Dealing with Dave - my advice to Labour
April 24th, 2006
-
How the party’s “Dave the Chameleon” boosts the Tories
In 1997 when Labour won its first land-slide victory more than 80% of the population were without multichannel television and had to rely on just four channels for their information and recreational needs.
Audiences for the then main TV news bulletins - BBC1 at 9pm and the ITN News at Ten - were vast compared with what their equivalents get today.
We’ve now reached a stage where two out of every three households have digital TV and the vastly increased choice. Large numbers of viewers never go near a channel where they can see news and current affairs so there’s much less exposure to politics.
In this context it is now much harder for opposition parties in particular to command coverage that will reach large proportions of the electorate. Quite simply the mass media is less “mass” than it used to be. All this is likely to be exacerbated by the political party spending cut-backs - which seem certain following the cash for honours controversy.
The lack of media exposure to the political process is showing up in the polls. What we are seeing are larger “don’t know” figures. Thus the last time that YouGov asked its panellists to rate the party leaders 38% did not know about Cameron and 44% had no view on Campbell. In this category were nearly quarter of all intending Tory voters while nearly a third of Lib Dems replied “don’t know” on Campbell.
So anything that increases awareness is to be welcomed - even if it’s the other’s campaigning.
Given the polls show that the Tories get a 1-5% uplift if the word “Cameron” is associated with “Conservative” then Labour’s priority, surely, should be to do nothing that links the opposition leader’s name with his party.
-
This is reinforced by a BPIX poll in yesterday’s Mail on Sunday on Labour’s “Dave the Chameleon” PPB. One in 20 of those who saw the ad said they’d be less likely to vote Tory, while 1 in 7 said it made them more likely to vote for Cameron’s party. BPIX, it should be noted, is not listed as a member of the British Polling Council.
Producing a campaign that leads to more voters wanting to vote for the other side does not seem very smart. The old adage of never mentioning your opponent’s name should should prevail.
Labour should continue with the strategy that has worked for a decade - just keep on demonising the Conservatives without ever mentioning Cameron.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Shaun of the Dead summed up the problem for politicians and jouranlists of the new media world when it opened with the all-too-plausible scene of Shaun missing the rather pressing news that flesh-eating zombies were ravaging London because he switched channels whenever a bulletin began.
It’s all very well Mike, but the point is that if the Cameron ‘bonus’ is still around come General Election time then Labour are in trouble. Because in a GE campaign it will be impossible to disassociate Cameron from the Conservatives. A 2-3% pro-Con swing in an Election campaign and it could be curtains.
Your strategy might be fine if Labour’s no.1 priority is to keep the polls respectable now but I suspect they are thinking more long term. The race is on to contaminate the Cameron brand with the word “Conservative”, before the “Cameron” word cleans up the Conservative brand. Whether the current campaign is a good way to do that is another matter (I doubt it).
2(con) - In other words Labour need to hope that the phrase that sticks is “Cameron the Conservative”, whereas the one that doesn’t is “Cameron’s Conservatives” (which the Tories should be using on all their literature).
I’ve seen mixed reactions to the PPB so I’m not sure if it was a good idea or not, but one needs to be wary of this sort of polling question, since if, say, blue2win is asked the question he might well loyally say “more likely” even though he was going to vote Tory anyway. Ideally the question should only be asked of the subset of people who have seen the PPB but said they were previously unsure how to vote. This doesn’t mean Mike’s conclusion is wrong (certainly the poll suggests the PPB didn’t produce a huge sea-change), just that this type of poll is tricky to interpret uness the detailed breakdown is available (which, because it’s BPIX, it isn’t).
Did the Mail also give voting intention figures? They’re likely to have been asked, to balance the sample, and if they weren’t shown it suggests they were seen as boring and/or unhelpful to the Tories - probably a 1% Labour lead or something like that.
I agree with Mike. But luckily Labour will not be clever enough to follow his advice. Besotted with the Bush admin, they think the Kerry flip-flop charge can be imported wholesale to equivalent effects. Clue, Tony: this is not the West Wing.
I would be interested to see if voters liked the Tory PPB, which I thought was outstanding.
Mike Smithson, your analysis is scarily accurate most of the time. How can we persuade you to vote Tory, eh? I seem to agree with you on almost everything
Nick 4. I agree with your concerns about this form of polling question which is why I did not lead on it. Also my irritation with BPIX for its lack of transparency has been rehearsed here before.
The other questions reported had respondents saying it improved their view of DC.
I think the images of Cameron cycling are very powerful and Labour was pretty dumb to remind viewers ot it.
I know a number of fellow peddlers who have been infuriated that Labour seems to be subjecting cycling to ridicule.
Mike Smithson
On another website I have seen postings by Tories suggesting they like the cuddly Chameleon on the bicycle so much that they have made it into T-shirts.
It may be that Labour will not be allowed to drop this campaign even if it wants to.
re 6. I have a number of big problems with the Tories including the support for the Iraq war which Cameron has continued, the EU, and electoral reform.
I still see the Tories as the ‘nasty’ party on social issues like immigration and I’m not convinced that the Cameron ‘make-over’ is real.
Mike Smithson
9 Mike.
I inhabit the same sort of political parish as you Mike. I lost touch with the Tories many years ago when it veered right. Whether it will ever come back far enough towards its more traditional centrist ground to recover the votes of people like me, I very much doubt. Nevertheless I find the centrist moves of Cameron and his ilk as encouraging.
I watch with interest and a certain amount of hope.
I yield to no man in my respect for NuLab’s campaigning expertise but the bicycling chameleon thing seems completely bizarre. It seems to give exactly that message that Cameron wants! “We’ve changed and we ride bikes.” It’s also a bit rich considering TB’s own ideological journey from, among many other things, proudly wearing the Chicken’s Footprint CND badge to ordering another round of Trident ICBMs.
It’s NuLab’s best year ever.
“It’s also a bit rich considering TB’s own ideological journey from, among many other things, proudly wearing the Chicken’s Footprint CND badge to ordering another round of Trident ICBMs”
maybe the difference is that Blair took some years to do that journey whilst Cameron took a couple of months leaving the fact if the journey is opportunistic or real debatable.
Not that people care in the end, but Labour is probably trying to make people believe DC is just an opportunist man and so not trustworthy.
Tactically you are probably right, Mike. Strategically you may not be correct.
If people do not know Cameron and the first thing they find out about him is that he is er over-flexible it may create an image he finds hard to shift.
Did you see Euan Ferguson’s column in the Observer Magazine?
Advertising is a very costly thing and I still cannot get my head round Nulab spending money on giving DC and the BNP so much free publicity ( and DC doing the same to UKIP ) - seems like a death wish to me .
14. Mark, actually Labour and DC didn’t spend money to give BNP and UKIP free publicity. They’ve done for free
13. Peter Pigeon, considering you seem to have contacts with the whole Libdem world, do you know if Lord Rennard is still in Moray today?
I showed the PPB to my girlfriend (a LD/Lab waverer, although much more LD these days; for which I claim no credit, blame Tony!) who thought it was very harsh, but funny and accurate.
Am now beginning to think that the makers of the PPB were not thinking hard enough about how it would be perceived in the public at large, and let their own view of Cameron shape the PPB too much. While many on the left, who don’t, and will never, trust the Tories, find this PPB amusing and accurate, this is not be the case for the majority of the country.
I think the next tactic for Labour would be to highlight Cameron’s lack of experience, and use that as the basis for attacks against him, alongside generally rubbishing the Tories. Whatever people may or may not think about Brown, experience is one thing he definitely has over Cameron.
Slightly O/T, but this is a dangerous tactic by Cameron. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4937380.stm
School run mothers are exactly Cameron’s target audience. Anger them at thy peril Dave…
12. You might well also ask whether Bliar’s left wing positions in the 1980s reflected real convictions as well - rather than just an attempt to fit in with the prevailing bias within Labour at the time. If they didn’t, his ‘converstion’ to more centrist attitudes is essentially fraudulent
16. Clear that I have only recently got up…
“this is not the case for the majority of the country.”
and
“I think the best tactic…”
“School run mothers are exactly Cameron’s target audience. Anger them at thy peril Dave… ” - true, but Cameron is right on this issue! But I feel that whenever he is right, he is alienating some of his core vote. You could say this does not matter as it has nowhere to go, but that core vote could stay at home (as much of Labour’s does these days) and it remains to be seen if UKIP can get its act together.
I am still impressed by Cameron, but I am unconvinced he can truly change the Tories. I feel that Conservatives are keener to stick to their principles (and stay in opposition) than Labour were in the mid 1990s.
i think in the world of politics it is acceptable to start with a clean sheet re policy as a new leader - before being leader you have to do a lot for the sake of party unity and it is difficult to separate a personal agenda from the part . So for me the judgement period for what Cameron does and how consistent he is sarted from when he became leader .
16. Wow, Tistoph! You certainly know how to impress a girl!
15 - Andrea there was a bit in the Times (probably just the Scottish edition) about Moray but it doesn’t say anything new.
19 - It depends what wing of the party you are on - for one-nation type’s this is all good so far. I do think there is a great desire to win again and some people won’t be happy but they will be a pretty small minority of the party.
Anyway off out to use my hard earned holiday to do some canvassing - I’ll see y’all in a few hours time!!
