Labour move to 35% with Ipsos-Mori
May 31st, 2007
Brown’s party boosted by big increase in intention to vote
News of the final poll for May is just out and shows a big move to Labour. The headline figures from the Ipsos-Mori poll are with changes on last month CON 37% (-1): LAB 35% (+4): LD 18% (-2).
Like all Ipsos-Mori polls the figures shown are based on those who say they are “certain to vote” and given what has happened with other pollsters it had been expected that Labour would do well. The 35% share must be particuarly pleasing.
Overall the moves reported today are in direct line with the other recent polls.
Fieldwork was conducted face-to-face on 17-22 May 2007 and involved a sample of 1,999 people. Because of timing fieldwork was finalised before the recent YouGov and Communicate Research polls.
Given the prolonged period of positive media coverage for the party since the week after the May elections then the finding are not surprising. The question is can Labour keep it up?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Do I detect an official bounce?
So that means since April (when the only news has been the formal annoucement of the resignation of Prime Minister Blair and the appointment of Prime Minister Elect Brown):
Conservatives -0.49% (on the April average)
Labour +3.06%
Lib Dems -2.11%
Others -0.46%
Which means that if that carries on, by the time Brown becomes PM formally at the end of June, we should see a poll rating of:
Conservatives 36.22%
Labour 35.92%
Lib Dems 15.18%
Others 12.68%
which in laymen’s terms is a swing to Con of 1.5% since Election 2005 or just on the cusp of a Lab majority does raise the prospect of a General Election this October (where it wouldn’t suprise me at all if the Lib Dems fall from 62 to as low as 25)
For what its worth Baxter gives Labour a 2 seat majority on these figures. We will have to wait a bit longer to see if this is meaningful but if in October/November the figures are similar or better for Labour where does that leave Cameron?
The question surely is ‘Can the Tories keep it up!’. Their lead is slowly crumbling against a Party who have done no more than ditched their leader and appointed as his replacement one who is going to be desperately unpopular-apparently!
4 - Other than ICM none of the polls show a significant fall in Tory support - indeed YouGov showed a rise. The increase in Labour support does not seem to be coming from voters deserting the Tories. I don’t think it gives us too much to be worried about.
Could it be that Lab supporters who wouldn’t vote for Blair are now more certain to vote ? Would have to see the figures..
Is it just me or has everything gone into italics?
2 - there won’t be an election in October. The Labour Party is still almost technically insolvent. It hasn’t got a pot to pee in.
And Brown is hardly going to let the “big prize” potentially out of his grasp after just 3 months, is he? Even if 10 points clear, he’d be a brave man to risk it - who knows what could happen.
All meaningless at the moment until GB arrives on the scene (he is still out there, somewhere, I take it?), when I expect Labour’s ratings to do something similar to what happens when you drop a very big rock in a very deep pool.
4
A bit of fresh is a marvellous aphrodisiac for some.
Maybe the same applies politically for a new leader and PM, and this is just in the anticipation stage.
Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off for a moment, I would echo Jamie at 6, that Brown will almost certainly see a hardening of the Labour vote and a softening of the LDs in constituencies where the Tories came within touching distance of beating Labour last time - but only because the Labour vote went to the LDs. Pendle or Calder Valley being two particular examples near me where this happened - the Tories realistically may be further away from winning next time there than the 2005 results suggest. Of course, it may also mean the Westmorland & Lonsdales are easier to win back as Labour voters go back to Labour away from the LDs. I don’t know how it all shakes down, but I suspect the hardening of the “old Labour” vote back to Brown will harm the Tories more than they will gain from it.
It’s interesting IF the increase in Labour’s % is driven mainly by an increasing likelihood of Labour supporters to vote. If true, could this mean that Labour will pile up votes in places that they don’t really need them? I’ve often thought that GB would be great at boosting Labour’s majority in say Barsnley Central or Wigan, but would struggle to make an impact in some of the southern marginals in say Kent and Essex. To be fair though, balanced against that is Cameron’s apparent lack of progress in the North.
8 Labour’s ratings will create a very large splash, Bob?
CLPs nominations update
Benn 50
Cruddas 48
Johnson 34
Harman 32
Blears 26
Hain 17
The last undeclared MEP has nominated Benn
8. A big wet rock ?
Sedgefield CLP has nominated Blears. As mentioned in the previous thread, North Tyneside CLP (Byers’ seat) has nominated Cruddas
Harry, all Tories will hope Brown sees it that way! In a GE, the LDs and Tories will get airtime and Brown won’t be able to hide from the cameras. Bring it on!
I don’t necessarily agree with those who say Cameron couldn’t organize a Piss up at a brewery but to have Dominic Grieve join Graham Brady on the front bench in criticizing the Tory education policy at this particular time makes you wonder. I think he and Osborne are just too clever by half and are going to end up up their own backsides!
16: maybe Brown’s cunning new strategy is to just hide from the electorate, so as not to harm his poll ratings. Is that what he’s doing at the moment? Not seen or heard from him since he nervously came through his Greatest Britons 2007 TV appearance last Monday, like a best man at a wedding.
Actually, he is still standing, isn’t he? Has anyone checked?
Mings dasy must be numbered now….
Good stuff. We clearly had an initial bounce following TB’s resignation and GB’s initial interviews, and as Mike correctly predicted it’s probably taken the form mainly of harder Labour voting intention (which has a positive circular effect - polls like these cheer supporters up). The current week has been nothing special and I’d expect to slip back a bit until GB takes over, at which point I have hopes of winning my charity bet (that Labour will lead in the July ICM).
I’m not sure about the solvency question being decisive in election timing. In many marginal seats including Broxtowe money is not the problem - we could fight a General Election tomorrow if we had to. Obviously the national campaign also needs money, but post-GB I suspect that will be less of a problem than the Tories hope.
