Labour gets three points closer with Mori
June 18th, 2006[Updated 0730]
-
“Nearly one in four Labour supporters want their party to lose”
The Observer carries reports this morning of a new Mori poll that shows that amongst those certain to vote - the pollster’s normal way of presenting its headline figures - the Tories had a 7% lead.
-
The online version carries only a few details but those forking out £1.60 for the print edition edition get little extra information for their cash. Although there are fancy colour graphics on Cameron - Brown the Observer does not appear to mention the actual vote shares. It’s like saying that England won by two goals without giving the score.
The 7% compares with the 10 point Tory lead the pollster recorded from a survey at the end of May. The paper does not commission monthly polls but when it does carry out surveys it usually uses Mori whose monthly poll features in a range of publications.
On who has “the common touch” those interviewed rated Blair 27-62; Brown 37-45; and Cameron on 41-31. So the Eton-educated leader came out best.
An interesting finding is that 23 per cent of those saying they would vote Labour agreed with the statement “that the Labour party should be kicked out of power to give it a period out of office to rethink what they stand for and what their vision is for the future of the country”
Although the Observer is making this aspect their main point the question sounds like a leading one with an expectation that interviewees would answer yes. Mori, as I repeatedly state, does not use past voting weighting to ensure that it has a politically representative sample.
The Observer also carries details of a survey by Opinion Leader Research in a separate poll of what are described as “opinion formers’ from the worlds of business, the media and politics”. How they determine who to talk to is not clear and there are few details available. This shows that a narrow majority now expect either a Tory victory or a hung Parliament at the next election, although 45 per cent still believed Labour would win.
This finding is almost exactly in line with the latest General Election betting prices.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Much as I’d like to celebrate more good news in polling terms for Cameron’s Conservatives, I recognise two things from this. One, it’s a Mori poll, and we all know the dangers with that, and two, compared to the last Mori poll it’s a backwards step!
Nice that David Cameron is now given the Archbishop of Canterbury’s seal of approval as a role model father, on Fathers Day, along with David Beckham, the second most famous David in the country. Will we now see a string of endorsements from DC, followed by the inevitable call from Sven, having been allowed by FIFA to bring a new player in because of the unexpected alien kidnap of Michael Owen?
Sorry, strange turn of thought, but that is what Mori does to you. Especially on a Sunday morning.
Mike - You don’t cover the fact the Mori found that 53% rated Gordon Brown an asset to his party with only 27% against. Blair had a negative rating of 54% with only 33% say he was an asset.
Yet more polling evidence to support an early change of leadership. Bring on Gordon!
2 - all the seemingly contradictory evidence on Brown suggests that he is really unpopular with ’swing’ voters.
I should have added - Keep using those wonderful pictures of Blair Mike. What better case is there for Gordon than waking up to see those three pictures running across your computer screen.
It’s Mori.
When will there be a real poll? It seems it has been a while.
“It’s like saying that England won by two goals without giving the score.”
I should say that it is a bit ike saying England are one goal down halfway through the first half.
2. Gordon is relatively popular because for most people the economy is chugging along OK, despite the latest unemployment and trade figures, and the mounting debt burden (public and private). He has a highly developed sense of when to disappear that has served him well so far but will prove useless as PM when he would be constantly in the spotlight and have to face PMQ’s once a week.
I don’t think the post-Cameron change in the polls is fundamentally about individuals or personalities; the electorate decided that Labour didn’t really deserve a third term after they ignored public opinion - and their own evidence - over Iraq. Like 1992 in reverse, the problem was that the opposition didn’t appear to be acceptable (except that the Tories had at least repealed the Poll Tax by the election, though it was still being levied due to implementation lag). Once Smith became leader, and even more so with Blair, the public was happy to kick the Tories out without too much fear of the ‘other lot’. We’re not quite at that position yet, but we’re not far off. Brown will make no more difference to that than Redwood, Heseltine or Clarke would have done had Major stood down in 1995.
I can cast some light on the OLR survey. There are a fair number of MPs on that panel, including me. Once a month or so we get asked a range of questions on opinion-formers’ attitudes to politics, economics, and whoever pays for the survey (typically charities kee nto find out which of their campaigns has successfully caught our eye, and companies like BT). There are four or five institutes that do similar things.
I’d guess that the modest drop in the Tory lead reflects a small recovery in these calmer weeks in ‘certainty to vote’ among Labour voters, which was clearly the biggest problem with the last MORI survey for both Labour and LibDems.
The Westminster Tories and their Scottish colleagues in a mess over the Common Fisheries Policy …. hardly a surprise as the Tory Scottish Secretary - David Muchdull often gives an decent impression of a battered haddock !
http://www.sundayherald.com/56320
………………..
Meanwhile and still with Scottish fish ….. Salmond
…. Alec of the species, is pushing again for the anti Jacobite 1701 Act of Settlement to be repealed. This is the scurrilous and treacherous Act that bars catholics from the throne :
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=892782006
Tony has two dates to achieve before he goes.
Th rifrst is 10 years in powerie May 2007 and the second is beating margaret thatchers record which I think ic sometime in 2008.( Someone wil tell me exact date I am sure)
The former date still looks achievable,the later one less so.
An dof coourse event smay blow him off course - no not the Bromley byelection but the cash for honours investigation if it finishes too close to his door.
