YouGov reports an 11% SNP lead in Scotland?
December 6th, 2007
Could this point to disproportionate Labour losses in the General Election?
A main reason why my preferred Westminster general election spread bet is on the number of Labour, rather than Conservative, seats is what might happen north of the border where the party could have several more seats at risk than the conventional GB-based seat calculators are suggesting.
This is reinforced by a new YouGov poll on voting intention for the Scottish parliament which suggests that there has been a sharp move to the SNP. This has the following with changes on what happened at the Scottish elections in May.
Constituency vote SNP: 40%(+7): LAB: 29%(-3): LD 13% (-3): CON 12% (-5)
Regional list SNP: 34% (+3): LAB: 26% (-3): CON 13% (-1): LD 13% (+2): GRN 9% (+5)
The very high Green vote share is similar to that which the pollster reported before the May elections and which turned out to be an over-statement.
From what’s available online there does not seem to have been a Westminster voting intention but it is reasonable to assume that the SNP is doing well - which could put some Labour seats in danger.
Given the very different political environment in Scotland it would be very helpful if the General Election seat predictors could find a way of separating off the country when it comes to working out the impact of swings. Thus if you put the latest ICM poll into Martin Baxter’s calculator you’ll see a Tory gain from the SNP being reported. This is simply not going to happen.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
From the last thread and my thought on what was posted at comment 157 by RodCrosby on seat numbers
Strange thought if SNP did poll and win in these sort of numbers for a Westminster Election it is not outwith the bounds of possibility that they would hold the balance of power in a hung Parliament. If they did who might they get into bed with.
They currently have no love for labour and it is difficult to see how they might work with them. They have forged better relations with the Tories but I couldn’t see them actually creating any sort of coalition. They would certainly hold full devolution over all other parties as a reward for supporting them.
Surely if Labour is disproportionately more at risk in Scotland it means it is at less of a severe risk in the rest of the UK? Tactically better to lose seats to the SNP than the Tories, surely.
Article in the Herald that might go down well in Scotland for the SNP as it looks like they are going to give the Police the full amount of their pay rise agreed by arbitration of 2.5% rather than the effective 1.9% that Jacqui Smith will be offering the police in England and Wales.
Police (in England and Wales only!) are now demanding the right to take strike action after they said they had been “stabbed in the back” by the government.
The SNP seem unstoppable at the moment, with the caveat that they have a habit of overperforming in polls. I think this lessens the chance of Charlie “In good faith” Gordon resigning: Labour will do everything they can to hold onto him rather than risk a by-election in the current climate.
Please note: the fieldwork for this poll took place before the breaking of the Wendy Alexander criminal donations story.
I wonder what level of support Labour are at now? If the UK-wide polls are anything to go by then Labour could be scraping 20% in Scotland.
Something massive is occuring in the Scottish body-politic.
Rather than compare this poll with the actual votes for Holyrood in May , should you not show the comparison with the last Yougov poll prior to May’s election . IIRC that poll overstated the Green regional vote by a large amount and slightly overeStimated the SNP vote .
What, no “11 Alex’s”?
Alex Salmonds Honeymoon has lasted longer than Gordons!
Stuart,
what is your opinion? Will Scots voters throw out Labour in Westminster constituencies and send the Nats to Parliament or is the SNP love only for Holyrood?
Whatever you do, don’t let SeanT see this:
http://news.aol.co.uk/brown-may-miss-eu-treaty-signing/article/20071205123509990001
McCavity’s finest hour?
Although it does seem to have been moved forward an hour - so why not moved so as not to clash with signing the Treaty at all?
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/liaison_committee/lcpn02_051207.cfm
When was this date agreed? When was the date of signing the Consti…..sorry, Treaty - agreed? What efforts have been made to move the Liaison Committee meeting? Were they indeed asked at all?Perhaps one of these people could enlighten us:
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/liaison_committee/lcmembership.cfm
And if not them, then perhaps a member of the Press might like to look into it.
It’s certainly a nice puzzle for pollsters. Maybe Anthony Wells has some thoughts on that side of it. Makes my prediction that Labour will lose more seats next time than in 1983 all the more likely.
What is a reasonable number of SNP gains in Scotland at the next GE? Anyone unbiased? Mark Senior what do you think?
Dont get too excited. Brown will do OK in Scotland at the GE. The SNP always do better in Scottish Parliament polls. Remeber they even managed to lose a seat to the Tories in the 2001 GE! The most they will do is pick up the odd seat from Labour. Traditional Labour voters will stick with Labour because there is a real propect of a Conservative Govt.
An early good morning all.
Test @ 12.
Without wishing to unduly spike your question, this poll was a Holyrood question. I think it likely that some voters will vote differently for a Westminster election. Further as a 2010 appears more likely than not there’s plenty of time for the Nationalists to make a mess of government. Events, events.
For when Nick pops in, can you explain what you envisage being included in the “local spending limits”, and how you see them operating?
Presumably, as referred to yesterday, they won’t include spending on salaries or running constituency offices (this is a non-partisan question, but would be relevant in relation to Ashcroft since i understand that many of his donations are solicited by the local constituency party, independently of their MP/candidate).
Isn’t there in fact a problem with the way that most funding and campaigning outside of election periods is done through the local party, rather than through a specific bank account set up for the candidate (which is what i assume happens during general election campaign), and a further complication that many local parties will span several constituencies.
Assuming some definition for “campaigning” can be established how do you see parliamentary campaigning fitting in with local (council related) campaigning or activity? Again activity that may cross constituencies, and which could not anyway be brought in due to the huge (parliamentary) spending advantage it would bestow on candidates with little local council interest. There is also the question of how you cope with local councillors being candidates for parliament. Or campaigning material that combines the two - how would a LibDem focus leaflet that concentrates heavily on the local activities of local activists, but also includes a message from the local parliamentary candidate be classified?
