YouGov says the “leak” was wrong
February 8th, 2006-
But Times husting survey has Huhne ahead
I have just recieved the following email from Peter Kellner, the head of YouGov.
Mike
In common with other polling organisations, YouGov has a strict policy of not commenting on purported leaks of private surveys.However, on this occasion, I have been authorised by our client to say that all the figures that you, and Guido Fawkes, attributed yesterday to our recent poll of Lib Dem members are wrong.
In order to prevent this descending into a silly game in which people guess other numbers and seek a reaction from YouGov, I should add that this is the only comment I shall make on the survey unless authorised by our client.
Regards
Peter
-
The raises the question of why whoever commissioned the survey is holding onto the figures? For the real data clearly does not help their man.
The Times this morning carries the following which although not a poll is nevertheless interesting.
The Times spoke to 174 Lib Dems and asked how they intended to vote. Three were removed from the sample: two because they were attached to candidates’ campaign teams and a third who was not a party member. Of the remaining 171 members, 52 (30.5 per cent) said that their first preference votes would go to Chris Huhne, 42 (24.5 per cent) to Sir Menzies Campbell and 32 (19 per cent) to Simon Hughes. The remaining 45, or 26 per cent, were undecided
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
It will be interesting to see how long the Huhne team keep the figures up on their web site. If they stay there too long, it’ll be their turn to face accusations of desperation.
Best Betfair price on Campbell now 1.85 as against 1.94 a couple of hours ago. Huhne at 2.14.
Incidentally - well done to those who stuck their neck out earlier to venture the view that these figures were fake.
You should mention in the initial post that the survey of 174 members wasn’t a random or geographically representative sample, but was in fact taken of people leaving a hustings meeting at Cardiff University.
what a shower of *hit the liberal democrats are.
Huhne now at 2.2
(Someone else comment? Sorry to hog this space to myself - I’m going to work in a minute anyway. :))
Huhne now at 2.24.
This is a very serious matter. Is Mike going to make an apology?
In the absence of much media coverage, particularly on TV, focusing on the candidates, I wonder how “ordinary” LibDem members are gaining information about the contest on which to base their votes.
Obviously, all have received the manifestos, and a small number will have attended the hustings. But while their Tory counterparts were bombarded by almost saturation commentaries on the merits of DD and DC, the LibDem electorate may, to some extent, be in the dark about making their choice.
This is not intended to be a partisan dig, still less a criticism, but other things being equal, that - and the absence of polls - might indicate that the two with higher name recognition (Campbell and Hughes)have an advantage. And that Thursday’s QT could be decisive?
Lib Dem poll ratings rising, maybe a reasonable to good by election result tomorrow, and they haven’t got a leader!!
Does this say we rate the impact of a leader too much.
Really Cameron should be sailing away, I would have thought the Cons would have been been 5-10% clear by now. Dare one venture that policies are more important to the voters than they appear to be to the media.
5 - still one step up from you then
Huhne back at 2.2
re 8. Fair point. I put this out yesterday with the following caveat which was highlighted There is no way that I can verify the accuracy of this information
Let whoever has the real figures reveal them - or would they put his/her man in an even worse light?
Huhne now back at 2.24 again.
it may have been commmissioned by a big money gambler though, who would have no interest in the figures being published.
10 - Cameron has picked up 4-5pts from the Lib Dems but to win a GE he needs to start taking votes from Labour and so far he hasn’t really done that. If the Lib Dems at least manage to consolidate their position at around 18% then it will be interesting to see what strategy Cameron pursues. His most recent u-turn on Iraq has come in for some fairly embarrassing ridicule. The mood music may be good but he may be reaching the point where he is beginning to stretch people’s credulity with all his position changes. Maybe time for him to take stock?
That’s a bit harsh, Printz. If Mike had presented them as anything but an anonymous leak of whose veracity none of us can take for granted, of course he should apologise. But in fact he was open about the source of the information, and anyone who bet on the basis of it should have done so with their eyes open to the risk the data was fake.
The remoured poll has been reported by the Scotsman too. is it the only newspaper to mention it?
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=198072006
Huhne’s and Ming’s camp denied to have commissioned it
13 - Mike, you did put them up with a caveat. But then later on you posted that the absence of denials should be taken as confirmation.
I thought that Bobby made a convincing critique of the figures (not necessarily identifying their source). so convincing that I reproduced it on the blog.
I´m hearing good reports from Dunfermline btw.
10 - There should be another round of PV verification this morning of votes cast more recently in the byelection. It should give some indication as to whether or not the Lib Dems have been gaining momentum and may be reflected one way or another in the betting markets later on today.
19 - 19 not 10 above!
Mike put them up with a caveat, but Chris Huhne’s site still has a link to them on Guido’s website saying ‘Unofficial results only.’ Unbelievable.
13 - I am sorry Mike, but this is a serious matter.
You crossed the line in publishing those figures. It was unethical, especially on your betting site where money can be made by influencing election results. You are discrediting your own site, which is the best of its kind.
What you did was to publish figures of a private survey that belongs to whoever commissioned it. Not to you. Nor anyone else. And as it turned out those figures were wrong.
Your headline was: “YouGov poll leak: It is very close.” Unless you are doubting Peter Kellner, that was not a “leak” but a set of figures that were not YouGov’s figures. We may as well have had any figures and any polling organisation and called it a leak.
Don’t you think that it is up to the owner of those survey results to choose how, when and if to publish the results? The onus is not on the owner of the survey to publish, which seems to be your defence. It is private property.
Those figures are going to be banded about on the internet, in campaign material, probably in newspaper columns and a set of bogus figures could affect the outcome of this leadership election. If there’s one thing we should all stand up for, that is fair elections.
You should apologise.
This all has a very nasty smell about it. As I said yesterday, and was criticised for doing so - ramp ramp ramp ramp ramp.
Re. where the guilt lies: I also think Mike jumped the gun yesterday in giving these rumours excessive credence, but I also think the pollsters should not allow situations like this to develop. If they want to do private surveys they should remain private until the client authorises publication.
Assume that MS believed it was a leak. GF did too. Good-faith mistake. Caveat bettor, frankly.
Chris Huhne should apologize if he does not immediately remove this from his site, however. He has responsibilities that the owners of blogs do not.
Blogs live and die on rumour. If you don’t want rumour, go to the mainstream media. Nobody forces you to read or to wager.
the worst thing is that huhne’s site is still quoting the figures and has a link to a rubbish gossip site.
10, 16 - Cameron has lifted the tories from the 30-33 bracket to the 37-40 bracket in a little over two months the GE is likely to be almost 4 years away, I’d say he’s started off pretty well in comparison to a party who is taking positive signs out of an 18% poll rating, that would destroy you at a GE! (people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones).
A By Election on the borders of the probable future leaders of Lib Dems and Labour will also have little or no resemblance on how well the tories are doing nationally at present, May however will be a different kettle od fish!
23 - I see Printz is demanding apologies again. Printz, while you are down at B&Q, could you pick up a set of alan keys and a bucket of grout for me? (Older readers will get the reference, others can go back to sleep).
Well well, I have complained for years about Lib dem election tactics; down and dirty rumour-mongering, unattributed leaked information, insinuations, misinformation and snyde personal assasination.
