Is the Indy’s splash based on a question that does not exist?
February 2nd, 2010
And has it missed the main story from its poll?
Let there be no doubt - the latest poll from ComRes for the Independent showing that the Tory lead is down to just 7% is bad news for Cameron and his team - particularly as it follows a series of such poll findings.
So why the devil has the paper ignored the main story from the poll it spent good money on and splashed a finding that does not even exist.
For readers might be surprised to learn that participants in the survey were not asked whether they had confidence in Tory economic polices.
The headline “Vote of No Confidence in Tory economic policies” appears to be based on the finding that 82% believe that “Mr Cameron should be clearer over what he would do about the economy” with 13 per cent disagreeing.
To anybody but the Indy’s headline writer “Being clearer” is a million miles away from “Vote of No Confidence” and conflicts with other findings.
As Anthony Wells at UKPR puts it in his usual low-key way: “A good sign of a decent question is whether anyone can really agree with the opposite – and how many normal people would say “I think David Cameron should be much vaguer and less clear about his plans for the economy”?
On confidence in party economic polices the poll found that only 40 per cent of people said they trusted Brown more than Cameron to help Britain’s economy to recover, while 52 per cent do not.
Come on the Indy - your headline has by-passed the main story and focuses on something that is not supported by any numbers. Someone needs to get a grip on your polling coverage.
A paper that likes to think of itself as part of the “quality” end of the market has a responsibility to report things fairly and accurately - especially in a pre-election period like this. Today’s front page falls short.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Maybe writers from papers such as the Independent should spend a bit of time browsing sites such as PB, UKPR, IainDale, Vote2007, etc. They might learn something.
How fortunate that nobody reads the Bindependent!
Miles behind but FPT on Cameron’s personal rating:
Lot of people say it’s this or that. One thing everyone knows for certain is Lisbon and various other PC things have hurt him with the right wing. There may be other stuff as well but there’s no need to go looking for explanations when the biggest one is so obvious.
(I also think he hurt himself a bit with NHS-focused non-leftie Labour voters because of trust but i think that’s dwarfed by the right-wing problem.)
I’ve come to feel he can’t win on the right-wing. The shadow cabinet have all had years (and in some cases decades) of beasting on TV panels where people who take a non-Guardianista position are always outnumbered and the audience is always rigged against them. I think most of them either secretly believe the internal BBC consensus is the dominant view in the country or simply don’t have the stomach to promote a non-BBC approved view.
So…
Don’t try and be right-wing or even conservative because it just them look dishonest to righty right wing people - instead say to them “yes we’re a blancmange but if you want revenge on the pack of lying, thieving, corrupt dedicated “ex” marxist tr****rs who hijacked the Labour party then vote for us” i.e instead of trying to be righty right wing convince right-wing voters that they’re *just* a blancmange and not something worse.
(Exception allow the few who can do it *and* can do it the right way e.g himself, IDS, to do their thing in small doses.)
And while doing that on the right, on the left focus on trying to keep anti-Labour Labour voters at home which i still think is the key to the next election through repeating the Boris, Crewe and Norwich effect.
@@@
“(b) The irrational residual toxicity of the Thatcher brand is considerable.”
Could be well wrong on this because it’s pure gut feel but i think those posters will help with this. Although they bring out extreme antagonistic feelings from people who either have a strong ethnic hatred for white anglos or an extreme hatred for el Torees as a political party, i personally think they’re acting a bit like a poultice for those with less extreme views.
I can easily picture someone who’s been very anti-Tory for years, but recently become even more anti-Labour, looking at all that white space and imagining writing “bleep off you bleeping Tory bleep” and that getting it out of their system after all these years.
No logic to it. Gut feel. Poultice poster.
If so i think Cameron will (just) get away with allowing himself to be an Aunt Sally because he’s got the media shiny thing even though that will continue to be a bit double-edged while Dorian is still fresh in people’s minds.
@@@
“Accoring to Peston, Tory wobbles are unerving the markets, who were counting on Cameron being tough with the deficit. The softening of tone could pre-empt a pre-election gilt strike or ratings downgrade on Browns watch, and jeopardise Gordons fragile recovery. Check out Pestons blog”
If that’s true i do hope it’s deliberate.
@@@
Poll drop (if it’s not just dodgy sampling).
From the Labour conference before last whenever Campbell’s been on the telly he consistently attacked el Torees for having no policies. This is because he’s not thick and knows ZNL-BBC’s honed for attack and if el Torees just present a perfectly formed sphere of fluffiness, which is what they were doing for ages, there’s nothing to attack.
Generally speaking i’d say the single best Tory tactic would be do the opposite of what Campbell wants them to.
imo
All froth anyway until Labour reveals the Budget. That is the truly defining moment - “Mr Brown should be clearer over what he will do about the economy”.
But maybe he will run away from it - and from Chilcot - with a March poll. Then he can for ever blame the pollsters when he gets thumped.
Did they also ask:
Mr Brown should be clearer over what he would do about the economy?
If they did the numbers would be just as bad, or perhaps worse.
It’s just part of the cycle - the media is having fun bashing the Conservatives.
The Indy is not a newspaper. Newspapers are businesses which their shareholders own and appoint managers to, in order that they get a return on their investment.
The Indy is a vanity publishing house.
It pumps out left wing tat that gives its owner a big throbbing hard-on - and never mind the financial losses. Any publishing outfit that regularly commissions opinion pieces from the likes of Johann Hari, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown or Robert Fisk is clearly not there to make any meaningful contribution to our understanding of important issues or to make a profit. It’s just masturbation by another means for someone with a big ego and more money than sense.
So…I think you’ve missed the point Mike. They’re not trying to be ‘independent’ or anything like that. This piece delivers perfectly on the objective for which it was written – it serves to stroke some rich idiot’s willy by bashing Dave.
The Indy is the most expensive ‘box of tissues’ in history.
(I think Guido had a good suggestion about a complete volte-face editorial direction for the Indy that might actually make money not so long ago)
Whatever the polls are saying, I find it difficult to believe that when in the privacy of the polling booth, all of those plumping for Labour today, will actually go for “five more years of Brown”.
On the subject of writing about polls, the extremely warpedly biased independent cannot write about reality, as it conflicts with its sense of what is right.
Andy @ 1 suggests that the Indy’s journalists come to sites like this for an education. They won’t for two reasons:
1) They think they are so much better than us hordes of great unwashed, untutored amateurs.
2) They actually don’t wish to be learn anything, that would be an admission of ignorance.
Read the nuggets of wisdom on top Blog sites (in between the dross of course) and wonder at the combined knowledge on display. Then imagine how terrifying it must be to be a journalist, paid for your so called expertise, yet in so many cases ignorant of the most basic facts, fact that even the astroturfers of PB are aware of.
***BETTING POST***
I see a Tory majority has drifted to 1.5 on Betfair in recent days, from a low of around 1.35. Conversely and inevitably, NOM has contracted, now 3.5 from 5.0.
Yet, I think I’m right in saying that there’s been no corresponding decrease in the chances of a Labour majority, which has remained in the high teens.
I’m not sure what to make of that. If the Tories are really only 7-10 points ahead, why is Labour still viewed as unlikely to win as when they were 12-15 points behind?
Lack of time of left? Or because, like the relegation-threatened club against the title contenders, they’re playing not for a win but only to spoil and niggle their way not losing?
I’d welcome the thoughts of the betting fraternity on here…
8 I’m tempted to have a turnout based rant.
I don’t think anybody who wasn’t already planning to vote Labour a month ago will do so today. A rise in the Labour share and fall in the Tory is reflective of a slightly reduced likelihood of Tory inclined voters to turn up at all.
Labour’s total vote at this GE will not exceed their 2005 total. What will change hugely is the number of Tory votes. But by how much their vote grows depends on how scared they are by the prospect of 5 more years of the gurning psycho and on how comfortable Dave makes them feel.
Very good main article, I hope The Independent is suitably ashamed.
The frustrating thing from my perspective about the Tories economic policy is they’ve been branded as being cutters, but that could mean they’ll cut anything, so every special interest group is alarmed.
The Tories need to show the waste in government spending, there are so many easy targets, every QT/AQ appearence a different example could be brought up. For example £800million in overseas aid to India, £20m to China - why are we funding nuclear powers? The equality Commission - scrap it. Government Advertising, The Baby bond, ID cards etc etc etc.
Maybe as we get closer to the election a poster a day demonstrating some aspect of government waste, with a smiling Gordon Brown & the budget defecit numbers next to him.
7 - I know what you mean, but in 1997 Labour supporters were probably saying the same thing about John Major and the Tories and they managed to poll 31.4%.
I’m not saying Labour will get 31%, but they will get at least about 27% as a minimum, which is about 7 million votes.
11 Andy. The electorate is 45.4 million. 27% would give 8.6 million votes for Labour on a 70% turnout or 8.0 million on a 65% turnout.
They got 9.6 million in 2005 and I suspect they will get about the same or slightly less this time.
It’s the Tory vote that will make the result.
“I’m not sure what to make of that. If the Tories are really only 7-10 points ahead, why is Labour still viewed as unlikely to win as when they were 12-15 points behind?”
Underlying reality versus surface froth to sell newspapers?
Interesting, Alistair gone rogue again?
“http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7131255/Spending-cuts-not-tax-rises-Treasury-officials-urge-ministers.html”
“Ministers have been warned by Treasury officials that they must cut spending rather than increase taxes to ensure a stronger economic recovery, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.”
“An internal Treasury paper concluded there was “broad agreement” that “spending restraint is more likely to generate better economic performance than tax increases”.
“However, ministers stand accused of ignoring the advice after unveiling plans for a series of tax increases, including the new 50p higher rate of tax, to pay Britain’s rising debts.
Lord Myners, the City minister, admitted that many rich Britons would dodge the 50p rate, while some people would simply leave the country.”
“Late on Monday night the Government released a copy of the analysis – prepared for ministers – following a Freedom of Information request.
Large sections of the document, which are thought to set out preferred options for cuts, have been censored. Ministers have repeatedly refused to be drawn on whether the Treasury has drawn up plans for widespread cuts.”
Seems to undermine Brown again.
12 - thanks for the correction. My figure was based on a 60% turnout excluding the Northern Ireland electorate but I think I’m being a bit too pessimistic about turnout. Hopefully it’ll be nearer 70%.
Looking at the Labour vote, I’m fairly sure that of the 36% Labour polled in 2005 at least one percentage point will go over to each of the BNP, UKIP and the Greens. That would leave Labour on 33%. So these polls showing Labour on 31% are effectively saying that only two percentage points are going over to the Conservatives and LibDems. That seems like a very low figure. Maybe Labour is picking up support from somewhere? It’s difficult to explain.
10.
The U-turns by Cameron’s Conservatives on economic policies are mind blowing.
The electorate need “a cast iron guarantee” from Cameron/Osborne and the Opposition parties will deservedly give Cameron a roasting and make face turn redder than normal.
Yesterday’s news
The pre-election skirmishing between the main parties will resume today as Labour turns its fire on the Tories’ spending plans.
Ministers seized on David Cameron’s announcement at the weekend that there would be no “swingeing cuts” during the first year of a Conservative government to claim the party’s plans were in “confusion”.
The Tories previously stated they would move further and faster than Labour to tackle Britain’s £178 billion budget deficit in an effort to reassure the international markets and stabilise the economy.
‘Cameron in danger of falling behind his own MPs over Calman’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article7011696.ece
Times take a pop at the 50p tax band too
“http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7011728.ece”
“High earners will cost the public purse hundreds of millions of pounds through tax dodges as they avoid the new 50p rate of income tax, a minister indicated yesterday.
Lord Myners, the City Minister, said that the Treasury had “significantly reduced” its estimate of the revenue to be earned from the historic change.
He said that he believed that the new top rate, due to come into force this April, would still generate extra income from the wealthiest 2 per cent of the national workforce. But he cast doubt on whether the Treasury would pocket the £1.13 billion it has earmarked for 2010, and the £2.5 billion it hopes to raise in 2011. “We still believe it will be beneficial,” he said.
Lord Myners told peers that “behavioural consequences of the new higher rate of taxation” — shorthand for tax avoidance — had forced the Treasury to lower its expectations.”
Seems to me we knew all this from the off, it just took Labour longer to get there…. unless of course it was crude politics…..
Oh wait
“Gordon Brown was warned from the start over 50p top tax rate”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7011708.ece
“Raising the top rate to 50 per cent was done for political reasons, not economic ones. The problem with soak-the-rich tax policies is that they don’t work
Greg Pope, Labour MP for Hyndburn, November 17, 2009″
That Darling bloke that tim likes to big up, what did he say?
“There is no science behind it. It’s simply my judgment that I thought that figure was an appropriate one
Alastair Darling, April 29, 2009″
mmhhhh, yes well, he does a lot of that doesn’t he.
Excellent article and, of course, spot-on. It’s just a good job so few people read the Indy. I used to be a daily reader of the paper but things like this remind me why I quit it last year. I did phone up the Indy to tell them why I was ceasing my subscription and they really didn’t care one way or the other - amassing losses clearly mean nothing to them.
I agree with Chris Read and another richard prethread. Where are the Tory policies aimed at the C2, Worcester Women, Bloke on the Battersea Bendybus?
These are the people who are gonna swing, and decide the election. Has there been a single eye-catching policy for them? IHT was two years ago.
The Tories are simply not going to win by saying We will recycle our watermills and legalise stag-hunting.
The Tories have to go negative: point out how Labour is pauperising everybody in the country. Repeat and repeat and repeat how the collapse in sterling makes holidays so much more expensive. Divide the deficit per capita and repeat that figure ad nauseam.
Debt. Labour debt. Debt everywere. Ram this home.
F*ck the policy initiative crap. Be negative, remorselessly negative, ignore interiewers with difficult questions, mention Brown and his faults in every second sentence, say - do you want five more years of Gordon Brown? every third sentence.
This is the way to win: choose four or five simple policy themes that appeal to middle Britain, make sure they are watertight. Then repeat them, and do not stray from the narrative.
Then go negative, choose four or five simple and brutal attack lines, and just repeat them again and again and again.
It will sound annoying but it will work. It worked for Labour in 97.
And finally, sort out a better policy in Europe - we will give you a vote - and get a saner policy on Iraq - the war was a disaster.
The people agree with this. Why the F the Tories don’t follow their instincts and agree with the people in return is a mystery.
If they don’t do this I think we are probably staring at a very hung parliament, and, incredibly, horrendously, a possible Labour victory. All those Tories in denial on this should check the trend in the Tory lead - it has been falling for months. On present trends it could be gone by May. Not smaller - gone.
OK off for a swim now. Aw kohn.
15 Andy. I’d advocate that people really stop thinking in terms of poll share moving between parties. It is all wholly dependent on turnout. Think in terms of absolute vote numbers moving. This wholly explains the appaernt weirdness in your observation about ‘poll shares moving’ between parties. Shares don’t move from A to B - votes do. They also move hugely from DNV to one of the real parties depending on turnout.
Labour got 35.3% in 2005. They might just get slightly more votes this time - and the minor parties too. But all of them will see a drop in poll share if there is a big return of Tory voters - that is the main variable.
2005 turnout was 61.3%. If it’s nearer 70% this time then that’s 4.5 million votes that need to go somewhere. My guess is mostly not to Labour.
Well done Mike for pulling the Indie up on this.
Mike is right, but even if the Indy wanted a new line on the “Polls Point To Hung Parliament” trend there’s one in their own poll.
