ICM - Labour Lead down to 3%
February 21st, 2005
-
Is Howard’s campaigning having an impact?
The February ICM poll in the Guardian tomorrow shows that Labour’s lead has dropped to 3%. The vote shares with changes on the same poll last month are: LAB 37 (-3) : CON 34 (+3) : LD 21 (n/c).
For the Tories this is the best position with ICM since March last year and suggests that Michael Howard’s high-profile initiatives on crime and immigration are making an impact.
For Labour the poll will be a big disappointment because it is the first full survey since the the party cranked up the campaigning ten days ago with six-stop helicopter tour, the pledge card launch, Labour’s spring conference and Tony Blair’s high profile day on Channel 5.
For the Lib Dems the 21% share will be a great relief as it follows the Populus and NOP surveys earlier in the month which had Charles Kennedy’s party at 18%.
Although a 37-34 split would give Tony Blair a very substantial majority on a uniform national swing they are starting to get into the range where the outcome could be less certain. Using the Martin Baxter calculator with a 2% tactical unwind factor and you get LAB 356: CON 206: LD 54 - a Labour majority of 64.
ICM is probably the most market-sensitive of the pollsters and there is little doubt that this will have a big impact on the spread-betting markets where we expect Labour to drop and the Tories to rise.
Surveying for the ICM poll took place before the announcement of the Tory council tax plan for over-65s. The next major poll should be YouGov in the Telegraph on Friday. The last YG poll had Labour just 1% ahead.
IG Index spread prices: LAB 354-361 : CON 191-198: LDs 68 -72 .
Spreadfair prices: LAB 355.9-360 : CON 191.2-194.7 : LDs 68 -70
When comparing spreads remember that with Spreadfair you pay a commission on any profit. If you are opening a spread-betting account please use the link and mention Politicalbetting. We get a commission which helps defray some of the costs of keeping the site going.
© Mike Smithson 2005
MessageSpace Advertising
This is interesting and possibly significant.
The figures resemble figures I can only recall sering in a yougov poll in recent months
Will be very interesting to see how the council tax announcement affects this weeks further polls.
My buy bet on the Tories to exceed 197 is now looking good. At last we are seeing some movement as a result of a higher profile from MH and launching policies without other world events stealing the headlines. Locally in Angus the recognition of our candidate on the doorstep is higher than the sitting MP. And we haven’t even started our campaign(in earnest)!!
Looks like Labour and the Lib/Dems haven’t moved much. The Tories must have picked some ‘don’t know’s’ and some UKIP/BNP voters.
According to the ICM website last months Guardian poll has Labour on 38 and the Tories on 31. The Lib/Dems were on 21.
Very interesting poll. First time for a while the Tories have been close to labour in a poll apart from You Gov. No doubt MH has been v.effective in colonising the news agenda and producing clever policies. Policy for reductions on council tax for the pensioners is particulary clever as many of the seats with a large number of pensioners are marginals.
However key question is can he sustain it and what happens when inevitably he has a period when the party is out of the news? Talking about CK the problem for the Lib Dems is that in a sense they have already got their big policies in place (50% top rate tax, axe tuition fees, axe council tax, against Iraq etc). News media does not like to rehash old stuff. He will to think of something different to get on the news soon. Perhaps he should set out Lib Dem spending plans?
#5 - You sure that would be a good plan? He could end up loosing a lot of voters if he sets those out!
Andrew at 5; Ed Davey said last night on R4 that vince cable would be announcing them this week I think.
The Hill & Knowlton Election Calculator 2001 gives labour 348 seats with this figure (L37, C34, LD 21, WN 0.2, SN 2 OTH 5.8)
Subbtract 12 seats from Labour due to the Scotland changes and that gives labour 336 seats, a very 1992ish majority of 26
RE 6: Quite, I look forward to Lib Dem spending plans that as usual spend money everywhere and have to find numerous taxes to pay for them.
The last ICM poll was actually 37/32/21 (taken for the S Telegraph a bit after the last one they did for the Guardian), so a relatively small movement compared with that - the last Guardian poll was one of those up-blips. But it’s obviously encouraging for the Tories.
Nick
Nick 10. Fair point - the last ICM poll - in the S. Telegraph - was Lab 37: CON 32: LD 21. I was rushing to get the story out and just took the news agency report.
The Tories have not been above 32% with ICM since August and they’ve not been at 35% since March last year.
I’m very surprised by the poll because I shared your view that Labour was having a good time of it. What we are seeing, I think, is the highly focussed Lynton Crosby effect for Howard.
What’s YG going to have on Friday? My bet is that they’ll be level-pegging on 34% each.
Very different to NOP last week with a 12 point Labour lead.
Maybe the Blair media blitz either peaked too early or backfired as Blair is an electoral liability.
The theory was that Blair could do all the TV chat shows and his charisma would give a pre-election campaign boost.
Maybe Campbell over-estimated what most British people think of Tony Blair: that he’s a phony.
Now in the interest of fair play, Michael Howard has a chance to get on all those TV shows Blair has been on, but nearer to the election!
Whilst this is good news lets not get too excited over one poll (1 & 2)! I much prefer to view polls over a cycle.
