The Great Unknown: What’s Gordon like under fire?
June 16th, 2006-
Could he become PM without ever having to face a grilling?
One of the hardest things about trying to predict the next General Election is that, extraordinarily, we know so little about Gordon Brown.
If, as is his plan, he manages to move into the top job without having to go through the ardours of fighting a leadership election he will have managed to by-pass, yet again, situations where he would have faced fierce questioning.
For as both the Tories and Lib Dems showed during their leadership campaigns the process of putting the focus on the candidates over an extended period can be very revealing. The way Cameron reacted when facing a group of people who were hostile to him, as in the first Tory debate, brought out one of his weaknesses - his temper.
-
But if Gordon does get it unopposed then there will be no debates, no Paxman grillings and not even a discussion on Woman’s Hour about his taste in underpants.
In short there will be nothing that will be a pointer to what he’d be like when the questioning gets tough.
For one of the remarkable features of his tenure as Chancellor is that he’s always managed to leave it to one of his juniors during treasury questions when difficult issues have been put.
In an excellent article in the online news magazine, First Post, Richard Brooks writes. “…the Chancellor’s two most significant contributions to how taxpayers’ money is spent are tax credits and the private finance initiative (under which almost all public investment is now made). The policies have much in common: they involve tens of billions of pounds being spent every year; they’re designed to flatter Gordon’s books; they generate enormous bureaucracy and waste; and they are both hugely controversial. They cry out for their architect to be held accountable.Yet Brown has not once debated either policy in Parliament - or anywhere else for that matter. Instead he sends in hapless junior ministers to thumb frantically through reams of briefings while the opposition benches seethe with frustration at being unable to nail their man. “
It was the same last week, Brooks goes on, after the opposition chose to use some of their parliamentary time to debate on the latest critical report on tax credits. What happened? Gordon found a meeting to go to in Brussels.
You cannot but admire the skill that Brown has shown in avoiding such situations. For the problem any leadership candidate who has been round for so long has is baggage. Yet Gordon has been able to keep this to a minmum by his astute parliamentary tactics.
So how would he fare against Cameron? Who knows? One of the reasons why betting on the next election is such a tricky thing to do. Brown’s price in the Labour leadership market has eased during the week from 0.36/1 to 0.38/1.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I actually am proud to put in a first posting and join the PBC insomniacs club. First and foremost watching the England highlights, the team played much better than I first thought when seeing the match in the pub. Well done England.
Re; Gordon Brown- I actually think he is without doubt the last political heavyweight with currency value. He dominates those around him, including Blair and inspires total loyalty from those who work to him. For Blair he is a managerial nightmare- outshining him intellectually, but not with Blair’s gift of charisma, or political instinct. He will walk the leadership, and probably has an election under his belt.
Interestingly though he will be the last of his kind- it is doubtful whether someone with such a lack of charisma and good looks and such a serious demeanour will lead a major party in the UK again. In the 24 hour news and entertainment culture personal attractiveness, and personal qualities are all too important. The only proviso to this is in a time of national emergency or crisis, like Israel with Sharon, seriousness and lack of charisma become electorally appealing.
Still suffering from insomnia (and thinking)- but what do the Big Brother Contestants and Blair, Cameron, Osbourne, Miliband and others of their ilk have in common? Answer no marketable talent in entertainment, but yet a yearning for celebrity and superstardom- achieved in their case through politics. Galloway of course did both to proce the point. That is why they are so fickle about policies, and so quick to change tack. They have no sense of an inner ideology.
That is what marks Brown as different- he is an ideologue and that scares people. He can be characterised as a throwback to the electoral unelectability of old labour. The Tory Party had to jettison it’s new found ideogy to be electable again- either by moving back to it’s paternalistic, one nation roots (Clarke), or by embracing it’s own modern Tony Blair figure (Cameron). Both would have found it electroal success. Fox, Davis and co- the ideologues of the right would have led the Tories to self destruction.
Brown though as PM will rule without ideology- he will conceal his tribal, class warfare, presbyterian, republican, south england hating, high income tax raising, egalitarain instincts and in time the fear factor now generated through the media (and reflected in opinion polls) will dissipate. And I am sure he will thrive on the stresses of the job to answer Mike’s question.
PJ’s posts are interesting though I disagree with some of the political views. I agree that GB is a type of politician that has become rarer - more Gladstone than Disraeli. That said, I think people will be surprised how likeable he is when he’s not being the Iron Chancellor, though - the job is the opposite of DfID, which requires warm cuddliness and probably even makes you look warm and cuddly when you’re not.
An important Labour point which Tory commentators tend to miss is that most of us on the left think tax credits have been an enormous force for good despite the problems that have arisen. There is an objective dilemma in deciding how to spread available money - evenly without bureaucracy and means-testing, or selectively for those who need it most. But tax credits have been the main reason for the reduction in child poverty, and the main reason why you no longer hear many people say it’s better to be on the dole. For many people, tax credits are one of the main redistributive elements of the current Government and the reason why they put up with a lot that they are, ahem, less keen on.
They also have a big constituency in the public. The Tories think of it as a competence issue, but have not so far as I know promised to abolish them - if they do, I think they’ll be surprised how much it mobilises the Labour vote. A recent PMQ where Cameron attacked the system and TB passionately defended it was a foretaste.
Unopposed? Surely there will be at least someone (Hain?) who decides they’re screwed if Brown gets it, so might as well have a go.
Gordon Brown is an expert in ensuring that he is not around when tough decisions need to be made. Moreover, his widespread use of subordinates to defend his policies, rather than face the music himself shows what a political coward he really is. He will be a very poor Prime Minister.