“Now Tories Fall Behind Among Women Voters”
20 - sadly I have to agree with SeanT about the Tories having to go negative.
It was fairly obvious that Labour would be remorselessly negative - with Gordon Brown as leader and a wretched record to defend, they have no real choice.
To give Dave the benefit of the doubt, perhaps he knows this and is getting the dull-but-worthy policies bit out of the way now in preparation for an almighty assault. He’s cutting it close, though.
21 - Is the poor performance of Cameron depressing Tory likely turnout in your opinion?
I have no doubt that debt and waste will form the backbone of the Tpry GE campaign. abour have no reply. And, as Marquee Mark points out above, teh budget will be a game changer.
…oh dear..sorry for all the typos in that… assume it is still just about intelligible…
Andy D at 6:59am. For two years now, a LAB Overall has been just about the WORST bet on Betfair and I have opposed it to the hilt.
I still think it poor at 18.0-18.5 but it is less poor now than at any time since the end of 2007.
There is a huge window of 40+ Seats between LAB Most Seats and a LAB Overall and that is a far more realistic ask.
The Independent sleeps with the fiskes.
SPIN have taken down all their Politics markets.
Seat adjustments but probably Next Chancellor.
‘Pope to meet Queen on visit to Scotland’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article7011733.ece
24. Labour have absolutely no answer to the question: who the F wants five more years of Gordon Brown?
Most of the Labour Cabinet do not want five more years of Gordon Brown, let alone the country at large. More people in this country want change than want a Tory government, by a distance, so focus on The Change. We Are Not Led By Gordon Brown must be the Tories shoutline.
Every Tory spokesman and woman in every interview must be told to use the line Do you want five more years of Gordon Brown. Of course this will drive interviewers nuts but who cares, the hacks will also secretly agree with the power of the question. And the voters will totally get it.
And stop putting Cameron on posters. He’s not a male model. Put Gordon on the posters with the question - Five More Years?
It’s time to get out the pliers and get Torquemada on Labour’s scrotum.
25 - Again, the Tory share is unchanged in this poll. Whatever is going on is not so much about the Tories and more about Labour.
“sadly I have to agree with SeanT about the Tories having to go negative.”
I’d agree too but i don’t think the shadow cabinet have it in them. I think they’ve all got Stockholm syndrome from 30 years of BBC punishment beatings.
Hence the blancmange gambit.
24.
Maybe they have had some inside info on the state of the treasury’s books and think FFS we don’t want that mess, let Labour trash sort it out!
Anyway if the Tory’s can’t put a convincing message across to get rid of this shambles, then they don’t deserve to be in Government do they?
25 tim. Yes. I think when Dave is not firing on all 4 cylinders then some Tory inclined voters will be less likely to bother.
As an aside - I’d be truly fascinated to know how the pollsters deal with the sampling and weighting challenge posed by the 4 million or so voters who didn’t vote in 2005 but are potentially going to this time.
31. Cameron’s growing vanity is his weakness. He has believed he is the PM in waiting for a year now. He will not be able to resist putting himself at the centre of the Tories’ campaign.
32 “Again, the Tory share is unchanged in this poll. Whatever is going on is not so much about the Tories and more about Labour.”
Not neccessarily. Right-wing ex-Labour are one thing but there’s a second tranch of wavering Labour who couldn’t vote Tory without 3-4 run-ups over 10-15 years. If Cameron neutralized them then they’d switch from voting Labour to either not voting or voting LD (in Lab-Con areas) - so some of the Lab-Lib swapping *could* be down to what the Tories are doing.
There is, of course, also the fact that a fair chunk of the press will take on the negative campaign for them. I would imagine that The Sun, for example, will go on and on and on about debt, lies, bullying, etc and the ‘5 more years?’ theme. That message will certainly be there for the GE.
31 - It may have escaped your attention but just before the latest narrowing of the poll gap Cameron tried to hang the torture of two children round his opponents neck, it doesn’t get more negative than that.
And it appears to have backfired, particularly amongst women.
39, *yawns* all things entail rising and falling, and polls are no different. Recently the Tories have been poor, so it’s no surprise to see a slight narrowing. If they get their act together there is no reason to shift from whatever longterm view regarding the electoral result you’ve held for months.
Negative requires a consistent team message. Comes easy to Zanus because they’re consistently negative by inclination.
God Morning Pope Loving Voters For Nick Palmer Worldwide
Meanwhile …. The Old Chingford Skinhead dumps on Cammo for the sliding Tory poll lead :
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/normantebbit/
How can you be ‘clear’ about nothing?
Khammereon’s economic policies are whatever he thinks the reader/viewer wants to hear today.
Despite throwing in the odd extra cost to the public purse it is: “Cuts sir? How big do you want your cuts today?” Rather like like ‘how long is a piece of string’. And when you ask for specifics well, no, you can’t expect us to give you a ‘budget’ now can you? Well, in broad terms, yes we jolly well can. Otherwise you are just asking for ‘trust’ when you are no more worth trusting than the Bliar who you model yourself on.
42 - Ah yes, the man who thought IDS would become one of the great Tory Prime Ministers
Meanwhile II …. Rachel Sylvester in the ‘Times’ says that Cammo needs to shed his recent timidity and go for the throat !!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article7011597.ece
44 Scream. Old Norm wasn’t likely to say that IDS was going to be a turd as Tory leader was he ??
I can’t believe it I agree with 80% of an article from Polly Toynbee. That is a rare miracle as generally all she does is make my blood boil.
Brown has scuppered a fair, sensible and long-term plan for care of the elderly according to Polly Toynbee.
Sure enough, it was too good to be true. Gordon Brown, eager for an eye-catcher for his party conference speech, made an extravagant promise of free personal care at home for all those with “critical” needs. It blew the green paper out of the water by offering what the green paper and most experts agreed was impossible
Well what is the main story? ‘Cameron’s Lead Reduces Slightly!’? not exactly ‘Freddie Starr Ate My Hamster’
It’s clear that 82% of those asked weren’t clear about the Tories economic policy (the other 18% must be clairvoyant). Pollsters have to assume a certain knowledge from their respondents and Conservative economic confusion is the big story at the moment.
A paper that likes to think of itself as part of the “quality” end of the market has a responsibility to report things fairly and accurately - especially in a pre-election period like this. Today’s front page falls short.
Yeah cos the Telegraph, Mail, Sun and Times wouldn’t pick the choiciest pro-Tory tidbits from their polls - if there were any!
Sheesh, get a grip.
Meanwhile III …. Steve Richards in the ‘Independent’ wonders whether the Tories are fully prepared for the scrutiny of an extended election campaign :
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/steve-richards/steve-richards-the-tories-have-had-it-easy-too-long-1886153.html
#8 For comparison between 6-7 Jan was matched at:
NOM @ 3.75
Conservative Majority @ 1.46
Labour Majority @ 16
[Lay book % 101.4]
47 Had the same feeling. While I have doubts about the policy she supports I have no doubts about the ill thought out and underfunded election gimmick that is being rushed through Parliament.
Burnham yesterday fell apart on Today trying to defend a policy he in all probability feels the same about as Toynbee and the Yesterday in Parliament report on Today this morning was a litany of ex-Labour ministers and crossbenchers attacking it as a gimmick.
Six and a half hours of care a week for those who are categorised as requiring full time care?
It is something that the Conservatives and Lib Dems should be getting their teeth into, exposing the utter rubbish of a policy it is. Yet both parties decided to support it for fear of beig branded heartless and falling on wrong side of a dividing line set up by Gordon.
I’m not aligned to any political party, and over the decades have voted for all three of the main ones at one time or another - the Tories not for more than 20 years.
My main memory of Blair in the run-up to the 1997 election is that he attacked the Conservatives morning, noon and night. I recall nothing about his policy positions. The crucial thing was that he acted as focus for the widespread discontent with a tired and incompetent Government.
Needless to say, when he achieved power, his Government continued the Conservatives’ policies.
For a long time, Cameron acted effectively as a focus for discontent with the Labour government. His style was more nuanced than Blair’s, in that he supported Labour in some of their policies. But he got his criticisms across well enough, and probably more effectively than Thatcher in 1979.
The Conservatives’ current concentration on detailed policies:
(a) stops them acting as a focus for discontent with Labour;
(b) stops them from criticising the Government on important matters; and
(c) generates a lot of potential ‘losers’ among the electorate, because every policy generates winners and losers.
Cameron should lock Oliver Letwin in a room and not let him out until 7 May.
I’m going to set the Tories a test to see if they merit my vote.
With growth in GDP close to zero over the last half year and inflation rising fast, it seems to me that Labour’s massive stimulus of the economy has failed - at the cost of building up huge debts that will take the country many years to pay back. I want to see a strong attack on the way the stimulus has been handled by Labour over the next few weeks. The recent GDP figures and the inflation numbers to be issued on 16 February provide suitable opportunities.
Over to you Mr Cameron.
43. Wage Slave, Have to agree , I am not a Tory but I can honestly say I have no idea what Cameron believes in, he comes across as you say and appears to try to be what is wanted that day. He needs to get out there and show, the people he needs to vote for him, what he is really about and put some space between Tories and Labour.
At this point you could vote for either of them as being equally bad and people will often go for status quo if they do not see a clear difference.
This narrowing of the polls is good news for the Tories.
It will make Conservative voters more likely to go to the polls.
As i keep saying you just have to refer back to the London Mayorals to see what a difference a well motivated electorate will make.
This will though in turn be bad news for the LDs.
48 The big story at the moment is whether John Terry should be fired as England captain - the press want that because of his super-injunction rather than adultery IMHO - Terry must be praying the Gordon Brown doesn’t offer support.
People may be taking more of an interest in politics as an election approaches but it’s still all noise in the background and being ignored by most.
55 And probably also bad news for UKIP. Their voters are going to have to decide whether they really want to cut off their nose to spite their face…my guess is come the election, they will vote to oust Brown as being the greater risk to their core beliefs.
Anecdotally, was out last night with a friend who has always been solidly of the left - he published lots of anti-Thatcher stuff in the eighties. So when he said “the more I hear of David Cameron, the more I find I am agreeing with him. Things can’t go on like this…” you could have knocked me down with a feather!
General rule: anything labelled ’splash’=rubbish
I’m not sure I agree with the premise that the Indy has misreported this - if 82% want more clarity on Tory economic plans, how can it be said that “voters have confidence in Tory plans”? And I’m a lifelong Tory voter. Thusfar…
The typically shambolic way the Tories are operating is going to cost them big time as the GE gets nearer, and the Labour vote hardens up. I think we will get single digit leads right up to polling day and a fine line between hung parliament and wafer thin Tory majority/minority administration.
My real worry is that an effective sniper movement by Labour and their pals the Lib Dems will be enough to deprive the Tories of a win. The thought of the Brown-Clegg and Darling-Cable tag teams (aided by Stewart/Boulton/Dimbleby) demolishing the vague and muddled Tories in the PM and Chancellor TV debates during the campaign is enough to bring on a cold sweat - how are the Tories going to gracefully get out of these debates having campaigned so hard for them?
Or do they genuinely think they will demolish the combined forces of their opponents in each one?
To be honest though, I’m increasingly “not-fussed” about the outcome of the next GE anyway…
31. SeanT
“Most of the Labour Cabinet do not want five more years of Gordon Brown, let alone the country at large. More people in this country want change than want a Tory government, by a distance, so focus on The Change. We Are Not Led By Gordon Brown must be the Tories shoutline.
Every Tory spokesman and woman in every interview must be told to use the line Do you want five more years of Gordon Brown. Of course this will drive interviewers nuts but who cares, the hacks will also secretly agree with the power of the question. And the voters will totally get it.
And stop putting Cameron on posters. He’s not a male model. Put Gordon on the posters with the question - Five More Years?”
As SeanT says more people want change than want a Conservative government.
Do Cameron and Osborne know that though and if they do are they willing to accept it or do they prefer to believe what their sycophants tell them that the Conservative lead is down to the popularity of Cameron?
The voters upon whom a Conservative majority depends - the lower middle class and WWC of the midlands and north - have IMO no enthusiasm for the Conservatives but a deep anger towards Labour. It is them that Cameron needs to appeal to.
53: good post - agree with all of that
Douglas Carswell on electoral reform and Gordon’s latest wheeze aimed at mug liberals:
http://www.talkcarswell.com/show.aspx?id=1278
60. Bob Sykes
“The typically shambolic way the Tories are operating is going to cost them big time as the GE gets nearer, and the Labour vote hardens up.”
This is the thing that has surprised me.
The Conservatives have had plenty of time to formulate polices that were coherant (whether you agreed with them or not) and to get everyone pushing the same line.
Instead their policy launches have been shambolic.
@55
This narrowing of the polls is good news for the Tories.
It will make Conservative voters more likely to go to the polls.
And the large Tory leads were good for Labour as they seem to have galvanised their supporters and hardened up its vote.
Higher turnouts usually aren’t good for the Tories (which is funny when you think about it).
654, aye, it’s surprising and disappointing. I also agree that the 5 more year of Gordon question should be raised at every opportunity.
In my view the Tories are fighting a campaign with one arm tied behind their backs.
We have been instructed at a local level that we are not to negatively campaign whereas are opponents are throwing mud at will.
I am not saying that we should go negative but we should at least have the option.
42. Interesting article Jack. I think Steve Richards has it dead right. St Tony would have had Osborne’s nonsensical economic policy in shreads by now. I hope the story about Campbell being back in place are true.
65 ‘Higher turnouts usually aren’t good for the Tories’
Erm…. which election would that be? This is factually not just wrong but 100% backwards.
Nick Cohen (one of tim’s heroes) has an excellent blog in Standpoint magazine about Gordon and the company he keeps:
http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/2650
64 - Why does it surprise you?
Most of there policies were drawn up pre recession and they were so convinced that they would win that when the recession hit they didn’t bother to go back to their policies.
The marriage thing is a prime example, they presumed they’d just say “we’ll have transferable tax allowances” then it dawned on them that it was expensive and they hadn’t put anything in its place.
Same with Education, it was based on creating surplus capacity, dependent on extra spending and then had to be shifted to a model based on increased class sizes and one piece of Finnish research when the realised the cash wouldn’t be there.
ANd so on and so on.
I’d rather assumed that the Tories were wanting Labour to make lots of hubristic noise about coming out of recession, before battering them with a mass of numbers about just how big a hole the economy has fallen into.
The 0.1% seems to have wrong-footed everyone. Labour had nothing to crow about, and just wound their necks back in. So the Tories had nothing to react against. For now.
The economy will still form the back-drop against which many will decide how to vote come the election. And Labour’s record does not stand up to scrutiny. But if Labour won’t come out to defend their record, then Tories majoring about it just get accused of talking down the economy (as Mandy popped up to demonstrate just yesterday).
So all on hold for the Budget. Or not. Still think Gordon will munching his finger nails to the quick, wondering whether to go now - and avoid the Budget, the debates and Chilcot.
I think we can say though that the Tories money advantage over Labour has delivered little observable benefit in January. Which has to provide that rarest of commodities - Labour cheer.
Oh come on guys get over it. The Independent is a decent paper and I’d much rather read its coverage of polls than the Torygraph or The Guardian for example.
It may have missed the point a little but 82% of people (considering the Tories are supposed to be the peoples next choice of party at the election) simply does not cut it for a party of its calibre, especially considering the huge task they have when forming a government and taking control of our economy. I mean, when more than 8/10 people do not think the party is being clear with their policies, its not exactly a vote of confidence is it?