22. max, thanks. I see that Labour is attacking the Nats for the NATO policy saying it would cost lots of MoD jobs and many are in Moray.
23 - Yes there is a big RAF base but most of them vote elsewhere. Probably quite a few associated jobs too. But it’s hardly a new argument and I don’t see it having any more resonance now than in previous elections.
Defection alert
http://www.colin-ross.org.uk/news/680.html
15 Sorry, I don’t.
25. Some more info on the defector:
http://labour-watch.blogspot.com/2006/03/holtom-price.html
26 Thanks. The comment is rather juicy.
26 What is the situatin with Udeur/Prodi now?
4 Nick Palmer: “Did the Mail also give voting intention figures? They’re likely to have been asked, to balance the sample, and if they weren’t shown it suggests they were seen as boring and/or unhelpful to the Tories - probably a 1% Labour lead or something like that.”
The Mail has recently been very hostile to Cameron and the Tories in general. IIRC they gave IDS more friendly coverage… I think it annoys then when the party refuses to bow to their editor’s agenda…
Incidentally, best of luck in your speech at the Oxford Union next month… Look forward to hearing the debate
28. Udeur is pissed (as usual), but the main problem is if the CL candidate for the Senate speakership (Marini) will lose to Andreotti supported by the CR. It’s possible and some observers are already saying that it would mean that the government will never start (so don’t spend your betfair money too early…)
he makes my flesh crawl.
30 Good of the Senate to give youth a chance.
32. well, but at the Senate “youth” is a relative speaking term!
They’re all over 40 and Rita Levi Montalcini is 97.
21. How rude!
After over two years I hope that I don’t have to impress her to make her interested in me! 
I don’t really think that Labour (& TB especially) have quite worked out how, exactly, to attack DC. In PMQs you can almost sense the frustration of TB, especially when presented with these “nice, consesual” type questions. DC has presented an open goal opportunity a couple of times, but for the rest it’s left to someone else to do so (Alex Salmond’s question springs to mind particularly).
They can’t say he’s too nice, because the recent attacks on UKIP & the BNP spoil that image somewhat. They can’t say he’s a nasty right-winger, as this is just plainly at odds with what people see & hear. He;s a bit posh? Well, difficult to attack that one with a leader who has a Fettes background (tho admittedly this is not nearly as well recognised priviledge as Eton).
So they create the cycling chameleon… problem with this is that a chameleon is a pretty cute creature, especially a cartoon chameleon. Doesn’t go down too well to be seen to be attacking cycling either (that one gets my blood pressure rising too, Mike).
The other problem with the chameleon cartoon is that about the only time people see chameleons is on nature programmes, normally accompanied with shots of natural beauty, David Attenborough’s dulcit tones, and concerns about shrinking habitats and pollution.
Kind of reinforces DCs connection with environmental messages.
So, as Alex said @2, I guess they’re left trying to pollute Brand Dave with Brand Conservative, before Brand Conservative becomes bolstered with Brand Dave.
“but I am unconvinced he can truly change the Tories”
But would a “changed” (ie more left-wing) Tory party actually win more votes?
The best way for Labour to win the next election will be economic growth and the feel good factor. It’s time for the economic cycle to turn in Labour’s favour. If it does the Tories will find it very hard indeed to make progress. Why risk them?
37 Which UK economy do you live in Juan? The last 9 years have been a very benign period globally, and the UK economy inherited form the Tories has looked very good compared to the moribund economies of Europe for most of that time.
But the Nulab administration have undermined many of the props. Productivity has consistently fallen, manufacturing is still in a decline and the economy has been kept afloat up by massive personal borrowing that have been put into a consumer boom and higher taxes to pay for extravgant and inefficient state spending.
You can spin the plates for so long but sooner or later they start hitting the concrete. The current wobbling plates are pensions, the balance of payments and unemployment with the the plate representing the need to increase taxes clearly ready to launch itself into the void.
The chances have to be the opposite of your wish. That in four more years some of the plates will have smashed, debt may well put retail sales and housing on the downside, and the current economic stress for many families will be worse as interest rates, taxes and unemployment do their damage.
And who will they blame? Blair by then on the lucrative rubber chicken circuit or the man who was the Chancellor until Blair followed the money?
You don’t need a crash or real recession for the economy to play its part in a government’s downfall. Just enough dissatisfaction to make the electorate open to the arguments of the opposition and ready to welcome a change.
Of course The Trevor McDonald Moment (TTMM) may come first.
I think there is a better than even chance the economy will not improve much in the next 12-18 months. Consumer confidence still seems rather weak, and with disposable income growth only modest, unemployment edging up and long-term interest rates on the rise as well, it is likely to remain so. Consumption accounts for 70% of growth, so if it fails to recover, there will have to be a big improvement elsewhere to offset this…
…but monetary tightening in the US, Eurozone and Japan also looks likely to slow world growth, so that UK exporters are unlikely to fill any gap caused by soft consumption. In fact the weak peformance of exports in the face of strong world growth in the last 18 months is striking and suggests real problems in this sector. Business investment is also weak.
The government sector, which has provided a good deal of support to growth in recent years, cannot be expected to continue to do so. The budget deficit is already relatively large and there will be increasing pressure to rein it in over the next couple of years.
Overall, it looks likely growth will continue to stumble along a little below potential, a trajectory unlikely to generate a significant feel good factor.
[34] Us blokes never know what’s going on inside a woman’s head… when you get to my age you realise that’s a blessing
Benign economic conditions only help governments if they can take credit. Rocky conditions only help oppositions if they can appear to offer solutions. Major won in the midst of a serious recession because people were disinclined to trust Kinnock to get us through it. He then lost in a relatively strong period for the UK economy because few gave him credit for the recovery.
As it happens, I think notwithstanding Fred’s concerns (many of which are very sensible) that the world economy is looking surprisingly robust and we can look forward to a reasonable period of continued growth on the back of that. Whether the government deserve or are likely to get the credit is another matter.
38/39 It’s been a a pretty weak few years. I know it’s a mixed bag, but it’s hard to deny that there are some signs of recovery. Look at the FTSE. Surely govt. tax income is going to rise this year taking pressure of HM Treasury.
is people saying they don’t like negative campaigning rather like the polls in the 1980’s saying they wanted to pay more tax. People said they wanted to but consistently backed a women who didn’t quite go along with that idea.
I did some research on political advertising and i found the only way it is generally sucessful is sadly for combative advertising. It is a polemic case as most other products do recieve negative returns on negative advertising.
everyone laughs at ids but in my opinion he was better than hague or howard because it was him that got into the publics mentality that we shouldn’t trust blair, it toook along time but when it did it was politically devistating.
will the flip flop be as devastating - no but its worse paying a small cost now to ingrain it in peoples mentality now before moving on to attacking policies when he has some and positive advertising when labour has a new leader.
41. James - I am not forecasting a severe global slowdown - worryingly, that doesn’t need to happen for there to be a negative global impact on UK growth. As I mentioned in the previous post, the failure of the internationally exposed sectors of the UK economy to benefit from recent strong world growth is quite striking. This failure implies that a return of world growth to less elevated levels will likely see an even worse performance.
42. Juan - the FTSE 100 is not much of an indicator of what is happening in the UK economy. It better reflects the global economic picture, as around half the earnings of FTSE companies are earned abroad. On the public finances, revenues in the last year have been flattered by the big rise in oil prices - but despite this the deficit for 2005/2006 came in a little above target. As this effect drops out, there could actually be renewed upside pressure on the deficit. I think Brown would like to avoid a significant fiscal tightening for good political reasons, but I doubt the evil day can be put off indefinitely.
oh come on blue to win and fred most indepedent forcasters are prediciting 2.5% growth next year and 3% in 2008 - this is hardly bad economic growth and interest rates are likely to go down if anything.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4936352.stm - for those previously that complained about economic migration.
Surely it doesn’t matter whether the economic climate is good or bad . . . what matters is that Gordon Brown has spent the last several years telling us it is in superb shape, and it is all because of his efforts. Blair has backed him on this. Labour cannot go into the next election saying anything other than everything in the garden is lovely.
45. Such forecasts will probably prove overoptimistic. I would say something closer to 2%-2.25% for both years is more likely. Note in this regard that in August 2004, the Bank of England was predicting growth above 3% for 2005,and in May 2005 they were still looking for 2.5% growth. The actual outcome was 1.8%. There is a growing feeling (including among BoE staff) that the UK’s potential growth rate has dropped and the next couple of years may provide further evidence for this.
46. Why is a Labour supporter cheering about how immigration has apparently held down the wages of British working people? No wonder the BNP is picking up support.
Augustus Carp for most people will be the case so it doesn’t matter - hey 12 months ago i remember tories saying that 2005 was a good election to lose because of the economies shape - i remember one tory poster prediciting a 4% recession!!!!!
notts County - well we have realised that inflation is the major factor and that keeping that under control is a priority if you want to keep unemployment down. Plus we have a minimum wage of over a fiver an hour now to make sure that wages arn’t to low
36 - “But would a “changed” (ie more left-wing) Tory party actually win more votes? ” I have no idea, but I think Cameron believes there is some mileage in it. As I have said, a move to the left may pick up some liberals, but lose some Thatcherites.
Andrea- what will happen if the CL do not get their candidate as Senate leader?
Please not the spectrum of Berlusconi returning??
If the economy is in a bad way and GB is PM Labour are finished Candadian style.