And then how do you cope with a reversion to the practice of no candidate formerly calling themselves the party’s candidate in advance of an election.
It seems like an absolute minefield to me, and a bit more complicated than just transferring the rules governing campaigns to the full year cycle.
If you compare these figures with the YouGov poll the day before Scottish Parliament polling day, you will see not much change. SNP up 3% on constituency and Lib Dem up 3% on Region. Everything else is inside the margin of error. I think it’s a mistake to compare with the actual vote as the SNP always poll more than they actually get. NB there was a Westminster voting question asked. The SNP usually filter the good news out from their polls during the course of a week. So if it doesn’t appear we can assume it is bad for them
12 I had thought it was a GE poll. Honestly as I’m not Scots I don’t care as much about Holyrood; whether, on this form, the SNP can take Labour seats at a GE and how many is what I care about. Stuart, Marcia - anyone, any thoughts?
13 - Isn’t the whole basis for Labour’s problem in Scotland precisely that there is no prospect of individual’s votes ushering in a Conservative Govt? Hence there is potentially no limit to how far their vote can fall, and may explain why they seem to be having so many problems in Scotland. As we saw at the last election Labour’s most potent and enthusiastically expressed campaigning argument is a) we’re not the Tories and b) any vote against us is a vote for a Conservative Govt.
Which is very difficult to sustain in anything other than Lab/Con seats, not least because it relies upon technical arguments over which party would take power in a hung parliament scenario. (Of course Labour don’t actually want to delve into this too strongly in case people realise they rather like the prospect of a Conservative Govt limited by the lack of a parliamentary majority).
16 - Are they allowed to keep Westminster voting polls secret if they are part of the same poll?
Too soon to say. But as the SNP have broken the “unelectable” barrier, this could well happen. They may have got past the tipping point.
If there is a “plague on Labour” sentiment then the SNP are the logical repository for protest votes
In addition, as is frequently mentioned on here, there are some seats that would be very unlikely to be Labour anywhere else. The tribal loyalty will much thinner there = bigger swing maybe. I think it is Jim Murphy’s seat west of Glasgow that was as solid a Tory one as you could find until 1997
Can Alex Salmond go to the country early to try and get a majority (Or bigger minority) in the Scottish Parliament, or does he have to lose a vote of confidence first?
[18] Alex muses on the possibility that people (might) realise they rather like the prospect of a Conservative Govt limited by the lack of a parliamentary majority - but of course there’s no way that any of us as individuals can vote to produce a minority government of any colour.
22 - You’ve missed the point IA - Anybody in a Lab/SNP, Lab/Lib seat can not vote to prevent a majority Conservative Govt. The only influence they can have on the presence of a Conservative Govt is by a) preventing a Labour majority b) affecting the relative strength of Labour to the Conservatives in a hung parliament.
And therefore indirectly vote for a Conservative minority govt (in the event that the Conservatives don’t otherwise secure a majority).
21 - No.
This is an area where Yougov have a major advantage over other pollsters. Yougov would be wise to consider expanding the number of people polled in a UK survey so that more representative data for each area could be gathered.
The other pollsters could not easily compete with this as their expenses would rise significantly if they doubled the number of interviews. Yougov have a USP on this matter which is capable of embracing Scottish and Cornwall/Devon differences in polling.
It then follows that the forecasting software needs to be amended to take inputs on an area basis.
[23] Clearly people in such seats can’t affect the number of Tory MPs (unless the Tories have the potential to win from third place - Labour managed it in a few seats in 1997) any more than English voters can affect the number of SNP ones.
Don’t see how that affects my previous point.
25 That is true but the snag is that the Yougov panel may not be representative of the population in each region or even the country as a whole . In Scotland for example , they seem to be finding too many Greens .
Firstly, I would likely to extend my profound thanks to Test for the belly-laugh
Putting the words “unbiased” and “Mark Senior” in the same blog thread, let alone the same paragraph is an oxymoronic classic. Are you not aware that Mark Senior likes to think of himself as the Lab Dims Nat-Basher-in-Chief, which is absolutely fine by us, because for a start he has often displayed only a very superficial understanding of Scotland, let alone Scottish politics.
Secondly, Mike, why the use of the question mark in the header? AFAIAA “YouGov reports an 11% SNP lead in Scotland” is a plain statement of fact, not a query.
Thirdly, in regard to enquiries as to how I think the Scottish National Party may perform at the next UK general election:
I, and most SNP supporters with a strategic bent, are primarily focussed on two things:
- first and foremost: delivery in government, both at national and local authority level
- very much in second spot: in terms of elections, our focus is firmly on the next big test: Thursday 11 June 2009, the day of the European Parliament general election; plus of course any by-elections that happen to come along, eg. possibly in Glasgow Cathcart
I am afraid that although Westminster is still very much the focus of attention to people in England, and to a lesser degree in Northern Ireland and Wales too; in Scotland Westminster really is far less important, in nearly every area of public life. Eg, the entire criminal justice system is entirely separate from that in England and Wales; and the separate Northern Irish legal system is an issue “reserved” to Westminster (for obvious reasons!) As all political activists will know, “law and order” is always very high up in the minds of the electorate, and in this vital area, and health and education and transport and nearly all the other “biggies”, Westminster is either totally or increasingly meaningless.
Oppositions do not win elections, governments lose them. And oh my goodness, what a fine job Gordon Brown is doing on the SNP’s behalf! We really don’t need to do much at all in a Westminster context, except be reasonable and sane, which the current Westminster team led by Angus Robertson is doing very well indeed.
We just need to let Gordon be Gordon, Alistair be Alistair, Des be Des and Wee Dougie be Wee Dougie. And oh boy, what a shplendid job they are doing!
