Marvels of modern polling? Exit polls, part 2
September 3rd, 2006
Part 2 of a two-part guest series by Harry Hayfield. Part 1 can be found here.
Posted by their confidence at predicting Election 1997 to within an inch of the actual result, the pollsters headed into Election 2001 safe in the knowledge that they couldn’t get the result wrong no matter what the British electorate threw at them and so the BBC announced their exit poll for 2001 with it’s customary 2% margin of error. Labour 44%, Conservatives 32%, Liberal Democrats 17%. And that’s more or less what happened. The only trouble the pollsters had now was forecasting the Liberal Democrats (as the Lib Dems polled 19% and were the main gainers at Election 2001), but as they would never form a government it wouldn’t really matter would it?
Between the 2001 and 2005 General Elections a revolution in polling occurred, with companies such as Populus and YouGov using the internet to get people’s opinions and when Election 2005 was announced another sea change occurred. For the first time ever at a UK General Election, MORI (who usually polled for ITN) and NOP (who usually polled for the BBC) came together to provide the first ever joint exit poll. And the result of this exit poll? Labour 37%, Conservatives 33%, Liberal Democrats 22%.
But what was interesting was the changes in seats. Something didn’t quite add up. Sure, Labour were forecast to win 356 seats and the Conservatives 209 seats. But the Lib Dems: only 53 on a swing from Lab to Lib Dem of 4.5% and a swing from Con to Lib Dem of 2%? Were the pollsters about to get burned again by underestimating the support of the Liberal Democrats?
Well, initially that didn’t look to be the case. Sunderland South declared first (as it had done in 1997 and 2001) and recorded a swing to Con of 3.9% (slightly higher than the exit poll was suggesting) but what was this? Lab down 5%, Con up 3% and Lib Dem up 3%. That was strange to say the least and this was backed up when Cheadle (a Lib Dem gain in 2001 by 33 votes) stayed Lib Dem with a majority of 4,000!
As the night went on it was clear that a mini 1997 was happening. People were going away from Labour and voting for the person most likely to defeat Labour. This explained the SNP gain in the Western Isles (or to give it its new Gaelic name Na h-Eileannan an Iar), the Lib Dems gaining seats like Manchester Withington (on a Lab to Lib Dem swing of 17%) and the Conservatives gaining Enfield, Southgate (on a swing to Con of almost treble the national swing).
The bizarre thing is though, despite all of these radical changes, the end result of a Labour majority of 66 was the same as the exit poll! All of which poses the question with the idea of overnight counts being frowned upon following changes in how elections are regulated, will the exit poll have to be revamped yet again or will the tried and trusted method still work in the future?
Harry Hayfield is a Lib Dem activist in Wales.
MessageSpace Advertising
Harry - Thanks a very interesting second article.
Just thinking about next year’s devolved elections, does the addition of the nationalist parties to the 2 main parties and Lib Dems have any impact on the calculation of the exit poll numbers, or does it just make it even harder to predict seat numbers given the possibility of swings in 4 directions?
Almost as confused is Ed Balls article today.
This one beats it though.
2 I agree. Just rambling, muddled, wishful spin. “…the broad mainstream of the Labour party today is united” - risible. Unless of course he means that by reducing Labour support to the core vote only, Brown & Blair have united the remaining mainstream!
Much of Labour’s increasingly public angst at present is because it is Ed who has the “Balls” and not his boss. Interestingly I am starting to hear from non-political friends the view that Brown doesn’t have the strength of character to force the issue and runs for the hills when anything difficult arises. If that view takes hold, then any premiership he inherits is holed below the waterline already.
Interesting comments, thanks Harry. It’s a bit like the calculations that go on every 4 years to show that someone can win the US presidency without a majority of votes, by concentrating them in the right places. Technically and sometimes actually true, it usually turns out that a supreme effort to win state X lets the other side sneak through in state Y which you thought was safe. So while you get variations according to the candidates and local demography (see the discussion on Mosaic), the national swing figure remains a probably fairly good guide.
Mediawatch: I see the Sunday Times survey of backbenchers on when TB should step down hasn’t reported talking to me, as it wouldn’t have fitted the ‘everyone says he must go now’ theme, but does include two MPs who supplied the required prompt that Gordon could save their seats. Meanwhile, Newsnight rang up for comments: when they heard I wasn’t demanding an early change, they immediately lost interest. The pattern is so familiar that it seems hardly worth mentioning, but it does mean that you need to be careful when reading, let alone betting on, political trends reported by the press.
One factor that the media tend to miss is simply personal loyalty that builds up over time. When I had a family illness a while back and I needed to take some time off, Tony and Cherie sent separate handwritten personal notes wishing us all the best. This was during a week when there was a particularly intense international crisis, and I was astonished and grateful that they’d bothered. I’ll still use my political judgment on issues like the leadership contest, but when other things are roughly equal, people don’t forget personal kindness.
PS An oddity: my previous post, on Harry’s piece (which didn’t say anything immensely memorable or controversial), appeared as number 2 on the thread, but has now simply vanished.
[4] You’re spinning too, Robin
If Brown behaves loyally, he’s too weak to become PM: if he doesn’t, he doesn’t deserve to… I don’t think your friends are as non-political as you make them out to be…
6 - odd, Nick. I did edit the article a little while ago, to add a link back to part 1 - perhaps if that was simultaneous with your comment being posted, it knocked it out. (Though one would hope the software could handle that…)
7 - IA - for once it’s not spin
I am genuinely pleased that “ordinary” folk seem to be noticing and mentioning Brown’s seeming inability to face up to difficult issues.