Roger H
10. 27th November 2008 is the date with destiny…
Roger and Rod, I’m really not convinced there’s any real evidence that the man himself sees these dates as significant. I could see Blair going the day before his 10th anniversary just to prove it wasn’t about ‘Him’; it was his duty. This seems to be far more Blairlike than beating Thatcher.
Surprised nobody has drawn attention to Brown’s rating compared to Reid and Miliband:
Brown +34
Reid -12
Miliband -29
There has often been talk on here that Labour won’t pick Brown as they poll worse under him than they do under Blair. This finding suggests they would do even worse under Reid or Miliband.
Shame they didn’t ask about Johnson. But this shows it may well be that Brown is Labour’s best bet even though they poll worse under him than under Blair.
An editorial in today’s Sunday Herald.
http://www.sundayherald.com/56327
13. Mike, do you know how many “don’t know” there were in the questions about Reid and especially Miliband (who, I suppose, is less known than Gordon and Reid)
IIRC wasn’t the ten point lead on the if it’s Cameron vs Brown question and not the headline who would you vote for?
Either way a 7 point lead will do for the moment, thanks.
15. Sorry don’t know.
16. No, Marcus
http://www.mori.com/polls/2006/mpm060530.shtml
I don’t even think there was a DC/Gordon question in the last MORI poll.
17. Thanks anyway.
There is no other data available on this poll. It’s not up on the Mori site yet and the Observer story was pretty light on detail.
There’s not a lot you can say - except roll on Tuesday or Wednesday when I’m hoping for the June ICM poll for the Guardian.
I do not think that Mori have asked a Cameron-Brown voting intention question since last October when it put Labour three points ahead.
It’s all quiet and I guess it will remain that way, apart from the by-elections, until September.
I’m off-topic here, but I can’t somehow put a message in the Bromley & Chislehurst thread. My prediction so far is:
(a) The actual result
OMRLP 68,537 (100%)
Others…. 0 (0%)
(b) If I were not a candidate
Con 14,700 (46.0%)
LD.. 9,400 (29.4%)
Lab. 3,300 (10.3%)
UKIP 2,300 ( 7.2%)
Green. 680 ( 2.1%)
JHC… 470 ( 1.5%)
ED…. 440 ( 1.4%)
NF…. 310 ( 1.0%)
Nick… 80 ( 0.3%)
MRP…. 30 ( 0.1%)
I tried to get hose columns all neatly co-ordinated but it didn’t work. Bah humbug.
“David Cameron is now given the Archbishop of Canterbury’s seal of approval as a role model father, on Fathers Day, along with David Beckham,”
Funny how the Archbishop smiles favourably upon David Beckham, whose kids are really going to relish the Rebecca Loos back editions and associated teasing from their classmates when they grow up a bit, despite the bit in the Blairite ‘dadpack’ about ‘not having affairs’. Perhaps bisexuals don’t count innthis regard at Lambeth Palace?
22 - Would a being a “model father” be made easier by being so rich that the normal day to day worries the rest of us have do not count. if i was as minted as DC ireckon I could run him close, as it is I think my kids think I do a good job having never have been handed anything on a plate….makes it that much better!!
Johnloony, what is the criteria for your prediction?
I was in North West London yesterday at a family reunion etc.
They are interested in politics and all think Cons 55-65% range,
LD’s 15-20%, UKIP and Labour 10-15.
Your prediction would shake the very foundations of my families predicting instincts.
24 - I’d be closer to John’s prediction, although I’d put the tories 4 points up with labour & UKIP down a couple.
I’m basing this on what I expect to happen rather than what I want to happen or as a transparent setup for a subsequent ‘well it turns out have been a disaster for x’ comment.
22 & 23 - Such envy is most unbecoming, gentlemen.
26 - Easy to say in his or maybe even your position, and its not envy just sick and tired of being told how great he, Beckham or anyone else is and the media making them in to something they are not.
Beckham has had an affair which he has not denied fully and DC has tip toed around his drug use. I have done neither but do I go on about it? No I am a normal father trying to do the best for my family, boasting about it when you are so privileged is “unbecoming”
I would love to swap my life with DC for a week or two and see who copes better on a day to day level??
Portilio did it for a TV programme and I think it really hit him what the “average” person has to put up with these days; DC has no idea at all. I know all the Tories on the site will disagree but he is hardly from a working even middle class background so how would he know?
Anyone watch Hard Talk on BBC 24. Nick Clegg on for half an hour with Neill grilling him. Well not so much grilling as gentle questioning, suprised me, not like his normal aggressive style which often leaves politicians reeling.
Was he going a bit easy on Clegg, perhaps a sign of the media wanting him to take over some time.
At the same time Clegg seems to be on a lot lately. Is that another sign?
A poor LD Bromley result, what could follow!!!!!!
27 - It wasn’t Cameron singing his own praises here - the Archbishop of Canterbury made this statement. I rather doubt David Cameron had anything to do with it, but you don’t have to be a working class, common man to be a good father and instill your children with decent values either, which is what you seem to be moaning about.
Don’t you know that the class war is over, Big Mak?
Bit difficult to believe Miliband’s rating of -29 since I doubt 29% of the population know who he is.
Sorry it’s off-topic but I thought some of you may enjoy this.
