weighting by how people claim they voted at the last election.
There’s a much longer explanation of why most pollsters do this and MORI do not here, but the very short version is that people aren’t very good at recalling their 2005 vote. ICM, Populus and ComRes take the view that past recall is pretty stable over time and can be estimated well enough to weight by, MORI take the view that it’s too unstable and should not be used for weighting. The result is that MORI’s samples run the risk of varying politically from month to month more than those of other companies (though MORI would claim the opposite – that other companies risk weighting out genuine public volatility). In a case like this, it raises the question of to what extent the shift is down to people changing their minds, and what extent it is just a more Labour sample.
In MORI’s poll last month which showed a 17 point Tory lead, amongst those who voted in 2005 32% said they voted Conservative, 43% Labour and 16% Liberal Democrat. In this month’s poll which shows a 6 point Tory lead the figures of recalled 2005 vote break down as Conservative 29%, Labour 46% and 16% Liberal Democrat – so a 6 point change in the recalled lead from 2005. (For reference, ICM weighted their sample so recalled 2005 vote was Conservative 33%, Labour 38% and Lib Dem 22% – even they don’t weight to the actual figures because of false recall).
So part of the reason for the shift in MORI’s voting intentions since last month is that their sample appears to have had significantly fewer people who voted Tory in 2005 and significantly more people who voted Labour in 2005 (again, from MORI’s point of view at least some of that would be changes in the level of false recall).
However, this does not explain the whole difference. If you look at the rest of the survey’s innards, there is real movement in Labour’s favour too. Likelihood of Labour supporters voting has increased, that of Conservatives deceased – but in both cases the change is too small to be significant. More interestingly there was an increase in the likelihood of people who voted Labour in 2005 to vote Labour now – in October 65% of former Labour voters said they would back the party this time, this month 72% of Labour’s 2005 voters said they would back the party.
In conclusion, while a lot of the massive shift in voting intentions in this poll appeares to be down to sample variation, there’s a modest firming of the Labour vote too. We should still wait for some more polls to see whether that itself is real, and whether other companies also pick up a firming of the Labour vote. I wouldn’t, however, expect any company using political weighting to show quite such a narrowing of the lead.
Filed under: MORI, Methodology
could this poll prompt others to be commissioned from other companies to see if there is a genuine narrowing or will the usual cycle (if you can call it that, some seem quite infrequent) just continue?
Like OLDNAT, I’m more interested in the situation on the Celtic and Gaelic fringes of the UK than the GB figures most polls provide. At least this one does break out the England figures, where the decline in the official unionist lead is less marked, viz:
Party, England, GB
Con, 40.48%, 37.50%
Lab, 31.64%, 31.03%
L-D, 16.89%, 17.41%
Other, 10.99%, 14.06%
Does anyone know of a Westmidden calculator where you can enter the four national predictions to come up with a revised House of Cards?
Outlier or not, this is giving a real boost to the morale of the Labour foot soldiers, already in better spirits after the Glasgow result.
Support on the ground is firming up, possibly due to the improving financial situation (or the absence of continual Recession stories topping the news).
The Sun’s attack on Brown over the letter has backfired spectacularly – even people never previously sympathetic to Labour are saying they now support him. I think his performance in Cockermouth with flood victims will have done him some good also.
The fact that the Tory lead seems to have – in my area at least – relied on Govt unpopularity rather than any large scale switching from Lab to Con has always meant that it would be vulnerable to a firming up of the Labour vote as an election and the prospect of a Conservative govt approaches.
With a favourable media, better resources and targeting, the time-lag effect of unemployment vs recovery and a fresh leader still ought to put the Tories in a winning position, but polls like this must be making them very nervous.
Strange that this poll has the LDs weaker in England than in GB as a whole since most polls how the LDs doing worse in Scotland and Wales than GB.
The regional breakdowns look a little suspect, especially in London and the South.
Brownedov
Obviously we won’t know whether this is a rogue poll or a prescient indicator until the next round of polling, but a golden rule for historians when studying limited data is to ask “Is it likely?”
Looking at the changes from October in Mori produces
Party, GB, Eng
Con, -4.9%, -7.0%
Lab, +5.4%, +7.2%
LD, -1.1%, -3.8%
Oth, +2.7%, +2.9%
It simply seems unlikely that the shift from Con to Lab should be greater in England than in GB as a whole.
At the moment the govenment is pumping so much money into the economy, most people are not feeling the influence of the downturn. This is leading to a feeling of normality; however, once the pumping stops and the taxes / cuts start to bite, the government’s popularity could plummet . The question is, can the current government carry on pumping money in until the next election – will they be able to carry on borrowing until then?
One of the points, psephologists do not point out, many of them Tory, is that 2005 recall is not really Total Recall because of the Iraq / Liar factor.
I did not vote Labour then, but I will be there at 7am on polling day. Many Labour supporters did not vote at all knowing their party would win. The situation is different this time.
It is backs to the wall situation, Labour supporters will not be staying at home !
Could part of the collapse in the Tory vote be due to Cameron and his announcement that there will be no referendum on Lisbon if the Conservatives get into power?
No doubt they have done the regional weighting properly but I was wondering just how many average Glaswegians would need to be substituted for average non-Glaswegians to ptoduce a change of this magnitude. It would be worryingly few.
That relates to Brownedov’s point above.
Every time there is a new poll partisan posters here post their updated prediction for seats. If I am right that, less popular though Labour undoubtedly is, and though they will lose many votes, the effect in seats in Scotland will be marginal, and that there could be as few as only one Con gain and maybe five Labour losses.
The effect of that being separated out from national Lab/Con swings puts us in small (or no) majority territory.
