Will Labour’s Chameleon stalker bring the women back?
June 21st, 2006-
ICM’s data shows Tories leading by 11 points amongst females
On the day Labour launched the next stage of its plan to deal with David Cameron ICM released full data from its June poll showing a big gender divide in support for the parties.
Delegates arriving to hear the Tory leader’s “family friendly” speech yesterday were greeted at the door by a man dressed up as a Chameleon handing out leaflets. According to the Times “..the costume is terrific and must have cost a fortune. We are talking thousands here. I thought Labour was broke. Apparently not. Anyway, the money has been wasted, for the main problem with the lizard is that it is too cute to become a hate figure. Soon people will be wanting its autograph.”
Clearly this was a follow-on from the party’s local election TV broadcasts in April when the first “Dave the Chameleon” campaign was made public.
The ICM poll detail, meanwhile, shows a female vote share split of CON 42: LAB 31: LD 21 and follows the recent YouGov data which recorded a 15% Tory lead amongst women.
-
It is hard to see how the man in the rubber suit stunt will win back the women voters who seem to be leading the move from Labour.
When the “Dave the Chameleon” campaign was launched in April I questioned the strategy because it linked David Cameron with his party. All the polling evidence then showed that if you asked a voting intention question mentioning Cameron’s name as well as the party then the Tories got an uplift of 1-5%.
In fact this effect has now got bigger. The last time such a question was put the uplift in the Tory margin was 7%. Thus neither Labour nor the Lib Dems should do anything that links Cameron and Conservative. They should just ignore him.
Every single poll since the Chameleon campaign was launched has shown a Labour deficit. Before that the signs were that the Tory surge had faltered. But, of course, there have been many events since late April which have affected how people say they will vote so the it’s not possible to make the point that what I was saying then.
But it did appear that the “Chameleon” had been dead and buried with the local election disaster. Labour has enjoyed poll leads for so many years that it does not appear to be equipped to handle deficits. The return yesterday with the man in the rubber suit smacks, surely, of desperation.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
As I have said before: Where good women go, men will follow!
They are just a little slow in catching up…
Mike is right about linking the great man and the great party together. This is of mutual benefit to both especially the party. Anyone noticed plenty of “Cameron’s Conservatives” on leaflets, websites and the like?
Mike, is there any comparable data on linking Ming and the Libdems? I haven’t heard the saying “Campbell’s Libdems” but then it doesn’t roll off the tongue as easy as ” Cameron’s Conservatives”.
“Campbell’s Conservatives” sounds better than Libdems but not going to happen obviously.
Bring on the Chameleon! We could do with a cute cuddly mascot
I agree that Labour’s strategy seems wrong.
They ought instead to be reminding people quite how bad the Tories have been in power - notably on the economy. However corrupt and occasionally incompetant Labour have been over the last 9 years, it’s nothing compared to the Tories’ mishandling of the economy when they were in office. And the polls still show that Labour aren’t as hated as the Tories were back then.
Ironically perhaps Labour’s cack-handed approach to Cameron is another symptom of the Blair-Brown dispute. The relative economic performance of the 2 parties could well be Labour’s stongest card, but it may be that Blair is reluctant to play it, lest it reflects well on Brown.
I suspect that if Brown takes over we will see a resumed attack in this area, including Cameron’s role in Black Wednesday.
What price also a resurfacing of the drugs allegations against the Tory leader - no doubt strategically timed for 3 or 4 months before a planned General Election??
I hasten to add that the drugs stuff is all rumour and, even if the rumour is true, in my book it is hardly a disqualification for office.
But Labour can play very dirty (cf their local election campaign in Lambeth this year for a recent example). We could we see this in the context of one of their infamous “soft on drugs, soft on crime” campaigns, this time directed against the Tories.
We shall see, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they ran with this in around 18 months’ time.
Labour have been in power for almost ten years. Absolutely any voter will lay the horrendous crime figures at their doorstep and nobody else’s.
I don’t see what they can do at this point. It will take a miracle. The only thing that could possibly save them is a new leader with a raft of basically hardcore Tory policies.
The ICM poll data shows 39% of both men and women supporting the Conservatives but Labour gets 36% of men supporting them but only 32% of women. (page 2 of the Data set) http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2006/Guardian - May/OmGuardian-BPC (2).pdf
It seems that women are less likely to support labour than men but are not in love with Dave - their support has gone to the Lib Dems and particularly the Greens (that is the genuine Greens).
I disagree with Commentator, I think there’s plenty of mileage in attacking the Tories and Cameron in particular on crime.
They’ve voted against key legislation, removed wardens in councils they run, been sent to prison (Archer, Aitken) and, if the allegations are true, no wonder they’re soft on drugs.
People remember what the Tories are like and crime/anti-social behaviour is no longer a Tory issue by default. We should be hitting them hard on this.
6. It depends on the baseline. I don’t know how the figures have split historically, but as the Tory share hardly ever got above the low 30s between Black Wednesday and Cameron, there must have been a move in both sexes support. I do remember reading an article some time ago that women have always voted Conservative in larger numbers than men and had the electorate been solely female, Labour would not have won an election between 1945 and 1997.
I agree with Oxonian that Labour will almost certainly play dirty, but if it looks likely that Labour will lose the next election then the media will at worst hedge their bets in terms of knocking copy, and I’d question whether the public will buy it; we’ll be back to the good old Demon Eyes campaign. And if Gordon thinks that Black Wednesday will still play, he’s wrong (a) because he’s lost more himself selling off the gold reserves and (b) because it’s just too long ago - 17 years by the next election.
It is a silly stunt. But Camp Cameron are flip flopping on this - warm words about policies they voted against very recently. The Times sketch (click on my name for the link( on the event is pretty funny. Was Cameron really advertising for Vodafone? Was he really advocating increased mobile phone use by young children?
8 - And c) Cameron didn’t have any “role” in it.
Mike, when I read that a chameleon was giving out leaflets outside Cameron’s venue, I thought at first it was the Tories doing it!
It is clearly a vote winner for Dave Cameron and an own goal for Labour who have to attack him because he’s head and shoulders above their own disgraced leader.