A very good article - Brown certainly is untested under fire (same for Cameron btw - and that Sky clip is not a good sign). But I suspect that Brown’s warmer side will emerge (even if only briefly) and that he is well informed enough to getting through any interviews.
I increasinly think that Brown will go to the country soon after taking over.
An interesting point from Nick P on tax credits.
3-Nick Palmer
If tax credits are such a success and as popular with your party as you indicate,why is GB so reluctant to turn up to parliament and defend and promote his policy?
As mentioned in Mike’s introduction every time the policy comes up for scrutiny or discussion in parliament GB finds another meeting to attend.
If your analysis is correct, then it must be the first time that a politician has avoided the limelight when they are personally responsible for a successful major new policy.
One election result from last night (not a by-election) a contest held over from 4 May because of the death of the Labour candidate)
Lib Dem 887 45.4%
Conservative 828 42.4%
Green 145 7.4%
Labour 92 4.7%
Lib Dem gain from Tory
Swing Con to LD 14.7%
Please revise your local election gains and losses accordingly
Not only is Brown not around when tough decisions are to be made - he is never around when there is a tough situation to defend on tv/radio nor is he ever around when there is a tough interview to be taken. He has built a myth built in secret and is never called to defend it - he is a coward IMHO.
Don’t tell us where it was PP, we could all have fun guessing…
10 IA sorry.
Place with a directly elected Lib Dem mayor, where the Lib Dems came second in May 2005.
Copy of the collected speeches of Russell Johnstone for the first correct answer.
3. Tax Credits may be popular with some people, but they certainly are not with me and loads of other people on AVERAGE incomes (not high earners) who have to pay for them.
Also Nick, please get out of the habit of referring to the emotive phrase “Child Poverty”. Sorry for the rant, but this spurious use of language in order to justify political ends is aggravating. It is a weasel phase designed to make everyone agree with the re-distributive policies of Labour. Everyone hates poverty - right? Especially for poor innocent children. What better way to get people behind a redistribution policy - tug at the heartstrings. Well, I have news for you. There is no child poverty (or precious little). What actually exists are different standards of living. The poorest children are not as affluent as the richer ones. The arbitrary definition of poverty as living on 40% of the average household income, means that people will always technically be living in poverty. Even if they have a semi-detached house and a year-old BMW on the driveway! (If the ‘average’ is a detached house and a new Mercedes!)
Now, this may not be right. A society with a more equal standard of living may be a better, happier one. But let us debate this without recourse to false claims of ‘poverty’. That is just nonsense. Go to the third world to see REAL poverty. (More power to Gordon Brown’s elbow for realising this and pledging more British help, incidentaly.)
P.S. I hope GB really is a brighter person, as you claim. If he turns out just as dour as PM as he appears as Chancellor, God help us!
8. LDs +3 in May now - thats 50% better - winning here 50% more
Re 8 - Where was the result????????
14 - Watford. It’s on the other thread.
15 Sorry for the redundancy, I gave up on the other thread shortly after the football. Watford it was.
[12] Of course poverty can be relative, or it can be absolute. There are both kinds in Britain, see here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5084648.stm
AIUI, the Labour position is that no child should be adversely affected by its parents’ economic position to the extent that the State can do anything about it - what Gladstone is really suggesting is either that we debate what the qualifying phrase means in practice or the validity of the principle itself - these seem to me to be two different debates, and I’m not sure which he means - maybe both of them.
A full-blown economic liberal would want to say that State action to produce equity necessarily entails a loss of efficiency - any attempt to deal with poverty in itself reduces wealth.
A technical objection to tax credits, on the other hand, might be to the way they’ve been bolted on to a pre-existing system: as originally conceived, they would have replaced benefits rather than (at a lower level) supplementing them. For example, the housing benefit system continues to be completely separate.
Purbeck District Council- Swanage South
Con 642
LD 409
Lab 363
Con Hold
Purbeck Town Council:
Con 673
LD 480
LAb 255
18 - Result last month was
Con 894
Lib 532
Lab 516
Brain not functioning to work out swing .
Gordon Brown certainly has some tough questions to face.
For example, on why he has supported Blair’s neo-con adventure, why he stood by and took no action while intelligence was meddled with.
He has to defend Blair’s unpopular policies he will be inheriting, from ID cards to Home Buyers packs. One could make a list as long as one’s arm.
He might have to explain why unemployment could be over 2m at the next election.
But as John Major showed after Thacher, people will overlook a mess that the previous PM made.
All Brown has to do is make the right noises and make a few controversial comments, for example, announce that Bush must stop being reckless on the environment and sign up to treaties and his approval ratings would shot through the roof.
Diss (South Norfolk DC), Con GAIN from LibDem. Unsure of result but majority roughly 100.
South Norfolk is a solid enough LibDem DC and I am personally amazed at this result.
Full result from South Norfolk was:
Susan Lesley Ayres, Liberal Democrat: 714 votes
Anthony Charles Palmer, Conservative: 845 votes - elected
Graham Sessions, Green Party: 102 votes
Turnout: 29.6%
21 - The Lib Dem councillor who retired had been a councillor for 19 years and had a very large personal vote but even so it is a good result for the Conservatives
Result in 2003 was ( 3 member ward )
Lib 1026 ( retiring councillor ) and 736
Ind 579 and 337
Con 551 and 546
Lab 305
I predicted a few threads back that we’d close the gap but not win - I mutual aided there a few times and got a good feel but LibDems and by-elections go together so, you know, I wasn’t too sure. This is an amazing result, esepcially as the Tories did no knocking-up at all because of the footie.
