Labour’s YouGov lead down six points
November 25th, 2005-
1 in 13 Labour supporters switch to the Tories
The November YouGov poll in the Daily Telegraph reports a big cut in Labour’s lead and is the first significant polling movement since the Tories started to get a lot of media attention from 
their leadership contest.
Until today the Cameron-Davis fight had not appeared to have had an impact on the General Election voting intention of the main pollsters. All eyes will now be on ICM, Populus and Mori to see if they are picking up the same trends.
Today’s YouGov shares with the changes on last month are CON 35 (+3): LAB 37 (-3): LD 20 (+1).
-
Given that the Lib Dems have also shown an increase it look as though there has been a move of three points from Labour to the Tories. This is a big change because recent experience is that reductions in Labour’s margin have been attributable to rises in the Lib Dem share - not to Lab-Con switching.
Such volatility in a single month is very unusual for YouGov which, with its large sample sizes and internet methodology, has a history of recording relatively small jumps. Until today the pollster had had the Tories in a range of 31-33% since the General Election.
For the Lib Dems there will be some relief that in spite of all the attention on the Tories they have managed a small increase.
The poll has some other good news for the Tories - more than half those questioned thought that the party’s chances of winning the next General Election were getting better. On Labour those surveyed split 72-10 on the proposition that the overall standing of Labour was getting worse.
This poll is what many have been expecting given the huge focus there has been on the Davis-Cameron fight. The big question is whether this change will be sustained. I think we are going to have to wait several months before we can draw firm conclusions.
Charles Kennedy betting. We have temporaily withdrawn our story on the new “Will Charles Kennedy go” betting market because there is some ambivalence on the time scale and the precise terms of the bet. Thanks to Guido for pointing this out.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I still think the real issue is the extent to which Gordon Brown could implode. He has always had a bit of potential to get attached to politically disastrous/divisive policies, but freed of the restraining hand of Blair there maybe nobody to let his stubborness overrule other people’s heads. People have focussed on the extent to which strategically there may be little change once Brown replaces Blair but the way policies are sold (tactics) could change massively for the worse. The latest claims over pensions are not a good sign.
Right on the money, Alex!
BUT it may be yet another cunning stunt to force the opposition parties to line up behind either Blair or Brown who can collectively quote Bob Dylan: “one of us cannot be wrong.”
One important figure (On the “It’s the economy, stupid” front) there is the pegging back of Labour’s lead on the economy - from +22% at the election to just +8% now.
It seems to have come from an erosion of the Labour reputation (49% to 37%) rather than a major improvement in the Tory figure (27% to 29%) - but it’s always hard for Oppositions to make much traction there unless the Government blow it.
This poll isn’t too much of a surprise given the sustained battering Labour has had in the past few weeks and the free, largely uncritical coverage afforded the Conservatives and particularly Cameron.
It remains to be seen whether this is the beginning of something significant or whether Labour will recover during the winter. If the anti-Labour vote moves significantly to the Tories, then we may well be witnessing a change. If it splits more evenly between the Tories and LDs, less significant. I’m also of the view that as long as the LDs remain at or above 20%, it will be almost impossible for the Conservatives to win an overall majority next time.
I aint opening the champagne until a series of polls shows us moving in the right direction.
Let’s face it if those polls were replicated at a GE there would be a strong Labour majority anyway.
I agree we shouldn’t be opening the Champagne yet. However, seeing our ratings at 32-35% is still an encouraging improvement on this point last year.
That’s an encouraging poll for the Tories after a series of disappointing ones, but I think we’ve all been a bit puzzled that after months of bad publicity for the Government and good publicity for the Tories they’ve been stuck at around 33%: it wouldn’t be odd to see a Tory lead when Cameron’s leadership is announced. It would be a mistake to get excited over a reduction in the Labour lead from 3% at the election to 2% now, though, or findings saying the Tories’ chances have improved (I’d say “yes” to that myself): I don’t think anything much is happening ‘out there’ - yet.
6. Certainly no reason to get too excited..but perhaps some of the posters who seized on some other polls recently to declare there were no signs whatever of a ‘Cameron bounce’ or of Labour suffering from bad publicity might want to ponder whether they were a bit previous.
Yougov usually gave a less big lead for Labour than other pollsters. I was more surprised by the 8% lead last time than the 2% this time.
8 - prob the same people who predicted “Tory meltdown” before the last election!
There is often a time lag before events show up in polls as people ponder the consequences. Also Nick it is unrealistic to compare poll leads with General Election leads. Apart from the last minute polls they are rarely in tune with the exact results. Labour are usually overstated in polls before an after an election in recent years. SO this (if repeated) is less good for Labour than its 3% lead in the real election on 5th May.
7. The spin machine goes into operation…after crowing at the Conservatives’ ‘failure’ to advance in recent polls, we now hear the latest poll, which does show an advance, is ‘not surprising’. Let’s wait for a decent sequence of data before making a judgement, shall we?
BPIX also put the Conservatives on 35% this month, and MORI on 34%. The average Labour poll lead for the month is 4.6%.
“The collapse in the labour lead and my (small) part in it…….”
A few days ago I got a request from Yougov to fill in one of their political surveys. This was unusual. I get questionnaires about washing powders but rarely one on politics. I think their policy is to ignore Guardian reading Pinko’s and Vlad the Impaler Telegraph readers and search for the floating voter.
Nonethelss if asked under normal circumstances I would march into the ‘Aye’ lobby and loyally put my ticks in the right places.