It makes Labour look like the spiteful bullies in the school playground. Those bullies aren’t going to win any new friends.
Dave Cameron’s compassionate green Conservatives aim to reach out to the whole political spectrum and the Chameleon campaign reinforces that rather than undermine it.
Another technique imported from the States, like the flip-flops waved at the Republican convention vs. Kerry.
Like many such ideas, it won’t work here.
It really is silly to have an attack that drives home the single Tory message: “We’ve changed”.
But cheers for the free advertising, Gordo! It was his idea, this campaign, I think mike told us around the locals time.
8, 10, 11 - I think you risk confusing fact with Labour’s message.
Yes, Cameron’s role as one of Lamont’s team was small - but do you think that will stop Labour from using it?
Yes, Brown supported the ERM too - but he didn’t push up interest rates to 15%.
I agree it isn’t ‘fair’ but that certainly won’t stop Labour from running with it.
I think the 2 key issues for Lab/Con swing voters are the economy & law/order. To paraphrase the boss from Reggie Perrin (CJ?) “They didn’t get where they are today by giving the Tories an easy ride”.
Or indeed “why let the facts get in the way of a good attack story”.
Perception is key. I’d be interested to see what long terms trends polling there is (accept that issues polling is quite hard to compare) but my impression is that the Tories have never recovered the reputation for economic competance since 1992, whereas people have a kind of grudging respect for Brown’s work since 1997.
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think voters warm to Brown or will flock to him as leader - but I do still think he has a big edge over the Tories on the economy.
If I were Brown - and in the top job - I’d be seeking to portray Cameron as a lightweight whose only proper job involved losing millions in the ON-Digital debacle, and whose party screwed the economy when they were last in office. I’d also turn Cameron’s statements about “money isn’t everything” on their head - it’s easy for a man with 2 million pound houses to say that.
Forget the chameleon stuff; run with crime & the economy instead. Maybe that’s all to come once Blair stands down ..?
Oxonian, the trouble is that the economy is doing badly. Especially on the NHS, people are well aware Labour spent vast sums but they see their hospitals losing jobs and wards and closing.
As for law and order, it is the singgle biggest disaster for Labour at the moment. Early release, the HRA, “knife culture”, ASBOs and 24 hour drinking - that’s Blair/Brown legacy for you.
And Brown was there all through the Blair years, don’t see how he disassociates himself.
Lab would do better with a totally new broom, one not tainted by Blairism’s failure, one who can legitimately say “wasn’t me guv” and who can crack down hard (or promise to). But will they have the courage?
Mike - Sorry to be a bit critical here. Because PB.c has been a great feature on the political (and possibly betting!) scene. But could you please stop the constant whiff of “I told you so” posting. Other people do regularly support your points of view, so there often is not a need!!
3- Oxonian
The Tories made one big screwup on the economy: going into the ERM. They were just unfortunate to be the Party in power at the time. Labour and the Libdems were far more enthusiastic for the ERM than the Tories, many of whom had grave doubts about it. The Tories rightly got the blame for the ERM disaster, but Labour and the Libdems made the same mistake. They were just lucky.
That said, the electorate has a finite memory, and slowly forgets previous errors by Parties. So the ERM debacle is drifting out of immediate experience and into the history books. The current electorate wants answers to the current economic problems. I’m not sure what the relevant economic questions are, let alone the correct answers. In most recent GE’s, the deciding factor has been “the economy, stupid”, so in all probability, the Party that finds those right answers will be the next government.
9. That’s why he was talking about phones so much? Outrageous. And he’s bigging up Asda yet again…
He did have some good things to say on the transfer of tax allowances, but I’m much less convinced about the writing off of childcare as the other main plank.
Plus there was way too much of this ‘Let’s say that this is a good thing’ business. Since when has it been the main business of government to go round saying that things are a good thing? Legislate if you need to, and if not, shut up. However, Cameron really did say “We should give a leaning, rather than a law.”
That barometer of public opinion, my wife and her “Mum’s club”, have delcared that they love Dave the Chameleon! Out of seven young Mums, five thought it was run by the Tories - my wife got to look all smug as she knew it wasn’t! Gloat! It won’t work because DTC is so lovely looking and makes little gurgling noises. Hurrah for DTC!
Maybe the strategy isn’t to turn Cameron into a hate-figure at all. If instead people gradually get the idea that he’s a bit of a prat (likeable or otherwise) are they really going to want him in charge of the country?
(Just trying to work out what the plot might be…)
Lin
I do worry that Labour are holding fire on some revelations about David Cameron’s background / private life. It would be consistent with their approach for them to wait till they have their own change of leader before doing this.
In hindsight we may look back and wish we had chosen David Davis after all. At least with DD the worst that our opponents could throw at him were suggestions that his hair wasn’t all his own.
16 re voters’ personal experience of the economy, NHS and so on.
Yes, this is key and mirrors a Conservative mistake from two decades ago. When the official figures (which can be targetted or even fiddled) and the reality on the ground diverge, politicians quote the former but voters are swayed by the latter. Once it was Virginia Bottomley parroting the stats while ungrateful and unappreciative patients, relatives and visitors trudged passed closed wards.
For a lot of people, money is tight. Labour needs to drop policies that will make it tighter, like ID cards and the analogue television switch-off.
Good morning all . I must confess that I still have doubts on the validity of the statement that women have switched to the Conservatives to such a degree . If the figures quoted are correct then the corollary must be that to give the overall published vote share for the Conservatives of 37% then they must have lost support amongst men since the last GE . I find that hard to believe and if true would be worth a headline thread from Mike such as ” Will Cameron continue to lose votes amongst men ” . Strangely there is a glitch on the ICM site and the link to the June Guardian detailed data actually links to the May data .
I agree that the chameleon message from Labour backfired and only helped to give DC free advertising just as the attacks on BNP boosted their support in the local elections .
22 - Eleanor, A very doubtful thesis; If there was some terrible secret in DC’s background the Sunday papers would have found it, they all looked hard enough. He did drugs at university, it won’t stop people voting for him.
If the idiot behind the DTC campaign gets desperate he could of course have DTC smoking a giant spliff or something to try and dredge up the drugs story again. Like most things perpetrated by NuLab it won’t work.
