How punters reacted to Brown’s big day
November 16th, 2006-
The money piles on Brown after Blair’s apparent endorsement
The above chart shows hour by hour how the betting markets reacted to yesterday’s Queen’s speech debate when Tony Blair apparently endorsed Gordon Brown as his successor. Punters have weighed in to bet on Brown and his best price tightened at one stage to 0.22/1.
-
In fiery exchanges with David Cameron Tony Blair predicted that Labour will be led at the next election by a heavyweight with a “big clunking fist” who will “knock out the flyweight David Cameron”. The widespread view is that this was an endorsement.
As Andrew Grice writes in the Independent this morning the “…endorsement is expected to kill off any lingering hopes among ultra-Blairites, who fear that Mr Brown might lose the next general election, or that another cabinet minister might challenge Mr Brown for the leadership.”
The Sun, interestingly was not totally convinced that Blair had in fact endorsed Gordon. This is it’s main editorial this morning “DID we see Tony Blair anoint Gordon Brown as his chosen heir in the Commons yesterday? It looked like it as he warned “flyweight” David Cameron would be knocked out by a “big clunking fist”…The Chancellor showed his appreciation by warmly thumping the PM on the shoulder as he sat down. His path to Number 10 now looks clear. But some believe the PM still holds out hope that another big-hitter might emerge as a contender.And Cabinet bruiser John Reid can pack a haymaker when roused. “
What is extraordinary is how sentiment on the betting markets has been transformed in only seven weeks. On October 4th I was writing here about apparent attempts to keep the the Brown price artificially high. Then the Chancellor had moved out to 0.58/1 which seemed great value.
So in the space of seven weeks the profits on a successful £100 Brown win bet have moved from £58 to £22-23. Those punters who got on in early October have done very nicely.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Sounds more like Reid to me.
Thanks for the article Mike. Interesting to see how the price has moved, though I not a slight late drift.
I can’t see what was said today as any more of an endorsement that “I do not resile from what I have said before”.
If punters wan’t to move on that, its fine with me.
In discussions here I have recommended buying Gordon at circa 1.4 (or .4) and laying at 1.35 ish or less. Could have made a killing. I suspect many have.
Any way I am off to bed. Just spent 3 hours fisking the Queens speech for my blog.
It is interesting see Blair implictly back his arch-enemy Brown. This is the strangest endorsement seen in recent politics. Especially given that Brown lost his marbles last week.
Remember the Lib Dem election, Menzies Campbell was supposed to be a dead cert elected. Yet he only just clung on by his fingernails against a complete unknown before the election.
David Davis was supposed to be the strong favourite for the Conservative leadership as well. Yet he ended up losing by a wide margin to David Cameron. I suspect there could still be some big surprises in the coming weeks and months.
Both these elections occurred in just the last 18 months or so.
I would have to honest, and admit that Tony Blair is one of the most talented politicians in British politics over the last 50 years or so.
Brown is hardly a match - the chap has wrecked the economy - flooded the country with low productivity migrants - and presided over a ruined education system. All he can boast at is reaised health spending - yet most of this has gone into raising salaries while services have actually being cut back.
If Labour are foolish enough to annoint Brown into the Premiership they will be wiped out at the next General Election. The polls already show this under Brown, and the margin of defeat can only get bigger as we approach the next election. Labour would be far better off with Reid or Alan Johnson. The betting markets may not show this now. But a week is a long time in politics…
Brown is hardly a match - the chap has wrecked the economy - flooded the country with low productivity migrants - ” Hugh Laurie”
Is this a serious statement??
Of course. You will find per capita productivity in the UK has collapsed. Most of the much heralded economic growth Brown laudates is simply the natural economic expansion caused by increased population, itself caused by massive net immigration (in fact the highest in the history of the UK, and comparable with that of the US at the turn of the 19th century).
Any idiot can flood a rich country with migrants. What takes genius is raising economic productivity. Productivity Brown has damaged in a massive way. And if you remember the Labour promises in 1997, they were promising to bring about growth through RAISING PRODUCTIVITY, while actually reducing immigration. Hence, education, education, education. What we have actually seen under Brown is failure, failure, failure…
Combined with bogus inflation figures you may find that there must be some debate about just how much real growth there has actually been.
Inflation has been under-reported by 1-2% per annum over the last decade so the government could fiddle benefits payments, and overstate economic growth. Just as they have fiddled unemployment figures through pushing large numbers of unemployed onto incapacity benefit. Just as they have fiddled crime figures through punishing police forces that report rising crime (now they are penalised, whereas before they were incentivised in reporting crime - police forces deliberately fail to report large numbers of criminal incidents).
Irrespective of the implications for party politics, the now near certainty that Brown will accede has to be bad news for the country. Not only will he carry on Blair’s damaging agenda but there are also plenty of signs that he will do it with spite, malice and ill-humour.
Turning to the comments by Mr Blair, I can’t help thinking that all this talk of clunking and thunping will further alienate female voters from the Labour party.
Eleanor!!! You are an early riser today! Beat me to it!
But going back to Hugh Laurie (6) : “Just as they have fiddled unemployment figures through………” This is precisely what Thatcher did… and so did Heath, didn´t he? : Rik (not a spoof) to answer………….
But, returning to Eleanor - “the now near certainty that Brown will accede has to be bad news for the country. Not only will he carry on Blair’s damaging agenda but there are also plenty of signs that he will do it with spite, malice and ill-humour.”…
I have to confess that I agree with Eleanor 100%. I am not a Tory, any more than she is a Lib Dem, but here there is a consensus. Brown simply does not have the charisma (”breeding”, Eleanor?) to take people with him. He is stuck in a rat hole of his own making, and he reacts just like a cornered rat: he hits out at all and sundry, instead of building coalitions.