However,
If economy expands and GB is PM, DC will find it hard/impossible to displace him. “Thirteen years of growth - why risk it (with Lamont’s Apprentice)?” will be a key theme of the election.
Events will dictate the result of this one. The govt holds maybe a few cards. A tax cut here or there. DC holds none at all.
Red Flag Economics starts at home. You can bang on about the rate of growth and macro economic trends being upside or downside, sideways or long ways on. What matters, as Mr T well recognised, is what is going on at home.
IF perrsonal debt keeps increasing and unemploymnet rising then people will get pissed-off with the government because they have to blame someone for their extravangance and poor productivity, even if it is not really the government’s fault. Another demonstration of the nanny state being very ingrained: it must be nanny’s fault I fell off a cliff because she didn’t tell me not to jump, she only told me not to go near the edge.
54. Cogent analysis. GordEnron’s comparitive unlovliness will be overlooked in times of economic bounty. I think an IR raise (or series thereof) triggering a property market crash is the main risk for him.
53. PJ, actually they could still go on. But someone could question if they really have a majority at the Senate and how weak this majority is. They could still win a vote of confidence at the Senate (because there’re a couple of people who would vote Andreotti, but are willing to give a chance to the future government), but it’s always a risky situation.
Where’s Jack today? Surely he knows where Rennard is?
54. Spot on. The demise of the economy is all the tories have. I can’t see GB helping them, he can afford to take a couple of hits before a pre-election bonanza budget.
58. maybe he’s trying to follow Rennard!
Off topic I’m afraid but regarding the prediction competion you are having for London. Virtually everyone has gone for a Conservative gain in Croydon - which on paper seems a good bet.
However, how many of you have noticed that Labour have not fielded candidates in the Liberal Democrat’s best ward - Coulsdon East. Last time round that went 1 Lib Dem, 2 Tory but had Labour candidates. Could the lack of Labour candidates let the Lib Dems gain two seats?
If the Lib Dems gain two seats in Coulsdon it would make the Conservatives job of getting full control much harder on May 4 as they would have to take seven out of eight target seats in the other key wards against Labour. I’ve also noticed that the Liberals are not standing a full slate in Labour’s key marginal of Waddon.
54. The problem with that rather complacent view is that the economy can expand without the voters necessarily feeling any better off. The Conservatives found this to their cost in 1997 - I can remember Heseltine et al. confidently predicting Tory support would surge close to the GE on the back of the apparently solid recovery from mid 1992-1997. But real post-tax income had only grown 1.3% yoy on average in that period, compared to almost 4% in 1983-1990. This was not nearly fast enough to make people feel better off. Even after 20 quarters of growth from mid-1992, a lot of voters in 1997 still felt the economy was either in or just emerging from, recession. Interestingly, post tax disposable income is currently growing at around 1.5% yoy.
52 SBS It is a modern myth that Thatcherites, like me, will not support what Dave is doing. Its based on a myth that Thatcher was all red meat and cutting and burning, flogging and hanging and privatising into disaster.
Well, not true. She was on the green trail as far back as her first election as leader in 1979:
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT
The quality of our environment is a vital concern to all of us. The last Conservative government had a proud record of achievement in reducing pollution, and protecting our heritage and countryside. We shall continue to give these issues a proper priority. Subject to the availability of resources we shall pay particular attention to the improvement and restoration of derelict land, the disposal and recycling of dangerous and other wastes, and reducing pollution of our rivers and canals.
It is also true that a Thatcherite is very aware as was Mrs T, that there may have to be pain but there must be real gain for the individual as a result.
And of course that quote about society is always out of context. What she really said is what I still think:
“I think we’ve been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it’s the government’s job to cope with it. ‘I have a problem, I’ll get a grant.’ ‘I’m homeless, the government must house me.’ They’re casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There’s no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation.”
Margaret Thatcher October 31 1987
Thanks Andrea.
“And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families.”
(Thatcher’s mount sermon in Edinburgh)
Good example Thatcher set with Mark.
Thanks for reminding us. With all the re-packaging of Cameron it seeks to remind us what the Tories really are. A selfish, self interested party protecting it’s core constituents.
62 Not complacent, but perhaps a rather unrefined opinion.
GB’s reputation for economic competance is the key. If that remains even slightly positive he will benefit from growth.
The Tories problem in the 90’s was their reputation for economic completence was (and in part still is) abysmal. Any economic gains were despite them not because of them. In short, they had blown it. Hesletine did not clock this. IMO (and perhaps that is all it is) GB is not even remotely in that position.
If things perk up, there will be an element of the “record breaking Chancellor” again.
So the lesson regarding the post of how to handle DC. Paint DC as an untried risk and stimulate the economy at the right time. The chameleon thing is only valuable if it encapsulates a malignant doubt that will grow over the years.
OT, I can see that Labour is trying to to make capital out of Bullseye’s nudity: http://www.lambethlabour.com/news/liberaldemocrats/charlesanglin.html
Nice body… I could vote him, if I lived in Lambeth and in his ward.
Positive economic growth is not sufficient to maintain either full employment, or the “feel-good” factor. Innovation normally produces around 2% reduction in costs yoy in a developed economy. That means that growth must exceed 2% to even maintain employment levels. Last year growth was 1.8%, which led directly to the increases in unemployment this year, and to people feeling slightly less confident about the future.
In fact, worldwide productivity growth has recently been slightly above 2%, which makes things even worse. In order to keep the “feel-good” factor propping up Labour’s poll ratings, Brown must keep growth significantly above 2%. However, recent growth has largely been driven by increases in public spending (funded by borrowing), and private borrowing; neither can be maintained indefinitely. Brown therefore has a problem, and its hard to see how he’s going to solve it.
Afternoon all :). I finally got to watch the “Dave the Chamelon” PPB over the weekend. It was extremely good and, remember, we’ve only seen Part 1 so it will be interesting to see what Part 2 says. I do think we need to see the whole thing before we rush to judgement.
My weekend canvassing confirmed everything I had discovered last week. Apart from the small band of committed Tories and the smaller band of committed LDs in the areas I was working, very few likely to turn out. A huge amount of apathy and disillusionment but not real anger toward Blair as there was to the Major Government in the mid-90s. No real enthausiasm for Cameron or Campbell - one person “prepared to give Cameron a chance” while another “he’s just like Blair”. Very low turnout likely - 25/30%.
No doubt some Tories on this site will claim a great victory on the strength of vote share and sests gained but this would be premature. Turnout will be low - I have though changed my view on one thing. The next election is all to play for - while Cameron has not convinced the majority (or anything approaching it) that he is worth supporting, most people still have an open mind and the next election is still three years away. If, as Commentator and others claim, Cameron is “playing the long game”, he’s made a fair start.
Dave the Chameleon and Phoney Tony are remarkably similar concepts. I fear whoever is driving strategy for Labour at the moment is making the same mistakes made by the Tories in the run up to 1997.
Now it’s not easy to take out a promising opposition leader and there are no silver bullets, but I do worry about the current approach. Of course, there is a huge political obstacle in Labour developing a more effective response to cameron, and that is that all the really stinging attacks that could be made could also be applied to the personality and preferences of Blair himself. Until Blair goes I cannot see Labour developing an effective response.
Re: #63 - Mrs Thatcher also made a series of speaches ~1990 about global warming that seem to have been cut-and-pasted by Tony Blairs speachwriters over the previous couple of years. Hasn’t led to much being done about it.
I don’t see that Cameron is breaking this well travelled road. He is talking Green, but the detail of his poilicies is very lax.
On the car emissions he is calling for a 1/3 cut in CO2 emissions, per car, in 25 years, but with no halt to road-building. Given the increases in car use likely over the next 25 years, with a road-building program to provide additional road capacity, this would keep CO2 emissions from cars level at best. Would still be better than Tony has managed [CO2 emissions from transport having grown fast since 1997], but as a best-case scenario it is severely lacking.
Much of what stodge has said I agree with, though I think he underestimates the angry disillusionment with Blair. The number of people admitting to being definite Labour seems lower now that it was for the Tories under Major.
Does anyone share my experience that, despite the genuinely positive perception of Cameron, Tory voters are if anything more likely to vote Lib Dem tactically to beat Labour than in recent years?
65 - outpourings of left-wing bitterness and self-righteousness always help to remind me why I shoudl vote Conservative
73 - Nice one!
One thing about Nulabs ‘dave the chameleon’ is that it raises awareness of Cameron at a time when he’s talking green, while immediately this may not seem to damage him it will have the effect of making his statements more accountable.
The damage will be done when Cameron starts to back pedal from his current Green stance.
The PPB is not just about where Cameron is from, it is also a warning to the electorate and trap for cameron - he can escape it by not ‘flip floping’ ie staying green.
This maybe to Nulabs benefit
70 Agreed, but what if John Major had been able to do that in 1992/3 instead of 1996/7? Perceptions need time to bed in.
Major was simply too late/too damaged to have any effect with Phoney Tony/Demon Eyes in 1997. But look at the rewards it’s reaping now.
If Labour starts the ball rolling now, by 2010 Cameron might be looking a little less fresh and a little more greasy.
It’s a shame though.
Re: 72 - Thanks for the kind word, Lewis. I probably didn’t express myself very well on that. Back in the mid-90s, those who felt anger (and there were many of them) toward the Major Government were motivated enough to vent their anger by voting tactically or abstaining. Even those who wouldn’t vote anything other than Conservative made a point of telling me they weren’t voting.
