Labour has 2-point lead with ICM
July 8th, 2007
Brown just holding on to his Bounce
The UK Polling Report has news of an ICM poll in the Sunday Mirror which has Labour at 37%, the Conservatives at 35, and the Lib Dems at 17.
However it doesn’t look as though this poll is available online at present. The Baxter and Wells seat forecasting models produce Labour majorities of 58 and 42.
Elsewhere in the Sunday papers, the Independent reports that Blair aides think Levy will be charged over cash-for-honours, and the Sunday Times that Blair wanted to quit as PM in 2002.
Paul Maggs “Double Carpet”
Guest Editor
Mike Smithson returns on 16th July
MessageSpace Advertising
Thanks Paul for the new thread!
Great poll for the Tories. Reposted from previous thread
“Nick Palmer, I owe you twenty quid for the Cats Protection League but must send it to them anonymously, or I can send you a twenty pound note (for obvious reasons I cannot send you a cheque). Well done the moggies, and I am happy to do it - lead slashed to 2% after coronation and bombs is just awful for Labour, and as I thought, reflects the completely distorting fieldwork period for the last polls. At this rate of decline it will be back to reality by the autumn and as we all know Gordon hasn’t the courage to call a snap election, you’l return to the sizeable Tory leads and the Tory majority of 20 seats or so I have been predicting.
Very happy this morning with the poll!
(Does Mike S being away mean no more early morning threads, Double Carpet? I love me some early morning threads).
by Test July 8th, 2007 at 7:39 am
PS if you prefer me to pay them directly please supply me with an address for them.”
Given the origins of your nom de blog, perhaps a 2% Labour lead should be described here as “8 points short of a Roger”?
Oh, and many happy returns of yesterday to Andrea - I tried to post late last night but my internet connection packed up - my ISP doesn’t care about its existing customers, only on getting new ones. The wonder that is capitalism.
I cannot believe any Tory can be happy with that poll, what it does is reinforce my belief that nothing much has changed since the last GE. The day after the next GE when we study the result it will mirror that poll. Oh and for those who believe it won’t be this autumn, someone does!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/08/ncam108.xml
Coldstone, why would Brown go to the polls now? Days after his coronation his lead has already sunk to 2% and that’s with Cameron still completely off our screens.
You do realise that in any GE campaign Cameron will get some coverage? Do you suppose the Tory position would not improve?
The onluy good reason for an autumn poll is that Ming will still be there and Labour would have the very great benefit of a much-weakened LibDem party.
Going for an early election requires courage…
4 Shadow-boxing, Coldstone.
Btw, PtP has returned to cold-storage at ConHome but expects to be out by about Wednesday. If anybody wants to contact him about yesterday’s Tipping Lines article, the address is arklebar@talktalk.net
Have a good day everybody.
4. All the Telegraph article means is that Tories will be ready. If you’d been down to Ealing Southall you’d see how much better the Tory campaign machine has got
5
All the available evidence shows I am correct, political opinion amongst the dwindling band of voters is becalmed, it hasn’t moved for years, political exposure will have very little effect, only a sudden squall, a political watershed of the, ‘Winter of discontent/ERM disaster type is going to shift it. The movement, (such as it is) is going to the, ‘others’ people fed up with the 2/3 main parties prepared to experiment, SNP/PC in Scotland/Wales UKIP/BNP in England. Part of the Tory problem is explained by Peter Hitchens.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2007/06/at-last—the-l.html
8
Whistling in the dark
SPECIAL FELINES FOR LABOUR DAY
Thanks, test! (Yes, Icarus, woke annoyingly early this morning, zzzz.) I suggest sending the money directly to
Cats Protection Nottingham, The Gate House, New Farm Lane (off Watnall Road), Nuthall, Nottingham NG16 1DY
If you just send them the money in cash and say it’s a charity bet that you had with me but you prefer not to be identified, I’m sure they’ll be delighted (or you can send it to the national body if you prefer). tpfkar, want to do the same? kingbongo is allowed to hang on for the regular monthly survey.
I told the former Cats Protection chair, who is a Tory MP, about the bets - he was delighted and offered to defect temporarily for one month to boost our July ICM poll ratings…
(He WAS joking, I hasten to add, in case any Tory zealots are inclined to denounce him for it…)
Its online now
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/07/08/cam-fisted—98487-19422963/
Do wonder if the Mirror expected 10% or so lead (a Roger?) for Brown when they splashed out for a poll - make a brave attempt to ignore the fall in Labour support
Here is the link to the poll.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/tm_method=full%26objectid=19422963%26siteid=98487-name_page.html
It seems that Brown has incresed his personal lead over Cameron, and his lead on “every key issue”, even including asylum and immigration.
Must be the unexpected sun in the Midlands Nick - yesterday was, I think, the first day without rain for ages. Got back from Southall to find the cricket had already finished. Lutterworth 1st XI (having an average, aka poor, season) eaily beat Loughborough (top of the league) with many games off - waterlogged piches - a very useful victory.
Back on topic - are Labour not bothering with Ealing and Southall, Nick? They have chosen a candidate almost as old as the poor chap who died. Tories and Lib Dems going all out, but Labour invisible.
Interesting details in the Mirror poll - the 52% who think GB is better than expected is probably the most important one. My belief is that ‘issue’ ratings nearly always swing with the current assessment of the parties rather than vice versa - thus Labour now leads the Tories by 9% on asylum and immigration (not something I recall in past polls) not because we’ve suddenly done something that reassures everyone with any concerns, but because people currently feel we’re generally more serious than the Tories.
14: Southall: there are Labour teams out every day with MPs encouraged to pitch in, but I’ve guiltily not got round to helping yet myself, so have no idea how it’s going.
Yes, seemed remarkably bright at 5am this morning. I looked at the clock and shuddered, but decided I was awake. Bleah.
