Tomorrow is a year since the first Police and Crime Commissioner elections, and there are two polls out this morning on it, covering essentially the same territory – YouGov for the Times and ComRes for the BBC.

YouGov found only 11% of people were able to name the police commissioner for their local area (to put this in context, in 2012 YouGov found 63% of people could name their local MP, in January this year they found 5% could name one of their MEPs). Asked about what difference the PCC had made to their local police force, 63% said they had made no difference to levels of accountability, 64% that they had made no difference to how effective the local police were at fighting crime.

ComRes found a similarly low level of awareness with only 7% of people saying they could name their Police and Crime Commissioner. However in their survey people gave a more positive response on the impact of PCCs – they asked about policing in general, levels of crime, accountability and levels of anti-social behaviour and in every case around 30-40% of people said their PCC had made a positive impact, around 10% a negative imopact and around 40% no impact at all.

I’m not quite certain why the two surveys, similar in their findings on awareness, give such different results on what people think the effect of PCCs have been. It could be a difference between online and phone mode, or perhaps how the questions were worded (e.g. YouGov asked about the effect on “local police”, ComRes on “your region” – or perhaps the option of saying “made no difference” was less prominent in the ComRes script. There’s no obvious answer).

164 Responses to “Police and Crime Commissioners a year on”

1 2 3 4
  1. I’d argue that the more labour fights on welfare the better it is for them – as it highlights the large – and growing – number of cases of very vulnerable people being made to suffer considerable hardship through no fault of their own.

    The bedroom tax is a prime example – the reality of the situation it creates is very different from the initial public perception of it. Pretty much everyone familiar with the issues around public housing predicted exactly what would happen (tenants unable to ‘downsize’ because they had nowhere else to go – the ‘spare’ rooms being very much needed – housing providers losing huge sums due t rapidly escalating arrears – but IDS ploughed on regardless.

    The tories seemed to have got their political presentation act back together after the omnishambles – but they seem to back to gifting the opposition with easy targets – we have a public perception of cameron preaching permanent austerity from a golden throne, to failing to tackle energy bills to deleting their pre-election promises from the internet. The reality of these factors is beside the point – its the popular perception of the tories as out of touch toffs who care only about the rich.

    Lynton Crosby setting off on another round of pauper bashing and snarling at immigrants is not going to turn that around.

  2. last comment in auto-mod – can anyone explain what triggers this so I can avoid it in the future?

  3. Just as a matter of note while OvO’s CEO made a big thing of the Big 6’s price rises as being unjustified didn’t stop them putting up their own fixed rate tariffs (they only have two tariffs) by 11% Yesterday!

    They are still on average £250 Cheaper but Mr Fitzpatrick’s Halo has rather slipped!

  4. Ian Wright
    “I doubt Labour will want to push too far on the NHS with Burnham still at the helm. Miliband may regret not removing him.”

    Why ?

  5. @Reggieside

    Auto-mod seems to have a mind of it’s own & just as you think you’ve cracked it, off it goes again…

    Hopefully Anthony will be along soon to advise on the common triggers.

  6. Howard
    Yes ,strangely he did look a bit haggard, guilty conscience I expect.

  7. Populus:
    Lab 40 (+1)
    Cons 31 (=)
    LD 11 (=)
    UKIP 10 (=)

    40 seems to be the new 37.

    Also from Populus, we have ‘noticed stories’. Obviously the Philippines tragedy leads (68% noticed it, which if anything seems low) but we go down to 6th place before ‘economic recovery’ comes up – behind ‘Energy price rises’, ‘Phone hacking trials’, ‘Bedroom tax’ and ‘Deaths of cyclists’. Is it still wise to bank on it?

  8. Sam Coates Times [email protected] 7m
    Ipsos-Mori: CON 32 (-3); LAB 38 (+3); LIB DEM 8 (-1); UKIP 8 (-2)

    Mike Smithson [email protected] 17m
    Today’s online poll from Populus sees LAB lead up
    Lab 40 (+1)
    Cons 31 (=)
    LD 11 (=)
    UKIP 10 (=)

  9. That Ipsos-Mori poll is awful for the LDs and also the lowest UKIP score for a while.

    It does show what looks like a direct Con>Lab switch, a rare beast. That could be a mix of sources though, since there’s a net +3 for OTH.

  10. I suspect Anthony will start a new post soon, so won’t comment in detail yet, but the green figure is very high in Ipsos. = 7%.

  11. new thread

  12. Previous 35/35 Mori was outlier and we may see some crap headlines exaggerating Labours improvement jut as last time the level pegging was badly reported in one or 2 places.

  13. @reggie

    You used the word “famil-iar”, which contains the word “l-iar” in it. Similarly problems arise with words like “apply-ing”, “fl-ying” etc……


    “This chap was a LD councillor until about 3 months before the mayoral election”

    Ferguson was a member of the party but hasn’t been a councillor since the 1970s.

1 2 3 4