Anything, in fact, apart from the policies.
And it seems from the evidence so far that the Lib Dem leadership campaign is staying true to form.
How much more caution could be put on the numbers:
Quote from my blog
“Safety Warning! Handle with care! You Judge!
An anonymous source which Guido suspects is not a million miles away from Camp Huhne.”
What is all of this rubbish that some people are posting. The Times poll gives Huhne a massive lead, and the YouGov poll is simply confidential. The evidence we have is that Huhne is now the strong favourite, and the market is mis-pricing Menzies as the weak favourite. Its as simple as that. No doubt over the next few days Huhne will move to be the strong favourite.
Maybe the apology is due to Jacky Ashley who rightly said too much political gambling was self-serving and could even affect the results. She was roundly booed from most on here but what we’ve seen these last few days proves her point.
Dishonest polls, dishonest ‘knowledge’ of postal votes and dishonest ‘inside information’ not only makes the the punter money but CAN affect the result. The stuff we’ve seen on these boards the last few days makes the Lib Dem phoney bar charts look kindergaten. The Scotsman for instance has just used this bogus poll in it’s paper. Gamblers getting a rise on other gamblers is one thing but this goes further than that. ‘Will Macauley’ for example just uses one post after another to try to destroy the character of Ming Campbell by Reporting rumours on several threads. Does he work for one of the other candidates or is he from another party or is he trying to make a fast buck?
I don’t include Mike in any of this. He runs an honest site and tells things as as he sees them. Just occasionally he makes a genuine mistake. It’s just unfortunate that some posters aren’t as straight as he is.
Actually if we did get 18% at a GE I rather doubt it would destroy the party I’d guess it would cost about 15 seats.
31. The Times survey is as representative as a poll of all Hemming’s girlfriends and the Yougov poll has been denied.
Clearly this raises the question whether the leakage was meant to benefit Huhne and/or to damage Campbell and Hughes.
Fred. The pollsters didn’t make the surveys public. They just sent them round in the normsal way and people who had been asked to participate made them public. I don’t see how they could have asked their respondents to keep the poll secret.
Jon at 33 - don’t guess, go and do the excercise on Baxter and you lose 44 seats if you poll at 18% (with Lab 36 and Con 38).
Huhne favourite! The Tories must be licking their lips - a Euro fanatic who wants to scrap the pound with a 500 vote majority. Why are the Lib Dems sleepwalking into this nightmare? Nothing less than they deserve though.
Peter Black (who was there, as they say in Wales) has an interesting analysis on the times figures from the point of view of a Hughes supporter.
http://peterblack.blogspot.com/2006/02/opinion-polls.html
37.”don’t guess, go and do the excercise on Baxter and you lose 44 seats if you poll at 18% (with Lab 36 and Con 38). ”
With the LD, uniform swing need to be taken even more carefully than with the other parties.
37 - Marcus - we all know that performing an “excercise” [sic] with Baxter is fairly meaningless due to it using UNS.
Putting something reasonable into Baxter would see us down to 1 seat in Cornwall… obviously this is possible but I would say it is extremely unlikely almost regardless of what the overall share was.
41 Oh yes, Tabman. It is when it shows you being wiped out, yes. It wasn’t if I remember a few months back when it showed you making gains.
Tabman Baxter can indeed only give indicative figures but if the Tories are at or near 40% and you at 18% or less, then you are toast at a GE.
43 - Marcus, no one would be happier than I were you to base your strategy on the Predictions of Baxter, old boy!
Incidentally, did it forecast the results of Torbay correctly?
40/41 - Martin Baxter’s site doesn’t use a uniform swing, which would actually be much nicer to the Lib Dems. It used a modified uniform swing, which reduces the Lib Dem vote *proportionally* according to how much support they currently have in the seat, not at a flat rate across the country. (for example, say the Lib Dems dropped to three quarters of their 2005 support - about 17%. On a uniform swing you would deduct 6 percentage points from the Lib Dem support in each and every seat. On Baxter’s modified calculator you would reduce the Lib Dem support in every seat by a quarter)
44 It does depend a little on the tactical voting unwind as well.
I can’t make up my mind whether this unwind will be greater if the lib dems go clearly to the left of labour - socialism frightens the middle classes - or whether it will be greater if they come closer to the tories - why vote lib dem they’re the same as conservatives. Any thoughts?
44 - If ….
I’ve run those figures through Baxter, and very generously given Labour 32%. Con maj 4.
However, you’re far from reducing Labour to 32% (most polls have you neck and neck) - therefore no Tory majority.
FPTP is a be-atch, isn’t it
Sorry to be right Mike.
On the Times poll, no great surprise there, Huhne’s been doing o.k. at hustings while Hughes has been struggling to get the balance right between grass-roots tub-thumping and gravitas, pulling off neither particularly well. He also tends to get sulky and demotivated when he knows he can’t win. Campbell on the other hand has a cold at the moment which can’t have helped in Cardiff.
43/44 - May I suggest that you approach your friendly neighbourhood spreadbetting firm with a copy of your Baxter prediction under your arm? They will be more than happy to relieve you of your money. Clearly, the Lib Dems are likely to lose seats to the Tories if their vote is down and the Tories’ vote is up in 2009 - but I would suggest the Baxter formula is just a pleasant fantasy for you as you both know really.
46. well, our (well, I’ve understood Tabman) point was that it applied the same formula to all seats.And I think our point still stands.
And it makes sense to use a modified swing: otherwise the LD should give votes back in Blaenau Gwent!
Yes Guido but Mike implied his informant was not you so the information had now come from two different informants and was therefore likely to be true. (
(No offense intended!)
47 - “Lib Dems … Socialism …”
What are you studying, Anna? You’re making me embarressed for the reputation of my Alma Mater
Though Huhne would be toast even if he had been elected leader and scored the winning goal in the World Cup final.
31. Will Macauley, you are sad. The Times ‘poll’ was of 171 people walking out of a hustings at which it has been acknowledged that Ming (with a bad cold by all accounts) didn’t give his best performance. 25% still undecided.
53 It’s the 60% tax rate on high earners that does it… My middle class friends do equate many lib dem policies with socialism no matter what distinction political scientists make!
46 - thanks for the clarification, Anthony. Sorry for the mis-use of the term UNS (and thanks for the understanding, Andrea), but the point is that I would be wary of making any predictions on the basis of the same event happening in any seat.
As James points out, Marcus should put the mortgage on the outcome!
Any Liberal Democrat looks at polls with a huge pinch of salt - ISTR Bob Worcester before the last three general elections predicting we’d be wiped out on some sort of uniform swing.
(Some pollsters never had any credibility anyway).
The Times stats are unrepresentative in that they only reflect a subset of this electorate. What they do represent is a consistent impression that Chris Huhne has gained great momentum in this campaign - something that Peter, Valerie et al your snipes can’t hide.