19. Mark, % are:
2006:
Con 45.4%
LD 28.9%
Lab 25.67%
Last time:
Con 46.03%
LD 27.39%
Lab 26.5%
so not great movements there
There’s something else, Mike. Whenever the guns have begun to shoot, Brown has ducked for cover. During both the Kosovo and Iraq campaigns he disappeared, doubtless hoping for a disaster which would bring down Blair and allow him to emerge saying he’d never agreed with the war in the first place. He won’t be able to hide when he’s PM.
25. The ward is in the Lab/Con marginal Dorset South.
26 Nick C. I think your a bit off target there Nick. One of the oddest things about this administration is the general invisibility of the Chancellor since 97. Outside of his brief and indeed sometimes within it, he rarely ventures into the spotlight. Essentially he’s allowed the strength of the economy to be his profile umbrella and to a large degree the strategy has worked.
As PM, in the lead up to a GE, he’ll not be able to hide, which will make the contest even more interesting !!
People often talk about ‘Teflon Tony’ but I think Mike’s article illustrates an often unnoticed skill of GB’s.
Because of his physical appearance( and as Nick P points out - role) people often view him as ’solid’ ‘ imposing’ ‘Iron”bullying’’scowling’ etc but there is also this other side to how he seems to operate which is much more agile and fluid.
He’s been incredibly good at assosciating himself with good things and avoiding bad stuff sticking to him.
I find myself doing it, even though i dislike PFI I some how assosciate it with Blair and not Brown EVEN THOUGH I KNOW ITS BROWNS BABY .
Apart from respective roles I suspect some of it might also be down to Blair’s use of his charisma to strongly assosciate policies with himself and’triangulation’ in his speeches - his love of attacking the public sector as a technique.
Brown doesnt seem to do this as much and so while both may be equally responsible for Nu lab policies ( good or Bad) Brown doesnt ’seem’ as assosciated with them.
Cameron seems to be using the same charismatic techniques as Blair in his recent speeches on the public sector but the crucial difference is he opts for apearing nice rather than apearing tough
Nick (3), think you have a valid point re tax credits. The marginal rate of tax on the poor in this country has been very high and anything that reduces the tax take from those with less is to be applauded (I still support a 50% tax band on earnings over £100k and hope that as the Lib dems seem to have dropped this, Labour can now pick it up).
However there is still lots of confusion. I have a part timer (she has a young child) who doesn’t want to work extra days because “it wouldn’t be worth it”. She was overpaid by the tax credit system by £1200 - she rang them and offerred to repay it to be told it doesnt matter it will be sorted out next year!
This sort of inefficency does lead people to think that the system is in a mess and that perhaps some less deserving members of the community are also being paid. Disability benefit is in a similar state. A chap we made redundant (at 63) who worked full time for us has now been signed off as unable to work and gets the allowance.
Gordon Brown seems to think that giving the money is sufficient. The cost of management consultants, IT projects and the delivery of well meaning but poorly thought out schemes is a real problem, which he seems unwilling or unable to tackle.
I have no confidence that the Tories would be any better, but am concerned that they couldn’t be much worse and may be perceived as worth a go.
Finally what is DfiD (I am sure I will kick myself when you tell me!)
[30] Department for International Development.
Do stop kicking when it hurts
DfID = Department for International Development
30 - but the marginal rate is even higher now (viz your part-timer).
Re- Browns Charisma,
Ive never met him but pretty much all the people Ive spoken to who have ( an unscientific 20 ish) talk about him in charismatic terms - the way he works a room, his warmth , how he makes an effort to shake everybody’s hand and thank them.
Sounds like basic run of the mill politician stuff but I think it does illustrate that he can turn on the charisma.
Its all right, I am English my kick missed - thanks!
34 - is that terribly relevant though? People who have met John Major in person say much the same - yet the wider public hardly saw him as charismatic.
OT ….. I’m in a state of shock having tried to phone an English friend and been confronted with his answerphone belting out the Hamiltons England Football song …….. surely this constitutes cruel and unusual punishment for a Scot !
36. and?
[35]
and so what Gordon is like when you meet him in person does not necessarily influence his public image very much.
36- At most Id say its marginal, but does explain some of his popularity within the Laboutr party.As your reply points out its media charisma that counts.
I guess im no further on than Mikes original point - Brown is a bit of mystery when it comes to media performance.
40. and again?
(I actually would like you to say if it’s good or bad, if being charismatic is so essential!)
Red Ken has advised Gordon Brown to call a snap GE should he become PM.
Source AP.
42 - I’m not saying it’s good or bad really. You can argue that after a leader with such a strong image as Blair, someone a bit less charismatic is good. I was just responding to what I thought crossland had said - that someone who is charismatic in person will necessarily have a charismatic media image too.
Crossland, having read 41 I agree with you.
44.”I’m not saying it’s good or bad really. You can argue that after a leader with such a strong image as Blair, someone a bit less charismatic is good”
what’s your opinion about this matter?
As far as I can see Brown, one to one, is very warm - he comes across as one of the good guys and inspires peraonal loyalty.
Plus, he and his office has certainly put in a lot of effort with the Labour party, much more than no 10 or most cabinet colleagues. This will help him win the leadership and an enthuse activist base, when the time comes.
45 Andrea. Stop trying to paxo poor book value !!
Cameron, Ming and Dafydd Wigley are in Blaenau Gwent today
47. Jack, you can see he’s a LD! He’s saying everything without saying nothing
45 - I don’t think Brown needs to be charismatic as such. The risk he does face is being seen as a bit grumpy - it would help if he could improve that, but he probably needs to just become more “neutral” rather than a Bill Clinton type.
