YouGov puts Labour 8 points ahead
October 29th, 2005Amended
-
Cameron 4-1 ahead amongst Tory voters
The scale of the challenge facing the next Tory leader - whether Davis or Cameron - is reflected in the October YouGov survey for the Telegraph showing that Labour’s lead is unmoved at 8 points over the past month. The shares are LAB 40: CON 32. As yet there is no figure for the Lib Dems available on-line.
A consolation for the Tories is that it could be worse. At this stage after the 2001 General Election just after IDS had been made leader and in the weeks after 9/11 ICM had Labour 17 points ahead while MORI was showing 32 points.
Today’s YouGov survey was carried out this week after the huge publicity boost from the Blackpool conference and leadership contest had died down. Unlike earlier polls by the firm restricted to Tory members this is YouGov’s standard monthly survey.
On Cameron versus Davis the poll confirms the evidence of other surveys that the younger man is seen as by far the best prospect for the party. His media skills are rated very highly by both Tory and all voters.
-
What Davis needs desperately is a poll showing that his campaign is on the turn. The Tory membership is looking for a potential election winner and there’s little polling evidence to suggest that this could be him.
The attempt to seize the news agenda following the changes to his team sees a further proposal today with him promising to “reverse Labour’s £5 billion-a-year tax grab on pension funds”. This is the main lead in the Telegraph - the paper that played a major part in the IDS campaign in 2001. This follows the tax plan announcement yesterday. Certainly having professionals running Davis’s media relations is having an impact although this has hardly showed in the betting. Maybe he ought to have brought the team in much earlier before Cameron had captured the media’s attention.
Even so a new Davis story a day might have an impact in the week leading up to the ballot forms going out.
The best bookie prices are 1/12 Cameron and 13/2 Davis. The betting exchanges have 0.13/1 Cameron and 7.2/1 Davis.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
This is interesting. I suppose you could say that with the Tories in flux and the Lib Dems anonymous because all the attention has been on the Tories and no great gaffs by Labour this Yougov result isn’t surprising.
But you could also see it as the first signs that the wheels are starting to come off the Tory revival before it’s even started. And there is some evidence for this. Everyone accepts that Cameron is going to win so you could say this is the first poll with Cameron as the de facto leader. He was treated without mercy on HIGNFY last night. He was portrayed as “upper class twit of the year” (from Monty Python Max-so don’t get angry!) and the audience didn’t show him much sympathy. I’m beginning to wonder whether Davis might not have been a better bet. Cameron has a lot of baggage to exploit.
(PS.I REALLY would like the Tories to get their act to-gether and choose the best leader available. Politics isn’t interesting without an opposition)
It’s fair to say that the underlying political position remains favourable to Labour at this early stage. It would have been difficult for the Conservatives to script more attentive and helpful coverage over the last couple of months, and coverage of Labour has been either non-existent or hostile. The key is, I think, the Populus finding that I quoted on the other thread, showing a huge majority who felt optimistic about their personal prospects in the next few years. Many people feel the Government is irritating at times but basically delivers the essentials that one expects of a government - stable economy, public services in reasonable shape, etc. Outside the ranks of core suport, not many people yet consider the Tories as a plausible alternative, so they can combine thinking Cameron’s a nice-looking fellow without making them plan to vote for them (the Telegraph tries a prompt - ‘if the Conservatives were well led might you vote for them?’ - just 9% extra say yes to this broad hint, and it’s illusory to think they all will). There’s plenty of time for that to change, but it shows the dangers of going too much by some of the more excitable posts here.
Roger - Aren’t you scraping the barrel a bit, citing the idiotic, imbecilic audience of “Have I Got News for You” as your opinion poll. You are very worried by Cameron as he is going to demolish the Lib Dems and the Middle England Labour vote when Brown takes over - and you know it!
O/T: Chatted to Rob Wilson, Jane Griffiths’ pleasant successor in Reading East. He says she’s paid off her debts and is now in the clear. (Like me he likes Jane and is pleased for her.)
I think QT is the make or break issue.
I happen to believe that DD’s tax declaration is a mistake at this point. Although it is important to seize a political agenda and make the case for lower taxes over a long period, this has to be part of a well thought out tax reforming and reducing agenda, not as a last throw of the dice move in a leadership campaign - which essentually uses a slightly adapted version of our last election promises.
It would have been far better in the long run to say he hopes to reduce the rate of spending growth, thus stabilising our public services and hopefully, all being well, allowing some reduction in tax. The quick £38 billion of cuts headlines will only make the party seem as though we want to re-play the 2005 election and it also will make the party look like we have not changed, whoever wins.
So while I like the confidence DD shows in wanting to push for tax reduction - I think the timing of this decision and the strategy in achieving it are a little misguided. But he is keeping the debate going…
Mike, I think the figures in this poll are identical to those for September.
I’m a little sceptical of this poll, as I can’t see any reason why Labour would have jumped up by that much in the last month. Lets look at the overall trends when all the polls are out.
As for Cameron demolishing the LDs - no doubt that’s in the same way that Balir demolished the LibDems when he took over.
Amendment In the article I said that there had been a change on the past month. In fact there has been no change at all in the Lab and Con positions.
