Nadine Dorries is out of “I’m a Celebrity…” and to celebrate Lord Ashcroft has released a poll of her Mid-Bedfordshire constituency. Topline voting intentions in the constituency are CON 51%(-2), LAB 22%(+7), LDEM 14%(-11), UKIP 8%(+3), GRN 4%(+1) – changes are from the general result in 2010.

Opinions of Dorries in her own constituency are not particularly flattering. Asked to rate whether they have a positive or negative view of various politicians on a scale of 0-10, she averages at 2.8, well below Boris Johnson (6.1), David Cameron (5.4), Nick Clegg (4.0), Ed Miliband (4.0) and Nigel Farage (3.5). Only 8% of people in Mid-Bedfordshire rated her above 8/10 on a positively scale.

58% of people disapproved of her decision to go on “I’m a Celebrity…” compared to only 16% who approved. 57% disagreed that she’d be able to get more publicity for the issues she cared about on the show rather than at Westminster, 54% disagreed that donating her MPs salary to charity made up for her absence. On whether or not she was a good MP people were evenly split 35% thought she was, 35% thought she wasn’t. Finally, 58% of people thought the Conservative party were right to suspend her, compared to 26% who thought it was wrong (17% said it should have been left to the local party to decide). Conservative voters were even more hostile – 64% thought it was right to suspend her.

44% of people said they were less likely to vote for her because of her appearance on “I’m a Celebrity…”, only 8% were more likely. Readers will know my reservations over questions like this – lots of the people saying less likely are Labour and Lib Dem voters anyway, so they are hardly lost votes. I’d even take the 44% of Tory voters who said less likely with quite a big pinch of salt, as in the event that Nadine Dorries somehow ends up standing as a Conservative candidate again lots will end up voting on national issues. Those concerns aside, it does suggest that the MP’s decision has gone down very badly in her constituency.

In other news, today’s YouGov daily poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 41%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 10%. That 10% for UKIP is right at the top end of the level of support YouGov have been showing them at and is worth keeping an eye on. At the tail end of last year we also saw an increase in UKIP support when the European summit rose up the media agenda.

481 Responses to “Nadine out of the jungle”

1 7 8 9 10
  1. AMBER

    THanks………I think I knew that…

    A strange comment, which implies a relevance to the Rotherham incident which completelt escapes me.

  2. In my view Socialism in the UK died when Tony Blair removed Clause 4 from the Labour Party manifesto, Clause 4 defined Socialism…………it has gone, it is no more, it is bereft of life, it has ceased to be, it is not pining for the fjords ! :-)

  3. @ MitM

    If you are willing to adopt black children, or Asian children it probably means you aren’t a racist.
    The children were not adopted; they were receiving foster care. Foster carers are self-employed professional carers not parents.

  4. Smukesh

    Do pray tell, if you were a racist, why would you want to adopt ethnic children?

  5. Amber that is the cold clinical view for sure, but adoption can often come out as a result of fostering, I have an Aunt who was such a case, she was in foster care, then my Nan grew so fond of her she was adopted, although this was long ago, late 60’s, 1967 I believe.

  6. The actions of Labour-controlled Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council were met with fury from Ukip leader Nigel Farage, who called for resignations over what he said was an “appalling” decision.”
    The Indy.
    … Labour-or we take your children away.

    Apart from being clearly not in the spirit of non-partisan discussion and really rather silly .
    This comment like Mr Farage’s appears not to consider the individual case at all.

    This decision was made by the Social Services Professionals after long discussions with the foster carers concerned and I have no idea what party they social service staff concerned might vote for. I don’t know why they made this decision Neither does Farage. Consequently I wouldn’t wish to comment at all on whether it was right or wrong. The Social Service department concerned will now clearly have to explain the reasoning .I doubt if UKIPers will be interested in listening.

    I MO if the issue was concern about whether the fosterers could provide appropriate support for the children’s culture then not mentioning political affiliation at all might have been prudent.

    It wasn’t made by Rotheram council. It would be exceptionally worrying if elected counsellors made these type of decisions.