The Lib Dems launch their family friendly proposals ….. no not of the Hemmings/Taylor variety :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5085380.stm
51. “no not of the Hemmings/Taylor variety :”
were the Oatens sitting in the first line with a “look at me” expression?
Charisma seems more important when your in the situation Lab was when TB became Leader ( and DC is now with The Tories) - that there is a strong belief that the party is not trusted but the new leader is.
The leader becomes the embodiement of how the party is changing and adopts a charismatic style , strongly assosciating themself with any policies.
As I mentioned above ‘triangulation’ is very attractive to this style of politics because it amplifies the image that the Leader is working for you the people and it is only the beaurocracy in between that is stopping him
‘Scars on my back’ etc.
53 - oh and bad spelling
52 Andrea. It’s one of those inevitable features of “celebrity” politicians that Oaten is bound to appear on TV on every marginal occassion. Yuck !
I didn’t rate him before “Shittygate” …. if you recall I named him the “Slug” , leaving a trail of political slime behind him …. wasn’t far wrong was I !!
55. Jack, please find another name to the scandal…..it makes me want to vomit everytime I read it!
55- when he was on QT time I thought he looked like a shifty gerbil that had won weightwatcher of the year.
My most hated Celebician /Polibrity is still Oona King though
51 Oh No - Not more policies from Ming - Does he not realise that the way to success is to follow DC’s example and have no policies at all . We will now have to put up with Conservatives running around like headless chickens as they did after the tax proposals were announced . Some will say they are too left wing . Others that they are right wing trying to outflank the Conservatives , Some that it is silly to have policies this far out from the next GE , Some that they will cost too much and Many will just wish that they had thought of them themselves .
Charisam, Feudal or Rational? Brown would argue that the third supported by the first is his strong point. In reality the second may be strongest. Still he is quite capable of appearing to be a nice guy. Many have said that he hides when the bullets are flying. This is true - but he is enough of a mystery to appear to be something new when he takes over.
57.”My most hated Celebician /Polibrity is still Oona King though ”
Diane Abbott is not much better.
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/57368802.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A6A787FA6DCEB52C9C4E9C89C783688B46
while here her dress is almost exploding:
http://www.aclt.org/images/claudia.jpg
55 Andrea. “NumberOnesGate” !!
Brown is well known enough now for ‘charisma’, or whatever you want to call it, to be less of a factor in his election or otherwise. What will be more important is that as PM there is no hiding place, he has to be answerable and the parts of his remit which have resulted in problems will be brought into the public consciousness to a greater degree.
Regarding lib dem family proposals, they all look sufficiently vague enough and shiftable enough to not be a millstone. They also appear to be a natural progression from previous policy.
Mike, interesting thread. “If, as is his plan, he manages to move into the top job without having to go through the ardours of fighting a leadership election he will have managed to by-pass, yet again, situations where he would have faced fierce questioning. ” I think that Gordon Brown’s ability to avoid tough debate’s/questioning might have been politically astute during Labour’s first 2 terms of office, and would have helped him achieve a good honeymoon bounce had he become leader before the last GE. But over the last couple of year’s I think that this “detachment” from the collective cabinet responsibility of Labour’s policies, coupled with the perception that he sits “sulking” in No11 waiting to be handed the leadership at a time of Tony Blair’s choosing, is now beginning to look like a major flaw. It might suit Gordon Brown’s ambition’s and the Labour party to have a “coronation” rather than a serious contest for the leadership, but I think that it would seriously undermine Brown’s credential’s as a PM with the voting public. Do political “myth’s” automatically perform well at PMQ’s and press conference’s where journalist’s might ask awkward questions?
PJ way back 1…are you kidding? He so dominates Blair that young Tony has told him to feck away off on the leadership so many times. It’s the wider party that is causing Tony to shorten his tenure not Brown.
Anyway he’ll lose the next election when he gets in as Labour leader.
St Edmundsbury BC- Kedington Ward
http://www.stedmundsbury.gov.uk/sebc/live/pdf/demserv/Kedington/ResultofPoll.pdf
Any psychologists out there? One simple question. Do you think Gordon Brown will “lighten up” once he becomes prime minister?
I saw Ed Milliband at the Charity Awards 2006 last night. I may be stating the obvious but he looks very young and comes over as rather bland.
I think he should grow a beard or something.
61 - I can’t help but notice your gradually disappearing by-line. Are you evolving into a Cheshire Cat and all that will remain will be a ….
. Where’s the Mad Hatter when you need him? Ah, there he is @66
34. I have (briefly) met him in Berlaymont and while he is better than he appears on TV he’s nothing special. Certainly, not even in the same league as TB’s overpowering ‘fuhrerkontakt’. The other NuLab luminaries I have personally met are Prezza (who is shorter than he looks) and Mandy who gave me the impression that he may be the anti-christ.
68. John, and who’s Alice?!
I’ve the strange feeling I would end up being the Queen of Hearts!
70 - Anna of course
. Anyway, this is still morning and we must be serious, earnest and analytical. Sorry for the distraction.
66. yes, but not massively as its very hard to change your personality especially if you are over 30.
‘Gloomy/sulky’ fits the general narrative of the media while he’s No2 and ‘after the prize’. When he gets the Crown that story will have changed though Im sure some commentators will be looking for any evidence to paint him as a Richard III type figure .