That is why I think - sorry, Eleanor: presumably we will have to disagree on this one - that after the next general election and the hung parliament that will inevitably result - Ming will end up as Prime Minister - simply because he is better at building coalitions and consensus than either Brown or Chameron. There are lots of Labour and Tory MPs, I think, who would vastly prefer a Lib Dem led government and programme, to what we have been offered by Blair-Brown, or what is on offer, supposedly, by Chameron.
PS. Eleanor. I have several elderly aunts - though not as many as formerly - who all think exactly the way you do: breeding and courtesy do count for something, and I agree, at least as far as courtesy goes….. Please don´t be abashed by the negative comments that you have received on this site - I think that you speak for a very large number of Tory members and supporters.
8 - A leap of the imagination if ever i heard one!
“Tressage” you are a very strange person. But rest assured that I am not put off by any of the juvenile and hysterical comments over the last few days. I have seen an awful lot worse in my time.
Am I allowed a small ‘told you so’ murmur? I’ve been advising the forum that Gordon was bound to win the leadership and the gap to TB was exaggerrated for at least a year, to a fair amount of scepticism from our host and others. Believe your resident Parliamentary correspondent sometimes…
Some rather eccentric early posts here, but welcome to the forum, Hugh. Tressage, what odds are you prepared to offer to back your prediction that Ming will be PM after the next election? I think you will find a number of takers.
There are people who really don’t like Gordon, and they are well-represented on this forum. But some of the assertions above are just silly.
‘he reacts just like a cornered rat: he hits out at all and sundry, instead of building coalitions’
- as others have pointed out, something he doesn’t do is hit out at other people. I can’t remember any occasion, in public or private, where I’ve heard hinm being nasty about anyone. That doesn’t mean he goes out of his way to be nice to opponents (as Oliver Letwin does, for instance): he simply unleashes a tidal wave of facts and arguments. Anyone less like a cornered rat is hard to imagine.
Hugh’s arguments rest too heavily on two pillars: immigration and productivity. The former is simply not substantial enough to have made the decisive difference that he suggests. It’s been useful in addressing shortages with near-full employment, but it’s largely thanks to this government that we had the full employment in the first place. (Without rubbing in the party aspect, a brief comparison with 1979-97 illustrates the difference.) As for average productivity, it is notoriously difficult to measure in the service sector, and liable to rise when employment falls (because the least productive workers are laid off first) and vice versa. I agree there’s an issue there, but overall the economy is in better shape than at any pre-1997 time that I can remember.
8. Funny.
No polls til December eh?
12, Nick. All due respect. But to suggest that Brown is “not nasty” to opponents is simply ludicrous. Not merely Tories and LibDems, but the entire country, knows the foul things Brown has said about Blair both privately and in leaks to the press. Indeed it’s the stuff of late-night comedy routines.
George Osborne complained of Brown precisely because Brown is so personally rude and unpleasant to others in the Commons. I don’t recall any Tory ever saying such a thing of Blair. If I’m wrong doubtless Andrea will correct me. Did we not see on TV Brown petulantly throw papers across the despatch box just a few weeks ago? The man’s temper is a byword.
As to your paragraph about the country’s “prosperity” I cannot think you mean that either. Are there no hospitals in Broxtowe with wards under threat or closing despite record amounts of taxpapers money? (To take just a single example).
“it’s largely thanks to this government that we had the full employment in the first place”
Erm…nothing to do with Thatcher’s reforms of the 80s then?
Nick 12 - as a Fellow of Magdalen College Oxford in 2000 during the Laura Spence affair I beg to differ about you point on him not hitting out at other people. Without even checking his basic facts, which turned out to be totally wrong, Gordon launched into what was a personal attack on close colleagues of mine to make a point that simply did not stand up. Cheap and nasty is our Mr. Brown. He never withdrew even when proved wrong.
12. You may indeed have an ‘I told you so’ moment. I’ll join you in it. The odds on Brown on offer in early October were ludicrously long and even now look a touch that way (is there really about a 25% chance that someone else will win? At the moment, it’s probably only about a 25% chance that another serious candidate will stand).
I can’t let you get away with the employment comment though. Unemployment was falling rapidly at the close of John Major’s second term, with low inflation, steady growth, a balance of payments close to balance and a budget defecit also heading rapidly towards balance (somewhat in contrast to 1979, I might add) and the continuation of Tory spending plans through to 1999 mean that credit for the economic picture can be laid at his and Ken Clarke’s door through to at least that point, since when unemployment hasn’t shifted much at all. And the figures have also been helped by a very substantial increase in state employees.
Anyway, back on topic, I’m not convinced that it was an endorsement as such. He didn’t mention Brown and Blair would surely label anyone who took over from him ‘a heavyweight’ just from a party loyalty point of view (alright, perhaps not McDonnell). The Sun may have this one right and he can play it either way. Full marks to Brown for making it look like an endorsement though - it would have been funny had John Reid patted Blair on the shoulder instead.
One thing that Blair got right yesterday, if indeed he was referring to Gordo, was the lightweight/heavyweight tag. Gordon is awash with policy detail; it is coming out of his ears. He is presence to Cameron’s absence. Whether, of course, the GBP take to it is a different matter. But he does look a shoo-in for the leadership.
8. “There are lots of Labour and Tory MPs, I think, who would vastly prefer a Lib Dem led government and programme [to that of their own party]” - I like a good laugh in the morning.