This is inevitable. Since New Year’s Day we’ve all endured a barrage of propaganda from Team Brown about the lack of clarity from Team Cameron. The response from Team Cameron has so far been…??? Journalists (even those working for so-called “quality” papers) are not the intellectual giants they imagine themselves to be and so will work with whatever they can grab hold of to write an article which they imagine might be “interesting” or even “controversial”. At the moment Cameron is looking like the ex-Man City manager Mark Hughes - a good team with some outstanding players but with decent, if disappointing, results and even if Brown looks like Avram Grant, in a “winner takes all” cup match he’s in with a fighting chance.
67: living in Burnley, a key Lib Dem target, I get to see first hand how effective the LD campaigning tactics are compared to the Tories (the long-term 2nd place party, pre-2005). I’m getting an almost weekly bombardment of flyers and letters from the LD PPC, Nick and Vince, all of which are blood-boilingly economical with the truth in terms of attacking the Tories (primarily) and Labour (to a lesser degree and mostly Gordon-focused), and rubbishing their electoral prospects. I’m politically-interested, so can see through all this - but everyone else getting this weekly bombardment must be swayed by it.
Meantime, the Tories stick the occasional flyer through the door which (in a positive way) tries to advocate the main Tory principles, but doesn’t stick the boot in to Labour, Gordon and the LDs. It’s all very nice and pleasant and fluffy-bunny, but it’s hardly a sign of spoiling for a fight like the LDs are. It looks more like they’re fighting a local election campaign.
I’m sure the Tory campaign is at a higher level in key target seats (which mine isn’t), but what I see locally is reflected in what I see in their approach nationally. You’d think the GE campaign was 2 years off still, not 2 months.
In the meantime, I have to wrestle with a dilemma - do I vote Tory, as always, or vote tactically for a party I despise on the basis that they are the only party likely to rob Labour of the seat. Tricky…
The Mail joins in.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247682/Lord-Mandelson-Tories-disarray-spending-cuts.html
Interesting cartoon, Mastermind having recorded its lowest ever score.
71. tim
“Most of there policies were drawn up pre recession and they were so convinced that they would win that when the recession hit they didn’t bother to go back to their policies.”
True but why shouldn’t I be surprised that they didn’t review their policies under the changed circumstances. Common sense I would have thought but it seems that Cameron and Osborne were too in love with the ‘Cameron Project’.
According to Nick Cohen:
”Fraser Nelson of the Spectator is facing a libel writ after describing the alleged bullying tactics of Brown’s aide Charlie Whelan. (If the court finds that it is false and defamatory to describe Whelan’s tactics as ‘bullying’, by the way, the judgment will be one of the legal wonders of the 21st century.)”
Is this true, I can’t find any other links?
To go back to military comparisons, it appears a lot of posters think Cameron is mistakenly going with a too complicated Gen Montgomery Market Garden stategy when he should be doing a Gen Patton.
Patton’s famous “Blood and Guts” speech would be a good place to start. Just changes the names as appropriate!
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/patton_20010914.html
75-I do agree with you on this fluffy bunny approach.
It doesnt stack up well with the electorate.
The Boris campaign was positive but it also stuck the boot into Ken and his regieme.
They need a dual track approach and fast.
79.
“he should be doing a Gen Patton.”
“Kammereon - Lust for Tory!!”
80, not a Tory with a big T, but I agree with you entirely. It’s legitimate to point out the other side’s failings, so long as you spell out your own views too.
My own vote is nailed-on Tory (I’m in Morley & Outwood, and loathe Balls).
I agree that Cameron and the tories have lacked clarity. It is a bad mistake. I think they are also too timid in scaring any horses.
They need to regain the narrative. One or two ‘big’ things which would seperate from labour about how things would be different, so that people have a clear choice at the election. As it is, they’re ‘tinkering’ and ‘timid’.
Not that labour are any better, far worse in fact. Content to have no policies at all.
re 73. But the ComRes question was a total dud as Anthony Wells so eloquently pointed out.
This is one of the reasons I absolutely loathe non-voting intention question particularly from ComRes.
It was bollocks - the Indy chose to misinterpret it to back up a headline that had no basis in it whatsoever.
Rubbish journalism.
On topic, newspapers primarily try to sell newspapers. The Indie could have run with the headline of “Tory poll lead falls”, but they’d have been about the fourth paper to do that this week, so they needed to find a different angle. “Women swing to Labour” would have been better IMO, because it would get talked about (even if as I suspect there’s some random variation in the difference from men), but this one should sell a few as well as it reflects a widespread theme.
Is it justified? Yes, up to a point. To take Anthony Wells’ point, the opposite position that people could adopt would be “No, I think the Tory position is reasonably clear, I don’t require loads more detail.” The fact that 82% took the opportunity to express dissatsfaction is newsworthy. A precisely accurate headline would be “Voters refrain from expressing confidence in Tory economic policies”, but this is a newspaper, not the Proceedings of the British Statistical Society.
I think the British national press is usually crap at reporting politics - shallow, inaccurate, cynical and self-serving - but as Enoch Powell (!) said, politicians who complain about it are like fish complaining about the sea. We have to take them as they are, and if the Tories don’t recognise that, they’re wet behind the ears.
76.
“Mastermind having recorded its lowest ever score.”
Don’t misundrestimate the pressures of the black chair unless you’ve been there.
Can you imagined the first editorial meeting at the Indy when Rod Liddle takes over, he would put an end to this crap and sack the idiot columnists and then he should double or triple the wages of Simon Carr.
45.
“Cammo needs to shed his recent timidity and go for the throat !!”
So I presume GideO is hiding?
86.
“the British national press is usually crap at reporting politics - shallow, inaccurate, cynical and self-serving”
Are you suggesting that our media does not, as a whole, accurately report our nation’s politics and government as being ’shallow, inaccurate, cynical and self-serving’?
85. Actually Nick P seems to be spot on with his post (is this a first?) - no point the Indy repeating what three other papers have already reported this week. As the smallest paper with the lowest circulation they need to try and stand out from the crowd by being the noisiest even if accuracy is sacrificed in the process.
84. But why are you surprised by this Mike?
The UK ‘quality’ press now suffers from two massive problems - cr*p journalists and blatant political bias. Where they overlap, we get stories like this - there will be more as the election nears.
I stopped buying broadsheet papers 2-3 years ago because I considered them a waste of money. Since then, they have declined further. It now takes me about five minutes to trawl their content in the morning, so thin is it.
I get much more information from this and other blogs, where there is a nice mix of gossip and high quality analysis.
89: Normally Wage-slave I ignore your rambling, but if anything this year is proving that to ‘win’ in polictics you need to lie, smear, mis-represent and trade on peoples ignorance.
This country is quickly deserving the politicans it gets. If labour win by nothing more than tricking and putting fear into people, then we are heading to a dark place.
1) Nobody reads it
2) It’s crap ( Romanian for carp ( fish variety))
93: It doesn’t matter if anyone reads it or not. If the BBC report it, then its news.
The increasing monopoly, influence and power of the BBC (and BBC-think) should be a worry to all of us.
“The Independent, We are Not, Are You”
Well done Mike.
Problem is that the headline lead the way on the News shows last night. I believed it to be true but could not bring myself to read the detail as the Independent writes such biased rubbish.
84) Last night there were a number of twitters using some of the other questions in the ComRes poll to show various good / bad things depending upon party, in almost all cases they had misinterpreted or misquoted the results to show what they wanted. Answers to different questions were combined to try and score points and yet almost all of them were utter rubbish. Just makes ComRes look stupid to my mind.
On betting: the point made upthread about Labour’s price now being too long compared with NOM seems objectively correct. A NOM result would probably reflect a Tory lead in the range 3-8%. A Labour majority would probably reflect any Tory result lower than a 3% lead. If the current NOM price of 2-1 or whatever it is now is correct, then 16-1 is generous odds for a Labour win - we’re talking about a 2% swing from the apparent current position.
Some of the posts suggest that just saying “Do you want 5 more years of that ****** Brown?” will swing it for the Tories. I think that weapon is blunter than it was. Most people have become more nuanced about Brown - the floating voters don’t feel drawn to him, but he gets a degree of respect that he didn’t get a few months ago. That 40% who trust him more than Cameron on the economy (which doesn’t mean that 60% trust Cameron more as those who trust both or neither or don’t know are in there) will be actively repelled by a crude “Vote for us because we’re not Brown” strategy.
@74
This is inevitable. Since New Year’s Day we’ve all endured a barrage of propaganda from Team Brown about the lack of clarity from Team Cameron
Er, I’d call the poorly presented Tory policy launches “propaganda” too.
Why are the Tories placing such undeserved reliance on Iain Duncan Smith’s dire Centre for Social Justice reports? From what I’ve seen, none of IDS’s conclusions deal with the raw causes of Britain’s scoial problems.
Instead focussing far too much on the symptoms and doing everything it can to avoid the only practical conclusion to arresting some of these issues: more financial redistribution to the lower income groups.
It isn’t that hard to understand. And IDS’s ideological prison means his thinktank fails.
Another thing which should be of concern is how polling is become increasing politicised, and used by papers as a way of creating news, rather then reviewing it.
1.5 con majority ? fill yer boots
92
If labour win by nothing more than tricking and putting fear into people, then we are heading to a dark place.
Tricking and putting fear, perish the thought.
‘Labour’s Tax Bombshell’
‘Tony Blair’s Devil Eyes’
Yesterday i posted an item about the age of LD MPs. The LibDems are going to have as many elderly MPs in Scotland than Labour.
From snp tactical voting “Here is a list of the more ‘elderly’ Scottish MPs, with those already announcing they are standing down in bold. I daresay there are many more in this list who may yet decide enough is enough and announce their retirements in due course:
Tom Clarke (Labour) - 69
Menzies Campbell (Lib Dem) - 68
Rosemary McKenna (Labour) - 68
Gavin Strang (Labour) - 66
Tommy McAvoy (Labour) - 66
John McFall (Labour) - 65
Malcolm Bruce (Lib Dem) - 65
Adam Ingram (Labour) - 62
John Reid (Labour) - 62
http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2010/02/scottish-labour-mps-dropping-like-flies.html
Bedblockers stopping younger LD talent?
94. 95. All true but NP is basically correct - you have to deal with the media as it is, not as you might like it to be.
102 I do expect at least 1 more of the Labour ones to step down.
One thing the Indy is doing is supporting their man, more than can be said of the Tory press.
I think Cameron does well when you have most of the press,the London Standard, and BBC against him.
92-And that is just within your own party.
Any move on the seat spread today?
20 SeanT
Agree attack is necessary in the way you describe.Although I’m not sure attacking can be classed as wholly “negative”.I mean it’s the job of HM Official Opposition to hold the government to account and serve the public by fully informing them as to the folly of the government of the day.
Cameron and Co have ,in this sense, let the public down(and themselves) but its not too late to set the record straight.So yes they should fulfill their duty and start right away by remaining positive(and getting their policies straight before announcing them) but also at the same time using airtime to hit hard against Labour at every given opportunity.Just as Labour are doing to them at every given opportunity.
What Cam and Team must remember is that Labours soundbites seem to be working on the electorate.If this is true then the opposite would probably be true.If Cameron had effective “soundbites” then ,in the electorates mind,they’de have something to counter the uncertainty instilled in them by Labour.Or at least a counter arguement which Cam and Team have TOTALLY failed in getting across to the electorate.Until the electorate is more informed,at every available opportunity,then Labour have little to worry about.
Or maybe Cameron and Team know something we don’t know.Perhaps through private polling ? Is this why they’re not worried.Or perhaps their so worried they can’t see things as clearly ,as we, the public do.
1.5 long gone on betfair - now 1.48..
tim, the Erdlington Two was not negative campaigning as I understand it, it was just part of Cammo’s Broken Britain meme.
What I want is real swiftboating. Nasty vicious personal attacks on the venality and incompetence of this grotesque government. This is a government of insects. Stamp on them.
At the moment this election campaign feels like one side, the Tories, is playing by Queenberry rules, and the others, Labour, are cage fighting - gouging, spitting and headbutting.
Well if that’s what they want, so be it. Take off the gloves. Expose Brown as a bully who beats up his secretaries. Bang on and on about the deficit and the debt run up by Labour as Labour MPs lived high on the hog. Mention names. Straw “accountancy is hot my strong suit”, Alistair three houses Darling, Peter twice-resigned Mandelson and his 22k watch.
Stop piddling about on Iraq and call it for what it is: a disaster. And for f*cks sake get a better European policy so that the Tories can then say We will give you a referendum, Labour won’t and didn’t, cause they are lying vermin.
Be shamelessly negative. Swiftboat the f*ckers.
I agree with you on one thing: the Tories manifesto, indeed their whole election policy, seems to have been designed to fight a campaign during a period of growth. They have not successfully adapted to recession.
It is arguable that Cameron is ill suited to this kind of negative camapaigning and recession type cutting stuff. He is a cuddly nice Tory.
Tough titso, David. YOu’re gonna have to get nasty or you could lose. And if the tories lose this election Labour may well introduce AV and then we won’t see a majority Tory government for another generation, if ever.
These are high stakes.
101: Both run by parties which frankly deserved to lose their election, (especially in 1997).
One can admire Cameron for running a largely negative-free campaign to now, but they need to go negative. It works.
Oh! thought I’d bring this up.
158.re 126. Coldstone - Any posts that call into question the professional integrity of pollsters are moderated. Please stop being silly.
by Mike Smithson January 11th, 2010 at 9:37 am
So there!
I see the panic merchants are out in force today - again.
75 - Bob Sykes.
STV in multi-member constituencies. Removes your dilemma at a stroke. Come on in, the water’s lovely!
109-Sean well said.
You have hit the nail on the head.
The upcoming battle is one this country can not afford to lose to the arrogant socialists who want to impose their will on one and all.
Come on Cammo lets get down and dirty.
112: Panic isnt the right word. But the last few weeks show that the election is still to play for, and Cameron can’t just walk into No10.
He needs to set-up now. He’s done it before, but he’s fiddling around and trying to be too nice at the moment. Time for real-politik and land some punches. Lord knows it should be easy enough.
92 - “This country is quickly deserving the politicans it gets. If labour win by nothing more than tricking and putting fear into people, then we are heading to a dark place.”
You should be flattered - the Conservatives have been trading on fear as an election winner for the best part of 2 centuries, and you know what they say about imitation.
95. Respect for Brown, the PM who vanishes to N.I., yet secures no agreement, but able avoids PMQs again. The PM who uses children as human shields, photo ops fine, but no qestions. The PM who passses the buck over a Lybian bomber. The ex Chancellor who built up a structural budget deficit, and who studiously avoids questions on Tax Credit Overpayments. The former finance Minister who refuses to provide funds for equipment to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Respect for a man who almost lost it when interviewed by Sian Williams, Dr. Palmer, please don’t try to pull the wool over our eyes.
Tories: read the responses, upthread, from Labourites like tim and NickP on the idea of negative campaigning against Brown and Labour.
“oh it won’t work”, “voters will react against this”, “they tried it and it failed”.
What does this tell you? They are scared that negative campaigning will indeed work. So they are trying to put you off.
What were the best Tory posters of the last thirty years?
Labour’s Double Whammy
Labour Isn’t Working
Negative campaigns. Negative campaigns work. But they have to be timed right. What the Tories need is a blitz of this stuff for the last four weeks of the election camapaign.