Re 10 and 11 - Mike you are correct to compare this poll with the last in the Guardian monthly series. THere is always the possibilty that with different papers commissioning a poll there is some slight variation in question or combination of questions. The same company sometimes produces quite different results for different customers - I think YouGov has been guilty of this occasionally.
It will be interesting to see Friday’s poll. I would guess at a 1-2% Conservative lead!
Interesting, looking at my election poll calculator (which adjusts the polls according to their 2001 accuracy - or lack of) I get YG and MORI with Labour and the Tories in a virtual dead heat (Lab leads of 0.19 and 0.27 respectively), ICM with a Labour lead of just over 1% and NOP with a Labour lead of 4.53. My money (for what its worth) is for an actual Labour lead between ICM and NOP - though I’m obviously biased! It is interesting about the divergence though since my adjustments should eliminate it - what’s certain is that if this continues some pollster is going to be left with egg on their faces.
I just don’t buy into this masochistic strategy that Blair is using. They say it’s inspired by what he did in the run up to the war. Well that wasn’t exactly a roaring success. And at least there it could be seen as penance for taking an unpopular decision. I’m not sure someone who wants to advertise how well he’s run the country should be parading himself taking a kicking from members of the public. If anything it will cause people to question the dodgy statistics showing how well things are going when they seem to contradict individuals experiences.
Rik - there is a very slight methodological difference between the polls. The ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph was carried out as part of an ICM Omnibus. The ICM poll for the Guardian is carried out separately. The main difference is that Omnibus polls are weighted by the age respondents completed their education, the ICM/Guardian poll is apparantly not.
If you look at the weightings of the two polls, the result of this seems to be that the sample for the ICM/Sunday Telegraph poll is more highly educated that the sample for the ICM/Guardian poll! Other than that, the methodologies seem to be identical.
I await Grahams predictable dismaissal….
dismissal, even
We’ve had two weeks of practically wall to wall Tory policy announcements - and they’re still in the ‘box’.
The Labour 12% leads were a function of their timing - over the weekend of the Labour love in - sorry ’spring conference’.
I agree with Rik - let’s see what happens over the cycle - one assumes there are Labour and (possibly) Lib Dem initiatives (it would be a first
) coming up - so we can get a real feel for the ’settled’ situation.
This phoney war reminds me of the conference season - only with a few more polls and a little less right to reply.
I think the only change is that Labour have probably ratcheded up a point or two at the expense of the Lib Dems - so they’re on 36-37%, the Tories have crept up at the expense of the Eurosceptic right to 33-34% - leving the Lib Dems on 19-21.
Game on as Sid Wadell would say.
Just suppose You Gov had the Tories making up ground too or even pulling ahead: the wheels would have finally fallen off the Labour bandwagon before the next race has even started.
20 - maybe a bit premature Printz!
But isn’t there effectively just one polling cycle left before a May 5th election is called? If the ICM ‘trend’ is indeed confirmed by YouGov and then Populus, commencing an election campaign with a meagre 3-4% advantage seems quite a risky proposition. Ho, ho, ho, might we truckin’ along until October? I guess a UN peacekeeping force will have to be despatched to Voter 2005! Or the SAS….
Another interesting aspect of the Poll is that respect (not popularity) for Howard is growing. 45% see him as an asset to his party against 35% against. Interestingly though so is respect for Brown especially amongst Tory voters! As for waiting, it is too risky to wait. There is no real benefit to be gained from waiting till autumn or next year. You only wait if you are behind in the polls, or if the economy is in a slump. Also the longer he waits the more labour seats become at risk as the increasingly professional liberal and conservative campaigns keep on leafletting and canvassing.
In general though I think TB is lacking a vision for a third term. There are no really exciting policies to get worked up upon. Going on TV a lot as an opposition leader is fine as voters need to get to know you, as a PM it should be done more sparingly. Voters expect a PM to exude gravitas and statesmanship and appearing on TOTP and the Wright Show does not exactly symbolise this.
However labour’s announcements on education later this week, give them a good chance to shift the agenda onto their territory in arguably their strongest area.
For a Government supposedly standing on its record in office, to be running an election campaign on the basis of the opposition’s records in Government 10 years ago and effectively advocating tactical voting (TV!) isn’t exactly a positive vision for the future either!
Andrew is probably right, but when was the last occasion when a PM chose (as opposed to the Parliamentary term expiring as in 1964, 92 and 97)to call an election with such a slender lead? Possibly Heath in Feb 74…and look what happened to him! Of course, the electoral system is so skewed in Labour’s favour that this is far less important at present. But oh that hubris might be followed by memesis….
Exactly. Mrs T realised this and promised quite a radical set of policies for her third term (even if some should have been left on the shelf). There were major reforms to education (with the national curriculum and GM schools), the Internal Market (in the NHS), more privitisations, the Poll Tax (oh dear!), and more tax cuts.
You can’t really say the same for TB. His ideas about Housing Associations and Child Care are fine, but not eye catching. If if were TB I would think about following through on Lords Reform, upgrading the Assembly in Wales to a Parliament, create some new policies around the green agenda (such as road pricing). Whack in reform to the council tax, cuts on business rates and you have an interesting programme.