That’s not inconsistent with a situation where neither the Conservatives nor the SNP are winning hearts and minds and Labour are disappointing their floating voters and regular supporters as well as angering their core vote.
So this poll might be a bad poll with a good seat prediction.
Imtiaz Kabir – the pollsters do also include an appropriate proportion of people who did not vote last time – I’ve used repercentaged figures for only those who claimed they voted so the difference it makes is clearer, but to give the full breakdown MORI’s sample included
2005 recalled vote
19% Conservative
30% Labour
10% Lib Dem
6% Other
22% Didn’t vote
4% Were too young to vote
6% Couldn’t remember
3% Refused to say
@Brownedov:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/index.html?userregpoll.html
Labour foot soldiers had better lay off the spirits, and not be heartened by the Glasgow bye-election result.
They would be better advised to direct their thoughts towards what went wrong in Glasgow East.
Glasgow North had been Labour for 74 years. The voting age then was 21. To have voted in this constituency in the last election when there was a successful non-Labour candidate you would need to be about 100 years old. To have voted in the one before that I think you might have had to be male too.
There are unlikely to be many centenarians in a constituency with one of the worst health records in the country – the EU even, and I would be prepared to bet that there is nobody alive to-day living in Glasgow North who voted in an election which returned a non-Labour MP for that constituency.
Had it not been for the fact that Labour lost Glasgow East there would be no euphoria. I am still trying to understand that result.
Glasgow people quote a comment from a less well-informed but enthusiastic Orange Lodge, Protestant (or rather anti-Catholic) Unionist who if he existed at all would as like as not live in Glasgow North. He is said to have asked “Is the Pope a Catholic?”
An eqivalent I saw the other day is “Does Dolly Parton sleep on her back?”
So Labour won an election in Glasgow. Is the Pope still a Catholic?
Oldnat
A shift from Con to Lab might be possible in Wales, but in Scotland it is about as believable as a shift direct from Lab to Con
OLDNAT
Fair comment, but there are other factors to consider.
The fact that only 43.02% (Oct 43.71%) of those sampled are certain to vote indicates that either the GE is going to have the lowest turnout since WW2 by a country mile (2001 holds that record with nearly 60% in both Scotland + England – not sure of GB figure) OR that many who will actually vote have not made up their minds or perhaps are reluctant to admit who they’re voting for.
There’s also the absence of weighting by political ID, which must give greater likelihood of an outlier.
I’ll post fullier elsewhere, where political ID is not discouraged.
I think this is a rogue poll
Unless there are several more like it then I will continue to expect Labour to get slaughtered in May or June
A Wells – The recollection figures in this poll is in itself proof that any weighting based on recollection is faulty.
That MORI does not do it does not make their polls better, but, equally, does not make it worse.
MICHAEL
Thanks for link, but not quite what I meant.
I’ve seen that one before, but it doesn’t allow putting in overall “England” values.
The Scottish and Welsh polls may be fewer than the GB ones, but they do show a rather different political system to the one to which England is currently condemned.
A simple calculator where you are offered vote share percentage entry in each of the four “home” nations would actually be easier to write than some of the complex “regional” splits currently on offer.
If this poll was (on Nov 15) anything approaching correct and a “balanced” Westmidden beckons then such a calculator will be much more relevant than anything I’ve yet seen.
Amthony – thanks for that very helpful addendum. Unlike your good self I am not a polling expert but I have this suggestion which I think accords with what you are saying.
There has over the past few moinths been a firming up of the Labour vote – especially in response to the Osbourne “age of austerity “speech as it marked out a very traditonal left /right split.This would have motivated the Labour core vote. Politically I believe whoever gets in will be forced to cut spending and raise taxes but thats not quite how Labour are coming over at the moment.
At the same time there has been a dimming of enthusiasm amongst the Tory core vote because of primarily the “no Lisbon referendum” policy from David Cameron. It matters not one whit that I a Tory voter happens to think that Cameron’s policyy is a real assesment of what is achievable at present in our relationship with Europe, I have to accept that many of my fellow Tories felt this was a body blow and has caused a fair degree of disillusion and almost knocked the stuffing and enthusiasm out of them even voting at the next election.
However I very much doubt that this state of affairs will last – the very prospect of another 5 years of Gordon Brown is almost cetain to galvanise the Tory core vote again.Upto now the hardline Eurosceptics could indulge themselves and think it won’t really affect the result if I abstain or vote UKIP.If this poll, is anywhere near on the money then it shows that it most certainly will.
The scare of the Mori Poll will not necessarily show up in the next set of polls unless the fieldwok is done later this week but I do expect to see the gap widen again ironically because of Mori. Hope that is intelligible!
@Brownedov
Well there’s nothing I’ve seen that can do that for free, but if you have the UK-Elect forecaster this can be done. Entering the percentages you mentioned for the UK, and then England gives:
CON 309 – LAB 276 – LD 31
I am not getting too carried away with this poll, but the fact that Labour need to be within 5% of the Tories to be the biggest party at the next election means that it will possibly be a close run thing provided they are not any major new problems for Labour. Generally speaking in an election capaign, support does flow back towards the governing party. Ths means that if Labour can peg back the gap to around 8% by next spring, there is a real chance of being returned. Of course we could have a 97 scenario where people end up voting tactically to get rid of the sitting MP which would throw all of these polls out of the window.
Michael
Are you saying that the Con majority over Labour in England will be 33 and that to form a government Mr Cameron needs the Labour majority over Conservative in Scotland needs to be 32 or fewer?
If so, I think the Conservative party will soon see formerly unrecognised merit in Scottish independence.
There’s an interesting article in the Guardian today suggesting that the people who would lose out from a hung parliament the most would be, of all people, the Lib Dems. They would be stuck with the horrors of (a) an alliance with the Tories that could tear the party apart over PR, (b) an alliance with Labour that could destroy the party’s national support, (c) a hung parliament that would let Cameron “do a Salmond” and minority-government Labour and the Liberals to death.