Robert “he is going to demolish the Lib Dems and the Middle England Labour vote when Brown takes over”
I wonder if anyone on this site has the breakdown for the different sociological groups and who they vote for?
I’m sure that ‘Middle England’ will vote for the same reasons as everyone else. Schools, hospitals,the ecconomy etc and not be over impressed by an Old Etonian leader any more than they are put off by a Scottish one if that’s what you’re suggesting?
9. Tory Labour Lib Dem
Men 33 38 21
Women 32 38 23
AB (middle class) 37 32 24
C1(lower middle class) 34 35 24
C2 (skilled workers) 32 43 18
DE (unskilled workers)28 45 19
Roger 9. Many electors vote for the person - not the policies. TB won in 97, 01 and 05 becaue his whole style made him appealing to the middle classes. It was “safe” to vote Labour. Once he has moved on will the B2/C1s feel the same about GB? That’s hard to call.
This poll is in contrast to the ICM one last week which saw Labour’s lead cut back to 3 pts. Populus should be out in the next week and it will be interesting to see whether it follows ICM or YouGov.
Hague poor man was pilloried for wearing a baseball cap. It seems easy to make politicians look foolish these days and those politicians never seem to recover. Think of “Two Jags”. Before that Prescott was respected as someone who had done well despite few advantages. From that moment on he was at best ‘Del Boy’ and at worst a buffoon. I could be wrong but Davis will not be the cartoonists dream that Cameron might.
4. I think that this saga showed that Reading Labour Party was right.
Thanks Woody. Very interesting indeed. I don’t suppose you know the %in each group or where I can find it?
11.”TB won in 97, 01 and 05 becaue his whole style made him appealing to the middle classes. It was “safe” to vote Labour. Once he has moved on will the B2/C1s feel the same about GB? That’s hard to call”
Looking at results in seats with the highest proportion of managers and professionals, you could see that Glenda Jackson performed better than typical perfect Blairite MPs in Battersea, Putney and Wimbledon.
Mike. I agree that people vote for the leader in the sense that they give a flavour of what the party will be like but I don’t think that should be exaggerated. Wilson was much more popular than Heath in ‘70. Callaghan was more popular than Thatch in ‘79 and I think Kinnock was more popular than Thatch in ‘87 and ‘92. Also I don’t think anyone doubts that Smith or Brown would have won in ‘97 and there’s no evidence that it was Blair’s popularity that won it for them in ‘00 or ‘05. You could also ask why Kennedy did better than Ashdown and why the Tory vote didn’t shift when they tried three leaders? In front of a popular party Hague might have done well.
16.”Also I don’t think anyone doubts that Smith or Brown would have won in ‘97 and there’s no evidence that it was Blair’s popularity that won it for them in ‘00 or ‘05″
I suppose almost everyone could have won the 1997 election for Labour. The only difference could be the majority achieved in that election.
Looking at betfair market on next Labour leader, who the hell is betting on Michael Meacher as the next leader?
14. It’s an ICM poll that’s in my direct democracy booklet. It may be on their website
18. The same people who backed Boris and Derek from bif brother for the Tory leadership I expect.
20. Somebody is betting on GG, Frank Dobson and John Austin too. The difference is the odds they’re betting on:
http://politicalbetting.bestbetting.com/Default.aspx?partner=politicalbetting&market=15751076
Dennis skinner thinks Cameron is a “Puff of wind”! He thinks David Davis is miles better than Cameron.(He thinks Clark is better than both) He thought Cameron was hopeless during the education debate and after five minutes the House lost interest.
Perhaps not without an axe to grind! But perhaps he’s been around long enough to know what he’s talking about? Nonetheless he’s very witty!
(He’s just been on radio talking about the Tory leadership)
22. Skinner has already said that he thinks Cameron “was educated well beyond his intelligence”.
Andrea 21. Before everybody gets excited about Michael Meacher and the Labour leadership this is all based on ONE bet on Betfair of just £4 at 280/1. Nobody else is prepared to lay Meacher except one punter who has a £2 lay at 9.4. The result is that this is the price being quoted.
23. Roger, could we criticize Skinner’s choice of clothes (especially for Church cerimonies) just to show we’re not sexist toward Ruth Kelly?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2005/07/29/ncall29a.jpg
Andrea @ 24. He first said that about Paul Channon, a particularly hapless Tory toff, about 20 years. Good line tho
25. the punter is probably a MM’s relative!
I’ve already saw that it was just one bet. Before checking it, I was shocked by those odds.
22. There’s no doubt that Skinner will give whoever wins the leadership contest a tough time. I cannot recall which Tory leader it was but Skinner made his life a misery by bellowing “get your hands out of your pockets” and associated less savoury comments whenever the said person was at the dispatch box.
It’s just like the way some nastier Tory elements shout G&T at Prescott whenever he’s speaking - a reference to his former career as a ship’s steward.
Dennis Skinner is not ‘very witty’. He sits on the green benches in his shabby suit, barking out sinister exclamations, and the odd vulgar insult. And that’s it. Anywhere else apart from the House of Commons he’s not be regarded as ‘a wit’ - he’d be arrested for being a dreary old git with a cider habit. He is the performing bear of the Labour party, the sad faced clown left over the from the circus of socialism.