The key point is, as noted, that the system is in Blair’s favour, and even if it ends up neck and neck with the tories on may 5th he’ll still rock up a hundred MP majority. The longer he leaves it the longer the tactical voting messages (that we are already seeing) have to sink into people’s minds, and the more chance there is of something going pear-shaped.
21 - What I mean, to elaborate, is that Blair’s always been ahead apart from blips for post-war blues and fuel protests. Blair kicks off the unofficial campaign by doing talk shows and he falls behind. IF that happens they may have to scratch their heads and reassess their entire campaign strategy because that would show Blair is a liability. The attacks planned on Howard to remind voters of his past may not be as wise.
If I was Tory campaign director I would go for a mainly positive campaign as they have some popular policies, but I would have a poster campaign that asked voters to judge the character of Blair by the people he choses as friends (who he awards after they are disgraced) for example Campbell, Mandelson and Scarlet. This would attack Blair’s integrity and remind voters of the alleged lies and Iraqi dodgy dossiers. Maybe Campbell and Blair together in a loving embrace with the caption: “Who really runs Labour?” or “Whatever happened to NEW Labour?”
In February 2001 ICM had the Labour lead at 15%, Mori had 20% and Gallup had 21%.
In March 2001 - it was Gallup 26%, NOP 20%, Mori 19% but ICM had 9% which is what it finished up at the election.
# 27 - The majority, if the two main parties were to be neck and neck, would be in the range of 40 - 50 MPs.
Andy 17. Here comes my predictable ‘dismaissal’
, although it isn’t going to be a ‘dismaissal’, but a reasoned argument for all the punters out there!
I am basing this on a couple of assumptions that I cannot authenticate at the moment because ICM don’t seem to have put up their figures right now - or am I being stupid - anyway. Shall I begin…
If ICM affect the betting, wait until Labour comes down somewhat and then pile in with a big buy. This poll is reasonable for the Conservatives, but still sees them trailing Labour (and sorry Mike - must also point out the last ICM in the Guardian had Labour on 38, so their drop is statistically insignificant).That is because they have still only appeared to have activated their core vote. Conservative voters are ready to go to the voting booths now. This was also the case in 2001, when the Conservatives were hitting between 33% and 35% in ICM polls between Jan and May. What is clear when you look at the polling / voting evidence for the last few years is that the Conservatives have a core of around 31-32% of the vote, and can put on 1 to 2% with a sustained burst aimed at some specific touchstone areas (i.e. immigration, crime, Europe). What they haven’t done is convince the broader electorate that the economy will be better off in their hands, hence the lack of shift above and beyond that zone.
Therefore, in this ‘phoney war’ situation the Tories can rev up their voters by making an announcement on screening immigrants for TB and excite a particular segment of the electorate, but when they launch their spending plans they do not budge the dial (it is noticeable that the Conservatives’ best poll weeks have come after an immigration announcement).
This gives them a problem going into the campaign proper as it is probably going to be kicked off with a Big Bonanza Gordon Giveaway that will be used to focus the minds by Labour on their greatest current asset - Gordon Brown’s perceived management of the economy. (to TB’s chagrin we assume - as an aside is that the subliminal message of screening immigrants for TB?)
Anyway, the economic voters are going to weigh up their options and a good number of them will come down, in the ‘heat of battle’, on the side of the Chancellor. The Conservative vote will most likely stay in the 32 to 33% box that they achieved last time.
The real interest comes back to how the Lib / Lab vote splits. That one appears to be harder to predict. Lib Dem support in the last couple of months seems to have varied between 18% and 24%, and Labour between 34% and 42%. I am not sure we are going to get a clear indication vote is going to divide until the campaign its self. However, at the moment you would probably guess that it will split evenly, giving Labour 38% ish and the Lib Dems 21% ish. Leaving Labour with another fairly hefty majority.
Before everyone gets too excited it’s worth remembering that this is just one poll taken at a time of unprecedented publicity for the Conservatives. If my meemories right as an election gets close people do some serious thinking and usually swing towards the government party. They also stop worrying about the fad of the moment and make their decision based on the ecconomy. If I’m right Labour won’t be too worried about the polls converging. Their big worry will still be their supporters either going to the Lib/Dems as a protest or staying at home for the same reason. They also have the most impressive vote making machine around and I’m sure they’ll be aware of not peaking too early. And of course if all else fails,the budget.
It’s worth reading this written 20 days ago.I know 20 days is a long time in politics. But a single poll is just that!
Click this
[Roger I’ve put a proper link in - MS]
32- yes they always have the economy, but some not good news come from there too.
Apparently Brown is set to miss his economic growth target.
Click this
It seems that neither of our links work, Andrew. Must be something to do with the Guardian.
YOu have to highlight and paste them - it is the double comma that mucks it up!
Graham 31. I buy most of your argument except this - how do you account for the Tory ratings of 38-40% with YouGov from January-May 2004? That big number dissolved when UKIP came on the scene at the end of May and since then the Tories have been in the low 30s in almost all the polls.
Now that Howard is squeezing the UKIP/BNP support might we not see a return to those figures of last year - certainly from YG?
I should say that at the moment I am not betting on anything because I simply cannot read it.