[37] We discussed Baxter’s shortcomings as a predictor yesterday IIRC. For one thing, at both the last two elections there has been “turn and churn” between Conservatives and Lib Dems (i.e. each has won seats off the other) and I can’t see why that won’t happen again next time, short of a 1997-type landslide for the Cameroonies, in which case the Lib Dems will take seats off Labour too. Particularly since they won’t waste their efforts on a Tory “decapitation” strategy again…
47 - I suspect Cameron’s “we’re all liberals now” tosh (I think Rik and Marcus have formally declared it to be pure cant) plays into the Lib Dems’ hands in held seats and hinders them in Tory held seats. Why vote for some random plonker in Torbay when you can have good ol’ Adrian Sanders, who’s basically all part of Cameron’s mushy middle anyway?
58. Yes, Chris Huhne has gained great momentum in this campaign. That doesn’t make him a great leader.
56 -
60% tax rate?
(i) the policy was 50% on earnings over £100k (ie, earnings below £100k are taxed at the lower marginal rates; every £1 earned ABOVE £100k is taxed at 50%)
(ii) If that isn’t an argument for introducing “life-skills” into schools, I don’t know what is [help - I'm turning into Jack W!!!]
56 - where do you get 60% from?
37 - This is 2006 not 2009 and how often does the principal opposition party go on to poll at the same or a higher level when the GE actually arrives. I’m old fashioned and believe that votes in ballot boxes count for more than snapshot opinion polls. Since the beginning of the year local election results have been pretty mixed for both the Tories and Lib Dems with Labour the main losers if anyone. Whether they win Dunfermline or not the Lib Dems seem on course for a pretty impressive result in light of current circumstances. The May elections will be the real test of how the parties are actually performing and will probably provide the usual mixture of messages.
60 But the big question in seats like Torbay is whether the true labour voters will support the lib dems to keep the tories out, or whether they simply won’t care enough to vote tactically…
59 - Have I sniped? I posted a link to Peter Black, no more!
I find the Huhne has Mo argument boring.
46 - Thanks Anthony for an intelligent explanation of why Baxter forecasts must be taken with a pinch of salt . Marcus should keep on exchanging Emails with Rik W complaining how it was dirty Lib Dem tactics and not the fault of their own campaigns that caused them to lose at the last GE .
Tell your friends not to worry Anna they may not be a high earners and then they’d have everything to gain….. And if they were perhaps they wouldn’t mind helping those less well off?
It’s a win-win situation!
60 - Is Adrian Sanders a top hotelier?
63 - it is typical Tory misrepresentation of Lib Dem policies. Look for more of it from them over the coming years.
Some clue about the client for the YouGov surveys might be drawn from the code they give them. Each survey has a three letter code followed by eight numbers. The three letters are generally quite descriptive of the client ; e.g. TEL = Telegraph, FIN = Financial Times, YGX = YouGov.
The three surveys commissioned during the LD leadership race which I’ve completed all have the code IBE. That’s the first time this has been used in the two years I’ve been a YouGov panelist. I can’t come up with an answer from this… over to you Sherlocks.
62/63 Sorry I never really bothered to read the lib dem manifesto with any care. I gave up on them entirely when they voted in favour of letting 16 year olds smoke dope, but decided that they couldn’t be trusted to buy goldfish at the pet store.
A 50% tax rate is still viewed with horror BTW.
59.”in which case the Lib Dems will take seats off Labour too. ”
ok, it could be likely, but it’s not a 100% assured thing. Big swings aren’t always followed by other big swings (ex Chesterfield, St Helen South, Birmingham Perry Bar)
“A 50% tax rate is still viewed with horror BTW.”
Interesting use of the passive.
Tabman. Lie down dear.
Baxter is not very accurate I agree; but it completely destroys the idea postulated by some of you Lib Dems that a drop in support on the scale that you have had is ‘no problem’.
If we win over 36% of the vote at the next election, whenever it is, I believe your seats in Westminster will be halved, unless your share of the popular vote goes UP.
Do you really believe you will get more than 22% of the vote at the next GE with Huhne, Hughes or Campbell in charge?
71 independant betting expert!
65 - Anna, I discussed the Torbay result with Ken Clarke on election night [:oops: namedrop, namedrop ...
], who to my surprise happened to be sitting next to me at the count as that result was announced. We agreed that the reduction in the Lib Dem majority was almost entirely as a result of tactical unwind from Lib Dem to Labour (going against the trend os most other parts of the country, an possibly reflecting local issues re the council). The Tory vote numbers were pretty much unchanged from 2001.
72 - to be fair, I’m not a fan of the 50% rate and (without giving much away from the inside - you can pick up the currents from the newspapers) it’s pretty unlikely to be policy next time round. Combine this with Cameron’s rowing back from pretty much any tax cut and it would be pretty risky to strategise on the assumption that our tax policy is going to look significantly more “socialist” than yours.
65 - Yes (although Torbay is a bad example because many/most went back to Labour principally over the running of the council in 2005). A key law of politics is that true Labour people hate the Tories and true Tories hate Labour - and if you ask them in the right seat and convince them that the numbers stack up they will vote tactically. Policy positioning over PFIs, Asbos and whatever else doesn’t really matter a whole lot to tactical voting (although it matters greatly to overall levels of credibility/support).
68 Most of my friends who earn a *lot* of money already tithe + more to the church, as this is the way they are happy helping those less well off.
I have several friends who find the state playing Robin Hood quite offensive. They don’t need to be told/forced to contribute to society.
58 - You are probably confused. Another Peter posted this morning, not me.
72 - Anna - you’re allowed to stwitch off the direct feed to the CCO propaganda machine automated feed once in a while
If you believed everything that came out of party conferences you’d hanging and flogging asylum seekers whilst singing Rule Britannia in Union Flag boxers.
What an image …
82 Tabman - But I don’t wear boxers!!
79 - James, we’re getting our story straight at least
82 - Not sure the feed is working anyway - isn’t what Anna finds offensive precisely what Oliver Letwin has been proposing and Vince Cable has been retreating from? Anna - shall I pop a membership slip in the post?
82 - Anna, you can’t expect me to mind-read as well as be a shining wit (apologies to Rev. Spooner)!
79 Funny you should say that. I would consider myself to be a true Tory, but I would rather tactically vote Labour against lib dem than visa versa. Fortunately, in Surrey at any rate, I’m never put in that position!
72 And yet you will trust a leader of your own party who will not answer the question as to whether he has taken Class A drugs - a strange mentality !!
85 - James, some of this old software (Conwin ‘79) is a bit difficult to reprogramme
87 - is it only 100 years ago that Surrey was virtually a Tory-free zone … ?
86 Please don’t take offence Tabman… but you do realise I’m female don’t you? No mind reading necessary…
The bar chart has gone from http://www.chris2win.org now.
88 I don’t actually have a problem with the idea of legalising cannabis (I really don’t care I wouldn’t use it anyway), it was the goldfish policy that really upset me!
90 5 X my lifetime in fact
“I have several friends who find the state playing Robin Hood quite offensive. They don’t need to be told/forced to contribute to society”.
The trouble is that the church might decide that the A+E department at Rochdale Royal Infirmary isn’t the best place to put their funds. Sometimes the ’state’ have to make these choices.
Tabman You must have a special ‘winning here’ version of Baxter ‘cos when I put in 40, 32 and 18 for the LibDems it does indeed give a Tory majority of 4 but a LibDem representation of just 22 MPs. So you are right, FPTP is terrible.
On your own scenario, you are toast.