24. Actually empirically amongst people I know, the Tory support amongst men is slightly faltering, as our image has turned rather “feminine” of late. I think there is a significant difference in the reasons why women are supporting us again from why women used to support us in the 1980s and earlier. The latter was based on social stability and family; the former is attempting to be about “modernising” the image of women in the work place and in society in general. No need to guess which one of those approaches more traditional men will support, and which might start to rile some. Misogeny is by no means dead in Britain c. 2006.
If Cameron gives tax breaks to the wealthy with children,and shafts the poor by reforming the tax credits system.
Seems a good conservative womens policy.
Perhaps all that we are seeing is the re-assertion of the rule that a governing party has its hands full governing and is always likely to be out-campaigned by opposition parties, who by definition have nowhere else to focus their attention and energies. Whilst Ali Campbell and Mandelson were in Whitehall, this rule was temporarily suspended, but their successors have shown themselves to be mere mortals…
re 24. Mark - ICM have told me there’s a problem with their links and sent me the data directly.
The published Tory 37% vote share was after the “spiral of silence” adjustment” whereby part of the refusers and don’t knows is distributed in line with what they said they voted last time. This had a major impact on this poll - one of the biggest I have ever seen.
Before this adjustment the shares were CON 39: LAB 31: LD 21.
There are no gender split figures with the “spiral of silence” adjustment.
Your overall point is still valid. Cameron is making very little progress amongst men
I think the chameleon is cute too (I liked the Demon Eyes poster too), but the point of the cammpaign is not to make people dislike Dave but to point out that DC’s current position is as lightweight as it gets - ‘I’m a nice chap and I want some nice things and I’ll maybe let you know some details in a year’. Because Gordon is a heavyweight, it makes sense to cement the Dave=lightweight link, whether or not it imeddiately shifts the polls (which IMO are currently mostly about perceived government failings rather than admiration for the Tories). I think men are on average more prone to attach importance to this, but in the long run it’s a bad thing with both sexes if they decide you’re insubstantial.
Haven’t many New Labour politicians made flip-flopping political journeys from pacifists to war trumpeteers, from CND to pro-nuclear, from civil rights groups like Liberty to Nixon-style repression? The chameleon is a fitting emblem for New Labour.
I have been more steadfast in what I believe than either DC or TB. Probably almost everybody on pb.c could say the same.
Perhaps the Cons should choose an animal for Gordo - perhaps a pig noshing on pension funds and tax take ?
I want a Dave, the Chameleon mug!
30 Nick, if that’s the case the campaign’s a real failure. It just seems to suport the idea that Dave is sweet and nice and a break from Tory ideologues of the past. Which of course he isn’t - on both counts.
Why not cast him as a career polititian? Who the hell else spends their 20s working for Norman Lamount anyway? He is the the classic Tory boy.
We seem to have some more rabid Labour posters this morning than usual. (I don’t include Nick Palmer as he is not rabid).
On the economy, Black Wednessday did not cause all the negative equity and other problems, it freed us from the ERM and we have as a country been doing reasonably well since. Negative equity etc. was caused by the previous recession. Why that happened is of course open to debate, but in part it happened because everywhere else was in recession.
As for the record of the last Conservative government, they inherited a country going to the dogs, where unions had put one Conservative government out and seriously undermined a Labour one. It was a country where the state owned an airline? which it had to subsidise? We just would not stand for that sort of rubbish now.
As to the future, well, Gordon has been Chancellor long enough to build up skeletons of his own. Pensions anyone?
So if the next election is about dredging up history, rest assured we are working on the campaign.
I don’t know quite how DC’s stratergy is going to work. It is clear that a period of fluffyness without policy announcements was called for, and it is working. The question is how long should it be. He is far better at PR than I am.
I do like the idea of Gordon the pig, at the trough of our money though, I think that will chime with a lot of people.
“Perhaps the Cons should choose an animal for Gordo - perhaps a pig noshing on pension funds and tax take ?”
Perhaps we shouldn’t…it would all end up like the 1997 election which ended up over-run by hordes of people in animal costumes - foxes, teddy bears, a rhinoceros and - of course - the rival chickens.
Labour seem to have been completely wrong-footed by Cameron and just cannot seem to anticipate what he is up to.
The Chameleon campaign style would have probably worked against Hague or IDS but won’t do Cameron any harm whatsoever.
Cameron is working through a very thorough segmented campaign, targeting the lost groups of essential Tory support: women, ethnic minorities, the environmentally aware, younger voters, city dwellers and yesterday, same sex and unmarried couples.
Many of these groups had come to believe that the Conservatives hated them - partly our fault, I admit; but partly due to years of negative stereotyping from our political opponents, too. You just cannot win power with large sub groups of society saying ‘I’d never vote Conservative’ before even looking at your policies.
Over the last few months he has done a fantastic job of reminding many in these groups that they share many Conservative values, and that we share many of theirs, so they should perhaps keep an open mind about us.
Persuading some of these people that we are really committed to them may take some time, persuading some of them to actually vote for us could take a long longer; but the project is underway.
The point is that Labour have relied on the ‘hate Tory’ factor nearly as much as the Lib dems have - and they cannot figure out what to do now the boot is increasingly ‘on the other foot’.
36. re the chicken - I don’t suppose the prospect of a close election will make a leaders tv debate any more likely ?
re the animal - I think you are right it looks petty - best idea is to steal the chameleon - which is what we are doing. Carry on DC.
Are there any tips from the USA to deal with “man of the people” style so called “compassionate conservatives” like DC and GWB.
New Orleans?
Mike at 29 - are we reading different ICM figs - as I said at 6 Dave seems to get equal numbers of men (39%) and women (39%) Though for some reason Labour gets 36% of men but only 32% of women - the other 4%, the silly things, are supporting the Lib Dems and the (real) Greens rather than moving to the fluffy Tories.
Mike. I wonder if you could comment on the ’spiral of silence issue’. I would have thought that, although the idea has some validity, the adjustment needs to be adjusted as the years go by. For instance, I can well believe that Tory voters might have been shy in the period 1994-7 but perhaps it’s Labour voters who are shyer now in admitting their allegiance. Tories may be happier to admit their allegiance. Do ICM deal with this potential problem?