10. Not necessatily.
The bottom line is that a hardening fo teh Labour vote depends on where that hardening is.
8 I’ve got it now - and increase in the number of wets.
18 - He was at the hustings in Leicester just yesterday I believe. The media have no interest in these any more as they have been frustrated in their wish for a damaging competition.
Good poll for Labour, Tories still ahead (as I would expect at this stage) and yet another poll which should the LibDems sagging. I predicted this would happen - I know many people who voted LD in 2005 because of Blair and Iraq. Especially because of Blair. Now this Blair going and a new broom in No 10 (or should that be “new Broon”?
)people obviously feel they can come back to Labour.
This is good news for us (Labour) in Swansea West.
23. Yes he was there yesterday in Leicester. Hazel Blears got the best reception from the audience at the hustings.
Very good meeting at the Guiildhall for the PPCs for Swansea West on Tuesday. 7 in all. And guess who’s CV I had through my door yesterday - Tamsin Dunwoody’s! Fresh from her loss in Pembrokeshire she’s after Swansea West now!
Polls are only useful for morale purposes. It does knock the old morale to see your party on 29% (or even on 27% according to CR!) and the sun does shine brighter to see some sort of recovery in progress.
18: I suspect the problem is that you read a paper that doesn’t report GB’s speeches, Bob - see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1862695.ece
26. Maybe he judges a man by his deeds not his words ?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1862687.ece
26. Maybe he judges a man by his deeds not his words ?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1862687.ece
ARSE BREAKING WIND NEWS **** ARSE BREAKING WIND NEWS ****
The Whimsical Independent News Division (WIND) of ARSE have issued a new poll of polls, comprising Mori, ICM, Populus, CR and YouGov that gives :
Con 37% .. Lab 32.4% .. LibDem 18% .. Others 12.6%
The amended Wells/Baxter PISSED index with added SOAMES weighting gives :
Con 270 seats .. Lab 300 .. Lib Dem 48 .. Others 32.
Labour 26 seats short of a majority.
…………………
Sources :
ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
PISSED - Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
26.Well that is one option for Alex Salmond if he is to have any idea of what his working relationship will be with Brown in the near future. How long will Brown be able to ignore questions on the subject of the First Minister for Scotland, and is there a problem with the telephones in Downing Street?
13 Thanks Andrea
You see, this is what I don’t get about the betting. If you take these CLP figures literally and add them to the MP Nomination Figures, the overall effect is broadly:-
Johnson and Harman - Dropping back into the pack
Blears - Holding steady in mid-division
Hain - Dropping back towards the rear
Benn and Cruddas - Improving
Nobody is pulling away. Just the opposite in fact, the field is bunching. Why then is Benn such a hot favorite (6/4)? There seems to be an implicit assumption amongst punters that his popularity amongst voters is greater than the bare figures would suggest. This may be but it is only an assumption and a big one at that.
When all the Union declarations are in (later today?) it should be possible to do some crude what-if analysis to calculate a potential winner. My guess is that it will be very close whatever way you cut it, but I reckon on most reasonable assumptions Johnson, Benn and Cruddas will be the three in the mix.
Thanks again Andrea and I do wish you all the very best with your ‘D-Day’. I hope PB isn’t proving too much of a distraction. If you have enough time - and only if it’s no problem - could you remind me of the latest number of MP nominations received by the six? Curiously, the Labour Party site doesn’t seem to have it.
Ciao
30 - The petty behaviour that Blair and Brown are displaying is playing right into Salmonds hands. I can’t understand why they are so unwilling to contact him when even someone as Unionist as Ian Paisley is happy to do so.
13. Bloody hell - go Cruddas! He’s had a real surge over the last couple of days. I wonder if the Newsnight performance has contributed to this or whether it was the random way the CLPs were selecting? I still can’t believe that North Tyneside CLP backed him. I genuinely think something is happening on the ground. Only 2 CLPs behind Benn and now a lot more than the others.
20. Your placing your hopes in the pockets and contacts of Sir Ronald Cohen then. You better hope he can raise a pile, because Chai Patel, Lord Sainsbury and Derek Tullett are all queueing up to get their money back.
32.Max, as a true blue tory I did not vote for devolution or the present party in charge but I do think this petty minded behaviour as shown on BBC Scotland by the architect of devolution speaks volumes on what kind of “Statesman” Brown intends to be. I agree with you that this is playing into Salmond’s hands and considering the way that this government was able to deal with Sinn Fein & Co just highlights such graceless behaviour.
20: Ain’t gonna happen Nick!
Even in his election campaign, there’s a sense he’s hiding away form revealing his true position and plans, and there’s only so long he’ll be able to do that for.
Finally, I’ve been following the DL odds with interest recently, and Johnson seems to be at his best value for a while at 3.75 Is this tempting, or do posters anticipate better value on him shortly?
32 & 35. is there a religious angle to all this. I heard Paisley and the SNP always had links because of their shared Protestantism. Where as Labour in Scootland has traditionally gained most Catholic votes.
I don’t know why Cruddas appeared to discount his victory on Newsnight. I am certainly willing to give him at least my second preference - maybe my first.
36 Tpfkar - As an acquaintance of mine who bets for a living is apt to say - ‘If you see the price you want, take it.’ You can always back again on the drift.
Have a decent punt now but hold some back just in case.
38. I think he’s too modest. Maybe he could pass some of that modesty around to his fellow contenders - no names mentioned out of courtesy to Nick P
Yes, I cringed a bit when he added Peace in NI to his list of achievements!