OTOH last week’s figures on the public sector finances were considerably beyond expectations with the Treasury’s coffers boosted by much higher than expected corporate tax receipts, plus changing the rules (what a coincidence!) on how certain public expenditure is treated. These means that Brown has a little bit extra room to manouvre in the budget, but nothing like sufficient to produce a “Big Bonanza Gordon Giveaway” as argued by Graham.
I’m certainly not contending that the economy is anything other than a major plus for Labour (which is why I believe they will be re-elected). But the Conservatives do have an opening for their “third term tax rises” campaign which almost all the commentators I’ve seen still predict will have to happen.
The most alarming feature of the ICM poll is that 48% of those polled had never heard of Oliver Letwin. Which suggests that nearly half of those saying they are going to vote Conservative don’t know their own Shadoiw Chancellor. This really shows that public sector finances mentioned by John O might mean something on this board it’s not going to influence an election. Big brush strokes are what will be noticed and this has to be easier for the governing party than for an opposition.
More to the point Mike. This fell in line with MH’s personal ratings. These haven’t improved significantly subsequently.
The most important lesson to learn from this is to never ever under-estimate the Tories at General Elections.
It is quite obvious that while the liberal left sleep and toy with alternative voting options to labour-the tories can rely on around 33% supporting them no matter what - allowing them to focus their resources specifically on floating voters.
They have sent out at least two direct mails in recent months (not including direct mails last june), one containing postal vote ballots, to this category of voter they have identified. Along with telephone canvassing. And they have focused their campaign on specific issues like immigration that particularly resonate with middle england floating voters.
I expect more of the same “dog whistle” politics in the coming months to floating voters, whilst using national policy anouncements to try to pull over sections of the public they know consistantly vote- e.g. pensioners.
Very subtle and clever strategy. Its got Lynton Crosby’s finger prints all over it.
Graham 39. Today’s ICM poll has a 45:35 split that Howard will be an asset to his party during the campaign. The same question re Blair gets 45:43 while Kennedy gets 57:23.
Interestingly old people are the less they think that Tony Blair is an asset and there’s much stronger support for him amongst men than women.
With Howard the view does not change much across the age ranges and there is not the same gender difference.
Kennedy is slightly less liked by women than men.
Full details of the poll are now at
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2005/02/22/GuardianFeb05.pdf
It’s true that this poll comes after a sustained bout of publicity, however there is perhaps an interesting point to be made (aside from the important figures for Howard). We are led to believe that a large part of Labour’s strategy will be attacking the Conservative’s record. If this poll shows that the Conservatives have the potential to draw in supporters with some of their policies (don’t forget that they made quite big announcements on health this week and the pensioners promise probably hasn’t been factored in yet - although that is bound to be matched by Labour in some way) then one has to question how well this will work. Labour’s strategy seems to assume that a close examination of Tory policies will scare voters off, maybe these are the first signs that this is not true.
What will decide the election, as other posters have mentioned, is the economy. At present, there are some policies that the voters find attractive with the Tories, but the change will only come if/when there is a feeling of “time for a change”.
My view is that point will only come if there is economic bad bews on the way, which is why the Budget will be the key indicator to watch.
I don’t understand why ICM ask questions such as who will be an asset to their party Blair, Howard or kennedy. Surely a more interesting and relevant one would be “Who would make the better Prime Minister”? It would then be an even playing field. If someone asked me whether Howard was an asset to the Tory party I would probably shrug and say yes. An asset compared to whom? And as a tactical anti-Tory voter who loathes MH I would have to add that he’s also Labour’s greatest asset.
As a Tory activist I’ve always assumed that the more publicity that the leadership / parliamentary party get the worse we actually tend to do on the ground (hangover from the 1990s etc). However we have had a lot of publicity in the past few weeks and this does not seem to be happening this time.
It does however seem that Tony Blair and co. are now facing the same problem (and is recognised on the ground by the lack of Tony in Labour’s leaflets etc.)
Is this a sign of the start of a permanent shift?
Stephen 45. This is just one poll and it goes against the trend of recent other polls from Mori, NOP, Populus and CR. We need to see other surveys from a range of pollsters before we can draw any conclusions.
For me the stability of the Lib Dems is a major factor and this is why Labour’s figure was lower. The two parties usually get 57-61% between them with support toggling between the two.
5 - Andrew, you’ve hit the nail on the head. As a Lib Dem its frustrating to see MH on the news nearly every day, but that’s because they’ve chosen to drip-feed their policies out to the punters. A smart move, it would seem.
You are also correct in that Lib Dem policies are now all fixed and as a result the media do not tend to look at them in the same way.
Only when the campaign propoer kicks off will the Lib Dems’ policies get a propoer airing in relation to those of the other two.
I see that Milburn had a liability-asset deficit compared with Brown who came out brilliantly.
Milburn, of course, is the man responsible for Labour’s inept campaign start and this poll should be used to get rid of him as soon as possible. How much more Labour support is Milburn going to squander? His problem is the massive gap between his perception of how clever he is and the reality.
Keep the Tories out - sack Milburn!
He is the Tory secret weapon not that Crosby guy.