What I thought was interesting was the BBC coverage of this … the Tory Leader got in good soundbites in a calm way and with some degree of respect from the House. Blair was heckled and seemed very shouty dring his bit. He fluffed the words at one point too.
Blair is a political master, but using a boxing metaphor was bound to make the Tories leap up and down and point to Prescott…
A good point-scoring line, badly handled I think.
19 - “Got in good points in a calm way”
No, I don’t think so. He sounded high-pitched and shouty.
And as for Ming, Tabman, that was the single *worst* speech I have ever seen from a major party leader. The words were fine but the delivery was awful.
21 - and unfortunately for him, during the soundbite clip on the BBC (the comparison between Eden and Blair) somebody from somewhere said very loudly “he’s really struggling now!”
Some eccentric post on here Nick - agree totally but then you added to them with your (red) rose-tinted portrayal of Labour’s economic miracle!
Since we are clapping ourselves on the back I put a few k on at 1.6 - will run it to expiry as only his untimely demise can prevent Brown from winning.
For Ming to be PM I suspect we would have to overtake both the other main parties in vote share at least… well anything is possible but then not a runaway favourite.
But Hugh… actually Ming did win by miles. It’s certainly true that GB claimed he was going to lift productivity and has singularly failed to do so though.
I smell fear in the air at the very mention of his name and the big beast isn’t even out of his cage!
I understand why those who saw Cameron in the Commons yesterday are now feeling uncomfortable. Many thought that his CV suggested someone insubstantial who had been promoted too soon and yesterday we had the biggest hint yet that they might be right. Cameron was by no means awful but he did look out of his depth.
re 24. There will be fear in Oxford East Roger - just across Magdalen Bridge - amongst Labour members worried about how they can retain the seat from a Lib Dem attack.
TB really nailed Cameron on nuclear power yesterday. The man has NO policies at all. The one about, “quickly, rustle me up a nuclear power station” is so true of his position.
And some of these posts are truly ludicrous. Gordon was ALWAYS going to get the leadership. He has an economic record most Tories would kill for, despite their attacks. Have you ever known a period of such unprecendented prosperity?
26, 27. Welcome back, Professor!
Yesterday Blair won the prize in the debate, and his “Heavyweight” phrase was a good one. It revitalised his back benches and brought a rare real smile to Gordon’s face. But read the papers this morning - yes they often lead on that phrase and say it was a win on points for Tony (not a KO) - but otherwise the mood is of a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing - particularly as regards policies not politics. Lots of mentions of swansong and harking back to Mrs Thatcher’s PMQs.
Tony’s response was his PMQs writ large and most papers/commentators repeat Cameron’s criticisms - which will simmer in the minds of readers. I think Nick Palmer actually got to the nub of the Governments weakness in saying about Brown that he “unleashes a tidal wave of facts and arguments” - as a Tory I’d say less facts more arguments - but I think the repitition of past glories is chiming less and less with voters, and the criticisms of failure, too much legislation & little action and headline grabbing initiatives is becoming more effective.
RedFlump. I don’t know if you are new to this site but it’s mainly occupied by very optimistic Tories who I suspect aren’t averse to the odd magic mushroom. Even Disney couldn’t create the world that they inhabit. Their ten year dream that the economy would go back to the disaster it was in Thatcher and Majors time just isn’t going to happen so they hallucinate that it already has!
…a heavyweight with a “big clunking fist”
Bliar was surely referring to Reid
31 …Or John Prescott?
One simple point people seem to forget is that this is a leadership election in a governing Party involving the whole Party membership (organised in a complicated way, because that’s how the Labour Party does things). And there has never been such a thing before - Callaghan and Major were elected by their MPs, and all their predecessors who entered Downing Street mid-term “emerged.”
Peebies who who hold Labour Party cards are all agreed that Brown will win it easly - indeed, even finding an opponent who can get nominated against him is proving problematical. Polls showing that Labour might do a couple of points better under Reid Or Whoever (henceforth ROW) will not start a bandwagon in the Party’s electorate - the gap would need to be a lot nearer ten or fifteen for that.
Blair, I suspect, is content that Brown should move in from next door - a lot of Blairites are not.
And as Nick Palmer reminds us, labour productivity is simply not a Government target - apart from the cunning plan to reduce it further by getting all the Incapacity Benefits claimants back to work… well, someone’s got to hand out all those free newspapers on London street-corners after the immigrants have been sent packing, after all…
25. Oxford East? The Lib Dems are going to have to raise their sights higher than Oxford East if Ming is going fulfill the ambition of Tressage at 5! As it happens I think the Libs are positioning themselves perfectly for the Cameron implosion that I believe might happen over the next few years. The more you hype yourself the worse the fall. No one can accuse Ming of too much self promotion!
15. Bravo Mike. The Laura Spence affair showed Brown and Labour generally at their shallow, populist worst. No doubt it appealed to the ex-tankies in their ranks though.
Blair yesterday endorsed a heavyweight puncher as his successor.
The only Labour politician with a track record of punching people is John Prescott, so I presume it was JP who was being annointed
36. Prescott would be a fine role model for all those ‘yobs’ the government now tells us it is going to ‘crack down’ on with ASBOs, the stocks, thumscrews etc…
I would imagine Reid would stay in the Home Office under Gordon.
How about Hillary Benn for Foreign Secretary?
How about Blair for Foreign Secretary?
34 - “the more you hype yourself the worse the fall”.
I’d love that to be true, but it isn’t. The LibDems ramped and hyped and hyped and ramped their chances in all manner of seats, not leats on this site. When the dust settles and they’ve done worse than expected you never hear from them again. No come back at all …
In defence of Brown, the Laura Spence thing reminded me about the joke joke about the LAPD and OJ (they framed a guilty man). Oxbridge’s failure to take a decent share of state school pupils is strkking in my view.
