Invitation to PBers to the BPC mid-term conference
May 5th, 2007
15th June 2007 at Central Hall Westminster.
Storey’s Gate SW1H 9NH
Cost: Please send a cheque for £30 payable to British Polling Council sent to ICM Research, Berkshire House, 168-173, High Holborn, London WC1V 7AA, together with your name, address and any organisation that you represent. By 1st June.
For more information on the British polling Council please visit the BPC website - www.britishpollingcouncil.org
This looks like an interesting day for a modest price and I am delighted that the BPC is extending an invitation to visitors to this site.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
looks very interesting. I might have to book a place!
Perhaps we should send senior members of the Labour Party as they seem to have forgotton what an opinion poll is. Perhaps through learning that Labour is more unpopular than in 1983, and has less councillors than in 1977, they will appreciate why Labour is no longer a serious party in British politics. Its future is the same as that of the left in France - political extinction.
Other than a tiny rump in some pockets, Labour has no major representation in any region in the UK, including the North - where the Conservatives now control more authorities, and have more councillors. The innapropriately named ‘Liverpool’ and ‘Manchester’ authorities do not represent the full cities which cover a wide area, but just the inner city. To say these are required to win a general election is as absurd as saying the Conservatives need to win ‘Hackney’ and ‘Lambeth’ to win a general election - it is pure nonsense contrived to decieve and mislead. The Conservatives now have more Councillors than in 1983, 1987, and 1992 - all years in which they won the general election - and are very close to their total of 1977. They will win the next general election by a very wide margin.
Blair was just the last phase of the terminal decline of Labour. We should seriously doubt that any one of even minor talent would ever want to participate in the Labour Party ever again. I certainly no longer want to have anything to do with Labour, and believe the Conservatives offer us a much better future. Labour is a dinosaur that belongs in the 19th century, not the 21st.
Last thoughts about the French Presidential election going into Sunday.
I think we may see a historic score in the French presidential election tomorrow night. And this would add a lot of credibility to Sarkozy in the process of implementing reforms in the country and give the UMP a good deal of momentum for the legislative elections. All of this thanks to a nearly psychotic end to a disastrous campaign by Sego Royal. Frankly, I would have never predicted such a pitiful conclusion to a campaign by any PS representative (a lot of PS voters will agree with me here and will cast their votes now for Sarkozy.)
It is safe to say that with these hateful final calls for violence, she shows how cut off from reality the old guard of the PS truly is. Jospin threw a spoiled brat tantrum and went home to mommy. Let’s hope Sego has the good sense to retire from politics now as well. She has proven that she does not have a place in a responsible public discussion.
I hope Dominique Strauss-Kahn has the good sense to keep his mouth shut and distance himself from her. But maybe he is one of the elephants as well. In any case, the PS urgently needs a new generation of leaders who are rational and have a better contact with reality. The model should be Clinton’s “New Democrats” or Blair’s “New Labor.” To make this change, the new PS( or just change the name to the Social Democratic Party SDP ala Germanys SPD) will have to distance themselves from the wacko left. That will mean losing 30% of their constituency, and so it will be very tough for awhile. But they can rebuild from there towards the center of the real world instead of entertaining fantasies with the Gulag guys and among themselves in closed Parisian salons. They really need to get out of Paris and see the world a bit.
I’ll try to make it, Mike.
Benedict, do you think there may be some people there who have not heard about your blog?
Re 4, Peter, “Benedict, do you think there may be some people there who have not heard about your blog?”
Even though I do try and keep it very quiet, that thought is simply shocking! Surely not?
2 - Further to that, it’s worth mentioning that there are now no fewer than 89 councils in the UK where Labour have no seats.
http://www.conservatives.com/pdf/89-councils-with-no-Labour.jpg
6 - Sorry, I should’ve said England rather than the UK.
7 - don’t worry, if there are no fewer than 89 in England, there are certainly no fewer than 89 in the UK
OT. Big moves in the Betfair market for next Taoiseach. Must be something in the papers tomorrow I guess about the latest scandle. Bertie now out to 2.5 with virtually all the lays used up out to 12’s, and Brian Cowen (FF Minister for Finance) now in from 10’s to 6’s.
Ian McWhirter’s column in tomorrow’s Sunday Herald
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1379914.0.0.php
9 - Rumours about what might appear about Bertie in tomorrow’s papers (should be out in Dublin very soon) plus the latest poll make for all kinds of movements in the markets (except PP where the market is suspended). Cowen is now becoming a possibility if Fianna Fáil holds on but Bertie is too damaged by the fallout to remain as Taoiseach or leader of Fianna Fáil. Can’t see it myself - it would be unprecedented to have a party leader resign during a campaign or immediately after winning one. I’m sitting on my Kenny bet of many months ago!
I like the running order - the spinning hacks in the graveyard slot with nowt to follow: it pretty much screams “go down the pub after lunch and you’ll miss nothing.”