This time, the mood is one of resignation and disllusionment. People want to express the anger and disappointment they feel toward Blair but don’t feel motivated toward either Tory or LD. Even not voting at all is regarded as unsatisfactory. Although I have not worked in areas with BNP candidates, I now understand their appeal in a way I didn’t before. I expect the Greens to do well where they work and the odd local Independent might surprise, even in London.
I do feel very concerned about the apparent disengagement between politics/politicians and the electorate. The problem is that the cocktail of issues raised by people is too diverse and contradictory for any one Party to be able to resolve. There’s also the not irrelevant point that for whatever reason, many people believe that politics and politicians should be grappling with what are essentially “cultural” questions. I don’t need the Government to tell me how to live my life but in the absence of any moral or cultural leadership, many people are thrashing around in a vacumn.
Thinking about this more widely, I wonder whether the pursuit of “freedom” - be it individual, economic or social - has somehow eroded the concepts of collective behaviour, responsibility and obligation. Now I’m starting to sound like the Daily Mail which is happy to point out the problems but doesn’t offer much in the way of solution.
Max - I’m hearing in the last hour or so about yet more developments in Moray - has anything come your way yet?
54, etc. - in order for Labour to get an electoral benefit from economic growth, that growth needs to be felt by everyone. A 2% growth is of no electoral use if all of the increased wealth is in the hands of a few high-flyers in London. Now, I’m certainly not complaining that the rich are getting richer - I don’t object to that. But if - as seems to be the case - the only people in the private sector getting any richer are the top 1-2% or so of earners, this surely can’t much use to the government in terms of enthusing people to vote for them?
Any more detailed data than the few bits of anecdotal evidence cited by Guardian columnists would be most welcome.
77.stodge, id echo a lot of the sentiments you raise.
‘The cocktail of issues’ is a very good point in particular my personal take on it is that compromise is increadibly difficult for most of us and the level of compromise neededed for the major parties is such that many people just cant go there.
78. Stephen, what are you hearing from moray?
78 - I’m torn between spilling the beans and appearing to be self-important by witholding info! As a Tory, it doesn’t seem to be good news for us though…
81 - Sorry, 82 was meant for you, not myself at 78.
77 stodge, you run the risk of making a false comparison between the timing here. You are right that voters were heartily sick and tired of JM by the ‘mid 1990’s’ as you put it; but by then he really was in mid term.
Voters are heartily sick of Blair NOW - not even twelve months after they elected him again.
83. give us some clues……the yellow revolution is coming? or Sean Connery will be pleased?
Voters are heartily sick of Blair, Marcus, but they’re splitting in many different directions; one bunch are indeed moving to the Conservatives; another bunch to the Lib Dems; another to UKIP and the BNP; another to the Greens (and if Muslim Respect); and another bunch are just not voting at all.
By the mid nineties, everyone who wanted to get rid of the Conservatives had worked out who to vote for to throw them out (usually Labour, but Lib Dem in some seats).
85 - I’m hearing about a..ahhh…unuseful defection to the Yellow Peril (not Jack W though and not Mary Scanlon).
76 - I think that’s the theory for sure…start the ball rolling now on dave the chameleon and maybe in 2 or 3 years when the tories have to make some hard choices or get embarrassed by cock ups, CCO email leaks…that kind of thing….the untrustworthy charges start to stick.
Alternatively, it’s a case of labour giving the tories some free editorial with the message that cameron is different…which is a daft mistake when the main differences are of tone and being more professional in campaigns and marketing. I don’t think there has really been a significant tory policy change yet.
But, as we all have to remember, cameron is the leader of a very unpopular political brand…whereas in 1995-1997 Blair was the leader of a rehabilitated political brand.
87. uhm, someone is defecting to the LDs in Moray?
Re: 84 - Marcus, I’m not disputing the point that people are angry about Blair. It’s the way that anger is being manifested that is different. In the mid-90s, and here I mean 1994-96 in particular when I was a lot more politically active than I am now, my experience was that the electorate just wanted an end to Major and the Conservatives and they would vote for whoever was best able to accomplish it. I heard many people saying they would vote “to get rid of the Tory” and it didn’t matter whether that meant Labour or Lib Dem.
The corollary of that was that often hard-working local Conservative Councillors carried the can for the failures of the Government and by no means all of them deserved the fate that befell them. I dread to think how Tory canvassers coped then.
Now, the anger exists but the response simply isn’t the same. The motivation to vote Tory or LD to “kick Blair” just isn’t there to anything like the same extent. Some people will, I’m certain, but not to the degree that occurred in the mid-90s. For the majority, it will be abstention because they don’t feel, for whatever reason, that there is anything “positive” to be gained in voting Tory or LD. I used not to be bothered about where the votes came from - it now concerns me that people vote FOR you because they’re AGAINST someone else. As a Tory, wouldn’t you rather people voted with enthausiasm for what you are proposing rather than in anger or protest ?
I think Crossland at 77 calls it spot-on. To engage with the various and diverse resentments of the electorate is going to be very difficult because the concerns are often contradictory. For excample, people complain about paying too much tax but at the same time want their local school or hospital to be the best in the world. I don’t know how or why but a very large number of people, for whatever reason, have little or no concept of how public services are financed, what Councils or Councillors can and can’t do and what people could be doing for themselves.
65 PJ: “…the Tories really are. A selfish, self interested party protecting it’s core constituents.” It may have escaped your notice, PJ, but the redistributive policies of Old Labour (and to a lesser extent New Labour) also benefited their core constituency at the expense of others.
Thatcherism and right wing economics in general do not hold with redistibution, but believe in rewarding effort and ingenuity (eg encouraging entrpreneurs). The fact that the beneficiaries of these policies then vote for the centre-right is as much a result of selfishness as those on low incomes voting for socialism…
87. Stephen, anymore clues?
89. Allegedly and sort of. Sorry to be so secretive - I’m fishing for information as much as trying to make myself appear important by claiming to have it (/:)/)while additionally not trying to not do my party any harm if it’s complete piffle.
I respect your point, Stodge, and as a politician I would love to think you are right that people vote for something, not against the Government, but the facts say otherwise (with the possible exception of the 1947 election).
I am certain, for instance, that next week hundreds of often hard-working Labour councillors will carry the can for Tony Blairs failures and lose their seats; and not because they have suddenly millions have become converted to Cameron or Campbells politics.
Where I do agree with you is that in 1997 the ONLY reason many people voted for Blair was because he was the route to being rid of Major - they didn’t care what his policies were.
That is not going to happen to Cameron. Although we may have to wait a while yet to know what Camerons detailed policies are I am certain that he will be planning to win the next GE on the back of some totally fresh ideas about solving some age-old social, economic and environmental issues.
The Conservatives have been engaging some very serious intellectual firepower recently (and not just since Cameron took over, going back to IDS).
I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
93 I heard something along these lines over the weekend. But there doesn’t seem to be anything in it.
I genuinely believe that ‘Cameron the Chameleon’ is Labours version of the 1997 catastrophe that was ‘New Labour, New Danger’. The problem was that the Conservatives were acknowledging that there was something ‘New’ about the Labour party. People forgot 1979 and the only people demonised was the Tories.
People on PB have highlighted at great length the problems of Labours PPB (the bike, the ‘cute’ hat, the fact that the Chameleon is actually quite endearing). All it has done is make people question why Labour are so worried about Cameron. It is just a shame we have not capitalised on PH’s stupid comments about the NHS. If we had or can, I think it would reflect favourably in the polls.
“Chameleon is actually quite endearing” - it’s true, but so were George Formby and Norman Wisdom. Or Michael Foot. Or Charles Kennedy.
Re: 95 - Marcus, thanks for the coherent response. I look forward to seeing the detail of Conservative policies developed in the next three years and look forward to what will doubtless be rigorous and constructive debate.
I hope this new brand of Conservative thinking will be as evolutionary as you claim and I hope I can rely on you (and others) to clarify points about which I am unclear.
93. Stephen B..either front up or give up, please.
99 - Fred -I give up. I’ve probably been fed a false line.
100 - Stephen I’ve heard nothing but I’ve been out all day doing my bit for the party and now I’m totally knackered!!
Also some distressing news that the Libs are having a coffee morning in the village - I think I’ll go along and picket it. Especially as I believe the awful Jeremy Purvis will be their!
90. You raise a very important point about people’s contradictory desires. This is not helped at all by the way in which critics of the status quo tend to frame their arguments. For example, somebody advocating major reform of the NHS to make it more responsive to patients’ wishes and more able to cope with an every increasing array of treatment possibilities will often criticise the present system for being ‘inefficient’. This ignores the fact that an alternative system that better resolves the major problems may well be more inefficient. To argue in this way just confuses people and presents an own goal to Gordon Brown who can just reel off his list of figures showing that we have the most efficient system in the world etc. etc. etc.
100. Stephen, nothing would surprise in this Moray byelection!
102. an *ever* increasing array
101 go along, MAx. I’m sure you will be very welcome.
105 - I do love home baking - it’s a tough decision. If they have donuts I may have to consider defecting.
106 Take it step by step, Max. We wouldn´t expect you to go the whole way on the first date…and you can always justify it as espionage.