72 - Richard III? Will he lock up Hain and Hewitt in the Tower of London? I could warm to him…
The result from St Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, is a good hold for the Tories in a ward that the LibDems targeted. The agent for the Cons in that part of the world is excellent (if only he worked for us, preferably for free) and that added to the Row Heath win makes a good month for Suffolk Tories. A decent swing in Holt and a gain in Diss is pretty good for Norfolk Tories too.
Does anybody know what has happened to The Professor, he seems to have disappeared into thin air.
73. No, Hewitt, former Bennite, former Kinnockite, now Blairite, will become a Browite….it’s the natural path!
Jowell will end up in the Tower along with Reid.
74 Has the ward been fought since 2003 (when result was Con 423, Labour 250, no lib dem)?
Lib Dems seem to have reduced the majority to 100. (Con 350, Lib Dem 250, Lab 51).
68 John O. What do you mean …. 10/-
No the LibDems didn’t put up a candidate last time but made up for it this time!
Meeting Mandelson is not a pleasent experience- he has a damp handshake for starters. A friend at the BBC who had to deal with him on a regular basis described him as “essentially evil to the core”. If we can judge a man by his enemies then GB comes out rather well.
On the theme of style over substance, it is strange hearing that the Lib Dems should follow the Tories and have no policies. I seem to recall that politics was supposed to be all about ideas and policies. Have we dumbed down to such an extent that we will only vote for empty ciphers? I don’t think so- in fact the decline of voter participation can be matched more or less exactly to the decline in genuine policy debate.
At least with GB you know what his policies are, even the failures (and frankly the tax credit system is a total fiasco). DC has got to prove that he is more than a lightweight or he will be blown away by whoever opposes him.
Students from the rest of the UK will pay more to attend Scottish Universities ……. think themselves lucky we allow them to attend the best universities in the world.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5081668.stm
51: Yes, another excellent Lib Dems policy announcement. Ming and Vince are running rings around Cameron and Osbourne at the moment. When Osbourne announced several months ago that he was considering a flat tax I was horrified: this sort of radical, clear thinking could have been the jewel in the Tories’ economic crown and would have been a huge political asset for them. But then, in an act of abysmal political cowardice, Osbourne abandoned the policy. The flat tax is now up for grabs and I hope it will feature prominently in the next Liberal Democrat manifesto.
80.”Meeting Mandelson is not a pleasent experience- he has a damp handshake for starters. A friend at the BBC who had to deal with him on a regular basis described him as “essentially evil to the core”. ”
If Reinaldo reads it, you’re in deep trouble! All wizards from Brazil against you!
74 - “A decent swing in Holt” - The swing was against you in Holt. I understand that you chose to work it out last week by taking the total Conservative vote from 2003 when you put up only one candidate (as the Independent who topped the poll was one of the Con+Ind Alliance grouping) but that is neither a recognised nor remotely realistic way of calculating swing. I suspect you are aware of that.
374/384 Our Antony sees things through different coloured glasses to everyone else .
“Meeting Mandelson is not a pleasent experience- he has a damp handshake for starters. A friend at the BBC who had to deal with him on a regular basis described him as “essentially evil to the core””
Posts don’t get much more unpleasant than this. Keep it up Cicero.
82 - at what rate and threshold?
Cllr Baker isn’t a Tory - he’s independent. Check the results. The Tories scored IIRC c.17% and that is the base to calculate results not your method of deciding how people who voted Independent might have voted if they weren’t voting Independent. Don’t pick and choose the results that suit you.
BTW Are the LibDems now on a whacking great +3 in the May elections?
88 - “your method of deciding how people who voted Independent might have voted if they weren’t voting Independent”
He is not saying that, he is saying that you have to correct for the fact that the 2003 election had only one Tory candidate for a two-member seat.
89. But one councillor was thrown out from the party the week after the election…should we count it?!
But 17% of all votes cast were cast for the Conservatives in 2003 and +14% in the by-election. You cannot state with any certainty or trust that Clr Baker’s voters were Tories rather than LibDems.
Central Office, have Pelton Ward, Chester le Street, a Labour hold. Has anyone got the figures?. We have to watch the Labour figures in the North east, bit of a barometer at the moment.
92 - You make a giant assumption: you are assuming that of all the 2003 voters who split their ballots between the Independent and the Tory, not one single solitary one of them would have voted for two Tories instead had you had a full slate.
288 Antony , you speak with slightly forked tongue again . The council website officially describes him as Conservative and Independent Alliance though he is currently suspended .
93. Lab 530
Con 139
Lib Dem 113
Ind 46
A recap:
http://society.guardian.co.uk/localgovt/story/0,,1799354,00.html
there’s also a Plaid Cymru hold in Wales
93 - Chester-Le-Street figures not very exciting
LAB 530 CON 139 LIB 113 IND 46
2003 result 3 seats IND 949 LAB 925 , 879 , 853 CON 428
I will leave Antony to calculate the swing in such a way that it is a massive swing to the Conservatives
Andrea, many thanks, Gives Labour about 65%, Not what it was 15-20 years ago, but quite satisfactory. Imagine they are quite pleased, also taking Framwellgate Moor and Hartlepool into account from last week, things seem fairly stable. No real sign of a Labour uplift, they have just stopped the rot. Rather akin to most of the north, operating not much different to 2004 when Labour had a bad time.
I suspect the next election will be decided north of the Trent. Currently Labour would appear able to hold their 2005 general vote in this area. Up for grabs is whether there will be any more tactical voting from Cons to Lib Dem and to a lesser extent vice versa.
99. David(s). Pelton ward is in a safe constituency (Durham North)
I enjoyed hearing a Tory Shadow Minister (cant remember who) on Today earier this week promising that his policies would be announced in January 2008.
18 months of waffle to come.