91 - yes I did realise; but given the variety of female undies and the potential effect of mentioning them on some of the male contributors, I played safe!
94 - agree; we do not live in the middle ages now.
94 However, the state does poke it’s nose into matters that have traditionallly been better served through voluntary and charitable endeavours.
93 - you should campaign within the Tory party about this, as an Animal Welfare Bill recently passed with Tory support which put much tighter control on pet ownership. The honourable member for Twickenham tells me it even banned giving goldfish as prizes at funfairs!
Straying somewhat off topic, I was interested in the earlier discussions about the likely outcome of the London borough elections in May - and the impact of current political events.
In the area I know best (South/Southwest London) my assessment would be:
Richmond - I had originally feared that the Liberals might return to power here, after a run of by-election victories. However I think that the recent leadership turmoil may be just sufficient to de-rail them. Local MPs Cable and Kramer are in different camps, which can’t make for a unified campaign on the ground.
Kingston - I think this should be a banker for the Conservatives, not so much because of the Kramer/Davey rift, but because the Libs are likely to set the highest council tax. I’m sure Kevin Davis and his team are well placed to take advantage.
Sutton - the Liberal majority is so large here that I can’t see there being a change of control. I suspect the Conservatives will pick up a couple of wards each side of the borough (the semi-rural Carshalton South + one of the Wallingtons on the one hand; Sutton South + any one of 3 others on the Sutton side). We will have to wait until 2010 for a change of control.
Merton - I think the Conservatives should win here, though it may be tighter than expected. I think Labour are toast in Wimbledon but they are a tougher prospect in Mitcham & Morden. Should turn blue, but fairly narrowly.
Croydon - Well, the Conservatives should win here, but much depends on the distribution of votes - simple plurality won’t be enough. From what I hear, we are at least targeting the right areas this time. I’m pretty optimistic - and this would be the highest profile scalp.
[80] Anna wrote: I have several friends who find the state playing Robin Hood quite offensive - in which case whether its 60%, 50% or 5% is irrelevant, if the objection is to State-based social welfare in principle. Your friends must regard George W Bush as a dangerous godless bolshevik - or perhaps they just take the good old Genevan view that God shows what he thinks of us in our bank accounts…
96.”given the variety of female undies ”
Tabman, are you an expert on the issue?
99 I know! It’s very depressing!
95 - B2W - nope, it did indeed give 22 seats for us when I did it. The point I was making, is that regardless of what happens to us, you are unlikely to make big inroads to the Labour vote and therefore unlikely to win. So whilst Rik, Marcus et al might be getting all in a lather about the prospect of reducing us to 3 seats, wiping us out doesn’t do your prospects of getting into government much good - our vote seems to be going disproportionately to Labour. Some of the smarter Tory posters here have realised that (take a bow Sean Fear).
100 - with respect I think there is some wishful thinking about Richmond and Kingston. The idea that pro-Campbell and pro-Huhne MPs won’t speak to or cooperate with one another is a bit much.
Someone with time on their hands could find a list of councils whose territory is covered by both a pro-Davis and a pro-Cameron Tory. I wouldn’t base our strategy on it though.
Houseman @ 100
Surprised you think Merton will be close - I’m betting (not literally - but would if I could find a market) on a Tory landslide
102 -
these days solely in the form of my knowledge of the contents of Mrs Tabman’s underwear drawer, some of which was purchased by me.
75 - If the figures were 36-22, ie. a drop in Lib Dem support it would represent a swing of just 2% to the Tories. It would help you pick-up 10-15 seats at most on a uniform swing but would be offset to some degree by Lib Dem gains from Labour on those figures. In any event the Lib Dems would not lose half their seats.
I really can’t see what the point of postulating what might happen in three years is at this stage. I used to think that we were bad when our poll ratings shot up after a byelection win but I think that because they are less used to it than we are the years of electoral drought have made some Tories even more excitable.
102 Andrea, I just don’t get it, you post nothing for 20 minutes and then as soon as female undies are mentioned…
100 - Rik Willis won’t be pleased with just 2 wards! Do you think it will be Cllr Willis come May?
110 - is that Sqn Ldr Cllr, or Cllr Sqn Ldr?
[107] Trust a Cambridge man to go through his wife’s kn*c*er collection… thank God some of us had a proper education
Note to Anna: fortunately for the tone of this conversation, I have to go out now - Hyde Park and a properly educated redhead await (ah, the joys of being a Unitarian :lol:)
109. Anna. sometimes I’ve something else to do other than posting here!
The fundamental problem with Baxter is the assumption that the Lib Dem vote will decline by the most where they are strongest and the least where they are weakest.
It makes no rational sense, but may make his number crunching easier.
What Baxter doesn’t tell us is how accurate his ‘predictions’ have been. If I recall he has consistently underestimated the number of Lib Dem seats which is hardly surprising when the logic of his assumptions is so bizarre.
101 Innocent, I think they’re mostly happy to pay something and have the state provide a “safety net.” It just comes down to the principle of why shouldn’t they decide which worthy causes they wish to support with the money they have earned.
I have one friend in particular who reagards abortion as infanticide and therefore really hates the fact that her taxes go towards that. I know that isn’t a reason to criminalise abortion (God forbid), but I can understand her point of view.
There was the story of the Vicar the Priest and the Rabbi after a shipwreck hanging onto a small raft discussing what they each do with their ‘collections’. The Vicar said we first pay the clergy then renovate the churches and what’s left over we send to Africa. The Priest said they pay also first pay the clergy then renovate the churches and what’s left they send to the Vatigan in Rome. The Rabbi said they put it all in a big sack and throw it up to God. What he doesn’t want he sends back and we keep.
And I don’t like my taxes going to faith schools. Funny old world.
104 - The point I was trying to make upthread, Tabman. Even if we were to collapse and the Tories pick-up 40 seats they would still need 100+ gains from Labour to win a majority.
113 Really?
114 - quite. This simply does not happen the way Baxter assumes. Our overall vote went up last time, but in many of these seats we already held (with a high share of the vote) it went down. We did quite well in “derelict” seats. These “derelict” seats are where we are most likely to fall back in.
Womble & Tabman - not sure, which ward is he standing in?
117 Quite, so why should you have to pay for them?
122 - quite, though you probably find yourself in lonely company if you oppose state funding for them…
106 - I think Labour are rather well dug-in, at least in parts of Merton. OTOH they have a pretty poor record on the council. There’s plenty for the Conservatives to campaign on.
Rather the opposite position to the Libs in Sutton, where the council’s record seems pretty good & there’s a lot less to latch on to. Don’t much rate their campaigning but there’s no groundswell of disatisfaction, unlike Merton, and their large existing majority means they should be comfortable.
123 I have no problem funding faith schools and have made donations to the nearest one at home. I think there are a lot of other causes that the state supports that could be ditched less controversially to make savings.
125 - you can’t be very happy with your party leader then.
126 I don’t think he has spelled out what he intends to do about government waste yet… I’ll wait for the policy review thanks!
“And I don’t like my money being spent on Nuclear Weapons / Tanks / Aeroplanes …”
Chris Huhne’s site has, to its credit, now taken down fake You Gov stats and replaced them with the Times survey.