[2] I too think, although rather less gleefully, that it could indeed be very difficult for Labour to recover from a defeat at the next election, if that produces a majority for Cameron that he can go a full term with - we can debate how large that needs to be, but the relevant precedent may be 1951 rather than 1992.
If your post is intended to be any more than partisan spinning, Will, you need to go on to say whether you envisage the Lib Dems replacing Labour, a de facto one party state or some other scenario.
9 / 11 - See: http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0505/ahernb.html
or http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/frontpage/2007/0505/1178204444571.html
Brian ‘Biffo’ Cowen: http://www.ireland.com/focus/budget2005/images/cowen.jpg
Who was it said that image and looks are all that matter in politics these days
I’d like to ask Rallings & Thrasher why they stick to their system which has been so wrong two years in a row
Re 2 Will L stated that Labour “has less councillors than in 1977″.
Very true. It is now down to 25% of the UK Councillor base and the previous low was 26% in 78. Labour has lost half its Councillors since 97.
Even in the 80’s wilderness years Labour was never below 32% and usually had 35%.
Should Labour lose office it has a much reduced Councillor base to build upon and could face a further decade or more out of power.
16 And the architects of all this is Blair and his ‘co-PM’ Brown.
I’ve posted this on the other thread. Labour have told the BBC they are considering legal action over the Scottish election results. Incredible nerve!
To respond to the weird post by Paul in the last thread (post 21): not only is it not true that the Government has failed to approve tram funding, but here in Nottingham both the original system and the proposed extension were vehemently attacked by the conservatives - in Broxtowe it was their only consistent campaign theme, with no fewer than three ’stop the tram with the Conservatives’ leaflets going out in some areas. You can be a Tory. You can be someone who likes tram systems. But it’s hard to be both.
Mind you, the local Greens also opposed it until recently - their late local chairman lived on the proposed route.
Re 18 is the Labour party legal case that the previous Govt (themselves) failed to plan the elections properly?
Unreal.
11, 13. Neil, thanks for your take on it. I found more useful comment here…
http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?t=19833
If Bertie is toast (someone actually laid him at the 12’s I mentioned on BF!) there’s some interesting money making opportunities!
Hislops Brown gay remark referred to Lord Browne not Gordon Brown, with a small amount of confusion thrown in for comic effect.
Gladstone, this is OT but it’s in response to your remarks on the previous thread. I know I bang on about Iraq: please feel free to skim my comments on this subject! I just feel it is the overriding moral issue of our time. Compared to half a million dead, and a region in savage turmoil, everything else pales.
As to your precise points: I have previously applauded, very loudly, the Lib Dems for their brave and correct stance on the war. I have also chided, quite fiercely, the Tories for their craven and foolish support for the war. I am equally harsh on myself - I supported the war at first, like an idiot.
I believe the Labour Cabinet ultimately responsible for the war should be prosecuted.
A couple more points as the sun sets over the Chihuahua desert. As I have intimated, I am in Texas right now. The other day I was reading the Odessa Star, a regular local paper in this dyed-in-the-wool red state Republican heartland. I was very surprised to read a op-ed leader casually referring to ‘the disastrous war in Iraq’. The editorial wasn’t making a point, it was actually about the World Bank, but it still felt able to use this shorthand. In other words, it is now a given in America - even in Republican circles - that the war is a “disaster”. Intriguing.
And finally, it’s notable how Iraq disappears off the rader now, more and more. You might almost think the war was dying down, at last, and the situation was resolving. That’s what I was wondering after yr remarks. So I just Googled to see what happened in Iraq today. Stuff which didn’t even make the news. Here’s a snippet:
“Baghdad, Iraq (AHN) - A suicide bomber blew himself up amidst a crowd of army recruits Saturday, killing at least 15 of them in town of Abu Ghraib, west of the Iraqi capital city Baghdad. More than 20 people were also wounded in the blast, sources said.
No group has claimed responsibility for the blast yet.
In other news, authorities said bodies of seven security men were recovered in the town of Baiji. There were also stray incidents of blasts in the western town of Yarmuk, and the northern city of Kirkuk. The attacks targeted the police and succeeded in killing at least one officer, reports said.”
There were also riots in Basra.
23 - The Liberal Democrats’ “brave and correct stance on the war” was to oppose an invasion UNLESS sanctioned by a second UN resolution. There was no issue of principle involved.
So, if France (which came close to approving a 12,000-strong troop contribution to the invasion), Russia (who, in those days, could have been bought by the promise of oil contracts and Iraqi debt repayment without French cover) and China (biddable without French cover) had caved, the Liberal Democrats would have supported the war. They also supported Blair’s previous Kosovo adventure, undertaken without any UN mandate. Why? Because France supported it. Some “brave” and principled stand.
23 Hi SeanT. Trust you are very well and either enjoying your trip or learning from it, and preferably both.
The news about that extract from the local rag is really surprising. I wouldn’t have thought they’d even heard of Iraq in that neck of the woods. And I would have expected that those who had heard of it would have felt that if it was being wrecked, it must have deserved it. But mostly I would have expected them not to give a damn.