Does Brown in his heart of hearts really want to be leader? He goes through motions, acts as Prince across the water but hesitates whenever opportunity presents itself. He has little experience of government outside of finance - though his influence in driving domestic agenda in spending departments means that’s broader than most finance specialists have. It seems to me there is a struggle between a vanity that drives him to want to show he should have been the NuLab choice but a realism that perhaps he doesn’t have what it takes, or fears he doesn’t. Then he has become a late parent - having seen at close quarters the pressure on the young Blairs and the fallout on them is there a part that wants to enjoy his children, see them grow up, as he did, secure in Scotland close to his family.
4 NickP, Indeed people don’t forget “personal kindness”.
Do the mothers and fathers of British soldiers killed in Iraq because of Blair’s WMD fantasy get the personal notes from Tony and Cherie?
Last I heard, he couldn’t be ar*ed to meet them.
10. I sure he desperately wants to be leader, but at the same time would really like to be leader five years ago and - to follow your metaphor through - wants the crown handed to him rather than instigate a revolution. Balls’ article seems to be a plea for that coronation rather than having to make him fight (although as he then gets sidetracked into an irrelevant bash at Cameron he loses his thread anyway). I think deep down he probably knows it’s already too late for him to do what he wanted to as PM but couldn’t stand the thought of a retirement having not been there anyway.
[4][11] I’m still trying to get my head around the idea of Norma Major, Denis Thatcher or Mary Wilson sending handwritten notes to poorly ‘ick back-bench MPs… perhaps they did…
13 IA Perhaps they did but the recipients were more old fashioned and thought it inappropriate to put it in the public domain?
O/T one cruel funny line today “Ruth Kelly, the only woman to have fathered six children. ”
Sun.Telegraph Bstard http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=2JJFEI1IXANCNQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/opinion/2006/09/03/do0306.xml
3 Alex Very odd. Perhaps they are short of real journalism this weekend?
She doesn’t even know that Charles wants to be King George in honour of his grandfather. Pity as I would relish a Charles III. It has a feel to it of fun and rebuilding in a period of faith issues that will not simply go away.
13/14 - Reminds of a story shortly after New Labour came to power. Cherie Blair hosted some sort of party for underprivileged/disabled (I can’t remember the details) children at 10 Downing Street - and this was given to the press to show the new “family orientated, caring attitude” that purveyed in this new era.
A couple of days later it was mentioned as an aside that Norma Major had been doing almost exactly this sort of thing for years. Not media savvy enough to try and capitalise politically on it though…
16 - it’s a mischievous Republican blueprint for how the monarchy should destroy itself
17 - just another example of how New Labour has absolutey no shame in terms of self-agrandisement. Another example being Blair’s barefaced and entirely self-interested tour of the Amercian speech/job market recently whilst the Middle East was going up in flames.
[15] Many thanks for that link, HF. The cream of the jest has to be Marks & Gran having a column in the Sunday Telegraph…
17 Can anyone estimate how much will the Blair and his family have personally profited from his premiership?
(Of course, this is not a new phenomenon; Lloyd George’s premiership made him very rich! Amongst the reasons, not all the cash for peerages reached the Liberal party’s coffers — at least according to his son Richard LG)
Liam Fox has a very sensible article today on Turkey and the EU.
He is right, we may miss a trick here. French (and other) racist sentiment has already caused a mess in Cyprus giving the Greeks far too much leeway, giving hard evidence to those Islamic fundamentalists that seek proof of the West’s injustice to Muslims.
There is every danger that they and those in other European states that share their sentiments, may cause even more mayhem by prejudicial action - or inaction - in regard Turkey.
There is more to the war on terror than military action, police powers or silly commissions set up by R Kelly. Being true to your faithful long term allies comes somewhere near the top of the ‘must do’ list.
If you read it, please keep in mind that Fox rather underplays these nasty EU undercurrents.
17 - Alex
This simply demonstrates what many have known for years: New Labour came to power with the slickest PR machine in modern history.
This does not mean that they were a good administration or a bad one; it just means that they were superb at highlighting their successes and burying their failures.
Labour’s problem is that they came to see PR as the be-all of politics. E.g. Blair’s memo asking for eye-catching initiatives that could be associated with his name.
PR is a tool, no more, no less. It mustn’t become a goal in its own right. I fear that with their hundreds of advisors, hordes of press officers, and the infamous Grid, PR has become central to the Government.
That has in turn become dangerous because insufficient thought and analysis is given to the things that really matter to an administration, ie governing.
Ed Balls is currently desprately trying to find a new seat as Wakefield Council has woken up to reality and refused to waste taxpayers money on a judicial review of the Boundary Commissions decision to abolish the Normanton Constituency.
Book Value - Have the Brand Index weekly surveys of party leader approval ratings been released this weekend and do they show any trends ?
I haven’t seen them, Mark. Anthony, if you’re reading and have the figures it would be interesting to get hold of them!
24 - Wasn’t that really his fault in the first place for getting selected for a seat he knew was going to get abolished anyway?
Re 27 The Labour Party in their usual way thought that they could have the Boundary Commission Report overturned.
27 Perhaps he could job share with his wife.
24. Latest gossip was for Balls and Kingston Upon Hull East.
George Mudie (Leeds East) and Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) already said they won’t stand down.