With the Labour numbers in decline shouldn’t the fraudulently cheerful character pictured at the head of this article be replaced by the genuine dour and clunking reality.
[12] Ted, I think a 10% Labour lead would be a “full Roger2
[14] Icarus asks are Labour not bothering with Southall? Perhaps it’s a rule that in London by-elections the incumbent Party runs a cr*p, locally organised campaign (just the once, of course :wink:) so as to justify heavy-booted centralism in all subsequent ones…
Nick Palmer I see you are relentlessly on message again with ” we’re generally more serious than the Tories”.
But be careful what you wish for as ’serious’ can mean “significant or worrying because of possible danger or risk”.
The Telegraph claims this morning that the Tories are well advanced in planning for an autumn election and “So detailed is the planning, the Tories are working to a predicted “result” which would see them win 333 parliamentary seats”.
Well it is July and fantasy politics all round it seems.
I was out yesterday in Southall. Met lots of LibDems. No Labourites whatsoever. Would be interested to know if this fits in with LDs perceptions. Lab should hold but they are being very lazy about it. They will need to do better in more marginal seats to have a chance at the GE?
Good morning all , a nice day for a change here on the South Coast . The headline figures show no statistical change from the ICM/Guardian poll given the usual M of E but what may ( and I stress MAY ) be of importance is the substantial lead Brown is opening up on Cameron on issues even leading him on the environment and asylum/immigration where the Conservatives normally have a lead . We really need time for things to settle down after the Prime Ministerial Changeover before we get more feel for the way things are going .
18 - Indeed it is fanstasy politics all round. I am sure that there are constituencies from the Western Isles to Dover where the “Lib Dems Winning Here” stakeboard sites have already been earmarked.
Landslides all round!
As someone who never subscribed to the, ‘Brown bounce’ (believing instead we would see a gradual improvement in Labour’s position as voters adjusted to the demise of TB and grew to accept GB) I would point out that those who deride Roger are the same people who talked of GB being a, ‘total disaster’ who talked of Cameron and the Conservatives soaring up in the polls. What we are seeing is the, ‘floating 5%’ leftish voters incensed by Iraq returning to their natural home, and a return to the status quo. The problem for the Conservatives is they can’t get their vote above 35%, (sorry the Hitchen’s link doesn’t work) Hitchens back in June gave some of the reasons. When Mrs T, declared war on, ‘people with dirty finger nails’ she alienated large parts of the Northern parts of the country, it’ll take more than a smile and a wink from Dave to bring them back.Back in the eighties Conservative political strategy was based around the belief that as long as you pleased about 40% of the voters, based in the South and the Midlands by your economic programme, low taxes etc, you would always win GE’s, that would be true if you can get it to 40% or above, unfortunately for them it isn’t as simple as that. Economic squalls to which we are often subjected, quickly eroded that support, as voters realised, they were not as insulated, from economic problems as they thought.
18.”well advanced in planning for an autumn election and “So detailed is the planning, the Tories are working to a predicted “result” which would see them win 333 parliamentary seats”.
what’s the logic for Brown to call an election in Autumn with the tories getting 333 seats?
Good poll for Labour! Amazing result compard to where we were two months ago. People who say the Labour situation isn’t substatially better are delusional.
Lab has selected Jayne Innes for Nuneaton (notional Lab majority of around 10%). She stood and lost in Birmingham Yardley in 2005
23. Calling an Autumn election would require a sense of boldness and a willingness to risk everything on a single throw of the dice. When did Gordon ever exhibit that trait?
Coldstone, I think your bias is colouring you. Brown is in the middle of a) his honeymoon and b) a terror scare where he gets all the press there is. This is just awful for Labour if the best they can muster is 2%. I certainly have not shifted from my view that Broon will be a disaster and you should see normal service resumed after the conference season (sadly, there is zero way Brown will call a snap election, not having either flair or courage).
[9] It’s certainly worth a trip to the MoS’s website to read not only Peter Hitchens’ denunciation of the Tories but, even better, the comments thereon. I’ll never again suppose that there are posters here with a screw loose after reading that lot. My favourite has to be the chap who reckons that Blair destroyed democracy in this country by allowing foreign lorries to enter it with full fuel tanks. Would never have happened in Churchill’s time, would it?
27 Test , I think it is your bias that is colouring you . You have yet to explain how all those polls that said the Conservative lead would increase substantially when Brown took over were in fact wrong .
The Brown bounce is now the Brown blip.
His biggest problem is that he is smashing goodwill in his own party by disempowering the trade unions, demanding a public sector pay freeze and welching on the referndum on the Constitution.
None of these issues are hitting the media, or hardly, but the anger within the ranks of his own MPs is growing, as each day reveals more and more humiliation for the left wing of his party. If Brown had a 10% lead in opinion polls he might get away with it.
Ther are two big Blairite beasts on the back benches in John Reid and Charles Clark.
If Gordon carries on ignoring the convictions of his own MPs, he could become vulnerable. If his opinion polling is only plus 2% in the Mirror now after 10 days of total media backing, he could be well dipping into negative territory shortly. The pressure to reduce Brown from Presidential status within the Labour Party to a less dominant role could become overpowering. Watch the backbenches for the first signs of trouble.
29 how can Test answer that? Shouldn’t you put your question to the pollsters?
Either they were wrong or the honeymoon effect is masking the reality. Take your choice.
mildly OT: can someone explain what is happening to the Tory prices on the betfair market on southall? as I write there is currently over a 10 point spread between the back (5.4) and lay prices (16.5). I’m a novice at such things but I would have thought that the lay price would have followed the back price in (or the other way round). Is this just a function of a lightly traded market, or something else?
Has it been less a ‘Brown bounce’ than a ‘Blair’s gone’ relief rally, one wonders?