94 - Roger, I favour Lib Dems, but I agree with Anna that if a Tory millionaire doesn’t want his or her money to end up to an A+E department, (s)he shoudn’t be forced to, or (s)he is exposed to coercion not different to that present in socialism. And if (s)he wants to benefit an A+E department, there are other charities than church through which (s)he can contribute. The point is, that in socialism this kind of choices are made by a central planning committee or such, in liberalism they should be made by the individual.
129 - Good judgement (taking down the wrong numbers).
118 - hello Dean, how’s life?
125. “I think there are a lot of other causes that the state supports that could be ditched less controversially to make savings”.
…..Nuclear weapons (unless of course the church are prepared to payfor them)and the armed services…..
So far we’ve ditched abortion clinics, nuclear weapons the armed services and faith schools. This is fun. Before you can say ’socialism’ your friends might be even richer! Maybe they could fund their own private army if they feel the need
Roger 68. Why should higher earners feel obliged to pay even more to help the “less well-off”? I’m not a high earner but I pay taxes, NI and VAT already - and pay corporation tax on profits of my company. 40% is about right and tallies with the likes of US, Ireland and Australia.
130 - And anyway, it is dangerous to think that the state can always make the best and right choices.
125. “I think there are a lot of other causes that the state supports that could be ditched less controversially to make savings.”
Finding these is actually Chris Huhne’s current job in the LD shadow treasury team, and - although the results haven’t been published yet - I suspect he’s doing a very good job. Another reason why I don’t want him to be moved from the shadow front bench to the leadership.
130 - there is a certain intellectual consistency to the “nightwatchman state”, but I don’t think any Lib Dem believes in it - nor anyone who would by modern standards be called “liberal”, much as the evolution of the term may annoy some.
We already go some (but not all) of the way you describe in that charitable contributions are tax deductable. I do think though that the state ought to secure all its citizens basic standards of decency, and that isn’t compatible with the possibility that there is no subsidy of health care for the poor if everyone else should decide they’d rather give their money to the local cats’ home.
132 - Alright thanks with the Tigers going so well. Did you make it to the Stade Francais game? Any odds on the treble? Been away from the site for a while. Just been exchanging emails with Peter who has been informing me about a Lib Dem forum you participate in along with a few of the others from this site.
The state may not always make the right choices (for the common good), but is much more likely to do so.
136 - absolutely; otherwise a lot of the poor will end up back in workhouses as “decent hard-working families” (God, that phrase makes my blood boil!) may choose to sponsor sick donkeys instead.
What i dont understand is why smart people (including senior Mingers but also those outside the Lib Dems) dont seem to appreciate that the campaigning skills that have taken Huhne from no hoper to favourite in a few weeks in the leadership elections would serve him well in a general election campaign too.
He is a very smart politician with sharp electoral antena.
140 - I think a lot of MPs etc jumped to support Ming assuming he would become leader, perhaps without a contest. Bit like David Davis for the Tories. Some hoped for nice front bench jobs; betcha some regret it now.
130 Ellen, that’s not liberalism, that’s anarcho-capitalism. Every single state expenditure, including the military, the police and the courts can be argued against on precisely the same basis. If you are an anarcho-capitalist, then fine, but that doesn’t put you in the mainstream of British Conservatism.
133 The argument for higher rates for higher earners is that a greater proportion of a higher earner’s income is disposable and the intent is to have an equal rate on disposable income. This justifies a modestly progressive income tax, but not a steep curve. If you want steep curve arguments, then you need to ask a socialist, who will tell you that you take from the rich because they have the money and the poor should decide how it’s spent, not the rich. And they’re wrong.
130. Another confused post by a Lib Dem who apparently does not see that her party is actually the most socialist in its proposed tax policies of any of the main three parties. Something the voters noticed in 2005, hence the generally good performance of the Lib Dems in depressed Labour-dominated areas and their poorer performance in the more prosperous parts of the UK.
I cannot get over how many of the (apparently) younger Lib Dem posters on this site seem to support a set of values quite at variance with those actually expressed in their party’s policies. If you seriously hold these values, there is no point in wasting your time in an opportunistic left-wing populist party.
140 I think there is a perception among many others that when four riders start and two fall off their horses, it is not hard to be in second place. But the real point is that Huhne, for all his merits, does not seem to be our best choice for leader. Ming has impresed me throughout the campaign.
137 - Tigers??? Boo, hiss!
Peter is taking me to teh Shed to see my beloved Bath kick some Glaws behind 
He’ll give you the gen on siging up to Apollo.
142, comment to 130. Whoops, obviously meant Liberalism, not Conservatism at end of last sentence.
Dundee Courier this morning. He will split the Conservative party next if he is not careful. Perhaps he is planning to join the Liberal Democrats!!!!
“CONSERVATIVE LEADER David Cameron was accused last night of an astonishing policy U-turn over the war in Iraq in a last ditch attempt to woo Liberal Democrat voters in Dunfermline and West Fife.
In an election leaflet he describes himself as a “liberal Conservative” and claims his party and the Liberal Democrats “agree” on Iraq.
“Issues that once divided Conservatives from Liberal Democrats are now issues where we both agree,” Mr Cameron says in the leaflet. “Our attitude to devolution and the localisation of power. Iraq. The environment. I’m a liberal Conservative.”
The Liberal Democrats opposed British involvement in the war in Iraq and have consistently demanded a firm timetable for the withdrawal of British troops.
Last spring in Perth deputy leader Sir Menzies Campbell called on Prime Minister Tony Blair to bring British soldiers home “by the end of the year.”
The Tories gave their wholehearted backing to the war against Saddam Hussein and the subsequent occupation of Iraq by British troops and have not demanded a timetable for withdrawing British troops.
SNP leader Alex Salmond accused Mr Cameron of “one of the biggest about-turns in military history.”
He said, “This is an astonishing U-turn from the Tory leader and I would now expect him to put his name to our motion of impeachment of the Prime Minister.
“Having backed Blair to the hilt on Iraq it seems Cameron is doing one of the biggest about-turns in military history.
“However, converts to sanity must always be welcomed.
“It is a pity Mr Cameron didn’t see the light somewhat sooner.”
He added, “This is quite extraordinary. The next thing you know they’ll be waving Saltires.
“I think the Liberal leadership contest should be suspended and (they) just accept David Cameron as their new leader.”
The Liberal Democrat by-election candidate Willie Rennie said, “The Conservatives are clearly clutching at straws in a vain attempt to save their deposit.
Tigers? - now there is a team to unite Barf fans and Shedheads!
136 “…the possibility that there is no subsidy of health care for the poor if everyone else should decide they’d rather give their money to the local cats’ home.”
If everyone truly would rather give their money to the local cats’ home, they would probably vote for MPs, who would vote for a budget that would direct all the tax money to the animal welfare instead of the health care. So in the situatiom you describe, the same result would emerge regardless to whether the money would be distributed throug the state authorities or through the charities.
143 - Clearly we should be looking to someone with deeply grounded and long held principles like David Cameron. Just look at his longstanding opposition to the Iraq war for instance.
134. I’m a higher earner but I like the state to take enough money off me that I don’t get the feeling that I live somewhere where ‘have’s’ and ‘have-nots’are too obvious. If you’ve spent any time in a third world country like Mexico you’ll realize how ugly it is to see beggars on one side of the street and huge houses with armed guards on the other.