102. How, may I ask, can better meeting patient demand be ‘inefficient’?
108. If the percentage of money spent on non-clinical services goes up.
A new poll for MORI suggests that 34% believe Labour would get best value for money out of public services, compared to 31% for the Conservatives.
Which I think indicates that the GBPublic cannot see much difference between the two of them!
101 - I sincerely wish that the Lib Dems aren’t planning to commit a similar crime that the RESPECT made itself guilty a while ago in Birmingham?
106 - Could this be the defection Stephen B was referring to?
106 - Well…ahhh…maybe….maybe not…you see….ahh…it’s possible…under some circumstances…potentially what I’m hearing…ummmm….maybe…(continues in similar inconclusive vein for another 48 lines until Fred snaps
)
The real defection can be found at http://www.moraylibdems.org.uk/news/13/index.phtml
TOP HIGHLAND TORY TURNS TO THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
Robbie Rowantree, a former Conservative parliamentary candidate who is also well known for his involvement in the Highland community has defected to the Scottish Liberal Democrats just days before polling in the Moray by-election later this week.
etc
I’ve no idea know how significant this is/isn’t.
Thanks Lewis - that’s the one (phew!)
At last. The moment UK politics changed forever
PS What’s the going rate for a PPC defection? Can you make some cash from this?
Stephen, I hadn’t thought of being relieved to read about a defection before, but I guess it must be a lot better than reading about one knowing that another is just about to happen.
Sorry, Lewis, I’m not sure I understand . . . . .do you think that there is going to be another one??
Rowantree’s record as a Tory candidate.
General 2005 Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Conservative 4579
(10.4%)
General 2001 Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Conservative 3513
(14.1%)
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/person/0,,-5811,00.html
Shock horror! He’s been disolutioned for ages. Must be one of the few Liberals who has said that not only does he support the death penalty but would be willing to swing the axe himself!!!
Lewis - the ‘phew’ was more on account of knowing that it wasn’t pure rubbish that I was hearing - I was beginning to doubt myself.
I don’t think it was that unexpected in the area and so had already been factored in, so to speak.
What an anticlimax. No doubt this guy was sounded out ages ago as usual and is now wheeled out before the byelection. Same old tactics.
119 No, no. I just puzzled why at 116 Stephen B was saying Phew! about a defection from the Tories, and then I worked it out. Or at least I thought I had (until 122)
121. Perhaps he has been offered a peerage.
115. but he’s actually from Moray?
125 - Do you mean that he is rich as well?
Re: 123 & 125: Such healthy cynicism, NC. It may resonate very well up there, it may not. I suppose only the locals will know though it can’t help the Tories that much, can it?
Thinking of by-election defections, I remember when the LD candidate in Newham, Alec Kellaway (I think), defected three days BEFORE the by-election. That was a show-stopper. I remember in the uphoria after winning Greenwich in early 1987, Norman Tebbit produced John Horam as a “key defector” from the Alliance to the Conservatives.
Horam is one of the few people who has sat in Parliament for three parties - as I recall, he sat for a seat in Newcastle or Gateshead. He was first Labour, then SDP, lost his seat in 1983 and became Tory MP for Orpington in 1992.
124 -
I think I need to some wine to help me write a little better at this end of the day.
126 -I think he will be joining the Viscount’s trusty band of workers up north after this.
The various Lib Dem blog sites in Scotland are certainly displaying a confident air about Moray, suggesting they maybe doing better than some of us expected, considering the TV debate failure last week (my euphamism for something stronger). Claim they delivered most of the constituency on one weekend afternoon and appear to have had a heavy presence of workers. May explain the SNP apparently switching some of point of attack to the Lib Dem candidate. May need to watch this over the next 36 hours. Could all be a red herring of course.
Notice the defection in Birmingham is from Tyburn ward, safe Labour,unless they are really under the heaviest cosh, mind you BNP presence could be interesting.
126 - I’m pretty sure he’s not. I think he farms in the Highlands somewhere. It’s not ideal but it’s hardly the end of the world. I suspect it will mean little to the local voters though.
123 - more news on Liberal Review. And I think you are probably wrong this time…
131 Max - from Brora but with a business in Inverness I believe.
http://www.liberalreview.com/blogs/apollo/robbie_rowantree_joins_the_lib_d
130. David(s). SNP attacked Labour today too replying to acccusations they would cost Moray jobs
131. Defections don’t always produce effects (like the tory candidate defecting to LDs in Colne Valley last year didn’t seem to have helped the LDs)
does anyone know when part 2 of david the cam is on?
Maybe this anticipated his defection:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/09/04/ntory204.xml
Some senior activists do accept the need for change, though with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Robbie Rowantree, the chairman of Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Conservative Association, said: “We’ve been flat-lining for so many years now that something dramatic has to be done. We’re the Marks & Spencer of British politics: formerly extremely popular and now dull and out of fashion.”
‘He’s a big name catch’ hahaha yes of course he is, having come a poor fourth at the GE.
There is no more to this individual than there was to the ‘big name’ defector the Tories announced from the Lib Dems a few months back. You know - the one who contested Suffolk West at the GE? what was his name? Adrian? Andrew? Greaves? Graves? surely you remember….
132, Peter - “At last the news we have been waiting for. Robbie Robertson has joined the Lib Dems.”
Who is Robbie Robertson? Has there been already another defection?
That’s right, keep your spirits up!
137 - Robbie Robertson is a Canadian singer songwriter - one time lead singer of the Band. Minor hit in the late 1980s with “Somewhere down the crazy river”.
Guess the Tories are delighted it is only a twice candidate for Westminster. At least it is not one of their Scottish MPs. (Oh - there is only one!)
Just heard a Radio Scotland bulletin on the Moray by-election - the defection got precicely no coverage. Instead they started with the vandaliing of Tory posters and the ‘pressure’ put on the independent councillors who had backed Scanlon and then claimed not to.
136 This defection is clearly not of national importance (as sadly Andrew Grice in the Independent believed Mr Gra/o/?ves’ defection was), but I dare say that defection would have been highly embarrassing for the Lib Dems if there had been a West Suffolk by-election going on at the time.
From This is North Scotland
The Conservatives have apologised after several constituents had to pay a surcharge for by-election literature which was inadvertently sent out without a postage stamp.
A number of people went to their local post offices after being told they had unstamped mail waiting to be collected.
They paid a £1.27 surcharge to collect the letters only to find out they were part of a mailshot from Tory candidate Mary Scanlon.
A spokesman for Ms Scanlon’s campaign team last night apologised for the oversight.
He said the letters were part of a large consignment which had been sent out to voters and either the stamps had become detached or the letters had inadvertently failed to be stamped.
“It is very unfortunate and we can only apologise,” he said.
“A lot of these letters are hand-stamped and we don’t know if some were simply missed or if the stamps came off before they reached their destination.
“We believe there was only a small number involved and we will be happy to refund those people who paid to collect the letters
140. here’s the norm to vandalize posters!
Brora is 90 miles from Elgin.
So it was true after all.
By road you are right, Geographer, but Rowantree fought the seat next door at the last election.
144 …and what an extremely marvellous whisky Brora is. Shame it’s so expensive.
Changing subject, I see Mr Kennedy was campaigning in Speyside today.
Andrea at 133, yes may well indicate a contest closing up, SNP out to squeeze the Labour vote to their benefit. Good move, although I guess a lot of Labour rebel voters would go to the other Executive party
147. it depends on if the Labour voters are disilussed with the Westminster government or with the Holyrood one.
Interesting that SNP hasn’t said (yet) that the LDs are in power with Labour and so a vote for them is a vote for the government.
148 - they have - in the literature put out.
I found it funny about the postal surcharges - loved to have seen their faces when the opened the letters.
149. thanks.
The tories could at least offer to pay back what those people spent. If they aren’t many, it shouldn’t be a problem
150 - I think we already have. So far as I know it’s very few. Again not ideal but hardly the end of the world!
150. They have offered to repay people, in the report I saw.
151/52. thanks.
51.I just saw a report on the Moray byelection on BBC Scotland. Mary Scanlon adamant that she had the permission of the two councillors by phone to use their names on her leaflets. Told the interviewer to ask the councillors in question what had happened to make them “change” their minds!
The report mentioned “dirty tactics” but didn’t go into details, both Mary Scanlon and Linda Gorn came across much better than either Sandy Keith or Richard Lochhead when interviewed.
146. Still on the whisky trail, then?
A significantly better labour PEB tonight I thought, positive and based on policy. Was this a regional one, the one I saw was focused on Tower Hamlets Council?
156 - I don’t think it was a PEB. Channel 4 has a 5 minute political slot after the news every day.
154 - don’t agree - not much difference between them tonight- the report was too brief to make a real judgement.
157 - Well there’s irony for you. I was praising the labour party for a change and it turns out to be by some activists made on a shoestring. I’d seen a mention of a PEB on the programme guide and just presumed this was it!
I think there’s a message to the supposed media experts there.
154&158 - Did you see the televised debate on ITV a wee while ago - it really was dire. Not sure how many floating voters would have seen it though - it was on pretty late.
110 Sean Fear Have you alink to that poll. If the services include the NHS then it is a significant change in the peceptions of the Tory party isn’t it?