(c) is perhaps the most interesting scenario historically. Minority governments in the past have always had a lot of trouble, but Salmond has now set a precedent for minority governments- through skillful manipulation- to play the opposition like a fiddle. Would it work in Westminister? Would it lead to a second election? It would be fascinating to see, though it would be exactly what the country doesn’t need in the middle of an economic crisis and two political crises (Scottish nationalism and the moral bankrupcy of Westminister).
Cameron might also use coalition and minority politics as a “It wasnee me!” tactic. Basically, if the Conservatives get a relative majority in 2010, Cameron has an excuse for EVERYTHING. Anything that he does that the Tory base don’t like can be put down to the minority situation, while minority leaders like Callaghan have historically had a very sympathetic public (remember, it took the Winter of Discontent to bring down Labour in 1979 and get Maggie into No. 10). People put up with more under minority governments because a minority government can take credit for anything and deny accountability for anything.
That’s why it puzzles me why so many seem to regard a Tory minority administration with glee. It’s appealing to ME, because a Conservative-Liberal coalition or a weak government are my favoured outcomes, but if I was a Labour supporter or a Liberal I’d be terrified at the prospect.
Those figures were the totals for the entire UK, but I see how my post could have caused a bit of confusion.
This is an incredibly worrying poll.
Does anyone know when the next 2-3 polls are due so we can hopefully get a bit of comfort that this was a freak result?
MICHAEL
OK. Thanks. Perhaps Electoral Calculus can be persuaded to offer one.
So its a by election firming which has been blown out of all proportion by a polling method which is subject to more variation, by a paper that wants to sell Labour and by a pollster that is trying to sell its polls.
Brown’s battered reputation has been weighing heavily on Labour’s back. Afghanistan helicopters has hurt. I’m sure that’s why they’ve been below rock-bottom-30%.
Plenty of politics talked in the shop this week. Everyone I’ve spoken to was warmed and heartened to hear that Brown takes time to handwrite letters to the bereaved. Spelling errors attibuted to disability and eccentricty.
There’s also a feeling that the Sun attacking Brown so viciously so soon after dumping him and moving into Cameron’s flat has put the tories in a bad light, the tories equating the Sun I suppose.
Brown looking in control of the floods again, too. Just when you think he is down he summons an act of god and his vitality is restored.
So I expect a shift of a couple of points as the effect of the Sun and the Rains to kick in. Are we miles off?
I can’t for the lifeof me understand why Anthony Myers thinks this is ‘an incredibly worrying poll’. To my mind it could indicate that, people, whilst realisng that cuts in pubic spending are inevitable, are being persuaded that Labour would take a more compassionate and sensitive approach toward this process.
I must say I don’t get the same feeling as I did in 97 that the country really wants change. A lot of my friends are not clear on what Cameron stands for and are more likely to give Brown the benefit of the doubt.
Most of my family have moved back to labour and one is opting for UKIP. Interesting times.
Am I the only that finds it funny that as soon its a slightly pro-Labour poll they criticise Mori lots. If it showed a 20 point Tory I’m sure they’d all be queueing up to proclaim that it was a reflection of how the public feel.
However, I do kind of want it to be off as I’m really not liking these low Lib Dem polling figures.
“Everyone I’ve spoken to was warmed and heartened to hear that Brown takes time to handwrite letters to the bereaved…”
Brown is simply continiuing with a tradition started by Maggie during the Falklands, and carried on discreetly by Major and Blair.
The Daily Mail hates Cameron.
@ EPOCHERY :-
“Generally speaking in an election capaign, support does flow back towards the governing party”
This has been demonstrated as untrue on Political Betting , on more than one occasion.
Recommend a trawl through their archive for the data.
This poll would have to be repeated a half dozen times in the next month before I would accept the conclusions which have been drawn by much of the Press. In any case I believe Labour have to push any final Tory voting lead down to about 2 – 4% to deny them a majority of seats in the Commons.
What the Tories need to focus on are the total weighted and unweighted figures. I noted this last month with IMORI. Last month the total weighted/unweighted figures were C40% L31% / Con39% L31%. Yet this poll gave an headline figure of a 17% Tory lead. This month the figures are C34% L34% / Con35% L33%. Giving an headline figure of 6% Tory lead. This is what is the worrying trend for the Tories.
You are all wasting your time until there are at least another couple of polls and that should give us more indication.
This just has to be a rogue poll, but I await to be proved wrong!
My prediction is now:
Con ~ 40-42
Lab ~ 28-30
LD ~ 17-19
Apologies for breaking rules.
I am of course delighted by this poll – but it is only one and must be an outlier. Opinion does not move that quick. There is however (based on my canvassing) a large unknown or unsure still up for grabs, and it would be more helpful to see the raw data with unknowns included and not the headline grabbing data designed to sell the Observer
The raw figures seem to be 7% undecided, which rises to 9% among women. The definites now seem pretty solid, but there is a lot to play for in the D/K category. Game on I would say
Will not vote is 10%
After Nick Clegg said they are prepared to work with the party with the greatest votes the Lib Dems may be the beneficiary of this poll.
Andrew Myers
‘This is an incredibly worrying poll’
There are 3 reasons why you don’t need to worry
1 It is a rogue poll
2 It is a rogue poll
3 It is a rogue poll
Just thought of another
4 It is a rogue poll
Michael
Do you have an estimate for Lab/Con in UK-Scotland. Then we could see whether the Conservatives need 20 SNP MP’s more than Alex Salmond does.
If they do, they will be disappointed.