Actually Mudie also said Sheerman is “probably in his late eighties” when he’s actually just 66.
27 It was not clear that the seat was going to be abolished . The decision to lose one seat in that area was marginal for example the Assistant Commisioner did not agree with the reduction in seats from 23 to 22 .
The rumour amongst the local Labour Party is the Jon Trickett my be pushed to give up his Hemsworth seat seeing that he has started thinking for himself ( a dangerous crime in the Labour Party).
32. Mark Goodair, in local Huddersfield CLP? In a Balls-Trickett challenge Trickett has the advantage that just a little part of the old Normanton will go in his seat, so if he manages to get his old CLP members to vote for him, he can win it.
Will Compass like that they would get rid of one of their main figures in Parliament?
i think tony will be out by xmas unless he makes clear when he’s going. at some point in the last 6 months there’s been a sea-change moment and there’s nothing he can do to turn that around. time to leave the stage….and quickly.
16 B2W. As we’ve already had a de jure Charles III (Charles Edward Stuart) then the next regnal number would be IV.
The precedence for regnal numbers is simply whether the Scottish or English monarch had the larger number. Thus a future James would be the Scottish James IX whilst a future Stephen would be the English Stephen II.
[35] That may well be part of why the Prince of Wales is looking to his last given name for a regnal name as no one named George ever sat on the English or Scottish (as opposed to United Kingdom) throne.
I re-read both Harry’s articles and wondered what effect postal votes are having as those voters presumably go not appear in exit polls?
36 IA. I think it more likely that Prince Charles is , as B2W indicated, taking George in honour of his grandfather rather than for any other reason.
The monarch may take any name they choose. Charles might use one of his other names - Arthur or Philip. Or of course in the interests of diversity Susan !!
30. So Balls-up to Balls-in?
36. Both King Charleses were monarchs of both England and Scotland, so the numbering wouldn’t be an issue (except to Jacobites!), but then that should be true of Georges as well.
Fox rather underplays these nasty EU undercurrents.
That’s not like the Liam Fox I almost voted for in the leaership election!
When writing about Turkey and the EU though you do need to bear history in mind. It’s not just the middle east where centuries don’t seem to assuage anger. When I lived in Vienna everyone knew to the second the date at which the Turks were stopped at the gates and Austria was kept christian. The Greeks of course fought a tremendously romantic war to get rid of their Ottoman overlords and let’s not even get started on the Croats and the Serbs.
Turkey doesn’t belong in the EU as it’s not European, geographically or culturally but that shouldn’t get in the way of everyone pretending that Turkey is going to be a useful member of the EU - they’ll have to stop oppressing the Kurds though so when it comes down to it they won’t want to join the EU anyway.
[38] I deliberately said “part of why” Jack - but I very much doubt that the PoW shares your view that we have already had a de jure Charles III
41. Jack will no doubt argue that Georges I and II don’t count - and George III only from 1807 (I think that was when the Stuart line died out), therefore he should have been George I, the Prince Regent subsequently George II and the next one therefore George V. Not that he will be, any more than the next Charles will be Charles IV.
The idea of Charles as King Arthur tickles me
22 Blue2Win, what commission by R Kelly. Does he still believe he can fly?
This is an interesting article by Liam Fox. I tend to agree with him, but the rampant xenophobia isn’t just in France! My Mum, a staunch Conservative voter, is adamant that Turkey shouldn’t be in the EU - on the tenuous grounds that most of it isn’t in Europe. I personally think her reasons are xenophobic so we don’t discuss it (can hardly accuse my own Mum of racism can I) but I wonder how many other people oppose it - because the Turks look different and have a different religion.
Mind you, as I said a few threads ago, this will NOT be limited to the Conservative Party, racism is an evil that transcends party politics.
Having said all that, I bet this article is barely reported, because it doesn’t fit with the prevailing view of what the media would like the Conservative Party to be saying. It’s OK for us to be green, but to have sensible thoughts about EU integration? No, we have to remain the Little Englander xenophobe party on that issue, as far as the media are concerned.
(cue francis with a diatribe as to how remaining Little Englanders will ensure that the Conservative Party never loses another election in a 1000 years…)
42 David H. Not only do the Hanovarian Georges I & II not count, neither do the traitorious daughters of James II and VII - Mary and Ann !!
I accept that Henry IX settled the succession on The King of Hanover in 1807, thus becoming the true George I.
41 IA. I have a chat about it when I see the Duke of Rothesay next !
44.”what commission by R Kelly. Does he still believe he can fly? ”
Who is this “he”? Do you know something we don’t know about Ruth Kelly?!
Andrea, google R Kelly and see what you get!
BTW I think he is still not allowed here because of the underage s*x stuff.
47. Ah, Ben, now I understand!
5. Almost moved to tears by the story of the handwritten note….but remember the whole population of Northern Ireland got one too a while back to persuade them to vote for the GFA. I’m sure the fact it contained lies hasn’t diminished the fond memories people in Ulster must have of it.
PM methinks you are a cynic. Surely Tony is only too concerned for the welfare of Nick. After all he is one of his staunchest supporters on this site…
Nick, nice story, and quite possibly true. Slightly unseemly to tell people about it though. Surely you can’t believe we won’t all assume the worst about TB’s motives…
I thought the two separate notes, one from Tony and one from Cherie marked the incident out, and really showed the personal touch. Or the existence of two separate private offices that don’t talk to each other
[45] You sort him out, I’m sure he’ll be grateful
49/50. I’ve no reason not to believe what Nick said about Blair writing him a letter.