Re 2, Innocent, “Given the origins of your nom de blog, perhaps a 2% Labour lead should be described here as “8 points short of a Roger”? :)”
Apart from waiting till the autumn to see how it all pans out, it is good to see the lead looking like it is evaporating though it is of course within the margin of error.
32 There have been a few ( total less than £ 50 ) bet on the Conservatives which has brought their back price down from around 12 to 5.4 . The market is pretty illiquid with noone prepared to bet or lay significant sums .
Lets not get too excited about a couple of polls where the clunking fist has had wall to wall coverage.
6 months is when it will become much clearer. Another interest rate rise and middle England will really start to squeal, a few more bad performances at PMQ’s , I suspect things will be a bit different.
I find it hard to conceive that Gordo, having waited 13 yrs to become PM (Granita 1994) would risk it on a quick election. No chance whatsoever IMHO and the Labour Party is broke in any event.
Oh and then there’s th “Cash for peerages” resolution one way or the other, charges would see Labour ratings falling off a cliff.
I wonder what the odds are on Gordo doing a John Major and hanging on until the last minute. If the odds are good, I think that’s where I’d be putting my money.
29, no, I already explained it in a post to PtP after the first poll showing a Labour lead but I will reprise for you:
The polls are all correct, including the polls where DC leads Brown by large margins. There is no contradiction because of the distorting effect of the present set of circumstances - not Brown ‘honeymoon’ strictly speaking, but saturation news coverage that has forced Caneron off our screens altogether. That plus a rallying effect to the incumbent party over terror. Both these distorting effects will have evaporated by the autumn. The leaders will then share air time and a comparison will be effected. At that point DC will resume his lead over Brown as stated in more than 10 straight months of opinion polls.
Cameron cannot compete against Brown in the public eye when he is not in the public eye. The distortion is wholly circumstance based and has nothing to do with a genuine preference for Brown. Normal polling will resume when normal politics resumes, and you’ll see Tory leads back after conference (possibly sooner).
Re 32, Bernard, the gap is due to lack of liquidity.
the people who want to back them want considerably better odds than the layers will give.
BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of a new ARSE poll of polls including ICM, CR, YouGov, Populus and MORI that gives :
Con 35.4% .. Lab 36.6% .. LibDem 16.6% .. Others 11.4%
The PISSED Wells/Baxter Index with added SOAMES weighting gives :
Con 245 seats .. Lab 335 .. LibDem 41 .. Others 29
Labour majority of 20.
…………………………
Sources :
WIND …. Whimsical Independent News Division
JNN ….. Jacobite News Network
ARSE …. Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
PISSED .. Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
SOAMES .. System Of Amending Measured Election Scores
………………………….
PS. Belated birthday greetings to Andrea. Only 25 ….
Jack W is 4 and a bit Andrea’s !!!!!!!!!
31. The polls reflect opinion at the time. I think part of the answer as to why the predictive Brown vs Cameron polls were so far out, predictng a widening of the gap rather than a complete closing of it (even if only temporary), is given in Nick P’s first post: a lot of people are viewing Brown in a more favourable light than they expected to - and that will have been enough to change the minds of a few in terms of how they would vote ‘if an election were held tomorrow’ (which of course it won’t be).
On the question of the Hitchens thesis Coldstone discusses at [22], the facts don’t bear it out. Firstly, The Tories were polling at 40% for a few months recently which shows that the potential support is there. Perhaps more relevantly (though it depends on whether you count real votes or timeframe as being the more relevant), the Conservatives polled over 42% in 1992 - after the Thatcher revolution and so-called ‘war on people with dirty fingernails’. The drop in support came during the mid-nineties when most of the economic and social changes had already taken place.
Things are of course different now - Labour has a more recent, and in many ways better, track record than that of Wilson/Callaghan and is not being lead by Neil Kinnock - but equally, memories of the last ‘Tory’ recession and ERM mess are receding.
23 Article probably ordered by our old friend Phil Space.
11 That would be Derek Conway then. Any problems collecting ask him to go round. I know no one on this earth who will not pay up pronto with interest!
It is rather impressive to see posters who were absolutely convinced that Brown taking over would lead to a decrease in Labour support now just as resolute in their conviction that anything less than a 10% lead is a disaster of 1931 style proportions for the Labour party.
Personally I think the difference between the prediction of Brown vs Cameron and the reality is made up of two factors.
First, some Labour supporters who went Don’t Know when asked the hypothetical question about the match up have said Labour when asked now
Second, some LD and disillussioned labour supporters have returned to labour, not becuase they love brown, but because of what he’s done (and associated coverage)- appointing non labour people, talking about deveolving power, etc etc. The bully pulpit is a powerful thing.
Mike, if he were here, might argue that there’s also the cameron name recogntion factor, but personally I’m unconvinced- in part because camerons reputation is not quite as stellar as it was a few months ago.
Personally, i think the bombings have improved Brown’s personal ratings, but are unlikely to shift many voting prefernces- after all, the main thing politically was an emphasis on consensus and unity!
Any other suggestions on how to explain the difference?
“ahead on asylum and immigration” oh yeah, the NuLab policy of unrestricted economic migration and immigration is wildly popular in the country. What total delusion.
By the way, it should be in the main headline post, but the change figures are Lab -2, Con NC, LD -1.
Spinning this as a good poll for the Tories is daft.
Very recently the Tories here and elsewhere were rubbing their hands at glee in anticipation of the horror the public would feel when Brown took over. They were saying he wouldn’t get a bounce at all.
They’ve been proven wrong. The public are willing to give Brown a chance, they don’t have a pathological hatred of him for sure. And a 2 point lead is enough for him to get a healthy majority in a GE.
So lesson to Tories is this - don’t get over-excited and believe your own spin. Just because Brown is everything die-hard Tories seem to hate, doesn’t mean the rest of the public feel the same way.