37. Not quite. Labour have always polled far better among Scottish (and indeed British) Catholics than among the population of Scotland as a whole. This has tended to mean that in Lab/SNP type central belt seats, the SNP have done better among non-Catholics, many of whom ancestrally would have been Protestants (and Unionists/Tories), but many of whom are now non-practising. Generally the SNP do best among non-religious voters, while the Scottish Tories do noticeably better than average among Church of Scotland and (especially) Episcopalians than among Catholics and non-religious voters.
On Jon Cruddas his odds are freakishly low - there is no way he will win, and there is a good opportunity to lay back for profit now. Cruddas is regarded as a John Prescott clone (as he himself came close to admitting). The last thing the Labour party needs is another Prescott. I suspect that he will not make it to the last two despite the Newsnight nonsense. In the two Yougov polls Jon Cruddas did very badly. I suspect that when the next poll is published Cruddas will not be in the top two.
As for Benn, Harman and Johnson I would say it could be close on first preferences, but one may be far ahead when all the 2nd, 3rd, 4th preferences are counted. It may in the end be a matter of name recognition that helps the winner clear ahead of the rest.
OT. Democrats continue to make the running in New Hampshire :
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/31/democrats_press_advantage_in_nh/
37. No, much has changed. Whilst the SNP used to be known as Soon No Pope to some people because it did farm the so called Orange vote for a period with the death of the Tories/Scottish Unionists up there (the Orange vote wasnt going to go Labour), the SNP base has widened massively. Equally the Orange vote doesnt really exist as a hard bloc any more, some has goen to Labour, much to the SNP.
There are still some that would tell you that there is still an element of the old Protestantism buried in there as regards the SNP but its so buried you’d need drilling gear to find it.
Re 11. Maybe that’s why GB is hinting at the Alternative Vote (AV) for Westminster. It’s not a proportional system, so technically wouldn’t need a referendum. It maintains the constituency link too. He could drive that through before going to the polls. I think he’s also hinted at fixed term Parliaments in the past.
I suspect he’ll only want PR for an elected House of Lords, to act as a brake on a future Conservative Government.
13. 33. Henry G. I agree the number of CLPs backing Cruddas is impressive. And my guess is that he will do even better with individual party members. My CLP have not backed anyone and even if they did I wouldn’t be influenced. I’m sure most party members will vote for their own preferred candidate(s) and not be greatly influenced by the views of the CLP. And I also believe that the party members and union members most likely to use their votes will be the more “active” labour party members who again I suspect will be more likely to be Cruddas supporters.
I really think he could win this and feel 7/1 represents value. I’ve just had some more on with Hills. I think he will be top in two of the colleges, the Unions and the Party members and will gain second preferences from some Hain and Harman supporters.
Go Cruddas! And good luck to all the Crudites here that stand to win money on him!
The poll is actually very good news for the Conservaties as they are holding their vote, and the rise in Labour’s figure is NOT being caused by people switching back, but solely by a rise in certainty to vote of its existing voters (which always occurs in a General Election anyway) so this is not significant as a trend. This will drift back down, and then back up at the next GE.
Labour should be worried. With the adoption of Major as PM and leader in 1990, the Conservatives had a dramatic recovery as people SWITCHED BACK in significant numbers. The Conservaties went on to win the 1992 GE by a wide margin on the popular vote.
That Labour has failed to do so with Brown is extremely worrying for Labour. This brief interlude is certain to cease within a few months, as problems in the economy (high house prices, rising unemployment, etc.), problems in education and health become paramount in peoples minds. All Brown was ever good at was ‘tax and spend’. When it comes to ’spending well’, he has been a disaster. Never has so much money been wasted by so few, so fast.
Although I am angry about the damage that has been done, I do feel sorrow for him. Pity does not win general elections.
Popular vote defeats in GE’s in Scotland mean Labour no longer has a mandate to govern most of the UK - neither in England in 2005, Scotland in 2007 does Labour have any mandate to govern.
Even in Wales Labour scored it worst result in more than 80 years, getting nearly half the votes of the other parties combined. This certainly is not a convincing mandate, and the other parties should form a ‘coalition of the majority for Wales’ to reflect the views of the people of Wales.
“Crudites”? With thousand island or hummus dip?
Will - trying to spin this as “worries for Labour” is really weak. Labour are coming back from the brink and will defeat you in 2009. You read it here first!
And as for Wales, Labour is STILL the biggest party by far. The LDs are a shambles and a joke and Plaid are opportunists. PLaid and the LDs are split down the middle over a Rainbow Coalition because they know the elecorate will punish them for having the stain of letting the Tories back into government. Yes, the Stain!
49. Probaly a chilli dip. Red and will spice things up.
49/51 You are talking of the Hampstead wing. The Dagenham supporters are referred to as Cruddites (rhyming with Luddites). They like to go out on raiding parties to the Isle of Dogs where they trash laptops and hold BlackBerrys to ransom.
Usual caveats, two years to go,(or is it?) but Labour must feel more comfortable today;a third term government,(third terms being a poisoned chalice) and in contention for winning a fourth. The Conservatives must be getting nervous, no sign of the substantial lead, that an opposition should be getting at this stage of the game. For Cameron the next few months will be make or break, the right wing energised by ‘grammergate’ are out for blood. Brown’s silence, playing the waiting game, may be paying dividends. Ming, your retirement bungalow awaits: enjoy!!
53 - The only leader who should really be worrying at the moment is Ming. His party seems to be sagging in all polls, he has zero media impact and his personal ratings are poor, even among LibDems. If things don’t improve soon there may be a challenge to him by January.
50 - In the recent Assembly elections in Wales, Labour was the largest party by 9.75% on the constituency vote and by 8.19% on the list vote.
Lib Dems at 18%!
Wow, more than some polls earlier this year and YouGove now.