95 - Baker stood as a Conservative in 1999 and Independent in 2003 but has always sat as part of the Conservative and Independent Alliance and they deliberately didn’t stand against him in 2003 (i.e. they stood one for the two member ward). The Conservative/Independents are like that in North Norfolk - it is an odd set up.
In any event, nobody calculates swing in a multi-member ward by adding up votes in the Little manner as it grossly understates the level of support of parties who do not put up the full slate. You either take the top or average vote for each party.
101 Icarus. How very dare you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our glorious leader has announced widespread and stunning policy initiatives on chocolate oranges, rap music and kiddies knickers. These carefully thought out stratagem have left the Labour and Lib Dems reeling.
Remember in policy terms and government less is more - less chocolate oranges, less rap music, less kiddies kickers
87: The lower the rate and the higher the threshold the better!
Gladstone and Innocent Abroad both make fair points, and I agree with IA’s analysis. Also, it would be politically much easier to promise to eliminate child poverty in some absolute terms (e.g. “no family will by 2012 have less income than £xxx”) than to pursue the elusive relative target, which can be messed up not because poverty isn’t falling fast but because the rich are doing even better. The same sort of argument arises over pensions - the campaign to relink pensions to earnings has everything to do with relative poverty.
Inconveniently, though, there is evidence to suggest that relative poverty produces serious problems for children (and for the society that they grow up in): the sense that they are excluded from what they see around them as the norm produces a high degree of alienation with all kinds of undesirable effects. So it may be that the harder job that we’ve set ourselves is the right one. And yes, of course, it’s paid from your and my taxes, Gladstone - if it could be magicked from nothing it wouldn’t be controversial. But it may be that we’ll like the society that it leads to better than if we’d kept the money…
To respond to john’s less objective point: this is simply not the case - look at the Budget statements by Brown to find his defence of tax credits. Brown is nearly always present at Treasury questions and debates, but there’s a team of half a dozen Treasury Ministers who respond to most of the questions. This is exactly the same as in every other department and always has been. The only Minister who has to field any question on anything is the Prime Minister.
On the personal impact question: Brown and Major could hardly be more different. Major strikes you immediately as a nice man - the first time I met him was when we bumped into each other going into the Commons library, and he instinctively stepped back to let me through first. He is *always* like that. But he’s no more charismatic than I am, and the crowd doesn’t exist who would follow me into battle, or even into a pub.
Brown has extraordinarily powerful charisma close up, and dominates any room he’s in. He’s also IMO very likeable, but you wouldn’t dream of saying something inconsequential to him, like ‘Nice weather’ or ‘Had a good holiday?’ as you certainly could to Major or Tony Blair. Peter Mandelson can be very pleasant or not - I remember him walking off in mid-sentence when he saw someone more interesting - though I liked his obvious enthusiasm for his dog, whom he rather clearly preferred to all his guests when the Select Committee visited his office as NI Secretary.
By-elections: agree with david(s)’s analysis except that we do seem to be having a bad series of results in Scotland: I suspect that being in power at both national and Scottish levels isn’t doing us much good electorally.
105.”I remember him walking off in mid-sentence when he saw someone more interesting - though I liked his obvious enthusiasm for his dog, whom he rather clearly preferred to all his guests when the Select Committee visited his office as NI Secretary.”
Oh, Dear, I would have destroyed him if he had behaved in that way with me.
He’s clearly an unpolite man!
104 Nick P. “… and the crowd doesn’t exist who would follow me into battle, or even a pub.”
Nick … you do yourself a dis-service. We on PB would follow you to the pub if you were paying !!
x05:
“I suspect that being in power at both national and Scottish levels isn’t doing us much good electorally.”
Nick P, surely you are not suggesting that when people see the consequences of Labour in power they vote for another party!
Other than that, thought your post was good.
104 - very useful. Any opinions on motherhood and apple pie for us?
105. I once dropped a bon mot regarding nationalisation in Mandy’s presence and he bared his teeth and emitted a strange reptilian hissing noise. I was dumbfounded for a few seconds until I realised this was his way of simulating, what we humans call, laughter. This is turning into quite a starf*cking thread and I’m enjoying enormously.
110 He reads this you know, Simon.
111. Don’t give a toss if he does.
[97] Awful result for Labour in Scotland. I am begining to think that the Holyrood elections will be a bloodbath for them, as they get caught in an SNP/Lib Dem pincer. (Oooo, painful).
[105] Hmm, damned with faint praise: “well, at least Mandy is nice to his dog…”
I don’t take back a word from my previous post- not a nice guy at all.
80.”At least with GB you know what his policies are, even the failures (and frankly the tax credit system is a total fiasco). DC has got to prove that he is more than a lightweight or he will be blown away by whoever opposes him.” I know what the policies are for the present government lead by Tony Blair, but I don’t know what a Brown led Labour manifesto will look like, or if it will be radically different from what has been on offer the last 9 year’s.
“On the theme of style over substance” I think that you need both as I am sure Blair and Cameron will tell you, there is no point having great policies if the salesman’s pitch does not grab the voter’s attention.
Let’s be honest, David Cameron has got to do what Tony Blair successfully did in 97 when he sold the public the Nu Labour project with the emphasis on the “new”. Gordon Brown if elected has got to sell the revamped “older” model, don’t know who will be successful but I think that they both need to be put under a bit of pressure to assess their reliability.
111/12. Simon, look at what happens to Mandy’s enemies:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/03/26/nwhe26.xml
Any thoughts on why the LibDems do so badly in South Norfolk but then so well in North Norfolk then, James & Mark? And can you answer without using the words “Norman” and “Lamb”?