    Fortunately it is beyond their remit.

  7. @MIM

    Read Amber`s post.Adoption is not fostering

    You get paid to foster children,It pays more when the placement is emergency.And it pays more when the children are difficult.And it is possible that Immigrant children may fall into this category due to their specific cultural and language needs.(I am not sure about this part though)

  8. Smukesh
    Do pray tell, if you were a racist, why would you want to adopt ethnic children?

    -Fostering is very different from adoption.

  9. Smukesh
    Read my post

    “adoption can often come out as a result of fostering, “

  10. I think that maybe the terms left and right in economic context don’t apply anymore. It would be more correct to say pro-industrial or pro-finance, there being no pro-labour point of view on offer.

  11. @ Colin

    A strange comment, which implies a relevance to the Rotherham incident which completelt escapes me.
    Much less strange than yours: “Vote Labour or have your children taken away”. I think that probably tops the list of bizarre comments on here.

    I was pointing out that, in addition to being inflamatory, your comment was factually incorrect in the detail as well as the substance. i.e. The children are not ‘theirs’.

  12. When you go into Fostering children it is with a view to eventually adopt, fostering is not adoption no, but often adoption can come as a result of fostering.

    Also I can see why people are becoming reluctant to foster and or adopt, if they are portrayed as money grabbing self employed businesses.

    I’m sure when the majority of people agree to foster, I’m sure there first question isn’t how much money do we get?

  13. @MIM

    I like your posts generally but on this matter,please write with reference to some facts.

    Professional foster-carers are those parents who foster the children for a while till they reach a certain age and then move on to other children to foster.Yes,rarely they may adopt but this is not what happens generally.

  14. Amber

    Colin was wrong in that the situation is nothing to do with the Labour party, it’s with the crazy rogue social worker who’s name for some reason puts a comment into auto moderation.

    I think it’s perfectly plausible that you bond with foster children and consider them “yours” even if they legally aren’t, as I know of such a case myself. To deny a bond exists after 2 months is wrong.

  15. When you go into Fostering children it is with a view to eventually adopt, fostering is not adoption no, but often adoption can come as a result of fostering.

    -That isn’t the motivation behind most fosterers at all.

    My wife and I have raised our own children and fostered children, in common with most foster parents we have never wished to adopt any of them.

  16. @ MitM

    Amber that is the cold clinical view for sure, but adoption can often come out as a result of fostering…
    You are living in the past, MitM. Long-term fostering is unusual now. Generally speaking, the care is short-term until issues are resolved & the children can return to their own families.

  17. @MIM

    It was an emergency placement.The idea was to move to a more suitable placement once it was found.This is the case with thousands of foster-children.And if you are saying a child has got itself attached and shouldn`t be removed after two months,you haven`t a clue about child psychology,childhood attachments and child rearing.

  18. I agree in legal terms the children were not “theirs” but that’s a rather cold way to look at it which ignores the fact that over 2 months you are bound to have a bond with such children. I also don’t buy into this view that people foster for the money, I’m sure there are some do, but saying that’s broadly why people do it, is probably what puts people off, I think most people do it to look after disadvantaged children.

    As to the couple in question, I disagree with their politics, but I think it’s wrong to rip children they would have bonded with away, for those reasons.

    I personally am against MASS immigration of unskilled labour, but it’s a question of space not race, just because I think that there are too many people in such a small country wouldn’t stop me from looking after someone in their hour of need.

  19. Steve did you not ever feel a connection or a bond with them after looking after them for months? Were you not sometimes sad when they left? Or are you part of the caricature that’s being portrayed and was only in it for the money?

  20. Now that Nadine is out of the jungle, perhaps a gentle re-introduction into society, prior to meeting her constituents, could be via a short-term fostering programme ? :-)

  21. Anyone know how many crucial important, life altering votes Nadine missed in those 12 days?

    Were the predictions correct? Has Mid-Bedfordshire fallen into a situation of chaos and deprivation without their MP there to defend them? Or has life continued as normal and no one really noticed any difference?