35 Benedict. Either the Tories were responsible for the economy during their 18 years in office or not. And if not who the hell was ?? ……. And of course the same goes for this Labour administration.
I’m sure you’re not suffering from sea sickness (selective economic amnesia) just a case political indegestion. Burp !
The trouble with Dave the Chameleon is that like Crazy frog he may be irritating but he will be loved by many and it focuses on entirely the wrong aspect of criticism against the Tories. While we continue to drone on about “weren’t things terrible under the Tories” (which they were) most voters have moved on and what to deal with what’s wrong NOW.
Meanwhile instead of focusing on building and developing our good policies we jump from one crisis to another knee jerking to all the tabloid headlines. And because we’ve got so much complacency have now decided to take a pot at Alan Simpson MP in our own ranks! Sheer madness………
We’ve had the Vicar of St. Albions - now we’ve got Bishop Cameron…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/21/ncam121.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/21/ixuknews.html
35 - surely what Black Wednesday did was show the voters they had been hoodwinked. Before it the message was “its painful but you should accept the pain because it will cure the disease”, and that was message from all three parties so voters accepted it as true (except the Euro-sceptics). Black Wednesday showed that it was untrue - stopping the medicine (ERM) resulted in recovery. When that became apparent in 1993/4 it was over for Major. Labour wasn’t tarred with the same brush because it hadn’t been in power and then it became NuLab. Like Bush with “No New Taxes” voters don’t easily forgive being misled.
Labour’s fall as result of misleading people over Iraq was hidden by FPTP (so a majority with only 36% support) but I personally find it hard to believe they will poll close to 36% in next election. If Cameron can continue to attract high levels of female support then he nay well position the Conservatives to win though a hung parliament still seems more likely.
RE 42, Jack W, The point I was making is that the position the Conservative government started on was a very very bad one, where as this government has started with a benign one. Where would we have been if those 18 years were cut short?
DTC can work by highlighting certain ‘policy stance’ s that DC makes. as long as it gets picked up by the media it can ‘freeze frame’ on DC when he is makling a particular statement.
So far its been wheeled out when Dc was being’Green’. If it can be used to higlight DC when he is being ‘Family and chilcare’ friendly then that’s another good area to pin him down on.
Brown knows Nulab’s other main selling point apart from the Economy is its Family agenda
( sure start/Maternity /Carers/paternity leave/child poverty/tax credits etc )
DC’s voting record on the above isn’t great and im sure Brown would love to get the chance to slug out ‘who is the most family friendly’ with DC.
But I do think dressing up in suits to do it is a bit naff.
The Tories love the Chameleon attack it is so misconceived. Nick Palmer reckons it will establish Cameron as lightweight. That doesn’t wash, he has the authority of office which will give him gravitas. Particularly if he picks a fight with his own right-wing. Ironically the right-wing have ducked a fight because he is too popular and has winner written all over him.
PMQs would expose Dave as a lightweight we were told around his election, yet he gives the ever slippery Blair a run for his money, better in fact than Howard or IDS ever did.
There has been a mood change in the country, there is nothing Labour can do now. Trust is gone. Brown is not anywhere near as good a politician as Blair. Brown is a machine politician, Blair is a media politician. Blair is a genius who over-reached himself with Iraq. But the trust in Labour has gone.
35 - Recent policy announcements from Osborne and Cameron do not exactly inpire confidence in their economic expertise . We first had GO saying we must wait to see the state of the economy in 3/4 years time before deciding whether there can be tax cuts but since then we have had :-
Increase in prison building - Cost £ 15 bn
Reintroducing transferrable tax allowances
between married couples - Cost £ 10.5 bn
Tax allowance for the rich to help pay
pay for their nannies - Cost £ ??
Whose tax is going to go up to pay for these proposals and those to come ?
“I do like the idea of Gordon the pig, at the trough of our money though, I think that will chime with a lot of people”
Unfortunately nearly all dyed in the wool Tories………but for the rest of us it’s likely to bring back memories of 18 years that most of us (including David Cameron) are trying to forget.
But Mark, you have ignored the money they will save by not buying a couple of planes for ministers!!!
RE 47, The problem with the argument, “You voted against this anti terror/family friendly bill” so you are soft on crime or not family friendly is hogwash because it assumes the bills concerned would achieve what they are said to achieve. Frequently this is not the case.
There is no doubt for example that Guantanomo 9sic) bay has saved lives because it has locked up some terrorists. There is no doubt in my mind that in the long term it will cost many more because it is a recruiting sergent for terrorism.
I don’t think that labours policies have been either family friendly or of much practicle use in the fight on crime. Let us not forget that most ASBO’s outlaw people from committing criminal acts and that therefore the problem was not that we needed new laws, but no one was enforcing the ones we had.
46 Benedict. We could all track back into the economic past to determine the competence of various administrations and their legacy …. Barber, huge 70s oil price hikes etc.
We do know that the Tories in 97 opposed Bank of England independence and can we say that a Tory Chancellor wouldn’t have had his sticky mits on interest rates ??
The Tories needed to lose in 97, the worry is it has taken 3 election defeats for them to come back to the table. However my economic concern is that the Tories have accepted Labours project on public services and the prospect of Thatcherite economic reform and tax cuts has been left in the nascent hands of the Orange Booker Lib Dems … Mhhhmmmmm.
47. The Conservatives spent £3,500 on groundhog suits in the GE campaign…
RE 53, I think GO is clear on this, we put economic stability ahead of tax cuts, as you would have to be a loony to say otherwise. Thatcher did the same.
GO has also said that over a parliament the overall tax burden would go down. That is also Thatcherite.
You can’t offer tax cuts now because you don;t know where we will be when the GE comes, and because it will be used to whip us with in any case. (mean nasty tax cutting tories…)
Just take a look at what is being said about transferable allowances. I can see this helping lots of poor families who have only one person working because the only work the stay at home parent could get would not pay for child care, and yet we are being almost immeadiatly portrayed as Mr nasty given the rich tax breaks.