46 - Mike, your point about LibDem stability is a good one. I noticed last night that this is the fifth consecutive poll by ICM where the LibDems have been at 21%; the LibDem rating has been more volatile on ICM polls previously, so maybe the vote base - including tactical voters - is firming up.
Interesting poll……Plaid/SNp on 4% ……happy times:)
I love the tories…it turns out there new Council Tax proposals will not apply in Wales!…..
#50 - Thats because you control local taxation, or do you want that control to be taken back by Westminster?
Very encouraging. But, it’s only one poll, so let’s see how the others turn out.
Cymru Mark - that’s the price of devolved government that you lot were agitating for throughout the 80s and 90s - Do you not agree with it now?g
Am I not right in thinking that any increase in Government subsidy to enable local council tax cuts will automatically (under the Barnett formula) have to be given to Scotland and Wales as well? Or are they going to do it by reducing the requirement of local councils to spend money on certain central government projects?
Stephen [45] - yes, indeed. I am a believer in looking above the minutiae of policy announcements and looking for the big story - “where’s the beef?” as someone once said. And surely that is Blair himself - an incomparable asset in 2001, damaged goods this time around. The secret that opposition parties and journalists should be moving heaven and earth to uncover is this: how many Labour MPs and candidates want Blair in their constituency this time compared to four years ago?
Re. Gragam 31.- What is probably more important in seat numbers is not how the Labour/Lib vote in percentage terms but how it splits geographically and in particular the extent of anti Tory tactical voting.
In terms of exposure Blair is a liability it is noticeable that some of the best Labour polling figures came after sustained coverage of Gordon Brown hopefully the budget can produce a similar lift.
Sorry to break up the Conservative party (not the whole thing, that’s Ken Clarke’s job). In a role I am unaccustomed to (as Andy pointed out at 17) could I point out that assuming that the GE is May 5th, then at this time in 2001 ICM had the Conservative Party on 35% and 34%, with the other pollsters putting them on 31 / 32 - sound like a familiar situation? The Conservative Party ended the piece on 32.7%.
Lets get this all in perspective. The Tories figure has swung between 30 and 34% in all the polls since January. The Lib Dems have swung between 18 and 24% and Labour 34% and 42%. If we take the mid point for all three we get C32 Lab 38 LD 22. I think that until we get 3 or 4 polls in a row that show a different trend, those should be about our bases.
On a personal note - It makes me laugh that all sides always love the poll that looks good for them and slag off the poll that undermines their cause. I was particularly heartened by the warmer response from the Conservatives for the last South West Poll. Will my popularity continue??
Very simply Graham - No! Funny how you airbrush out Labour’s 47% rating on ICM at this stage before the 2001 GE. Inconvenient for your hypothesis eh?
Graham, Your popularity is only rivalled by that of Sarah J whom all will welcome back to our male, clubbish, banter-infested deliberations. She gives a steel heart and moral fibre to some of us soggy and sometimes uncertain souls who still march haphazardly under the Mighty Blue Banner. Now I’m off to the pub for lunch-time tinctures!
IA[55] - I agree, however it is all the small policy announcements that (as a whole) add up to provide the big story. These small announcements need to be coherant, sensible and viable, and if you have enough of them they add up top a big story which is coherant, sensible & viable. For the 1st time for 10/15 years the Tory party is starting to understand this. Whilst non-Tories may not agree with the Tory party’s story it is much better for us to have one than be in ‘Billy bandwagon’ mode as we appeared to be prior to 2001.
57, 58 - have “we” agreed wether “last time” equals the same month as this time, or a month later than this time (because the last election was in June not May)?
Sarah J - I don’t think anyone disputes that the pollsters overstate Labour support. The question is by how much.
59 - I thought the days of the 3-hours City Lunch were long gone?
lol at Graham’s interpretation of the comparable polling evidence
Dead Ringer 48. Interesting how perceptions of politicians are made. I don’t think I’ve seen Alan Milburn since he came back as election coordinator but my perception-that he’s insincere, lightweight and not to be trusted-seems to be shared by the ICM poll. And when you consider 48% of the poll have never even heard of Oliver Letwin it shows how strong Milburns odour must be!
Not at the Badger’s Rest in leafy Oatland Chase it ain’t
Ah - you’re spending a week out of Town
Do you feel suitably be-backboned by the reappearance of ms J?
In a very real way I do. So much so that I may now actually get round to delivering the few remaining ‘In Touches’ that are adorning the drawing room. Or better still, I’ll ask the butler….
Don’t forget zebidee has returned to our side… not just us fainthearts holding the fort anymore
68 was re 66.
67 - Rab can always be relied on!
Sarah. I am not airbrushing anything. Did I say that Labour are on 47%? No, I don’t think so. Did I say that they are between 34 and 42% - taking a mid point of 38% - Oh yes I did. Did I make any prediction of seats? No I don’t think so - I leave that to the seat predictors. I merely pointed out that the Conservative poll ratings remains almost identical to 2001. The majority (all) of the loss for Labour from that period - as Mike Smithson regularly points out - has gone to the Liberal Democrats who are currently standing around 8 points(ish) higher than 2001 with Labour 10 points(ish) lower. This is still the significant shift from 2001 Sarah, so if /until the Conservatives break out beyond this range for a significant period we all have to accept that that is the range their vote is in. Even you Sarah!