But this time I became a Jeremy Corbyn refusenik. To discover that Big T had discussed bombing Al-Jazeera was a little bit much for me (whichever side of the discussion he took) and then to try to suppress it put me in mind of Maggie and Ponting and Tisdell and many other things which made the 80’s such a politically ugly decade…..
So there you have it! It wasn’t Cameron’s fresh face that won it for the Tories but me!
13. I don’t understand from that why you refused to complete the survey. Excuse me if I’m being obtuse, was a late night…
14. I’m sorry I wasn’t very clear. It’s because if i had done the survey I would have had to answer “Labour” to the voting intention question which is difficult when I’m so angry with them.
Roger, roughly how old are you, please?
Couldn’t you have voted “none” or for some fringe party, thus registering a kind of “disillusioned with Labour but not a Tory” sentiment?
The trouble with looking at just this result is that given the margin of error in these polls it is possible that there has been no change at all since the last one and support is static at around Con 33 Lab 38 Lib 19 1/2 .
I seem to remember a time when it was expected that oppositions would lead in the polls during a Parliament only for the Government to recover as an election approached. It seems so long ago now.
I think, instinctively, not from evidence, that any shift in the levels of public support is more likely to be a result of what is happening with the government, and very little to do with the tory contest. Blair, unpopular to begin with, and who had to downplay his role in the election campaign, made some foolish and arrogant grandstanding on the terror bill - and key to all this….lost. Grandstanding and winning is a different matter! Then there are the NHS and Education plans, which are not popular with natural Labour supporters. Taking all of this into account it is hard to see how Labour’s standing could NOT decline further. Tony Blair is, day by day, killing off Labour’s chances of winning a fourth term. Gordon Brown, or anyone else, doesn’t need a short honeymoon period before a general election, they will need a period of years to piece together the mess that Blair is leaving behind.
“So there you have it! It wasn’t Cameron’s fresh face that won it for the Tories but me!”
Alas Roger - you didn’t make any difference at all. You not completing the survey just means that the other Labour identifiers would have been weighted up ever so slightly more. Obiously if you’d completed the survey but said don’t know to the voting question, it would have been a different matter, and the Labour vote would have fallen by that tincy little bit of a percentage point.
19 - Indeed 6 months after the 1979 election Labour were 10 points in front (according to MORI) and we all know what happened in 1983!
[21] Quite right, Anthony - and after Our Genial Host has gone to all the trouble to explain just how to spook YouGov polls too! But how dull this site would be if we all thought before we posted…
18/19… Exactly. I find it hard to get excited in any single poll which lies within the margin of error, but I was more suprised by the Guardian poll than this one- After all, after the sustained media love-in that cameron’s had and the media battering Labour have had, I expect the Tories to be up a little and labour down a little.
The economy numbers mentioned above are interesting, That’s a trend to watch.
Finally, on Cameron- I wonder if there might be an issue for him in that he appears to be having his media honeymoon very early- and that when he’s (finally) elected, the hacks will be looking for a backlash story… just a thought.
I would think Mark Senior is right that this latest poll when compared to the last Yougov poll could well have movements that are within the usual margins of error in individual levels of support: Labour down 3 Tories up 3. But as the measure of the gap or lead then that seems less likely as it has moved from +8 Labour lead held since September to +2 Labour lead since the last poll.
I look forward to Anthony Wells dissecting this poll result in the near future. What do you see in the runes, Anthony?
24 britspin. I’m with you on this one. A few polls showing a Tory improvement at the margin is hardly earth shattering and even the solid Tory local by election gains of recent weeks came to a shuddering halt last night. Impatient as we all are, I fear we’ll have to wait till the spring and a run of polls and local results to determine if there is any Cameron inspired Tory recovery into the heady mid thirties. And then May will bring the annual locals.
On Cameron, after seeing his performances and speaking to 2 of his backers, I’m a little concerned that this could all go horribly wrong for the Tories. The backers I spoke to were nervous that Cameron might not be the “real deal” and that is was possible they might be “lumbered with a younger, more telegenic IDS.” There was also concern that the hardline DD mob whilst accepting their man was clearly beaten wouldn’t hold their powder for too long before “installing the phone lines again”.
If so, this would be folly for the Tories as the recent polls still show that the voters consider the Tories as divided. So exciting times for the Tories but there are still penty of political sharks in the water.
It will be interesting to see how the Tories exploit Brown’s alleged reaction to the Turner proposals on pensions. It seems that the letter was leaked by one of Blair’s allies. It could become one of the major issues in the next election with not just pensioners but also those about to retire. They are just the sort of voters who could affect the result in a number of key marginals.
7. That’s a literally extraordinary post from Nick ‘90 day’ Palmer MP, where he says he doesn’t think the Tories are doing that well, in fact.
This contrasts sharply with previous posts, like where he said ‘that’s it, we’ve lost, it’s a shoo-in for the Tories, or ‘I wish I was a Tory, they have all the best policies’, or ‘God, Labour ARE useless after all’, or ‘I think my leader Tony Blair is totally wrong on Europe, pensions, taxes, terrorism, Iraq, education, and the NHS, and Cherie wears awful clothes’.
Just joshing, Nick. I know you are a pro.
As for the Cameron thing, as a lapsed libertarian Tory, I’m getting excited again. He just has that affability on TV, plus sound policies on Europe and deregulation and freedom and ID cards and detention etc. And he doesn’t look like a nutter. Indeed he makes NuLab look like the uptight authoritarian weirdoes they are, sans Blair.