I suppose everyone will see the newsclip on the Queen´s speech from their own position. In terms of the battle between Cameron I thought it was yah-boo stuff (turning off most voters). But Cameron looked a desparate poseur, out of his depth on such occasions. And I thought Blair landed a blow with the “flyweight” charge. The words from Ming chosen for the news clip did not contain any message aimed at convincing voters. But he seemed calm and above the fray. A lot of voters will like that.
My thoughts on the spectacle are here.
Winchester Tories clearly have a sense of humour as whilst Oaten’s been in the brown stuff, the new Conservative candidate is called Brine !! ….. Steve thereof.
Meanwhile Cheltenham Tories have gone for a bird ….. Coote … Mark for the use of.
Andrea @ 206 previous. Lib Dem Sandy Walkington is indeed an old hand in St Albans and I would expect that the yellow peril will push Labour into third at the GE. Present Tory MP Anne Main will then have a difficult fight at the following GE. Her best hope IMO is for the Lib Dems and Labour to roughly evenly share the anti-conservative vote and hang on. The Lib Dems will also be helped if they take Watford, as seems likely, and thus obtain a bridgehead in Herts.
Are there any boundary changes in Cheltenham that benefit the Tories? Otherwise it looks like a much tougher seat than Hastings & Rye. Winchester should be Con gain.
RE 41, Peter Oxford is taking less state pupils now than it did under previous Conservative administrations. Whos fault do you suppose that is?
As for all those who say (OK Roger) Us Conservatives must be feeling uncomfortable now, is it worth pointing out this was just one parliamentary joust?
43. Commentator - yes. Anthony Wells has the notional majority around 500 only now I think.
45. Thanks. Should be Con gain then.
43 Commentator. In Cheltenham the notional is now Lib Dem +515 down from 2,303. The boundary changes in Winchester barely change the Lib Dem maj of around 8,000.
38I “would imagine Reid would stay in the Home Office under Gordon.”
Well, today’s ‘Mail’ tells us that “Fanatic allowed to stay at Home Office.” But they said this about both Blunkett and Clarke, didn’t they?
Max,
Near the end of the discussion on yesterday’s post, you said:
One poll you may have missed was in the Scottish Mail on Sunday carried out by the same firm that carried out a poll for the Sunday Mail a couple of weeks earlier.
It found - amongst other things that Labour would gain four seats, others would lose 14, and the Lib Dems share of the 2nd vote had fallen from 26% to 12% in around two weeks!”
I assume that this was conducted by the mysterious new polling entity “Progressive Partnership” (they do not Google very well!), and was published in the Scottish edition of the Mail on Sunday (ie. the sister title of The Daily Mail) as opposed to the Progressive Partnership voting intention poll of 22 October…
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_headline=exclusive–salmond-is-leaping&method=full&objectid=17971859&siteid=64736-name_page.html
… which was published in the Sunday Mail (ie. the sister title of The Daily Record).
All very confusing!
Anyway, I cannot find the relevant newspaper article online. Most of the English papers, rather oddly, do not put articles from their Scottish editions on their websites. (The Sunday Times is an exception, although they do their very, very best to hide the Scottish content - it takes a master detective to actually find the Sunday Times Scotland homepage.)
Could you help us out by providing the full stats, dates, sample size, seat projections, and any other info that you have from the dead wood edition of the Mail on Sunday? And if you are aware of a weblink then that would be great.
44 What are Conservative proposals to overcome this problem? Perhaps cap no of students from any single school at 15? (Just bouncing ideas around).
46 Hubris, probably.
Horwood was fighting the seat for the first time. He will be dug in by the next election. He will also benefit from the unpopularity of the conservative county council, elected in 2005.
RE 48, But Zebidee, its true isn’t it? Can’t call Blunket a card carrying liberal can you?
RE 50, No, Peter we will look at the other ways that social mobility was better under Conservative governments and see what we can learn.
Charles vs Straw now:
http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED16%20Nov%202006%2008%3A56%3A37%3A060
On Dec 6, the Poplar and Limehouse CLP hosts a debate between Charles Clarke and John McDonnell…how many critics to ministers will come out of it?!
48. Zeb - I wouldn’t let it be known you read the Daily Mail. Not good for the old street cred.
Peter Dobbie wrote in a profile of Reid in 2003: “He was a noted pugilist and Commons door staff have vivid memories of wrestling him to the ground when he tried to barge into the chamber when too late to vote.”
More on my blog.
49. Stuart Dickson, I found on SNP website the full figures of the “who would make the best First Minister of Scotland” question and they’re:
Salmond 27%, McConnell 22%, Goldie 7%, Sheridan 5%, Stephen 3%, Harper 1%, Fox 1%
56. Blimey - a lot of dont knows !
57. Maybe there’re some “none of them (please get rid of them all!)” too
47. I think a lot of that was Oaten’s personal vote. All gone now.
Cheltenham is a definite though, no excuses if the candidate does not win it!
2. Benedict White. I recall you recommending backing Brown at 1.4 and laying at 1.35ish or less. This would give a profit on top of your original stake of 1.4/1.35 - 1 = 0.037 or 3.7%. As I argued at the time you would have to put a lot of money down to make it worth while at those odds.
Anyone who backed GB at 1.6 and lays off now at 1.23 will get a profit on top of their original stake of 1.6/1.23 - 1 = 0.3 or 30%. Following the general consensus of opinion expressed here, I have backed GB at average odds 1.54. I am not laying off yet.