I also think Nick has a point when he said “I’ll still use my political judgment on issues like the leadership contest, but when other things are roughly equal, people don’t forget personal kindness”. But it can also work in the opposite way for people who think TB hasn’t done them some sort of wrongdoing.
51. Alex, you can also get the same office writing you twice to answer the same request suggesting that people in the same office don’t talk to each other
Geography and the EU are already a mess. Cyprus is closer to Lebanon than to Greece and much further east than most of Turkey. Malta has a language that has a closer relationship to North Africa than Europe.
Europe has always been, in EUese, a political concept otherwise the French overseas ‘departements’ would be a difficulty, not to mention the two Spanish colonies in North Africa.
History is an even more difficult row to hoe.
Turkey was the imperial power in the Balkans and ran a very tolerant - in religious terms- regime.
That empire was replaced by the Austrian Empire - which saw itself as the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, and that name tells a tale in itself- which proceeded to persecute the muslims there as they were held responsible for every possible event, including no doubt, the siege of Vienna nearly four centuries earlier. You will recall the residue of hatred that policy has left even today. Although to be fair the Imperial anti-semitism was pretty strong too.
And the Greeks followed up the war of independence with a bloody occupation of the Turkish mainland around Izmir and followed up while Turkey was weak with a little ethnic cleansing of Turks from the islands off the Turkish coast where they had lived for centuries.
Because of the extent of empire many Turks have ancestors from current and soon to be EU states.
The trouble with history is that it is so vast a subject that anyone can chose the spin they prefer, and that makes it an uncertain basis for arguing the best course for a safer future.
The post at 5. looks like a decent contender for the Private Eye OBN award.
Blue2Win @ 55: Your summary of history is, to say the least, tendentious. To take only Greco-Turkish relations: “The Greeks followed up the war of independence [1821-27] with a bloody occupation of the Turkish mainland around Izmir [1921-22] and followed up while Turkey was weak with a little ethnic cleansing of Turks from the islands off the Turkish coast where they had lived for centuries.” No mention of the Izmir occupation being under mandate from the Allies; no mention of the fact that Turkey fought on the side of the Central Powers in WWI; no mention of the sack of Izmir (85% ethnic Greek: “gavur Izmir”); no mention of the officially negotiated, between Ataturk and Venizelos, exchange of populations (c 2m to Greece, but only about a tenth of that number in the opposite direction); no mention of the mass expulsions of ethnic Greeks from Istanbul in the 1950s and 60s. (There were few ethnic Turks in the Aegean islands; there weren’t many ethnic Greeks either, nor many people at all).
I’m far from swallowing the modern Greek view of Greek history, and my little list also omits salient fects (for example, the atrocities committed by the Greek army in Anatolia in 1921-22; you won’t find that anyone in Greece today will even admit to the possibility of such a thing). But I think that you shouldn’t post so confidently points which are sure to mislead people in this country, who understandably know little about the subject.
I couldn’t agree more with your last sentence!
Keep up the good postings.
57 Well, yes, you could say that.
But then I would say that the Treaty of Sèvres was between the victorious powers ( and the same masterminds that gave us Versailles and another world war) and the Ottoman Empire that did not, except in name, exist at the time of the signing. It offered parts of Turkey to Greece but was not, unsurprisingly, accepted by the nascent Turkish Republic. Most historians accept that it never came into effect as it was not ratified by the signatories.
After removing the invading and fire raising Greeks form the mainland Ataturk initiated the deal with Venizelos as Ataturk had other fish to fry, like votes for women well ahead of the other notable hostile EU nations that preach so much at Turkey today).
Ataturk, born in Salonika, and so effective against us at Gelibolu, accepted the loss of the fringes of modern Turkey in exchange for time and resources for his revolution at home. The Greeks wanted the deal as they had made such a hash of their little Izmir mayhem that they had created a resentment in Turks and a fear in the Greeks who had lived amicably on the mainland until then. Word of what was happening on the islands just added to this.
And as for the ethnic Turks not being on the islands perhaps you omit Cyprus( much much closer to Turkey than Greece) where the Greek side through terrorist organisations such as EOKA continued the policy of removing Turks by force if necessary. Then there is Crete.
As for the islands close to the mainland of Turkey all I can say is that I have met a remarkable number of descendants who look towards the islands from the coast and say that they were once home. And I have every reason to believe them.
57 - 80 years later it seems that the ethnic cleansing of the 20’s (and smaller recurrences) has probably on balance resulted in a better outcome for Greco-Turk relationships than would have been the case if the Cypriot experience had been replicated across the Aegean and on the mainlands.
I’m concerned that my point about the personal letters has been the subject of so many comments, most of them cynical - my point was not to advertise the letters but to note that personal loyalties (and, as andrea points out, resentments) probably play a larger factor than you’d think.
I don’t want to go into detail as it would require discussing someone else’s health situation, but I hope people will accept that the notes were obviously genuine and there was a good personal reason why they both wrote and why it was separate. I guess this is obscure, but can we leave it at that? I apologise for mentioning it since I’m not able to give more details.
59 - I’m obviously no even amateur expert, but having read Margaret MacMillan’s book on Versailles, it was eyeopening to discover the enormous problems it left in terms of people being separated from their “ethnic” countries, one could put a pretty good thesis forward that the harmony in Modern Europe was made possible explicitly by the large scale ethnic cleansing during World War II and its immediate aftermath. I assume people have made this argument, but i also imagine that doing so would not be good for any future career (so politically sensitive is the whole ethnic cleansing issue).