161. blue2win:
http://www.mori.com/polls/2006/s060422b.shtml
60. No did not get to see it. Max, what do you think of the tory campaign in Moray and previously in Dunfermline?
162. I’m a bit puzzled by the “other” and “none” option on the first question. The question is “Do you think a Labour or a Conservative Government would be most effective in getting good value for the public money it spends?”
I suppose “other” means that the person interviewed thinks another party would do better.
If, for ex, I think a LD government would be the best, I could reply “other” (not Lab or Con, but another party). But I could reply “none” too (I think that none of the 2 options in the questions would do it well)
161 - Not sure that “not getting value for money” has ever been a public perception of the Conservatives.
162 Thanks Andrea.
There is not enough data there to be sure but if the poll were in the context of the NHS as the other questions suggest then the trust deficit for the Tories seems to be very muc reduced. Inded with a standard MoE of 3% it is now level pegging.
I would be delighted if this encouraging data were not from MORI.
163 - Their wasn’t much of a campaign in Dunfermline so it can’t really be compared. Moray, so far as I know (and I only have a couple of friends I know working up there - can’t go myself I’m busy in my own part of the world!!) has been more intensive and certainly more expensive. It’s been helped by a strong local association and by a few Condipendent councillors.
Their have been a number of problems (mainly with the councillors letters) although I think it is increasingly clear that they were put under certain pressures and that Mary Scanlon wasn’t at it. Although a very partisan local press has amplified this (as they have done for the Libs) which was damaging.
But honestly - I just don’t know - but I suspect the ground war is where it will be won & lost.
For a more informed local Tory have a look at this thread - he calls himelf ‘Elginloon’ but he knows his stuff!!!
http://alexcolehamilton.iblogs.com/2006/04/18/scanlons-moray-implosion
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2006/04/adam-boulton-gordon-brown-hasnt-got.html
ICM Guardian tomorrow. Con 34 Lab 32 LD 24.
69 - Whoa, big lib dem leap there! Within the MOE I suppose but with others at 10% maybe a more realistic take on the supposed BNP surge.
Its Lab down 5. Tories, I think, static, LDs up 3. I don’t know about others
169: What was it last time?.
71 - I thought it’s Tories -1, Lab, -3 and Libs +3. But I could be wrong.
Last ICM was LAB 37 CON 33 LD 21 so it’s
LAB -5
CON +1
LD +3
OTHE +1
Change on last ICM poll:
Con -1%
Lab -3%
LD +3%
Change on last ICM/Guardian poll:
Con n/c
Lab -5%
LD +3%
No ukpaul. I just checked. Tories were 34% last time ( mid March) so they’re static on last time which was mid march. Lab down 5 Tories n/c LDs up 3
Just noticed a more recent poll cunningly titled Brown vs Cameron instead.
That was 35/35/21 so
-3/-1/+3 is correct.
76 - Neither of us were right! It’s ICM giving polls misleading titles that got me. The last one was 5/6 April.
Last ICM poll was for Channel 4 (8 April)
Con 35%
Lab 35%
LD 21%
Last ICM poll for the Guardian was (13 March)
Con 34%
Lab 37%
LD 21%
Chrisco, there is obviously some mistake there. Mr Luntz has proven that we are in fact extremely unpopular. There is no way we can be polling above 10% or the Turquoise Party less than 50%.
Either way it’s the best poll for the LDs for ages and the worst poll for Labour. If this poll is anywhere near correct Labour are in for a grim time on May 4. The trouble for the Tories is that it looks like the voters will be using all the other parties to give them a kicking; LDs, BNP, Respect so there won’t be such a focus on the Tory performance. It’ll be extremely interesting to see what happens in the Con/LD battlegrounds. Is the LD pick up strongest in the Labour heartlands, could they still lose seats net to the Tories in the South and East?
Of course if a very anti Labour mood predominated at the next GE it’s the Tories who could clean up because unlike local government they’re best placed as an anti Labour vehicle in the vast bulk of Lab marginals but that’s a long way off and the most recent YouGov poll showed a much different picture to this poll.
181 - I’m not sure the ‘others’ vote will be as high. Given that they simply aren’t contesting that many seats. I think UKIP and the BNP are only contesting some 600 odd seats between them. Not so sure about the Greens though.
good poll for the LDs.
are we back to pre-2005 trend: voters leaving Labour for the Libdems? or is this just an outliner poll?
182. Max, the Greens are fielding 1,294 candidates
I’d expect others to poll 10%+ in the locals (certainly when you add in votes for independents and very localised parties). In London, Others won 12% in 2002; it’ll be higher this time.
32% is dreadful for Labour.
What causes confusion, however, is the way that the BBC’s projections automatically reduce the share for “Others” and reallocate some of their votes to the big three.
184 - Thanks Andrea. I do think that benefits us as I would think the Greens take votes disproportionately from the Left and should more than compensate for any loss of right-wing voters to UKIP.
I do tend to feel the weaker the Labour vote the better it is for us as I don’t see all that much scope for large scale gains/losses between the Conservatives and Liberals (outside a few areas of course).
“Others” could be significant here in Lincoln where UKIP are contesting twice as many seats as the Lib Dems are. (Con and Lab are contesting all 11 wards, UKIP contesting 6, Lib Dems contesting 3).
I live in a solidly Labour ward so my Conservative vote always falls on stoney ground.
185 - Sean are there still a few London bourghs with ‘Residents’ elected to local councils - a few in the Romford area IIRC.
I imagine Respect will hope for a few seats too.
189. Respect’s candidates are here:
http://www.respectcoalition.org/2006/news.php?ite=1038
Recent polls have had the Lib Dems higher in Scotland than nationally, a regional breakdown of this latest poll would be interesting, particularly in view of Moray on Thursday.
189, yes. There are strong Residents’ Associations in Havering.
The ICM poll is a useful guide for how the votes might stack up on May 4th. In 2002, the Conservatives polled 34% in March and May but only 29% in April so make of that what you will. Labour were polling over 40% in 2002 so this looks like a big fall - perhaps 7-8% down on 2002. The LDs are up 2-3 points according to the ICM poll which is obviously encouraging.
Hard quite to know what to make of this except that Labour are in for a battering on May 4th. Doorstep response perhaps a shade firmer for Tory and LD support tonight but Labour support very weak. Back home in Newham, my other half tells me Respect were busy in East Ham this evening. They haven’t come to my door but I don’t know if my ward is one of their “prospects”.
Mike,
Very good article, a lot of us political anoraks forget just how ‘dispersed’ the media is compared to just 9 years ago.
Amazed to see how many people are trying to predict the result of the next GE on the last thread. If you had to pin me up against a brick wall and predict then I’d go Tories largest in a hung parliament. Why?
a) I don’t see the economy going vastly off the rails but growth will be sluggish, I think we are in for a long period of moderately rising unemployment, look at the figures for the last 3 months. Worst for Labour as Fred has mentioned I don’t think the outlook for real disposable income will be great. Very true in 97 just how many people thought the economy had only just come out of recession. One of the reasons why people have lumped the gov’t until now is the relatively quick growth in disposable income even in the face of many tax rises.
b) moderate Brown ‘bounce factor. I have a theory that people may just about remember thinking what happened when they gave Major the benefit of the doubt in 92 and elected a gov’t for a 4th time, could cut both ways. On the other hand I’m sceptical that your average voter really thinks like that.
c) Iran. I think people are really underrating this. I think Brown might be wise to wait until 2008 if Tony has to deal with an Iran standoff which I think will happen sooner than most people think. This will only make voters remember Iraq even more, very unpredictable dynamic. Don’t see how Cameron can credibly oppose this though.
d) My gut feeling is that the Tory brand still won’t be in a good enough shape to win by 2010 even if it goes that far. But I don’t rule out the (small) possibility of some unknown calamitous event for Labour to throw everyones predictions awry.
So in summary I think it’s about as predictable as the outcome of the Rocket Ryan Day snooker match was at the start of this evening!
186 - Sean Fear - intrigued by that - “BBC’s projections automatically reduce the share for “Others” and reallocate some of their votes to the big three.” How does it work?
Surprised no one’s fed the Grauniad poll into Baxter - when I did (assuming a +2% tactical vote to the Liberals against Labour, and a -2% tactical vote to the Liberals against Conservatives) the Tories were still 70 seats behind Labour, who (tho’ without an overall majority) still had more seats than the Tories and the LDs put together. Not a pretty picture for anyone, really.
last post - by win I meant an overall majority
I don’t know about Labour dealing with Dave, but it looks like Dave might have been doing deals with Frank Luntz, the “impartial”
Newsnight Pollster.
195 - Others won well over 10% of the total vote in 2004, yet the BBC projection put them on just 6%. The BBC try to treat the outcome as being like a general election, and so assume that some people who vote for Others will switch to the big 3 at a general election. It makes the whole BBC projection a very artificial exercise IMO.
Labour down to 32%? Well, they’re heading in the right direction then. Wonder where they’ll be by 2010?
200. and you’re not moving…the Yellow Peril is arriving!!!!!!
Suspect this is more like reality.
“Angela Says:
“April 24th, 2006 at
I had a good visit at the weekend - not the same atmosphere as Dunfermline but as long as we get a good vote and come 2nd at least. I found too much support for the SNP on the doors than I am used to in Edinburgh! The local accent is difficult to understand at first as well”.