I believe the very first spin doctors in America were the chaps who spoke to the press after big interviews and speeches and explained what REALLY happened and what really was said. The Lab posters on this blog are returning to their roots. Cameron gave a good speech that was well reeived in the House. The Lab front bench looked grim throughout. Blair, of course, got away with murder - speaking second, as always, with no threat of a come-back.
Is the sudden withdrawal of opinion polls an abuse of my human rights ?
50 peter pigeon. Despite the respective Lib Dem majs in Cheltenham and Winchester there’s a perfectly reasonable case, in light of local circumstances, for Cheltenham to be held and Winchester to go down the toilet !
Much will depend on who replaces Oaten as the Lib Dem candidate. IMO a little known outsider will struggle as Oaten’s previous large personal vote evaporates. In contrast a well known local or nationally known heavyweight stands a half decent chance of keeping the seat in the yellow peril column.
[44][50] One thing Oxbridge could do would be to provide a service to state school pupils to identify the college in which they would fit in best - so far as I know they leave applicants to make the choice on utterly inadequate information. I’m sure I only made it through because (nearly 40 years ago
) Queen’s was full of grammar school boys I could identify with - and I only found this out because my father had a colleague who had a son who was a fresher when I was UCCA-ing who recommended it to me on those grounds…
My daughter (who subsequently passed her Civil Service Entrance first go with room to spare) picked Hilda’s as it was the only remaining all-female college - which she coded for feminism but when she got to the interview she was appalled by all the Hooray Henriettas… she went instead to S.O.A.S. and enjoyed it greatly…
If the Universities themselves can’t be *rsed to provide adequate information to prospective students perhaps someone else could produce a website doing it and shame them into it?
GB’s actual performance is irrelevant. He is perceived to have been more good than bad as chancellor by the floating voter. I don’t even read about the votes of pensioners in the private sector who have lost out because of GB turning against him.
So far so good for his fans. When he takes over as PM, we will see a blizzard of announcements and new bills. We don’t need them now, and won’t need them then. Again, politically irrelevant. Will the GBP be impressed—-will they think: there’s tomorrow’s man?
My guess is no. If you can find the tories at evens for the next GE, I’d take it.
RE 60, St John, Fair enough. If he ends up walking it. However covering your position means definate profit. At the time the market was moving up and down.
It even went through a period where soeone was laying at 1.58 ish and giving away free money.
Doh! I don’t know what on earth I was doing with Google earlier? Progressive Partnership, based in Edinburgh, are a mystery to me no longer:
http://www.progressivepartnership.co.uk/about
They are the parent company of “Scottish Opinion”, who did a series of erratically-published (and in retrospect surprisingly accurate) Scottish voting intention polls for the Daily Record/Sunday Mail before GE 2005.
Their list of clients includes BSkyB, BBC, stv, BBC Radio 5 Live, BBC Radio Scotland, several independent radio stations, Aberdeen Journals (ie. the P&J), Associated Newspapers, DC Thomson (ie. The Courier/Sunday Post), Johnston Press (ie. The Scotsman/Scotland on Sunday), News International, Newsquest, Northcliffe, Scottish and Universal Newspapers, Scottish Daily Newspaper Society, Trinity Mirror, … and even The Dandy! As well as the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Executive.
I bet they have done an awful lot of unpublished Scottish voting intention work. I wonder why more of it isn’t published? Does it make uncomfortable reading for the Unionist newspaper proprietors?
They are not a member of the BPC, therefore do not publish findings or methodology.
62. The Tories will not regain Cheltneham because the Lib Dems have spent years nursing the big council estates which in normal circumstances should be Labour heartland. The Lib Dems are very well organised on the ground. The Tories run the council at the moment, but they have never been able to reach ouyt beyond their natural constituency.
When John Taylor stood in Cheltenham, it was close on the night until they opened the ballot boxes from the most deprived area of town. they were jammed packed with Lib Dem votes.
64 You can get 2.25 to 1 on Betfair that the Conservatives will get an overall majority at the next GE . Why haven’t you taken it ?
I didnt think that the Blair attack came over well on TV at all. It seemed like Blair was shouty and pointy, and the idea of politicians decking the opposition is something that belongs perhaps at party rallies but never at the Dispatch Box. The more significant outcome of the attack is the apparent endorsement, though as pointed out by others, Ried (and Presscott!) also fits the punching bill pretty well.
As for the Queen’s Speech, I think Cameron’s attack of trying to “Legislate himself a legacy” and the Lib Dems attack of trying to legislate to undo legislative errors of last year are both sticking.
Not only that, but the opposition will relish the chance to defeat the govt again on detention without trial and trial by jury. The govt would be wise to focus its time on the NHS and the transport nightmare in this country, rather than trying to play to the tabloid gallery with “tough” sounding nonsense that unites every other activist group in the UK except Darth Murdock.
[64] “Tories at evens” - for largest party, yes but you can’t get it; for outright majority surely not better than 6-4 against?
52 Tories as the party of social mobility is going to be ahard one to sell next time. Harder under your current junta than under Thatcher Hague or Howard, don´t you think?
62 Yes I entirely agree.
view from the PLP is that the speech did not endorse GB but that it was spun afterwards to make it appear that he did.
66. Isn’t it time there was a Scottish Polling Council to erase forever the Unionist bias in polling?
62. Jack, do the Libdems have “nationally known heavyweight” who are not already MP? Can you give me an example?
65. Agreed about covering your position. In my own case if I let the bet run and GB succeeds I will gain 54% of my stake but risk losing all. If I lay all off now at 1.24 I get a guaranteed 24% return with no risk to my stake. Decisions, decisions.