In Scotland Orange Unionists (traditionally voting Tory) have been advised that voting Labour to keep out the SNP is the best way to protect the Union. I don’t think they need to bother. Labour are not that much at risk in the West.
@ David Bowtell
It’s worrying (if indeed it is representative) because [...snip - I think for the sake of the comments policy we can leave it at it is worrying because you don't want Labour to win - AW]
My sense is that the electorate’s support for Cameron is only skin deep. The high polling over the past two years was a result of voters being turned off by a chaotic and at times incoherent Brown administration rather than being in love with the Tories. Cameron hit the ground running with a politically sophisticated early leadership. His leftish leaning noises on –for example environment, public sector and tax played well with the majority and were seductive to non Tory voters. If I remember correctly, (maybe not!) there were even warmer words for trade unions.
We can debate the reasons, but the softer side to the Tories now seems to be making way, for a harder edge. They’ve not been able to sustain their momentum on the environment and talk of immanently slashing the public sector to pay off the public sector deficit has support, but nevertheless risks losing the offer of a break with the Tory past. In previous times, they might have been able to get away with that, but after three terms of a Labour Government, the electorate is used to a more interventionist Government – and don’t seem to be sufficiently angry with it to change their view fundamentally.
For me it’s the Tories changing attitude to the BBC which seems to be a strong indicator of where they are politically. In the early days, Cameron seemed to extend the hand of friendship to the Beeb, but there have been more hostile noises from his team of late.
@PAUL(BROWNOUTIN2010 – It’s too simplistic to dismiss this as an out and out rogue. AW confirmed here what some of us said in the previous post – namely that the lead here looks suspect, but there is some evidence for a Labour boost. You also have to accept that 4 out of 7 polls since Nov 5th have the Tories below 40%. Apart from the conference season, its a long time since we had those kind of numbers. It’s too early to call this a positive step for Labour, likewise too soon to cry rogue.
On another matter, I wonder if Cameron has slipped up slightly with the talk of an emergency budget. I understand what he’s saying, and a new government in these circumstances probably should have a quick review of the financial situation, but by announcing this now he is risking raising the image of the Tories going for rapid and savage cuts. Putting aside the economic arguements for a moment, by telling us he wants an emergency budget without saying what would be in it , he may have set some people’s imagination running in a way that won’t help him gain their votes. I wonder if this is the brightest political manouvere, especially if people’s economic confidence is on the rise? I’m only pondering out loud here, and wondering what others may think of this, so please don’t accuse me of being a leftie keysian marxist economist, Labour stooge, or any of the other nonsense that gets chucked my way with monotonous regularity.
Do English Conservatives in this site know what FPTP does to their party in Scotland? With 16% of the vote last time they got less than 2% of the seats.
The SNP and LibDems together got almost the same number of votes as Labour, but Labour got well over twice as many seats. The Lab majority over Con in Scotland could be 30+ I don’t see where the changes could come from that would make it 25.
The less likely but possible Con Gains aren’t all from Labour and the less likely but possible Labour losses aren’t all to Con so they only make half as much difference as a direct Lab to Con change in England.
I’ll add an surplus for Labour of 33 to any Con/Lab projection for r-UK if someone will offer one.
If you don’t like it you can follow the PR model of the Scottish Parliament when reforming the r-UK one after independence. The 33 will all be unemployed including GB and AD.
OLDNAT
How am I doing in promoting independence amongst English Tories? Better than the SNP supporters here? It’s not even my first preference and I havn’t even mentioned the West Lothian Question yet.
There must be some despair among those in the Labour party who want to change their leader – with this poll and the Glasgow NE by-election probably giving a false impression of how well the party is going to do in an election in 24 weeks time.
@ Anthony – apologies for breaching the policy in my response to David.
I have taken a look at the polls at this time in 1996. Labour were between 14 and 37 points ahead. In the immediate run up to the 1997 election they were between 5 and 24 points ahead.
The final result was a 13 point lead.
it does seem like there were wilder fluctuations in the polls back then but they did vary by a considerable margin.
The jury is out here but if future polls slip down to 2 to 4 point lead we are definitely in hung parliament territory.
This will be a remarkable turnaround for Brown – I’m still thinking Cameron will get in with a majority come the actual judgement day but I think it could be a much closer run thing than previously thought. We might be talking 10 to 15 seats.
John B Dick
To keep this within site policy, I’ll simply say that your stance (if I guess it correctly) is supported by the only fairly recent polling that I have seen which actually looked at which powers Scots wanted to be exercised in Holyrood, and which at Westminster, in which generally Defence and Foreign Affairs were seen as being UK issues, and most other things for Holyrood.
John B Dick,
I for one have no interest in getting English tories to support Independence. I want Scots voters to support Independence because any move to it without the backing of the majority of scots would mean starting on the wrong foot.
In addition i think the prospect of that regressive strand of self serving conservatism that wants to dump scotland for party political gain or that sees Scots as steriotypical spongers would be bad for England.
I’d hate our neighbour in the south to have a narrow minded reactionary right wing government.
Peter.
John B Dick
“How am I doing in promoting independence amongst English Tories?”
Not sure if I’m included in that, but nearly everyone I know in England, of whatever party fully supports Scottish independence. Indeed I think we should have a UK-wide referendum on the subject.
I think Labour would be more anxious to keep Scotland in the Union because of the number of seats they hold.
Pete B
Has there been any polling on this in England? I haven’t seen any, but it would certainly be interesting.
Generally, I’m with Peter on nations voting positively FOR their own independence as opposed to AGAINST the other nations in the current UK Union
You are right, Adam
The announcement by David Cameron that there will not be a referendum on the Lisbon treaty can easily explain the recent decline of the Tory support in that poll.
He still has a few months to change his mind and get the landslide he will deserve.