Brown was underestimated. Who would have thought it? Answer - anyone with any common sense whatsoever.
Ealing Southall by election, what is the status with 10 campaigning days left? For postal voters it is under 5 days left.
Several posters on here and elsewhere have stated that they have seen LD and Conservative activity in the form of leaflets and activists but little Labour activity. Respect and UKIP being mentioned as much as Labour. Is this true?
How many different editions of leaflets/newspapers has each party delivered to date?
Amthony Wells has his usual fair summary here: http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1006
He points out that the squeeze is still clearly on the Lib Dems who have their lowest ICM result since the election.
For what it’s worth (on one poll only) a halving of the Labour lead is fine by me. BUt we do see a pattern across the polls of GB having jumped Labour into a small lead at present. The question is whether this will last when ‘normal service’ is resumed and GB is not dominating the headlines!
I don’t think this poll is either particularly good or bad for Labour or the Conservatives. It’s well within the margin of error of previously published polls. On balance, I think the Conservatives can take slightly more comfort, on the basis that Labour seem not be opening up a decisive lead - certainly not the sort of lead on which Brown might be tempted to go for an early election. And I’d take any poll finding which puts Labour ahead on immigration with a huge piece of salt.
WRT Southall, I also went there yesterday. Labour are certainly not inactive, and are well ahead in terms of posters in Southall proper (although there’s certainly a decent number for Tony Lit also). I didn’t spot one Lib Dem poster, although they were out leafletting. Respect were quite busy as well.
Not in Ealing, Sean - LibDem and Tory posters only. Suppose it depends where you were campaigning.
Thanks Rik W - Anthony Wells worth quoting;
“It shouldn’t be a particular surprise to find Labour down slightly anyway, the last polls were taken in the days immediately following Gordon Brown becoming PM when he was receiving blanket coverage on the television, and that initial publicity burst at least should have begun to subside. It is still difficult to say what the future holds. Still, for what little it is worth it is our first indication of the direction of movement. It does also suggest a continuing squeeze for the Lib Dems - 17% equals the lowest level of support they’ve recorded in an ICM poll since the election, and is from the pollster who normally gives them their highest figures.”
42 - We are still at a time when people don’t know what Brown will do, just what they want him to do. As PM he’s a blank page, given that he’s already gone to the authoritarian side with ID cards and 90 day detention that’ll start peeling away those who gave the benefit of the doubt, in future months other areas will disappoint others. In essence we’ll be back where we were soon but the variable is how well Brown can sell his ideas, if the public aren’t presented with something they expected he may well go lower than Blair.
Are polls giving a ‘don’t know’ option for Gordon Brown? I imagine that’s where most voters are at the moment, or at least many.
In six months most of them will have made their minds up. We can then expect an increase for Labour in the six months leading up to the poll, as people move from answering the voting intention question a little away from ‘do you like the government’ to ‘who would you vote for?’ That’ll be mostly at the Tories’ expense. And then there’ll be perhaps a four-point boost for the lIb Dems with the extra publicity, during the election campaign itself. But who that’ll come from is hard to say. In the past it’s been Labour.
Applying that to whatever the polls are saying in six months will give us some idea what might happen in the election, plus or minus a healthy bit for ‘events’. Labour to scrape home?
49 I was in Southall Broadway and Dormers Wells. I didn’t see it, but was told my a couple of Conservatives, that Labour had just held some big procession down the Broadway.
It’s a curious constituency. It contains some of the poorest and some of the wealthiest wards in London. One of the curiosities of the Broadway is that it’s almost impossible to find an Indian restaurant that serves alchohol.
Why are the Lib Dems’ odds so much stronger for Ealing than Sedgefield?
48-49 - The Ealing campaign and the Southall campaigns certainly seem to be two different campaigns. I have been to Ealing where I saw Lib Dem activists and no Labour. There were LD leaflets on the mat but again no Labour. We seem to be matching the LDs on literature quantity but surpassing them on quality (they were delivering a B&W survey questionnaire).
I am pleased to note that we have adopted the LD practice of bar charts with the 2006 local election election results shown and an arrow pointing at the LD figure saying “Cant win here”! lol
Obviously the Lib Dems have a better chance in Ealing (some councillors, easier for activists to get to, higher score last time, more young voters and minority ethnic groups) but I wouldn’t think there’s that much difference between the two seats. Do we have any intelligence as to whether the party’s going for both of them?
re 48 I don’t agree. I think it’s more significant for Lab than the barely credible 39:35 taken at an almost unbelievably good moment for Lab. Given the 12 months up to May elections (inc poll evidence that things would not improve under Brown), I think whole of Lab party would have taken level-pegging or just behind over this mid-term summer.
Proof that Labour exists in Southall
http://www.laboursouthall.co.uk/images/uploads/166563/a68ce404-1ec9-aa34-e156-b9b3110f9c65.jpg
but maybe they doctored the photo!
54 Probably because Sedgefield is so deeply Labour + TB’s old seat that the bookies think by comparison that it must be Ealing Southall. I take the contrary theory for the following:
1. Sedgefield unlike Ealing there is no strong Tory candidate or campaign, and no one doubts who to vote for if you’re against Labour
2 We saw in the GE Labour slip up in a few nominally safer seats eg Wimbledon than ones where the Tories should have in theory found easier eg Enfield North
3 The TB thing. Surely it has to rankly that after 23 years of loyally returning him, putting up de facto with no Local rep for ten years he is now off like a long dog when he has no more use for them. Not saying die hard Labour men will all vote Lib Dem , but I bet quite a few and possibly more than a few will say sod it and stay at home.
My prediction Labour hold, but I think the Lib Dems will give them a fright. Specially with the Dunfermline team
The poll confirms where the Brown bounce sits, some progress, while the Tories can expect some of the edge to come off the bounce within the next two or three months. So a poll both sides can claim something from, but not decisive either way. It’s all to play for.