The same happened with the patient passport, aimed at giving the opt out to people who would have to wait so long for treatment that it would be almost pointless raise the money in their hard pressed families, and we get accused of wanting to subsidise the rich!
Benedict at 52 wrote: “The problem with the argument, “You voted against this anti terror/family friendly bill” so you are soft on crime or not family friendly is hogwash because it assumes the bills concerned would achieve what they are said to achieve. Frequently this is not the case.”
I know that, you know that … but it doesn’t stop Labour running this argument, and running it hard. If in any doubt, just look at the way Labour have successfully used exactly this approach against the Lib Dems in Southwark, Lambeth, Hartlepool etc etc.
It’s only a matter of time before they turn the same spotlight on the Tories. And they’re aided in that regard by the fact that there are a number of high profile Tories (Aitken, Archer on the one side; even Cameron with the drufs stuff on the other) they can tar with that brush.
The only sure-fire way that the Tories can fight that off is by tacking to the right, towards their hang ‘em, flog ‘em instincts. But DC shows no signs of wanting to go there.
sorry, for “drufs” read “drugs”.
Unless there are also some drufs allegations we don’t know about …
30.”Because Gordon is a heavyweight, it makes sense to cement the Dave=lightweight” Nick, the problem is that the public perception of Gordon Brown as a “heavyweight” has been slowly eroding over the last couple of year’s. Here we have a potential prime minister who is sitting in No11 briefing against his own boss whilst trying to run a backseat negative campaign against David Cameron. He then has the added problem of having to manage set piece PR stunts to try and halt his own sliding personal ratings.
If Gordon Brown does not participate in a serious leadership contest then I think that this will damage his image even further and make him appear even more distant and reluctant to engage in a serious political debate with his opponents or the public. He can’t now put the “genie” back in the bottle regarding more open forum’s like Questiontime during GE’s. Without any real evidence there seems to be an assumption that Gordon Brown will be more heavyweight under pressure than say David Cameron or Ming Campbell who were both “tested” under pressure before even being elected leader of their party.
Labour have really run out of steam…..In the words of my ex- a lovely girl from the North West. “i am voting for your lot now….Labour are so over”
2 more things Chameleon Campaign will not work…cements idea of Labour as bullying - something which has been felt recently.
Attacking Cameron on Policy is just boring and no-one who matters (voters) pays attention
so find a new strategy…but where?
55 Benedict. The Tories need to be bolder. Tinkering round the edges of public service reform isn’t going to cut it. I think the time is right in term of public acceptance of such reforms. The squandering of public cash is horrific. This will enable the Tories to offer tax cuts, indeed a switch to consumption taxes (as the Tories enacted in the 80s) will allow them to go further.
Being a pale imitation of NuLabour isn’t very enticing !!
Interesting this talk of Cameron having “Winner written all over him”……I’ve just read Piers Morgan’ diaries from the early ’90’s and what is obvious is that the hyperbole surrounding Cameron was nothing compared to what Blair was receiving at that time. He was lauded not only for his charisma but for his political skill and ideas as well. Politicians from Europe and the US were lining up to get to know him. I think Cameron has a long way to go before he gets into that league.
Re 56, Well, I am glad we agree, and we will have to see how DC seeks to nuetralise the argument. It is one that needs dealing with but then there is so much inherent dishonesty in politics it is dffficult to see a way out.
One thing we could use against Labour is the number of Conservative policies they voted against then reversed only to re-enact later in a slightly different way.
Re 57, No I am not aware of any drufs question as far as DC goes
Makes Cameron look a lightweight, said Mr Palmer. Well it isn’t working. Since the campaign was launched Cameron has become more popular.
Childish name calling makes those that are childish look lightweight. Maybe they have been involved in dirty politics for so long, they have lost touch with any concept of good manners. Mr Palmer, respect in this day and age does not automatically come from the office you hold, it comes from how you conduct yourself.
I have never been involved in personal abuse, although Mr Palmer has on several times suggested I have simply because I repeatedly ask difficult questions, and yet he supports what amounts to immature name calling that would be more suited in a kindergarden. Shame on you Mr Palmer!
The Czechs introduced joint taxation for couples with children last year, and it’s been massively popular - the uptake was well beyond what they were expecting.
55 Transferable tax allowances may well help some poor families that is not my point which is - whose tax is going to go up to pay for them .
kingbongo @ 25 said: If there was some terrible secret in DC’s background the Sunday papers would have found it, they all looked hard enough. He did drugs at university, it won’t stop people voting for him.
I think the unfortunate Mr Oaten proved that the Sunday papers are quite adept at keeping knocking stories in the bag until they’re needed.
As far as I’m aware it’s not been confirmed that Cameron “did drugs at university” as you suggest - but if he did, I’ll give you a tip from our experiences in the Lib Dems: Charles Kennedy started drinking at university. We could have saved ourselves an awful lots of grief by asking him the simple question “have you stopped?”
Roger, yes Blair was very popular, but did you also check to see how popular John Smith was?
Blair was a fresh-faced good-looking inheritor of the John Smith legacy and the people had enormous faith in him. Millions of people like myself put our trust in him, only to discover he was a great pretender and was more right wing than Thatcher and was a less than honest warmonger.
Do you really think if John Smith was still alive and leading the Labour Party, things would have ended up like this? That man was a giant compared to Blair. Cameron may be starting from a lower base, but he is earning the confidence of the people, not getting it handed to him on a plate from his predecessor.
56.”The only sure-fire way that the Tories can fight that off is by tacking to the right, towards their hang ‘em, flog ‘em instincts. But DC shows no signs of wanting to go there.” Sorry, that boat sailed for the last time back in 2005.
In fact these days people are not interested in how the tories voted on a certain bill, instead they want to know why Labour can’t successfully implement the legislation!
33. Andrea, I wanted a mug too! I think you’ll find some bright spark selling them at the party conference. Although which party conference remains to be seen! Anyway, I’ve given one of our few Labour councillors a request to purchase a mug or a T-shirt if they see one.
Dave the Chameleon is, IMHO, an awful attack ad, simply because it doesn’t work. It’s like attacking someone with a blamange.