But they can start repeating the mantra now. In every single interview. Do you want 5 more years of Brown? etc
K I gotta pack for Bangers, aw kohn.
If Cammo does start to move towards realpolitik and start landing blows i know of many who would come out and assist in getting rid of GB.
At the moment all they see is mush.
109 - Thats strategy may work if Cameron had a talented Shadow Cabinet untainted by the expenses scandal.
He has a second rate group of expenses cheats.
It has just occurred to me whats happened in the polls.
Smithsons law is dead, Cameron is no longer an asset.
The Tories drop in the polls when Baroness Warsi is not on the media - tims golden rule.
113 - Any idea whether the Lib Dems can attach an amendment on that as a price for supporting a referendum with the AV option?
115. Of course it is the right word. Every time we get a blip in the polls, the site is full of old women running around screaming about how the Tory campaign is failing - and providing their own dubious prescriptions for improving it.
The possibility that they have no qualifications whatever to make such suggestions seems to entirely pass them by.
Morning all and as Mike says this poll appears to be bad news for the Tories and is being portrayed as such.
However apart from Angus Reid a simple analysis of all the polls in the past few months shows little has changed.
Assume the Tories are on 40% I stand to be corrected but virtually every poll has had us within the margin of error 37-43%
Assume Labour is on 29%, again almost every poll has had them within the margin of error 26-32%
Assume the LibDems are on 19%, again almost every poll has had them within the margin of error 16-22%
So what causes the swings? The direction of the non-Tory vote. One poll Labour is up the LibDems down. Another as in last night Labour is up and Others is down.
The Tory vote share is barely moving it is everyone else who is swinging all over the place.
I agree that we have made a bit of a mess of several policy announcements recently, the marriage tax relief and the emergency budget cuts being the best 2 examples. However we are at least 7 weeks and possibly 12 weeks away from the GE.
We have the budget to come or not as the case may be.
We have Brown and others before the Iraq enquiry.
We may have other events which change things but
Right now I am sticking with the 2 things I ahve always believed:
Governments lose elections, oppositions do not win them
Labour tends to be overstated in the polls and the Tories understated.
Meanwhile in the real world as was stated on Newsnight Scotland last night, as more Labour MPs inexpectedly announce their retirement, what do they know from private polling and canvas returns that the media and general public dont know?
I suspect it is that as we have predicted many times for many historical reasons, the forthcoming general election is a “change” one and there will be unexpected casualties from the Government side of the HoC just as there was in 1997.
Separately last night I had an exchange of emails with a well known paper reviewing journalist so I will be watching to see how that journalist comments on polls in the future. S/he may even start looking at PB as I suggested s/he should do.
What is going on with the polls?
What on earth has changed? I am feeling sick to the stomach that Brown might not be kicked out, never was a government more deserving of being booted out of office, yet some people can’t see it.
Why?? Surely not the 0.1% growth figure??
So depressing
At least Brown has (surely??) scored a spectacular own goal with this AV joke - naked bribe to the Lib Dems. Anyone who wants a change of government cannot vote Lib Dem, Brown has as good as said “our best hope is a Hung parliament, and we will gang up with the liberals against the tories” Desperate stuff. But maybe people will like it?
I am at a loss to explain the collective midsent of the electorate at the moment.
120. as opposed to a PM, Chancellor and many ministers who switched homes, manipulated expenses, when they were in aosition to say no.
As for Tory cuts Labour savings etc, the climb into debt goes back to 2002.
http://order-order.com/2010/02/02/through-the-looking-glass-economics/
120 - tim, I sincerely hope so.
I was thinking about that this morning. I was wondering how you decide between day four different systems. Presumably you use AV to rank the preferences for voting systems?
121. Shhhh - you’ll stop the Con majority price going back up
They may be right tho - are GO and DC are hiding under their duvets crossing their fingers and hoping they’ll win by default - or maybe keeping their powder dry for the GE campaign - we’ll soon find out..
Has anybody considered that Cameron and Tory High Command may have decided that this GE is the one to Lose?
Brown’s room to manoeuvre has vanished. He is left with the sole option - to implement cuts (and savage ones at that). If Brown tries some other policy, it will result in disaster visited on the country from the markets.
So after a GE there could be an authoritarian Labour government (because this government is naturally authoritarian) propped up by the Lib/Dems (who are ‘on a promise’ of electoral reform), forced to slash and burn everything they have done over the past thirteen years (it started y/day with the education cuts - and that seems to have ‘escaped’ the ever watchful eye of the ‘esteemed’ fourth estate) while our competitors in the EU enjoy increasing growth and rising standards of living, at the expense of increasingly impoverished taxpayers in what is left of the UK. It will be British noses pressed against the windows of the restaurant.
Just as the 1992 election victory eventually heavily damaged the Conservatives - a term too far - one last GE win for Labour could see the end of Left/Centre/Left politics in this country
118 - Isn’t it stark staring obvious that’s what the Conservatives are planning for the election campaign?
On a poster it should ask a question, not just
“And stop putting Cameron on posters. He’s not a male model. Put Gordon on the posters with the question - Five More Years?”
“Who would give this man 5 more years”
127. rubbish
I really don’t see the reason for all this sky-falling-in panic
Yes, the polls are near the bottom range for the Tories and upper end for Labour - but there’s still a good gap between them and the marginals are much further ahead where it matters.
I disagree that going negative now is the *right* thing to do - Cameron has spent a long time making the Tories nicer, more inclusive, more caring and more firm-but-fair dad.
It would be nonsense to throw all that away now when there’s no need to go nuclear.
Look at how much criticism the LDs get on here when they go nasty? Shed loads of it.
Cameron et al need to be a lot clearer about their policies - I’ve been irritated by the fuzziness of several announcements, some have come out as well thought out whilst others…
The country is feeling grim or thankful not to be effected to badly personally [yet knows the future isn't all sunshine], the Tories need reassure voters that they’ll look after us and be sincere about it.
You don’t create that impression/trust by lobbing grenades at a failed government when you simply don’t need to.
I’m hoping that the Tories will be forensic in their criticism of Labour’s policies/legacy and have the discipline to mention 2/3 lines to take on every broadcast that bigs up their own stuff.
If it gets to the point where the only way to fight is dirty, then fine - but it’d be a massive mistake to panic and go early and hand Labour the Nasty Party stick to beat them with.
128. To Captain Mannerings yes, to the private Frazers - no
112
Oh! here’s ‘yer chance. SeanT gave as one of his reasons for not voting Tory, their, ‘Gayness’ as I know you are rather touchy about that sort of thing would you like to ask him what he meant?
I don’t however think it’s good enough to say ‘It’s fine, its all fine’
Mistakes have been made, things should have been done better. The policy fuzziness is not something which should be happening and they will be punished for it.
134. Put it this way if they have some silver bullets its an easy Con majority, if they don’t then it isnt
[75] - I have to wrestle with a dilemma - do I vote Tory, as always, or vote tactically for a party I despise on the basis that they are the only party likely to rob Labour of the seat.
I wouldn’t normally seek to convince someone to vote Tory, but if you look at the history of the votes in the seat, I wouldn’t have said that the Tories were as out of the running as they might at first appear.
They rather curiously lost about half their votes last time around, when an Independent took nearly 15%. I have no idea what that was all about, but without that the Tories would start off pretty much level pegging with the Lib Dems in second place.
Just think how gutted you would be to have voted Lib Dem if they ended up coming third behind the Tories?
127. I think it daft to think the Conservatives are deliberatly trying to lose, however theres no doubt that if Labour did somehow manage to hold on to office they would quickly become severely unpopular and given their already disasterous position in local government, you could realistically expect to witness their political death at local level in a fourth term, followed by a landslide defeat at any subsequant general election. Lefties who are cock a hoop at the prospect of a fourth term should be careful what they wish for…
Are the panic attacks subsiding? Onto more important news, the BoE monthly meeting is Thursday and it matters for the first time in a while, because the forecast is the end of QE:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article7011654.ece
124. The way debt has shot up under Labour is reason alone to never allow them to form a government ever again.
You have to say well done to the Labour Trolls who are working really hard and to acertain extent succeeding in changing the media narrative from “The worst government and PM ever” to “The Conservatives are incompetent and devoid of vision”
Whilst i dont think it will work it will have an effect.
Two points Tories seem to be missing:
1. the trend. Your party has gone from leads in the mid teens to a series of leads in single digits. The trend is still down.
It just needs a couple of more points to swing and we are facing a minority Labour government after the next GE. That’s how close you are to disaster.
Maybe this trend doesn’t bother you. If so, you deserve to lose.
Second, how do we know the Tories are preparing to go negative in the GE? The GE could be in March. I see no sign of any Tory fightback as yet. They are leaving it very late.
Third, I have an idea for more Tory posters. Just put up pictures of Gordon Brown, with quotes from Cabinet Ministers.
“A self deluded control freak”
“psychologically flawed”
“he will be a f*cking disaster as a prime minister”
Put these quotes, then ask: Who said this? Then give the name: John Hutton, Labour Minister, etc
That’s powerful. And it’s not that personal, because you are using Labour comments, not Tory comments.
ALSO negative campaigning posters are much harder to deface and ridicule.
If you put up a poster with a picture of Gordo saying “Who wants five more years of this man?” how is anyone going to deface it. Are people gonna scrawl on it: “I do!”
lol. Come on Tories, put your ten hole docs on.
137 - I’m not so sure. If Labour wins, they get the benefit of the recovery, Iraq a distant memory, eventual progress/withdrawal in Afghanistan, a new leader (as Brown will surely handover to someone else mid-term) and the Tories tearing themselves apart, which they inevitably will if they do not win this time round. Plus they will rig the electoral system to ensure the Tories can never win again. The only thing going for the Tories would be the 18 year timespan of the administration come the GE in 2015 - and voters will remember that was time for a change last time round.
I do increasingly think Labour will still be in office this summer.
142
Gordon’s going to wait until the very last minute before calling a June election is he?
On topic, I totally agree with Mike about this, although he’s also been known to over-interpret these unbalanced supplementals, too. And he doesn’t even have the excuse that he needs to sell newspapers. Just the other day he wrote:
“Although the Tories are not doing as well as they would like ICM last week had 66% saying they wanted change to just 25% wanting to stick with Labour. In that environment people will vote in the way that best achieves change.”
Like the Independent question, this was fairly horrendously worded. ICM asked people to choose between “Continuity is important, stick with Labour” and “Time for a change”. To agree with the first part you need to both value Continuity and like Labour, whereas to agree with the second party you just need to support any kind of change. Support The Green Party? Prefer a progressive Lib/Lab coalition? Think the parties are all crap and we need something different? Just like the sound of Change? They’re all lumped in with the 66%.
The Independent stopped being a serious - or even a readable - newspaper some time ago. I wouldn’t waste any time on it. As for the Tories, they’re going to need to be clear-sighted and ruthless about attaining their objectives should they get into power. All this faffing about at the moment - or what looks like faffing about - like a bunch of old ladies is not encouraging.
142. To be fair though Bob, you’ve been predicting disaster for the Tories for as long as I’ve posted on here (mid 2007)
129. almost every jury.
140 “You have to say well done to the Labour Trolls who are working really hard and to acertain extent succeeding in changing the media narrative from “The worst government and PM ever” to “The Conservatives are incompetent and devoid of vision”
Whilst i dont think it will work it will have an effect.”
Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.
Is anyone going to watch Claire Short at Chilcott? I can’t bear her so I won’t be - she’s such a self-serving numpty.
136. I rather fear the demographics make Burnley a no-hope seat for the Tories now.
Gordon Brown should grab the lunch-time headlines today
Gordon Brown is expected today to offer MPs a vote on a referendum to ditch the traditional first-past-the-post voting system for Westminster elections.
Reports last night suggested Mr Brown had secured agreement from senior ministers for a vote as early as next week and would seek the approval of his Cabinet this morning.
He is expected to announce in a speech in London at lunchtime that MPs will vote next week on whether a referendum should be held after the general election on a switch to the Alternative Vote system
130 Runnymede
You don’t think that the Conservatives would be as constrained by circumstances almost as much as Labour?
Or that the policies that would have to be implemented by either party would result in huge unpopularity for that party?
Or that our competitors on the continent will enjoy higher growth rates than the UK, and their standards of living will steadily draw ahead of the SoL in this country?
Or that a plan by Brown (I wouldn’t say Labour, because the party doesn’t seem to want to follow him down the route) to take a high taxation path would result in an exodus of Business as well as individuals from the UK?
Morning all.
Alas, The Independent! This was a really good newspaper in its first years under Andreas Whittam Smith (with a young Andrew Marr, as political editor, giving superb insights into New Labour). They even had the wonderful Alex cartoon, in its best year.
Now it is just risible.
If, as Nick P says at 85, they choose their headlines in order to sell the newspaper, then all I can say is that they’re not doing a terribly good job, are they?
152. The idea that the Conservatives are deliberately trying to lose is barking.
149. Thus far it’s a hatchet job on Blair
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/feb/02/clare-short-iraq-war-inquiry
It is a good point made by some chap or other above that the Tory High Command could be keeping the weapon of negative campaigning “Gordon Brown - 5 more years?” type posters on ice until the campaign actually starts.
155 Thanks and no surprise there then. Her pathetic - oh Gordon was on the perifery, nothing to do with him blah blah was so obvious.
Her hypocrisy over Iraq and resigning only when it was all over bar the shouting really summed her up. I’m no Cook fan, but he stuck to his principles and killed his own career.
Wednesday 7 March 2007
MPs vote for an elected Lords with a majority of 113.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6420965.stm
What happened to that? The answer, is the same as what will happend to this AV thing and mug liberals look set to fall for it again.
If Labour are on course for a win, why are the rats still deserting?
BBCLauraK
Labour MP Mike Hall, standing down at election for health reasons -will more announce they’re off this week with Legg report on Thurs?
I wonder what comment would have been like if these websites had existed in 1979 or even 1997?
136, 150: the Tories came within 700 votes of winning Burnley in 1983 - but that’s another age given what’s happened since then. The 2005 GE was cruel on the Tories because they got seriously squeezed by two independents fighting high-profile campaigns, the high-water mark for the BNP, and the LDs picking up the anti-Iraq Labour vote. By rights, they should have strongly recovered 2nd place in 2010, but the LD onslaught has been so constant and they have taken power on the council, that the Tories have no chance of convincing locals that they can beat Labour. And frankly, there are too many people locally who would stick pins in their eyes before they’d ever vote for “Thatcher’s lot”.
Anyhow, Labour will win in Burnley - the boil that needed lancing was Kitty Ussher, and she’s gone now. The Labour PPC is a decent local councillor, female and white, and from the town. Given Labour’s recovery in the polls, she will win.
146: no, only in the past 6 months have I become seriously depressed about where the Tories are going and the increasing ineptness and shallowness of their offering. I rather think they ended 2009 thinking the election was in the bag. It’s not, and they are seriously underestimating the ability of Labour to motivate their core vote and hang on. Labour can’t win outright, but they can do enough to deny the Tories, and possibly even remain the largest party (due to the electoral geography and the LDs holding on to their Tory target seats).
Osborne speaking at 11.
It’s interesting (though perhaps not informative) to compare reporting of the same event
Guardian
Sir Lawrence Freedman says that Alastair Campbell in his diary talked about discussing the Iraq dossier on the Mozambique trip.