Rudy
I’ve never seem any polling on it either, but I was just being mischievous.
It would be unfortunate if the rest of the UK opted to cut Scotland adrift when the majority of Scots didn’t actually want to go. (Quite funny though)
Pete B
It would certainly be a fascinating constitutional issue!
Technically, I suspect one would have to go back to the pre 1707 partners in the Union when England & Wales were one of the partners that negotiated the 1707 Union and Scotland the other. Under the UN Charter, the population of either country would have the right to vote for their own independence by repealing the Act of Union that their respective Parliaments signed.
Doubtless the Welsh would have the right to secede from England since they were only subject to the English Crown by right of conquest.
I don’t know of a case where the conquering power has ever voted to kick out the conquered – so I don’t know how England could rid themselves of the Welsh, if they didn’t want to go.
How would one deal with NI, where their Union with the combined E&W and Scotland was the result of an Act of the Irish Parliament?
(I can be mischevious too!)
If Cameron wins then we have to consider the effects a vast popluation shift as people move to Scotland and support total independance from England
One poll proves nothing though
I think this poll is very good news for the Tories. No one in the Labour Party will be able to get rid of Brown now as they see this as a hope.
Right wing tories, however will hold their collective nose and vote for Cameron as they would suffer from a Tory/Liberal pact which would be more pro europe.
@WARREN
Are you seriously saying that despite the appaling debt, the shambles that is Afghanistan, the lies deceit and selfserving, over the last 12 years, a visit to Cockermouth makes it all ok ?
Have the British people really come to that ?
@SALLYC
Spot on Sally in every particular.
Nick Clegg has allegedly said he will support the Tories in the event they are the biggest party in a hung parliament so we only need to start worrying if the WMA starts to suggest Labour as the biggest party.
@ JOHN B DICK
You are doing a grand job of confirming my support for an independent England.
I have always wished the Scottish Nationalists every success they wish themselves.
What I don’t understand is why MORI didn’t release their result until yesterday – it is well over a week old and doesn’t relate to two polls conducted at the same time.
Also, it has dominated the news and the CBI conference is this morning?????
@ALEC
Whilst it is alleged that public confidence in the economy is riseing, the reality is with every day that goes by, the debt becomes less and less manageable. It is all very well Carl and Tracy of Luton not yet feeling the pinch to much and feeling sorry for Mr Brown because the Sun was horrible, but the facts of economic life continue.
Cameron has every business to make contingency plans, just in case the Tories do scrape home.
Re Scots Independence.
Do the English care? Is there any polling data?
That John an Edward are from Dublin, not Scotland, do we see the difference?
Who was the most foreign? Johnny Giles or Billy Bremner.
Who’s the most British on a morning? Nicky Campbell or Terry Wogan?
I don’t know whether it is time, or travel, or the EU, or football or whatever, but Scots independence might well have happened, as far as we’re concerened. When it does happen, we won’t notice, our lives will be unaffected.
Presently, the only differencebto me between an independent ROI and a “subjugated” Scotland is as follows:
Bring your Irish Euros into my shop and I will accept them. I do not accept scottish notes at all. Go figure!
Is there a Scottish Breakdown available
The 15% “others ” is quite high?
OldNat – there are occassionally polls of England or Great Britain as a whole asking about Scottish independence. Here’s one from 2007 (the nationality cross break there is actually which nation people were from, not their nationality!)
Irere – The Observer publishes on Sunday. Ipsos-MORI do their political monitor over a weekend – therefore by necessity there has to be a week’s gap for MORI’s political monitor to be published in the Observer.
King Harold – no “alleged” about it. At the very least YouGov, MORI, NOP and TNS all do trackers of economic optimism and they all show it recovering.
Paul – no Scottish break I’m afraid. If there was, the sample size would be so absurdly small I would have urged you to ignore it anyway! The other breakdown is SNP/PC 3%, Green 3%, UKIP 3%, BNP 2%, “Other others” 4%.
Hi Anthony, the link you provide is dead.
@ Anthony Wells
I stand corrected.
@King Harold – I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but the question I raised was whether the political presentation of an emergency budget is helpful in the task of gaining votes. It’s slightly unusual for me, in that I may be in the position of criticising Cameron for publically stating a reasonably sensible position to take in financial planning terms that could look bad presentationally. Normally I am highly critical of Cameron for the reverse – for being obsessed with presentation at the expense of honesty (eg, being trailed by a private photographer in a garden of remembrance…)
To be honest, I don’t know the answer to original question I posed – I was merely interested in what other people might think.
Shopkeeper –
Whoops! Missed the f off the end of pdf. Should be working now.
@ALEC
Yes, as you say the most common complaint about Dave is all fluff no substance. This at least is him doing somthing. The message I get is “the economy is a huge mess, it needs planning to tackle the debt now”. I imagine with a firming up of the Labour vote, the Tories will be attacking mounting debt harder. The BBC & ITV have been telling people how bad it all is, but have that many people really felt the pinch yet? Unemployment seems to be the obvious factor which has reduced an individuals or family’s living standards.
Interestingly a majority support the idea of reducing debt.
Alec – what I noticed was a hint that Cameron recognises that savage cuts + straightkindofguytalk = fewer votes. He’s leaving the bad news rhetoric behind, and his emergency budget is portrayed by him as a budget for growth, rather than simply one for cuts.
I would have thought that a new Govt would have a new budget pretty quickly anyway, Unless they had committed to sticking to the plans of the old Govt.
@ALEC & JOHN TT
The issue of telling voters the truth (and starting a new tradition), and not getting into Blair soundbite mode is interesting. Cameron does need to push the point that borrowing at the present level is not only pushing our luck but the luck of our grandchildren. Keyenes lovers will disagree, however take my point we are talking about Tories. If the people would prefer Labours “sweet little lies” because its nicer and easier to live with (for now), Cameron has a real problem. Growth may pick up but will the debt go down, and if not what will be the effect. This has to be Camerons pitch and the truth will hurt.