I think Nick Palmer is right that people are, on the whole, still economically optimistic, therefore they see no reason to switch to the Tories, yet. But they also see no reason, I suspect, because the frigging election is four years away - who cares at the moment, apart from us anoraks?
But they will care one day, In four years time Blair will be gone. Labour’s biggest asset, by far (though it pains me to say it). Cameron may, or may not, have proved himself (I think the former, of course). The polls won’t start moving significantly, for a long time, a year or two at least. But when they do, when Blair goes…
I were a Labour supporter I wouldn’t be sitting back patting my stomach, just yet.
29. Skinner was the first Labour MP to make fun of Cameron and the drug question in the House.
Roger 16. Can you really be serious in saying that Kinnock was more popular than Thatcher in 87? It was Kinnock v Major in 92.
Down the memory lane, here’s Skinner and a young Blunkett 20 years ago:
http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51837021.jpg?x=x&dasite=GettyImages&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=7DC161F3CE5DF56F9C318828BE000B96
Btw, are there chances that Dennis will retire next time or will he go on until the end?
I don’t think Kinnock was more popular than Thatcher in 1987. He was widely credited with having fought a better campaign though (polling evidence supports this). 1987 is a textbook example of how little difference (in this country) a general election campaign makes.
The local elections of May 1987 showed the Conservatives had won the election even before it started.
34. Do you know the full list of the 20 seats gained by Labour in that election? I know I could look by myself, but I’m lazy to check seat by seat and if somebody here knows the list, it would be easier.
I’ve aware of some of them: Halifax, Manchester Whitington, Newcastle Central, Norwich South, Notthingham North, Oxford East, Glasgow Hillhead, Edinburgh Central, Dundee East, Stranthkelvin and Beardsen, RENFREW WEST AND INVERCLYDE, Cunninghame North and Western Isles.
Which are the remaing 7 seats?
Of course Rico you’re right about ‘92. It was Major. I wasn’t sure about ‘87? I remember the party always being more popular than Mrs T but I could well have been wrong about Kinnock being more popular than her in ‘87. Interestingly in the ‘05 election I seem to remember the party being more popular than TB but I could be wrong here as well.
35. Aberdeen South was one, then it was the only seat the Tories regained in 1992.
Sean at 34. William Hague said before the ‘05 election that he didn’t think the campaigns made any difference at all. I think the polls do though. It helps people with their tactical voting.
Andrea, Edinburgh South, Leicester South, Leicester East were among Labour’s gains, but I don’t have a full list.
Roger. I don’t think Kinnock was ever really popular with people, although in the early days he was popular with his party. He became gradually more presidential after 87, partly to help him stamp out dissent on the left, just when that was going out of vogue. Many disliked Thatcher, but because she was seen to have principles and stuck to them, etc, she was preferred as a leader by the general public. Whether that made her more popular than K, I’m not sure. I certainly agree with your last comment!
37/39. Thanks. So we’ve named 17 seats so far.
35. Andrea, Labour’s net gain was 20 but they also lost 5 or 6 seats at that election (Walthamstow and Ipswich were two of them and Greenwich was a by-election loss held by the SDP). I don’t have the fulllist to hand.
42. yes, I forgot about their losses.For ex. Thurrock and Wolverhampton North East were Con gain from Lab.
The Wrekin was another Lab gain in 1987.
43. Leeds West and Glanford and Scunthorpe were among LAb gains in 1987 too.
43 - Battersea too was a Con gain from Lab, I believe.
45. yes, a 7.4% Lab majority became a 1.8% Tory lead
Those kind of results make elections more interesting!
Looking at 1983 results, I noticed that Gwyneth Dunwoody survived by an hair.
Re 3 Robert J. Demolishing the Lib dems aint going to get the Conservatives power. It is, as you just be aware, very short sighted and I hope you were talking tongue in cheek. It is impossible to “demolish” the Lib Dems, they might be reduced in number, but it is more than possible the next election will be a hung result and the Cons and Lib Dems may find themselves working together if they can sort out reasonable compromises.
About DC. I recall him well at the 1997 election. He was I felt right wing on the econony and crime but on social issues very resaonable and balanced, middle of the road or a bit left. He was certainly not a twit. Although I am sure he will win it is almost impossible to know where he is coming from at the moment, except through the Tv screen saying little or nothing distinctive. He seems to be inheriting or trying to inherit the all things to all mens agenda, and overall I do not think the public want too much more of that after the last 12 years of new labour (opposition as well as government). A conviction politican like Dennis Skinner would prefer DD but DC has got to define himself soon. Presumably he is sending out a manifesto to members, perhaps that will see what he will do and simply not sight vague generalities which people very quickly see through.