Talking of all to play for, after Grammar schools you would think the Tories would be trying to avoid self destructing. However this link suggests they may do just that.
[url]http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=466976&in_page_id=1770 [/url]
A tax to increase the price of alcohol by 7 pence, not only will this go down like a lead bloon with key voters, it is proposed by the worst Tory leader of all time, and leads the Tories back to the lecturing moral values agenda where it simply cannot win. Any more like this, and Gordon’s lead will be going up further.
60 - Kevin - first of all this is not a policy it is leak from a report from one of the commissions. They make recommendations which may or may not be taken up by the party. Secondly, I think this is a very saleable policy if the money was ring fenced (or hypothecated) for the NHS and drug and alcohol rehabilitation specifically!
O/T why does the July 6th Sean Fear Friday slot piece still have the wrong Lib Dem figures in the headline story? (the actual voting numbers were 908, 51.4% according to the agent I spoke to yeaterday).
Loved Cameron’s kitchen spinning on Marr’s programme this morning. Tories not centralising control freaks!!!!!? Obviously someone else who forced through the poll tax and charging for care in local authority homes etc, and whose planning policies forced local authorities to aaccept phone masts in sits they do not want them.
“Vote Cameron - more Blair than Blair with a little less hair.”
Saw your bar chart Rik. The difference is no one would believe a Tory bar chart! Did you see the leaflet from the local Chinese in Ealing “Ming” !
Hear on the one o’clock news that the Conservatives want to put the price of alcoholic drinks up so that only young people who can afford to be members of the Bullingdon Club will be able buy enough to get drunk!!
This will go down well with the working class Tories - not.
63 - Binge drinking is an important issue and something needs to be done.
That is Cameron’s secret agenda, Icarus (63). Keep the plebs in their place, but let the Tory toffs do whatever they like!
I am surprised that the Tories have let this one out of the bag quite so soon…..
64 That may be true but an extra 7p a pint less than an extra £1 on a binge night of 10-12 pints will have no effect whatsover .
63. Alcohol is significantly cheaper in real terms than it was 20 years ago. We do have a serious problem with excessive alcohol consumption in the UK by young people and price is one method that could be used to deter people from drinking so much.
having said all that I did get rather sozzled last night!!
On the posters, ‘thing’ years ago I was driving through Guildford, The Liberals,(as they were then) were making a big push, (they of course did eventually take the seat) my wife commented on the sea of orange, and that the Liberals looked they would take the seat. I said, ‘See all of the windows without a poster, they’re the ones who will be voting Tory’ How often have we been surprised, by how much effort, produces so little result.
As for the beer drinking, ‘thing’ this is another idea being floated by camp Cameron, rather like the, ‘flying thing’ it’ll whoosh around, the usual suspects will come onto this site and others and claim its wonderful, marvelous, just shows how Dave has his finger on the pulse etc. The polls will show its a non-starter and orders will go out to smother it. Yeah thats it guys, go out of your way to upset the brewers, how much did they put into Tory party funds last year?
66 - Laws against it are anathema to me, legislating behaviour is such a nannyish way of doing it, taxes are better because it puts the onus on the consumer. It should be much more than 7p though to have an effect, although money raised could be used to try and offset the terrible effects that it has on the health service.
More than anything there needs to be a change from having alcohol seen as something illicit, the whole culture of how drink is viewed is the problem, a sort of rite of passage that supposedly makes you an adult and something that takes down social boundaries that we shouldn’t have allowed to be erected in the first place (a hangover from the puritan/hedonist dualism that has been Britain for centuries).
Still, it could be worse, we could be in the USA.
42. BritSpin: “Any other suggestions on how to explain the difference?”
An element might be that people didn’t realise how much Blair irritated them till after he was gone. And for all his gifts, he was irritating people very badly in his last three years. Then after maddening people, he’d do a spectacularly good speech, his critics would reluctantly acknowledge that it was spectacular, but that made them feel even more cross and irritated. That’s all gone now and there’s a palpable sense of relief in the air, esp as Brown is a more low-key person.
What Nick Palmer said in 15 is also true - Brown is exceeding expectations. The Tories/Cameron/Osborne people did such a great job of lowering expectations and telling the world and their dog that Brown would be “disastrous” that he was inevitably going to be a success when disaster failed to materialize (as any sane person could have predicted). Thank you Tories!
Just a couple of things. Radio 4’s world at one featured the WLQ lots.
On the social breakdown thing by IDS, drink was only one area.
The proposal as I understand it is to fund programs to deal with drug and drink rehabilitation with a bit of tax on drink. If there was just a proposal to have drug and drink rehab then some one would be bound to pop up and say “how are you going to pay for that then?”
71
As I said, ‘The usual suspects’ note Benedict, your phrase, ‘with a bit of a tax on drink’ if this had been a Labour proposal, it would have read, ‘a stealth tax that will bit into the pockets of those least able to afford it etc’ I’ll remember that Benedict, next time Brown puts up taxes, it’ll be a ‘bit of a tax’
Re 72, Coldstone, I was explaining the policy not endorsing it.
That is drug and drink rehab funded by tax, and here is where we are going to get the tax from. The reason for the clarification is that that tax is not there to discourage drinking but to fund rehab.
73
Sweet, When the Tories put up taxes, its good for us, when Labour put up taxes it bad for us’ Oh! got it now, thanks for explaining it to me Benedict, I can rest easy in my bed tonight.
re 74, Coldstone, do you think we should be spending more on drink and drug rehab?
Yes or no?
71. Why should sensible drinkers be forced to pay for the treatment of p*ssheads and yobs?
Re 76, Scallywag, taht is then an argument for taking the money out of general taxation rather than a specific tax.
Why should lucky smokers pay for the unlucky ones?