I suppose for many English politicians and activists and voters, Brown, Darling, Browne and Alexander are “new faces”, but I, and most other Scots, have known them very well for a long, long time. The fact that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling signed the Claim of Right in 1989 may be news to English bloggers, but I can actually well remember that day: it was an amazing moment in Scottish history, and yet utterly ignored by the media in London:
I have been aware of Gordon Brown my entire adult life. I know the man reasonably well. I know he will not let the SNP down. You are all in for a treat…..
RodCrosby has calculated the tipping point for when the SNP vote starts to really eat into parliamentary gains from Labour as 33%. I had a more rough estimate of 35%.
So when this and other surveys find the SNP support at 40%+ we start to see a real possibility of Labour losing a large (10+) number of Scottish MPs. Also the LDs and Conservatives are clearly shedding votes to the SNP, but LDs have far more Scottish parliamentary seats to lose.
There are also indications that Salmond has concluded that because his main opponent is Labour, if he can cut the number of Labour MPs down it will erode the ability of Labour’s organisation to retain/gain MSPs.
Also Salmond has probably concluded that the LDs are his second target because of their past alignment with Labour.
26 - Well fair enough. But then i don’t see how your previous point impacts on my previous, previous point
I assumed that it had been made into response to it.
10 - now there really is no need for such cynicism, when has Gordon Brown ever gone missing before when there’s something unpleasant to be faced?
“what a shplendid job they are doing!”
Stuart Dickson, you are Sean Connery and I claim my £5. (But will settle for an autogragh!)
The poll although welcome is only a guide. However we did have an election in the Lochee by-election in Dundee on the 29 November where we took 49% of the first vote in a seat, giving its make-up was way beyond my expectation. There was a massive effort by the Liberals to make an impact with 4 different leaflets, visits by Nicol Stephens etc but it did not work. This would bear out the Youguv poll. As that seat makes up 20% of Dundee West for Westminster and takes in Labour’s strongest area that is encouraging.
The latest Labour saga might weaken their support even further and if Wendy Alexander stays might put people off from returning to Labour.
Alas now off to work.
31 Andy D, perhaps Gordon’s advisors realised that a happy smiling picture of him signing our rights away was about the very last thing he wanted for Christmas.
(Although I am a little confused - I thought that in New Labour, you don’t have to be present at anything, you are just digitally added to the photo later….)
33.
I am surprised that you are surprised that the SNP got 49% in Lochee when they got 47% in May.
33.
I am surprised that you are surprised that the SNP got 49% in Lochee when they got 47% in May.
If Brown had the nerve,(he doesn’t) he would call a referendum on Scottish independence, (get your retaliation in first) next May.
Lets get it on and over with asap, better than the Scots grumbling all the time.
A positive aspect of Scottish independence would be banning all those crap Scottish singers from the X-factor. Leon is just rubbish, he’s only got this far, because all the Jocks and ex-pat Jocks vote for him regardless. Same last year with the dire McGregor Brothers.
29. HF - “… because his main opponent is Labour, if he can cut the number of Labour MPs down it will erode the ability of Labour’s organisation to retain/gain MSPs.”
That is a very astute observation. And it is true too if you substitute the word “MPs” for the word “councillors”.
In my opinion, Labour’s disastrous result in May’s council elections is likely to have almost as big effect as the Lib-Lab coalition losing power in Edinburgh.
By slashing the number of Labour councillors (from 509 to 348) and Labour-controlled councils (from 13 to just 2) in May 2007, the SNP has utterly crippled the Labour Party in vast swathes of the country. And the amazing thing is that Labour simply do not know what to do! They are still floundering about on the canvas, gasping for air like a flabby old haddie. (Sorry for the appallingly mixed metaphor there.)
If Labour are to ever get into shape for the Euros in 2009, the UK GE in 2010, and the next Scottish general election in 2011, then they are going to have to face the plain, brutal truth: you lost, now get over it!
If we can cut the number of Labour MEPs down it will erode the ability of Labour’s organisation to retain/gain MSPs and MPs. The Scottish National Party intend to take on Labour on all fronts.
I think this was also the biggest single reason there was no election last month.
My God. Anyone listening to this chap on radio 5 defending 28day+? Is currently saying that the reason we need more time but America needs 2 is because America has elected police commissioners!
27 Mark Senior “..but the snag is that the Yougov panel may not be representative of the population in each region or even the country as a whole . In Scotland for example , they seem to be finding too many Greens.”
Quite right, Yougov can improve its chances of eliminating this through a bigger sample and some better selection techniques.
On the issue of the Greens, Mark you are right that there is a problem. At GE2005 they did not fight every seat. In Scotland I had a quick look at 10 seats and only found one GE2005 Green candidate. In these circumstances a party like the Greens which is not fielding candidates in most constituencies, needs some special techniques in apportioning their votes amongst parties that will field candidates maybe as a separate reporting page?
Or do we automatically just add 1% more to the Lib Dems figure to account for this problem?
A quick look at 10 in England found 2 Green candidates. I am sure someone has access to the overall picture for Green candidates at GE2005?
Just out of interest, what’s the SNP policy on the BBC? Presumably they want to break it up and have their own Scottish Broadcasting Corporation, or MacBeeb? Doubtless they’d revive Rab C Nesbitt running a Labour committee room…
For thos who didn’t take advantage yesterday,no worries,Coral haven’t changed their prices.
Does anyone know how old this market on Corals is ? It could be that they are just squaring their books after the events of September.
As Rosebud pointed out yesterday they still have LAB as favourites which is ludicrous !
riccardo and others……you could now consider backing CON 51-75 as a saver at 20-1 as I just did.
What I have done is to take 4-1 a CON MAJ up to 75 but weighted towards the lower end and to lay any CON OVERALL at 7-4.
On a less obvious note,I am now beginning to think that a SELL of LAB Seats could be a better move than the BUY of CON Seats.This is because I can now see LAB getting twatted in areas other than the South.
For example things could get terminal for them in Scotland and there could be Seats lost in Wales and the North without the CONS winning one of them.
This will need fancy footwork on my part but I would pay a few Seats right now to do it.