Both seats put in a hell of a lot of effort, both have strong local gov bases yet compare 05 in NN and SN - plus the Diss result. Curious.
RE 105, Nick Palmer, whilst tax credits look good to Chianti drinking Champagne socialists, who are in an income bracket above where it applies, there are many problems with it, not least the fact that in effect families on it pay 70% in tax NI and clawback for every extra pound they earn leaves people on it seriously upset when they find out. Add to that the disaffection caused amongst young single people and you begin to have an electoral issue.
For my preference I would have preferred something administered by tax allowances, which whilst it would also benefit the wealthy families, would be much cheaper to operate, would require no clawback and would never over pay. Unfortunately I think some chancellor got rid of all the family friendly tax breaks there were. Who was that now?
113 - Cicero – I’m still not sure about there being a bloodbath. I can only think of ten seats where they are seriously likely to lose (which on the face of it is pretty bad), but if they even only pick up 4 or 5 list seats then they’re not looking at huge net losses.
70% ?
116.”And can you answer without using the words “Norman” and “Lamb”? ”
Simon Wright?
116 - I don’t know the answer , Antony , you are closer to the action than I am . Why did the Conservative vote fall so much in Norfolk Mid and SW in 2005 and rise so much in these in 2001 . These are the vagaries in swing variation in similar seats that do occur . FWIW IMHO , whilst the Norfolk S results were I believe disappointing to local lib Dems I think they were an average performance nationally and were held back by the Labour vote standing firm . The Diss result was good for your party ( it does not grate to give your opponents some praise sometimes ) but clearly the Lib Dem councillor who stood down had a large personal vote after being there 19 years - see the 2003 results . All these factors come into play with local council byelections on an individual basis .
As to the method of calculating swing in multi member wards , the 2 universally accepted methods are taking the highest vote of each party or taking the average vote per candidate . I prefer the latter as it reduces distortion where a candidate clearly has a large personal cross party vote but either method is acceptable . Your method of calculation is plainly mathematically incorrect and will give meaningless figures .
Any chance of a considered spin free response from yourself ?
Of course they are, I got them from the DC Website.
O/T but Argentina scored the most amazing goal in the first half - if you didn’t see it, I’d strongly advise you to try and catch the highlights. (24 passes and a back-heel in the build-up)
By-Election Results: Thursday 15th June 2006.
Gwynedd UA, Tywyn
PC 434 (51.9; +11.8), Ind 294 (35.1; -7.7), Lab 109 (13.0; -4.1).
Majority 140. Turnout 32%. PC hold. Last fought 2004.
South Norfolk DC, Diss
Con 845 (50.9; +25.5), LD Suzanne Ayres 714 (43.0; +2.9), Green 102 (6.1; +6.1), [Lab (0.0; -11.9)], [Ind (0.0; -22.6)].
Majority 131. Turnout 29.6%. Con gain from LD. Last fought 2003.
Chester-Le-Street DC, Pelton
Lab 530 (64.0; +23.8), Con 139 (16.8; -1.8), LD Philip Nathan 113 (13.6; +13.6), Ind 46 (5.6; -35.6).
Majority 391. Turnout 19.8%. Lab hold. Last fought 2004.
Purbeck DC, Swanage South
Con 642 (45.4; +9.8), LD Anita Chennell 409 (28.9; +6.6), Lab 363 (25.7; -4.3), [UKIP (0.0; -12.1)].
Majority 233. Turnout 30%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Swanage TC, Swanage South
Con 673 (47.8), LD Anita Chennell 480 (34.1), Lab 255 (18.1).
Majority 193. Turnout 30%. Con hold.
St Edmundsbury BC, Kedington
Con 350 (53.8; -9.1), LD Terry McNally 250 (38.4; +38.4), Lab 51 (7.8; -29.3).
Majority 100. Turnout 43%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Watford BC, Nascot
LD Mark Watkin 887 (45.4; +17.4), Con 828 (42.4; -12.0), Green 145 (7.4; +1.3), Lab 92 (4.7; -6.9).
Majority 59. Turnout 36.6%. LD gain from Con. Last fought 2004.
West Dunbartonshire UA, Dumbarton West
SNP 592 (45.1; +24.5), Lab 588 (44.8; -16.4), SSP 75 (5.7; -12.5), Con 58 (4.4; +4.4).
Majority 4. Turnout 46.2%. SNP gain from Lab. Last fought 2003.
Normandy PC, Worplesdon County
LD Mary Laker elected unopposed on 25th May 2006.
LD gain from Con.
Please note:
The figures for percentage change are based on the details of the results from the last time that there was an election in the ward by statute in the May (or sometimes June) elections, rather than by any by-election. We use the figures in The Local Elections Handbook by Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher.
The Party-defending seat is the party that the former Councillor (who has died, resigned or been disqualified) belonged to when she or he was elected not the one that she or he may have subsequently belonged to as a result of any defection.
Good to see the result from Normandy. Conquering here!
120 - A quite brilliant answer, Andrea. Two words to strike fear into the Little heart.
I think one key difference between North and South Norfolk is that the Lib Dems focussed in South on getting councillors elected and running the district, which they have done in a small “c” conservative area for many years. In North, the council was always secondary and they only made serious gains after an MP was elected.
122 - Nobody is suggesting that your numbers are in some way invented, Anthony, just that it is plainly statistical nonsense to calculate swing based on combined votes in multi-member wards. Ignoring the Conservative-allied independent who topped the poll easily, the Tories in 2003 stood one candidate who gained around 450 votes, the Lib Dems stood two, one of whom got slightly more than that and one slightly less. This clearly implies to anyone with a couple of brain cells to rub together that there are roughly equal numbers of Lib Dems and Tories in Holt. You must admit it is statistical nonsense to suggest it means there are twice as many Lib Dems as Tories.