PS Angela is Lib Dem
202 Second at least?
Yes, great poll for LDs, bad for Lab, not great for Tories. I did some London canvassing tonight - found the Labour vote a few percent adrift of 2002, much as we’ve collectively thought. Only one switcher (to the LDs), but some apathy among normally Labour voters: not a meltdown but suggestive of a rough night next week with turnout lower than usual.
Not a good poll for Labour, however, with the govt down to the low 30s the tories really should be in the high 30s…at least. 34% is rather unconvincing.
In the short term being on the wrong side of unison and the rcn is bad news for labour, but, in the long run higher levels of voter concern on nhs funding and staffing levels is very bad news for the tories.
So what do we reckon will be the notional national share on local election night.
I hazard a guess now at: Con 36 LD 29 Lab 27
And according to Baxter Nick, you’ll have more time to spend on PB.C after the next election. I don’t think the LDs should get too excited though - I got excited when Hague got 40% in a poll and it didn’t do my team much good. I think this poll needs to be supported by a few others - it might point to a ‘none of the Above’ trend with the LDs benefiting slightly.
188 - so how are the vibes in Lincoln? I used to live there and was 23 votes away from being a cllr !!
204. I know its a horribly bad model, but on Baxter a GE with the ICM poll result, with no tactical voting, would leave you in need of a job! Oh dear…
There a high positive correlation between ICM last poll in April and Conservative and Labour share of local vote in May. Based on the average performance since 1997 stats suggest 37% Conservative and 23% Labour.
The best/worst outcome the numbers suggest are Con 40:30 Lab 27/27
209. And further; 24% for the LDs means that my prediction of 23% highest Guardian ICM vote share for the LDs this year has already been sunk.
I should have learn to be more optimistic in the future!
Sorry. Random digit. Should read Lab 27/20
207, 209 No need to gloat…
BTW on Baxter what level of tactical voting do you think would be reasonable? Is the Labour to LD tactical voting likely to hold up, or the LD to Lab, if/when Gordon Brown takes over?
207/09. why do some posters on this site seem to have the secret mission to unseat Nick Palmer?!
214 Secret?
Re: 211 - the correltation between the ICM poll figures and the May local election figures is striking for both 1998 and 2002. My reading suggests a Labour decline with the LDs doing slightly better and the Conservatives about the same as 2002.
Re; 204 - Nick, sounds like your canvassing experience matches mine. I detect no great enthausiasm for either Tory or LD but the Labour vote is as soft as I have known it since the early 80s. It may all come down to polling day organisation in many areas. The votes ARE there for labour but they need substantial persuasion to go down to the polling booth.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-2150004,00.html
Last line…I thought Meriden constituency covered Solihull Council areas, not Birmingham?
213. I’m not gloating, merely warning the man! Unlike other posters here I quite rate Nick’s contributions to the commons, even though he is unapologetically NuLab.
Have you seen any figures on the tactical voting at the last GE? It would be nice to see which way it meant and how much.
I would expect a bit of a fall off in the tactical voting from Lab-LD, although if there is a real fear in Labour supporters that the Tories might get into power then it might increase. As for LD-Lab, think there will still be some tactical voting that way (I know lots of leftie LD voters who would never vote Tory). But equally there may be a “get Labour out” swing from LD-Tory, although that may be limited by the degree of apathy and disillusionment.
214 Andrea I am quite open about wanting Nick Palmer (and about another 130 LAbour MPs) out of office. Nothing personal, just business.
214. I don’t want to get rid of the man, was only joking with him. Hadn’t refreshed my webpage before posting so didn’t see that kingbongo had said the same thing.
Little bit more on Moray on Newsnight Scotland. Apparently Tories pouring in workers and resources in last few days. Libs talking a good game with the ’sensible ones’ predicting ‘progress’. Nothing on Labour at all, although I’m not sure they’ll do all that badly.
206 - SBS - 202 results were Con 34%,Lab 33%,Lib Dems 27% & Others 5% obtained from http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2002/rp02-033.pdf
I expect Others to do a lot better this time - 12% or higher!!
O/T - Does anyone have any thoughts on which if any of the Mets will change hands. The only one I can see the Tories picking up is Coventry and hopefully we’ll hold on in Solihull.
218 I think that at the next election the Tories will probably still face tribal tactical voting Lab to LD. I have read cogent hypotheses that the LD to Tory tactical vote might be quite strong.. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking though! I’d guess that there will also be a bit of Tory-LD voting.
What I don’t understand is how you can do a national tactical voting figure. I’ve always assumed that tactical voting swing was highly dependent on the actual candidates and varies from marginal to marginal. I can’t seem to find any figures on this though… Andrea?
“Re; 204 - Nick, sounds like your canvassing experience matches mine. I detect no great enthausiasm for either Tory or LD but the Labour vote is as soft as I have known it since the early 80s. It may all come down to polling day organisation in many areas. The votes ARE there for labour but they need substantial persuasion to go down to the polling booth. ”
My experience matches that precisely
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4940182.stm
“Ex-Tory leader Michael Howard spent £3,600 on make-up during the general election campaign.”
221. Max, what did they say about SNP?
213 - I don’t think it’s unreasonable to forecast some level of tactical unwind that might work in the Conservatives’ favour. DC’s first job - which he’s made a decent start at - is to stop the instinctive hatred of the Tories that there was in the last few elections. If he succeeds in this - and there’s no reason on current form that he shouldn’t - then a lot of the anti-Tory tactical voting that went on in previous elections should stop.
Consequently, I think a reasonable level of tactical voting in Baxter is Con +x to Lib, Lab -x to Lib, Lib -x to Lab - where x is really any number you want between 0 and 5 (1.5ish?).
As far as the Conservatives are concerned, I don’t think tactical voting need be too much of a worry. It’s not that people will be tactically voting for them, but we might see less tactical voting against them.
228 Thanks!
227 - Pretty much the obvious - favourites, need to win and need to win well.
226 - To be fair I think Charlie spent £2,000. Hard to decide who needs it more. Incidentally, on the subject of cosmetics, can I urge people not to buy ’self tan facial moisturiser for men’ - I still haven’t recovered. And I got sunburned delivering leaflets - in Scotland!! - so not looking my best.
I saw a snatch of Dave the Chameleon on HIGNFY tonight. Labour really seem unreasonably angry that DC is calling himself Dave rather than David. I know almost no-one called David who doesn’t shorten himself to Dave. Some I call David behind their back, some Dave - but to their face almost everyone is Dave. British male Christian names (at least, the ones we use) rarely have a second syllable that ends in a consonant - John, Nick, Will, Matt, Mark, Tony, Bob, etc.
I really can’t see why they see this as an issue.
230. well, I think a reduced majority (if not too reduced) would be ok for them.
228 - Of course if, as is very likely, both tories and labour are desperate not to have the other in government lib dems will gain labour votes in tory constituencies/targets and tory votes in the labour ones.
Win/win!
“I know almost no-one called David who doesn’t shorten himself to Dave”
Dave Davis?
David Beckham?
230. I shall heed your cosmetics advice advice!
Yes, it seems Charlie was covering up the bags under the eyes and the green-ness from around the gills, and Howard was trying to counter the pale-skinned vampire image!
234 - Dave Steele, Dave Owen, Dave Blunkett, Dave Hunt, Dave Penhaligon…
222 - “206 - SBS - 202 results were Con 34%,Lab 33%,Lib Dems 27% & Others 5% obtained from http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2002/rp02-033.pdf
I expect Others to do a lot better this time - 12% or higher!! ”
No, I don’t think this is notional share, I think it is actual share. On the night the BBC will give us what the notional share would be if elections had taken place everywhere.
How much will Ming spend on make up come the general election?
231. I thought it was because he changed how he liked to be called at some point early on in his appearence on the public stage. Quite possibly a inacurate rumour, but I was under the impression it is where the attack on his use of “Dave” came from.
237. and?
238. as much as Elizabeth R production spent for Glenda.
237 - SBS - you are correct - it was actual share, now Sean Fear post at 199 makes sense - thanks.
With the locals coming up even a conceited Nulab regime surely knows they ought to be careful.
Yet the much admired spin factory seems to have lost its touch. Negative ads that backfire, silly boasting from Nanny Hewitt, encouragement of the BNP from that Islington charmer and failed councillor Margaret Hodge.
But then comes Brown being criticised by his own MPs for not doing something about aircraft pollution and blamed for coming up with the cuddly chameleon, Adam Bolton saying Brown hasn’t got what it takes.
Then not content with that there are strange authoritarian outpourings by email from No 10, car factories closing, the party nearing financial collapse and the nation waiting for The Trevor McDonald Moment.
Would you hire these people to run your Christmas club let alone a council?
Vino and SBS, I don’t know why the BBC bother with their national projection, as it is so artificial, and tells you so little about how the parties have actually performed.
The local election programme in May 2003 was surreal. The BBC was projecting a national vote share of 35% for the Conservatives, and having a good jeer at Theresa May because the Tories were only doing 2% better than in the 2001 general election - yet every few minutes another blue flash was coming up saying “Conservative gain!”
234, 235, 237 - yes, yes, ok - but I mean people I know personally. (i.e. people you can’t contradict me about). I wonder how many of the friends of those Davids you mention can actually be bothered with the second syllable of their names.
Re234 the commons research paper on 2002 talsk of estimated share.
Actual share would be available from Local elections handbooh 20032 Rallings and Thresher.
Maybe the estimate they are using is from the BBC which is base son 3 party contests.