As far as I am concerned, I was 13 when we came out of the ERM. Lika a large number of potential voters, I have no real memory of the arguments at the time, or any clear decision in my mind as to the relevant economic competence of the COnservatives. However I am all too aware that I now pay much more in tax than I did in 1997 as part of my wages, and that I have had to watch three good hospitals close and four wards in our two acute hospitals, along with nearly 200 nursing staff. This is being repeated across the country.
Part of the reason DC is targetting younger voters is that they don’t have the memory of the Conservative government of 1979-1997. They were mostly born during it, and consequently only remember Blair. At the next election, widely expected in 2009, there will be people voting who were born in 1991. It will be the first election to include voters who never lived through a Thatcher government. At every general election we lost, the memory faded of some of the mistakes we made in the dying years of the Conservative government. Unfortunately we also allowed the memory to fade as to the successes we had. But to start talking about the 1980’s and early 1990’s in 2009 is about as relevant as talking about the Labour government of 1974-79 was in 1997.
I think we have a long way to go to persuade voters to trust us again. At the moment we are just trying to get them to open their minds about us. We have changed as a party. We are no longer the stuffed shirt blue rinse brigade. They still exist, but the power has moved on. We are a party renewed. If we want a mascot, then I propose the Phoenix.
RE 60, Jack W, You are right to say that this government has shown that throwing cash at public services does not help. Most of the improvements in NHS throughput since 1990 happened either under the last Conservative government or whilst their spending plans were being followed. The problem is how you stop the waste. The only way currently to do so is to ask the people who are wasting the money to stop doing so, and they would rather cut nurses. (If they were any good they would not have been wasting so much money anyway.)
More imagination is needed and it will take time to come off.
RE 65, No idea who will pay for it, we have not produced a budget yet.
70 - And unless you can give some clues as to who will pay for your present and future proposals you will not be trusted enough to produce a budget .
RE 71, When you say “you” if you mean me, I am not in a position of power in the Conservative party, if you mean us, then we will have produced a costed manifesto and policy statements for the next election when it will be more relevant.
Marcus at 37 claims: ‘Cameron is working through a very thorough segmented campaign, targeting the lost groups of essential Tory support: women, ethnic minorities, the environmentally aware, younger voters, city dwellers and yesterday, same sex and unmarried couples.’
Ah those were the days - I distinctly remember Norman Tebbit as Party Chairman in 1987 having words with Maggie ‘It’s outrageious Prime Minister - your last press conference had no sandal wearing, asian, gay parents on the platform. I’ll get it sorted pronto’!
Now Marcus repeat after me - ‘Four legs good two legs bad’
The Conservative candidate in Bromley seems to be having problems with the law (I hope this link works okay)
http://www.recessmonkey.com/2006/06/20/bob-0-fifa-1/
60-Jack W
‘The squandering of public cash is horrific. This will enable the Tories to offer tax cuts, indeed a switch to consumption taxes (as the Tories enacted in the 80s) will allow them to go further’.
Agree,examples of the waste over the past 9 years could fill an entire election manifesto and at the same time illustrate scope for tax cuts.
Hopefully nearer to the next election,when the state of the economy is clearer along with the real cost of unreformed public sector pensions,some meat can be put on the bones.
Maybe consumption taxes can be linked to council tax reform,since government VAT receipts (around £ 80 billion) is almost the exact sum that it passes on to local councils in grants.
72 The You was the party You . So in effect what you personally are saying is that until your party produce their detailed costed manifesto all these current ” policy ” announcements are just froth and candyfloss .
Re 76, No it is not just candyfloss, whilst you can cost a given policy, it is difficult to add all the numbers because we do not have them all yet. I suspect some will come from looking at the tax credit system though as it is pouring billions away in over payments and administration.
77 So until then , we will have to just tot up the cost of these proposals as they are announced on a daily basis in the hope that your party will find the means to pay for them when it gets to look at the books but I would bet that the first proposals that would be ditched would be those that help the poor and the last would be those that benefit the rich .
77 Re 76, No it is not just candyfloss, whilst you can cost a given policy, it is difficult to add all the numbers because we do not have them all yet. I suspect some will come from looking at the tax credit system though as it is pouring billions away in over payments and administration.
by Benedict White June 21st, 2006 at 11:47 am
You must be wrong there. Cameron made a speech the other day where he wanted tax relief for childcare costs. Have you thought about the administration involved, and the potential for fraud? Millions of families would been to provide tax returns who do not do so at present. The administration cost would outweigh any benefit they received.
75 john. I’m concerned that the Tories are too timid and the mood music from Osbourne on GDP/Public Spending ratio and tax cuts isn’t encouraging. Time will tell.
As far as local authority finance is concerned, one of the few Lib Dem election taxation proposals I supported was the Local Income Tax. Although the middle income levels were set too high. The principle is correct. Councils should take more direct responsibility for their finance and the consequences thereof.
Increase in prison building - Cost £ 15 bn
Reintroducing transferrable tax allowances
between married couples - Cost £ 10.5 bn
Tax allowance for the rich to help pay
pay for their nannies - Cost £ ??
Mike stick to misquoting and manipulating polling numbers to show how the LDs are Britain’s most popular political force, you’re better at it.
The Sunday Telegraph ran a story on prisons which conflated two separate issues and got their facts wrong. The new prison building programme wouldn’t cost anything like £15 billion as a the use of a bit of common sense should tell you and should have told the journalist who wrote the story.
The scrapping of ID cards will reduce expenditure by approximately £15 billion. The transferable tax allowances is currently a popular policy in development, and if paying for it means saving money by not spraying it at the public sector then that’s a good thing for both families and the economy; surprised you’re not more positive about that, but then supporting a party that believes having over 40% of the economy controlled by the state is a good thing makes it difficult for you to spot activities that the state should just not be involved in, your figure of £10.5 billion might well be an underestimate but the increased revenue to the governemnt from increased economic activity will be greater just as it is in other low tax economies.
Only a believer in the fallacy of the pubic sector muliplier effect would play the “you’ve cut taxes by £5 which services are you cutting by £5″ and I thought the new low tax LimpDums had moved on from that kind of economic illiteracy to the new kind where ‘other people’ will pay all the taxes and spending can keep on growing as a % of the economy.
until your party produce their detailed costed manifesto all these current ” policy ” announcements are just froth and candyfloss .