GENERAL ELECTION OF 11th JUNE 1987
22 Labour gains from Conservative
Aberdeen, South
Bradford, North
Cardiff, West
Clwyd, Clwyd South West
Edinburgh, Central
Edinburgh, South
Glanford and Scunthorpe
Gwent, Newport West
Halifax
Leicester, East
Leicester, South
Manchester, Withington
Mid Glamorgan, Bridgend
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central
Norwich, South
Nottingham, North
Oxford, East
Strathclyde, Cunninghame North
Strathclyde, Renfrew West and Inverclyde
Strathclyde, Strathkelvin and Bearsden
West Yorkshire, Dewsbury
The Wrekin
5 Conservative gains from Labour
Ipswich
Thurrock
Waltham Forest, Walthamstow
Wandsworth, Battersea
Wolverhampton, North East
4 Liberal gains from Conservative
Fife, North East Fife
Powys, Brecon and Radnor
Southport
Strathclyde, Argyll and Bute
3 Conservative gains from Liberal
Cambridgeshire, North East Cambridgeshire
Isle of Wight
West Yorkshire, Colne Valley
3 Scottish National Party gains from Conservative
Grampian, Banff and Buchan
Grampian, Moray
Tayside, Angus East
2 Labour gains from Scottish National Party
Dundee, East
Western Isles
2 Social Democratic and Labour Party gains from Ulster Unionist
Newry and Armagh
South Down
1 Conservative gain from Social Democratic Party
Stockton, South
1 Labour gain from Liberal
Leeds, West
1 Labour gain from Social Democratic Party
Glasgow, Hillhead
1 Plaid Cymru gain from Conservative
Gwynedd, Ynys Môn
1 Social Democratic Party gain from Labour
Greenwich, Greenwich
Ahhh, those were the days. I remember them well. Oh, to get back to that level of political dominance again!
48. Thanks Andy!
Among Labour 1987’s new intake there were David Blunkett, Alistair Darling. John Reid, Hilary Armstrong and Ian McCartney.
1987’s new intake produced also Diane Abbott, Tony Banks, Gorgeous George, Red Ken and Red Alice.
49. A H Matlock, you delight us with your presence even in these early hours of the day. Considering your late night appearance, I was starting to have some suspicions…….
51 - Andrea: Old Tory Vampires like me require very little sleep. Just the blood of a young left-leaning virgin or two keeps us going for days!
52.”Just the blood of a left-leaning virgin or two keeps us going for days”
Widdy has been MIA in the last few days……what have you done to her?
53 - Can’t say, sorry. That was a classified request by my friend Michael, of whom you may have heard… sort of a settling of scores before he changes jobs.
49,As someone who has followed UK and US (to a lesser extent) politics for 20 years,would you roughly agree that politics seems to go in 20 year-cycles,and Labour are now where the Tories were in 1987;indeed one could say the Tories today are roughly where Labour were in 1987( some contributors have compared the Tories position to Labour in 1983,I would’nt say its quite that dire;they have at least shored up up their core vote)
54. I’ve not seen your friend Michael in the last couples of days……..
56 - The Master has been quite busy of late. Fear not though, he will return to us soon!
57. I was told that a couple of my favourites were on TV in those last few days.
OT: My PM has just said that his policies and Tony Blair’s policies are the same. Now I think it’s clear why I don’t like TB.
58 - How do you personally rate his chances of winning re-election next year?
It doesn’t make much difference but according to the Telegraph Cameron leads Davis by 56-16, not 56-13 amongst Tory voters.
59.A H Matlock. A new poll out yesterday showed the centre-left leading by 7%.
Silvio’s party is way down compared to 2001, while the other parties of the centre-right coalition aren’t doing bad.
Prodi won the primary elections to be the centre-left candidate 2 weeks ago (they were a big success considering it was the first time we had them to chose a national leader).
I would say that if we vote tomorrow, Berlusconi will lose. But I don’t think the race is already decided. The scenario could change in 6 months. I wouldn’t write him off just yet.
I don’t know if you already know, but we’re changing the electoral system back to full PR.
The biggest problem for the centre-left is to rule if they’ll win the election. The government will probably be dependant from hard-left MPs: Communist Refondation is at 7% in yesterday’s poll and the Greens/Italian Communists are at 5.5% (it’s not official yet, but they probably present a list together next year).
61 - Yes, I recall your discussions with JohnO on this subject some days ago now. I agree that Berlusconi is a very wily politico and can hardly be ruled out. I don’t think much of Romano Prodi either.
re 60. Corrected.
Davis has completely relaunched his website today. It looks far more modern and professional.
I guess this shows he is still making a real effort.
64 - It’s about time. The old one was a sloppy embarrassment. Has he removed his errant supporters yet?
65. No he’s still showing 2 excess MPs.
He still only lists MP supporters - unlike Cameron who has a total of 390 MPs/MEPs/MSPs/Welsh/GLA/Officials/Councillors/Businessmen.
64 - Is it just me or is half of the front page ‘missing’?
My mistake - it was not immune to me changing the font setting
67 - even on Internet Explorer (it doesn’t quite render properly on Firefox) it looks like something’s been cut off at the left-hand side.
I still wouldn’t say the site looked particularly good, to be honest. In the picture at the left-hand side of most of the pages, DD looks a bit like a cardboard cutout in a golf course advert.
69. LOL. I’ve just seen that picture. I think it’s a decent website. He’s got to fight to make the result respectable.
69 - No it may look professional, but i think we can safely say that it isn’t. Why not just get a proper web-designer to construct it?