In 1998 (same nmix of London/Metro/disticts) shares were 30 con,
40 Lab and 23% LIb.
Adjusting by Nat opinoin poll ratings 2002 v 1998 gives 30% con .37%v lab and 24% lib.
My own bestbgues for 2006 based on latest ICM poll is Con 35%,Lab 24%,Lib 30% others 11%.
Roger H
243 - Sean - thanks
245 - my guess believe it or not was going to be Con 36%,Lab 22%,Lib Dems 30% & Others 12% - not much difference.
42,
Did not know you ever admired their spin machine.
Good balanced post though as usual.
243 - Sean Fear - sorry to be a pain but how would the BBC (or others) convert my guessed actual % into a notational national one?
242.”failed councillor Margaret Hodge”
well, considering she was the leader of the council, I wouldn’t call her “failed”.
238
I would have thought that hair and dentures were a higher priority?
167&221 Max, thanks for that. I would not feel confident enough to bet on the outcome of this byelection.
242,
Some would believe a lot of new Tories are reading The Unfinished Revolution, how the modernisers saved the Labour Party.
I have heard its their working maual back to power for the Cameroons.
249 Andrea I am not alone in my judgement of M Hodge. A lot of people in Islington would call Margaret Hidge a failed councillor. She particuarly failed in respect of some of the children. Getting to the top of any political tree is no guarantee of success. One Silvio B comes to mind?
247 Dez I always admire good professionalism even where it is misplaced or misused. Are you saying I have my facts wrong about the Nulab spin machine failures or the publicly expressed views about Brown or the foolishness of Hodge and Nanny?
New ICM poll shows Lib Dem advance at the expense of Labour. Full figures Con 34%(-1), Lab 32%(-3%), LD 24%(+3%)
253. well, Blue2win, I’m not a fan of Hodge. That’s just the I use the term “failed” in different context. For ex, I wouldn’t say SB is a failed politician, but I would say he’s bad politician.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php
BNP at 2%
251 - Not a problem seeing as there are no markets! - probably not sufficient demand. I doubt anyone honestly knows the outcome. It’s very much up in the air especially when you consider the winning candidate could poll only 7,000-8,000 votes - maybe even less.
Now was there ever a better example of being hoist by his own Nulab braces. He might ask himself who helped to create this situation. From This is London
A “pernicious and even dangerous poison” is present in the British media, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has said.
The politician accused parts of the Press of making incorrect and over-simplified statements about his Government’s record on civil liberties.
Blue to win,
I was just saying that come general election time, yes I might hire some of the people around the project.
260 If they are any good we will hire them first. They like to be with the winners.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1760808,00.html
More details about ICM poll.
LDs are the better party in protecting the environment (LD 29%, Con 22%, Lab 17%)
Tories doing well among professionals, but bad among young voters (as usual)
Repeat of tax credit debacle put thousands into penury
Blair turns on critics of his ‘illiberal’ agenda
The article say in part:
David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: “Charles Clarke should realise that you don’t defend our way of life by sacrificing our way of life. It is remarkable he has chosen to blame the media - especially as his whole strategy seems designed to achieve good headlines for the Government rather than effective policies to protect the citizens.”
260,
Very true, and one day it might be the case.
If Labour goes back to its comfort zone, of defender of union intrest, only.
263
New Labour really know how to piss taxpayers money away.
Why bother with policies at the next GE just focus on New Labour’s waste,that will more than fill any manifesto,and I fear there is certainly worse to come.
259;Good evening,I trust you are well.A straight question;are we seriously concerned about the ‘civil liberties’ of a haevy-drinking,abusive,vandalsing,little chav-these ‘people’ often scraem loudest when their (in my not-so-humble-opinion) liberties are curtailed-personally,I work hard,drink hard,but retain an idea of whta is right and wrong-last night I read (you may have too) the oh-so-touchy-feely piece about a teenager who was disturbed by being arrested.His crime? He stole money from the pay-as-you-enter tray of a bus,in west London( this is close to home for me as a lot of my mates are bus drivers where I live in Bournemouth)-he felt ‘traumatised’ for being arrested,and spending the night in cells -the little w ****er even had the front to claim ‘part of his childhood had been snatched’
I am intelligent enough to appeciate not very ASBO,court order etc is ideal,but ,in fairness,if the Conseravtive Partry held office,they too would implement authoritarian measures-for the record,I am 35 years old,was brought up by working-class grandparents,and maybe have an authoritarian outlook,but what is wrong with order and discipline-I am Labour,but I am sure a lot of Tory posters would agree!!
Patrick, I welcome your posts as much as anyone else, but is it absolutely necessary to mention the fact that you are a 35 year-old council worker who was brought up by working-class grandparents in every post?
About the ICM poll - shockingly low figure for Labour, really. They haven’t polled as low as 32% in an ICM poll since 8th June 1987! Can’t be long now until they dip below 30% Interesting that back then, when Labour last polled 32%, the Tories were on a whopping 45%, with others only getting 2%. This will make predicting how the seats are allocated very complicated/interesting.
I think that it is very hard now to untangle what is tactical voting/unwind thereof from actual changes in allegiance/turnout. 1997 was an exception as the tactical voting was so widespread. I think that 2001 and 2005 more clearly showed the effects of parties effectively concentrating their efforts. In 2001 Labour did a very good job defending marginals, whereas in 2005 the Tories did a rather better job in taking them.
Re: #166 - The questions specifically about the NHS come after the question about how well people think the parties would spend public money. I would have thought that the Tories would do better in a more general question than in one about the NHS, so I don’t think level pegging is necessarily that great for the Tories, but I don’t know what the recent history is for this sort of question.
#190 - No clue as to where Respect are concentrating their resources, then…? [/joke]
Two points to make: (266),i wish you well,and have no first hand knowledge of your economics;I would merely reply that whatever froth has occurred from Gordon Brown’s economic stewardship,it surely pales into insignificance against the blatant waste of keeping 3 million unemployed throughout most of the 1980s off the back of North Sea Oil (I believe I am correct in stating 70-80% of recipts were (i)The differnce between Briatin’s solvency and Britain’s bankruptcy)
(ii)Frittered in upholding an unnecesaarily tight monetary policy,which basically,saw the UK run on c.75% capacity
throughout most of the1980s
(b)Whatever our political differences,I’d say to Sean Fear/Sean T,if you’re ever in Bournemouth,pop into a town-center hostelry,the ‘Moon In The Square’-recommended by CAMRA,I’m sure on many issues we’d agree!
Hi Chrisco,sorry if I appear repetitive;if a point is being amde,it is the fact that,as someone born in 1971,usually I would have been brought up by a couple born in the 1940s(give or take)-as it was,a couple born in 1912 and 1914 raised me,and has impressed on me(as a lot of friens say),a slightly old-fashioned outllok-sorry if I’ve bored you,but I hope that’s a reasonable explaination!
269 - I agree a bad figure for Labour. However what is surprising is that this hasn’t shown up already in the polls. I’ve been surprised at how well Labour has been holding up given the welter of bad news, the loans for peerages and NHS stories have just kept running. However I don’t think the tories can be very happy either. The poll suggests a continuation of the post 97 trend. Falling support for Labour but only a bit of that going to the tories and most going to the LDs or others. Lib Dems I’m sure will be very pleased. However the ususal caveats apply - this is only one poll and may be a rogue. Also another point of interest is the ever-widening gap between yougov and ICM in Lib Dem support. The gap is now 7%, last yougov poll had the Lib Dems at only 17%.
“About the ICM poll - shockingly low figure for Labour, really. They haven’t polled as low as 32% in an ICM poll since 8th June 1987″
They have - they hit 31% in September 2003 (just after the Brent East by-election) in an ICM poll for the News of the World.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2003/notw-sept-2003.htm
#273 - Oh, OK, not in a Guardian/ICM poll, then…
#272 - Others on here have noted the decrease in the CON/LAB aggregate and it’s something I’m watching with interest.
I don’t know if this is a rogue poll or the start of a trend showing Labour dipping below the dreaded 33%, a figure which has brought the tories nothing but bad headlines for so long. The pressure has been on David Cameron to not just take the tories out of that flatline figure but also to continue to a poll rating of 40% or more.
If further polls continue to show Labour dipping below 33% I think this will take the pressure off David Cameoron and might even “force” the Labour party to choose Tony Blair’s departure date rather than leaving it up to him.
Andrea at 217 - That times article is truely awful, I think I’ve spotted half a dozen errors in it.
Meriden is indeed in Solihull, it’s a combination of high turnout rural areas and “The Wood” which is a low turnout social housing area.
The Tories did not perform strongly in 2004, they performed in a below average manner, from what I hear, they will probably be below average again.
The supposed position on the council is completely wrong, its Lab 44, Con 40, LD 33, Ind 2, Vacant 1.
And if the Tories have done anything outside the “gated communities” then I’m a monkey’s uncle, I have friends in Ladywood in three different areas and they report nothing of the sort. Also there are ways of getting leaflets around such places, but they aren’t ones the Tories have thought of
Re 221 Moray. Did Newsnight mention “progress” for the Conservatives. This could be a critical factor if it is close in any shape or form. Have to add myself, dont think it will be that close.
277 - No they did not. - suggested SNP will hold. Brian Taylor is usually accurate in his predictions.
Apologies - this is a test to see if I can post… > > < < € &euro