__________________
The Skoda of professional gamblers at your service.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I posted this elsewhere on the 30th Nov,since when Corals have changed their prices !
On the issue of the switch from a Buy of CON Seats to a Sell of LAB seats,this has proven more troublesome than I thought.Peter the Punter made a very interesting post where he said that CON seats should not go above 300 on the Spreads for quite a while.
This was most prescient but not helpful to my cause.
It seems I will have to pay a premium of two seats to make the switch.
38 - You’re right to some extent, Stuart, but I think you’re overstating the case a little. Remember that the 2007 Scottish local council elections were conducted under STV; Labour were always going to take a pasting in comparison because of the change of system.
I estimate 4-5 SNP gains off Labour in 2010. Maybe another 1/2 off the Libdems, I dunno.
Couldn’t tell you which seats… don’t have the data with me.
(and, yes, before Mark “Smug Git” Senior has a shot at me on changing by mind on this, yes, I did originally think 10 SNP gains, but I’ve now had a rethink and had a look at the data in the Times HoC guide!)
Things looking very bad for Gordon Brown. Not only are the SNP breathing down his neck but the news has got worse for Labour in Scotland since the survey.
Meanwhile sleaze at Westminster has got worse. We have Labour officials organising David Abrahams secret donations and Paul Myners having been shown to donate to Gordon Brown’s campaign in May when on appointment it was said he had not donated to any political party.
Ouch. In fact Double ouch…
38 Stuart Dickson “…slashing the number of Labour councillors (from 509 to 348) and Labour-controlled councils (from 13 to just 2) in May 2007, the SNP has utterly crippled the Labour Party in vast swathes of the country.”
Yes it would have that effect, I understand that Labour also pensioned off a lot of experienced councillors with large personal votes within the reductions in councillor numbers.
I still believe that after their poll rating, the key for a party’s fortune is the strength of its councillor and activist base. The Labour party has also had a 20 year trend of centralising power internally, starting with Kinnock. This has weakened its constituency grass roots.
“very much in second spot: in terms of elections, our focus is firmly on the next big test: Thursday 11 June 2009, the day of the European Parliament general election;”
the Euro 2009 elections in Scotland don’t look very interesting to me…prediction: 2 MEPs for SNP, 2 for Lab, 1 for Con, 1 for LD
46 but was it not all the fault of the last Tory govt?
(in before the nuLabour spin meisters).
44. Eddie
Yes, of course you have a point, but… whatever the cause was, the effect is precisely the same: crippling the Labour Party in vast swathes of the country.
(It is lagely meaningless now, but I suspect that about 60% of Labour’s councillor losses were due to the change to Single Transferable Vote, and about 40% to swings against them.)
O/T - Betfair now has markets for individual States for the US Democrat and Republican primaries.
47 “The Labour party has also had a 20 year trend of centralising power internally, starting with Kinnock. This has weakened its constituency grass roots.”
I think this is true of ALL parties, not just Labour. Not sure about the SNP, though.
48 - Is it not possible they could get 3?
Have the SNP ever considered organising in England?
39 Paul Linford thinks that the problems with Labour’s Scottish vote was the biggest reason for no GE.
At the time it was mentioned as a factor, when we looked at the available data my recollection is that the official polls were showing that Labour’s Scottish vote was holding up. But were there internal polls or a state of realism in the Scottish Labour MPs that affected the decision?
Finding that you have no MSP and 35% fewer councillors in your constituency, could have shocked the Scots Lab MPs?
38. “By slashing the number of Labour councillors (from 509 to 348) and Labour-controlled councils (from 13 to just 2) in ”
losing council control may not be a bad for thing in the end for Labour. At least they have a potential source of complaint (local council decision) not affecting them.
36. And in a lower turnout (which may have favoured SNP than Lab)
45. The 10 gains thing looks more likely now than when you made it
41. The Greens fielded 203 candidates in 2005 GE
15: alex, prepared a detailed reply, but on reflection a fairer answer is that I don’t know the final version. All these points have been discussed and there is a model based closely on the GE system, but the outcome depends on whether the Tories negotiate seriously (in which case we’ll need to take account of their preferences), what the LibDems would like, and so on. We should see a Bill early in 2008 so we’ll know then.
38
As an exiled Scot who revisits occasionally, I used to be struck by how 1970s the politics was: union dominated old styl Labour socialism. Yes councils have more money than England but they are so badly run - for the benefit of union members - (you need a COUNCIL electrician to change a light bulb in a school) - much of the extra money is wasted imo.
Reecntly the comments have changed. There is no doubt at local levels SNP councils have revitalised local politics. The SNP do seem committed to make a success of it.
I can see the SNP making large inroads into Labour: they (SNP) have established their credntials and shown they can govern competently.
I see no reason why there could not be a melt up of SNP votes at a GE and a melt down of Labour. Labour mix John Major levels of sleaze with gross levels of incompetence in Scotland. The result I suggest may be toxic for Labour.
Re 49, HF “46 but was it not all the fault of the last Tory govt?
(in before the nuLabour spin meisters). ”
*cough* Not according to my blog.
Here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
58
I’ll be sad to see you go! as soon as Scotland opts for independence, we will of course expect a purge of all you Jocks.
Bring back Hadrian, he had the right idea.
19 - The SNP (or anyone else for that matter) are allowed, with some limited caveats, to chose which questions they release to the public, so yes, if they asked both Westminster and Scottish voting intention questions and found one was good and one was bad they could release the good one and keep the bad one secret.
The caveat is that the pollster has to release things that contradict the results published by the client. This isn’t as broad as, they have to release bad thing to counteract good findings - I think it is more intended to catch a client who asked the same question in 5 different ways and then only wanted to release the best answer. I’ve never seen that happen in practice.