If you wish to spend money on drink and drug rehab, fine take it out of the profits of the big brewers etc., why don’t you do that?
Having said that, drink and drug rehab only ever has limited effect, people who become addicted, have personality flaws that lead them into drug dependency. For most your time wasting your time and our money even trying to prevent it. For most young people binge drinking is a rite of passage, a brief period before they settle down to the mundane, mortgage, family etc. I have doubts if anything the government does will have any lasting effect. The ‘Saturday night’ problem get the police in crack down, clean up, hand out the fines etc, its not very imaginative but can’t see any end to it. Still don’t worry about it Benedict, this ‘policy’ will be like all of Dave’s others, they’re a bit like greyhounds leaving the trap, they come out like bullets, then are stopped dead after fifty yards, because the owner shoots them.
77. No. Charge the yobs and drunks for their treatment, not the rest of us.
Re 79,Scallywag, and what if they have no money?
80. If they are penniless how did they get the money to go binge drinking in the first place?
re 81 Scallywag, it takes less money to get drunk or stoned than to get into rehab. What is more drug users sometimes resort to criminality to get their fix. Are you suggesting rehab programs should be funded by crime?
70 Snowflake5, yeah Brown is wonderful, PMQ’s ddddd did not happen and I believe in Father Xmas.
Seriously the tax on booze is a dumb idea and lowers the Conservatives chances of winning a GE.
But communication was never IDS strong point.
Meanwhile Conservative odds in Ealing Southall in the 5 and 6 to 1 range. LDs at 3 to 1 and Labour 1.44 to 1.
82. I wasn’t suggesting the rehab should be voluntary.
Re 84, Scallywag,so how is it going to be paid for?
78 - Brown has been the friend of big brewers more than anyone.
84. Surcharge their earnings after release. The same should happen to criminals like burglars as well - their income and/or assets should be surcharged to repay those who they stole from. You like to talk about ’social responsibility’ - fine. Let those who damage society take responsibility for putting it right. Ordinary people are already paying through the nose to finance the anti-social behaviour of criminals and irresponsibles, and the latter are laughing at them. Let the balance be shifted.
Interesting the taxation on Booze, however the piece that i found particularly interesting was Frank Field’s contrubution in the The Times today.
I think Field is said not to be one of Brown’s most sympathetic parliamentry colleagues. I will be watching developments most interestingly this week with regards to the Tories social development program.
In respect of the poll i would say this is good for the tories. I cannot see Brown going to the country early a sentiment echoed by Nick Palmer in one of yesterdays threads. I think Labour activisdts and MP’s are waking upto the fact that the Labour voters who went LD about the Iraq war are not as likely to come back now that Brown has said he would go to war in Iraq on the same terms and he is not changing the governments policy on Iraq.
I think Brown has indeed shot himself in the foot by going on about him being a change maker: when in fact one of the most dispised policies of the last 5 years and certainly one of the most contentious policies - Iraq will not be changed. If Labour think the LD’s on this one are going to roll over and play ball then they are just mere wishfull thinkers!!!
Another interesting thing is the Floods - Brown has had an absolute abysmal presents up until yesterday and offered £14M to those households effected. Two groups of vulenrable people have emerged Social housing tennants and homes built on flood planes. The lattor group bought houses on flood plans in some places on good faith after Prescott enabled planning consent to go through. Many do not have insurance due to the high risk of these properties from flooding. The total bill is estimated at £1,500 million. So Brown offeres less than O.1% of the costs from this devastation. Real leadership there.
Re 87,Scallywag, presumably you would like to repeal the 1986 Insolvency act and the amendments to it contained in the 2002 Enterprise act?
Re 88, Martin, got a link to the Times article?
When the anti-smoking lobby persuaded governments of all parties to up the tax as a way of cutting smoking I thought it wrong. But I was wrong. The tax alongside health propaganda has changed the outlook.
Booze is a serious health as well as social problem. I can see no reason why the formula shouldn’t work there.
For those that oppose this please tell us what you would do instead. And if you support the campaign against smoking please explain why that campaign including tax hikes was right and the proposed campaign against drinking is wrong.
Drinking kills as many people as smoking ever did and is far, far more corrosive socially.
PS I drink like a fish (and used to smoke like the Titanic clearing coal dust from the funnels, but not any more).
Interesting that the Tories have just traded more than 20 behind Labour on the seats markets… the biggest gap since Cameron took over. So real money, most of it Tory, is not that optimistic for their prospects.
If the precedent of the previous elections with these seat markets is any guide (not in my view) Cameron not only will not win but would be stepping down after getting only 250 or so.
89. Yes it is here: I read it in the dead wood version!!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2042238.ece
88 - The floods - small pedantic point - the aid is less than 1% of the costs, but a lot more than 0.1%. And most of that 1.5 billion will be met from insurance firms - most people, sensibly, were insured. I certainly wouldn’t want the role of insurance to be replaced by indiscriminate taxpayer-funded relief.
An extra tax on booze is a terrible idea. I don’t want to appear totally unconcerned about binge drinking, but the level which is deemed a binge is so absurdly low as to render the figures meaningless. It is also lower in this country than most others, rendering comparisons meaningless too. By government standards, I binge drink most times I go out - and I’m sure most of the government do too.
Having finally won the battle against smoking, the puritans are now starting to attack drinking. A valuable illustration of why we must stand up against the intrusions on our liberty we don’t care about to postpone the attacks on those that we do.
91. Shows how much you fear Cameron when you trot out this:
Cameron not only will not win but would be stepping down after getting only 250 or so.
It is laughable to say the seat market is a good indicator after Brown becomes PM and there is volitility in the market. I bet if you looked at the seat market just after the fuel protests it showed similar dramatic movement. You would need several months to deduce this of similar prices.
I would say even if Cameron does not win but get’s maybe 270 - 280 seats. This would mean Labour have lost their majority and the next parliament is likely to be shorter than 4/5 years.