3/16 - You’ve got that right, Alex. What a load of fanciful codswallop!
61 - on the other hand, it’s pretty much accepted across central and eastern Europe that the borders aren’t going to change, isn’t it? And there isn’t a mainstream movement for the rights of expellees to have their property restored. (They do largely have the physical right of return now, I suppose, due to free movement within the EU.)
57. 58. The Treaty of Sevres was very generous to the Greeks, and their attempt to push for a greater Greece still in 1921-22 was foolish. Vis-a-vis ‘atrocities’ I think one could safely say ’score draw’.
I see a new party is born today. Solidarity or should it be called Solitary after the 2007 elections up in Scotland.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5307316.stm
Interesting piece on the electoral system.
65 - Your probably right. If Gail Sheridan stands she could maybe get in too but doubt anyone elsa will.
Reading todays Scottish News of the World they seem to have become huge fans of the SSP. Can’t possibly think why?
@ 35
I can only find in Wikipedia reference to the system of numbering monarchs whereby: “The precedence for regnal numbers is simply whether the Scottish or English monarch had the larger number.” What concerns me is the fact that in talk articles on wikipedia this is attributed to Churchill and Blair - both cannot be the case! Do any of the experts here know the veracity of this information?
’score draw’
except of course if you are an Armenian then it’s definetely 1 genocide to nil to Attaturk, who was so busy giving votes to women he forgot to tell everyone not to massacre the christian population.
If Turkey should be in the EU it is not because they are European in any meaningful sense as they clearly aren’t. The current thinking is that it will help cement the Turkish state and people into the Western democratic model. I really doubt if this will work but can understand why people want to give it a try. As the UK would be better off out of the EU perhaps the tory party could create a market for EU membership and it could be traded openly, then if Russia or Mexico ever fancied becoming a member they would have an easy way in.
67 Max -you read the News of the World???. Yesterday the usual SSP crowd was absent from the Murraygate in Dundee no SSP stall for the first time on a Saturday for a long while- I believe most went to the SSP meeting in Glasgow. It will be interesting to find who remains behind their stall next Saturday or do we have two stalls.
Thanks for the article harry. There is one problem the exit polsters have, which is will they be told the truth?
It was the rumour after 1992 that people must have told the odd fib to the polsters though there may of course be other explanations.
Nick. I thought your story about the Blairs note was a nice one. I heard a similar story about Thatcher told by one of her MP’s which made me think better of her than I had done previously. I don’t find it particularly surprising from Mr and Mrs Blair though. That a few Tories on this site choose to be cynical tells you much more about the unreconstructed nature of the Tories than it does about either the Blairs or you for repeating the story.
Incidentally the person using the silly names is almost certainly just one person and I’m sure most of us can guess who that person is
60. Apparently those tea mugs are always empty and dishwasher clean. I suggest that personal kindnesses remain personal kindnesses. After almost a decade of spin Blair are you surprised taht people show more than degree of cynicism.
The only reason to publish even modest details of such notes here is for spin purposes, or perhaps the OBN.
And look who has crawled out from under their stone right on cue…….
re 35 Your Jacobite fantasies are running away with you. The next Kng James will be James VIII we’ve only had 7 previous ones.
RE 2, Thanks for the link. Truely Balls at it’s and his finest.
I wwonder if any of the socialist folk here could tell me what they mean by terms such as:
Social justice
The progressive agenda, or indeed progressive politics.
re 5. She did thank me (as did Leo) when I had them in the back of my bus the last week at the world rowing championships.
75 - Weren’t there a couple of Stuart pretenders called James?
re 60. Still amazement at cynicism by us at anything the Blairs do? What naivety.
re 78. Well one of them was (son of James VII), but he was no more king than Lambert Simnel or Perkin Warbeck say
RE 5, Surely Nick Palmer you are not suggesting that the press are the lowest of cum, considered below both estate agenst and politicians.
That must realy take some doing, but when you hear of an MP pointing out fiddled polls (And I know we here trust him to tell the truth) it is no surprise.
Re 66 alex
Thanks a really interesting piece explaining how the eleectoral seat system works against the Conservatives. (Though no mention of the greater inequity for the Lib Dems).
I was shocked that both the Scottish and Welsh boundary commissions are required to follow the same allocation as England but ignore that and give Scotland 2 more seats and the Welsh get 5 more seats.
I would have thoght they should have less seats than the English average because they now have their own assemblies, so the workload for a Scottish or Welsh MP is much less.
Thinking of kindness many will never forget the frozen and fixed smiles on the face of both Blairs as Reg Keys made his address after the declaration at Sedgfield. Presumably at that moment Mr Palmer was hoping for the phone to call with a job offer whilst Roger musut have been incandescant that any mere mortal could have been even a teeny bit critical of his idol.
What is the expression about casting the first stone”……?
83.”Presumably at that moment Mr Palmer was hoping for the phone to call with a job offer ”
Presumably he was at the count looking at last phases of Broxtowe count.
82 HF - shocked? do you really think this government would have pressured the commissions to meet the letter of the law rather than err in Labours favour. Hopefully the next commission will be under a different regime.
66 Great link! The question is: will Conservatives ever learn to vote tactically (for the LDs)? My guess, is NO. That is the nature of traditionalism and conservatism, not to change habits for pragmatic reasons.