We could win it. We really could. *daydreams*
28.”that’s it, we’ve lost, it’s a shoo-in for the Tories, or ‘I wish I was a Tory, they have all the best policies’, or ‘God, Labour ARE useless after all’, or ‘I think my leader Tony Blair is totally wrong on Europe, pensions, taxes, terrorism, Iraq, education, and the NHS, and Cherie wears awful clothes’.”
what is this? Bob Marshall Andrews’ manifesto?
I think people have to adopt some consitency when looking at the polls. It seems if we fall back/stay the same/go up some people think it all indicates we are doing badly no matter what. As has been said above it’s far too early to read much into the polls - we all have to wait and see.
30 - But Max, surely the whole fun of polls this far out is seeing peoples ability to spin them in all and every direction…
By Chris Mead, PA Elections Editor
Liberal Democrats snatched two shock by-election gains from Tories in seats they had previously failed to fight.
In the latest council by-elections, their candidate John Field took nearly two-thirds of the vote at Bramford and Blakenham, Mid Suffolk District, where Conservatives had been returned unopposed last time.
Mr Field’s party colleague Simon Davey won at Congleton North West in Cheshire’s Congleton Borough, a ward Lib Dems failed to fight in 2003.
They missed a third surprise gain by just five votes at Nettelton, North Wiltshire District.
There was disappointment for Lib Dems when Paul Holmes of the separate Liberal Party pipped them to gain Cornwall’s previously independent Illogan and Portreath division.
Tories easily held a three party marginal at Barnes, Sunderland.
An unopposed return at Ryhall and Casterton enabled them to keep their overall majority on Rutland County.
A hard fought battle at Friary and St Nicolas, Guildford Borough, Surrey saw a comfortable Lib Dem win after slumping in an earlier by-election last year.
Analysis of 15 comparable contests during November gives a 6.8% projected nationwide Tory lead over Labour.
A calculation based on 11 wards fought both times by all three major parties gives a line-up of C 38.6%, Lib Dem 27.8%, Lab 27.6%.
RESULTS
Allerdale Borough Dalton: C 220, Lab 83. (May 2003 C unopposed). C hold.
Carlisle City Castle: Lib Dem 538, Lab 370. (June 2004 Lib Dem 917, Lab 541). Lib Dem hold. Swing 3.6% Lib Dem to Lab.
Congleton Borough Congleton North West: Lib Dem 341, C 191, Lab 90. (May 2003 - C 284, Ind 208, Lab 153). Lib Dem gain from C. Swing 2% C to Lab.
Cornwall County Illogan and Portreath: Liberal Party 324, Lib Dem 268, Ind 216, C 202, Lab 84. (May 2005 Ind 813, Lib Dem 684, Liberal Party 673, C 636, Lab 576, Ind 148). Liberal Party gain from Ind. Swing 2.7% Lib Dem to Liberal Party.
Guildford Borough Friary and St Nicolas: Lib Dem 1123, C 602, Lab 74, Ind 43. (May 2003 Three seats Lib Dem 1694, 1682, 1642, C 628, 621, 571, Lab 325, 292, 261, Trinity 225, 205; March 25 2004 by-election Lib Dem 1419, C 929, Lab 158, Ind 85). Lib Dem hold. Swing 5% Lib Dem to C.
Maldon District Maldon West: C 212, Ind 107, Lab 94. (May 2003 Two seats C 521, 435, Lab 309, Green 254). C hold. Swing 6.2% Lab to C.
Mid Suffolk District Bramford and Blakenham: Lib Dem 536, C 229, Lab 68. (May 2003 C unopposed). Lib Dem gain from C.
North Wiltshire District Nettleton: C 322, Lib Dem 317. (May 2003 C 558, Lib Dem 173). C hold. Swing 25.9% C to Lib Dem.
Rutland County Ryhall and Casterton: C unopposed. (May 2003 Two seats Ind 493, C 370, Ind 272). C hold.
Sunderland City Barnes: C 1139, Lib Dem 547, Lab 489, BNP 67. (June 2004 Three seats C 1557, 1495, 1427, Lib Dem 1296, Lab 1171, Lib Dem 1016, Lab 1011, 938, Lib Dem 884, BNP 427). Swing 7.8% Lib Dem to C.
end
30 Max. I think there’s nothing wrong with Tory posters enjoying the potential of the moment as you elect a new leader. However I would just caution there’s as much potential for danger as triumph. …… Is there a market yet for the next Tory leader after Cameron.
Well if the Tories have a similar nationwide lead in May to their lead in November, I don’t think they’ll be complaining very much.
Blue2win - the runes are up on my blog now. I’m still wary of voting intention polls in the absence of a leader of the opposition - it’s hard to say how people are answering the question.
If you look at the underlying figures though - Best PM, economic competence, forced choice question, etc - the Conservatives are behind, but in a substantially better position than at the election. Add to that the two momentum type questions and it appears that yes, something is stiring.
33 - That’s true Jack. But it seems some people won’t say he/we have anything going for us untill Bootle turns blue!
Interestingly, if you feed those November percentages into Baxter the result is a Conservative majority of 10!
35 Anthony Thanks. Your post on Polling Report has a very interesting comparison
Tony Blair has only a 6 point lead over David Cameron, compared to a 21 point lead over Michael Howard in the last Blair/Howard/Kennedy poll.
Not too bad a position before he is actually the leader of the party.
But all a little early to celebrate.