89. ???
Re 92, Many thanks Martin.
Re 89, Scallywag the laws that allow a person to walk away from the debts, debt free.
Surely if you want people to pay for their mistakes no matter what, you can’t be happy with that?
88 Yes reading the news reports from Hull, I cannot for the life of me see how they will hold Hull East next time. Even Hull West must seea reduced majority surely.
83 View on 59
94 If it isn’t a good indicator Martin then buy all the Tory seats you can eat. Clearly you believe you know more than the market which is a pretty unusual viewpoint for a Tory, even one as colourful as yourself.
93. People on flood plains are unlikely to be able to get insurance due to the risk of flooding.
People in social housing may not get insurance or be able to acquire it. If somebody lives in social housing and the occupier has not chosen or able to get exercise their right to buy the local authority usually picks up the tab to the structural damage. If they have no insurance how are they supposed to make their house viable. Some of the communities affected are the poorest in England in Hull and sheffield. Is it right that they have to “make - do” with sewage and water damaged furniture? I don’t think so. Remember local Govt. provides B & B for some of these unfortunate people in the long run it is cheaper to get them in their houses.
Ps My view of Cameron is fairly negative but not nearly as hostile as my Tory friends… and that is why the price is down there I reckon.
97. A rather feeble reductio ad absurdum I would say.
These proposals smack of exactly the same kind of nannyism we are all sick of from Labour. Worse still, they even resemble the pious temperance-style politics of the Liberal Party in its former incarnations. Yuk.
99. I would but i don’t have any spare cash!!! Living on credit at the moment whilst completing my IFS exam’s!!! Done them very quickly indeed. I would say though that markets can shift one way or the other. Brown lets remember had trmendous volitility in late winter early spring in his market price. I would say the seat market is different of course but the same principle applies.
101. Fair enough! I think you would hate most tory leaders!!!
Re 102,. Scallywag, no you insisted that they have no choice and be compelled to do rehab for which they would have to pay. That is the nasty nanny state gone mad, not just the nanny state, as they may never have the money to pay off the incurred debt, hence asking about bankruptcy laws.
We are also not just talking about drink, but more importantly drugs.
105. If that is ‘nannyism’ then so is putting people in prison. I think you do not understand the meaning of the term.
101 Probably so, but you would hope that most Tories would be rather keen on them.
88 thank you Martin.
Frank Field’s piece is fantastic. I do wish he would defect. I don’t say that as a sucks boo to the Labour party over their massive catch of hang em and flog em Sir Bufton Tufton. Most Tories I know have long admired Frank Field. He would be a true credit to our party. I wish he would cross the floor. I think he is absolutely fantastic. The same goes for Kate Hoey. But Frank Field is perhaps the number one wished for defection because the man just talks so much sense.
You think he is a Lib Dem at heart then, Test?
107 - Speaking of hated leaders, Jon, how are you lot getting on with the Epileptic Corpse at the head of your own party?
I know Lib Dems will be the main challengers in Sedgfield but I think anyone thinking about betting against labour should have a look at this-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdQTPFxN6sE
111 AHM, I for one have missed your contributions of late, but that was not one of your better ones!
test
If you’re going to put cash in the post I would suggest wrapping it up in a letter on thick paper to make sure no one can see it. There are still crooked postmen out there - maybe use a brown envelope if you have one.
111 - I thought Jon was the same person as Jonathan, is that not right?
113 - I thought it was rather good, Augustus - sorry to have offended your Liberal sensitivities.
115 - No. Jonathan is a Labourite from Horsham and Jon is a Liberal from Tiverton.
112 That woman is a hero of mine! I have nothing but admiration for candidates of all parties who stand and lose. Sometimes, winning is easy, and sometimes losing is easy, but whe losing is difficult then it takes a lot of guts. Full marks for her for standing up to be counted.
As I said a few weeks ago, I think she should go onto the masthead when Mike Smthson re-designs it.
116 Not my Liberal sensitivites, AHM, just my sense of good taste and objection to personal vilification.
Still glad to see you back, though.
118 - I earnestly hope you apply your finely tuned sense of both to all parties and not just your own and speak out when the situation demands it, Augustus; the rampant Cameron bashing that goes on here from a select group of people (most of the Lib Dems) is the primary reason that I haven’t bothered posting lately.
Re 106, Scallywag, no, people go to prison if they have committed a criminal offence, what we are talking about is addicts and it is not a criminal offence to be an addict.
You demand they be forcibly rehabilitated at their own expense.
I tend to agree, Augustus (117). But surely one of the interviewees was one of the Labour hooligans and hackmen who did their best to break up the Lib Dem inauguration of the campaign in Sedgefield?
Or do all Labour voters look alike in Sedgefield?
yes she gave a very gracious interview.
98.” I cannot for the life of me see how they will hold Hull East next time. ”
Why Hull East in particular?
Does any one have a tally of the number of aces at Wimbledon today (or rather in the Mens Final?)
43: a poll you don’t agree with is a delusion, steve? I know the feeling from last year’s polls, but it’s unsafe to rely on it. ‘Issue’ polls often aren’t adjusted for sample, so should mainly be viewed in comparison with other ones. The shift to Labour on immigration IMO simply reflects a general shift to seeing Labour as more competent than before or the Tories as less so.
70: snowflake on TB: “Then after maddening people, he’d do a spectacularly good speech, his critics would reluctantly acknowledge that it was spectacular, but that made them feel even more cross and irritated.” That’s perceptive as well as funny - describes quite a few of my constituents. I just had an email from one who says how nice it is to see GB’s “low-key style” at PMQ.
111 is as Augustus said pretty unpleasant. Can’t we have a moratorium on calling each other’s leaders silly names?