I can’t see what all the fuss is about. Apparently he wrote some very nice letters to party members in the mid 1990s.
60 I don’t think it is cynical to raise the question of the Iraqi war dead.
A hand-written letter of condolences from Tony and Cherie (whose sons are safely in Oxford and Yale) is the very least the parents of dead teenage soldiers might expect.
88. Gwynfa. Do you think the Prime minister should always write a letter of condolence when a British soldier dies in battle or should it only be done if you don’t approve of the Prime Minister and the battle? Furthermore do you think all Prime Ministers should send their children into battle even if they are not experienced soldiers or should this only apply to the Blairs?
Roger @ 89 - I think personal condolences from the “Commander in Chief” is a basic matter of respect and integrity, and should be the least that Blair is doing*. Particularly if he can find the time to write similar messages to backbench MPs (no disrepsect meant to NP’s family here).
Clearly this is not feasible in a large-scale war situation, but in the current situation I think it would be the least we could expect. I think (but could be wrong) that Bush does it - even meets some of the relatives.
*NB I am not sure - he may already even be doing it, but I somehow doubt it.
I thought that the families of those killed in active service were always written to by the PM. If that’s not the case then I think it certainly should be.
Would they receive anything simnilar from the Queen? Not really comparable though, seeing as she didn’t make the decision which led to the death.
89. Roger, let me answer your questions. I think a handwritten letter of condolences should always be written by the PM when a British soldier dies in battle. I hope ukpaul is right and that this is always done.
I think it’s largely the poor that die in wars (whether in Iraq or in the Lebanon). Contrast the opportunities open to the rich sons of the Blairs and, say, the son of Rose Gentle.
In the case of the Blair sons, my understanding is that they strongly approve of their father’s decision to go to war and have said so to the press.
If they believe in the cause, they should enlist and fight. Of course, it’s much more fun partying in Oxford or Yale….
I don’t like the idea myself. If anyone should write such a letter it should be the Queen not the Prime Minister. I don’t know the protocol but obviously if he doesn’t write such a letter there must be a reason. Sending a hundred or so letters would hardly be taxing. It would be interesting to find out what Maggie did in the Falklands war. I’d be surprised if Blair did anything different.
Michael Crick interviewed a load of ‘loyal’Labour MP’s who wanted Blair out. He said it was extaordinary how many cited Lebanon as the reason. The same happened to me. I was angered by the Iraq war but Lebanon is the reason I want him out. Interesting.
RE 93, Roger, it is interesting that they always are interested in Nick palmers opinion right up until they don’t like it and move on.
On the Lebanon thing I actualy think many people feel genuinly different about the Lebanon tham most other places in the Middle East, but there is also the question of compaitive fire power and the fact that the Lebanon if a democracy.
93. Where Roger’s conscience leads, the British left follows…
Oh,by the way Roger, I am a little bit dissappointed that you could not help me out with telling me what “socialists” mean by “social justice” and the “progressive agenda”. I think I understand what “redistributing wealth” is about.
PS. Paul. Interesting that the British ambassador to Washington had to write to Blair asking him to change his Lebanon policy because by siding with the Hawks he was leaving Condi Rice and others isolated! The shame of his behaviour over Lebanon is for me impossible to forgive and unless Brown apologizes for the government’s cravenness then I will struggle to vote for them next time.
78/80 alex/Chris A. Thr Prince of Wales (James Francis Edward Stuart) son of James II and VII succeeded on his fathers death in 1701 and was de jure James III and VIII until his death in 1766. He was so recognized by all the major states in Europe and the Pope. Thus the next regnal number will be James IX.
93. Re soldiers killed in actions. I’m not sure what the protocol here is. But when the bodies come back from the war zone, the top “institutions” (usually the President of the Republic, the PM, the speakers of the Houses and the Defence Secretary) are present at the airport waiting for the coffins.
Social Justice means what it says. ‘A just society’. The rich pay progressively more in tax than the poor. Equality of services and opportunity as far as it’s in the ‘States’ power to give it. Housing to those who can’t afford it and a living wage to those who can’t work
Poor Nick Palmer, getting panned for a little personal story. Whilst I wouldn’t vote Labour if they gave me a peerage I think perhaps those who suspect Nick’s story is a bit of a spin job need to wind their necks in.
I think the point is fair, there is personal loyalty indeed but this is politics, seats are at stake and that will ultimately win out. Tony really wished he hadn’t said a thing about going but tide is so firmly against him that it is increasingly out of his hands on the when and hows of his departure. Ironically in trying so hard to secure a legacy he’s actually about to be dragged out kicking and screaming messing that legacy up before there is even any debate about the substance of it.
It’ll need 80-100 MPs to go public to really get this thing going, but if they do it’ll take mere weeks before Blair will be forced out or forced to make a hasty statement.
99 Andrea. Normally a minister (but not PM or royal family) meet the returning deceased service personnel. Additionally senior military officers are in attendance.
Benedict. There are some unpleasant posters on this site. Mostly I’m afraid to say on your side (some very nice ones too I must add!). I guess Nick P puts up with it because he’s used to it but I must say I would be pretty angry if it was me.
I don’t really understand all this stuff about Blair “regretting” that he made his pledge to quit. Aside from completely ignoring the context in which he announced it, it’s the height of delusion, surely, to suggest that had he not made the pledge then there would be no pressure for him to go. It is only the assurance that he is definitely going that is preventing open warfare and more people putting their head above the parapet.