Mark - it depends exactly how Yougov asked the question. Prior to the Scottish elections YouGov were showing the Greens very low, Peter Kellner took the judgement call that the drop in their support was implausibly large and switched methodology to include the Greens in the question prompt, bumping up the amount of support they registered. The end result was that YouGov overestimated Green support. Maybe if the initial methodology had been kept all along YouGov’s Green figure would have been nearer the mark.
53. “Is it not possible they could get 3?”
everything is possible. Last time a 7% Lab lead over SNP gave both of them 2 seats.
I think 40/26/13/12 split (the yougov constituency vote) would give SNP 3 seats at the expense of LD seat
Bear in mind at the next GE there may be a major unwinding of anti Tory tactical voting replaced by anti Labour tactical voting. This could result in several gains for the SNP from Labour, the Tories taking say 3 seats from Labour and the Lib Dems taking perhaps 1 seat from Labour.
I think Paul Linford is partly right.
The crucial factor on internal Labour Polling was the retirement of JACK W who’s Jacobite party had previously split the SNP vote.
57 Nick P, thanks for the honesty.
That said it beggars belief that we had the PM saying yesterday “are you going to back our proposals” when these proposals are not defined.
A PM with integrity would have detailed those proposals otherwise he is asking for backing to a few broad ideas that lack any specifics. (Ah yes er 35, er 40, uhm 58 days of detention…)
Only a mug or the Govt awarding a contract would regard a few broad points as the basis for a commitment.
61 Anthony , interesting comment re Greens so we need to now whether the new poll had a Green prompt .
2007 SNP Holyrood gains..
Argyl & Bute
Cunninghame North
Dundee West
Edinburgh East
Falkirk West
Fife Central
Glasgow Govan
Gordon
Kilmarnock & Loudoun
Livingston
Stirling
Western Isles (already SNP at Wesminster level)
The “where they’re at Westminster level” is easy for some seats…but quite complicated for others (for ex Govan is split in many Glasgow constituencies)
56 Andrea “The Greens fielded 203 candidates in 2005 GE”
Thanks, just under 1 in 3 and a much lower ratio in Scotland.
66. Yep (as in, yep, we need to know that. Not as in yes, it did - I don’t know!)
My personal view is that the SNP may in fact be close to peaking.
The SNP heartland is Tartan Torydom and although the idea of a Scottish voice is obviously attractive, the fact is that support for independence is pretty much at a recent low. So a bit like the Bloc Quebecois or CiU in Catalonia, I think that they will do much better in the National (i.e. Scottish) than in the State (i.e. British) elections. They did well in the air war of the Scottish elections because thay have so much money. At the locals, you need organisation- which they do not have- and at Westminster you need a reason to vote for them, which they do not have (they want to abolish Westminster).
Salmond is so far a lucky politician, but he is also cocksure, and there are plenty of minefields for him to deal with- not least within his own- highly confused- party. Several journalists have noticed the emerging SNP-Tory axis that you can see in this poll, yet the SNP still asks us to beleiev that they are a “Democratic Socialist” party. However, I do not underestimate the power of the West of Scotland truly “Democratic Socialist” mac-ia and I think that their fight back will be fierce and bloody. I would keep my money in my pocket as far as the SNP is concerned.
Why should the Labour party be any less unpopular in Scotland than the rest of the UK ?
The Scots know a dud when they see one - even if Gordo is one of them.
The problem for the SNP, and potentially Labour, is that the majority of Westminster seats fall within a very narrow swing band. Even a uniform 10% swing only delivers three seats to the SNP from Labour. The tipping point starts to kick in from 12% on. Every extra point of swing after that delivers multiple seats. That kind of swing is equivalent to the SNP being 2% ahead of Labour.
(Of course, uniform national swing doesn’t exist any more - even within Scotland.)
Always nice to be honoured by the presence of the esteemed Anthony
Tell me Anthony, why have you omitted the August YouGov/Sunday Times poll of Scottish Westminster voting intention from your list of Scottish polls at UK Polling Report?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2284286.ece
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/scottish.pdf
Contrary to what the “unbiased” Mark Senior may opine, the last published Holyrood figures from YouGov were actually that poll in August. If we compare today’s YouGov with August’a YouGov then we get:
Constituency vote SNP: 40%(+8): LAB: 29%(-3): LD 13% (+1): CON 12% (n/c)
Regional list SNP: 34% (-1): LAB: 26% (-6): CON 13% (n/c): LD 13% (n/c): GRN 9% (+2-ish?)
68. HF. Greens saved deposits in 2005 were 24 and their avarage vote in contested constitunecy was 3.4
70 “Salmond is so far a lucky politician, but he is also cocksure, and there are plenty of minefields for him to deal with- not least within his own- highly confused- party”
He also has one other problem, Cicero - he looks like Shrek.
I tried…
Argyl & Bute: Westminster’s A&B include all the Holyrood one + 28% of Dumbarton
Cunninghame North: (all CN is in Ayrshire North and Arran along wiht 35% of C South)
Dundee West (Wesminster’s DW is almost all the Holyrood one +some parts of old DE and 1 ward from Angus)
Edinburgh East & Musselburgh (at Westminster level the Musselburgh part is in East Lothian)
Falkirk West (all in Falkirk along with 40% of Falkirk East)
Fife Central (it’s in Glenrothes at Westminster level along 16% of Kirkcaldy and 11% of Dunfermline East)
Glasgow Govan (34% in Glasgow Central, 34% in Glasgow South, 32% in Glasgow South West)
Gordon (73% is in Westminster’s Gordon)
Kilmarnock & Loudoun (all in K&L along with 17% of Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)
Livingston
Stirling (Westminster’s Stirling is all the Holyrood’s one + 22% of Holyrood’s Ochil)
Western Isles (already SNP at Wesminster level)
SNP have a much larger lead in England
75. Listen, Augustus, please please do not enter into that territory, or we may have to consider the physical appearance of “The Mouth of the South”:
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=782&id=1896542007
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/scotland/6921903.stm
http://worldofjack.blogspot.com/2007/02/new-definition-of-scaremongering.html
Thanks Stuart, I’m updating now and I was searching for that
stuard dickson, where can I find the full list of SNP Westminster candidates?