124 - The Purbeck ward was of course also fought last month see Andrea’s post 25 .
25 - Yes it’s Ming’s repositioning on Europe. We are going to show a new ‘euro-realism’ stance by invading France
119: The effective marginal tax rate for those in receipt of the Working Families Tax credit is about 70% because the level of the WFTC is clawed back as income rises.
Say you earn £7,000 and are in receipt of the WFTC. You start working an extra shift and your income goes up to £7,100. Of that extra £100, £22 will be paid in income tax, £11 will be paid in national insurance contributions and, because your net income has risen by £67, your WFTC will be reduced by 55% of £67 = £36.85. Altogether, out of that extra £100, you actually only end up with an extra £30.15 in your pocket - a marginal tax rate of just under 70%.
110 - I must be the only person in politics with a good word to say for Peter. I used to run the ‘Youth & Student Day’ for the Lib Dems which included a number of ‘Question Time’ style debates. One year one of the Labour speakers let us down on the day and I had to do a quick ring round of the various Labour researchers I knew. One of those I rang was Derek Draper - a friend from NUS days - who was working for Peter at the time. Peter not only hot footed it across from parliament at half an hours notice but was very pleasant, took a great interest in what we doing on the day, and performed extremely well in the Question Time.
[125] Conquering here- and unopposed in Normandy
I imagine the Conservatives just had one of their Europhobe spasms…
Cllr Little is being economical with the actualite:
The changes in vote share in Diss since 2003 when last fought are as follows:
South Norfolk DC, Diss
Con 845 (50.9; +25.5)
LD Suzanne Ayres 714 (43.0; +2.9)
Green 102 (6.1; +6.1)
[Lab (0.0; -11.9)]
[Ind (0.0; -22.6)]
Majority 131.
Turnout 29.6%.
Con gain from LD.
While it is clearly a poor result for the Lib Dems (in a safish Conservative seat) - the Lib Dem share went up (genuinely). The Tories (at least in this part of Norfolk!
) clearly were the beneficiaries of the Ind withdrawal.
And if you compare the turnout at less than 30% compared with Holt’s 55% then you can see a different level of campaign (by the Lib Dems at least).
This makes the point that where it really matters in Con/Lib Dem battles in the south the results are significantly worse for the Tories than they are in the safe Conservative areas.
The new Mid Norfolk seat (IIRC) will be an interesting battle - must be a good change it will be one of the ’shock’ Lib Dem gains from the Tories next time.
Agree with you in principle Dan but I cannot work out if Mid Norfolk or the new Broadland seat is dodgier. You canot say that Indy votes went en masse to the Tories. How do you know that LibDems didn’t go Tory and Indys went LibDem? I am still amazed that the Libs lost this one.
The LibDems have not been able to get any traction into the residual Labour vote in South Norfolk, whereas they did in North. I really don’t know why. In 2001, South Norfolk (the in-laws live there) was a sea of orange but still the labour vote stubbornly remained at 25%+. South is perhaps not as prosperous and definitely not as trendy (except Harleston!) as the North. Perhaps there are also stronger remnants of that rural agricultural labour vote that we hear about on here.
RE 128, If Ming is going to promise to invade France I will be compelled to join the Lib dems….
233 - I’m surpised you’re amazed that the Tories won the Diss seat - your Tory colleagues on Vote2006 seem to think it was a shoo-in!
133 Antony , you have not responded to any of the points I raised in my post 121 . If you ask myself and James a question then it is courtesy to acknowledge and respond to my answer .
William Hills locally been told no market on Bromley.
Clearly so open and shut for the Conservatives they fear losing money.
Argentina just gone 6-0 up. Hope Sven is watching, their players seem to have the freedom to play and not act like a bunch of robots.
138 - you can still bet on Bromley on Betfair.
Sounds like Argentina are one of the few of the top teams to be genuinely impressive so far.
138.”Argentina just gone 6-0 up.”
tennis?
139 - Indeed, very good to watch. Very rare that a team that plays well in the group stages goes on to win it though… Avioding them makes the game against Sweden interesting again though…
Although I didn’t manage to get up the A140 to Diss, I’m told by colleagues who went that the place was plastered with LD posters and they were surprised to win it.
[121] Mark I’m not sure what ‘ Norfolk S results were I believe disappointing to local lib Dems I think they were an average performance nationally and were held back by the Labour vote standing firm ‘ was meant to mean, as the Labour party didn’t stand in this election?
[132] Sorry, I don’t think the votes went anywhere, with this low turnout we just got more of our voters to the polls than the other parties. Not a case of Independent switchers, just a case of differential turnout.
[135] I concur wholeheartedly. Although I hope his promise is worth more than my local Lib Dems who justify their manifesto with ‘well it’s what we’d like to do, not what we are able/going to do…’
RE 142, Ah, well I’ll stay with the Conservatives until Primeminister Ming declares war!
Surely Emperor Ming is the one famous for declaring war? Maybe Gordon really is a threat to the Lib Dems…
Flash Gordon, saviour of the Universe!
134 - I heard from somebody that Lamb was courted by both North and South Norfolk in the late 1980s/very early 1990s. He judged that the Labour vote was (at the time) higher in North but softer for much the reasons you describe and picked accordingly.
RE 144, My mistake, I’ll wait till Emperor Ming declares war before switching parties, but will watch out for “flash” Gordon, Aha! Savior of the universe…