Jack W(izard of the barcharts) Were you at one of those boozey bashes offered by the more dubious of DC’s backers? Or have you a Cornerstone member as as neighbour?
36 Max. You’re right. And there’s no doubt that this government deserves an opposition worthy of the name, and should the Tories and the Lib Dems provide it in good measure I’ll be among the first to cheer.
However we should also not forget that the opposition parties and especially the Tories, still have a mountain to climb to oust the government. More so as FPTP presently works against them. I think the Tories need a nationwide lead of around 7% to achieve a majority of one. And just to make things more difficult too many of the marginals are in the midlands and north where the Tories polled indifferently in May.
Sorry to sound like a harbinger of doom ! I usually reserve that trait for Hanovarians and their Whig/Lib Dem followers !! But a measure of reality among the Tory cup of cheer shouldn’t taste too uneven …. a bit like someone putting soda in the malt whisky - sacrilege !!
40 - Had a few drams last night - a very nice 18 year old Talisker. Although I fear I might need the rest of the bottle to make tomorrows rugby bearable - and not just to keep the cold out either!
39 Blue2Win. Moi at “boozey bashes” !! ….. I’m outraged, but banged to rights
:(
Both DC backers spoke to me independently. I think it comes from a mixture of anticipation, trepedation and disbelief that the prize has fallen in their lap very easily. Nevertheless both acknowledged and feared that their man was still very much an unknown quantity and there were many potential elephant traps ahead for an inexperienced leader and nationwide policy former. Interesting times ahead !!
40 Max. Are you going to Murrayfield for the match ? I use the word match advisedly
…. as I fear a narrow win for us is not on the menu !!
Talisker, I find a little too peaty for me - it sure packs a punch though !!
43 - I’m afraid so Jack - the pints before and after should hopefully make up for the game itself!
I take it your not a great fan of Laphroig either then it tastes and smells a bit liked burned tyres!
The local results look a score draw between Con and LibDems (which is better for the LDs than recently, as is the YouGov poll), with Labour doing OK in the few seats this week where they were even veguely in the frame.
28/29: seanT is teasing me, Andrea (shock horror). I hate politicians who always claim perfect consistency, but on this one I don’t think I’ve been inconsistent, actually - I said on previous polls that I was surprised the Tories weren’t making more progress in view of all the recent news coverage, and on this one that it’s more in line with what I’d expected. I’d expect a modest Tory lead after Cameron’s crowned. But I agree with the posters of all parties that it’s too soon to draw any longger-term conclusions.
BTW, the East Midlanders among you can see me being grilled on the spit this evening if you’ve nothing else to do - I’m speaking in favour of keeping troops in Iraq as long as the Iraqi government wants them, at a meeting of the Stop the War Coalition (NTU Chaucer Lecture Theatre 1, Goldsmith St, Nottingham, from 7pm), with Alan Simpson putting the alternative view. This is one vote I don’t expect to win (Stop the War is outspokenly in favour of immediate withdrawal), but show me a windmill and I’m always up for a tilt.
44 Max. I shall probably watch from behind the sofa
Laphroaig like many of the Islay malts is one the more robust and earthy malts. Although I wouldn’t decline a dram if offered on a cold evening !! Of the Islay malts Bruichladdich is a fine malt.
Just heard George Best has died.
45 Nick Palmer. Verily Mr. Palmer - the Don Quixote de la Mancha a Broxtowe
Because we have a Blairite, not a Labour, government, predicting what the political landscape will look like after Tony steps down is almost impossible. Crystal ball, anyone?
Unfortunately I dont have a crystal ball but I am feeling very confident about the next Election, if it is somewhat prematurely. I wonder if Labou have a disastrous Council Elections next year TB may make his exit then?
40 “However we should also not forget that the opposition parties and especially the Tories, still have a mountain to climb to oust the government.”
Not sure about that “especially the Tories”, Jack! There’s a fair sized mountian in front of us Lib Dems.
The local results look a score draw between Con and LibDems (which is better for the LDs than recently, as is the YouGov poll), with Labour doing OK in the few seats this week where they were even veguely in the frame.
48 “The local results look a score draw between Con and LibDems (which is better for the LDs than recently, as is the YouGov poll), with Labour doing OK in the few seats this week where they were even veguely in the frame.”
Lightly spun, perhaps. Over the the month I think it has been more or less a score draw, but I make both of the last couple of weeks worth of results a points win for the Lib Dems. (AHM seems to agree!)
Who is running a book on the final percentages in the C leadership race?
45. Fair play to you, Mr Palmer. As someone who’s had a hall-full of SWP members hurling abuse at my direction, I can sympathise with your position (if I dare compare SWP to STWC). Then again I’m sure you’re in a stronger position to deal with it than the 20-year-old Julian H was at the time.
Nick - How many troops have we still got in Germany?
I asked this of the relevant minister (now moved to Defra) - he didnt know.
The second world war finished in 1945 (60 years ago and we still have 20,000 plus troops there!!!
50 Peter. I think the Lib Dems have a different mountain to climb … perhaps foot hills at the moment !!
53 Icarus. 20,000 troops in Germany since 1945 - That’s nothing !! We’ve had thousands of Hanovarian troops in Scotland since 1746
According to Nick Robinson, Brownites are convinced the letter with the concerns about the pensions reform was leaked by Blairites. It could be interesting to see if the relationship between the 2 camp will become even more worse now.
Btw, how is the weather in UK?
55 - very cold and windy in London, but no snow here. It’s snowed in other parts of the country, I think.