We came close to a situation like that during Maggies slash and burn period in the 80’s. Westminster where I have a flat became ‘cardboard box city’. More people living in shop doorways than in houses and flats. As a resident I was bombarded with letters from Shirley Porters council that they had the second lowest rates in the country. That it was impossible to walk on the pavement without stepping over bodies didn’t seem to have registered. Some Spanish clients came with me from Soho to the Savoy on the Strand for dinner and they said they had never seen anything like this even in Spain’s darkest days.
143 For most Liberals economics is not their political priority. That’s why Liberal/LibDem policy seems so opportunist to Conservatives and Labourites, for whom their main priorities are economic.
Let me say as a LibDem, that if I could get PR-STV, real freedom of information, a proper internationalist foreign policy, the abolition of the royal prerogative, the restoration of the right to silence and of habeas corpus, the abolition of all the terrorist legislation, an elected House of Lords, scrapping ID cards and other such intrusions into civil liberties, etc. then I’d happily vote for a higher rate income tax of 25% or of 75%.
That’s not unprincipled, it’s just a completely different set of priorities than the other parties - and the reason why Mark Oaten’s “tough liberalism” provoked far more hostility within the party than any rumblings on economics ever will.
Labour and Conservative politicians, accustomed to economism, tend to look at the Lib Dems and wonder how we hold a party together when we disagree so much on economic questions. I can’t see how any member of LCER is in the same party as John Prescott.
142 - Richard, I know what anarcho-capitalism is and it seems that you don’t.
Anarcho-capitalism would not only make contributions to health care and other public services such as education voluntary (or at least allow you to choose to what kind of good causes your money is used to), it would also privatise the judicial system, police and army. I think I have not expressed a view which would support anytyhing such.
Please try to find out what a word means before using it to describe the thinking of other people.
LibDem 1 : The Tories are awful, silly policies and nasty to boot. Why can’t they wise up and smell the coffee. They will get nowhere without learning from their defeats.
LibDem 1 (some months later) : The Tories are not to be trusted. They change their policies at the drop of the hat. Totally inconsistent. They will get nowhere unless they stick to a clear policy like we do.
Tigers seem to be doing OK this year despite large parts of the their team giving their all for England (and one for Ireland).
What a wide ranging discussion from Liberalism to underwear and now rugby!
OT - the IG price on Ming is 55 (a bargain I think) but all LIB dem Markets say call so IG are perhaps nervous.
Re Dunfermline - I would expect the Labour vote to collapse, but not actually go anywhere - The party with the best organisation may hold on to most of their GE vote but surely the Labour vote cannot collapse enough to cause a sensational result, can it?
151. What a load of exaggerated, sentimental trash Roger.
153 - You did not make a distinction between public services and other forms of public expenditure. Indeed, that’s precisely the point I was (clearly failing to) make.
If the only forms of public expenditure you favour are “the judicial system, police and army”, then the proper characterisation is a minarchist, but I won’t describe you as such unless you confirm that you do hold that opinion.
148 - And it takes a hell of a lot to do that. I’ve braved the Shed a few times and we always found a lot of agreement with the Glawcs fans but that may have been back in the days when Barf used to win things (I’m now ducking my head Tabman) and they were the hate figures. One of my rugby mates is from Gloucester but I’m afraid he’s defected to the darkside or at least the red, white and scarlet.
145 - We’ll be seeing you for the Heineken Cup Q-F then Tabman?
It was Mrs. Thatcher’s insistence that charity should play a far greater role which put me off her when I was about 15/16. While I’m a natural sceptic about the state making the right choices/allocating funds in the most effective manner, I remember thinking that she was far too much of an idealist.
Fred. I imagine from your post that you were also a resident of Westminster during the 80’s?
158 - if its the Friday or Sunday I might make an appearance - I am in Bath on the Saturday/night.
There is a great difference between giving to a charity, for moral and ethical reasons, and the state providing a social good. The basic rationales are quite different. State provision of basic healthcare and education is not, fundamentally, driven by the need to relieve people’s suffering: it is driven by party by assumptions about the basic rights and dignities of every human in our society (which might, admittedly, have an ethical and moral concept) and the greater efficency and cohesion that can be achieved be providing social goods. Charity ought to fill the gaps that the state cannot and should not enter into, or substitute for them.
152. I don’t see why these priorities should ever even have to conflict with each other. Civil liberties and a sound economic policy are both priorities for me - but I wouldn’t even say they are twin priorities; they simply don’t compete with each other.
Intra-LD ‘disagreements’ on economic policy I tend to see more as healthy debate and a distrust of narrowly ideological solutions.
I wouldn’t characterise Westminster in the 1980s as being at all comparable with Mexico City.
There are places where taxes are very low indeed, and yet you don’t see many beggars.
155 - You’re the Tigers’ fan (one of many of course)? I was getting you and Tabman mixed up on the rugby allegiance frontI think.
For anyone to beat Labour they are going to have to squeeze the other opposition parties and pick up at least a few transfers from Labour which are worth twice their weight, of course. Tough but not impossible. Momentum is everything. Will people attach themselves to a bandwagon if one develops. It’s impossible to know unless you are there and can get a feel on the ground.
What are the latest odds on Dunfermline? It looks like things are starting to move there.
I do think it is unfortunate that, for example, many parents get less involved in their children’s school because of the psychology of state provision. It would be desirable in terms of outcomes if more people genuinely felt they had some sort of investment to protect.
But a retreat from state funding (which is not the same as provision of course) is no sort of sensible answer. Those who say they expect private charity would flood in are either idealistic to a foolish extent or have a hidden agenda. None of the parties has yet properly got to grips with how to get the benefits of charity with the secure income flow of tax and spend and I don’t blame them - it is a genuinely vexing issue.
152. Richard - I’m a bit confused; wasn’t the whole Orange Book thing rather about economics, e.g. the use of more market mechanisms in public services? Doesn’t the hostility this provoked among many Lib Dems (adherents to this site mostly excepted) prove that it is market economics the Lib Dems have no interest in, not economics per se?
Roger dear chap - given your ability to view everything through wildly distorted partisan spectacles, your supposed personal experiences are of zero interest to me. The idea that the UK in the 1980s in any way resembled a third world country is clearly exaggerated trash, unless you are mentally ill.
164 - Scandinavia has very high taxes and very few beggars. These two facts are not connected; something to do with living on the streets in -20′C not being an option. If you choose to, you die very very quickly.
157 - I didn’t make the distinction, but that was simply because I was only speaking about the case of A+E department. If you would have asked about judicial system, police and army, I could have told you, that I don’t think they should be financed by voluntary contributions.
The argument, that they could be argued against on precisely the same basis is not valid, otherwise I could tell that financing free vacations in the Bahamas or free golf courses could be argued for on precisely the same basis than you are arguing for the free health care.
Anyway, I didn’t actually say, that health care shouldn’t be financed with tax money at all. What I said was that people’s money shouldn’t be used to causes that offend them. (I think there are some here, who wouldn’t have wanted their money to be used to the war in Iraq, for instance.) Therefore a system (to which Book Value referred), where they could instead contribute to charities, is a viable alternative. There are also other models, where people could give conditions to which purposes their taxes can be spent or can’t be spent, and the budget then has to be modified according to these conditions.