Imagine a political movement that had this agenda:
abolish league tables
support neither tuition fees, nor a graduate tax but instead free education
oppose Unions being compelled by law to ballot members before strike action
unions should not be banned by law from ‘political action’
it is shameful that a Labour government is involved in dropping bombs on Iraq
believe that current policy risks demonising all Muslims for the (unproven) actions of a few
believes that war is both an irrational and, a priori, an immoral way to solve disputes
the USA and UK, have become increasingly militaristic in their willingness to use war since the collapse of the Eastern Bloc. OULC,by contrast, believes that the UK should renounce nuclear weapons, withdraw from the NATO nuclear alliance, reduce military spending, end participation in the arms trade and follow a non- aligned policy.
Israel’s continuing occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza is indefensible.
do not believe that the greatest evil facing us is terrorism. Far worse are the conditions of poverty, exploitation, state repression and military occupation, commonplace under capitalism, that have helped give rise to Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.
the Iraqi workers’ movement is the key force in winning an independent, democratic, secular and socialist Iraq, free from foreign occupation and religious or nationalist tyranny.
source http://www.oulc.org/
Not my policies, not Respect’s policies, not old Labour, but Oxford Union Labour Club’s policy’s co-chaired by PM son Nicky Blair!
Meanwhile, the Mail on Sunday reports that Nicky Blair has attacked Britain’s human rights abuses on the website: “Are you aware of the human rights abuses that go on every day in Britain?” he is reported to have asked in a joint statement with his co-chairman.
Oh to be a fly on the wall at the Blair breakfast table!
29. The Ultra-Rich get richer and the poor poorer: the latter, often fatherless, grow up getting further out of control and fill our Prisons to bursting and beyond.
It seems to me that the class war is being waged very nicely thank you very much, with amorality thrown in for good measure.
Big Mak, do you not see that DC knows ’nuffink about nuffink’ - therefore has no need to bother his tiny little mind about the effect of policies on real people. As such, he is the perfect replacement for Tony Blair.
Correction: should be Oxford University Union Labour Club!
32 - I’m sure a political slime merchant like yourself knows amorality when he sees it, Zebidee.
“political slime merchant”
unfortunately AHM, I have been skipping your classes. But yes I do know it when I see it, and do not pretend this is a party political football. Moral decline is almost as endemic in British society as it is in the USA, and it’s a bit late to blame it on the Romans.
35 - A rather clumsy and specious rejoinder, particularly from someone with as much form on these things as you have - and a paper trail to match.
34: “political slime merchant”? You’re more than usually irascible today, AHM.
37 - I do get fed up with these holier than though Lib Dems, Nick. Particularly when some of them are the worst sinners around.
38 - ‘holier than thou’, rather.
AHM, I may have many other fault, but would suggest that you are somewhat wide of the beam. I am not aware of anyone ever impuning (rightly or wrongly) the personal morality of zebidee, or anyone else with whom you may have been correctly or incorectly connecting me.
Big Mak, you will be pleased to know that being a good father does not equate to the size of your bank balance (though that can make things easier or harder, naturally). Its all to do with the amount of time you devote to your children, and the values you intsill in them. I have met good and bad fathers in all income brackets.
41 - Hear, hear Tabman.
42 - it’s nice to agree on something for a change
43 - Very pleasant indeed.
Sadly, it seems to have become all too infrequent of late. 
42&43 - You miss my point (as often Tories do, in one ear and out the other) I agree money does not make you a better/worse parent. However it DOES make like simpler if you have a decent amount of cash and don’t have to worry to much about paying the bills(I am sure Dc does not have his wife in tears as I have when we realise we can’t go on holiday because we are not cash rich)
Don’t get me wrong we are a middle class family, I earn a good salary and my wife works part time but that seems not to matter.
As Zebedee rightly says only the rich get richer the rest of us just about make do.
While I agree Dc make be a good father (I am sure he is) why does the Archbishop not say this about average “Jo” why is it always someone who others really cannot ever truly relate too?
The Beckham’s and DC’s of this world who have everything can always tell us that we can do a better job but I bet they would never exchange places with us!
24. David(s). I don’t think 15-20% is good for the LDs. It would mean falling down.
143/144 Tabman/AHM. You pair of tarts !!
Get back to normal !!
45 - Big Mak. With the greatest respect, your argument seems to boil down to a complaint that DC and Beckham have got more money than you and that this disqualifies them from being an exemplar of any kind. I’m sorry, but to me smacks of simple class envy and is a contention which I simply cannot take seriously.
48 - Again you miss my point, as I say to my managers at work when they are in their “ivory towers” it’s very easy to tell others how to do their jobs better.
Now DC with his rantings on Green policy and how to feed & dress our kids, who does he think he is? (or Goldsmith or Geldoff…no “NORMAL” people helping him out I see)Nothing to do with class but made easier by him being so rich that he can afford to put a wind turbine or solar panels on his house, I can’t.
As for how to bring them up, it’s my responsibility NOT his and its up to me if I feed them chocolate orange and what type of clothing they wear.
It’s like the old argument about suitable TV, if you don’t like it you can always switch it off.
My point still stand when you are rich you have more time to tell others what to do, when you are not you are have hardly enough time to sort your own family out let alone others.
This is not a class thing, I have some seriously rich family, and I like them fine. Then again the day they tell me how to live my life is the day they can take a running jump, same goes for friends at the other end of the social scale.