I also think that Cameron’s other attack, that Labour are trying to use fear to cover up policy failures is a very sharp one that resonates in much of the population, even Labour supporters.
Labour would do well to attack the Tories on Transport, the NHS and environmental action, as the Tories are weak or lacking policy on all of them. But Blair’s obsession with the “terror” agenda means he cant let go of it and tackle what is actually makeing British people’s lives difficult right now (which is NOT terrorism!)
‘nationally known heavyweight’
Cyril Smith?
74 Cyril Smith
RE 71, Peter it may be a hard sell, but it is true that it was better under the Conservatives.
Meanwhile NuLabour’s “Fear Agenda” gathers pace it appears the 90 day detention scheme is back on the table :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6153488.stm
RE 75, If it helps St John I expect the price to carry on fluctuating. It will be both higher and lower than now. Its all a game of nerves or you can lock in profit now and get another bite at the cherry next time he drifts only to lay off later.
44,50,63. But, I think we looked at the statistics of state school versus independent school in all three parliamentary parties and the Cabinent a few weeks ago on pb.com.
There are a number of Oxbridge Colleges with a better state versus independent record than, for example, the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party or the Cabinent.
74 Andrea. Half the BBC for a start !
79 cionservatives often agrgue (with some reason) that Thatcher´s economic reforms have helped the economy under Labour govts. So I imagine you will agree that their other policies have continued to hurt social mobility even under labour.
Both Labour and Conservatives are essentially against social mobility.
Conservatives want to protect their social position. Labour want the working class to stay working class. In my view anyway.
77/78. Ah, so Jack was just suggesting that a “large” man is a vote winner in Winchester!
Btw, the first EDM of 2006/07 session is about…Centenary of Scouting and it has been tabled by Bob Russell.
Dinky tabled an EDM titled “Sexual Orientation Regulations”. It’s about regulations on the Discrimination On Grounds Of Sexual Orientation (part of the Equality Act), but maybe he should have chosen a longer title, because from that title I thought he wanted to regulate sexual orientations.
Re 84 Peter Pigion, Yawn.
83. I don’t think they would so successful in Winchester compared to a solid local candidate. The poor voters already have their sitting MP (and wife) trying to tour the BBC and the media.
56. Andrea
Many thanks. Salmond has been ahead of McConnell on this type of question for a long time. However, the LibDems must be concerned by the appalling figures for their leader Nicol Stephen: almost negligible.
Have you got the weblink? I have searched the SNP’s press releases, but cannot see the item you refer to.
80. Quite a rebranding under way by Nu Labour…from the mindless optimism of ‘things can only get better’ to cultivating the ‘feel bad factor’.
God, I am useless today with search engines!
Found it. Annoyingly don’t give voting intention numbers. Labour must’ve been ahead!
http://www.snp.org/press-releases/2006/mcconnell-reduced-to-cipher-as-brown-takes-remote-control/
88. Stuart:
http://www.snp.org/press-releases/2006/mcconnell-reduced-to-cipher-as-brown-takes-remote-control
86 Thought you might have a stronger argument, Benedict. Although on second thoughts…
34 Roger when you say : The more you hype yourself the worse the fall. is this a subliminal concern you have about your massive hyping of Brown.
Mind you your efforts will be ineffective anyway if they are backed up by spinathons like the one Nick Palmer produced this morning.
Nearly choked on my toast to read the comic line immigration and productivity. The former is simply not substantial enough to have made the decisive difference that he suggests. Tell that to the increasing number of unemployed who look on in amazement as the numbers in work also increase.
Now how can that happen? Now let me think………
75 St John - I’m in exactly the same position. It’s not much of a problem though. I reckon if the price gets down to 1.20, as it might, I’ll start laying off. After all, he may step under a bus.
I do take Benedict’s point (81) however. You could close out now and play again as the price fluctuates. It really depends how you feel about risk.
I’d hold for the moment. Not many buses in Downing St.
93 I think it was Fred who pointed out yesterday that while GDP was growing at 2.6% p.a., similar to the rate in the eighties, 0.6% was accounted for simply by rising population (mainly due to immigration). GDP per head was 2%, below the rate in the eighties. And because taxes, as a proportion of national income are rising, real incomes are barely increasing at all.
93 “Nearly choked on my toast to read the comic line immigration and productivity. The former is simply not substantial enough to have made the decisive difference that he suggests.”
You are right on this part of your argument. See recent Item Club releases for confirmation:
A number of factors have recently combined to increase the UK’s potential output. The greatest change has been the increase in the labour supply, largely due to immigration from the EU accession countries since 2004, but also because of the increase in the number of older people in the work force, including many people choosing to continue working beyond retirement age. Add to this the recent Blue Book revisions to GDP and the steady growth of around 3 per cent in the value of capital stock, and ITEM concludes that there is currently an ‘output gap’ of about 1% between the economy’s actual output and its potential output. This is somewhat higher than most other estimates, and in the short term it will help contain inflationary pressures, without constraining economic growth – which has positive implications for monetary and fiscal policy.
27
‘Have you ever known a period of such unprecendented prosperity?’
Have you ever known a period of such unprecedented debt and bankrupties,would be nearer the truth.
Unemployment at a 7 year high and soon back to 19997 levels?
After 10 years of Labour and an NHS budget tripling from £30 to £ 90 billion we still have hospital waiting lists and now widescale cuts,certainly nothing to brag about there.
And those inflation figures,well if you leave out items such as council tax that have increased by 100% over the lifetime of this government,you can massage the numbers to look ok.
RE 92, Sorry Peter but “Conservatives want to protect their social position.” Is not an argument is it?