So what Roger is saying about taxation is that those who well, most likely through hard work and skill get punished….
Can you imagine the headlines in the run up to the conference if everything was the same, just he hadn’t promised to go?
Re 100, Roger, So the rich should pay more tax as a percentage? (They don’t, but nevermind, especialy if you factor in the effective rates on working families tax credits),
People should have the same access to state provision as far as is possible? Does this mean closing down independent schools or do they get to stay open?
How do you define can’t work, and how do you define a living wage? What about those who can and do work, are they entitled to a living wage?
Alex at 104, people make mistakes. He made a mistake and is about to get hung on it.
More pertinently, when you know someone is going you feel freer to stick the boot in.
103 - if he’s going to “get angry” about a bit of extremely mild ribbing then i don’t think he would have got involved in politics in the first place.
If anyone has heard Sarkozy’s speech in France that signifies the launch of his presidential campaign its anathema to much of the French ’system’ and ist about the most right wing I’ve ever heard a headlining French politician.
107. Benedict FYI the top 10% of taxpayers pay more than 50% of the total yield of income tax, the top 1% more than 20% of the total. In 1978/9 the figures were 35% and 11% respectively. Roger’s socialist utopia has already arrived.
109 - you seriously think that the Labour Party would be sailing merrily along, contented and (mostly) united, if only he hadn’t made one hasty pledge? I really find that very far-fetched. Far from “encouraging people to stick the boot in” the knowledge that he is going is causing people to bite their lip, believing that to rock the boat now will have no point rather than to demonstrate the impression of a divided party something that virtually every Labour MP is so desparate to avoid. That is also, incidentally why they are refusing to publicly contenance the possibility of a challenge to Brown and are insistent on a coronation. A contest means ‘division’, and what’s the point if Gordon’s going to win anyway?
103- Roger. I would disagree with you about where the unpleasent posters on here come from. I do think Nick P should be treated with a bit of respect by posters. He doesn’t have to come on here under his real name but I think it’s great that he does and will engage with us.
104. Dead right alex. He answered the question to get him off the hook of having to answer it during election campaign -and it worked
Benedict/Yokel. You were asking for a definition not a justification! Though if you want one …….but it might take some time! Incidentally how come you knew-and others- that Hizbollah wouldn’t be defeated by Israel but Bush, the State Department No 10 the Israeli population and their cabinet didn’t!
re 98, thst’s fanciful. It doesn’t matter how many countries recognised him he wasn’t de facto head of state. By that reckoning Prince William will be William IV, William III never having existed.
It’s like saying that Sadam Hussein is still de jure head of state of Iraq - which of course he is - but we won’t go down that route.
RE 112, Beatrice, people with more money will pay more of the tax than people with less. Originaly most people did not pay income tax.
What Roger means is that they should pay a higher percentage of their earnings rather than a higher percentage of the total take.
I understand it was Mrs T’s policies that initialy had the take up whilts putting the rate down.
Alex
I wrote next to a one liner..and it stated what has been widely reported, Tony wishes he hadn’t said a thing. It didn’t say anything about whether the Labour Party wouldn’t be in the divided mess it is if he hadn’t said anything. If I wished to have speculated on that I would have written something longer.
DC. I’m know all parties have their zealots but for sheer unpleasantness I’m sorry to say but they’re NEALY all yours!
Excuse the typos!
God, two clarifications in two minutes. Roger at 115, I didn’t ask for a definition at all…
Probably no-one has noticed but Terry Wynn MEP (Labour MEP for North West) has resigned his seat (he was in the Euro Parliament since 1989). Brian Simpson is now MEP in his place (Simpson was a MEP in the 1999-2004 Parliament but he was ranked in 4th place in 2004 and Labour just got 3 seats)
Fair enough, I obviously misread your posts then. If you are just reporting what are Blairs views then it is he who is just completely deluded.
re 122. Oh yes and who chose Brian Simpson as the new MEP for the North West. The voters? Of course not far too simple for new Labour. Presumable he was only in 4th place because he didn’t a*se lick enough?
Yeah Tony is deluded, standard practice when you’ve been unassailable for so long, but reality is about to sink in.
114 - I agree with Roger; there are some quite rabid posters on the site, and I guess we have all risen to the bait on occasion.
I try to remember that despite my contempt for most things socialist, some of my best friends are socialists; and that the sort of people on PB.com are the sort of people I would almost certainly enjoy discussing politics with in the pub. I wouldn’t generally abuse them in the pub to the same extent that sometimes occurs on here, and this is a useful rule to follow before pressing “submit”.
That said, I don’t think Roger is right in terms of where most of the abuse comes from; but I guess I have my blue-tinted specs on!
124 - Who chose Terry Wynn?
119 - the main reason for that is because it is not possible to be unpleasant about Tories.
RE 115, For the same reason why at 13 I knew withdrawing the Endevour would result in the invasion of the Falklands, and when in 1982 some one got on my School bus home and said they had been invaded, I was not surprised, and also knew where they were, what their exploitable resources were (kelp and krill are in very high abundance).
I disagree with your comment about the State department. I doubt they are at all surprised.
The reason I knew? Because I can read. (Can’t spell, but what the heck)
Roger
Two questions:
Did you enjoy Israel’s apparent inability to strike a decisive military blow against Hizbollah?
Are you enjoying Israel’s current bloodletting (metaphorical) within the country over the conduct of the war?