Hope thats clearer for you.
[47] You’re 100 ahead of yourself, Jack - I know why, done it myself… you’ll also recall that Alastair was one of the Tories I caught on my fishing expedition the other day (along with Anna) - he’d rather vote Labour than Lib Dem!
49 - I think I will just have to leave you to your point then, because you still aren’t making any sense as far as I can tell.
50 - IA. I was recently reminded of the words of Sir Julian Critchley on this subject: ‘Dislike of the Lib Dems is the one thing that unites Labour and the Tories at election time.’
49 - So for you to develop a happier outlook on life should the state give you a hand up or a handout?
[49] Big Mak wrote when you are rich you have more time to tell others what to do … Polly Toynbee must be richer than Bill Gates, then
[51] It’s the dinner party scene from England, their England all over again
53 -
:lol: on both points!
Any comments on John Reid’s pathetic efforts at the Home Office thus far? Having been brought in with a brief to restore basic competence in administration at the Home Office he’s now made how many ridiculous policy announcements? What bad news was being buried today?
Is not the class argument somewhat dated-I am from a lower middle-class/skilled manual working class background- more and more southern skilled manual workers take the view,through home ownership,foreign holidays,being self-employed that up to a point,they have ‘joined the middle classes’- ‘middle class’ goes a long way,from being self-employed,being a tattooed White Van Man,up to someone in a professional occupation,playing tennis,living in a £1 million house, sending your kids to private school( which I would not do this side of the Earth stopping spinning on its axis )-any thoughts?
This Tabman AHM love-in made me laugh. First AHM says he doesn´t like holier than thou Lib Dems. Then Tabman makes a pretty holier than thou post. And finally AHM says he agrees with him.
Personally I don´t think we know enough abour Beckham, Dave, nor Big Mak to choose the best father between them. And I cannot understand why Thatcher failed to privatise the C of E.
57 - Tabman simply reiterated the point that I had made at 29, Peter. Nothing contradictory or ‘holier than thou’ about it. Nice try though…
I see: “holier as thou”
Getting away from the whole parenting debate (which I’m afraid I may have spawned in my first post) does anyone have any idea how things are going in Blaenau Gwent? It occurs to me that the Labour Party are quite pleased with whatever the result in Bromley because it stands a really good chance of hiding a bad result in Blaenau Gwent, given the London bias of the national media.
It would be nice to see some news from a seat that the natural party may well lose, rather than the foregone conclusion that seems to be Bromley (assuming other posters are right, I’m not going down until tomorrow so cannot say)
Are Labour on course to fail to regain Blaenau Gwent?
60. In the NOP poll some weeks ago they were ahead in the Westminster election by 12/13% (don’t recall the exact lead), while they were 3% behind in the Assembly election.
Thanks Andrea. I was hoping some of our socialist ‘friends’ might have been and could tell us more, but then I suspect many Labour members would like to use a failure here to try and force Blair to go early.
59 Peter P. I think the Tabman/Matlock “love-in” is a simple forerunner of the post 2009 Lib/Con pact.
Me thinks there’ll be a run on puke bags over the next few years though ……. just think of it … Tory bar charts and Lib Dem Orange Rinse Brigades …. just too much, too much !!
59 - Only by your rather, ummmm… ‘unique’ logic, Peter.
To bring things back to the subject of the thread, is any more known about the details of this Mori poll, such as the actual vote shares and who the survey was commissioned by?
63 - A frightening prospect indeed.
63. ” I think the Tabman/Matlock “love-in” is ”
Jack, I looked in the tabs and I didn’t find this new sex scandal.
Do you think Tabman will blame it to his hair? And Alastair? Do we know if he’s bald?
63 I hope you are wrong, Jack. I hoped we could cherry pick Ken Clarke and David Curry and leave the rest
I will now log off and see if my daughters need me…
66 - Certainly not! I’ll have you know that I possess a luxuriant silver mane!
FWIW A bit of money has gone on the Lib Dems in Bromley on Betfair at 4 and 5 to 1 and the Conservatives have a small amount available at 1.15 . One lucky soul was even able to place a bet in them at 2.5 .
66/68 Andrea/AHM. Young Matlock is the Dr Who of the Tory party …… We may only speculate on who he’ll become next ?? …… my guess is a cross between Disraeli, the Prince Regent and Lulu !! ….
51 - Yes that’s the Tories all over, you just don’t GET IT!!
52 - None of the above, I want them to leave me alone and let me get on, no hand outs or hand up needed nor wanted, I will do things off my own back and that way I owe nothing to anyone.
53 - Bad point, badly made. She is just a Journo, people will read her views and then throw them away. People like Gates and DC have real power, people may not listen but please tell me you son’t think Toynbee has the same clout as men like Gates or DC??
I can sympathise with Big Mak’s annoyance at some Tory posters taking a somewhat mocking,public schoolboy tone- that prevailed in the mid 1980s when I was at state grammar :I would respectfully remind the Tories they are going to need every swing voter they can enamour to even get remotely close to power next time-one false move by the Tories would be blown out of proportion by the media-so I feel quietly confident the Conservative Party will still be her Majesty’s loyal Opposition the day after the next general election
72 - If all ’swinging voters’ change their mind as often as you do, Patrick, then you may well have a point.