Cameron clearly doesn’t agree with that. He’s leaving behind the “age of austerity” stuff, and probably listening to the IMF and other sensible observers who are urging caustion when it comes to quick and painful policy errors.
It was enlightening to hear him talk recently (or did I read him somewhere) of his fear of messing things up.
The “grandchildren will pay” line only works if the grandchildren haven’t grown up and paid in the past, and of course they have. Long term debt is preferable to short term agony.
So it’s not people preferring lies that Cameron is worried about, it’s people preferring common sense as approved by the IMF.
@John tt
Well if thats the case there is no difference between Tory and Labour.
Conservative Home’s “Centre Right” has Stephan Shakespeare from YouGov talking about the details of the poll and the criteria used for arriving at the final figures . One clear conclusion he makes is that MORI’s methodology has volatility bui;t into it.
The article is worth the read.
Alec,
If you recall there was much discussion here during the conference season as to what effect telling it straight on the economy would have. In the main, most peole do not fully grasp the inter-connection between tax, spending and debt, but I think we can safely assume that the public prefer palliatives to the bitter truth.
In that context it is interesting that Cameron has the courage to say things which might not be immediately attractive to the electorate.
To me, that suggests that he may display a firmer backbone as PM than some of his predecessors (from both sides of the house).
Whetehr that can translate into votes in the spotlight of an election campaign remains to be seen, but if teh Government’s plans are scrutinised as thoroughly as Cameron’s, then it should prove illuminating and instructive.
Which is why it’ll come down to who looks nicer.
It’s only after the GE that real differences will emerge. Thatcher didn’t get in in 1979 based on her policies on wholesale privatisation, closing down mines and doubling VAT to make income tax cuts, because those policies didn’t exist before she got in.
If Cameron sticks to his guns now, he’ll have a small majority and lots and lots of marginals to defend in 2015. The trick should be to say the cuts will be balanced by growth for now, and then blame Brown when the time comes to wipe out large portions of the public sector.
Sorry, I was addressing King harold when I wrote “which is why..”
I think Adam got it spot on. It is the Cameron retreat on Europe amongst my Tory friends which has demotivated them. They are all non-plussed that he didn’t opt for a referendum to endorse the proposed Sovereinty Act, which if endorsed by the public in a referendum would defacto make it binding on any future administration facing a treaty which gave more powers to Europe. Sun Newpaper nastiness to Brown over the Janes letter backfired badly too. It might be a rogue poll, but I suspect it is directionally correct if somewhat too much in Labour’s direction. We shall have to wait and see confirmation from others.
Please can everyone remember that “UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of POLLS.”
There are sites a-plenty for having political discussions. By having these here we are distracted from examining professionally what the polls ac tually represent.
As Stephan Shakespeare writes “That this particular poll should produce some outlandish figures is even less of a surprise. When pollsters talk about a margin of error of plus or minus 3% it is based on a sample of 1000 people. However, the voting intention figures in this poll weren’t based on 1000 people. Firstly only 799 people gave a voting intention. On top of that MORI excluded all of those who were not 10/10 certain they would vote, leaving only 449 people – the margin of error on that is plus or minus 4.6%.”
Mr Wells – Could you please read a polite riot act?
Note to all: there is no such thing as a pro-Labour or pro-Tory or pro-Anyone poll. There are polls which show good results for some parties and there are polls that show bad results for some parties. It is not possible, following scientific polling methods, for a poll to be “biased”.
This is one difference between polls and the anecdotal evidence some people bring up on here. I would think that my generation was entirely made up of small l-liberals (liberal in the sense of liking liberty rather than in the sense of liking a large oppressive socially-interventionist state) if it wasn’t from my exposure to actual hard evidence of their opinions in the form of polls and student democracy.
John T. T. : I think Cameron will opt to be as explicit as is politically possible come June. The more he puts into his manifesto, the more he castrates the Labour controlled House of Lords.
@John tt
Well I like the look of your first sentence. We might as well break out the Moet now.
Just read on PH that 50% of ‘insiders’ expect other polls to show the Tory lead reduced to single figures. One would assume that the ‘insiders’ are not naive enough to rush to judgement on the evidence of a single poll.
@christina speight, this is the same polling company, using the same methodology, which last month produced a Tory lead of 17%.
Bill “as explicit as is politically possible”
Well don’t they all operate on that basis?
KH – Nyetimber, surely?
Christina – Are you related to THE ORACLE – a pro among pros?
testing testing
@ Christina – maybe you should relax a little more. After the first 50 responses or so there isn’t much left to say about an individual poll, and AW’s leeway in letting us ramble on harmlessly here in the dark recesses of ageing threads at least keeps us off the streets.
To the other responses to my query – thanks, it’s interesting. The point that growth is being heavily trailed as a key element of the debt solution today by non other than the CBI is interesting – in general tone it rather backs up Labour’s approach, and there is no question that most economists see more risks in rapid withdrawal of government support as opposed to over shooting on the debt. In truth, there isn’t much between the two parties on this really, which is one reason why I thought Cameron had goofed with the talk of cuts. I also didn’t see Cameron’s conference approach as honest straight talking – they identified a tiny fraction of the cuts they say are needed, and even these didn’t stack up financially. If you are going to claim the honesty mantle you really need to go the distance with it. Unfortunately he has now raised the prospect of deep cuts in many voters minds and potentially given Labour lots of weapons to weild on the doorstep (he’ll cut this,that and the other etc – it doesn’t have to be true to get people worried).