There probably will not be an election in October. Any gains Labour might get from a change of leader may dissipate during a campaign with more equal coverage.
YouGov especially show this very high Others vote 15-16% at times.
This poll is at 10%, much the same as the last General.
That leaves Cons up about 4%, Lib Dems down about 4%. That only requires a 2% change to leave them level, that could happen in a campaign. LD’s got 52 seats with 18-19% in 2001! In February 1974 they would have got 23% and 14 seats, if they had fought all constituencies! Work that out.
Overall in all probability this poll suggests there wont be any major changes, if another election was held NOW. Just shows how improbable it is to prophesy this and that on this and that poll, well before any actual election date.
52. I bought a Blackberry online once, a week later I was delivered a small basket of somewhat sweaty fruit….I’m still trying to work out how it helps my business communications.
Mother in law jokes to follow…..
54 - Absolutely.
The problems for the Libs is that originally they were rising in the Polls at the expense of Labour as Labour fell from the mid 30s to the low 30s. Then the Tory rise seemed to come at the expense of the Liberals as the Tories moved into the high 30s and the Libs fell back from their mid 20s ratings.
Now that there is a Labour rise again, it seems once again to be coming at the expense of the Lib ratings which are stagnating in the teens.
No matter about how these ratings are arrived at (I’m not a fan of the certainty to vote process - I’d never say I was 10/10 likely to vote for instance) the effect seems to be damaging to the Lib rating
Just popping in to comment on the deputy dogs.
So far I think it’s being a pretty uninspiring contest. I’ve been particulalry depressed by the amount of pandering to the activists going on, espoecially by Benn and Harman. I find Red harriet especially unconvincing.
Cruddas has been doing well, but frankly, I can’t see the storming perfomance in the CLPs he would need to win. Remember,. His support base in the PLP is very tightly defined and he’ll struggle to get above 25% even after 2nds and 3rd preferences come into play. That means he needs to be well ahead of the field in both CLPs and TU section= and while he’s doing well, there’s no sign he’s doing that well (though the Unite endorsement might well help).
And remember kids, CLP nominations are a lot more left wing than the membership votes!
By all accounts Blears has been doign well, and Johnson poorly throughout the hustings. I’m voting Johnson, but he needs to up his game. Perhaps a well timed attack on those pandering to the soft prejudices of activists that cost us four election in a row? He’s not going to win the left vote, so why not move to be a bit harder edged on the centre right?
It’s a very hard one to call, without more data. For Johnson to win he needs Blears to be eliminated relatively early, along with Hain and pick up a lot of second prefs. Cruddas will want hain and Benn and possibly harman, and will need a big lead in TU and members sections. Blears will want to be ahead of Johnson and Harman on first prefs.
On a side note, does anyone else find it very amusing that there’s two seperate unions cally Unite and Unity?
Even with reasonable polling results I can’t see Brown going for an Autumn election. The man has constantly claimed that he has a mandate to govern, and therefore won’t feel obliged to hold a GE for another few years. The only other reason PMs call a GE are when they have something to gain… losing Labour’s remaining seats in the Home counties and losing most of their London seats hardly seems like a good reason. I woulkd be suprised if anyone could find a logical reason for GB wanting to hold a GE in the autumn.
PtP, if you are about, the leak from the BBC is that it isn’t Warnock, its Nigel Worthington.
31.”could you remind me of the latest number of MP nominations received by the six? ”
The MPs nominations finale figures were: Johnson 73, Harman 65, Hain 51, Blears 49, Cruddas 49, Benn 47.
However it doesn’t mean all those MPs will vote in the same way. Cruddas has lost 2 of his 49 nominators.
Btw, it seems that Unison will nominate Johnson (and recommend a second preference for Hain)
61 Thanks Yokel. I had all of £12 on him so I’m not laying off, even if I could. Appreciate your assistance nonetheless.
Gotta dash. The Esher express waits for no man.
Interesting division of opinion among Labour people here about the DL. My view is close to BritSpin - Jon Cruddas has regained some momentum after the sag in recent months, but not enough to overcome the deficit in the PLP (he had an off day at the PLP hustings), where I can’t see him getting over 25-30% even in the last round after four other candidates are eliminated. If YouGov shows him ahead in the membership and unions that might be different, but I’d guess it will show him up on last time but not in the lead there either.
Leaving aside my own preference, I’m finding it really hard to get a sense of how Hazel and Harriet are doing. Hazel shines at every face-to-face hustings and shared in the score draw on TV, but I think has left her run too late to build up momentum. Everyone I talk to has a different view of how Harriet is doing, but I’d think she might get more second preferences than anyone else if she lasts long enough to get them - most people in the party think she’s honest and thoughtful, and that’s good enough for a 2nd or 3rd preference, as there is a general feeling that voting for three males top of your ballot is a bit reactionary.
Oh dear, oh dear. The poll rating of the Liberal Democrats is withering on the vine. Charles Kennedy’s experiment of leftish positioning over Iraq and other issues was always dangerous for the obvious reason that it might loose us the vital votes of erstwhile Tories. However, I’m sure that by now Cameron has attracted all the Lib Dem voters he’s going to attract. Yet suddenly the Liberal Democrats appear to be loosing voters to Labour. The Brown bandwagon - deputy leadership contest and all - certainly has the look and feel of being a more left-wing entity. Surely this movement of Labour from Lib Dem can only be explained by the hard-left faction of the Liberal Democrats’ being more comfortable with Uncle Gordon than the slightly vague, slightly genteel Uncle Ming. Thus two thoughts. First, the Liberal Democrats are being lopped off at either end. Secondly, with no evidence of Labour’s gaining greatly at the expense of the Tories, can we conclude that Cameron has finally captured the mythical ‘centre ground’ of British politics?