Innocent at 55: Can’t speak for anyone else, but I’ve asked for both Blair and Brown, among others. I see the Tories are repenting their “vote Blair, get Brown” message. OK, vote Labour and get *two* first-class leaders, all right? I speak as someone who counts Oliver Letwin as a personal friend - I invited him to my wedding and we nearly wrote a book together. But objectively I think Blair+Brown vs Howard+Letwin and Kennedy+Cable is really quite a good deal as far most voters go.
Incidentally, for you betting types out there, it does strike me that the 100-1+ odds on the election being held in post-September periods (about 40-1 against any post-September date if you combine) are really quite generous. I do expect a May 5 election, as I think we all do, but are you *that* sure?
Next YouGov poll: Mike’s level pegging prediction sounds about right to me, maybe +/-2%. I’m not sure how seriously to take them, but they don’t seem very volatile.
Nick
I’m not in any way assuming a huge Tory revival from one poll - would that I would like to. However, I think it speaks volumes of Labour’s “tin ear” campaign that launching a Pledge Card, a Spring Conference and the “Cross Country His Toniness Touching Down from Budgie the Helicopter to Let the Plebs touch the hem of his Cloth” strategy has completely bombed. What long term affect this will have I don’t know. My hunch is that even tax cuts in the Budget will fail to take Labour over 37/38% as we go into the election campaign proper.
The thing is Graham, that merit as your point may have, you make it as if there are a load of Tory activists on this thread saying that this is conclusive proof of them sweeping to power in 3 months time. Whereas the reality is that none of the Tories here have said anything other than it’s “encouraging”, and presumably something of a relief after some of the other polls that have come out recently. After all if they want to get to 38+% they’re going to have to go ‘through’ 34% on the way
Alex. Why so funny? Or do you subscribe to the selective school of polling evidence - ‘ooh ICM put us on 34%, so NOP’s 30% Communicate’s 32% and Populus’ 32% must all be wrong.’ Should it not be me laughing out loud?
Sarah J - don’t be so sure about Brown’s budget. A totally unscientific example is that I ‘felt’ the effect of the 2002 budget whilst canvassing - it definately hardened the Labour vote and got them to the polling booths in the 2002 locals. Labour won seats that they wouldn’t have done otherwise in my area (NW). (Mind you subsequent budgets haven’t had had such an impact).
Yeah sorry Graham.
I’ve given a more reasoned reply.
nb. I don’t know who I’ll vote for at the next general election so you don’t need to accuse me of only looking at the polls I like. (although I think we neutrals all have an interest in it being closer)
Alex - cheers.
re 50 and 51……devolved government in Wales? Oh right yes I remember Tony’s talking shop on the Taf….however I thought the rules regarding who was eligible for Council tax rebate were decided in Westminster and then the budget allocation for Wales tweaked accordingly in Westminster….the Tory plan would mean we have to cut some other form of spending to fund a rebate for pensioners it will be expensive to implement etc….now if we had a proper parliament in Wales we could just scrap the council tax and have local income tax instead….
If you had a proper parliament in Wales perhaps we English would be able to stop subsidising you.
80 - overspill from the Other Side …
“Stay away from that trap-DOOOOOOOOR!”
What does this poll tell us?
Labour in mid 30’s, Tories in low 30’s, LDs in low 20’s. This has with occassional blips been the story since the Euro’s last year and I’ll be amazed if its not the story on May 6.
Yes there is an outside chance (maybe 20%) that the Tory/Lab figures might flip with the Cons eeking out a numerical lead, but I doubt it. Also they is a smaller chance (10% or less) that the LDs could lose votes and fall back to 15% or really get the big mo during the campaign and end up with over 25%, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for either one.
Bullseye. My point exactly - only you said it in 2 paras whilst it took me endless reams. The power of brevity - justifying your moniker
In response to the posts which claimed that Blair is a liability, have a look at the details on the Guardian web site. He is seen by most voters as an asset, in particular among AB voters.
People’s feelings about politicians generally are more complex and nuanced than intensely political types (like most of us) give them credit for.
Nick
Nick [85] So will TB be appearing on your election address?
Only with regard to screening immigrants - or is that the Tories?
80……:)
Very funny
Just had a little glance at vote-2005 (or should I say Paeschendaele?). I have just noticed that all the extensively hit seats are Tory / Lib Dem marginals (bar The Battle of Medway). I think it says something - but I don’t know what.
Mark - I undestand that in Scotland funding would be given to the executive to implement the policy. It would then be up to them to implement it. I don’t know what happens if the plan is rejected by the executive though.
Massive no vote in the tolls referendum today (74%). A bit embarrasing for the cuncil but could help Labour in Ed South and South West by defusing the issue.
Agree with Bullseye on the poll I don’t think it tells us anything we didn’t know allready.
89 - that internicine warfare is always more bitter?
91 - trying to be too clever. I spelt it wrong.
“in·ter·nec·ine ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ntr-nsn, -n, -nsn)
adj.
Of or relating to struggle within a nation, organization, or group.
Mutually destructive; ruinous or fatal to both sides.