Please don’t think I am just being critical of Cameron for the sake of it though. I’m interested in what messages will swing the polls, and I feel that Brown’s growth arguement is more palitable and tactically astute, although I’m not necessarily claiming it is either correct or honest. It’s just a much more wobbly target to hit where you end up arguing about how much the economy will grow in the future rather than pointing to real jobs and services that might be cut now. I think a great deal of how this debate will pan out will come down the Labour’s credibility. If there is any sense of recovery that would help in this respect, and make Cameron’s task of attacking a reliance on some nebulous future growth even harder.
@Alec – There’s plenty more to say about the poll if you take the trouble to read the figures. Surely there’s somewhere else to argue political points without hijacking this excellent and vital technical blog.
@John TT – not related to any other blogger anywhere – I always use my own name except for a time i ADDED Cassandra to the real name when predicting economic catastrophe. . Only relations upwards were my Mum and (I hope ) my Dad.
“By having these here we are distracted from examining professionally what the polls ac tually represent.”
Well I for one am happy to be distracted from time to time, and grateful that Anthony allows it.
What the polls actually represent is the problem-and frankly the comments by professionals doesn’t make it any easier. Whilst the minutae of polling methodology may be of intense academic interest to some-I just want to know if I can believe a given poll-yes or no.
This poll is symptomatic of the problem for a layman like me.
Is it :-
A-Flawed because of a methodology which builds in excessive volatility/flawed because of a low sample with the resultant high MoE/ released late by a politically motivated publisher because it conflicted with three other polls which converged with each other but clashed with this one…..ie useless & uninformative.
or
B-Accurately highlighting a recent trend which rival polls have failed to pick up.
You tell me Christina-which should I believe?
I,ve read the professionals views on it-Stephan Shakespeare & Bob Worcester & they disagree.
They both run polling companies-rival polling companies , so where does that get me?
The sooner we have the only opinion poll which matters the better.
If this poll has indeed only considered 449 people how can it be in any way representative?
There were approx 27 million votes in the 2005 GE. I don’t believe that a poll with only 449 people would be accurate to within 4.6%
- my guess would be closer to 20-30% although I’m not a statistician!
@Andrew Myers
Have you actually looked at the IMORI data tables? The poll was of 1006 people. The headline figure was that of those certain to vote, 449. But if you look at the total of those who say they will vote, 799(weighted) 34% would vote Tory, 34% would vote Labour. I think I am right in saying that IMORI are the only polling organization that uses such a strict filter, as certainty to vote, to produce their headline figure.
I also enjoy reading the different opinions here. It’s interesting to know why people think the polls move in one direction or another. The policies of Brown and Cameron will be scrutinised even more as the GE approaches. We can’t divorce them from the polls.
Anthony may I ask does the Ipsos Mori Poll carry any less weight than the others?
Andrew Myers – well, all margin of error figures are a bit of a polite fiction. If one actually had a genuinely random sample of 449 people who would actually vote out of an electorate of 27 million, then the margin of error would be 4.6%.
In reality, samples are not random. Most don’t even pretend to be, they are described as “quasi-random” and often include some degree of quota sampling. The majority of people called do not complete the survey, which itself prevents a genuinely random sample. Weighting and stratifying also both affect the actual margin of error. For that reason, treat it as only a rough guide!
What is worth pointing out is that the size of the population the poll is measuring doesn’t really matter once it gets above 40,000 or so. Assuming the samples were equally represenative a poll of 1000 people out of 100 million would be just as accurate as a poll of 1000 people out of 100,000.
The metaphor always used is George Gallup’s one about soup. If he wants to know whether a bowl of soup is too salty or not he wouldn’t need to eat the whole lot, providing it was sufficently stirred a single spoonful would suffice…. and it would make no difference whether he was taking that spoonful from a bowl of soup, a cauldron of soup, a bathtub of soup, an ocean of soup, etc, etc.
CLAD – MORI use a far stricter filter on likelihood to vote than any other company. There’s a detailled explanation here.
AL J – that is entirely a matter for you! In my average of the polls it does, because they do not use political weighting. However, that’s just my opinion and others can and do differ in their opinion of the right way to do things. In terms of reputation, in the Westminster village some pollsters do tend to be taken more seriously than others, but I wouldn’t like to name names (not least because I’m sure it depends who you ask!).
In my main commentary, I always try to explain the difference between different companies and why they might be showing different figures. People can make their own decisions on which they believe.
I’m with Colin and particularly Al J on this one. Polls are, by definition, historical and backward looking measurements. Christina and others who wish to restrict discussion to a strict technical examination of what is, in effect, out of date data, are I feel missing the point of what polls are really about. The scientific method involves accurate measurement, analysis and ultimately prediction. With polls, this inevitably involves judgements and necessarily disagreements. While we are all interested in what the polls said about yesterday, and how technically accurate or otherwise they might be, I’m much more interested about what they have to say about tomorrow. There is no point trying to restrict debate purely to the poll results (except of course at an election time). Its more about the why than the what.
@ Anthony
Thanks for the explaination – my question I guess would be in the context of such a small opinion poll sample how could one be sure that the “soup” is sufficiently “stirred”?
If anyone has any Euros or Scots notes lying around that they do not want then please send to our CLP office. Many thanks
Anthony thanks for the reply. I put my trust in your judgement and remember Bob Worcester from when I was a kid.
I would love to know what the Westminster Village think of the various Pollsters but guess it must be a secret;-)
“So Labour won an election in Glasgow. Is the Pope still a Catholic?”
They increased their vote from even 1997. And it probably points to the fact that the protest voting in Scotland (and probably in many heartlands is probably over).
Cameron needs to win lots of “glasgow easts” if they are to even win this election.
That’s why it matters.