Aren’t we still waiting for the Lib Dems to say how they will pay for the 2p off income tax and 3 million off tax altogether?
Candyfloss anyone?
81. Kingbongo, if you keep calling us the LimpDums I’m going to start calling you the Tearies. Which I will do if Dave gets any more sentimental…
If a Conservative supporting newspaper gets it’s facts wrong that my fault LOL . So how much will it cost ? exactly ?
Part of the cost of ID cards was to be/ will be recouped by increased passport application fees . Presumably to make the full saving of £ 15 bn you will still make passports cost a great deal more .
Yes the Lib Dems have and are moving on but the Conservatives still stuck in the neocon beliefs that tax cuts for the wealthy will trickle down and help the poor too .
RE 78, You obviously just hate tories, so we may not be trying to win your vote, but most of our policies last time involved cutting taxes from the bottom up, and those that did not got us a higher tax take from the rich.
RE 79. The current tax credits system is open to both fraud and accidental claiming, I think there would be less paperwork. Bear in mind that 90% of families are entitled to some form of tax credit and yo get an idea of how huge that system is.
Re 80, Jack W the problem is local councils have even less leaway than under the conservatives. We did what we did at the time because it needed doing, we now need to re empower local councils, and possibly hand them responsibility for other things such as health.
82 The full proposals are being published next month thsat is July 2006 not in 3/4 years time when we may see something concrete from the Conservatives .
I suppose (anti-English) Labour will say that the Conservatives proposed ‘English Votes on English Matters’ is Chameleon, as it is a form of ‘devolution’ which the Tories vehemently opposed in 1997. Although English Votes on English Matters doesn’t go far enough for the English Nationalist cause, it is at least a step in the right direction for English independence and the break up the the UK. As an English Nationalist, a Tory administration is always preferable to an Anglophobic Labour government. ‘Unionist’ Labour started the devolution timebomb ‘to strengthen the union’ and it is likely to explode next year with the Scottish Holyrood elections culminating in the break up of the UK - exactly what the devolutionists did not want!! So who is the Chameleon now? Chameron or Tory Blair or both of them?
Re 84, most income tax is payed by the poor, and cutting it helps the economy loads. Call it a tricle up effect.
88. So what are you doing about it? Unlike the Lib Dems…
85 Benedict. I’m afraid the emasculation of local government and drawing power to the centre by the Tories and Labour was and is shameful. It’s the right of electors to have a useless council and re-elect them if they wish !!
The Lib Dems are doing nothing about it. At the momoent their ‘policy’ is, to use Mark Senior’s word, candyfloss.
When we do read about it we’ll learn that it isn’t a tax cut at all. Some people will be told they will pay less tax. Others will pay more. The big question will be whether the policy would raise as much as it costs.
87 Even if the SNP win at Holyrood, they’ll won’t get a referendum for independence through. No-one is going to want a border patrol at Coldstream.
RE 90, The reason we started on that route was because the electorate who elected bad councils did not generaly pay for them in large numbers, so we had to make that connection.
The problem with local variable consumption taxes would be that cross border smulgling would be rife. Or alternatively councils would be competing to have the lowest tax rates to attract more business and therefore revenue from higher taxed people next door.
Might produce interesting results….
Ming got a battering from Blair to-day. I like Ming and his party but when it’s pointed out by someone like TB how opportunistic the Lib Dems can be it’s difficult not to agree. And Nick Clegg (my original choice for Lib dem leader) is giving that awful Tory (someone?) Evans a run for his money on cheap opportunism
90. The Tory emasculation of local government under Mrs. Thatcher is reminiscent of many Conservatives’ attitude towards the EU - a tendency to blame the level of government for policy failings. If you don’t like what councils are doing, emasculate them; if you don’t like what the EU’s doing, withdraw from it - it’s the same attitude.
94. “Tory (someone?) Evans a run for his money on cheap opportunism ”
probably Nigel Evans who usually speaks always and about everything.
Thanks Andrea ! That’s the one…..
90 - further to that, Jack, the more power you take from councils, the more you encourage people to vote for useless ones. If councils actually raised all their own income (for example), you might see more effective councils - as the ones that overcharged us for useless services would be voted out. Though thinking about it, when councils did raise their own funds, what happened in eg Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, was that the middle classes - who couldn’t afford to be fleeced but could afford to move - fled to the less tax-addicted suburbs.
91 The Lib Dem proposals are to be neutral in overall effect so you are correct that some will pay more and others less but that is not candyfloss policy , unlike current Conservative statements they will soon be on the table for the detail to be examined .
One would hope by then the Conservatives will have thought out a response to them instead of the myriad headless chicken responses we have had so far with Conservatives contadicting each other in their criticism .
91 - It is an income tax cut for less well off people exactly as Benedict was proposing at 88. It is exactly this that Cameron/Osbourne have said they won’t do whilst Campbell/Cable will.
91. Roger, I often find him quoted expressing opinions about the most various issues.
93 Benedict. On that basis the poor would be dis-enfrachised completely !!
Regretably the Tories decided that nanny knew better, and perhaps she did, but it’s the right of the voters to have a rotten council, full stop. Just as it was the right of well off Westminster voters to re-elect a corrupt local council in the name of Shirley Porter.
87 - Why exactly are next years Scottish Holyrood elections likley to culminate in the break up of the UK? I haven’t seen any poll showing the SNP above about 30%, and with the possible exception of the SSP (who seem to be in the process of self destructing) no-one else of any significance is in favour.
101 Andrea, me too. There used to be another Tory called Brunveilles or something similar who always used to appear when a news organization needed a ‘Vlad the impaler’ type rent-a-quote. Everyone (except a few blue rinses I suppose) hated him! Nigel Evans has exactly the same sneer and I would guess a similar audience .
RE 100, Sorry, where have we said we won’t cut taxes for the poorest? Most families are relatively not super rich.
Re 102. No, the aim of the poll tax was to get everyone paying something. Council tax does that more fairly. OK there are lots with complete relief but no where near the proportion if non tax payers as under the former rates schemes.