Short says that did not come up in her discussions with Blair on the trip.
She did hear about the dossier being planned. But she decided not to engage with it. There are only so many battles you can win, she says.
Sky
While Short was talking to Blair, Alastair Campbell & Blair were having far more important discussions: About presenting the “dodgy” dossier
“Osborne speaking at 11″
Bit of a late developer, then. Most people get it cracked by age 2.
Stupid idea No 94 from Labour - pay fines using a credit card.
“A secret pilot scheme lets people settle demands from county courts and bailiffs by getting DEEPER into arrears.
…The Government has admitted it has made no assessment of the effect on struggling debtors.
Shadow Housing Minister Grant Shapps said: “You couldn’t make it up. Labour ministers have given bailiffs the go-ahead to collect credit card debts by credit card.
“They’ve lost touch with reality. This callous approach will give the green light for aggressive bailiffs to demand credit card payments with menace, pushing some of the most vulnerable in our society deeper in debt. The Labour Party is on the side of bailiff bullies.”
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2834603/Anger-as-Labour-lets-poor-pay-debts-by-credit-card.html#ixzz0eNBgR3xg
The people who are running the Tory Party election campaign seem to be complete amateurs.
Who are the PR company doing the work for them by the way?
165.
Great response to “Osborne speaking at 11″
I wouldn’t be surprised to see this used tomorrow at PMQ’s
166 - LOL.
I thought Dave’s supposed big strength was that he was a talented PR executive?
“A paper that likes to think of itself as part of the “quality” end of the market has a responsibility to report things fairly and accurately - especially in a pre-election period like this. Today’s front page falls short.”
Surely that’s the point Mike, it’s not and hasn’t been for quite some time. It used to be fairly good at covering Foreign Affairs when I was at University, but even this has now gone the way of the Dodo. The rest of the paper never was that impressive and simply acted as a vent for Liberal’s who couldn’t get the dream gig of writing for the Guardian. The Indy now comes into that Sunday Sport category for me now, except there is a point to buying the Sport, the art is much more entertaining.
SeanT
Agree.It’s time to get ruthless like Labour and land punches from WHEREVER and WHENEVER you can.Just as they are doing.Be that the Papers,TV or News conferences.
Its the job of HM Official Opposition to COUNTER the government of the day and inform the electorate as to exactly why they think the government of the day is letting the people down.Which lets face it the Tories have always been a crap opposition.So me thinks its time to redeem themselves and do their bloody job.Of making bloody obvious the lay of the land.Like they should have been doing this last 13 yrs.Whilst at the same time remaining positive on their vision for the country.
Surely this can’t be that difficult.By rights winning this election should be like taking candy from a baby.Labour have ballsed everything they have touched in the past and continue to rank up unprecedented debt whilst at the same time following policies which are driving companies and investment away.
FFS they’ll be no prosperity for anyone if these numpties get in again.No investment=less goods/services=less jobs.Its friggin insanity what Labour are doing and getting away with.Dave sort your shit out will you or its hardcore socialism for all inc the poverty it brings.
Education,economy,law and order,Afghanistan,society,NHS,debt,losing our place in the G7(possibly).Its all f*cked.What more ammo does Dave need?
Now just 0.6% further swingback to a viable Lab/LD coalition.
1.25% more swingback to Labour largest party…
http://hungparliament2010.blogspot.com/
Nick Palmer
“A Labour majority would probably reflect any Tory result lower than a 3% lead.”
You are being far too optimistic there Nick. It’s hard for Labour to hold on to a majority if the Tories have any kind of a lead (unless the LibDems collapse)…
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/hp/plotter.png
Labour have selected Graeme Morrice in Livingston and Michanel McCann in East Kilbride Strathaven and Lesmahagow. Both are local councillor
155
I merely offered it for consideration.
But likewise consider that the Conservatives hold first-hand knowledge of what it is like to be engulfed by a tidal wave for change after staying around for just too long.
Will there be ‘happy thoughts’ from the electorate, after withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan? I don’t think so. Post VietNam ‘blues’ plagued US society for years and the British like to think of their forces as ‘winners’ so a tail-between-the-legs retreat from both Iraq and Afghanistan will not shine brightly from the Battle Honours on ‘The Peoples’ Flag’.
And one last thing - will the Scots hang around suffering under Labour/Lib/Dems maladministration while the SNP whispers sweet nothings in their collective ears?
Harry Flash Ghost- You talk a lot of sense at times.
This is what I did yesterday. I bought the Tories on the Party Seats Line at 247 and then 240.5.I Layed LAB Most Seats at 8.0 and I Backed a CON Overall at 1.49. It represented my biggest committmen t to the Cameron cause in a long time.
It could all go pear-shaped in the short term but I am reconciled to that. Why is there so much panic from The Herd ?
Clare shorts testimony is dynamite.
Basically accusing Blair and Campbell of lying
Idle tease - some of us, including Gordon, have kept publicly calm when our party was up to 20% behind in the polls. The Tories seem awfully easy to rattle (”Aargh, we’re only 7% ahead, we must change our strategy NOW!”), and I’m not sure that the electorate will be impressed.
With reference to the 5 minute BBC OneShow investigation about Tory toffs, given by Labour supporters Kaye Adams and Kevin Maguire, whose political affiliaton was not stated:
“Kaye Adams, who hosted the piece, reportedly said that if the
Conservatives win the election “we will be electing a Cabinet filled with no less than 18 millionaires”.
Meanwhile, people who were interviewed for the show allegedly
described David Cameron as a “toff” and “unashamedly a Sloane Ranger”.
The BBC said: “We received complaints that the item was biased against the Conservative Party. We accept that the piece was not as good as it should have been. The One Show production team are aware of their responsibilities to ensure fairness in their output.” ”
This report went out on January 14th. Rather stangely, to put it mildly, no recent political event had occurred to inspire such a report against Tory toffs. All except two polls since January 14th have shown the Tory lead in single figures. Most polls in the month before then showed the lead in double figures. Nothing else happened at this time to cause such a drop. This programme was such excellent propaganda because most viewers would have assumed it was unbiased and not like a typical Party Political Broadcast. Polls are fragile things and the Tories have been hit by some recent disarray; but I have no doubt that the OneShow PPB played its part by starting the ball rolling.
One awaits a BBC OneShow investigation into whether a deranged Scotsman is fit to be Prime Minister.
Harry Flash Ghost- You talk a lot of sense at times.
This is what I did yesterday. I bought the Tories on the Party Seats Line at 247 and then 240.5.I Layed LAB Most Seats at 8.0 and I Backed a CON Overall at 1.49. It represented my biggest committmen t to the Cameron cause in a long time.
It could all go pear-shaped in the short term but I am reconciled to that. Why is there so much panic ?
173. So what? Everyone knows they lied.
177-Agreed but we have an ex cabinet minister uttering it in public.
Her assertion that she was not allowed to ask questions of the Attourney General at cabinet on the 17th March 2003 is extraordinary.
168, no. Labour banged on and on about PR. It’s like their airbrushing hypocrisy.
178. Sure - but there’s no new information here. No-one cares.
F1 important(ish) news:
The points scoring system is being changed again:
25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1
It’s to give an extra incentive for winning by changing the points difference to 7 rather than 5 for 1st and 2nd.
Also, in the early stages of testing day 2, Massa’s Ferrari remains shit-hot. However, be veeery wary of times at this stage, especially as some cars will be running with heavy loads.
Those nce Lib Dems eh who never do anything wrong..
Camden mayor in benefit fraud probe stripped of chain http://bit.ly/9qtsBI
Ooh, and Kobayashi (Sauber, apparently) is second fastest. If this keeps up through this and the later tests Sauber may spring a surprise. On the other hand, Williams were frequently quick in practices last season only to be almost uniformly under-achievers in the race proper.
176 URW “Why is there so much panic ?”
Good question. Some people seem to be working themselves into a position where they think Labour can get close to their 2005 vote share of 35%.
I don’t think you need to be a political genius to realise that that is not a plausible outcome.
184, postal votes could swing it.
176 - URW, I hope you meant 340.5 and 347 or I’m sick with envy.
The credibility of the Iraq inquiry depends on witnesses telling the truth in its public hearings. So what does it do when a witness says something that is untrue and then declines to correct it in spite of a clear invitation to do so? It thanks the witness and carries on as if nothing had happened.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/02/chilcot-inquiry-iraq-sawers-mi6
185-You mean those postal votes already written and bagged up ready to go to the counts in many a marginal?
184 “Labour can get close to their 2005 vote share of 35%.”
Unlikely but not impossible. Don’t forget that the mood music in 2005 was pretty poor for Labour. In many ways the motivation for some Labour voters to turn out is higher today than it was in 2005.
186 antifrank. Lol, yes. It was a typo ! You knew what I meant.
Can we assume that the first quarter growth figures in the UK will be good?
I think so and stand by for a “Brown Bounce” to surpass all prevoius bounces.
Unless Labour is sure the first quarter growth figures are going to give them good news it would make sense to call the election and catch the Conservatives on the hop,” ComRes Chief Executive Andrew Hawkins said in an interview. “Labour can’t rely on a continuing recovery of their vote share until May.”
188, let’s just say that once the date is announced I’m buying shares in Tippex and the country’s leading envelope manufacturers.
Weird F1 discrepancy: Alonsi is 5 for the title. Button’s 15 or so. But Alonso to beat Button is just 1.5. If the title prices are right, the match bet is a stonker. If the match bet is wrong, Button’s one to back.
I think it still too early to say, but I’m going to try and keep my eyes peeled for this sort of thing when most or all of the tests are done.
DP sounds interesting/fun - two people with enormous egos and…
daily_politics Tune in at 12 for hot DP action with Christopher Meyer, Nadine Dorries & (fingers crossed) a Cabinet Minister on electoral reform
Yeah, right - I’ll believe him…
“Leeds MP Fabian Hamilton has been forced to repay thousands of pounds to the public purse after failing to spot that £7,000 had been mistakenly paid into his bank account.
The Leeds North East MP said he did not notice a huge double payment because his balance had been “going up and down like a yo-yo” due to the costs of selling his late mother’s home.”
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Leeds-MP-forced-to-pay.6033613.jp
191 yesterday mandy said the Q1 figures would be positive because of continuing gov support = we have put so much money in they will be positive = propping up your business with your maxed out credit card.
185. Only in a few places with unusual local conditions. Don’t start going down the Tapestry route.
re 184. Richard - for the sake of consistency can we use the GB totals for 2005 not the UK ones which include NI. All the polls operate on a GB basis and Labour got 36.1%
This could be interesting!!
Cabinet office under pressure over Ashcroft tax promise
Commissioner grants appeal after Cabinet Office refused Freedom of Information request
The Cabinet Office has been given a 35-day deadline [from 1 Feb] to disclose full details of the undertaking Lord Ashcroft gave to become a UK resident for tax purposes when he became a Tory peer ten years ago.
Information Commissioner Christopher Graham has ruled there is a legitimate public interest in the issue. He was ruling on an appeal by Labour MP Gordon Prentice after he was refused information on Lord Ashcroft thorugh a Freedom of Information request.
Graham added the public is also entitled to know whether Ashcroft had complied.
His ruling said that since the ennoblement of the billionaire Tory donor and former party treasurer there had been speculation he had not satisfied the undertaking he gave, adding: “Statements by senior politicians concerning Lord Ashcroft’s undertaking have been evasive and obfuscatory and have served to compound this speculation.
“Lord Ashcroft could have ended the speculation about his residency by making a public statement to that effect. He has chosen not to do this.” In the commissioner’s view there is a legitimate interest for the public to know more about Lord Ashcroft’s undertaking
198-Is this good or bad for the Tories?
President Barack Obama to propose using $30 billion in TARP funds as a small business lending fund to spur job growth
Obviously he has been rung up by Gordon.
URGH - Benchmarks for Britain
What a terrible soundbite.
201-Well we have had skidmarks for the last 2 years
174. Yes Nick, some of you kept very calm when you were 20 points behind; the rest of you ran around like headless chickens and have spent the best past of two years desparately trying to find a way to unseat Gordon Brown.
199 - sounds like another disaster waiting to happen. Again, it’s self-inflicted because they could and should have sorted this years ago.
Manna from heaven for Labour.
Here’s what you missed when Osbornes live feed went down.
“Whether we meet these benchmarks or not, my family will get a million pound tax cut”
With luck today we’ll get away from the confusion of the past few days and back to the difference between Labour and the Tories on the economy. CCHQ’s best efforts to muddy the waters should not allow us to lose sight of the substantial gap between what Labour proposes – profligacy coupled with pandering to sectional interests – and what the Conservatives are committed to achieving – sound money, rebuilt society etc.
That at least was where the debate was until last week. Since then the Tories have shifted the ground and left us scratching our heads. Are they afraid? Are they confused? Are they slacking? Today is their chance to get back on track.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100024717/how-to-judge-george-osborne/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
198
Interesting. So now we can send a FoI request about any member of the Lords tax status? So I could put in one about, say, Lord Paul?
ARGH Lord Stern to advise on setting up a Green Investment Bank Noooooooooooooooooo
Ooh, very nice list of great and good new Tory strategy supporters.
Ozzie - “Britain cannot afford 5 more years of Gordon Brown” OUCH
160 As I mentioned up list, on Newsnight Scotland last night they were speculating that Labour MPs well under the age of 65 announcing tehir retirement might have more to do with private polling and canvas returns. Clearly not all is running as smoothly for Labour MPs in less than marginal seats as it is for the Nick Palmers of this world.
“Britain cannot afford 5 more years of Gordon Brown” needs to be on every poster and leaflet
A lot of effort and thought goes into these roadside posters but I sometimes wonder why we don’t tap in to the every-day quips that are known to everyone yet conversely are meaningless - one I could suggest would be ‘Vote Labour? I should cocoa.’ That to me has more street cred than trying to get out a message that one side or the other will tear apart.
207 - Not that simple. Ashcroft gave an undertaking to the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee regarding his tax status before being granted his peerage and it’s that undertaking that is potentially being revealed. That isn’t the same as going through individuals’ tax affairs where no such undertaking is in place.
The message should be forced down the throats of every man, woman and registered voter…..
‘Britain cannot afford 5 more years of Brown’
209 George Osborne clearly has many talents, but he isn’t the sort of reassuring figure that the Tories need to sell their economic policies to the public. He is far too political for this particular job IMO.
Osborne speaking at 11, and squeaking until 35.
Now he’s giggling like a little girl trying to avoid the question about Hammond figures from yesterday.
174 - We tribalists of Methuselah vintage are blessed with inner tranquility and serenity. But I suspect that Labour were in a similar nervous anxiety state before 1997. After so so long in the wilderness, could we ever win? And of course…yes we can. And yes we shall.
(But I agree with SeanT and others that the Conservatives should now be in rather more aggressive mode).
The event - planned some time ago and before the latest GDP figures - was meant to highlight that there is much more to Tory economic policy than cutting public spending and the deficit. It will, however, provide a platform for journalists about the uncertain noises coming from Tory high command on the scale of planned cuts which I first highlighted last week.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/02/where_will_the.html
208. I think it’s a good idea to get people like Stern on board, even though I disagree with many of his views.
This is part of the successful campaign the Tories have been waging for the last couple of years to get endorsement from across the establishment - including what might be termed the Islingtonian end of it.