Characterized by bloodshed or carnage. ”
The group is of course the Middle Class.
So if its a Civil War, which constituency is Naseby?
We have to assume that the Lib Dems are the Roundheads - which maybe considered offensive given the discussions regarding CK’s weight gain and the shape of his face. It is true though that some of the Conservative posters have been demonstrating a cavalier attitude to their chances in some seats
93 - Kettering. Lab marginal, and adjacent to Harborough.
Roundheads/cavaliers - schoolboy slang IIRC. Of course the Whig tradition of dissent would probably be traced to Oliver’s Army.
Sorry Steve - I meant metaphorically on the Naseby front - I can see that was unclear.
OK ‘Parliament’ and ‘the King’, but the joke doesn’t work like that
Graham - sorry for being so literal. I prefer to retain the WWI analogy. being comp-educated, my knowledge of history only starts around 1840.
Having an A level in History and a degree in politics and History, I can hand on heart tell you, I haven’t the foggiest idea what happened in the 1840s - or the 1640s for that matter. Ah, education, education, education.
Surely the main focus of this poll is that Labour’s huge campaign launch seems, being most charitable, to have had no impact whatsoever. The mood has been good within the party since Tony Blair’s six-stop chopper flight to Gateshead and only on Friday Nick was writing here in an upbeat fashion..“Labour are clearly doing better than a month ago”.
When Nick wrote that I agreed with him. The Labour campaign machine was looking good and my expectation was that ICM would have moved up to about 39-41%. We were wrong and if this trend is confirmed in further polls then the Labour campaign strategists are going to have to think again.
If demonising Howard boosts the Tory vote then they have to think of something different.
It’s early days yet but might the ever-caustic, Dead Ringer 48, be right about the position of Alan Milburn. The Brownites hated it when their man was pushed to one side to make way for Milburn. They are going to be ultra-critical and if Milburn is not delivering success then his role might be in doubt.
I think you are reading too much into this poll Mike. Labour have essentially not moved (down 1 not 3 as you say in your banner) and neither have the Lib Dems. The Conservatives are the only movers, and this is slightly out of line with the other phone pollsters. As this poll is against the trend of the other phone pollsters, from a statistical point of view it probably should be treated as an outlier until such time as it becomes/does not become a trend.
98 - I think the best Labour can do at the moment is Blair’s personal appeal, divisive though that has become. When you look at the rest of the campaign his “crockery” speech starts to look quite good. The dreadful, amateurish “forward not back” logo reminds me of an anecdote about Bush’s (or, rather, Rove’s) first campaign for Texas governor: Rove realised he had an opening when the Democrat team staged a press conference with a white background behind the white-haired incumbent Ann Richards. They had taken their eye off the ball and were going to lose an election they should have won easily.
I don’t think Labour are going to lose, but the Blairites’ efficiency will trump any loyalty they feel to Milburn, who has been proved woefully unsuitable for the role. I expect him to be gone (if not formally, then kicked upstairs) by Easter.
I’m having problems with the spam filter I think Mike.
Can anyone remember what Labour’s six pledges are? (if they ever knew)
BV - sorry about that. Looking at yourp post I cannot work out why it got trapped. What happens is that certain words or phrases put comments into the moderation box for me to decide on. So you commwent was there amongst those offering to make certain parts of your body bigger etc etc. We’ll have a look again.
Re 100- About Milburn’s future, according to The Times Milburn is telling his friend he’ll become the next chancellor instead of Brown.
Thanks - I wondered if the surname of the US president triggered the filter, but if that was the case, so did “Dubya”. Ironic that it should be one of my more substantive comments that got trapped…
I’ve been in the real world, glad to be back here, it’s warmer. I wasn’t asking Nick Palmer whether Blair had +ve or -ve ratings, simply contrasting those ratings with how they stood in 2001… and I’m far too much of a gentleman to ask him how he’s reply if Millbank told him he could have either Blair or Brown but not both!
And I hope John O. knows that he can’t get his butler to deliver literature after the election is announced without its going on expenses…
Graham - whether the poll is an outlier or not is irrelevant. The ICM survey is more important than other recent polls and will have a bigger impact because it is from ICM and because of the way the Guardian has treated it today. The disappointing message to Labour activists and strategists will cause question to be asked of the way the campaign is going and it will be used by those opposed to Alan Milburn.
107 - is the implication of this, Mike, that the Guardian is playing out its own agenda here?
Steve at 92 - as a fascinated observer of the English class system, do you not consider NuLab Islington tractor drivers as Middle Class ?
109 - tom, its all down to nuances …
The reason Labour has gone down despite the fact that they have just had a spring launch event is that Blair is so unpopular. The economy might be ok but do people really trust Blair?
In addition, Whilst Blair and Brown have been playing the international stage, the tories have been getting on with campaigning on the real issues.
andrew - Milburn as Chancellor? IIRC he ran a bookshop. We should be told if he was any good at that before letting him run something bigger.
book value - God I hated that crockery speech. Have I mentioned that once or twice?
The Labour party is allowing the Conservatives to set the agenda at present, Labour needs to return the debate to its strong areas such as health and education. Perhaps Blunkett going has had an effect, Ruth Kelly has not had a chance to become a big hitter yet.