163. My point in 152 is that to the LibDems it’s a “sound” economic policy. That’s pure mangerialism. To the Conservatives, tax cuts are morally right; to Labour, progressive taxation is morally right.
Let me try it another way: in a thought experiment, we can test three levels of higher rate income tax: 40%, 25% and 75%. We set the tax at one of these rates, then see how the economy looks 20 years later. Then we run the clock back and try again.
Any Lib Dem will pick whichever one leaves the economy and country in a better state at the end of the 20 years.
Tories will argue that the 75% can’t possibly have beneficial effects and therefore should never even be tested - and if it is tested they will deny any benefits it might bring (I don’t think it would - but I’m not that sure of my judgement on that one).
Labourites will argue that the 25% can’t possibly have beneficial effects and therefore should never even be tested - and if it is tested they will deny any benefits it might bring (I don’t think it would - but I’m not that sure of my judgement on that one).
Does that make sense - your “distrust of narrowly ideological solutions” looks like a statement of lack of principle from the POV of the Labour and Conservative parties.
61 - Valerie - Yes - the ability to gain momentum in a six week election campaign does not necessarily prove that Huhne is a good leader. Nor does the fact that Campbell has failed to generate momentum during a six week election campaign necessarily make him a bad leader. But given that one of the key parts of the party leader’s job description is presumably ‘helping the party gain momentum in the next General Election campaign’ it is surely reasonable to take their respective abilities in this matter into account?
The top tax debate is somewhat totemic, but important as it represents a popular policy - (and the Tories here will get confused by this) even in the leafiest bits of Berkshire.
Back to leadership and campaigning, I would far rather a leader who shows tactical nous and the ability to create an agenda, than one who simply follows it
roger - how dare you attack the glories of the thatcher period!don’t you know it was fun, fun, fun to be one of the 3m plus unemployed back then? people may have been poor and unable to find work, but they were happy knowing that maggie was taking the country in the right direction. everybody was a yuppie back then, don’t you remember?
164 - Would not a mean streak in the populace lead to both those outcomes (few beggars and low taxes)? Poverty is not the only cause of begging - there is a cost/benefit analysis by beggars too. And if begging is likely get you shot rather than get you money you probably won’t bother.
170. I wasn’t arguing for free health care on any basis, so I’d like to see how you can use an argument I didn’t make.
Turning to your principal point. Yes, I actually like the idea of giving individuals more control over how their taxes are directed. Provided enough money ends up in the General Fund, I have no problem with not spending pacifists’ money on the military, no problem with not spending pro-lifers’ money on abortions, etc.
169 - The disparity of income in Scandinavia is smaller than let’s say in the United States, but the average standard of living is also lower. I don’t know if the poorest people in Scandinavia really are better off than in countries with lower taxes. I have lived several years in Scandinavia, and during the coldest time in the winter there were poor people sleeping in the staircase of my house. I think that the Scandinavian welfare is in great part just a myth.
But it might be healthy for you to live in Scandinavia for couple of years and see it for yourself.
The odds on Betfair seem to suggesting that there will not be an upset in Dunfermline (Lib Dems 9.5 - 1) but happily someone at 1.13 this morning took my offer of 5.6 - 1 so I show a nice profit if the Lib Dems do win for no investment.
Sorry the IG odds on Ming are 59 to buy (55 is the mid price) - it goes to 100 if he wins and 0 if he loses
The LDs and the Tories can afford to be relatively relaxed in Dunfermline. If the LDs do badly, then its attributable to recent coverage. If they do well, as the hints appear to indicate, then it’s an excellent bonus. Cameron won’t expect to be reaping dividends in Scotland anyway, especially in a constituency with no recent Tory heritage.
Labour would have been fairly sanguine about a slashed majority a couple of years ago; now, a poor Dunfermline result - never mind a loss - might worry the PLP, and could have serious long-term effects if combined with the locals. A poor result is also a mark on Gordon Brown’s personal electorability, given his constituency connections.
But the pressure is really on the SNP (interesting that we don’t seem to have had many Nat contributors commenting on here recently). A failure to capture second, given the SNP’s traditional bye performances, would be poor; a fall in the SNP vote would raise serious questions about the SNP’s ability to progress in 2007.
176. Richard that approach would lead to chaos - where would you draw the line? I might argue I was hugely opposed on principle to a stalinist NHS (which indeed I am) and ask for a third of my tax bill back. How would you decide who was honest and who was just trying it on? It is really a ridiculous idea.
177. The Swedes were shocked not long ago when new national income statistics showed the average standard of living in Sweden was lower than that of the poorest US states like Alabama. Of course if you are a real socialist, or it seems Lib Dem, this doesn’t matter.
177 - I spent two and a half years in Finland and paid far too much tax. Unemployment is high, and heavily disguised by “projects” with Government funding. I worked for a while in the public sector there - it was a joke - so much money was wasted.
People don’t live better; suicide is far higher, and it seems a large proportion of the people are on anti-depressants. The murder rate is also higher than in the UK. If Nokia went belly-up, Finland would be stuffed.
People view Scandinavians as socially liberal; their goverments may be, but the Finns for example are pretty racist and very homophobic.
Yes - I have lived in Scandinavia (though Finns would argue that Scandinvia does not include them). My point was that the high tax does not stop beggars - though the weather might. We do not want to follow the Scandinavian model.
Morning Economists
………OK….. a little snippet from the D & FW by-election :
A journo tracking the campaign says that the “Labour is twitching at the prospect of a bad result” and that the Lib Dems are “pouring time, money and resources” into the seat in the expectation that they’ll give Labour a “bloody nose”.
To wit said I are we in Orpington and Bermondsey land or are the Lib Dems in La La Land ?? ……… a telephonic furrowed brow came forth ………. to close to call ???? …. just not sure …..but what is clear is that the SNP are out for the count and the Tories were never in the count ……….. the count itself …… well it might be quite jolly.
have you been to sweden? they might not all own 2 DVD players, go on two holidays a year to the costa del puke or have massive credit card bills, but the quality of life is way higher. the streets are clean, public transport works, there’s a vibrant culture and strong national identity without major social unrest, the health system is reliable and the roads are unclogged. quality of life is more important than buying a more expensive sofa to some people Fred. something your leader was quacking on about the other day I recall.
“I wouldn’t characterise Westminster in the 1980s as being at all comparable with Mexico City”.
In ‘83 to save money dole was withdrawn from 16 year olds. At that time employment for 16 year olds was non existent so kids who had problems at home or whose parents just wouldn’t or couldn’t keep them left home and came down to Londons West End. It became a gravitational pull that had 15,000 living in cardboard boxes in Westminster alone. Most of them young. When they got to 18 they couldn’t get dole because they had no fixed address. The huge rise in rent boys and drug addicts can be precisely dated from this time and no-one did anything to tackle it until this government came to power.
If you know different Fred please tell me where I’m wrong? You seem to be an expert on most things. Perhaps better still contact Shelter and find out the facts from them
183 - so why is suicide so popular in Sweden too?