Great laugh and applause for Osborne jokette at Nick Robinson’s salary
Gary Gibbon to Osborne, on the tories proposed extra £1.5bn cuts:
“Not so much a ‘Year for Change’ as a ‘Year for Tweak’”
lol
The Independent ceased being a newspaper long ago.
213: If ashcroft is not above board, then the tories are simply extremely stupid, it’s not as if its news to them, or they’ve not had time to sort it out.
My beleive is that it’s a good lighting rod, on a matter the man in the street cares little about, and labour spend a lot of time attacking something which gets them no-where. However the useful-ness of that is quickly running out.
So it’s a partial application. The executive using it’s power to target a member of the legislature in a biased manner.
The great liberal thinkers will be turning in their graves at what has happened to the mother of parliaments.
People of Britain, you can know Ashcroft’s status, but not Paul’s. Liberte, equalite, fraternite!
I agree with the main article. It’s also a pity that they didn’t ask, by way of comparison, whether they trust Cameron more than Brown, to ensure an economic recovery.
The Conservative leadership needs to sharpen up its act. Why they just can’t agree a line on a particular issue, and then stick to it, in the face of criticism, escapes me.
However, the situation isn’t disastrous. Look back to the last time the Conservatives gained power, in 1979. The Conservatives’ lead fell rapidly, across the board, from 15% or so to low single digits, in the Spring of 1979. Indeed, NOP put Labour in the lead at one point. Yet they still won, because in the end, the public realised that things couldn’t go on as they were.
Also look at the run up to the 2005 election. Labour led by about 8-10% on the economy, according to Yougov, with the Conservatives enjoying similar leads now. Blair led Howard as favoured PM by a similar margin, whereas now the position’s reversed.
So, the Conservatives need to keep their nerve, and fight to win, rather than just assuming victory will be handed to them.
220, what was it?
Note sure how much airtime the Tories are going to get today
Clare Short, the former minister who resigned from the cabinet in protest at the Iraq war, is giving evidence to the Chilcot inquiry. She has accused Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith of being misleading in the run up to the war, and said that Cabinet was not a decision-making body under Blair.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/5276/cabinet_didnt_discuss_iraq_at_all_says_short.html
197 Mike - Right, my mistake. I was reading the wrong figure.
220/1 He can’t answer the simplest of questions, but he did have a nice little giggle at his own joke.
At the least, all future Lords appointments should require similar undertakings. Which is only fair. Will probably put of a few applicants, not least one Tony Blair.
225 - Well done, that man!
osborne just accused the gov of a coverup over FOI to the telegraph.
229, was he smirking about the prospect of a dam bursting and killing dozens of people? Or was he laughing at the thought of a banking collapse?
Oh wait, that’s *your* glorious leader.
I am now in Siem Reap airport getting drunk.
One more note for Tories. Stop banging on about climate change. Half the country doesn’t believe in it, most of the rest doesn’t care. Again, this is pre-recession politics.
If you need to stress yr green credentials go on about renewable energy, recycling, saving fossil fuels, not spraying small children with pesticides. Most people agree with that.
But do not use the phrase “climate change”.
226. Morris Dancer
Nick Robinson questioned whether £1.5bn extra cuts would make any difference to the deficit or the credit rating.
Osborne said that BBC salaries may be high but he though £1.5bn was still a lot of money.
Cheap point coming from a multi-millionaire.
Where can you find this newly released list of “celeb tory supporters”
224 - No. The application has nothing to do with what Ashcroft’s tax affairs are now. It is an application to get information from the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee about the undertaking Ashcroft gave as a condition of getting his peerage. It’s perfectly simple.
235 Gabble - It’s rather good. The kind of reponse Mandy is so good at.
235, isn’t Brown a multi-millionaire? And Harman? And Mandelson? Are politicians to be barred from making savings of less than £100bn if they’re wealthy?
However, thanks for answering my question.
235. Cheap, but quite droll.
237 Off the top of my head - Ch Exec of Glaxo, Kingfisher, Virgin plus a few others - no celebs just business peeps.
237
That’s a clarification. So if I’m to submit FoI’s they should be along the lines of:
”Was Lord Paul asked to give undertakings as to his tax status before taking a peerage?”
”Did Lord Paul offer to give undertaking as to his tax status before taking a peerage?”
Sound fair?
239. Morris Dancer
They should probably avoid jokes about the financial circumstances of people who are no where near as wealthy as them.
Just think how many computers for chavs you could get for £1.5 BN !!
Osborne comments on Independent poll, then says “we don’t comment on polls” then giggles.
Can we have more of him on TV.
230 - All nominees have been required to confirm they are UK resident for tax purposes and will remain so since 2005. But Ashcroft got his peerage in 2000 and it is unclear what undertakings were asked for and given.
243 Gabble - Somehow I don’t think there is going to be much sympathy for poor underpaid BBC executives and journalists, least of all from the other hacks.
Sean Fear - I basically agree with you. However you elide one point - in 1979, as I understand it, Thatcher did not face the bias against her, courtesy of FPTP, that Cameron must endure.
(or did she? I am no electoral historian)
So Cammo needs to be doing BETTER than Thatch.
Also, a query for the more aloof Tories on here, the Don’t Panic brigade, at what point do you start to think.. hmmm…. average lead down from 15 to 8… and still declining…
When will you feel things are slipping? Average lead of 5? 2? When you are behind?
And what will you suggest, if and when you need to change your campaign strategy?
245. Can we have more of him on TV.
When he is chancellor I am sure you will see him all the time
245. You’ll have plenty of him on tv in July tim - outside no 11 holding up a red briefcase.
I think Labour will be happy that Osborne is providing jokes, at the expense of the BBC, rather than any clarification of his economic policies.
We’re all laughing but for different reasons.
Oh one I forgot - Mr Easy Stelios. That’s a nice one.
Tories setting Labour style targets for the economy. Interesting.
PS Lord Stern is not taking on an advisory role after all. Oops.
Osborne anounced Lord Stern will advise them.
Didn’t tell Lord Stern.
What a shambles.
BBC News: tory gaffe
Lord Stern statement: happy to talk to tories about setting up a green bank but will not be working for them specifically. He is also happy to talk to Labour.
Good - Lord Stern is apparently happy to provide input but is not an official advisor.
A narrow escape for meat eaters everywhere.
248 He needs a bigger lead than her 7%, although not a much bigger lead. My point is more that a particular direction of travel usually doesn’t continue all the way to polling day.
As to the rest, panicking never results in good decisions being made. The polling figures on the underlying questions are still decent for the Conservatives, and they need to capitalise on this. They must relentlessly focus on the economy, as this is still very proglematic for Labour, and there’ll be plenty of unpleasant news between now and polling day.
242 - Absolutely right. You might also ask what the content of any undertaking was, and for copies of relevant correspondence. The address is House of Lords Appointments Commission, 35 Great Smith Street, London SW1P 3BQ and I’d be interested to know how you get on!
You were laughing when the Israelis were, as you requested, “annihilating the Palestinians” with white phosphorus.
I suspect we have a sense of humour non-overlap.
bbc putting the boot in about tory details yet yesterday awwww wernt labour good and careing, but if i remeber mandy didnt give any details and they have the books to look at now!!!!
251. I think Labour will be happy that Osborne is providing jokes, at the expense of the BBC, rather than any clarification of his economic policies.
Slight malfunction on the line from the bunker there Gabs. It was supposed to be, Osborne confused and unable to clarify, not Labour scared of Osborne getting his message across…
In the BBC F1 gossip column there is a rumour (and it’s just that at this stage) Schumacher’s neck might be creaking. Right now I disbelieve it, but if you’ve backed him, you could lay him to race at 1.02 as an insurance policy.
And Lord Paul got his peerage in 1996, as you say ‘it is unclear what undertakings were asked for and given.’
So FoI requests along those line would be fair? They would also be consistent with the ruling by the information commissioner?
I’m guessing the Lords Appointments Commission would be the best place to submit the FoI request?
http://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/
248. Campaign strategy? We are not in the campaign yet. We are still in the prepare-the-ground stage. The political village may think the starting gun has sounded, but the vast majority of voters haven’t heard it. Camborne are still working the fertile soil of pre-election positioning, brand decontamination and subtle undermining of Brown’s position.
When the campaign begins - and only Brown can start it - then I would expect much more direct language, both positive and negative.
Ah crosspost.
I’ll draft something tonight when I’ve got time to get the Labour MP’s and Info Commissioner’s justifications into it.
Yes today’s Indy headline was written by an imbecile. Quite apart from the fact that the change in the Lab vote is within the MOE, they reort no change in the Tory vote! A more truthful headline would have been “A few more voters plump for Labour”. I’ve said before that papers will always distort polls to suit the story they want to get across.
263 “Camborne are still working the fertile soil of pre-election positioning, brand decontamination and subtle undermining of Brown’s position.”
Well if they are doing this, they’re not doing a very good job.
Today’s document was rather weak IMO. Only 5 endorsements from the FT100. Not had to do the maths on that one.
Go to bed on a cold and wake up with a polling headache.
It’s not great [the poll and the cold]. No doubt. But it’s not panic stations. I think the near we get to the lection, the more some of us have to focus on our own turf.
I take noting for granted but there is little sign of ours staying red.
Now I’m off back to bed.
257. The tragic waste here is that Cameron doesn’t need to be in this position of even considering panicking.
If he had just stuck to his promise of offering some kind of referendum on Europe he would have all the UKIP votes in his pocket. Yes Ken Clarke would have resigned, who gives a f*ck.
He would now be on a solid and impregnable 41-42 points, and also he’d have kept his reputation as an honest straight-shooter, and he’d have enthused his activists, and he would have a big moral cudgel with which to bash Labour (you lied on a referendum, we kept our promise) it would be win-win-win.
He would now be cruising to victory. I despise him. He chose subtle lies over raw honesty, and he’s paying for it. The only reason I still give him the time of day is cause I hate Labour SO MUCH MORE.
Whilst Osborne will get a weeny bit of coverage in the MSM, the financial press will be the ones to read.
I thought he has played it well - deficit reduction pace will be driven in tandem with the BoE, no arguing with that one.
I liked the emphasis on keeping interest rates lower for longer too, and the big players didn’t think Gordon’s plan was credible - and therefore it isn’t no matter what Labour say.
Not too impressed at the fast broadband - yawn stuff, high-speed rail ditto. They need something much more creative than that.
267 Judging by the spelling…. the meds have kicked in.
248. There was a modest pro-Labour bias in 1979. Without it, Thatcher’s majority would have been 69, instead of the actual 43.
Most of the bias was accounted for by an increase in the variation of constituency sizes and an increase of the efficiency of the Labour vote (they did quite well in some of the marginals).
In other news, the Prime Minister has announced that it would be inappropriate to comment on an attack on a foreign head of state on flagship legislation that his Government has introduced. Is that a first?
248. In fact the 1979 boundaries weren’t especially favourable to the Tories - there were some ridiculously tiny city centre seats, for example.
As Robert Waller put it ‘The 1983 redistribution had political and electoral effects. The Labour Party, which launched an expensive but unsuccessful court case against the Boundary Commission, was right to believe that the new boundaries would favour the Conservatives, to the extent of increasing the Tory majority by about 30 seats. However, this was…a reflection of Labour’s disproportionate strength in previously over-represented urban constituencies’
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V9P-4HV83TD-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1983&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1190132435&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=efed09743a195d44ac85b0b0153acf1e
268. Sean - Cameron isn’t panicking; you are.
271 Thatcher started from a much better position. She inherited a national party, which hadn’t spent the previous 10 years piling up massive majorities in it’s heartlands. Cameron has a job on his hands to unravel that.
The problem with going negative against the backrop of a falling poll lead is that it looks like desparation - which it is. Instead of being nasy, the Tories just need to keep their heads. A 7% lead in Britain as a whole is a 10% plus lead in the south and the midlands. And that means dozens and dozens of marginals easily falling into Tory hands. The only way for the Tories not to win this coming election is for them to throw it away. I remain a convinced 60 plus majority man.
Politicos and journalists must hate this tweeter
eyespymp Nick Robinson outside British Museum on mobile “It’s a big favour I’m doing, you owe me one”
277. Mandy ?
Brown on Constitutional Reform, BBC news now.
Had a haircut.
277. Wife, Milk from Tescos?
276
Well said. Those above wanting the tories to go aggressively negative are allowing their (justified) antipathy to Brown to colour their thoughts.
276: My wife was saying to me this morning ‘Can’t we have an election now? I’m not sure I can take another 3 months of this’.
The man-in-the-street will be very sick of it by the end, if they arn’t already.
262/264 - Your best bet with FOI requests is to work from the ground up, ending with a request for the moon on a stick.
So you start asking for confirmation undertakings were discussed, then confirmation of the existence of any undertakings, then the content of the undertakings, then associated correspondence, then whether the undertaking was fulfilled, then associated correspondence etc.
Separate the requests clearly, ideally as a list of questions, so they can’t refuse the whole thing. But don’t hold back on what you ask for in the final stages of the letter - hell, you could ask for any tax papers submitted by whoever although you almost certainly won’t get them to go that far.
279. When does the beard get trimmed ? 7th May ?
273. However in 1983, as usual, the Boundary Commission was unable to completely eradicate Labour’s advantage. Had they been able to do so, the Tory majority would have been even 13 seats larger…
Stress returning to the financial system?
…So it’s not quite at the 10.25bps level hit when Lehman Brothers collapsed in September 2008, but the difference between the iTraxx Main and Financials Senior CDS indices (a basic indicator of how credit investors are viewing corporates versus financials) is getting close. [circa 9bps]
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2010/02/02/139266/europe-is-lehman-fied-part-deux/
Is it just me or is Labour completely mad to bring up electoral reform now?
It looks so appalling cynical and desperate - we’re a matter of weeks before an election FFS, and they first promised it in 1997.
I assume this is Gordon’s idea.
283 Sir Norfolk - Yes, good advice. Give them something they can reject to save face, and of course always appeal if you don’t get what you want. It’s also well worth looking at the possible grounds for rejection under the FOI before formulating your questions.
Referendum on AV, Brown will campaign for the change.
Dave will campaign agains the referendum and in favour of safe seats.
(I guessed the last bit)
so electoral reform is important enough to have a refurendum but not lisbon ! brown has no shame
Who will govern Britain under a tory government?
According to Osborne, it will be the Credit Agencies:
“Will Protect UK’s AAA Credit Rating”
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100202-704102.html?mod=rss_Bonds
283
That sounds like good advice. I read somewhere that they can reject an entire request, if there is one part they don’t like. Sending separate ones will take me even longer. Sigh.
I see Gordon is playing the ethnix and equality card too - URGH.
HMG will engineer the representation of the HoC
What are they thinking of???
287. It would look mad or cynical, but for Expensesgate, which now looks like a godsend for Labour…
293 - Don’t be silly.
292 asod - No, you don’t need to do that. Just formulate it as a single letter but with separate (preferably numbered) questions.
287 - After expenses?
Its Dave on the hook defending the troughers in their safe seats.
BBCLauraK Brown says Legg report on Thursday will be a ’sobering moment’ - has he seen it already?
Is anyone interesting at Chilcott that day?
Both parties must feel that they’ve wasted their efforts today. Today’s news is going to be all about Clare Short’s onslaught on our bloodsoaked duplicitous ex-Prime Minister and the former Attorney General.
“Does Osborne plan a year of change, or a year of tweak?”
http://blogs.channel4.com/snowblog/2010/02/02/does-osborne-plan-a-year-of-change-or-a-year-of-tweak/
Brilliant!