    I’m sure my MP whoever he is, has missed 12 days of parliamentary time during the course of the past 2 and a half years. I’m happy to confirm that life continues here as well.

    So what votes has Nadine missed?

  22. Unbelievable but votes are still being counted in the US Presidential election. The actual number of votes cast for each candidate will not be known for a few weeks.

    Obama currently has a lead of 3.32%, making it a fairly decent winning margin. When votes are all counted, Obama is expected to have won by 3.6% or thereabouts.

  23. @Steve

    Why do you think it sound that democracy doesn’t apply to fostering? Fostering and adoption are very lucrative businesses so I would have thought they need as much supervision as possible.


    The term is ‘special educational needs’.it’s to social workers what image rights are to footballers.

  24. “Fostering and adoption are very lucrative businesses ”

    How much do fosterers get paid??? I didn’t even know you got paid for adoption???

    I always knew you received some money to help with the upkeep of the child, but do you actually profit? Can you make a living out of just fostering children?

  25. @Maninthemiddle,

    Yes foster carers are paid, quite handsomely. It is perfectly possible to earn your living entirely from fostering if you foster more than one child at a time. I used to work with a Detective Constable in London whose wife was a full-time foster carer salaried by Islington Council, for example.

    Adoption is very different. When you adopt you assume responsibility for the child, including paying for all of their needs out of your own resources. So in fact it is uncommon for foster carers to adopt (why take the huge financial hit?). To do so is a massive expression of love – or of independent wealth.

  26. By the way, I agree that decisions taken by social workers are not necessarily a reflection of the competence of their political masters.

    I just wish this logic could be applied more widely in political debate, where partisans on all sides regularly seize on mistakes by officials to bludgeon their party political opponents.

  27. I agree with Neil, the rhetoric in the country is getting too much like the states, where the party you don’t support is the root of all evils and all problems in the country can be traced directly to the policies of the party you don’t support.

    If I was a pensioner in the states, who believed the negative ads on television, forget going out to vote, I’d be heading for the airport as fast as my zimmer frame could take me in fear of my life.

    “If I vote for Obama, his death panel will deny me healthcare, but if I vote for Romney his Vice President will push me off a cliff”

  28. @ChrisLane1945

    Fully agree with your comment to @Colin (12.40).

    I had come on here to post some restrospective observations about polling on the US elections on this “site for non-partisan discussion of polls”, but given the partisan guff flying about here it’s not worth the candle.

  29. @ MitM,

    Far from being cold & clinical, I think fostering is a very good thing to do. The financial rewards are not high, given the 24/7 committment needed so money is not the first thing people consider.

    You really need to read a bit more about becoming a foster carer. The carers are expected to work with the children’s own parents & promote that relationship (if it is judged to be viable) with a view to the children returning to their own family as soon as it is in the children’s best interests to do so.

    Carers who expect to love the children & form a lasting relationship with them will likely be disappointed. I think most councils do not place children with foster carers who have this view of the relationship.

    The child/ fostercarer relationship is formed for the benefit of the child not the carer; of course to show approval & affection is a good thing for the children but carers must only ‘form a bond’ with a child which is appropriate to the child’s individual circumstances.

    So again, I am not cold & clinical; I have simply made the effort to find out what is actually required of foster carers.

    I do believe that some of the uproar over this UKIP thing is based on people sharing your rather out-of-date view of what a foster carer is/does.

  30. I wasn’t saying you were personally cold and clinical, I think you come across as very warm and friendly, I just thought that 1 particular way of phrasing seemed a little bit distant, but I shall bow to your obvious greater wisdom on this. I was only going on what I know of my family’s experience, but as you said, that happened in the 60’s and the whole philosophy could well have changed by now.

  31. AW

    I fully accept that voting intentions tend to stick down the generations.

    Is there any evidence that this is due to following our fathers’ ideas as opposed to there being strong socio-economic reasons why certain political ideas retain their attraction in certain areas.

    I just find it curious that we expect kids to rebel against their parents’ view on morality, music, culture in general, yet we assume that political views come with the mother’s milk.