65. Nick have you jumped ship on Hain yet?
50. Redflump, if you are so convinced why don’t you put your money on Labour to win?!!!!! Imagine all that money you will make. No one agrees with you - the entire market thinks Labour will lose. I’m laying Labour at more than 2.2. Please buy up my position!!!!!!
There is more chance of pigs flying than Labour winning in 2010 after 13 years in power (the election will not be in 2009).
63 - If they carry through and direct mail, that might be the most significant development for sometime.
With Cruddas getting Unite, GMB splitting Cruddas-Hain, CWU for Johnson and USDAW for Blears it doesn’t look like Benn is getting many votes out of the affiliates section at all.
That leaves him a healthy score among members and very poor standing among MPs. Not enough I’d say to win.
Second pref for Hain is irrelevant.
Will L - yes to 2010 - but that is the only thing I think you’ve ever said that made sense
Where would people place the deputy candidates on a Left (wing) to Right (wing) basis…Cruddas, Hain, Harman, Benn, Johnson, Blears??
Would a ‘lefter leaning’ deputy add to the possible impression that a Brown Labour party is more left wing than Blair’s? As such, will the Tories be hoping for a Cruddas victory?
37 - I doubt it. Especially as the SNP have recently been trying to court the Catholic vote.
To be honest I’ve never heard anyone associate the SNP with either the Catholic Church or the COS - although it could be a west-central Scotland type thing.
50 - Heard it here first? I’m fairly sure it’s not the first time you’ve told us that.
65. If Nick Palmer is correct in predicting a maximum 25-30 per cent vote for Cruddas from the MPs college after 4 candidates have been eliminated then Cruddas will have to get over 60-62.5 per cent in each of the 2 other colleges at the same stage to win. That’s if I’ve done the maths correctly.
70. Coming from you that is a great compliment.
Isn’t ‘the Pimpernel’ supposed to be an arch-Tory? May be ‘CommiePimpernel’ would be a better name. lol
can we zap the italics like this?
italics 1, me 0
OK, I give up
OT. Trouble at mill down Beaconsfield way …. no, the only Labour voter hasn’t escaped and Matlock is still curfewed until midnight, but …..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6708511.stm
46 - “Maybe that’s why GB is hinting at the Alternative Vote (AV) for Westminster. It’s not a proportional system, so technically wouldn’t need a referendum.”
Nothing requires a referendum.
The interesting thing at the moment is the tories still seem to be getting significant airtime. Their education debate seems to be of more interest to the media than the Labour deputy leadership. There have been disputes in both parties, yet the party in government usually maintains the main interest of media reporting in revelations like this and cabinet ministers publicly disagreeing on policy issues would normally attract much higher interest.
One of the offenders, Blears for instance got a lot of interest on the governments NHS closure program.
My view is that this may be because despite what some of the earlier contributions have posted, Labour are in more trouble electorally than you might think looking at the poll. It is almost as if it does not matter anymore because Brown will be PM after the end of june till he is defeated in an election. On the otherhand it could be because cabinet ministers like the PM are in complete limbo until Blair goes. I really do think the Tories should call a no confidence motion in the PM next week. It may actually help some of the deputy leadership candidates to distance themselves from Blair further
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
80. Indeed not. Labour can introduce any electoral system it wishes without a referendum. Whether that would impress the voters is another matter.
60. I see no advantage to Labour in calling an early election, when it would emerge with fewer seats than it has at present.
82.I see no advantage to Labour in calling an early election, when it would emerge with fewer seats than it has at present.
You are right there - worse case scenerio: Labour get back as a minority govt or with a small majority. It makes life easier for Cameron and after a period of time he pick Labour off and swing into govt on a larger swing. Even better for the tories they are a on a 35% a piece for Labour and the tories 2-3 % ahead in England and possibly either more seats or narrowly behind WLQ comes into play!!!
I don’t think Labour relise how tenious there grip on power is actually. If anything 2005 was there 1992!!!
OT. Turkeys vote for Christmas down the Apennine Way.
Gobble, gobble bella ciao baby !!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6707865.stm
84. Turkeys vote for Christmas - No we know Labour MP’s have installed Brown - old news
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
82 - is there a constitutional precedent for a major change in the electoral system for the Commons?
Didn’t we used to have two member consituencies in the 19th century? When were they abolished and how was it done?
Although I suppose that would be better equated to boundary changes rather than a change in the way votes are cast.
85 - about as funny as cholera.
86 Stonch. All electoral and constitutional changes prior to the Common Market referendum were by parliamentary votes.
87. My sides just split open!
No referendum for the Great Reform Act of 1832, or for the various extensions of the franchise to the working classes and women. No referendum either for the abolition of the University seats after the war, or (pedantically) for the disenfranchisement of the residents of Southern Ireland in 1922.
Parliamentary Sovrenty Rules OK!
86 Two member constituencies were gradually abolished after 1885. I think the last ones went in 1948.
86 Two member constituencies were gradually abolished after 1885. I think the last ones went in 1948.
Great i hopr they bring in AV i can tatically vote against Labour then as LD are second where i live!
Great i hope they bring in AV i can tatically vote against Labour then as LD are second where i live!
67: I never jump ships, Will.
71: Yes, that looks the right left-right sequence, bobby, with the reservation that not everything fits neatly on that scale…
More on the union decisions: Unison voted for Johnson over Hain by a margin of just two - tantalising. But there are consolation prizes - both candidates will get their literature sent to all members, and the plentiful left-of-centre Unison members will be prompted accordingly. Meanwhile the GMB decision will be Monday, and my understanding is that they are now unlikely to go for Cruddas - it will either be Hain or Johnson.