299. Labour have very cleverly turned Expensesgate to their advantage, by suggesting (not entirely dishonestly
) that AV is the antidote…
paulwaugh
Chilcot and genteel panel reeling from Clare Short’s whirlwind testimony. Sounds like a Socialist Worker disturbing Evensong
293 - You should be fine as long as you send a shopping list. They really can’t refuse in full a request which says:
(a) confirm the dates on which meetings were held when Lord Paul’s nomination was discussed; and
(b) provide the social security numbers and addresses of all your employees.
Clearly, (b) is utterly absurd. But they should answer (a) and say we can’t provide (b) as it’s personal information. If you sort of conflate the requests in a single demand you can give them an excuse to refuse in full. But not if you list them out in a clear way - there’s no need to write a dozen separate letters.
is anybody able to listen to brown speak?? I find myself zoning in and out, not having a clue to what he has actually said. This speech is an excellent example as to why he’ll be pummled on the tv debates.
Good article by Michael Crick:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/02/lib_dems_hijack_tory_blue.html
The Lib Dems have put out leaflets on blue paper for years in some areas of Liverpool, and of course leaflets on red paper in other areas. Apparently using blue is now official party policy.
302 - Clare sounds a bit like SeanT.
Voted for the war then became slightly unhinged.
308 - It’s turquoise, in homage to that great political thinker, David Icke.
Cheers, you’ve saved me some work there.
289 - My word… At work, Friday, I needed to express my views on the hung parliament narrative (in the context of a potential sterling sell-off), and today someone quotes CDS indices on PB.com. (I once had a pretty explicit objective which was to get publications mentioning them as part of their stories).
I think I can now justify reading this site whilst working!
308. The turquoise taliban !
SeanT is PB.com’s Corporal Jones from Dad’s Army:
“Don’t panic Mr Cameron, don’t panic!”
310- you think there may be another leadership election?
276 Agreed.
All campaigns go through sticky periods and its important to remember there are two sides - the Conservatives and their opponents and the lack of clarity isn’t only from one side.
Much of the confusion has been generated by the opponents and they have done well through laying false agendas helped by the lack of clarity initially.
Labour’s dodgy dossier laid out their version of some Conservative policy, little of it factual but clear - when Cameron said he had no intention in current circumstances of bringing fully transferrable allowances that was reported as reneging on his promise, then when he messed up clarification it became a story; its the story that matters and he answered badly but the measure of U turn was against Labour’s version of the Tory promise/aspiration/intent not his.
Labour through Brown & Ball’s Investment v Cuts built up the expectation of swingeing cuts in 2010/11 so when Cameron and Osborne clarified what they had said in speeches from Conference onwards it became a U turn. Labour spin doctors led friendly and unfriendly journalists to measure what was said against what they had been led to believe.
Similarly with Lisbon. Labour has very professionally muddied the waters so that clarification becomes a flip or U turn or weakening. They still retain a strong friendly group in the media, who got where they are through their contacts with McBride, Whelan, Campbell which served them well professionally and who remain conduits for misinformation.
Many Tories underestimate the strength of the propaganda machine that Labour retains. Unfortunately in month 1 of the campaign it seems that underestimation is prevalent in CCHQ as well.
A quick word from a marginal.
The reason most Tory activists are relaxed about the dropping poll leads is simple, SeanT, they are not matched by the numbers we are seeing on the ground where it matters.
There is an informal conspiracy going on here, the media want a close contest because it sells papers, Labour want a close contest because it keeps their activists from giving up the ghost, Lib Dems and the minority parties want a close contest because it holds out the delicious prospect of the balance of power, and even the Conservatives want to talk up a close contest because it keeps activists on their toes and complacency at bay.
Pollsters are commercial organisations (not academic institutions as some on here treat them) and do what their clients demand. They don’t fiddle the responses or massage the figures, they don’t need to. As canvassers like me know well, its not just what you ask but how you ask it that counts.
On the doorstep if we ask ‘will you be voting for a change of Government at the next election?’ 90% say yes. If you then say ‘So you will be supporting Conservatives, then?’ our poll rating goes into the stratosphere.
310. David Icke as a Lib Dem seems somehow very appropriate.
314 - Who do you see as Frazer, Godfrey, Wilson and Pike?
Tim has to be Hodges.
319: Godfrey=Jack W of course…he’s 107 you know.
314: Fraser=Stuart Dickson.
319- Plato as Mrs Fox
Plato is Mrs Fox.
Walker=SeanT
Arnold Ridley,who played Godfrey,was a real-life Tommy,who sustained serious injury to his right arm in combat
Bob Sykes = Fraser
322 Oh dear
319 - Christina D is Mavis Pike, with the idea that David Cammeron (Peace Be Upon Him) is Wilson.
324 SORRY-his left arm,I am sure-I learnt this c.12 months ago
278 That’s not actually the Conservatives’ problem (scarcely any seat voted 55%+ for the Conservatives in 2005, whereas 21 Labour seats saw vote shares of 60%+).
More of a problem is how evenly distributed Conservative support is across the country (there are lots of non-Conservative seats where they poll around 25-30%, but where they have no realistic prospect of winning) and the concentration of the non-Conservative vote on the candidate best placed to stop them.
WRT AV, I don’t see how it would be any more of a threat to a trougher in a safe seat than FPTP would be. The worst cases all seem to be stepping down, in any event. Electoral reform is on a par with flouridation in terms of importance to the voters in any case.
319 antifrank - though not on this site I’ve said before Fraser Nelson must be Frazer, though Bob Sykes (it’s going to be a disaster) is probably Pb.com’s closest.
More importantly who from our rather small female contigent are Mrs Pike, Elizabeth Mannering, Dolly Godfrey or Mrs Fox?
327 I wonder what surviving relatives of John Le Mesurier might think
Stuart Dickson as Hodges, with Oldnat as his accomplice, the Verger
324. Yes, Ridley fought in both world wars, and yet gave a wonderful performance as the ineffectual Godfrey, who was discovered to have been a “conchie” in WW1…
Young Mr Fear is correct for the most part. The Tories need not revert to panic mode just yet. The polls are mixed and some individual polls should raise an eyebrow. The feature to look at is the trend and long term that is looking more tricky - edging slowing away from the Tories.
FWIW I feel the mood of the electorate is perplexing - certainly not ready to crown a Tory triumph but in a mood to tantilize same - throwing around favours to one party and then another - hence the volatility in the polls.
In all the voters appear determindly undecided as they sway back and forth and the weeks tick by to election day. Frustrating but there we have it !!
333 - there’s a documentary about him on one of the DVD’s, the guy was a legitimate hero. IIRC he was wounded in both wars. Apparently he was also a good writer in his own right.
Finally got wikipedia loaded:
“He saw active service in the First World War, sustaining several serious injuries: his left arm was left virtually useless by injuries sustained on the Somme, his legs were riddled with shrapnel and the legacy of a blow to the head by a German soldier’s rifle butt left him prone to blackouts.”
Ridley wasn’t wounded in WW2 but was invalided out.
In politics, you choose your friends even more carefully than your enemies.
So Gordon Brown is probably regretting his little chats with Clare Short right now. Her testimony to the Chilcot inquiry suggests she and GB were some kind of Gold Blend couple.
Short claims she met the then Chancellor for “cups of coffee” in Number 11 soon after the 2003 Iraq invasion.
Brown was being “marginalised” on domestic policy at the time, she says. So far, so Andrew Marr (last weekend).
But then Short chucked in her hand grenade:
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/02/short-on-iraq-brown-told-her-blair-was-obsessed.html
The most inspired thing about Dad’s Army was that originally, Le Mesurier and Lowe were to have swapped roles…
Would not have made it beyond the pilot episode if that had happened.
334 - That’s the best summary of the current public mood that I’ve read yet. There are a lot of very unenthused people out there. Who can blame them, given the unappetising choice we’re offered and the dismal few years in prospect?
Turnout is not going to be up much.
317 Marcus. PPC’s are the very last people to obtain an objective view on their chances of success and most certainly not from their own ‘impartial’ canvass teams !!
PB recalls their piss poor record in 2005 !!
334. JackW, you don’t agree with Mr C that the election outcome has been inevitable ever since May 5th 2005?
338- yes, Manering’s insecurity about class is what makes the show in many ways
337 - You might want to compare the last paragraph of that piece and tim’s comment at 309.
337 From Waugh’s Twitter panel:
Short says Admiral Boyce “spent a lot of his time in submarines..and it showed. He was not a chatty sort of chap”
333. Wasn’t that inverted though, the twist being Godfrey served as a medic and got decorated for bravery.
Indeed. Ridley achieved the rank of Major.
Quite a departure from Godfrey, making his performance even more wonderufl.
250 Sean I start to become concerned when it is the Tory poll share dropping like a stone rather than the Labour one increasing at the expense of the rest of the non-Tory share.
glenoglaza
Session closing: Short & Blair clearly did not like or trust eachother. APPLAUSE for Short when she finished
342. The best sitcoms are all about people being trapped somehow. [Porridge, Steptoe and Son, Rising Damp all play on this]
Dad’s Army works on so many levels:
People trapped under the constant threat of invasion.
Wilson trapped by Mrs. Pike.
Mainwaring trapped by the class system and his wife.
Young men trapped in old men’s bodies…
Pure genius.
341 GIN. No. This election is still for the winning and losing.
I remain of the view that a Conservative win is most likely but I consider a hung parliament has eaten into the former narrative. Now around a 20% chance and increasing.
349 Dads Army was beautifully written, and played.
I’ll never forget the look on Mainwaring’s face when senior officers greet Wilson as an old friend.
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/02/short-on-iraq-brown-told-her-blair-was-obsessed.html
“[He was] saying Tony Blair is obsessed with his legacy and he thinks he can have a quick war and then a reshuffle etcetera.”
The ego has landed.
340 - “PB recalls their piss poor record in 2005 !!”
What nonsense, Jack. I remain grateful to this day for the sage advice of North Norfolk MP, Iain Dale, on his electoral prospects in 2005.
350. A 20% chance available at 2.6/1 on betfair ? Someones odds are wrong….
342. There’s an episode where Mainwaring’s drunk and abusive brother turns up - he reminds me of a PBer as well, can’t quite think which one at present…
I also remember one writer vividly bringing to life how savage was the fighting on the Eastern Front - when he said “imagine an episode of Dad’s Army where Mainwaring and Pike are photographed next to a prisoner they’ve just hanged from a tree.”
355- yes that episode is brilliant, I can’t think who you mean
110: ‘Expose Brown as a bully who beats up his secretaries.’
Quite. Brown is a wanton thug whose propensity for violence - regardless of his numerous other failings - should see him thrown out of office and put in a secure detention centre. Alas, making political capital out of this will be all but impossible. If the Tories mention Brown’s sickening behaviour I can already see Mandelson’s being given top billing and a free hit on the BBC News, denouncing, in pious tones, these ‘desperate, hurtful and deeply false accusations against our prime minister’. Witness, too how Sky removed the Mail on Sunday front page about this matter from its paper review. No, the media loves Gordon, is on his side and will do whatever it takes to protect him.
Interesting snippet on Conhome from their latest survey:
“10% said they would “accept proportional representation as the price of a coalition deal with the Liberal Democrats.” 86% said no.”
358. Perhaps the blogosphere will force its hand ?
Guido has been dropping a lot of hints - time will tell.
353 Sir NP. Iain Dale MP ?????
359
I wonder what the % would be if it was elected Lords as the price?
362- you could suggest that as a question for the next survey, it would be interesting.
Just watching a snippet of sky news and can’t help but think that Brown and Osborne have chosen the wrong day to do speeches!
Might do that.
Anyone know about German radio comedy in WW2 ? We had ITMA, who did they have ?
Apart from Lord Haw-Haw obviously.
366 none -germans don’t have a sense of humour
350. Thanks Jack.
As the wise old man of PB (how many elections is it you’ve seen? 30?) I’ll take that analysis right now. 
352. Clare Shorts evidence has been dinamite. Talk about revenge being a dish best served cold!
The only problem I have is that once again the question has to be asked;
If she had all these doubts and she thought the way the Cabinet was being sidelined was so terrible and the way Blair was rushing to war was outrageous, why didn;t she follow Robin Cook and resign? The moment she decided to stay in the Cabinet she blew all of her credability.
Zippy making it up as he goes along on Radio2.
“We were uniquely placed to handle the recession”
You can say that again!
358 - The problem with the Mail story was that there wasn’t a story there. The report actually said that it is not known whether any of the allegaitons will actually make it into Rawnsley’s book. It merely stated that Rawnsley had asked No. 10 about them and that they had been categorically denied. Now on that basis, if Rawnsley does not have any other evidence (as opposed to unsubstantiated rumour) these allegations have nowhere to go.
Any media outlet giving them any credence right now would be insane. And that’s why none of them have.
337 from your link
“We’ll see how Mr Brown responds to this version of events when he appears before Chilcot later this month. For the time being, it’s worth mentioning that when I just put Short’s account to Number 10 sources, I got this response:
“Our response on this is our response on everything she says: It’s Clare Short. It’s a bit like ‘it’s the economy, stupid’. It’s Clare Short.”
The full interview with Jacques Chirac when he explained the French position on the second UN resolution is available here:
http://www.ina.fr/politique/politique-internationale/video/2250965001/declaration-du-president-de-la-republique-monsieur-jacques-chirac.fr.html
“Whatever the circumstances France will vote no.” Is an accurate quote, but Blair deliberately misrepresented to what France would vote no. Chirac did not oppose military force “whatever the circumstances” but he was opposed to a second resolution which would authorise the use of forse prematurely.
372. force…
I think Sky are more concerned that until the Tory deal with the electorate is sealed, they don’t want to upset Gordon, self protection against TV rights whilst GB is still in office and in a position to make life difficult.
Oh dear, BBC reporting stem cell scientists are doing a CRU - obstructing their work so others can monopolise the publications…
I wonder how many dodgy practices are going to be exposed following Climategate?
370 - Andrew Rawnsley’s book is being published on 1 March 2010. He is presumably conducting an auction for serialisation rights. Given Andrew Rawnsley’s contacts, I will bet £100 to a rusty nail that he will have enough material to keep him in tables at the Cinnamon Club and the Gay Hussar for the next five years.
St David’s Day is shaping up to be a day when ordure hits the rotating cooling object.
Did anyone else listen to Gordon’s speech?
I’m gobsmacked that he has the cheek to talk about constitutional reform blah blah
367 “A German joke is no laughing matter”.
Had the pleasure of watching a chunk of Clare Short’s evidence to Chilcott this morning. How ironic that the only Cabinet Minister to show any cullions was female.
379, hmm. Didn’t Short resign over tuition fees, and failed to do so despite threatening it over Iraq?
Also, was Robin Cook in the Cabinet? I know he was Leader of the House, but unsure if that’s Cabinet.
376 I agree, antifrank. I suspect the name McBride might come up.
380. I thought Short did resign over Iraq just really late.
I believe Cook was cabinet. Cabinet means different things really, the PM invites who they like to cabinet meetings so roles can move in and out of there rather than any hard and fast rules on the matter. But iirc he was.
380 You illustrate the dilemman, Morris.
Cook resigned and criticised ineffectually from outside the Cabinet. Short stayed in and tried to influence events and is now criticised for not resigning.
Sometimes you just can’t win.