RE 94, I expect Tony will hire some
OT. The Washington Post through Reuters is reporting that seven House races remain unresolved 10 days after voting took place :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/15/AR2006111501370.html
73. Murray - “Isn’t it time there was a Scottish Polling Council… “
There are actually quite a lot of Scottish market research firms, or there certainly used to be. I used to work in that sector, but am now well out of the loop.
The thing is, they probably mostly do consumer and B2B work, and although public opinion work will definitely have increased post-devolution, it is not really an industry in its own right, as it is in London. Scottish firms just do the opinion stuff as tack-ons to omnibus surveys or as wee ad hocs.
98 what do think the word “Conservative” means, old chap?
94 & others - personally, I’m somewhat risk averse when it comes to these things. It doesn’t require a particularly fertile imagination to conjure up scenarios under which Brown could miss out. Untimely ill-health or worse, for himself or his wife/son, the fact that we do still have several months for someone else to emerge, the possibility of skeletons in dark cupboards, etc.
I should say that I’m not suggesting, or hoping, that any of those will happen - just that even at 1/4 I’m not prepared to oppose him. However, just because of this ill-defined sense of “something MIGHT happen”, and the fact that I don’t like big fat red numbers blotting my usually tidy account, I’ve closed out at 1.23 this week even though I accept he should be shorter.
Re 101 Peter clearly different things to what you think it does.
RE 102, Andy, you can of course pick up some more free money if he lengthens to lay again later. I suspect there is still oportunity in this market.
Disagree with Peter and strongly agree with Mike on Oxford admissions policy. Brown’s comments were anachronistic at best, and made from a position of considerable ignorance. They fall into the classic Labour trap of focusing solely on outcomes.
OT - I tried to post earlier (but no doubt got caught by the spam filter). Today’s Millennium Elephant blog has the best &and also most entertaining) analysis of the party funding scandals I’ve yet to see.
Murray,
MRS Scotland is 26 years old. Only a branch of the English organisation though I’m afraid.
http://www.mrs.org.uk/networking/scotland/news.htm
I actually think the Boy David is scared of Gordon. From the little hissy fit he threw during the budget, to the endless nasty and personal attacks (no more punch and judy politics eh?) he is trembling in his little pantaloons.
106. Is that why most Con supporters voted that JR was the man they feared most to be leader ?
107. They also voted Ian Duncan Smith to lead them! So they don’t have a great past record in their judgement
RE 104, Oxonian, got a link for that?
[109] You beat me to it, BW
100 - it might also be worth checking to see whether the polling company is a member of the MRS which has guidelines such as these.
RedFlump – So what about Gordon’s hissy fit when he through a load of papers at George Osbourne.
Murray – there is no Unionist bias in opinion polling. If anything they have tended – almost without fail – to overstate the SNP’s support from the 1979 election onwards.
Stuart – Sorry can’t remember the other details and I threw the paper away weeks ago. I suspect that some of these firms don’t have staff who are experts in political polling and I very much doubt there is much weighting for likelihood to vote, past vote etc.
I have twice tried to post the link and it hasn´t come up
millenniumelephant dot blogspot dot com
Oxonian (clue is in the alias) is wrong on Oxbridge, but right on the elecphant. In my view.
67. The difference between this time and last time is that Mark Coote only has a 500 vote deficit! He did OK in Hastings last time didn’t he?
RE 104, and 113, Wow that peace was longer than mine on fisking the queens speech.
Unemployment is 1.7 million and rising.
Labour will raise the school leaving age to fraudulently keep it below the headliner 2 million mark.
ps, Labour is trying to get the Cash for Peerages investigation scrapped because of “press leaks”
96 PP You can take your choice. The The BoE Governor said yesterday:
it was near impossible to judge the state of the labour market since nobody knew how many migrant workers were coming from Eastern Europe….
Mr King said the ONS……” just missed all these people.”
Mr King questioned whether it was worth paying any attention to the concept of the “output gap” – the guiding star of most central banks – if workers were being brought in on such a huge scale.
The Bank said CPI inflation was likely to edge up from 2.4pc in the near term and peak at 2.7pc …….
98 “Conservative” means someone who conserves, eg conserving the countryside, conserving fish stocks, conserving the environment.
In essence, building on what you have.
117 Labour knew. It is all part of their plan.
Peter Pigeon at 41, “Oxbridge’s failure to take a decent share of state school pupils is striking in my view.”
Percentage of population educated in independent schools = 7 per cent
Percentage of Liberal Democrat MPs educated at independent/selective schools == 59 per cent (Source: the Sutton Trust)
Suggestion — replace “Oxbridge” with “Liberal Democrats” in your sentence.
116
Problem is that unemployment may reach the 2 million mark before they can raise the school leaving age,but it won’t stop them from trying.
Yes, Blair is using the same defence as Abu Hamza,that he can’t get a fair trial (’abuse of process’) because of press leaks,looks like he’s really got something to hide.
Oxbridge can hardly be blamed for their intake of public school pupils. They take the pick of each year’s crop.
It’s worth noting that while only 7% of pupils overall are educated at independent schools, 25% of A Level students (from whom universities take undergraduates) are.
122 I would be interested in your comments on this, Sean. How do you think Conservatives saw the debate yesterday?
122 To be honest, I didn’t watch or listen to the debate on the Queen’s Speech. I’d be very surprised though, if David Davis were on the point of resigning.
There’s no doubt that John Reid is an asset to Labour, as much that he says does resonate with working class Conservative voters. Personally, I think that the Conservative line on law and order is pretty robust (David Davis is clear that a Conservative government would build more prisons) - but there are some strange mixed messages being given on this topic.
122 I believe I saw David Davies pat Cameron on the arm, smile warmly and say “well done” after his speech. Loud cheers also from backbenchers.