Meanwhile, I’m told there is yet another twist to the Tory grammar school saga. First they were against new grammars, because they’re divisive. Then they said they’d leave existing grammars in place. Now they’ve announced that they *will* have allow grammar schools…but only in LEAs that already have them, with everyone else still not allowed any. So do the Tories think them good (in which case why not elsewhere?) or bad (in which case why more in Kent etc.?). lol…
50 - Although Will was being a tad partisan in his post, I do think he has more than an inkling of a point.
The Tories have not been put back into their box, by any means. They still have extra support that Cameron has brought them. Other recent polls, with the named leader question, indicate that the Cameron factor is as strong as ever.
It is clear to me that Brown has an opportunity. What will he do with it?
As for the Lib Dems I don’t think the national polls are their primary concern. They hold
… (less than) 10% of the seats. It is perfectly plausible for the Lib Dems to repeat the performance of 1997 and increase their number of MPs on a reduced vote share.
I haven’t the foggiest whether they will, though I expect that Sean Fear, in particular, will be poring over local election results to see if he can discern anything about what will happen to incumbent Lib Dem MPs.
Additionally, did I miss the mea culpas from those Tories who were harping on about the “dead-cat bounce” that Gordon Brown was going to receive? Perhaps there is a blog I should check on…
(Whatever)
95. Then they said they’d leave existing grammars in place. - To be fair they have said that all along.
So do the Tories think them good (in which case why not elsewhere?) or bad (in which case why more in Kent etc.?). - You could say localis - you know something that is not dictated to an area by overmighty central government. If a local area decides to maintain a grammer school - why not?
Personally i did not go to grammer school - did you?
98. localis - sorry i meant localisation
I thought Peter Hain was absolutly terrible on newsnight. I think any MP who backs him should say whether Hazel Blears should be repremanded for publically disagreeing on a serious policy involving the curtailment of civil liberties?
Is there any truth to the rumour, that Hain manufactured the request on guidance on this policy to boost his campaign as the wheels have never been attached to his band wagon - nevermind falling off?
This letter in the Guardian summarises neatly what some of my more left-inclined friends have been telling me:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/alice_onwordi/2007/05/labours_leftovers.html
This is going to be an increasing dilemma for Labour as the Conservatives are seen as less “nasty” and Gordon Brown is more of the same. People are becoming tired of Labour just as they did of the Conservatives after 10+ years!
95. I take it the Labour party are going to close all Grammer schools - are you not a PPS for a government minister by the way?
So you speak for the government - if not what do you do?
98: No, I didn’t go to a grammar school. If the policy has something to do with loocalism, then why are they opposed to allow local authorities to introduce grammar schools where they don’t already have them?
Essentially it sounds like a fudge; they want to bar them outside existing areas, because it fits the image Cameron wants, but they want to stop winding up areas that have them, because they’re full of peeved Topry activists. But is it durable fudge?
“I don’t think Labour relise how tenious there grip on power is actually. If anything 2005 was there 1992!!!”
I’m working on the translation now Martin. Can you just tell me if you’ve left out any important words?
103. You are probably right - It worked whilst the tories were last in power and indeed i do not see the Labour party rushing to close them!
95 Good question Mr Palmer, Good Question
This inept parody of a PR disaster defies words….
104. I’ll leave you to decide!
Oh Oh - the excitement..I’ve just been sent my CH monthly voting link …
Where’s Willetts !?
103. I went to a Comp - interesting experience!!!
It’s good fun comparing the quotes, Martin. To be precise:
“In my view, the idea, the policy idea, has been knocking around for a very long time, that you create a few extra grammar schools, is completely delusional.” (David Cameron May 21)
“I made very clear that we weren’t going to have a policy of a handful of extra grammar schools, that I thought that was backward looking and something we wouldn’t achieve.” (David Cameron May 22)
“The prospect of more grammars is not practical politics. Conservative governments in the past - and Conservative councils in the present - have both failed to carry out this policy because, ultimately, it is not what parents want.” (David Cameron, May 27)
“We will look at it on a case by case basis to see whether there is a case for building one or two more grammar schools.” (Education spokesman Nick Gibb May 31)
“The Lib Dems will be disappointed that yet another survey has them on the decline”
Really? If you click on the useful link on the right, you’ll see that Ipsos-MORI polls since last October have given the Lib Dems 18%, 20%, 18%, 18%, 16% and 20%. I can’t really see how 18% suddenly represents a decline.
To address why Brown would be wise to go early.
1. The support for the Conservatives is on a gradual upwards long term trend. The longer he leaves it the stronger their base of councillors will be.
2. If he goes in his honeymoon period the propensity to vote will be higher than later periods. The longer he leaves it the less enthusiasm there will be in the Labour voters to vote for him.
3. If he pulls off an announcement such as withdrawing from Iraq (by Xmas?) he can attract back to Labour a lot of the voters that left Labour since 2003. That may add 4% to 5% to his ratings.
4.His erstwhile partners in any hung parliament (the Lib Dems) look to be in a slump of their own and the longer he delays the smaller their chances are likely to be.
5. The economy is likely to be worse in 2008 or 2009 than it is now.
Once he gets a mandate from the voters then he can change the electoral system to ensure a Lib/Lab Govt in future elections.
Finally the Conservative party may have more cash but their policies are not ready for the scrutiny of a GE. Labour as the incumbent has fewer new candidates to sort out in target seats. An early defeat could send his opponents into another Leadership debate.
109 - people always say it on sites like this like it is a relevation. I once met a Tory press officer who went obssessively around a reception saying he went to a comp.
Didn’t 70%+ of the population under 45 go to comps?
I assume everyone I meet went to a comp unless there is evidence otherwise, obviously I mix in the wrong circles.