56- That’s exactly what I wanted to know. Here it’s snowing.
Book Value, you were MIA in the last days….I could start to think you’re Tabman
Peter, not according to the Press Association at any rate. They reckon the Conservatives have been nudging 40% for the past couple of months, with Labour and Lib Dems a long way behind that.
Look at the proportion of seats being successfully defended by each party to see how they’re *really* doing.
#49 - “I wonder if Labou have a disastrous Council Elections next year TB may make his exit then?”
I’d doubt it. His inclination has been to fight on until he feels he’s done what he set out to do [whatever *that* is]. Someone in the senior ranks of the parliamentary labour party would have to make a move to oust him a la Howe and Thatcher.
I’m not sure whether they’d dare to stick their necks out.
Snow that fell in Exeter now all melted. Didn’t stop the County Council sending everyone home “on police advice” though.
55. Sunny in South Derbyshire
55 - BBC has a nice selection of pictures…
61- Thanks Lennon, very nice pictures.
55 - We had a fair bit of snow in Edinburgh today Andrea. It’s very, very cold!
55. surely Nick Robinson would know if that were true since it was leaked _to him_
I’m beginning to really loathe the BBC’s political coverage. If it’s not Paxman sneering, it’s Robinson endless inside baseball and process focus, or Neil’s smugness and massive conflicts of interest.
The only moment in the campaign I’ve liked Cameron was when he gave paxman a well deserved poke.
The Turner story is important- but it’s pensions people care about, not who leaked to who. I wish the beeb would get over itself and focus on what matters. It’s not even that I think it’s damaging to my side- I think people get bored of process and switch off, but get really involved if they think the governent is harming/helping their intersts.
58. Sean Fear - today’s headline
“Lib Dems take ground from the Tories
Press Association
Friday November 25, 2005 ”
It goes on to say “A calculation based on 11 wards fought both times by all three major parties gives the Conservatives 38.6%, the Lib Dems 27.8% and Labour 27.6%.”
But by definition this excludes these seats: “The Liberal Democrats snatched two shock council byelection gains from Tories in seats they were fighting for the first time.”
But away from this point scoring, I think the interesting point is that although Labour haven´t suffered too much in the opinion polls from the various disasters of the last weeks and months, they are not doing at all well in real elections.
62 Andrea. What about this one Andrea !!
http://www.kaufmann.de/assets/images/db_images/db_Snow/Kilt21.jpg
Peter. Analysis of 184 by-elections since the General Election, and comparisons to votes when last fought. Score draw on vote % Tory win but clear Tory victory on seats.
Con held 59 gained 23 lost 16 net change +7 32.31% +2.92%
Lab held 30 gained 15 lost 14 net change +1 26.25% -2.40%
LibDem held 25 gained 15 lost 14 net change +1 28.45% +3.16%
Ind/Oth held 7 gained 10 lost 19 net change -9 12.99% -3.68%
And the Tories have held 79%, compared to 64% for the Lib Dems Andy.
64 - Britspin, any chance of you starting your blog again? So few people seem to have any real understanding of the Government. Nice to see you posting here.
67- and doesn’t that data show how maasively “local” local elections are becoming? I mean the Labour hold 30, loses 15, gain 15 line suggests to me that any national conclusion drawn from those races is likely to be so caveated as to be almost useless.
BTW, is it fair to say that total by-elections seats is a biassed indicator Tory areas tend to be rural, which tend to be smaller, two tier authorities, which means vore seats per voter, which means they’ll be dispropotionately ahead in by-elections of as more seats means more by-elections…
Probably the reverse Britspin, as it means more Tory seats come up for election, and they’ve therefore got more to lose.
71 - But you could argue that the ones that they are likely to lose are those non-rural seats, and the rural ones are a gimmie in the hold column. Obviously this is just wild speculation and conjecture, to say nothing of the gross generalisations…
I’d have more comfort in the full 184 population than any smaller sample.
70 - so look at the % vote change then…
69- nice of you to remember! I keep thinking about it- and I have to admit when I saw the Guardian piece i felt a tug- but i think it’ll have to wait for a while..
74- I think you’d only be able to look at the %change- and even then it’d be a %change on a biased sample- of course the flip side would be that a tory surge would really show up on these voting %ages. Ahhh the pleasures of data.
Curiouser and curiouser… for those following the CP leadership campaign, the latest figure on votes received is still only at 62%… seem to be a lot of “Don’t Knows” out there. Maybe the Sky debate result of DC 6, DD 5 and DK 6 was about right, after all.
64.”but it’s pensions people care about, not who leaked to who”
if Brown’s camp looking for a revenge will leak something else regarding Blair, then Blairites will leak something concerning Brown and so on…..are you telling me it’s not important the relationship between the 2 camps (regarding the succession)? If the contest for the new leader will be too divisive, Labour could be damaged.
Sorry to go off-topic again (as per usual) but continuing a conversation on pb.com we were having a week or so ago, I’ve just had this little moan at the BBC:
“I am appalled to see this kind of report on your website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4469422.stm
As is becoming increasingly evident you, our beloved State media, have extremely dubious ways of collecting revenue. It is well known that the body the BBC employs to impose a License Fee for televisions targets the vulnerable - figures show that single mothers on council estates are far more likely to face prosecution than confident upper/middle-class people in the shires. This is no doubt partially due the latter being more aware of the gross injustice of having to pay a State body to access media. It is, in fact, technically against Human Rights Conventions that this country has signed up to; these state that Governments are not permitted to impose barriers to the media. Your exponentially-increasing License Fee is just such a barrier, and it is only a matter of time before your backward ways are reformed.