71 - Well I’ve lost your train of though as well, sorry, I presumed you were going on about the rich/poor divide needing state intervention. If you don’t want either a greater system of benefits or the reduction of what is stopping you creating greater wealth then I don’t see where you are heading.
The result of the completely hands off system that you suggest is more of the same, which is what you appear to dislike in the first place………..
Personally, I’ve been helped by growing up with an enabling state.
31,33 For the record, OULC = Oxford University Labour Club. Children playing politics. Even Blair Senior was too busy to waste his time with them. The only relevance to political betting is that I bet they’ll change their opinions several times before they grow up.
My on-line waver a few weeks ago was the first time since 1984 ,when I was a 13 year old boy,at the time of the miners strike,that I felt even close to supporting the Conservative Party-I repent my sins
75. “OULC = Oxford University Labour Club. Children playing politics”
Here’s their excutive full photo gallery:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~labclub/people.html
Some of them have clear problems in how to take a picture of themself.
7 - Apparently not, as you seem to be receding back into the darkness
78 should have been addressed to 76, rather.
75 - Great method of appealing to young voters that you’ve got there. Any chance you could try and be a bit more patronising next time?
Whilst on-line,I wonder if A H Matlock would offer an opinion to this assertion;when the Conseravtaive Party do re-gain office,they will have trimmed so far to the centre ground as to be almost indistinguishable from the Labour Party-this was the case in 1951,when Winston Churchill re-claimed power from Clement Attlee’s post-war Labour govt-may it be that we could see another period of ‘Bustskellism’-a word combining the names of Gaitskell and Rab Butler,Chancellor in the mid 50s,when you could hardly seperate the main parties-I am aware A H Matlock is a fair bit,well senior to myself,so I’d respect your view
75 I bet Nicky Blair doesn’t actually beleive any of that stuff. People know that they must appear to be well on the left to get elected as Chair of Oxford or Cambridge ULCs but it doesn’t mean they will actully believe it. Many of them have in private been as moderate as normall Brownite Chairs of Durham, Essex, Leeds etc.
81 - That remains to be seen, Patrick, and I have no crystal ball. Suffice it to say that I would expect a Conservative government to be worthy of the name insofar as the manner it runs the country and the policies it enacts. The mistake that most people make when discussing this subject is to conflate ‘conservatism’ and ‘Thatcherism’ when they are not not necessarily the same thing.
71 Big Mak: I think AHM does get it… To paraphrase your good self - money makes being a good father easy. Just stick a wind turbine on your house and your children will instantly be well-behaved and mannerly… Unfortunately families with higher income also have problems and children from rich households are not always given the care and attention they require.
As for DC telling people what they ought to do… All politicians do that! Just the other week we had the dream team telling us that driving 4×4s was such an evil and anti-social activity that it must be taxed punitively….
81 - You seem to be forgetting - or overlooking - that Thatcherism and the successive Conservative governments of the 1980s and mid 1990s have essentially forged the present ideological ‘consensus’ (to which even the Orange sweeties are at last acknowledging).
So, a Cameron administration, governing from a radically transformed centre established by its Conservative predecessors, shouldn’t really care too much about labels or who else might also be sharing ‘its’ natural terrain.
85 - Exactly right, John.
86 - Liege ;). (Long time, no hear :))
86:
should have been 
85,I should be more specific and say the ‘present centre ground’-I would not anticipate a wholesale return to policies of the 1950s and 1960s-what I would anticipate is that,whilst the late 70s/early 80s saw the polorisation of Britsh politics between the ultra-left Bennite agenda,and the opposite was Friedman monetarism(which incidentally Mrs.T largely abandoned after around 1982)-what I would foresee is a more consensual tone to Britsh politics,over the next 10-20 years
89 - Much of that will depend on how the Labour Party reacts internally to its inevitable defeat at the hands of David Cameron, Patrick.
Seriously though - If, when defeat finally comes for them, they turn inward on themselves as they did after 1979, or indeed as we did after 1997, then the new government may have much more latitude than anyone now foresees.
89 - Patrick, I really don’t want to be a sylistic ‘pedant’ (though sadly I am :(), but your posts would be FAR FAR easier to digest if you could simply add a space after punctuation or dashes.
91 - I think Jack W has some spares.
92 - Philip . I think you may be right !!!
92,93 - Too deep for me, particularly in a state of sublime semi-squiffiness. Pray explain to O’Bear with little brain
84 - Anna, i do not deny that any family rich or poor has problems. If you reread my posts it is the fact that with income some have they sem to think they can tell others how to live their lives.
Yes I agree politicians from every party but does that make it right?
As for 74 - ukpaul i do belive that some need a hand up, but too many want hand outs and that is the problem with this country.
If people actually wanted to better themselves they would consider a handout a falure to do that, a hand up however is acceptable.
We love this nanny stae mentality and then complain when some people abuse it. rather start making people helpo themselves, liberate them don’t treat them like children to be looked after from cradle to grave.
90. Alastair, I thought there was consensus about the fact that DC’s win will be so big that Labour will lose all their seats with the exception of the Rhondda. Then with all his versatility Rev YFronts will hold all Shadow portfolios leading Labour to a big poll bounce
92 / 93 b o o k v a l u e / A H M . R u b b i s h !