110. You are right in the first 3 quotes by Cameron he has not really devated.
In Gibbs case, there is more room for manouvre - one may even say they have U-turned. But as Labour have found with Iraq - sometimes it is better to ditch an aspiration before adopting it as a formal policy! It is good for your ‘team’ because you can say look “Tories…” but if the tories were elected i cannot see them erecting Grammer schools in every catchment area in every LEA. Indeed they voted for the Academies with you and the other government pay role vote.
Certainly in terms of localism the third quote of Cameron on the 27 may 2007 shows that when Local authorities have had the choice they have failed to implement them. If i were the tories i would stand on a policy of localism - let the people decide. But that is me and i am not paid £300,000 a year to loose elections!!!
112 HF. Actually the poll of polls show a slow decline for the Tories over the past weeks to around 37%. Well short of majority territory.
101 Rik W. The 10 year analogy isn’t a particularly good one for contemporary Tories as it would indicate that Gordon will win the next election !
113. I once met some people at a former employer, a friend from school worked there. This women after spending 10 minutes talking to me said to her work friend, who i went to school with ” I did not know you went to Private school…….”
I thought it funny as you cannot tell, i corrected them. On the note of private school - I once worked with a bloke who was the ruddest, worst mannered individual i have ever met. He sware like a trooper, never washed his clothes, stank like brewrey and was basically a complete C**T. You guessed it he went to private school!!!
£400k?????
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/05/so_what_does_da.html
This can’t be true.
114. Indeed by adopting a policy of let the people decide (Localism), one could argue the tories are in essence encouraging democracy and could contrast this to the way in which the Labour leadership was decided. By a public press gang in the form of “compulsary” public nomination.
I would love to know how many Labour MP’s in marginal seats failed to back Brown as i have said before Central organisations have a lot of power over local parties and representatives. This is especially the case in a close election, where every resource counts.
martin - cameron said 2 weeks ago - NO new grammar schools and anyone who wants them is delusional. Willetts and Gibb have today said there will be new grammar schools if local authorities want them.
A party spokesman told the Standard today: “Where there is a particular demographic change, as in Buckinghamshire, then to maintain the status quo we would look at allowing more grammars to be built. This would all be done on a case-bycase basis so we can’t rule it out. Where there is a big population expansion in an area, we would try to maintain the proportion of pupils going to grammar schools. We would need new ones built because they can’t just go to more comprehensives.”
Re 155 Jack W. Yes the poll of polls shows a small decline in the short term but the longer term trend line is upwards. The Conservatives have also gained councillors every year since 1996.
CLP nominations update:
Benn 60
Cruddas 51
Harman 36
Johnson 34
Blears 27
Hain 19
120 - and lost three general elections at the same time.
O/T looks like Rhodri Morgan & Labour are about to be dumped in Wales in what will have been an administration that lasted around two weeks,will this be a record for the shortest administration ever in government?
74
75 - But it’s SCARLET !
For David Cameron to pay the disgraced News of the World ex-editor £400.000 a year gives us a perfect insight into his view of politics. If he had paid a similar amount to someone with interesting policy ideas it might be understandable but then that wouldn’t be Cameron. That is the inevitable consequence of choosing as it’s leader David Green’s ex PR man whose answer to a serious question on grammar schools is to employ an expensive spin doctor. The mans out of his depth and if not drowning
For David Cameron to pay the disgraced News of the World ex-editor £400.000 a year gives us a perfect insight into his view of politics. If he had paid a similar amount to someone with interesting policy ideas it might be understandable but then that wouldn’t be Cameron. That is the inevitable consequence of choosing as it’s leader David Green’s ex PR man whose answer to a serious question on grammar schools is to employ an expensive spin doctor. The mans out of his depth if not drowning
Evening all… for those, unlike me, who like a longer term punt, the odds on Labour being the largest party next GE are starting to look attractive.
Any market on whether Willets will keep his job? If any of the famous Tory’s in grey suits was watching channel 4 news the odds must be strongly on him going!
Anybody know the “all expressing a preference” figure for mori, before those less than 10 out of 10 to vote are stripped out. Tends to interest me as on the evening Blair called the 2005 election, Labour were 5% behind on the headline figure, but nearer the actual final result on the other figure. I therefore wonder if this is more expressive of the national mood mid term, when people knopw there is not going to be an election.
Hain’s progress (or lack) is no reason at all for Nick Palmer to jump ship. It might, in his private moments, lead him to ponder his lower preferences with care.
The former suggestion suggests that some people don’t understand preferential voting, (whether STV or AV).
re 46 GB wouldn’t need a referendum if he brought in a bill in his first week for STV for the Commons and a regional list system for the Lords. Why do people on this site insist that we would need a referendum to change the voting system?
128: Willets was excellent on C4 News. He made it perfectly clear that the few education authorities still with the grammar system could create some more in the event of large population increase. Perfectly reasonable I thought. Snow was tedious and was reduced to semantic quibbling. This grammar school business is getting boring. When will the media find something new to bang on about?
127,
I agree this row about grammar schools looks a bad omen for the upcoming policy reviews regarding new conservatism.
It reeks of amateurism presentation and will be confusing for the non alligned voting public on a bread and butter issue that counts.
Whatver ever cheerleaders like Martin Day say.
The ex editor of the NOW might be money well spent, to get a grip.
131 - whether he would need a referendum or not, it just wouldn’t be possible to introduce STV before the next election. It’s 3 years away, maximum, but the bill would be unlikely to get through for another year. Then the new constituencies would have to be drawn up, and then the candidates would have to be selected.
127. I recon Labour will be about 270 to 290 seats at the next election with the tories not far behind but that has been my view for a long time.