If running a Book Shop constituted good credentials for being Chancellor of the Exchequer, then I would have thought that Iain Dale was a shoo-in for the job.
112 - Indeed! Not that I was impressed either, but Labour’s real problem at the moment is the failure to articulate a convincing third term programme.
I’m not sure if Milburn ran, or was just always hanging around, a far-left bookshop in Newcastle named “Days of Hope”. The spirit of the Rev Spooner made its presence felt…
115 - clearly a shining wit.
114: Well, W H Smith was First Lord of the Admiralty and Secretary for War…
Excellent piece from Zoe Williams in today’s Guardian about the parties’ crass efforts to target women voters. Amazing how the parties fail to treat women voters, but also many others, with basic respect or any presumption of intelligence among voters.
Even if the backroom analysis does turn up polling trends such as that particular types of women minister are a turn-off to most women voters as being too posh or whatever, parties should realise that it’s disastrous to let this stuff influence the mainstream political debate too closely. To engage with voters and be successful in the long run, you’ve got to treat them with respect.
Though I’m sure people will line up to disagree…?
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1419885,00.html
112- Here’s the link to the Times’ article about Milburn wanting to become the next chancellor: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,1-523-1491807,00.html
Now I like this speech! “to seek out new markets, to boldly search out new opportunities where others have hesitated to go”
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/economics/story/0,11268,1419686,00.html
Andrew - link doesn’t seem to work for me. Perhaps non print friendly would work?
Shocked nobody is talking about the Edin. Ref. as it sent a dagger through the heart of most Town hall leaders?
120- maybe this time I’m luckier:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-523-1491807,00.html
Don’t think the referendum is that big a deal. I voted no myself and am very happy not forking out more money. As I said above though I think Labour will be happy the issues dead now.
Its almost certain that the issue will be gone for a good few years now. PR for local government (in Scotland) will be in place by 2007 so its unlikely Labour will form an administration in the forseeable future. Given that all the other parties were against it, I can’t see them changing their minds anytime soon.
thanks Andrew 122 - that link works now. (I have to say I’ve never really understood how a minister can go from, say, trade to health. Do ministers not have to know about their subject in some degree of depth?)
I think most Prime Ministers work on the basis that a minister knowing something about their department is a very dangerous thing. Blair learnt that lesson with Frank Field.
Re the Times story - it doesn’t say much for the calibre of this Parliament when Stephen Byers is tipped for a return to the Cabinet.
Surely the calibre of this Prime Minister?
Sedgley 121. I’m preparing an article on the implications of the Edinburgh congestion charge referendum. Hopefull we’ll have it tomorrow.
127 - hello John, working late? Off to the club for a fat stogie and a glass of ‘63 later?
125 and 126 say a lot I think about Blair’s inability to bring independent-minded talents together without fear; to be a “deep-lying centre-half” as Harold Wilson described himself in his second premiership. OTOH, look at the disasters of that government!
New article just published on the growing gender gap. Click the masthead at the top of the page.
Er, Steve, Fully “restored” after a curtailed 2 1/2 hour ‘ne(w)tworking’ ‘consultation’ at the Badger’s Rest, and briefing Grimshaw (for it is he) on delivering those In Touches (I have a feeling Sarah J knows where I live)…Onwards and downwards to another perfect day.
Re 130 - There aren’t any independent-minded talents! Just career clones who parrot the party line. The Labour party will be in dire straits once Blair and Brown have left the scene as all that will be left will be faceless yes-men/women (rather as happened to the Tories after Thatcher).
Not looking good for our friend Mr Dale. I would say ‘don’t give up the day job’ but i believe he already has. And there was he saying the Lib Dems had all but given up on North Norfolk. Ah the capacity for self delusion among candidates…
The result from North Norfolk implies that the outcome of the contest at the GE will be extremely tight - something which most regulars at Political Betting were already aware of.
There’s a wide gulf between what punters convince themselves is true and the actualite - I believe that is why there are so many rich bookies around. Anyone who knows anything about the territory and the background to this campaign will fully understand the implications of the result.
Sorry - what North Norfolk result
Graham - comment 24 on the women/Michael Howard thread.
re 137. North Norfolk District Council by-election (yes, on a Tuesday) - Lib Dem gain from Con with a 16%+ swing in just about the most strongly Conservative part of the constituency. Conservative candidate was the Independent runner-up from 2003 (when the Libs got about 15% of the vote). Labour also worked the by-election quite hard apparently - for the grand total of 36 votes.
Yeah I know Labour went out to leaflet for the by election but the tactical message is very strong, personally I hope Lamb wins he is by all accounts one of the best MP’s around.
Perhaps by may, labour and Tories will have blown each other/themselves out of the water. then it will be back to ‘the economy stupid’. Maybe people will rminding themselves that the most useful thing Brown did with the economy to stabilise it was a policy labour had actually opposed during their election campaign, which was to put interests into the hands of an independent body rather than let politicians play short-term. It was of course a Lib dem policy. Perhaps after eight years of Monkeys they might give the organ grinders a go?
commuted speeding norms disappoint multiplies subordinate Scotchgard.
Latinate?ethical!brindled unpleasantness parity relaxing.afore .