The Tory announcements today on alcohol and cannabis have an odd echo in my patch - my A-list moderniser Tory opponent wants to lower the drinking age to 16 and legalise cannabis. I’ve had some sympathy with the latter view myself but the latest medical evidence is worrying.
124. Live scoring at Wimbledon website says 22 aces so far in the man’s final
Re 126, Andrea, that means Henry G’s tip cam in big style!
126. 16 in the double finale. 13 in the mixed double semifinals (final still to be played). 11 in the boys single final. 5 in the girls single final. 7 in the boys double final. 5 in the girls double final.
Do you want stats for senior matches too?!
83 For as long as the Hills bet about the ‘next event’ being a Labour by-election loss staying at 3-1, the LD odds at Southall shouldn’t fall below 3-1. Indeed, people accepting that price are paying the price of knowing less than readers of this column.
re 128, Andrea,many thanks no just in the mens as I have waled away with free money on Henry’s most excellent tip
Great Wimbledon final, wonderful tennis. The 25 aces were a bonus.
78.
“drink and drug rehab only ever has limited effect, people who become addicted, have personality flaws that lead them into drug dependency.”
Maybe this policy is the Tories last ditch plan to force Charlie Kennedy to defect?
Re 131, Henry, yes good final! I liked the free money though
123 Because of the local rage apparently stirred up by the Govt handling of the floods see the Sunday Times. The Lib Dems have already worked themselves into a good long term position in HullEast. Now they have a rich new seam of resentment to mine. Hull West is of course far the safer of the two for Labour
I thought Hull North was a pretty good prospect for the Lib Dems.
135 I bow to to your knowledge I thought Hull East was your primary target there.
112 Can’t hear it. Why is uit extra reason to bet against Lib Dems see 59
134.”The Lib Dems have already worked themselves into a good long term position in HullEast”
That’s actually the seat where Labour did better in 2007 locals.
“Hull West is of course far the safer of the two for Labour ”
There’re actually 3 Hull seats (East, West & Hessle, North)
Back to the smoking and drinking, I have never smoked, for me July 1 was a great day, drinking very modest, 2/3 pints once a week, glass of red wine most days, that’s about it. I think witan said drinking kills as many people as smoking, don’t think so! Smoking is a major killer, drinking is not. There are people who become addicted to alcohol, but as a percentage of drinkers its very small. To become addicted to alcohol you’ve really got to work at it, smoking is almost instantly addictive. The main problem with alcohol is it leads to anti-social behaviour, 60% of all arrests involve alcohol related incidents etc. I would point out to Tory posters in particular, that the Tory Party has a long history of involvement with the brewing industry, Labour long associated with temperence, (although you wouldn’t know it as many famous Labour politicans were renowned for their alcohol abuse) the Liberal’s too, Lloyd George a famous tee-totaller, his vices were else where.
When the Tories where in power Lord Young was asked to draw up a report on the brewing industry, I though it was one of the most brilliant reports any politician has ever produce. Its proposals for reform were excellent, unfortunately the brewers and their allies did not like it, threats were made to Tory funding, tragically it was scrapped. Young’s report should be enacted by this or any other government if they have the courage, but I doubt it.
135. Tressage, in terms of GE majority North (Diana Johnson MP) is the one with the less big Lab majority. LDs lead Lab at local level in that constituency by some years (always a bit difficult in Hull to compare as there’re some 2 members wards which are not up in some years). In 2007 locals LDs did well also in West (Alan Johnson) leading Lab by a decent margin (and the only ward not up that year is a safe LD ward, so it can potentially make the gap even bigger). In East (Prezza) LDs had just a small lead in 2007 locals with 2 wards not voting (1 Lab/LD marginal and 1 safish Lab. So the not voting wards could have made the situation level pegging).
90 Witan, what I object to is the fact that the only “public” places exempted from the recent smoking ban in England are the Houses of Parliament - an absolute disgrace and a classic case of “do as I say and not as I do”. What possible justification can there be for such special treatment?
140. I agree. Another case of ‘do as I say and not do as I do’ is devolution. Scotland and Wales are allowed Parliaments as this strengthens the union, but the English are not allowed one and must be called British and government by the UK Parliament. How can an English Paliament threaten the union, but Scottish/Walsh devolution strengthens it. I just don’t the logic. Can you? Gordon Brown campaigned hard to get a Scottish Parliament so why is campaigning equally hard to prevent England from getting national devolution? He’s a typical anglophobic little Scotlander that rules the Labour Party and government.
90 Also, as regards anti-smoking tax hikes, I’ve seen it said that around 40% of cigarettes consumed in SE England are either purchased in bulk, sur le continent via booze cruises, or are brought in illicitly from Eastern Europe, etc. to be sold at a heavy discount, compared with the UK taxed price of the same brands. The net effect is that smokers,by and large continue to smoke the same quantity of cigarettes, but the Exchequer is poorer to the extent of hundreds of millions of pounds per year. Going all the way back to my “O” level economics days, I believe this is what was called the law of diminishing returns.
We seem to be onto tax on booze for a lot of the thread.
For what it’s worth, I think alcohol probably does us more damage than the fun it gives us is worth - overall that is, even though most people manage it fairly well.
But I doubt tax will make much difference. I don’t know the price elasticity of alcohol, but I bet it’s pretty low. What we should be doing is whatever they did with smoking a a couple of decades ago, using people’s brains rather than their wallets. How about some campaigns with beautiful women being derisive about pissheads? And for the people who sit at home with a bottle of whiskey, perhaps a campaign on the health risks? I bet that would make a lot more difference than a tax rise.
Still, it is at least a tax the Tories have an excuse to raise, which will help them pay for more popular tax cuts or even spending. Personally I agree with Rik W (shock!) that hypothecating it for alcohol rehab or campaigns would be a good way to spend the money.
At least the New French Govt has it’s priorities right…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6282274.stm
&n