Conservative: favouring the keeping of what is established or traditional; disliking change, Conservative, traditional, conventional, ‘hidebound, diehard, reactionary’.
Well the last three just about covers it.
Gordon Brown’s comments on Laura Spence might have gone down badly with a few elitists but I’ll bet a pound to a penny they went down well with the vast majority whatever the rights and wrongs of her particular case.
To those who didn’t follow the detail it seemed like Oxbridge were preferring pupils from private schools to those from state schools. One privileges after another. Brown-as so often-appeared to champion the underdog and did himself no harm at all.
I suspect we will get much more of this when he becomes leader and the contrast with Cameron will be delicious!
114 Commentator. Being within 500 isn’t of itself enough. Cheltenhamm may turn into a Hereford that saw the Tories dent the Lib Dem majority by all of 6 votes from 01/05 or a better Tory case like Guilford.
Much will depend of how new MP Martin Horwood manages the seat in his first term. Additionally having a new Conservative council may not help the Conservative contender.
As I said earlier it may be easier in Winchester than Cheltenham. Who knows….. the English Democrats may sweep to victory in both seats …… and Margaret Beckett might become Miss Caravan World 2007 !! …… Bloody hell flying pink hippos by the drawing room windows.
Re 127, Roger, you don’t mind him picking on people and misrepresenting the facts as long as it gets votes?
I see.
I’m surprised you think Reid an asset to Labour Sean? He strikes me as a Tory in the mould of Tebbit. I’m not a fan of extreme political cross dressing and there is nothing about Reid that would tempt me to vote labour. Those Essex taxi drivers who might be attracted to Reid are better off not being pandered to in my opinion. Howard tried and the results were predictable.
123: Hmm. That tale of Tory ’splits’ and ‘meltdown’ seems to originate from a curious blog. I noticed this gem in one of its earlier posts:
‘To be brutally honest there was nothing suspicious about his [Dr David Kelly's] death. In the finest traditions of the British security services Dr Kelly was bumped off. And whatever the rights and wrongs of that, if he deserved to be bumped off then so be it.’
Quite.
117. You’ve got it back to front Blue2Win (or the journalist you are quoting has). If your population increases, but your economy does not create additional jobs to employ them, there is more spare capacity in the economy, which should exert downward pressure on wages and inflation. Your thesis that immigration automatically narrows spare capacity would only be true if the immigrants themselves were creating jobs faster than they themselves can fill them, (possible in the medium term but unlikely in the short term).
Mervyn King’s problem is not with the migration from the EU from 2004, it’s with the 2001 census. He thinks that it has got the balance between age groups all wrong, and in particular he was irritated that the ONS discovered in 2002 that they’d missed off a million people in the census, and feels there are other errors there.
This is important as the 2001 census is used to weight the Labour force survey. The Labour force survey is essentially a large poll asking households whether they were seeking work in the previous month. Essentially Mr King thinks that the Labour Force Survey, which provides the headline unemployment rate, is overstating unemployment. This was his testimony to the House of Lords. If the Labour force survey is overstating unemployment, then spare capacity is smaller than thought, and inflationary pressures larger. This view is backed up by the consumer confidence figures for October which rose, the buoyant housing market, and retail sales (numbers out today show a stonking October).
Essentially the BoE raised interest rates in November believing that the Labour Force survey was wrong. It remains to be seen whether their judgement is correct - we shall find out in the next year. But it puts an interesting spin on migration - if the BoE is saying that even with the extra migrants relieving labour shortages, the labour market is tight, what would things have been like without them?
In an attempt to counter 126 (and produce a display of spurious knowledge)I looked up the Tamworth Manifesto. And found this attack on the Whig gov.
are we ” to live in a perpetual vortex of agitation; that public men can only support themselves in public estimation by adopting every popular impression of the day, - by promising the instant redress of anything which anybody may call an abuse - by abandoning altogether that great aid of government - more powerful than either law or reason - the respect for ancient rights….”
Remind you of anyone ?
Re 133. F.R. got a link for that?
129. No Benedict. The point that over 50% of Oxbridge students come from the 7% who go to private schools is a statistic that stinks. It’s nothing to do with votes but everything to do with social justice. I’m pleased that after the 18 years of social stagnation under the Tories some senior politicians are prepared at last to address some of the underlying injustices in this county.
134: http://www.victorianweb.org/history/tamworth2.html
124 Thanks, Sean. Persoanlly I have always thought there must be some tension between them (if only for the way some of Davis´s supporters dragged Cameron´s family into the leadership election).
RE 135, Roger, I think the point is Labour policies over the years have made the situation worse not better.
RE 136, many thanks.
Its hard for Gordon to let all this name-calling wash over him - he is quite a moody person. And all the better for it!! Especially when faced with a jumped-up chinless wonder like George Osbourne.
126. Codestone’s definition taken from the swivle eyed “progressive” dictionary.
Progressive Socialism, now there’s an oxymoron.
129. Roger is a school playground bully.
Like most, he likes to dish it out but cannot take it.
Like most, he is a coward.
128.”Being within 500 isn’t of itself enough. Cheltenhamm may turn into a Hereford that saw the Tories dent the Lib Dem majority by all of 6 votes from 01/05 or a better Tory case like Guilford.
Much will depend of how new MP Martin Horwood manages the seat in his first term. Additionally having a new Conservative council may not help the Conservative contender.”
Jack, it can also depends on the national picture in 2009 (or when the next GE will take place). I’m sure many hardworking MPs were sent to the job center in 1997.
Btw, did you see the newly selected Lab candidate in St Albans?