96 - Oooohhh right!! I’d forgotten about that!
*ahem* Yes - that is precisely what will happen.
I could lend him some ! ! ! ! ! !
99. Rik, of what?!
Exclamation marks!
99 Rik W. Typical Tory ! - “lend” !!!
I have been meaning to ask whether Rik and Jack were related.
102 - For a nominal fee and at a reasonable rate of interest.
103 Ford. Only in Rik’s worst nightmare !!
101. You love them. I found an Italian politician who liked them too. She was from Bolzano and she used to end her press releases with many !!!!. She apparently scared half of the city and she has been blamed for the CR defeat in mayoral election there.
Here’s one of her statements:
«Non ci credo che Benussi abbia detto così! Ve lo siete inventati voi giornalisti! Come sempre! A me non ha mai detto niente, lui! Me l’avrebbe detto, no? Berlusconi che fa perdere!!! Scherziamo? Le sinistre hanno vinto solo perché qui c’è la Svp! Perché ci sono migliaia di tedeschi che stanno qui, non nel resto dell’Italia! La coalizione? Abbiamo dato anima, soldi, sangue per la coalizione!».
(I know you probably can’t understand it, but you can count the !)
[104] AHM promises exclamation marks at a reasonable rate of interest … of course it’ll be reasonable, it’s set by the Bank of England. Let’s hear it for “Tories for Gordon in secret and not those nasty Lib Dems”
107 - IA. Fortuitously, I am unlikely to be personally presented with that dilemma here in Beaconsfield
Does anyone have an opine about what will happen to Labour in opposition? Given the dearth of talent/charisma in the junior ranks the future looks bleak.
90 - AHM: If, when defeat finally comes for them, they turn inward on themselves as they did after 1979, or indeed as we did after 1997, then the new government may have much more latitude than anyone now foresees.
Perhaps - but latitude to do what, exactly…?
110 - I am not thinking in terms of any policy specifics at this stage, Stephen, but in terms of the opportunity of being more assertive and radical than was originally thought possible.
111 - when you say, “more assertive and radical”, do you mean DC might pursue a policy agenda which will be (how shall we say?) traditionally Tory?
If yes, don’t you think he’ll run into trouble with the public, who’ve been promised a fluffy, green Tory leader with blurred edges?
If no, don’t you think he’ll run into trouble with his Tombstone MPs, who, though small in number, might have disproportionate influence in a minority (or small majority) Tory government?
Evening all :). Re: 109 - It’s an interesting question and cuts really to the heart of modern politics. How do parties “handle” defeat after a long period in office ? Given the experience of Labour after 1979, the Liberals after 1918, the Conservatives after 1997 and the US Democrats after 2000, not terribly well.
The problem is that after a period in power, it becomes all too tempting, I suspect, for those in power to believe it to be the natural order of things. Looking back at the antics of some Conservatives in the Major Government in the mid-90s, the only explanation seems to be that they believed somehow that however bad things got, they would get re-elected as they had in 1992.
Of course, all Governments and parties have a shelf life. There is a fairly predictable course of events which I call the “three-term rule”. In term 1, the incoming Government takes office. It is full of the ideas it has had time in opposition to craft and full of the energy of those wanting to carry these ideas out but being unable to do so. Despite these ideas, the Government spends much of term 1 clearing up the mess of the previosu administration and redressing some of its more obscure or failed policies.
In Term 2, the Government, armed with a new mandate, can put into effect the main ideas it developed in Opposition. These ideas will be the “sensible” ones, the ones which will work and they will carry the Government forward into Term 3.
Term 3 is where the problems start. The Government has been in power for so long it has become too comfortable and starts taking the electorate for granted. The sensible ideas having been implemented, the Government, wishing to continue to look full of energy and ideas, strives to push forward more radical ideas. These have been less well thought through and are less popular, not just within the Government but outside. In its inability to recognise its own shortcomings, the Government ploughs on in the face of growing opposition and begins to run out of steam.
Now, let’s consider the Opposition. In term 1, they are out of office, tired and bereft of ideas. The leadership that led them to defeat is replaced but usually only by second-ranking former ministers who are in effect still the last Government and are unable to break out of the ideas and mores of that period. In the first term, they are too busy fighting their internal battles to respond to the Government. In any case, nobody is listening to them anyway.
After a second defeat, the recognition begins to grow that the Party has to change, to reform and redevelop its platform of policies not only to recognise the changing world but also to recognise that elements of its previous platform were profoundly rejected by the electorate. In the seond term, it begins to more vigourously oppose the Government but its opposition to the Government’s “sensible” policies is weak. While the platform is still far from fully developed, the second term is the time for the Opposition to regnerate its own organisation.
The next defeat leads the Opposition to complete the process of internal reform. It can also continue the development of its own new policy platform amd is able to develop effective proposals to counter the more radical ideas of the Government’s third term. As the Government runs into trouble, the Opposition grows in strength and confidence.
The end of Term 3 may or may not mark a change in Government. If it doesn’t happen at the end of Term 3, it will happen at the end of Term 4 and on a larger and more profound scale.
While I think popular expectations of a Cameron Government will be impossible for that Government to match and while I think its own political “honeymoon” will be short, my guess is a Cameron Government would be re-elected in a 2013 election unless it seriously makes a mess.