“There’s an interesting article in the Guardian today suggesting that the people who would lose out from a hung parliament the most would be, of all people, the Lib Dems. They would be stuck with the horrors of (a) an alliance with the Tories that could tear the party apart over PR, (b) an alliance with Labour that could destroy the party’s national support, (c) a hung parliament that would let Cameron “do a Salmond” and minority-government Labour and the Liberals to death.
”
There’s no wat the LD will be in parliament wit the tories.
Their principles, manifestos and policies are polls apart.
They are much more likely to get their way with the Labour party.
Clegg will tell the media he won’t side with Labour, as they won’t want to be tarred with their brush.
But I assure you, they will when it counts
“There are 3 reasons why you don’t need to worry
1 It is a rogue poll
2 It is a rogue poll
3 It is a rogue poll
Just thought of another
4 It is a rogue poll
”
Is that the hands over ears “nanananan it’s not happening” approach.
This poll is quite climatic of the tory overall drops in most polls in the last few months.
The big one may have stayed the same, but they’ve lost ground to Labour on many major sub topics.
I think the tories will be very worried. As there poll lead certainly isn’t growing.
An intelligent view will suggest that it will probably shrink a fair bit before now and then.
Watch Cameron in the news, basically now backing Labour’s approach to deficiet.
Citing “growth” and not cuts.
That’s a man who’s realised that things could possibly be turning
As for the poll, I actually think people think into it too much.
Any Labour gains in polls are either:
1: Ignored by the media, until they change back
2: The media say there’s something wrong with the poll
Every tory drop since conference season, people have blamed the poll it’s in. Including this web site.
It seems that tory gains are just “normal”, but Labour gains “it’s the poll!”.
Personally, if you are canvassing, and looking at the political forums on newspapers, I think it’s personally obvious that the tories polling is going nowhere but down.
Like it or not, they’ve been shown up on the credit crunch. Cameron is in the media today telling us all that backing “growth” is actually the way out. What Brown has been saying for nigh on 2 years.
Europe was a clanger. If you read the forums you would have seen a huge majority of irate tories, thinking they’ve been sold out, and vowing to head to UKIP.
Like it or not, the lack of real accountable policy is still hurting them. Cameron can laugh all he wants about Labour policy, when Brown can just chirp back “what are you actually going to do?”.
Personally, I can quite easily see that when your campaign is built on sand foundations, it won’t take much to knock it down.
No matter how much they hate a leader (see Maggie Thatcher) they will always stick with the status quo, if the opposition hasn’t convinced them that they are up to it themselves.
Continued growth in the future, will do nothing but hurt Cameron. As he’s been the one in the last 2 years, telling us all about how cuts are the only option. And how Brown has been lying to us all about being able to ride growth.
Well Dave, if the economy does have a big rise, cuts are the political equivilant of retiring your prize greyhound after his 10 wins in a row, as you don’t want to risk wasting £20 on food, in case he doesn’t win 11.
So we have Dave in the media, backing growth, and going off the “age of austerity approach”.
The polls will always fluctuate as no one has a clue what Cameron is, and what he plans to do.
The more he flip flops, the more faith will drop.
I think the tories will win, but this claims about going into a election with a 13 point poll lead are wrong.
I’d be amazed if it wasn’t closer to 7 or 8 points. As your poll suggests.
@ CHRIS:-
“Citing “growth” and not cuts.”
You do live in a very one dimensional world Cris.
The two are not incompatible.
Indeed if you believe-as Cameron does-, that defict financing can be inimical to real sustainable economic growth, then you prefer-as he does-incentives to employment in the private sector to unproductive expenditure in the State sector.
It’s a balance Chris-not one or the other.
By the way-seen the latest poll?
Confusing isn’t it when you’ve just got all excited.
Dear Chris- of course we need growth. We are stuffed without it.
But we need real growth and we need to rebalance (a good labour spin word there for you) our spending.
Brown has been saying we need growth you say? That growth is the answer?
Well why, despite ‘growth’, then did Brown run deficits every year since 2001 after he stopped sticking to Tory spending plans? We have a massive structural deficit. Growth alone will not fill that gap, which is why Cameron also talks about spending.
As by now you will know – we have a new poll putting labour on 22 and a tory lead of 17. You are the clever one; go figure.
Dear Chris
In the by election the labour vote was 12,231, 59%)
In 1997 when the seat was Glasgow Springburn, Martin polled 22,534, 71% .
So your contention about Labour increasing its vote seems a little wide of the mark.
Chris,
the fact that you suggest Cameron needs to win lots of Glasgow Easts to win the election shows little or no understanding. It would have been equivalent to suggesting in 1997 that Labour neeeded to win lots of Kensington and Chelsea’s for them to get in power.
Cameron’s battleground is not the likes of Glasgow East, its the likes of Dartford,Chorley,Tynemouth and Bolton.
Nobody ignores Labour’s increase in the polls, but when one shows them on 31 then the next on 22 they need to be treated with caution, not used as the fuel for a one sided, unfounded rant.
It must have been soul destroying to see the latest Angus Reid poll down at Labour HQ. Just when they thought they might be catching up as well!
Of course one of the other factors with polls (even, to a lesser extent exit-polls) is how many people lie if they’ve voted for a seemingly unpopular party. Often this can be the encumbent.
The Scottish vote certainly will play a big part this time.
The apathy wich has coloured recent votes may do also, especially if we are subjected to a near 6 month unofficial campaign following the pre-budget report.
I still think the forthcoming GE might be very close indeed, and psephologically very interesting.
What I have found, when currently canvassing for Labour on the doorstep, is that there isn’t the hostility towards the party that I remember throughout the 80s.
I think the firming of the Labour vote in this poll would seem to reflect that fact,