I first started reading political betting just before the U.S elections in 2004. So i have been here for 18 months now. When i first started reading it was a compulsive website that offered something unique. However recently, especially since DC won the tory leadership, this website has become significantly worse. I used to read every post carefully and find a wide range of intelligent comments. Today, i can not stand to read a whole thread because of all the self rightous, vitriolic, pompus, arrogant rhetoric. In all honesty these days i just control F to find the old posters views and a few people who try to be objective.
I know it has been said before but this site is really going down hill because of people who insist on saying the most absurd partisan things.
105 Benedict. Poll tax and council tax area are and were a shambles and have nothing to do with consumption of local services. Why a family of 4 should pay less than a single pensioner is bonkers !
Red Flag. I doubt anyone comes on here who isn’t very partizan. The skill is to hide it! But I guess you’re right. We must all try harder.
Know I am a day late but the apparent regional variations in the ICM poll are interesting:
North
RE 107, Whilst the system has it’s faults (Do I get an award for understatement of the year?) the old system had it that most people did not pay rates at all. So why should a pensioner who owns his own house pay rates when a family of 4 does not at all?
Lets start again:
Lab Con LD
North 43 25 23
Midlands 27 42 21
South 23 48 19
re 106. Good point Red Flag. I share your sentiments.
The problem at the moment is that there is very little to bet on. People are much more objective when its their cash that they are concerned about. There’s nothing like the prospect of a big loss or a big win to concentrate the mind!
Once the Labour leader/deputy leadership battle(s) start things will be different.
104. Roger, at least in the Labour party it seems they try to “rotate” the MPs usually quoted….but there’s always John McDonnell…everytime something bad happens, he put out a press release with catastrophic tones to say how bad New Labour is…the problem is not what he says, but the catastrophic tone!
RE 106, and 112, and in the mean time sorry for fighting in public
111. David(s). the Midlands figures are bad for Labour.
Is the south including London?
110 Benedict.
Wonderful understatement !!
That’s why I support LIT. All pay, added to an ability to pay. Just forget it’s a Lib Dem proposal ..
and look at it impartially !!
84 stuck in the neocon beliefs that tax cuts for the wealthy will trickle down and help the poor too .
a) the trickle down effect is not a neocon belief, what gave you that idea?
b) which proposals are you talking about? nobody has talked about tax cuts for the wealthy, or are households with a gross income over £30,000 ‘wealthy’?
c) I don’t care which newspaper prints rubbish, it’s still rubbish
d) I’m not an expert on prison building programmes but as you could build 35 Scottish parliaments for £15 billion I think £1,531,456,729.38p (exactly) would do it.
You really should stick to mangling opinion polls as you sound much more informed when doing that than when discussing economic policy.
Valerie - you can call us the Tearies but I think you should work harder to come up with something with more bite - I use LimpDums because I can’t help it. I will try to stick with LD in future or come up with something more original.
112. But people will never be totally objective….and then what’s objective or not?
For ex I could think that your view about LD communication machine is biased and not objective and you can think mine is not objective either.
In the spirit of 106,112.
Has anyone reviewed the success or otherwise of the betting markets in predicting political outcomes thus far. How does it compare to opinion polls.
As a nove, I expect that the nature of the market is quite different to horse racing, but maybe closer to regional betting on Football. Tribal loyalties coupled with and asymmetry in the relative distribution of income may produce a biased out.
Particularly, is there any evidence of a slight bias to the right?
119 nove = novice
out= outcome
116. LIT would be fine as long as LAs have the right to set their own taxation level and we get some competition. I can also exclusively reveal the taxation policy of my new political party ‘!’. Flat rate of 10% and once you’ve paid a million quid in tax, that’s it, you’re done, the government hasn’t got the right to take any more of your money. Vote!
RE 116, The issue with LIT is that it is a lot easier to hide your income but somewhat harder to hide your house. That said we can always look at it..
How do you handle second homes though?
122. I’m not sure it is easier to hide one’s income than to obfuscate property ownership. I should know, I’ve probably tried every tax evasion scam possible in my time.
117 You don’t seem to be an expert on anything except Conservative spin .
Andrea, i dont mind people being favourable towards a party, afterall thats why most of us are here, but if i was to simply go on in such a manner ” all you tories are so stupid who do you think that you are going top get a 10% swing in a term with a new leader and without any major disasters from the governemnt etc etc” it wuld be pretty pointless.
Political point scoring just doesnt work on here and the sooner certain posters realise that the better because otherwise no sensible posters will be left.
122 Benedict. Secondary homes treated as a % of primary rate.
111 (stands on one leg)
I agree that the regional differences are almost more interesting than the headline figures. They certainly don´t point to a UNS.
Is Scotland subsumed by “North” here, is there a separate set of figures, or was this an England only poll?
RE 123, it is not a question of who owns a property but the fact that it exists and therefore council tax is due on it.
That said I know that sometimes under occupancy is alledged to avoid some council tax.
103 - The Greens are also in favour. To be honest I can’t see any other party agreeing to a coalition that would involve agreeing to hold a referendum on independence.
Intrestingly the SNP claimed to have carried out a poll of 1000 people the only information that was leaked to the press was that surprise, surprise no one (least of all Tories) wanted a Tory/Labour coalition. Presumably they must therefore have asked about party voting intensions but this information hasn’t been leaked.
106/112/125:
Hear! Hear! It really is deteriorating into partisan point scoring, though there a few honourable exceptions like stodge & Nick Palmer, despite the stick he sometimes gets (I’m sure there are Tory exceptions as well, but I probably don’t notice their partisan point-scoring to pick out the ones who aren’t).
There might not be anything to bet on at the moment, but there was a time when we discussed things like opponents in the same game, rather than enemies. It used to be the equivalent of the Christmas football match in no-mans land.
129.MAX
Well if the SNP haven’t leaked the voting intentions I would speculatethat it must be quite bad in relation to what they realistically hoped to get. Your the chap in the best position Max how many losses/gains will the tories make realistically in Scotlands elections.
125. Red Flag, I understand what you mean…
But I’m part of the ruin of this site (being not objective and tedious as I am)
Benedict@122
well, it’s probably rather more difficult to establish wha