The one certainty is that one day Labour will return to power in one form or another. What I can’t tell you is what policies it will be offering by then.
112 - That depends on what you mean by ‘traditionally Tory’, Stephen. I said earlier that Conservatism and Thatcherism are often taken to be the same thing when they are not.
As things stand, no specific policy proposals have been made to the public - we have said that we will not jeopardise economic stability for the sake of tax cuts, that the environment will be higher up the priority list than it has been under previous Conservative governments, and that we accept the importance of well run public services to the public. Within that, there is lots of room to be creative if circumstances (such as the state of the economy and national finances) permit.
O/T - Colin Montgomerie tied for lead in US Open with Phil Mickelson.
Montgomerie 1 hole to play, Mickelson 2 holes to play.
24. Con down a bit because Cameron is too lefty for Bromleyites.
LD up because it’s a by-election.
Lab down because Lab is in governemnt, and therefore swing to LD.
UKIP up more than usual because Farage is the candidate.
Green down because not enough resources to do a lot.
116 - “Con down a bit because Cameron is too lefty for Bromleyites.”
I am sorry but this kind of nonsense needs to be challenged. Cameron is in no way shape or form a lefty - he is an upper class, Etonian conservative whose more moderate pronouncements have been just that - MORE MODERATE - more moderate than the right wing bile we got from his predecessors.
Monty took 6 at the last, Mickleson’s to lose.
110 - exactly! Comments like that from that Matlock fella beg the question - what would a bouyant, upbeat Tory govt with a decent majority actually do? I shudder to think. Thatcher, Major and Blair have already gone where no man dared go before in terms of making this country conservative. How far would a new Tory government dare go?
84 - Anna, “As for DC telling people what they ought to do… All politicians do that! Just the other week we had the dream team telling us that driving 4×4s was such an evil and anti-social activity that it must be taxed punitively…. ”
It is an anti social activity. It does deserve to be taxed punitively.
Oh, Alastair…. “That depends on what you mean by ‘traditionally Tory’, Stephen. I said earlier that Conservatism and Thatcherism are often taken to be the same thing when they are not.”
So the Tories abandoned Conservatism at some time in the 1970s and turned Thatcherites instead…. which you have now abandonded.
Whyever did you not tell us about this at the time? Everybody thought you were still “Conservatives” inthe 1980s, but even nastier than ususal.
Ogilvy holes for par, Monty out.
Just seen John Loony 20 and david(s) 24
I think John’s prediction much more likely to be close. If it were a GE, Tory 55 - 60% would look about right for Tories, but in a suburban seat with a traditional Lib / LD second place (even though just beaten for second last year) you have got to be kidding David.
45% Tory, 32% Lib Dem, and 15% Labour looks about right, and it could be closer depending on whether a bandwagon rolls in next few days!
34, 51 - AH Matlock. Having read your postings here for a while can I be perhaps the first to say you are an obnoxious, judgemental old duffer and not actually very intelligent by the sounds of it.
Are you a local Tory party chairman or something? You remind me of one I once knew. Horrible man.
Why is someone posting things about golf? The world cup is on.
OYB - prepare for a severe “tongue-lashing” …
Well I’m sorry but why is he allowed to get away with it? Seems to me he is allowed to be really unpleasant and none of you pull him up on it. I suspect this is just some kind of respect for elders things, very misplaced if he is going to be as hateful as he has been above.
25 - They’re trying to ignore the idiot whose addled brain is on show at post 25.
Amazing what having a drink does to some people………
121 - I would explain it to you John, but I rather doubt you’re interested in listening - so why don’t you just wait and we’ll show you?
124 -
I am very happy to report, OYB, that you would be by no means the first. I have been called much worse by much better people - so try again and don’t hold back next time. 
OYB - my own preference (not always adhered to
) is to let contributors write what they write, and then be judged accordingly by people forming their own opinion.
Are you party-affiliated or unaligned?
Hello campers,;’Hi-de-Hi!’ ‘Ted can’t hear you’(Forced loud’Hi-de-Hi!)
O.K;Patrick’s back; one issue I have is the Conservative Party’s ability to run the economy-looking back:
(a)The sharp drop in interest rates post the 19/10/87 stock market crash.followed by Chancellor’s Lawson’s abolition of the 60,55,50,and 45% tax rates(incrementably installed:in 2006/7 terms you would earn
131,My post ended (basically)that a Denis Healey opposition would have beaten Mrs.T in 1983/4,despite the Falklands,in the same way Attlee beat Churchill-who cut me off,BTW?????
unaligned. i am interested in politics because i live in this country and like or not the awful people who go into politics have some power in society.
out of the parties, the tories are the ones i dislike the most, if that helps
133 - We’d never have guessed, old boy!
Going back to the original article, I was surprised to see that Cameron rated highly on “the common touch”, until I thought about it a bit more.
As members of the government for 9+ years, and one perceived to be insulating itself from the “ordinary man”, its hardly surprising that Blair and Brown are viewed as out of touch. It also shows how well Cameron’s PR people have been at his image - someone with two £1m+ houses, a nanny, genetic links to the aristocracy and royal family [deliberate non-capitalisation] and the expectation of a sizeable inheritance is hardly someone with the common touch.