62. AH Matlock. I forgot to add that in the last few days I saw some mentions by our centre-left politicians of Gordon Brown as the model to follow to win the centre-ground (his conference speech was quoted).
69/70. DD has a bad signature! Especially the “D”.
re 64. David Davis’s new site is a big improvement. Unfortunately it is not fully compatible with the Mozilla Firefox browser on which it looks a total mess. These days so many people use Firefox you have to ensure that a site is compatible.
69.”In the picture at the left-hand side of most of the pages, DD looks a bit like a cardboard cutout in a golf course advert”
In the previous version, he had a picture of him with the sky full of clouds: he seemed Scarlett O’Hara over the Tara’s hill. Infact I was wondering if he would have said “tomorrow is another day and I’ll reborn from Tara!” after the conference speech.
73 - Mike, your site isn’t particularly compatible with my PocketPC. Most infuriating….
why did he post his pictures on the left side just to have them cut becuase there’s no enough space?
In the biography section, half of his wife is missing.
Why has the picture in the “help david” section been taken in a mirror?
77. In the “contact David” section, it seems that the low part of his nose was added later: it’s more red than the rest.
In the “About David” section, not only he’s tieless, but he’s showing us his chest is not hairy too.
78 - Well thank god for small mercies.
Actually the back to front pictures could form the basis of a game of “spot the difference”
71 - Perhaps Lord Kalms has tightened the purse strings? No more chucking good money after bad..
79. which are the small mercies?
The red nose or his chest?
72. You should see my signature!
82. well, mine is not better either, but I tend not to show it to everyone.
My signature is quite good, actually. Largely because I was taught penmanship at school
Those were the days…
84. My signature tends to change everytime I do it, especially if I do it faster. If you go and check my university exams’ registers, my signatures are sometimes different.
What the hell is penmanship?
86.The art, skill, style, or manner of handwriting
84 - Copperplated and sloping gently to the right ;). The mark of a true gentleman.
86 - For you kids, it means to be taught the art of writing legibly!
88 - Exactly John! Whatever would this lot do without the exquisite level of refinement you and I bring to this forum?
89. I’ve sometimes problems to understand my own writing…….
In my experience whether an individual writes legibly or not often has far more to be down to whether they choose to be understood or not, rather than anything they’ve been taught
Doctors would rather their notes cannot be read by others, hence their handwriting is uniformly terrible.
On Davis’ blog after talking about his trip to Surrey it says “David Cameron was also invited to Surrey but turned it down saying he is doing enough regional events already via the hustings”.
This appears to be a curious comment to make. In the last week I think Cameron spent several days visiting various constituencies. In the next week he is visiting Cornwall, Wells, Manchester and Middlesbrough.
Actually I think i probably did “handwriting” as it was called once. It went out with grammar (and mental arithmetic) when the national curriculum arrived. I could have been a linguist if it hadn’t taken me until 15 to find out what an adverb was. I was just about to learn that at age 8, when grammar was removed from the learning experience.
92.”In my experience whether an individual writes legibly or not often has far more to be down to whether they choose to be understood or not, rather than anything they’ve been taught ”
Infact in uni exams I write in a such bad calligraphy hoping the teacher won’t understand what I’ve wrote and consider it right
“Doctors would rather their notes cannot be read by others, hence their handwriting is uniformly terrible. ”
In my village the pharmacist sometimes have to call the doctor just to ask him what the hell he has wrote.
95 - quite. Don’t know how to spell a word? Give it three different spelling versions simultaneously!
92 - Well, perhaps. Calligraphy is something of a hobby of mine. I’m an avid pen collector.
I am a worried about David Davis’ campaign. Seriously, I am. I might be a Cameron supporter and a mad moderniser but DD has a role to play even if it is not as leader.
He is building up a pledge list that is undeliverable. 38 billion in tax cuts from ‘tighter spending’ controls and 5 billion a year to restore the pension raid that Gordon Brown undertook in the first Labour term.
He should have realised from previous elections that tax cuts is well understood to mean less spending which, to the average voter, means worse or fewer public services.
And the 5 billion pension funds GB nicked will be worth about 10 billion a year at projected 2010 prices I read somewhere. And what of the lost years , and the schemes that have collapsed since the Brown Raid? How will it help the overall pensions crisis? And the state sector? Will he cut their pensions to pay for his windfall restitution?
And what will he cut to find the consequent 47 billion a year at 2005 prices ( and here I ignore spending commitments about grammar schools and the classic Tory spending promises to burst on us next week?)
Its unbelievable that a Tory politician should be so unaware as to fall into the same trap yet again. Reinforcing failure with….er …. failure.
He has persuaded himself that all the natter about policies is real and that to win he has to make detailed promises that match what he thinks the party wants. But in that judgement he is out of time and out of place as what the party wants is to win.
How could DD win a general election with, by 2010, his self constructed noisome albatross of out-dated and unworkable promises swinging around his neck?
Indeed, how can he aspire to even be Chancellor or deputy PM when he has given so much ammunition to the NuLab mob who will not hesitate to point out that ‘savings’ of that size even over five years of a parliament, will be more than painful. They would be traumatic.
DD is preparing to fight the 1997 election all over again. But the world has moved on. So has the Tory party.