380 MD. Cook was LotH in the Cabinet and resigned.
383 It’s a dillemma, actually. A dilleman is a male who cannot make up his mind.
383. She’s still alive though (cue X-files music…)
383 PtP. “Sometimes you just can’t win.”
You should know !!
359
I’m not sure anybody is offering Prop Rep.
Brown certainly isn’t. Be interesting to find out if the Lib/Dems are stupid enough to go for the bait. A change in the electoral system now would push further changes well into the future - festina lente…
“What I want is real swiftboating. ”
That’s exactly what is not needed, there is enough truth to lay out there for the electorate without resorting to lying. Why should Cameron lie about labour when the truth hurts so much?
Afternoon all.
Fully agree with Mike’s post. What is it with the media these days do they not know the difference between what is plausible and what is not? Or is it a case that Campbell and Co have got the delicate parts of the editors of all these newspapers firmly in their grasp thus turning them into propaganda comics.
To be honest, I really don’t see why they need to introduce such delusional fantasy into it because Cameron’s making a pretty good fist of messing this up on his own. That said of course Cameron has shown the ability to bounce back.
Again though he does seem to have closed off a number of options over the last 12 months. Losing Davis, appointing Clarke etc all seem to forewarn Cameron was moving in the wrong direction (the same direction as Brown, as it goes) and there is nothing since to prove that wrong.
Which then bring us to the polls, now I get the feeling that at least 1 pollster is going to get egg all over their faces at the GE. Now it could be the new boys Angus Reid who seem to be disregarding all prior political allegiance or it could be those whose weighting go beyond the vote shares of the last GE (Mori / Yougov) in leaning toward the Government. Alternatively it could be there has been a sea change in voting attitudes as suggested by BSAS and all the Labour favouring polls could be out. Whatever, it will be fascinating to see how much out each of the pollsters are. I get the feeling this could be 1992 or 1997 in terms of pollsters accuracy all over again.
388 - Does that really need an answer? The Lib Dems are the mackerels of the political world: dangle something sparkly on a hook and they’ll bite on it every time.
Betting Post
A crucial plank of the PfP-tim Bastard Love Child Bet has been cruelly yanked away.
Paddy Power have cut the price of Tory seats 251-300 from 10/1 to 3/1.
391 antifrank:
The Liberal Democrats say the AV option is “a small step in the right direction” but not a substitute for a fully fledged proportional system.
“If they agree it, this is a death-bed conversion from a party facing defeat at the general election,” said its home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne, confirming the party would put forward its own amendment.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8492622.stm
It must be fun to be a headline writer for a major newspaper. But personally, after reviewing the polling data, I would have written “New Poll Shows Cameron Worse Than Hitler”.
392
But have they improved the odds on any of the bands worth betting on?
395 - Have a look and do a betting post.
On topic: Can’t agree more that this headline was stretching the actuality more than anything. In fact if you look at the following questions asked they all got a negative (figures from Table 7, Pages 23/24):
The Labour Government can rightly take the credit for getting Britain out of recession
Agree: 37%, Disagree: 59%
The recession would have ended sooner if the Conservatives had been in power
Agree: 24%, Disagree: 69%
I trust Gordon Brown more than David Cameron to help Britain’s economy to recover
Agree: 40%, Disagree: 52%
So you could easily argue that a headline of “Vote of no confidence in Government’s Recession Handling” or “Conservatives would not have made the recession any better” or “Gordon Brown not trusted on recovery”….
385
and that makes a dilletante..?
394. Didn’t moll Flanders have a headline yesterday, on the lines that Cameron was as honest as Nixon?
393 - Rick Stein would have them nestling on a bed of samphire by now.
Apologies if already posted but the graph heading this blog is truly scary. How on earth did we end up up there when everone else bar Japan is right down the bottom? Frightening!
http://order-order.com/2010/02/02/through-the-looking-glass-economics/#comments
If Schumie’s neck is bad, Rosberg’s price becomes very nice as the team will throw their weight behind their other main driver.
I’m putting early money on Rosberg, Button and Massa.
Not a lot. As others are saying, this is all very early and rumour but those prices look large at the moment.
My one main thought from the Chilcott enquiries is:
How many hundreds of our soldiers would not have been killed or left maimed if only the orders for equipment had been placed earlier?
Labour MPs have a lot to answer for.
399, aye.
The BBC needs culling. Come the defeat of Brown, should you read a strange story about enormous land-walking fish invading Television Centre, do not be alarmed.
402, what odds did you get for Rosberg and Massa?
I got 14 and 17 respectively (the former price was pre-Schumacher).
I think you’re right… probably. I think the 3rd Mercedes driver is Nick Heidfeld. He’s a bit overlooked, but I’d say he’s capable of giving Rosberg a run for his money.
Betting Post
For those who suggested Gareth Barry as a good 20/1 shot for England captain at the World Cup, Skybet have the following. The 22/1 bar price looks fabulous. If Fabio wants to go for someone squeaky clean, none of the named options are in the running.
Having said that, John Terry the shameless s0d looks to be determined to stick it out and he might well be able to.
Terry J 8/11 Lampard F 14/1
Gerrard S 5/2 Beckham D 14/1
Rooney W 6/1 Any Other 22/1
Ferdinand R 10/1
376 I surmised at the weekend that The Sunday Times had beaten the MoS to the serialisation rights for Rawnsley’s new book and the piece in the MoS was simply intended as a spoiler.
Conversely, of course, it may have been by way of a taster.
I have no idea what the going rate is for such a tome, perfectly timed as is the case here….. perhaps £80K-£100K, maybe more if there is serious competition between deep-pocketed newpapers.
No sign as yet of the Budget date being announced. Does this have any possible significance in terms of the GE timing? I suppose once such announcement has been made, the Gov’t is more or less committed to it. On the other hand, if no such announcement is made before say mid February, could Brown still be keeping his options open?
Any polls expected tonight?
405 - I have 18 on Rosberg and 12 on Massa.
Button seems to have drifted to 15. I only got him at 12 too so I am thinking of adding some more but the size of the drift concerns me. I always assume someone knows a lot more than me on F1
I’m certainly no expert other than having watched most GPs of the last 20 years.
394 “New Poll Shows Cameron Worse Than Hitler”
Well, certainly worse than Saddam. No WAY is he going to get 100% of the vote…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2331951.stm
Pressure mounts to phase out Internet Explorer 6
A Downing Street petition is calling for the UK government to drop Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 6 (IE6) and move to a more modern browser.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8492862.stm
Could this explain Gordo’s rage issues? If I had to use that piece of c##p to surf the web everyday I might end up at the very least throwing the odd Nokia!
406. unless i’ve missed something Lampard is fairly squeeky clean isn’t he? 14s is perhaps slight value of those odds (I can’t see Barry myself, as you couldn’t say he’s an absolute definite starter IMO), though their would be the issue then about how Gerrard would react to that appointment (and Gerrard and Rooney are also pally).
“I’ve said before Fraser Nelson must be Frazer, though Bob Sykes (it’s going to be a disaster) is probably Pb.com’s closest”
Ha! We’re all dooooomed to another term of Gordon Brown.
You can laugh, but if Labour hasn’t drawn level by polling day, I wouldn’t rule out Cammo and Osborne appearing together at a rally, geeing up the crowd with a few ‘Well alright!’s.
On current form, anyway…
393 Don’t know what happened there - 393 is for S&S at 377
401 - I’m guessing that’s mainly the unfunded public sector pension liabilities doing the damage, there, BF.
405 - I’ve also taken a very small punt (£3) on Adrian Sutil. He might be driving a milk float but until that is certain, I think 250 or higher is nice to take.
407 - I agree with your weekend surmising. It explains why News International completely ignored the story and why the Mail on Sunday would splash a secondhand story.
What is happening with a by-election for the Labour MP that died around Christmas time? Is Gordo just going to ignore it all the way to the GE?
408 - JSFL - Anthony Wells’ thinks there was a Populus in the field at the weekend, but no details came out last night (I believe The Times normally publish on a Tuesday)…
Even more weird - what is happening to the numbers? Will someone please nail them down?!!?
406 David Roe
Isn’t there an Etonian that can be appointed captain?
With Dave as PM and Prince William as FA President, it would be a natural extension of the new world order.
Can Jacob Rees-Mogg kick a ball?
409, don’t think Button’s even tested yet. It does piss me off when I back someone and then their odds instantly lengthen.
416, on Sutil, I suspect you’re wasting your money, though can’t be sure, obviously. With 4 teams expected to be competitive and maybe BMW Sauber as well, Force India are going to have a real fight to score another podium this season.
412 - Lampard, squeaky clean? Cough, splutter, cough,
http://www.ogpaper.com/news/news-0701.html
412 - He’s probably never done anything actually wrong but Google is your friend. Cyprus is a lovely place.
424 - Oh yes, nearly forgot about that holiday with Kieron Dyer.
Tory Seats, Ladbrokes.
250-274 16/1
275-299 12/1
I’m sure Shadsy would like punters topping up his pension funds on those bands.
412 - Google Frank Lampard John Terry 9/11
410- Are you reading this, Mr. Cameron? Saddam Hussein, there was a guy who knew how to seal the deal.
re Terry. I spoke to a sports journo yesterday at a Sunday broadsheet (not over foie gras in the French Riviera Roger style..) and his view was that Capello would see the effect on the other players before deciding but that they already (senior players) thought JT was a tw@t.
413.
” a few ‘Well alright!’s.”
These would be a few cast-off WaGs donated by Premiership footballers supporting their cause of putting even more money in the pockets of those who have the most?
429, am I the only one hoping Capello informs Terry he’s fired by means of a horse’s head in his bed?
I must be missing something, but “young man with great body and lots of money has good, if sometimes immoral, sex life” doesn’t immediately seem to be something that would automatically bar all candidates with that history from the England captaincy. John Terry is in a slightly different category because his activities are disruptive of team morale.
I don’t see Fabio Capello choosing a captain just because he was squeaky clean. I expect that he would take the Clemens Westerhof approach:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clemens_Westerhof#Quotes
Frank Lampard looks like a fair bet to me.
406.
“John Terry the shameless s0d looks to be determined to stick it out”
Too much sticking it out seems to be the source of his problems. But if he looks to the Goldsmith model it may not do him any harm in the long run.
429 - Yes, I think even a jury of twelve footballers would find that John Terry is tw@t.
With Walcott having seemingly played himself out of the England team, I wonder if David Beckham might end up with the armband for the World Cup as FC could just go with the old Italian approach of giving it to the man with most caps…
If Aaron Lennon has a few bad games it might come down to that.
431 - The horse would still outpace him.
432 - There’s far more to it that that if you can be bothered googling.
431.
Your message might not get through due to Capello’s struggling diction:
“Chay ham harranging for you to be givin the whoreses chead tonight!”
Hmm - familiar ?
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5746638/browns-empty-pr-promise.thtml
“Debates about electoral reform are rather strange. A very small number of very passionate people can talk for hours about the minutiae of different electoral systems and how they can radically change politics. Yet the question is rarely asked whether or not it would have much impact”
Avatar and Hurt Locker both get 9 Oscar nominations. This could be an interesting one…
406 David - should Terry lose lose the England captaincy which I think is likely - Capello may look weak if he doesn’t act. I rate Rooney as the value bet in the list at 6/1 who captained the side in a recent International. Having grown up considerably since he got married, he would be a schrewd choice by Capello until the end of the World Cup tournament. Becks is too old, plays in Italy and is not guaranteed his place. Gerrard has had his own scrapes as has Ferdinand, I’m not sure Lampard has sufficient empathy with the other players.
Barry is a good spot by you as ANO, at a big price and he’s well worth a pint of Speckled Hen imho.
Just looked into the background of Gordon’s AV proposal - I’m flabbergasted to see that he’s actually suggesting it will be in place before the GE.
What on earth can he be thinking? There’s all sorts of arguments against AV which I’m sure most on here are aware of, but the one which should be uppermost in Gordon’s mind is that it punishes unpopular governments. It’s pretty much the only system which will be worse for Labour right now that FPTP.
Make no mistake, the tactical voting at the GE will be anti-Labour - the forced choice questions on the opinion polls bear this out.
Gordon is still working in a world where everyone’s first choice is to stop the Tories. This has been Fordon’s driving political instinct since he became PM and it seems that he believes that everyone else feels the same.
Not only that, but such a transparent attempt to change the rules at the last minute isn’t really going to reflect too well on the Labour Party - whether it gets introduced or not.
AV is a lose-lose situation for Labour. One of Gordon’s worst tactical moves since abolishing the 20p tax rate.
440 - I concur with you re Rooney so I’m following my initial tip with a similar sized bet on Rooney at 6s.
Labour the party of tax cuts ?
” Lord Myners, the City minister, admitted that many rich Britons would dodge the 50p rate, while some people would simply leave the country.
The Treasury minister said he wanted to scrap the new tax rate as soon as possible. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7131255/Spending-cuts-not-tax-rises-Treasury-officials-urge-ministers.html
I said yesterday if I was betting I’d put money on Gerrard. He’s the obvious next in line. I would consider a saver on Rooney as Capello seems to like him.
Watching Brown’s cross-examination by the Parliamentary Liaison Committee.
Could someone explain to me why the Hansard stenographers are wearing seat-belts?
106.
“Any move on the seat spread today?”
Eric P’s pantaloons are bearing up well under the strain.
419 As long as I can remember, Populus voting intention surveys appear on Tuesdays. It may have been a non-voting intention survey.
brown just claimed he cut spending in 97/98 hmmm lies again gordon it was tory spending plans not yours
From the archives:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/labour-to-back-pr-for-insultingly-obvious-reasons-200905261782/
When playing cards you do not show your hand around the table. Labour want George to show his hand, but I would like him to wait till the TV debates, and then hit them with it.
It will leave the Labour party to have shown their hand, and then lay your cards on the table.
Heard some of Gordon Brown’s speech on Constitutional reform. It was the same speech he gave shortly after becoming PM, same promises as yet undelivered, with addition of AV and references to the expenses debacle. A Gordon Brown relaunch is composed of the same elements as it was in 2007.
He even promised a follow up speech on Liberty, which is apparently close to his heart, as he had done before. Yet again we heard of a written constitution, of a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities etc.
Much of the text was built up from phrases he uses regularly, to the extent I wondered if there was a Gordon Speech Word Template set up on his PC (or that of his speechwriter) with whole paragraphs waiting for a few changes to move it from a speech on reform of banks to reform of voting to reform of education or announcing broadband for free.
Noted it has dropped off the front page on BBCi as it wasn’t really news, just deja vu. Do wonder how lazy or ill read reporters are that they never pick up the re-announcement of re-announcements.
441&451 How on earth could Brown possibly force through AV with only two months of Parliamentary time remaining, based on an early May GE.
If there’s any Gov’t measure which must surely absolutely require the electorate’s consent before being introduced, it is surely constitutional reform. It would be an outrage were Brown to attempt such a stunt in the dying weeks of his administration.
Re Thread - sometimes it’s genuinely tricky to know what the Conservatives can do. If they took a harder line on the economy the Independent (and quite probably the BBC) would be screaming “Tory Cuts” from the front page. Yet they don’t seem to be scrutinising the party that is actually in Govt and created the problem! Some have suggested that the Conservatives should go on the attack more so that it’s Labour who have to defend their position and the media have some beef to report. Then of course others argued in the past, including parts of the media, that Conservatives were bullying and attacking the Govt and not putting forward their position. Tricky call.