And before anyone starts bangin on about Ming - I agree - he is a “patrician reekie lawyer” as I heard him described recently. But the point is he doesn’t pretend to be something he’s not, which is clearly the case with Cameron. And keeping up a pretence can be awful wearing …
133 - well I don’t think AHM is a party chairman, but he is something to do with Beaconsfield constituency party.
A.H Matlock,good evening,can I pose you a reasonbale question;
(a)What policies may a future Conservative govt follow to ensure reaonable economic stabilility-I do speak with experience of the late 80s Lawson boom’early 90s Lamont bust
(b)The blind adherence to monetarism by the first 2 1/2 years of MRs.T’s govt,which by independent sources,wiped out unnnecessarily 1 million jobs
(c)(Although not quite old enough to remember,Barber’s ‘dash for growth’,around 1973/4-there does seem a recurrent pattern,of Tory govts booming and busting-as a quiet,middle-of-the-road guy,I am sure you understand my reticence!
137 - I’m sorry to disappoint you, Patrick, but I am but a lowly grassroots Tory activist and would not presume to write the entire Conservative economic manifesto on an internet forum for your personal viewing pleasure.
B and C sound an awful lot like Labour propaganda that are pretty effectively debunked by subsequent Conservative electoral victories.
138,With due respect,Mr.Matlock,the major arguments from (b) and (c) were ,at least partially,from my ‘A’ level economics macro-econmomic file-with the greatest deference,I suggest your manner can be very patronising,and if you wish your party to succeed beyond your leafy middle-class roots,you would be well advised to remember many people in seats yo would need to gain to win a general election would take great offence at your tone- I’m not being nasty,before anyone syas-if you want to go to Eastbourne,on to the White Sisters,and jump proclaiming Thatcherism,that’s your funeral,mate,but don’t say I did’nt warn you…………..
139 - have you read The Children of Men?
Maybe Patrick would like to talk about the 1970’s under Labour if he assumes that things repeat themselves.
138 - I know one or two things about Economics myself, Patrick, and one of the first things you learn is that (as in everything else) hindsight is perfect. Mrs Thatcher’s government took the the best decisions it could based upon the best information available at the time early on in her first government in the midst of an extremely difficult set of circumstances, and while she didn’t always get things right, I think recent history has largely vindicated the decisions she took.
I do apologise if my comments have come over as patronising to you, they were actually intended to be humourous, but there you are.
As far as Eastbourne goes, do you not have a Conservative MP there? Things cannot possibly be quite as bad as you let on…
139(Addendum) The record of the Labour govt 1997( to a man born in 1971) is:
(a)Historically low interset-and mortgage rates,benefitting millions
(b)Largely borne from this:
(i)Stable,staedy economic growth-admittedly dropping to 1.8% 2005;reliably forcast for 2.4% 2007, 2.9% 2008
(c)Social justice;tax credits,admittedly not well administered, PLUS fast-rising minimum wage,taking millions out of poverty
(d)A conclusive end to the tragedy of Northern Ireland:the brave decision to re-classify many nationalist activists away from ‘terrorist’ to ‘political prisoner-of-war’ (I admit my Irish Catholic ancestry blurs my vision on this issue)
(e)Record.albeit with some waste,investment in public services
(f)Achieving the longest period of opposoition for 200 + years that the British Conservative Party have endured in oppositon;once safely installed,bring on KING GORDON IV!!!!!!!!!!!
143-I think I am going to be sick.
Brown was just lucky not to massively cock up the golden legacy left to him by the Conservatives. He is bankrupting this Country and annoyingly the true level will not be realised until we have to clean up his mess.
144 - Indeed. He even adhered to Ken Clarke’s spending plans for the first two or three years, did he not?
There is nothing original about economic stability under this tired government. The smartest decision they have taken on this front was to keep their fingers out, for which I give them full credit!
142,Mr Matlock,my comment 143 will come across as triumpahlist-it ‘passed in the post’,as it were!
I am NOT a Conservative-I can talk to Tories of the more paternalistic,’wet’ wing(I am probably right in surmising that is from where you come
(b)Tabman had to bring up the 1970s-
(i)The power cuts,and subsequent three-dayweek,occurrd under Mr.Heath’s administration-Friday 19th June 1970-Monday 4th March 1974
(ii)I am a blue-collar council worker,the oft-quoted ‘winter of discontent’ was:
(1)TV engineers of both ITV and BBC strilikng in Decemeber 1978
(2)Mr.Callaghan’s 5% pay policy being smacked b
y dustmen,general council workers,the grave-diggers of ONE,I repeat ONE Merseyside depot refusing to carry out orders
(3)The TGWU=affilated lorry drivers went out for an extraordinary pay claim-and I agree,they were prats-
BUT,does that excuse Mrs.Thatcher to want to take us back to the days of workhouses,people frightemed to speak-where do you drawe the line-Mrs.T saying kids go up chimneysecause its good for the econmomy?
AHM … I know it’s late and the children are in bed, but there’s no need to go using language like “Ken Clarke” !
Kind regards
TB
Kind regards
146 - A Wet?!! You have the temerity to call ME a Wet??!
:shock:
I have never been so insulted in my life!
Setting that to one side, why are you so determined to re-fight the election of 1979, Patrick? Callaghan lost, the Conservatives won, the country has moved on and the argument has changed.
147 - Come now, Tory Boy. We are all one big, happy and united party now, remember?
<