And the NuLab attack dogs are slavering in their kennels relishing easy meat.
96. I do it with foreign names if I don’t know how to spell them. For ex. if I’m undecided between an A or an O, I just write down a circle!
98 - It also makes it virtually impossible for DC to appoint Davis as Shadow Chancellor. If he was we would get 4 years of Labour going on about sacking nurses, closing schools etc.
100. I’m already picture Patricia Hewitt with tears in her eyes calling the nation to save all those poor nurses.
re 75. I create pages, edit and view the site often on my SE 910 mobile phone in the Opera browser. You’ve just got to get the settings right.
96 - why bother with even that, when the penalties for poor spelling vary from negligible to zero? (That’s the case in school exams, anyway; some universities may have tougher standards, though I’m not so sure.)
Davis has made another announcement today - this time it’s 20 new grammar schools in his first year as PM.
Cameron is right about not writing the manifesto now but there must be a possibility that Davis will start to make progress if he makes a big announcement every day and Cameron is not seen to be making any announcements.
Can Cameron start saying some things that look like announcements - but not detailed policies? I don’t think he should give Davis a clear run over the next 10 days.
103. book value, could I ask you who decides those things? Is it left to teachers or each schools decide some standards and all teachers in that school should respect them?
103. how illiberal. Surely alternate spellings should be allowed to compete against each other
Anyone watching Middlesboro v Man Utd?
Absolutely hysterical if you don’t like Man U. Boro leading 3-0 at half time.
105 - in GCSEs and A Levels, the exam boards set the rules (I think a maximum of 4 or 5% of the mark can be allotted to spelling, punctuation and grammar). In universities presumably there are policies for exams, but for other assignments I think it would be left up to the lecturer responsible for them.
106 - you can post that on librul vyooz
107 - Trying not to think about football after todays result. Still feeling hungover after last night as well so it’s not been the best of days so far!
108. Thanks. Another (probably stupid) question, but during the school year, do students have various tests (with marks)?
There are a number of posters saying that Davis is wrong to be stating policy now. While it is indeed early in this parliament, it takes a long time to get a policy message across. Perhaps Davis is correct to be making prouncements now and Cameron should be taking note. Announcing a policy like a rabbit out of a hat close to election time is dangerous. A long time is needed to get the public used to an opposition party’s policies and general stance, as John Smith found out in 1992, just before the election, over his National Insurance policy. Why shouldn’t Davis be going into details now? It is a leadership contest.
111 - There are although I don’t think I ever sat an exam all the way through primary school (quite a few in Secondry school) but the situation was probably different down south.
111 - again it’ll vary from university to university. When I was an undergraduate, we had laboratory work and some assignments during the year - but the only “tests” we had as such were the end of year exams. In the postgrad course I’m doing now, there are tests in some subjects which count for a small percentage of marks, but again most of the marks come from assignments and exams.
113. How do teachers decide if you could advance to the next year?
114. I don’t mean in university, but at a lower stage.
115, 116 - ah, sorry. I thought you might mean “school” in the American sense. We had them at our school, yes, and I think most schools do, but they only count internally.
It’s pretty rare not to advance a year - we tend not to have mixed-age classes.
117. I don’t actually know what meaning of “school” I’m using…….
Our system is quite different. For example our “scuola superiore” (superiour school) has 5 classes/levels (usually a student starts it when he’s 14 year old). We have a final exam at the end of the 5 stages. During the school year we have lots of test and the marks got in those tests decide if a student will pass to the next year or if he has to repeat the current classes (teachers look at how many subjects you’ve negative marks in).
Usually the great majority of students passes the year (rejected student are usually more numerous in the first year). In may class some people have been forced to repeat a class and so I was the only boy at the end of the 5 years.
Interesting discussion about DD. By spouting off about policy he is taking a gamble. His gamble is that laying down loads of heavy policy will revive his position in the race and give him a position to win, as Tory members begin to question Cameron’s police lite zone. However at the same time, if he loses he has just ruled himself out of just about every position other than remaining as Shadow Home Secretary. You could not know appoint him as a Shadow Chancellor. Incidentally if Cameron can look past friendship then I think Rifkind will be the man for the Shadow Chancellor’s job, as his one nation credentials and strong oratory would be able to counter labour jibes about inexperience and cuts in public services.
Students repeating years. Now there’s a radical policy…
Just an add on to my last point. The only shadow chancellor to trouble Gordon, was Howard, which proves that experience and decent oratory skills are keys for the jobs, tools that Osbourne has yet to fully develop. Personally I think Howard made a mistake in pushing Osbourne forward to Shadow Chancellor as it is enitable unless Cameron looses his political antannae that he will demoted (which would not really be a fair reflection of his performance).
120. In 5 years, I had 2 rejected in the first year (I was so happy. they made fun of me all the time!), 4 in the second year, 1 in the the third, 4 or 5 in the 4th and no one in the final year.
Heseltine’s been banging on about his “oppositions shouldn’t have any policies” theory for years, but it is not necessarily a good thing. It all depends what the public think you will do if you don’t tell them. The problem with the Tories being vague is that it allows Labour to portray them as extremists. And the public find that credible. Vagueness and aspirations work if the public WANT to believe that you can offer a better future. If they don’t then you’ve got to give them a reason to vote for you. But both are long term strategies. Intend to go heavy on (controversial) policy in an election and the groundwork has to be laid now. The attacks from opponents have to appear tired by the time the election arises.