  32. I listened to the Head of Rotherham Social Services this morning, expecting her to say that media coverage was sensationalist and had totally misjudged the story.

    She didn’t.
    She blathered and blustered and evaded questions, whilst never denying that a decision had been made because of the couple’s political views.

    For the record, here’s one person of the left who thinks that this was a shockingly bad and inappropriate decision. Crass stupidity like that has no place in my idea of sensible social policy. I fully expect that this woman and anyone else responsible for the imementation of such a ridiculous policy to be sacked within days.

  33. Lefty how can it be down to “socioeconomic reasons” when even upper class Northerners are less likely according to the poll in the link I sent you, than their southern counterparts.

    As we saw in Durham, it’s not really to do with ideology if this Labour stronghold prefers Ukip to the Tories.

    I think most voters when you start talking about individual party ideologies are quite ignorant and glaze over, during the election there was polling where they told people about a policy and asked them to guess which party it came from. There were people who thought the so called “tax on jobs” was a Conservative party idea, because as we all know, the Conservatives are the wicked vile nasty party and so anything bad must automatically be a Conservative idea according to some.

  34. As I post less and less on this site, although still a regular lurker if only to keep abreast of the polls, it’s threads like this one that tempt me to desert permanently.

    I’ve got to ask, Anthony; why on earth have you allowed some of the comments that have appeared on here today to go unmoderated?

    When this site is good, it’s very good but when it’s bad, it’s almost as dispiriting as some silly and moronic twitter exchange. The same posters droning on and on, picking away at party political scabs to see if they can draw blood.

    And it all started with Nadine Dorries and Lord Ashcroft!

  35. We’ve seen it today, where one daft woman thinks that because a couple support Ukip, they must be crazy foaming at the mouth racists. And then we see the right, especially on the BBC site, suggesting that because this daft woman happened to be in a Labour controlled council that it must be indicative of Labour policy in general to take children away from dissenters.

  36. AMBER

    Ah-I see.

    Thanks for explaining.

  37. LEFTY

    Well said & succinct.

    I fear your reasonable expectation will not be realised, however.

  38. MiM

    Could it be because “even” upper middle class Northerns rationally conclude that Tory policies, in general, are worse for the North?

    Look, I fully accept that there is a degree of herd instinct. But equally, the North has a different history and a different culture to the South. Clearly, I am being extremely broad brush here, but there is a less individualistic, more communitarian culture in the North. Of course, people are born into that culture and their life experiences within such a culture shape their political views. But, I’d argue that the reason for Labour’s continued popularity is that Labour more closely shares that ethos than any other major party.

    If the Tories want to be popular oop north, they need to understand this.

  39. Has anybody considered: The “tip-off” may have come from the children’s parent(s) or other relatives. The council, for reasons of confidentiality, would not be able to say this to the media. Parents & relatives of foster children are expected to provide input that shows concern for the welfare of their child.

    I do believe that parents are entitled to say that they’d prefer their children not to be in an overtly political home. Were I a foster carer & a child’s parent(s) did not like it that I am an active member of the Labour Party, I would respect their right to have a view on this.

    The council may have been balancing the rights which parents have with the ‘no-rights at all’ of the foster carers. I wonder whether Farange or Gove have full knowledge of the possible circumstances before they waded in with their opinions.

  40. Lefty I feel you are sort of arguing my point there, not all people in the North vote for what they feel is best for themselves, they see the Tory party as toxic, because that is the prevailing view in the area and so vote for other parties. Even if an individual feels they would be better off under the Tories they might still not vote Tory because that goes against the culture they live in.

    Ukip are more to the right than the Conservative party, there are parts of the country that are no go areas for Tory canvassers, it’s rare for Ukip to encounter such problems, because even though they are more right wing than the Tories, in those parts of the country their brand is not as toxic.

  41. AMBER

    @” I wonder whether Farange or Gove have full knowledge of the possible circumstances before they waded in with their opinions.”

    I expect they felt the same as Ed Miliband Amber-he said

    “”I don’t know all the facts of this case, but I am clear about this; that what matters is the future of children in Rotherham and elsewhere, and being a member of a political party like UKIP should not be a bar to fostering children,” said Ed Miliband.