In the meantime I would suggest you remove such pathetic “Police, Camera, Action”-style reports from your website.”
76. My 1st ballot paper went to my old address. When they sent me out a new ballot paper it took 7 days to arrive! I then decided it was better to return it straight away!. I am pretty sure most people have already voted and that a large amount of ballot papers are still somewhere in the postal system.
Even stupider than my post this morning julian. keep it up!
78 - I think the class bias in enforcement is mainly because they never seem to bother coming round outside working hours. I don’t have a licence (because I don’t have a TV) and have had a couple of threatening letters/ “we called to catch you out, you lying scum, but you weren’t in” cards, but never have they visited at the weekend or evening.
81 contd - therefore I can see why it seems to be the unemployed who are disproportionately populated.
If they ever do come round, I’m torn between letting them in to see their uncomprehending expression at the thought of someone not owning a TV, or, as is my right, not letting them in without a warrant. I’m inclining towards the latter at the moment as a rather oblique protest against the current state of civil liberties.
78.”these state that Governments are not permitted to impose barriers to the media. Your exponentially-increasing License Fee is just such a barrier, and it is only a matter of time before your backward ways are reformed.”
I wouldn’t read the Human Rights Convention in that way. Otherwise pay TV should be illegal too.
83 - but pay TV, even if the government owns it, isn’t a barrier to the media. If you don’t pay, you don’t get that channel, but it doesn’t compromise your freedom of access to other channels.
But then again, is VAT on TVs and radios a “barrier to the media”? I don’t think many people would argue that - yet in previous centuries, taxes on paper were used with the specific intent of suppressing newspapers and pamphlets. It seems hard to draw a distinction which is both precise and intuitively right.
84. oh, yes, now I see the point. I should hide myself now …..:-(
84:
There was a tax on number of pages in a newspaper. Apparently that is what caused the broadsheet format.
Local by elections, the lib dem results appear to have improved recently. One explanation might be that being a smaller party their members may have been “knackered” after the General and are only now just getting properly back into the fray.(Conservative figures are not altogether bad this week)
Congleton of course was a Lib Dem council for years till the local council group got in a mess and they just crashed. However they have been clawing back over the last 2-3 years, the general elction figures as well as the local councils, so the result was not totally unexpected to people in the area.
Mid Suffolk by-election win for LibDems, not big surprise either as the LibDems had won another by-election off the Conservatives back in July this year.
Sean’s point at 68 is some what misleading as it fails to mention gains. The Tories have gained 15 Lib Dem council seats in 2005, but lost 16 the other way.
While it is clear the Tories are doing reasonably well in local contests, so are the Lib Dems. There is little sign of the Lib Dems being generally brushed aside (even in the South or in rural areas) by the Tory’s election ‘machine’.
Re. 8, Fred, I note you use the phrase ‘a bit previous’. Are you from Leek or N. Staffs? I ask when ‘a bit previous’ is a classic Leek phrase (or maybe it’s one of those classic northern phrases, which Leekensians often think are ours alone, but are common round the Pennines, eg ‘mithered’, ‘nesh’ and the substitution of ‘as’ for ‘that’).
Are you, indeed, Fred Morrow?
We need more polls beofre we can comment on a cameroon bounce. Is not the depressing truth though, that after all this government has sufferred the opposition should be 10 points ahead. I think these are sadly really good results for labour.
90. Richard - I have a mixed ancestry..my parents are from Yorkshire and Lancashire, so I probably picked up a few choice phrases from them.
I always thought ‘mithered’ was a standard word (rather than a dialect word) so I was a bit puzzled that other people were puzzled when I used the phrase at university.
As Master Hari has so many fans on this site, I thought I’d direct people to a letter I had published in the New Statesman a few years ago, which gently poked fun at the boy wonder. Just type RJ Briand into Google, and then go to the fourth entry down.
93.”Just type RJ Briand into Google, and then go to the fourth entry down”
I typed it, but the 4th entry is about the 88th Canadian Chemistry Conference.
A copy and paste, just for you Andrea:
Letters - Classy parents
Congratulations to Johann Hari on lifting the scales from my eyes. Until I read his piece (”The boy who hadn’t heard of St Paul’s”, 25 December), I was under the illusion that my parents were either working class or lower middle class. A teacher and a small businessman respectively, neither of them went to university. I can now see, however, that as they both read broadsheet newspapers and listen to Radio 4 (never mind that their own accents aren’t remotely BBC), they have been, in Hari’s words, “plainly upper middle class” all along.
R J Briand
Leek, Staffordshire
You may find it helpful to search google.co.uk rather than google.com - the former has a “pages from the UK” button.
Sorry, forgot to turn off the italics…
95. Innocent Abroad, I used google.co.uk too, but the 4th entry was “Plant Pathology Publications”.
Well, we’ve got it now - like some other “older” regulars, I don’t understand the internet altogether - I managed to paste a map into an e-mail to-day (which was what I wanted to do) but God knows how I managed it…
98. IA, thanks for the cut and paste.
Btw, considering Cameron and Osborne are so horrified to enter in the same lobby with “dinosaurs” like Jeremy Corbyn, what will they do now that John McDonnell voiced his support for pensions linked to earnings? Will they start to support Gordon or will they try to stop McDonnell to enter the opposition lobby?