121 - Experience and oratory are key to shadowing the Chancellor but not to shadowing the PM? !
123. if the incumbent government is very unpopular, it’s ok for the opposition not to have policies, people will vote for them just because they aren’t the others.
If the opposition is facing a popular (or at least not unpopular) government, not having detailed policies could be a problem.
123 and 125. A problem with the Tories being vague is that it simply means that people don’t know what the party stands for, on the mainstream issues. People scratch their head about where they stand.
“I could have been a linguist if it hadn’t taken me until 15 to find out what an adverb was….”
Well you should have been grateful not to have been taught. When Alistaire Cooke was asked the secret of his elegant writing style he said never it was never to use an adjective or an adverb unless it couldn’t be avoided
Bluetowin “And the NuLab attack dogs are slavering in their kennels relishing easy meat”.
Since your party ejected Clark I’m beginning to think that’s right. I’ve noticed a spring in the step of Labour and Lib Dems since they saw Cameron up close and personal..
125 - You put it so more succinctly than me, Andrea
127 - you’ve got to know the rules to break them
128. Now I’ll write to Ruth Kelly to propose her harder standards to force more students to repeat school years. Just to have another education debate with Cameron.
I could already picture the dabate: Diane Abbott will protest because black children could feel targetted, John McDonnell will claim it’s onlt the first step toward privatisations, Jeremy Corbyn will complain about working class children being left behind, Bob Marshall Andrews will see it as an attack to civil liberties, Clare Short will link the proposal to Iraq and Gorgeous George will be absent.
During the House of Lords debate, Baroness Jenny Tonge could always claim that if she could become a rejected student too.
You’re a walking encyclopedia of British MP’s Andrea! So it’s probably only right that you should be one of the first to know that Tim Yeo is throwing his considerable weight (politically speaking) behind Davis. His announcement to be made in the next few days.
(He mentioned it on Any Questions-incase you think I’m a Conservative mole)
My point was that a PM or Opposition leader has to appeal primarily to the heart, whereas a Shadow Chancellor has to appeal to the head. People want a leader primarily to inspire them, whereas they want a chancellor primarily to inspire trust.
131 - well that would be some sort of a coup.
133 (con) - Yeo obviously still has ambitions to become leader
“whereas they want a chancellor primarily to inspire trust”.
Lamont (or lamontable if you want the adjective) being an exception!
Perhaps the best job for Osborne, then, is shadow home secretary. Cameron will know that it is a good job to shadow. A young Blair did well in that role.
135 - Roger, I’m not sure I ever worked out what your line was on what should have happened in 1992. You supported maintaining ERM membership at that level, I think - so is your objection to Lamont that he threw in the towel too early on the Wednesday? Or that he had allowed the pound to slide negligently in the runup by not raising interest rates enough to keep it comfortably in the band?
re 131. This is all a generation thing. DD seems to pick up white males over the age of 55. On his website there are only three women listed as supporters.
Blue 2 Win, are you happy to see public spending continuously rise as a proportion of national income? Do you think the Conservative party should oppose this, or do you think we’ve no option but to go with the flow?
BV. I did want the UK to stay in and I’ve always thought that if the Tories at the time hadn’t shown such antipathy to Europe when the problems arose the European waggons would have protected us like they did the French. Nonetheless the general incompetence of the Treasury at the time had to be seen to be believed. Not since Dennis Healey has the UK looked so completely rudderless and at the whim of speculators. But Lamont unlike Healey looked way out of his depth.
138 - although Cameron only has 6, one of whom formerly supported Davis
What advantage was there to staying in Roger? Surely the UK economy benefitted from being thrown out of the ERM. If staying in meant we had had a French rate of growth for the past 12 years, it would hardly have been worth it.
139 - It’s all about positioning, though, really. It would be sensible for the Conservatives to return on a fairly cautious, consolidatory manifesto, builiding up credibility for a really radical reshaping of the state in the second term. Mrs. Thatcher took a similar path in 1979. Admittedly, she was able to start with some radical surgery straight away, but that was only because the structural problems bedevilling Britain were all too apparent and Labour were divided and bereft of new or credible ideas. It would be rash to assume that Labour will be in such a poor position at the end of decade, even if they do lose.
112 Rico You are right. Selling a policy is a long term business, but what DD is doing is giving specific pledges with specific numbers with a specific horizon. It looks like the usual electoral suicide gambit of his generation in the Tory party. Lay out a radical agenda that Mrs T would have blanched at and look stunned when it becomes anathema to the floating voters.
What Cameron is doing is better politics. He is laying ground work for a detailed manifesto by giving out the broad brush of his position and arguing the general case before trying to write the specifics of a manifesto.
In 97 and 01 and o5 we did not prepare the ground well, did not understand the electorate (indeed blamed it for not voting for us in some cases).
What we need is a steady buildup with good argument and PR for the general position and then a good well timed series of policy launches (preferably when the other parties have penned themselves in arguing against you): a case well built with policy document reinforcing your arguments and proving your trustworthiness.