That said, we have no idea how turnout, tactical unwide etc will do to the Labour vote / seat distrubution.
I think the Tories will widen their England vote lead on Labour at the next election from the tiny 60,000 votes in 2005. If this is the case and the tories have a several percentage point lead in England then i have a sneaking suspicion that Labour will suffer deminishing returns on votes per seat. This therefore may mean my feeling of 270 to 290 is dramatically over optimistic for Labour.
I feel it is harder to predict the number of tory seats as the LD factor is very hard to judge. As they tend to do better sometimes than one would expect in seats given there overall performance. That said i would not be surprised if a lot of seats 20 - 30 that are held by the Lib Dems go tory.
119. Yes i can see where your coming from and it does not seem to me a major change. If the tories were now saying that every area would have a grammer school i would agree with you but i think it is very unlikely that will happen.
It would indeed be dulisional to think that inner cities and areas of heavy industry which have been tradational bastions of Labour voters would want selection. I personally don’t have a problem with it either way and indeed it is irrelevant really as the tories are not the national govt at this time. If the tories go into the next election promising to devolve decision making on this issue to local communities, then i could see this being fairly attractive to the electorate at large and particularly “traditional Tory” voters.
re 129. The Mori figures without the “certain to vote” filter” were CON 33%: LAB 39%: LD 18%
On this poll, Wells puts Labour (plus the SDLP) just 3 seats short of a majority, although the Tories would narrowly have the most seats in England…. the WLQ demands its answer….
I’ve nearly finished my AV-swingometer. Makes interesting predictions on Anthony Wells’ data. Could I have a guest-slot sometime, Mike?
131 Agreed Brown has nothing to stop him re-organising the constitution but the convention is that a party puts it in a manifesto and then goes to the country. That has been the argument on most constitutional changes.
Since the Scots & Welsh referendums plus the regional amd mayoral ones there has been an expectation that major changes would be approved through a referendum.
The point about those obsessing about Grammar schools being “delusional” is not that in certain circumstances a new grammar school may be created (whether that is or is not Tory policy). The point is that the debate is, at best, on the very margins of the educational debate. If there was a proposition to reintroduce, nationwide, the 11 plus then it would not, but nobody is proposing that, even the most ardent supporters of the Grammar school system. The debate focusses exclusively on the odd local area, generally in safe Tory seats, reintroducing the odd school to meet parental demand. The idea that this could form the centrepiece of Tory education policy is what is delusional, and is as ridiculous as making Gipsies the centrepiece of the 2005 election campaign, or even, dare i say it, “save the pound” in 2001.
127 - I would not go as far as to say that Labour will surely be the biggest party, but those odds at present will drop. I expect a Brown bounce to make Labour favourites again, if only for a while.
Do you think AV would lead to extreme majorities? Curtice forecast a Labour majority in 1997 which would have been much bigger than with FPTP. But I wonder if voters might learn to express very carefully, depending on whether the seat was a 2 or 3 horse race.
The TB line of 2005: Vote Charle Kennedy, and wake up to Michael Howard would no longer be teneabe (OK, vote Ming and wake up to David maybe).
I don’t understand the current Tory line on “continuing the Blair reforms”. It makes no sense and is somewhat worrying. They should be concentrating on competence, pure and simple.
139. I think you hit the nail on the head there.
141 - “Do you think AV would lead to extreme majorities?” - probably. I really don’t like AV at all for that reason. However, it’s hard to tell how people would actually vote under such a system, and assumptions that Labour votes under FPTP would translate to Labour first preferences under AV may be mistaken. Has any study been done on how people would vote differently?
This Tory “heir to Blair” stuff is quite surprising; not quite the way to play it - a bit rattled by Labour’s upturn?
139,
Its delusional because is presents an image that the party is getting into such a state over grammar schools, that only concern very few people.
Widen that out, and old the old prejudices can be attached.
142. I think that the fact is Blair, when he came to power undid a lot of Tory inspired policy. Then found he had nothing as effective to replace it. For instance NHS organisational reform and city academies formley known as city technology colloges!
I think the real problem that Labour have found is that whilst these ideas are good (of course they are their provinence is the tories!). Labour have had to overcome too many internal and external pressure groups that they owe favours to make things a success.
I think the other problem has been the ineffective control of the relievent projects they have implemented and surprisingly in some respects the consumers awareness / appreciation of changes. For instance i went to hospital (Where they persuaded me out of an operation - the consultant started at a 50 % success rate, which dropped subsequently to 40%!!!) anyway whilst i was waiting another patient came out of a room and i could see on a Desktop PC X-rays of this patients hand. The point is customers do not relise the £12bn invested in this project enables the consultant to do this and access other high memory files. The impression is left they have some loverly toys but are very likely to want to avoid operations on cost grounds or perhaps some other underlying NHS objective or so it would seem.
New Post - is it worth betting on Betfair’s new market that Gordon will call an election this year?
I wonder whether the Cash for Peerages issue will affect Labour’s poll performance as it seems likely to come back just as Brown takes over?
It could be the case therefore that this is as good as it get’s for Brown? As it will be a reminder of his continual central position in the Labour party machine as well as government.
On an interesting subject, will Brown use the deputy as the campaign co-ordiantor as i think he has traditionally done this role and obviously as PM and leader it would be too much to expect of one person. Although having said that did Blair not sack him at the last election?
146
‘For instance i went to hospital (Where they persuaded me out of an operation - the consultant started at a 50 % success rate, which dropped subsequently to 40%!!!)’
Maybe you were a victim of the recent NHS cuts.
In addition to the numerous redundancies,freezing recruitment etc,trusts have been delaying operations and almost three-quarters have also been restricting access to certain procedures. This was highlighted in the February survey conducted by the Health Service Journal.