90, Richard, I think “previous” with that meaning is, as you surmise, generally northern, or at least Pennines. I occasionally use it, but picked up more from my parents’ circle - and they were from Rossendale, Lancashire - not High Peak.
52: The debate was fine - both of us got polite-to-friendly hearings and the one chap who tried to defend the murders by the Iraqi insurgency (’the more they kill the better’) was roundly booed. The speakers from the hall were about 6-4 for early withdrawal, which given that it was a STW meeting I reckon was a fair result. Someone from Respect urged Alan Simpson to stop defending Tony Blair, which got a big laugh all round. The SWP rep was taking quite a nuanced view - in favour of withdrawal but not precipitately abandoning Iraqi trade unionists and other progressives.
101.” Someone from Respect urged Alan Simpson to stop defending Tony Blair”
Poor Simpson, insulted in that way
Dan, no my point’s not at all misleading.
132 Conservative seats have come up, compared to 61 Lib Dem seats. The potential for Consservative losses is much greater than the potential for Lib Dem losses. But the Conservatives have managed to hold a much higher proportion of their existing seats than the Lib Dems have.
Take an extreme case to illustrate my point; suppose every seat being contested was a Conservative seat. The best the Conservatives could hope for would be to hold what they’ve got. The worst their opponents could fear is to make no gains.
If 132 Lib Dem seats had come up, then on current form, they’d have lost 35 of them to the Conservatives.
With mathematical logic like that, you’d never be in charge of the LibDem bar chart division, Sean!
103 - Makes perfect sense to me, Sean. These Liberals only understand dodgy maths, you know…
106 - I understand your point, but the fact remains that there is on the 24th November one fewer Conservative Councillor and one more Liberal Democrat Councillor than there was at the start of the year.
Yes it is important how many seats you hold, but I would imagine that you’d be happy with winning more than you lose. I guess it’s the difference between your football team winning 4-3 or 1-0 - it’s still a win and progress.
Of course the loss of a single seat is always going to represent double the percentage if you are defending half the number of seats.
Your maths may be sound but the argument is spurious. If the Lib Dems had defended just 10 seats and lost 5 they would have had a ‘defence’ rate of 50%. It the Tories had defended 150 seats and lost 30 seats they would have had a ‘defence’ rate of 80%. They would also have lost 600% more councillors than the Lib Dems.
It’s not the percntages that matter it’s the number of wins and losses - hasn’t first past the post taught you that?
76 - I think that figure sounds about as expected - assuming at least another 5% are in the post and a final turnout of 80% that would mean at least 84% of the votes have now been cast.
I think you would expect about 10% to 15% to wait till the last 10 days to vote so it seems to make sense.
Well, strictly speaking, your first point is wrong. According to Keith Edkins’ chart, the Conservatives have made a net gain of 2 seats in by-elections over the year. In additon to that, they made a gain of 100 or so seats in the County Council elections on May 5th.
Your point about winning more than one lost would be correct if the seats being contested in by-elections were proportionate to the the three main parties’ seat shares overall. But they aren’t. There have, over the past year, been a disproportionately large number of Conservative seats that have been contested. Almost as many Conservative seats have come up as for the other two parties combined, even though the Conservatives have nothing like as many seats as the other two, combined, in total.
As it happens, I don’t expect the Lib Dems to be wiped out next May. But the current trend, from their point of view, ought to be worrying, and I suspect their more sophisticated agents realise this.
In fact, if 150 Conservative seats had come up over the past year, Dan, and we’d held 120, and if only 10 Lib Dem seats had come up, and they’d held just 5, that would be a very worrying result for the Lib Dems.
80 - care to explain why?
Archer is back. Ha ha ha.
80. Julian. When Conservatives quote the European Convention on Human Rights it is normally to ridicule it or to show it’s inconsistancies. If they then go on to play the ‘class warrior’ in a letter to the BBC I start to smell a rat!
And in your post you managed both;
“figures show that single mothers on council estates are far more likely to face prosecution than confident upper/middle-class people in the shires. This is no doubt partially due the latter being more aware of the gross injustice of having to pay a State body to access media. It is, in fact, technically against Human Rights Conventions that this country has signed up to……..”
Are you suggesting that when the TV detector van arrives on a council estate the licensless home owner says “It’s a fair cop guv” and gets prosecuted…….but when they approach ‘Disgusted of Tumbridge Wells’ they get a mouthful of the Eureopean Convention on Human Rights and a kick up the backside?
I expect the BBC will be more polite than I was when they reply but that’s why so many of us like them. They are a non-profit making organization and their motivation is good programs.
112. Please do not stereotype me on the basis of the party I currently choose to support. I am not speaking for Conservatives, I am speaking for myself.
Furthermore, I am not playing class warrior at all. My point is simply that the attempt to implement enforced License Fee payment is not consistent across society, and we should ask why. Single mothers on Council Estates are easily persuaded by the propaganda about databases and huge fines; educated types in big houses tend to argue back and contest. There are figures to support this (I will happily look them up if you wish). I also have anecdotal evidence to support this - I have told License Fee inspectors all of the above and threatened to call the police if they ring the bell again without a full search warrant - believe it or not, we never heard from them again.
My ex-girlfriend’s father openly refused to pay a fee, mentioning it regularly in his column in the Sunday Times as well as being interviewed on several radio programmes. It took a year of baiting them and challenging them to take him to court before any (reluctant) action was taken.