These are fairtly straight questions…they may require some supporting material but the base answers are yes or no.
Re 119, Roger that is not fair. Tyson thinks we are a bunch of bar*tards if we do some thing he thinks is bad, and double ba8tards if we do some thing he thinks was good.
Benedict, Never mind the kelp and krill what about the oil….
Roger - If your model of social justice is to redistribute wealth to create a situation where no-one is homeless or without a living wage of some form, (ie “a minimum standard of existence within the community”), why is it then “just” that those who have achieved progressively more above that minimum standard, should pay proportionately more in tax to maintain that minimum standard. Surely it is just that we all contribute proportionately the same?
Even mediaeval feudalism set a common tithe at a flat 10%
RE 131, My encyclopedia’s at the time did not contain that information. Besdies which we do not know how exploitable that is both in technical and political terms.
It is interesting to note that you did not direct the questions about Hezboulah and Israel at me, why not?
Sorry Benedict, didn’t realise it was compulsory. If you want to fire away, go ahead.
127. The voters giving Labour 3 seats in that area knowing how the people were ranked (ok, maybe many didn’t know). If they didn’t like a candidate, they could have voted for another list.
Having said that I dislike closed lists.
Blair’s problem over Lebanon - an inability to understand that one could answer no to both those questions and still be critical of Israeli actions. Most (non anti-semitic) Conservatives who were critical of Israel did so probably because they had no desire for such questions to be asked.
(not intending an argument), but isn’t any individual voter in a closed list system implicitly voting for all the list candidates or none?
re 135 so on that argument you put your most popular figure in 5th place so that the voters seeing that turn out in droves to get you 5 MEPs. Closed lists are the anithesis of democracy which is why I always spoil my vote in Euro elections.
119- Roger. I really think you are wrong about this and come to think about it you can get quite rabid yourself at times… I have had personal insults I recall on here from Dan and Colin W, both Libdems I believe. It doesn’t bother me and yes some Conservative posters can get irate at times but to say it mostly comes from us really isn’t fair or accurate.
Damnit Roger has gone absent just as a couple of queries were put…
138. well, I agree that closed lists aren’t great
137. Alex, I’m not following you
But it’s late for me, I’ll try and read it better tomorrow morning
Why don’t we have open lists for euro elections? I wonder if the Tories will have a pledge on any aspect of electoral reform (PR for local govt for example) in the next manifesto?
11 - Do the mothers and fathers of British soldiers killed in Iraq because of Blair’s WMD fantasy get the personal notes from Tony and Cherie?
No but fat gold diggers earn 200,000 for twisting delicate ankles.
Nobody should be rude to anybody.
Nick P can look after himself but he is entitled to as much respect as anybody else. The silly jibes at his interesting little anecdote reflected badly on those that made them.
We seem to be getting an increasing number of children on this site. Maybe if we spent more time discussing betting they would go away.
[132] Robin, do you disagree with the principle of from each according to his/her ability, to each according to his/her need or just the way Labour puts it into practice?
137 - Yes, because unless they know where the cut-off on the list will be, they have to vote for the whole list en masse.
Makes a total mockery of democracy, and the accountability of individual representatives to the electorate.
It is just one of the many many reasons I despise the sham that is PR-based/multi-member regional AM system we have here in Wales for the parish council down in Cardiff.
FPTP ain’t great in parts, but I have not been convinced yet of any alternative that does not have bigger inherent problems.
Peter
You wouldn’t be looking at the Ryder Cup for an interest at all?
146. “Yes, because unless they know where the cut-off on the list will be, they have to vote for the whole list en masse.”
But when I vote for a list, I know who the hell is in it.
145 IA - As a compassionate conservative with a strong social conscience, I think there is something morally just in “from each according to his/her ability, to each according to his/her need”
However, I think a proportionate contribution (ie non-progressive tax bandings) is entirely just and consitent with the statement. Labour’s implementation of it and non-proportionate wealth redistribution is based upon the politics of envy, and a desire to punish individualism and enterpise.
It is the basic self-defeatism of this approach which is why I can have no truck with socialism.
47. Good grief, a betting post! Yes, Yokel, and I should think the value will be in backing the USA.
148 - but you do not know how many of the (say) 5 names on it who will be elected - some on the list will make the cut, and others won’t. There is no opportunity to vote for some on the list and not for others, when it is a closed list.
The party machinery has already determined which of the candidates are most likley to be elected.
Yokel. Yes I am glad Hizbollah weren’t dealt a decisive blow by Israel.
When the twenty year civil war ended in Lebanon all the competing factions got a place in the government. The President for example had to be Muslim, the Prime Minister Christian.
During the civil war Hizbollah had control of the South where they functioned as a quasi state. They provided schooling and hospitals and welfare to the people in that area. They also through village cooperatives provided protection from another Israeli invasion. To describe them as simple terrorists is a foolish American simplification. They are part of a complicated fabric which is the Lebanese State.
I think a lot of the problem in the Middle East has been the imbalance of power. Israel have been able to do what they liked to whom whenever they liked. The subjugation and occupation of all the Palestinian areas has been bad for the Palestinians but also bad for the the Israelis who have come to believe physical force is everything
[149] But even Margaret Thatcher kept the higher rate tax band - did that mean she was signed up for the politics of envy, and a desire to punish individualism and enterprise?
The US have no strength in depth in their team. A lot of first timers and that’s a lot of pressure for anyone.
I’m not convinced either way yet.