Am I guilty of stereotyping?
Crazy goings on here. Sounds like Labour might be challenging the Scottish election results. Presumably they’re going to blame the Government.
I’d stay put for a bit if I were you.
24 I don’t know about brave and correct, Mr Chip, but it was certainly an improvement on the stance of the Govenment and the Opposition. And I should have thought the sanction of a second UN resolution was no minor difference, principled or otherwise.
Hinsight is a wonderful thing but if we are going to criticise those who got it wrong it is only consistent to praise those who called it right.
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-18&number=118
Have people got collective amnesia - the Liberal Democrat were the only party to vote against the invasion of Iraq - both the Conservative Party including David Cameron voted for the War … It is easy to condemn the government for the War but the Conservatives are just as complicit.
addition to 27 - Plaid Cymru and the SNP were also in opposition to the War and voted against in parliament too …
Wouldn’t it be ironic if a Labour candidate sued the Labour government in London for installing a deliberately currupt system to rig the system in their favour, which still wasn’t enough for the disappointed Labour candidate.
The net effect of the change putting both list AND constituency on the same ballot paper was to increase Labour’s vote through creating the impression that people were exericising two preferences within a single contest. This was a deliberate change from before designed to increase the Labour vote on the constituency election through creating confusion. The evidence is that it did so. Labour did much worse than the SNP on the list.
If the relevant contest is re-run the outcome would thus be a bigger SNP win. A re-run cannot change the overall seats outcome, as the SNP would have gained an extra from the list seat if they hadn’t gained that constituency.
2 et al. So “the Labour Party’s future is political extinction” is it? And “Blair was just the last phase of the terminal decline of Labour”. So terminal a decline that we won the last three general elections. Your first statement (about extinction) shows no understanding of how deep the Labour Party’s roots are in most of the country and conveniently forgets that the Tory’s are successfully rebuilding after a much greater pasting. Frankly if we could survive in the 1980’s with Michael Foot as leader, the SDP breakaway and Margaret Thatcher as PM we can survive anything. We are without doubt unpopular. But we are not either universally hated or univerally thought of as incompetent.
Your second statement is laughable and betrays wishful thinking rather than analysis. Blair is not popular in the party or country for a myriad of reasons but you assert that he is the last phase of the terminal decine of Labour! The Labour Party is bigger than Blair or any politician. It stands for equality and justice for working people. It may not always live up to what it attempts to do as it is run by everyday people and sometimes they are lead astray or fail. But essentially the Labour Party knows what it stands for. I realise you won’t see that from the outside. But trust me, we know. We have won three General Elections and we are at our lowest ebb in terms of popularity due to a limbo era whilst we have all waited for Blair to go. But we will be back. You can count on it. Regardless of what you want to believe. And if I am not mistaken you are also the same person who was accusing us all of electoral fraud a few a hours ago when things were not going your way. Nuff said.
Re 25 Peter the Punter, “Crazy goings on here. Sounds like Labour might be challenging the Scottish election results. Presumably they’re going to blame the Government.”
If I were them I would as well! The government is a shambles!
31 LOL Benedict!
It really does sound like a plot line from ‘The Thick of Things’. Maybe it is. Maybe when I wake up tomorrow I’ll realise it was a dream.
Night nite.
Re 32, Peter yes it does doesn’t it! Good night! I have an election campaign to prepare for (2011).
Holyrood legal challenges start…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/05/06/do0604.xml
29. No, I don’t think so.
If there is a rerun and Labour win, the SNP would not gain a list seat to compensate.
This region is the same as Glasgow with over representation for Labour in total. Labour do not have a list seat so can’t lose one if they gain an extra FPTP seat.
35. Further to my above post, see link to West of Scotland region results:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2007/scottish_parliment/html/region_18.stm
If Labour win a rerun they then have all 9 FPTP seats.
Then look at list votes and seats:
SNP 76,000 votes, 4 seats
Con 41,000 votes, 2 seats
LD 23,000 votes, 1 seat
So no way that SNP would get an extra list seat.
Presumably the calculation amongst the Scots Labs is that any close examination of spoilt ballots will reveal a preponderance of their supporters, befuddled by the complexities of the system. Given that around 95% of the electorate managed to work it out without too much bother, this doesn’t say much for their confidence in the intellectual ability of the average Labour voter - or for the much-vaunted Scottish education system.
But if they are right and it becomes clear that the majority of the ‘disenfranchised’ did indeed intend to vote Labour, then methinks Braveheart Salmond will soon be backpedalling on his ‘what a shambles’ rhetoric and start hinting that if you didn’t get your Highers you probably shouldn’t be voting anyway…..
R&T analysis in the Sunday Times is that the notionals are actually Conservatives 40% (+1), Labour 26% (=) and LDs 24% (-2) as compared with last year. That looks much more in line with the results, Tories up a bit, Labour at bedrock and LDs falling.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1752263.ece
2. Blah, blah. Naive. Doesn’t seem like 5 minutes since people were talking about the extinction of the Tories, and did that happen??