Are Labour going to really be in a stronger position in a GE delayed to 2010 than in 2007?
If the SNP can keep a steady ship and consolidate their Scottish parliament and council positions, Labour are probably going to be weaker in 2010. Delay could make a weak position worse.
Anyone know what Labour’s scottish membership numbers are now?
Wikipedia says “March 2006 the Scottish Labour Party had 18,800 members”. That would be down from 30,000 in 1997.
In contrast, the SNP reported 12,571 members in Jan 07 up 20% from 2004. The SNP might be fighting GE2010 with the same membership levels as Labour, around 15,000.
81. but will SNP be in a better position in 2010 than in 2007?
(actually I don’t have a clue on the answer and will depend on events).
As for 2011 Holyrood elections…Lab may be in a better position than 2007: they would probably be out of Wesminster government by that time
81. And HF, there is one other factor to consider there to: your average SNP activist, supporter and voter is likely to be about ten times more committed to get out there and canvass, to leaflet, to fund-raise, to write to the local rag, to wear a badge, to bung up a poster, to give grannie a lift to the polling station, to campaign, to debate, to convince, to persuade, to vote….. to win!
72: I think we’ll see a goodly amount of anti Labour tactical voting from Tories in Scotland.
Andrea et al.
Sorry, I just gotta go now!! Have fun. I am sure Marcia will be able to help you out when she pops back. I will have a wee skip in my step for the rest of the day now…
57 - “All these points have been discussed and there is a model based closely on the GE system, but the outcome depends on whether the Tories negotiate seriously (in which case we’ll need to take account of their preferences), what the LibDems would like, and so on”
Surely you’re not suggesting that the “proposals” as they stand are designed to be to Labour’s benefit?
That the principle and thought behind them is so well established that they will need changing according to other party’s ‘preferences’?
How well are the LibDems going to do in Scotland? After two Scots MPs as leader, now they will be faced with a very English leader.
How will that play?
Must be worth a seat or two to the SNP imo.
51. No access to Betfair here, whats the odds in S.Carolina?
Question Time tonight:
Douglas Alexander MP
Ken Clarke MP
Simon Sebag Montefiore
Allison Pearson
James Rubin
there is an interesting article on this poll in the guardian, whether it has made the edition in England is another matter.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/comment/0,,2222835,00.html
There is the inference that one party rule in Scotland, particularly in the West has had a corrosive effect on the judgement and the political culture of the Lab Party. How far the actions of the Alexanders have undermined confidence in Scottish Labour is a moot point, but trying to ‘fix’ the electoral system in May and then claiming that the other parties are also to blame takes a bit of cheek. Likewise claiming that rules not laws have been unintentionally broken.
Make of it what you will, but compared to the late J. P. McKintosh the present Scottish Labour figures are pygmies.
Re 89, Andrea, re question time, Wee Dougie has bottled it and pulled out.
82 Andrea good to be honest but you dont expect Labour to remain in UK Govt.
83 Stuart, morale of activists is a factor hard to define but the evidence from GE2005 indicates that the Conservatives and LDs mobilised a considerably greater proportion of their members in the UK than did Labour. It is quite conceiveable that the SNP could get 2 to 3 times from its members than Labour.
73 Stuart , you are clearly far more adept at selectively quoting statistics to ” prove ” your biased viewpoint than I am . Mike in his thread intro compared the poll figures with the actual Holyrood results . I pointed out that it was a fairer comparison to compare them with the immediate preelection Yougov poll - it stops people believing there has been a surge in Green support since May for one thing .
On a separate point due agree with Salmond that the SNP government are right to take the Trump developement decision out of the hands of the democratically elected local councillors . The SNP look just as much a centralising force as Labour ever was .
92. ” good to be honest but you dont expect Labour to remain in UK Govt”
isn’t what I said? At least it’s what I wanted to say
91. BBC website still lists him..they even put a pic of him on front page
93 should be do you not due !!!!
Having looked through the last few threads It’s a great disappointment to see that two of the left’s finest-Tyson and Innocent abroad- have gone native. I can understand that spending time on here would lead anyone to believe that Cameron and Osborne are your average left of center do-gooders and Brown is a sleazy crook with no table manners.
Well having not followed politics much for the last few weeks I couldn’t agree less! Brown was organizing soup kitchens at the age of ten-that’s ten years younger than Cameron when he went on his restaurant rampage as a member of the Bullingdon club with fellow front bencher and prospective Tory Mayor of London Boris Johnson.
I’m confident for the first time in weeks that Brown will turn this round and Labour will be level pegging in the polls quite soon. He’s taken time to find his feet but give me an honest compassionate politician any day than the tinsel and glitter of Cameron Osborne and Johnson.
ah, no, they just changed the page whilst I was posting (b*astards!) and the 5th guest is to be announced…who will be sent instea of Dougie?
When some Labourite goes on hiding, they usually get Tony Benn instead…
If you consider the seats individually, you will see that the only seat where the SNP are within striking distance of Labour is Ochil and South Perthshire, where the Labour majority over SNP is 1.47%. The next most vulnerable seat for Labour is Dundee West, where they have a majority of 14.56%. The SNP aren’t in much of a position to strike in any other Constituencies either.
While no-one is expecting the Lib Dems to make much of an impact in this election, they are in quite a good strategic position in terms of marginal seats. The most marginal seat in Scotland is Edinburgh South, which Labour has less than a 1% lead over the Liberal Democrats. Local MP Nigel Griffiths has been working the seat hard, but so have the local Liberal Democrats. My feeling there is that Griffiths may just hag on my the skin of his teeth after showing some mettle over the Trident issue. Aberdeen South is an attractive target for the Lib Dems, with a 3.24% Labour majority, but despite the mere 5% majority in Edinburgh North and Leith, Mark Lazarowicz will be tough to oust.