TB and GB were smart in 1997 and promised to keep to Tory spending plans, as they knew they had something to prove about managing the nation’s money. DC is trying to do the same with public services (as did Michael Howard but with too short a lead-in time) and so reassure people that the public services are safe with the Tories. And we must do that if we are to have any chance of winning.
It seems to me that DD is unaware that he is doing the opposite and reaffirming to the voters that the Tories under his leadership will slash spending on those services.
Most people believe NuLab are wasteful but they also know that government profligacy cannot be turned around overnight, so they are either unlikely to believe DD will, or can, do what he says and protect public services. So they are likely to conclude that he will slash and burn just as NuLab claim us Tories would do regardless of the effect on health and education, pensioners and so on.
Indeed DD would have to be more radical in his cuts than Mrs T ever was if he is to achieve his target in the promised single parliament. Surely DD cannot believe he will be believed even if he is so misguided as to actually believe he can do what he is promising.
Mind you he did use this tax cut promise in during the parliamentary phase and his vote went down. Slow learner?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/16/ndavis16.xml
Whatever happens DD will be hung out to dry by his self imposed albatross of pledges. And if he were leader, the party would go down with him.
127. Although I really wanted KC to do it I think he would have been disastrous for the Tory party. Labour did a brilliant job attacking Howard for his part in the old Tory regime. They would have done the same with KC and added the BAT dimension. If KC had still been in the race the current smoking debate would have been used to embarrass him.
The great thing about DD and DC is that they have little “form” from old Tory governments. David was a minster but not in the cabinet while Cameron was an adviser. It’s a bit harder to pin the “same old Tories” tag on them.
The danger for Labour is that with TB gone they will be accused of “reverting to type”.
Sean. The advantage gained was by an overnight devaluation that made us ultra competative. If other countries had followed us we’d have been in danger of becoming a basket case like Turkey. The damage it did us was political. We looked incompetent (the Conservatives are suffering till to-day). When Wilson devalued it gave him a short term gain but ultimately it was politics that took us back into the mud. I think our ecconomic health now is down to several factors. Lamonts devaluation just steadied the ship while our ecconomy improved. Several other countries had ecconomic miracles without a devaluation
Just to summarise… in the last several days David Davis has secured the endorsement of our Roger, Denis Skinner and now Tim Yeo to be leader of the Conservative Party.
We must be onto a winner here!
147 - Let it never be said that Davis can’t reach parts of the country where others fail!
Alex 141. What this shows is the dearth of women Tory MPs.
“When Wilson devalued it gave him a short term gain but ultimately it was politics that took us back into the mud.”
Had he voluntarily devalued, as most of his economic advisers begged him to from early 1965 onwards, it would have been much less poltically painful: it could have been blamed on Sir Alec and Maudling.
re 147. AH. Do you think that Conservativehome will be making a story of Roger’s announcement? The site gave lead treament to Dennis Skinner.
Roger, I wouldn’t dispute that exiting the ERM damaged the Conservatives politically. But there seems no doubt that over the past 12 years, overall living standards are higher as a result of having come out than they would have been had we stayed in (particularly if we’d had to rack up interest rates like the Swedes did).
151 - Mike: It wouldn’t surprise me. As you can tell by the comments I’ve made there today if you’ve read the Skinner thread, I’m rather disgusted by the bias being displayed by the Editor there.
re 151. As a non-Tory I’ve come to love Conservativehome . At times it is just so nasty. It makes PB.C appear civilised.
151 - It wouldn’t surprise me if they did. The site seems to have given up any pretence of talking for the party as a home and is little more than a cheerleader for DD. I don’t think it’s particularly clever of them to be so critical of DC when we should be pulling together and are all going to have to work under whoever the next leader is.
153,155 - when did you start reading ConservativeHome?
155 - Sorry should be as a ‘whole’ not home.
153 - Spot on AH, some of the articles and comments just serve to convince me I’m backing the right man.
154 - Mike, there is no question that it is an invaluable resource and Tim Montgomerie does a stellar job setting out out, writing the articles and managing the site in general. I think it’s brilliant from that standpoint. I just wish that he would exercise a little more editorial restraint - both himself and on some of his more acerbic contributiors.
156 - Shortly after it was set up. I used to quite like it too.
Sean Fear I believe that a low tax economy is essential for our global competitiveness and that government spending is out of control and must be reduced or it will (shall) bring fairly hideous long term problems.
I also believe the government are progenitors of the pensions crisis and are making it worse on a regular basis, and have sneakily changed the labour market to a more European rigidity than is often appreciated.
The lack of democratic control on a wide scale is also very troubling: from Europe to judges, from local police to parental power, from patient choice to habeas corpus, cronyism to yobbism.
But I also believe in good public services and have benefited from them to a great extent myself. I hate top up fees and disagree with DC on those, as I want all people to have equal access to higher education as I did (it was a Tory Council in the teeth of Labour opposition that set up a route for me and others to move at 16 from a Secondary Modern to a Grammar school and then to university)). But on almost every other position he has taken he seems to speak my language.
And I am concerned particularly about generating trust in the electorate