The point here is not whether or not one “likes the BBC”. I like some of their work, and dislike other parts. The point is that if we must have State media there are other ways for it to raise revenue than putting this enforced barrier to media access upon everyone who wishes to view television.
If I was given the option of BBC services for a price, I would consider it, and maybe take it. I think we should all have this option.
103. 2001-2004 the Tories successfully defended 72% of their seats, so it is clear they are doing a bit better.
The Lib Dems successfully defended 64% over the same period, so this year is very much average.
Backs up the theory that the Tories are doing a bit better, Lib Dems holding their own, with a bit of churn.
If you are telling me that the rich are arrogant and often think of themselves as being above the law then I couldn’t agree with you more. The story you tell about your girl friends father is unfortunately all too typical and come the revolution-if I was running it-he would be first up against the lamp-post! (ONLY JOKING). I wonder what he thought of those who refused to pay their poll tax?
As for your argument; I can’t understand it. Should those without children not pay for schools because some go to private schools or those in good health not pay for doctors because they might use BUPA and should radio disappear altogether? You either believe in a society where costs can be shared or you don’t. If you want the BBC to be commercial then fine. But don’t shout at the BBC because they don’t agree with you. I think most people don’t
Two more results from the ALDC which seem to have been left off the list we had yesterday:
Abingdon TC , Dunmore
LD 652 Colin Walters (64.1%) Con 365 (35.9%)
Majority 287. Turnout 26.1%. LD hold. Last fought 2003
Chippenham TC, Hill Rise
LD Paul Darby 201 (58.6%) Con 142 (41.4%)
Majority 19%. Turnout 17.7%. LD Hold.
115.”Should those without children not pay for schools because some go to private schools or those in good health not pay for doctors because they might use BUPA and should radio disappear altogether?”
I think someone posted here an anecdote about a canvassing session where a gay man protested because he couldn’t understand why he had to pay for the education system considering he won’t have children.
It seems to me that the TV licence was quite a rational concept once. In a situation where TV was an expensive luxury, and technological constraints meant there could be very few channels, a levy on TV ownership to fund a state-operated channel made some sense.
That is hardly the situation today.
My preference would be for some state funding, from general taxation, of public service broadcasting - where not all BBC programmes were defined as public service (I defy anyone to seriously claim they are), and public service is not defined as exclusively a property of BBC programmes.
Roger, I find your health and education analogies a bit curious. Do you think the TV licence concept should be extended to these areas? The analogous situation would be this: if you have children, you pay a flat rate of education tax, regardless of your income or wealth. This goes to fund a small, and not all that popular, fraction of the nation’s schools. If you claim not to owe the tax because you do not have children, state agents frequently visit your home to search it for kiddies. Furthermore, state-funded advertising campaigns make the claim that “child detector vans” operate, with sophisticated sensing equipment capable of zeroing on the presence of soft toys, sweeties and nappies.
I know you maintain a lot of faith in the Labour party, even when it disappoints you, but I wouldn’t really hold your breath for this policy to be in the next manifesto.
116 I’ve never seen Town Council elections as any sort of indicator
I have, Andy (at 119).If a party puts up candidates at Town and Parish level, it is - to me - a sign that it is in good shape; at least it has people to put forward. I don´t read to much into it, of course, but I find continued Lib Dem success at this level very heartening.
Re. 94, sorry about that, Andrea, I got muddled up…thanks to IA for the cut and paste.
The problem with abolishing the licence fee is that it gives government a greater degree of editorial leverage over the BBC (as they exercise over the World Service, mostly funded by an FCO grant-in-aid), which, sooner or later, a government will be tempted to convert into reality. One possibility is to calcuate the grant level on the same basis as the licence fee, but to take the revenue from general taxation instead.
“If you want the BBC to be commercial then fine.”
Ha, Roger, I hope you’re not implying that the BBC produces high-brow, valuable television not seen on commercial channels. It’s a Saturday evening as I type - had a peek at BBC1?
Without wanting to make a tangent of my ex’s dad - you seem very keen to portray him as a born-rich Tory. This is sadly untrue; I don’t think he’s ever voted Tory in his life. I am unaware of what he thought of the Poll Tax as we never discussed it.
I must stress that this is not a Tory argument. Many Tories love the BBC and are only annoyed at it due to the bias moving left since ‘97. In my opinion there is evidence that it leaned to the right at certain points in the ’80s and this is equally unacceptable. Is a partial state media channel not quite a dangerous thing, or do we believe Berlusconi’s impudent protests that people should stop moaning about it?
The arguments for state-provided health and education services are based on the notion of the welfare state - providing free-at-the-point-of-delivery services that have clear and tangible social benefits. Does this apply to television? Is the BBC necessary for our welfare? If so, shouldn’t we also have a state newspaper which we all pay into?
BV: Child-Detector Vans - classic. Bremner eat your heart out.
123.”I hope you’re not implying that the BBC produces high-brow, valuable television not seen on commercial channels”
well, BBC’s known here for producing high quality television.
At time of posting - Strictly Come Dancing.
125. “My” State TV is showing “Dancing with the Stars”.
Former Miss Italy Cristina Chiabotto is dancing at the moment…….:roll:
Julian. I make my living from commercials so if we are talking vested interests I should declare mine! Perhaps this is why I dislike watching ads in my spare time. But in the end it comes down to this; The BBC has a public service remit and though it has to have popular appeal as well it doesn’t have to have it’s content be driven by owners and advertisers and in my book that alone makes it worthwhile.
Testing
and< >
“< " ">“