What will be interesting will be the SNP-Tory fights, with the Conservatives sitting right behind the SNP in both Perth North & Perthshire and Angus. Watch out for a Conservative resurgence in the borders, with David Steel’s old seat of Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk a potential Conservative hit. The Tories will also attempt to unseat locally popular Gavin Brown with former Shadow Scottish Secretary Peter Duncan, who lost the seat in 2005.
A Scottish seat “to watch” for a potential suprise IMO can be East Lothian. The Lab MP is attracting lots of negative press
Re 94, Andrea, “91. BBC website still lists him..they even put a pic of him on front page”
Well, the blogosphere is alight calling him a bottler for not fdoing it.
See here:
http://www.order-order.com/2007/12/why-has-wee-dougie-bottled-it-again.html
as an example.
96. so basically what your saying is ‘everything will go well for Brown from now’. More of a heavily slanted opinion than a real prospect.
99. Is that Nigel Griffiths ?
re 96 Roger “I’m confident for the first time in weeks that Brown will turn this round and Labour will be level pegging in the polls quite soon.”
Labour are doing that badly? Will they poll below 20% now Roger has predicted their rise?
Re 97 andrea “ah, no, they just changed the page whilst I was posting (b*astards!) and the 5th guest is to be announced…who will be sent instea of Dougie?
When some Labourite goes on hiding, they usually get Tony Benn instead…”
102. Ann Moffat
103: ‘I wonder what Tony will say about the latest Labour scandals?’
‘Waffle, waffle, Atlee, waffle, Wilson, when I, waffle’?
96. Well with a nod to Richard Curtis and Ben Elton…When all else fails a complete inability to stare facts in the face will always see you through..
Oh and that bit about soup kitchens was pretty nasty as well.
It’s hard to judge from London how much of an impact the SNP are having on the basis of their policies, but a Labour Party in dire straits plus full support for a referendum on Scottish independence is obviously going to help the SNP along.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
88 Yokel
Betfair South Carolina Primary odds
SC Dem Primay: Hillary (1.04), Obama (1.5), Edwards (2.5), Richardson Biden Dodd Gravel Kucinich all (7), any other (2.5)
SC GOP Primary: Guiliani, Thompson, Romney all at (1.5), McCain Huckerbee both at (4.5), Paul Tancredo Hunter all at (7), any other (2.5)
This may be a bit of a curve ball, but if the cons are only polling 12% in Scotland & 41 % overall with you gov, the English vote must be around the 46%/47% mark which must surely lead to more gains then suggested in any of the seat calculators??
96 Roger. Yes, there have been a few hints this week that this is not the end of the world the pb.com Tories have been hoping for.
Brown’s public performances are much improved, the Evening standard claimed Brown bested Cam in the HoC for the first time. He looks far more relaxed and the team seems to be pulling together. He strategy of dealing with party funding looks to be working.
In the meantime Cameron seems unable to come up with anything new or interesting to say and singularly failed to land a killer blow in the past two weeks.
Still not great, but clearly not fatal.
96. Roger, I am prepared to accept that Brown’s political career was initiated by sincere beliefs but the question remains - is he any good at running the country?
I sometimes think the relationship between Brown and Blair is like the relationship between Keith Halliwell and the playwright Joe Orton (leaving aside the sexual connetation). Halliwell (Brown)was the lumbering gawky one who had a burning desire to be writer (politician). He was well-read and knowledgeable. Orton (Blair) was the lightweight charmer who latched on to Halliwell’s dream and suddenly demonstrated a talent. Halliwell could only glower while Orton had the success and the popularity, which he felt by right should have come to him.
That relationship ended in tragedy. Already one Labour MP has described Brown’s premiership as a “Shakespearean tragedy.”
I reported on Tuesday:
On Betfair a 0.5 % cut is 34.0, (33-1 in old money); 0.25 is avilable at 2.62 (13/8) and no change is 1.61 (8/13).
Current prices 0.5% cut 23.0; 0.25% cut 1.52 (Now favourite) ; No change 3.15%
Am happy to say my bet on 0.5% cut at 33 was paid for by someone who took my layt at 15.0.
Am afraid 0.25 is likely which will be fine but really make money at 0.5%. 0.75 was suggested on Today as what is needed - but I am sure the the Bank wont do that!! So just taken £2 cover at 600.0!!
Re 110, Jonathan “In the meantime Cameron seems unable to come up with anything new or interesting to say and singularly failed to land a killer blow in the past two weeks.”
Have you seen this:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/12/labour-lawyers-organised-donorgate.html
Trust me, this can get worse.
On top of that we have Paul Myners who hasn’t donated money to any political party being appointed in July when he in fact had donated to Gordon Brown’s campaign in May. See here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-labour-sleaze-over-paul-myners.html
You couldn’t make this up!
Whats wrong Labour posters? Cat got your tongue?
Oooh, and the hits keep coming in. You could write a small book on the last few weeks.
“Will Labour get rid of Gordon?
Labour would get rid of Gordon — if the plotters had a real candidate”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/388831/labour-would-get-rid-of-gordon-if-the-plotters-had-a-real-candidate.thtml
117. Ed Balls couldn’t run a bath - PM - lol !
113 - I don’t see that that makes things worse. All parties are wandering around trying to find loopholes in the law on party finance, and we all know of many that are being exploited.
All that says is that one of these supposed loopholes, wasn’t, and in this case Labour’s lawyers got it wrong. It would be far worse if the whole thing had been organised thinking that it was illegal.
Are you seriously saying that the Conservatives haven’t been frantically checking all their current donation methods to ensure that they are all within the law, despite some not being within the spirit of the law? And who is the judge of that? Their lawyers. Fortunately for them they seem to have better lawyers.