    That’s a pretty simple concept really.

  42. Amber so you would be ok with parents saying they didn’t want you to foster their children because you are a Labour supporter and therefore are obviously going to brainwash them against the free market system? Even though I’m sure you wouldn’t.

    I don’t think political party should be a factor at all. You can be a great parent no matter what political party you belong to. It just furthers this rhetoric, that the opposing parties to your own are vile and dangerous, when in actual fact, most politicians of all stripes are probably decent people trying to make the country better. (Except Clegg :P) just kidding

  43. I’m not qualified to make any comment on the circumstances of the decision, but the Rotherham head of social services this morning did allude to a possible conflict… it is UKIP policy to “end the active promotion of the doctrine of multiculturalism by local and national government and all publicly funded bodies.”

    At the same time statutary minimum standards for fostering require carers to “respect and preserve each child’s ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background.”


    I hope you will reconsider – “some restrospective observations about polling on the US elections” from you would be welcome.

  44. @ Colin

    I agree with Ed. He is speaking about a general ‘ban’ on being foster carers at all – which would be outrageous. He is not talking about specific children, where the rights of the parents should usually prevail. The couple have not been banned from fostering nor removed from the council’s list. It will now be a matter for the council to investigate whether or not the “tip-off” came from somebody with a right to provide input regarding these specific children.

  45. @ MitM

    Thank you. :-)

  46. Lefty – it’s definitely more than just socio-economic factors, if you had two people of the of the same social class and income in the north and south the first would be more likely to be Labour than the latter (and vice-versa in terms of Toryness). However, while it is easy to come up with plausible hypotheses (and I think the things that influenced us when we were growing up and reaching adulthood, the people we spoke to, the experiences we had, etc, are all very plausible factors) we don’t really know why.

  47. My view of this is as follows…

    When you demand social workers do everything possible to protect children from any possibility of harm, then also demand that social workers do everything possible to respect the rights of parents, then also demand that social workers do everything possible to respect the rights of foster parents, then also slash the budgets and increase the paper work by sacking admin staff, and then you freeze the social workers pay, then ensure that anyone who makes a mistake will be vilified in the press and lose their job… The system starts to break down.

  48. AMBER

    It is pretty clear to me what he meant., & which “children” he was talking about-I’ve just watched the clip again.

    Why don’t we wait & see what the councillors & social service officers of Rotherham have to say for themselves.


    @”if you had two people of the of the same social class and income in the north and south the first would be more likely to be Labour than the latter ”

    Does that apply across social classes & income groups Anthony?

    What is the evidence for it?

  50. As someone who is married to a senior manager who oversees fostering and adoption I can say that they dread these cases.

    They rarely disrupt a placement unless there is a very good reason to do so, but those reasons are usually sensitive and confidential. Unfortunately the reasons that the aggrieved party give, particularly to the press, aren’t the reasons for the decision. Unfortunately the details of the decision are confidential.

    By and large this leads to the authority getting a public kicking.

    It’s a bit like the ” Is It cos I is Black” joke where someone throws someone off a roof and then claims they have only been arrested because the police are racist.

    Most of the details of this case should and hopefully will remain confidential, but if it had been reported that one or other of the carers had made comments like “they shouldn’t even be in this country”, then that might have been reason to move them to another carer.

    However who if anyone made such a comment or claimed it was made, or even the allegation should remain confidential.

    It is important for the system to work particularly when the children come from chaotic backgrounds that everyone can be confident that they can speak freely and in confidence.

    That is why so often, spokes people talk about the policy and procedures rather than individual cases. Ever case is different and much of the background isn’t and shouldn’t be aired in public.

    I lost count of the times as a Councillor when an aggrieved party turned up on the front of the paper giving a version of events that bore little or no relation to the facts, but as the facts were mostly confidential the Council ended up looking like Nazi’s.

    If the Press accounts of this case are in any way accurate I’ll be amazed.


1 7 8 9 10