93 Mark shurely shome mishtake????
- Stuart , you are clearly far more adept at selectively quoting statistics to ” prove ” your biased viewpoint than I am
you are the best stats spinner on PB by a country mile, don’t sell yourself so short.
Re 116, Cuddles, “Oooh, and the hits keep coming in. You could write a small book on the last few weeks.”
If you throw in the fact that the canooist being listed a dead as opposed to missing (I understand that ruling is being reconsidered) requires a ministerial signature to do it in less than 7 years then it is just possible to get a fil script out of it. That is however wild speculation
Still, as you could not have made the rest up, nothing would surprise me. I wonder if teh wife donated to Labour?
See me up thread Benedict115, but when you see the needless unpleasant rudeness to Mark Senior - who is completely up front about his alegiance, and always argues cogently, not sure I’m up to it.
For what its worth I would rather have the chaos of the current situation regarding donation to state funding. Abrahams broke the law, but the law was an ass in this respect.
Re 119, Alex “Are you seriously saying that the Conservatives haven’t been frantically checking all their current donation methods to ensure that they are all within the law, despite some not being within the spirit of the law?”
My understanding is that was all checked before donations were accepted. Very carefully with clear lines of responsibility for each donation. It is called due dilligence.
All this talk of Cameron not delivering a killer blow is a bit fanciful. Landing a killer blow during PMQ’s is nigh on impossible, as the PM always has the last comment. All Cameron has to do is keep raising issues that are in the press, some that are not to get them bubbling again, and come ou with a goodish line. The fact that some labour supporters are crowing over the fact that their man isn’t looking incoherant anymore shows how far he has fallen.
Whenever someone from the Conservatives gets up and says “everyone knew the party funding laws were brought in to introduce transparency, how can we believe Labour were so stupid as to think this arrangement was OK?” etc, then they’re really being disingenuous. Because the Conservatives have several funding vehicles that in effect preserve donor anonymity, even if it is via a more indirect route.
The answer would be that they checked out the legality before they accepted the donations, but then now we have a story that Labour did the same thing. Just got it wrong.
118-Ok, Balls can’t be PM, but Wee can!!!!=)
[96] Let me assure you, Roger, that I haven’t started to support the Blue Harpies, Cameroon or otherwise. Nor have I been a Labour supporter since long before this site was but a gleam in Our Genial Host’s eye
OTOH, I do think that Labour need a “time out” to look at themselves (rosy scenario, they may of course just fall to pieces) and I am not alone in thinking that there is far less ideological difference between Labour and Tory than once there was. What I do believe in is good quality value-for-money public services (the “entitlement culture” to our friendly Blue Harpy tax exiles) and that the way to provide them is through localisation wherever possible. All opposition parties sign up for this, but in government centralise because they want to defend standards.
I heard the other day of a former colleague (a sometime Area Chief Exec in Tower Hamlets) who was hired as a consultant to run a facilitation session to explain to stakeholders in a deprived part of North London how to bid successfully for government money. At the end of the week-end he was battered and bruised: none of them had the slightest interest in the ostensible purpose of the exercise, and every interest in denouncing each other with every insult they could lay their hands on.
It is this sort of attitude that leads politicians in office - irrespective of Party - to despair. It’s something that hasn’t changed in my lifetime - Crossman’s diaries are full of it back in the 1960s. Creating a civic culture is the most urgent task our political class faces - and I do mean “creating”, not re-creating - the English (particularly) have always had a passive attitude to public life.
I’d like to offer a challenge to my fellow Peebies. Why should people devote their energies to party politics when the evidence is that local non-partisan campaigning is both more effective and more emotionally satisfying?
125. yes they did. they were doing something illegal, and the tories weren’t. That’s it in a nutshell.
However, Benedict, I admit i haven’t fully read the story, and recognise that it may not have been the Labour Party’s personal lawyers that did it, as opposed to some ad hoc legal advice, so accept your point about clear lines of responsibility etc.
Just pointing out that some of the holier than thou stuff is a bit much.
Bo e as always cautious 0.25% cut .
Re 122, John Wheatley “See me up thread Benedict115, but when you see the needless unpleasant rudeness to Mark Senior - who is completely up front about his alegiance, and always argues cogently, not sure I’m up to it.”
To be fair mark can look after himself and is not always pleasant to Conservatives. Not as bad as ColinW though
“For what its worth I would rather have the chaos of the current situation regarding donation to state funding.”
So would I. State funding would really irritate the voters as well.
“Abrahams broke the law, but the law was an ass in this respect.”
How so?
Anyone know anything about the scandal supposedly brewing in London?
130. Some would say that cutting rates in the face of rising inflation was reckless…
131. I can’t comment on Mark Senior vs SNP, I never noticed. I only care about SNP at Westminster and therefore miss many Holyrood discussions. However, although Mark is obviously LibDem biased and hates Tories more than Labour, I find him to have a good solid core of analysis when it comes to Lab-Tory contests. His posts on votes on the ground during the bounce told me that the bounce wasn’t real and in an election we’d do way better than the polls predicted. Kept me sane.
128 - All I’m saying is that this particular Guardian story can be reported two ways.
1) Labour connived to subvert the law on party funding to preserve the anonymity of one of the largest donors.
2) Lawyers cleared Labour’s controversial scheme to preserve the anonymity of one of their largest donors in advance of it commencing.
Bad as the situation is for Labour, I can’t see how the second interpretation makes it worse
re 130. Well that’s really bad news for savers. Nobody ever speaks up for us.
117. Labour will not find it so easy to get rid of Gordon Brown. You think he schemed for 10 years and shouted at Blair in order to be turfed out in disgrace before the GE? Gordon would not go quietly. He would rather go to the Queen and call an election. Anyway, Labour party rules make regicide incredibly difficult. Thankfully - as I admit Labour replacing Gordon is my biggest worry.
136 - Put it in the stock market, Mike