Poor Caroline Spelman given a real roasting by Andrew Neil on the Politics Show. All you can think of as she tries to reply is that one side of her jacket collar is n’t folded back,making her look silly. You’d think the make-up people would have pointed it out - or is it all part of a BBC plot!?
average standard of living is very misleading. If there are a few very very rich people in atlanta, it can skew the figures.
I think it is fair to say that sweden doesnt have many very very rich people.
183. My wife is Swedish and I spend some time there every year. I also worked frequently in Stockholm. That good enough?
183 - you sound like Polly Toynbee. I’m sure that Sweden has many attractive features, but its social problems (high levels of crime, alchoholism, family breakdown) aren’t dissimilar to our own. And it has a much more authoritarian and intrusive government to boot.
Roger - I’d be amazed if as many as 15,000 people were living on the streets in Westminster at any point.
Surely the media will pounce on Cameron if the Tories don’t at least show some signs of life in Dunfermline.
He needs to do well particularly where the old Tories did badly or he will be finished before he has started. What is the life expectancy of a Tory leader?
173. Readingliberal - it depends if you consider a couple of eye-catching statements about eco-taxes to be ’setting an agenda.’ I’ve had enough of that sort of thing from Blair and Cameron, and I worry that Huhne would be too similar in style.
Huhne has a good brain, but so does Ming, and Ming is more principled, more grounded and generally more confidence-inspiring.
188 Fred. Balls !! ….. of the Swedish meat variety …….. enough to drive anybody to suicide.
188 - for the first time in my life I can totally agree with you… (just substitute Finnish wife, annual trips to Finland).
193 - Finland.
190 Icarus. It difficult to underestimate the hostility to the Tories in much of Scotland …… it’ll take more than a cheesy smile and some SWP policies to make Scots love the Tories again.
188/193. if I’ve to judge only basing about what I’ve studied at uni, I should run to live in Sweden and never touch Britih territory (the Thatcher years were almost presented as full of inequity and underpaid people. The professor* even said ironically “that lovely woman”. Without forgetting to insert a picture of the police and miners).
* Not it wasn’t Polly Toynbee!
In a Scottish constituency with no Conservative local strength to speak of, and the possibility of LD squeezing, it’s asking for miracles to imagine Ruxon improving the Tory share by 1-2%, and to see her doing worse than that would not be surprising. If Cameron were sitting on a firm national polling lead of at least 5%, expectations would be better.
185: SAD
One final pop at Sweden. You have thought that Sweden would have rooted out any problems in society by the time they abolished eugenics in about 1975. (Yes, the Government is that authoritarian).
And Finland managed to “elect” the same President for 25 years until the mid 1980s. Parliament at that time had hardly any power; sounds a bit like post colonial Africa!
Peter Kellner’s denial doesn’t take us very far. Mike’s figures could be out because of rounding and this would enable Kellner to deny the figures safely. The fact is that a poll took place and the results have not been published. A national newspaper would certainly have published the results; why else spend good money commissioning a poll? Since all the ‘leaks’ point to Huhne doing better than expected you have to conclude that Mike’s information was broadly correct and that this poll is bad for MC and good for Huhne. No doubt MC’s team was hoping to create a bandwagon effect based on ‘inevitability’ but it appears to have backfired.
Special Bets have summarised the last 2 days of poll debacle and are now out and out mingers!
http://specialbets.blogspot.com/2006/02/sorting-out-truth-from-spin-and-ending.html
Flip Flop ……..
…. oh dear Mr Cameron !!!!!!!!!!
Does anyone think that it might be better for the Tories if LD win in Dunfermline? A Labour win with a very poor Con 4th will be spun by Labour as “Tories still nowhere”. A LD win will make the main news story “Labour on the rocks”, from which Con stand to gain in England, and Tories will spin it as “we was 4th before anyway, and voters voted tactically to beat the govt”.
186. I don’t know about Caroline Spelman. Letting Milliband get the better of her when there was an easy comeback was dissapointing.
202. Looks like Labour have found there area to attack Cameron.
PMQs a knockout from Blair over Cameroon !
203 Mark. You may find the odd Lib Dem (are there any other sort ??) who agree with you !
nice to see cameron get a shoe-ing at pmq’s today. gordon looked very pleased!
203 - careful, Mark - this voting tactically by Tories for LDs might catch on in the 200(?) or so seats where we’re second
203 - Don’t think that it will make any difference either way. The Tory performance will drop off the radar pretty quickly unless the press try to run with it which seems unlikely. I think they can get away with low expectations in Scotland. The real test at parliamentary level will come when we have a byelection in England. Even if it’s an unfavourable seat it will be far harder to brush aside if they don’t make progress.
180 - “Of course if you are a real socialist, or it seems Lib Dem, this doesn’t matter.”
I think that anything that I have said doesn’t justify that. I’m definitely not a socialist. Indeed, I argued that the kind of redistribution Roger argued for was not really different for socialism, and I didn’t support it.
I told that I favour Lib Dems. That doesn’t mean that I’m a Lib Dem myself, or a member of any other party as a matter of fact. And the reason why I’m favouring the Lib Dems isn’t because of their economic policies. And anyway, even if econom policies would determine who I support, why would I support the Tories now, when Cameron has told that they don’t support choice in the health care anymore? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4578440.stm
What’s the story? Ming been yet?
Wasn’t it Mrs Thatcher who said “We are very fond of Scotland” Even my scottish Mother-in-Law felt patronised by that remark, I am sure she would have voted Tory but like most of them has since died out.
Ming slipping further on IG - now can buy at 56 - PMQ’s doesnt sound (reading Guardian) very exciting though liberal conserative is being hung round Camerons neck.
ming was okay. solid if uninspiring. cameron’s worst showing so far, possibly because labour have got him sussed. told you he’d made some strategic errors in the first 3 weeks as leader.
185 - If I recall correctly, the suicide rate in Sweden is no higher and possibly rather lower than places like France. Finland has always been “known for it” and I think there is evidence for that.
198 - Same to you! Probably a factor but maybe not that strong, I suspect it is much more cultural. The UK is well towards the bottom of the suicide league and is not known for its ample sunshine (not as bad as Scandinavia but still). Places like Croatia (?) are the reverse.
181 - It’s not just the Finns that would argue that Finland isn’t in Scandinavia, it’s an objective fact, much like the fact that Iceland isn’t in the British Isles.
213 baly eric. I feel the phrase “flip flop” will not be passing Cameroon’s lips in the near future !
…….glum faces on the Tory benches said it all !
I’m not actually convinced that you can treat the Times Hustings poll as too representative of the views of Liberal Democrat members on the issue; for one thing there is regional bias.
I believe the hustings they were talking about took place in Slough, which is smack-bang in Huhne’s home region of South Central, giving a clear regional bias. My experience in the Midlands is that there is that Huhne’s support up here is significantly less clear.
Huhne’s support in my experience also appears most amongst the young and amongst the internet active - partially explaining what appears to be a fairly good poll result for Huhne on internet-based polling.
Furthermore we have to remember that most armchair members won’t have been to a hustings, which is the place at which Huhne is picking up most support, and that thus the more important event will be the Question Time special tomorrow evening, where most armchair members, I suspect, will be watching.
I don’t think, therefore, that it’s reasonable to expect any fair polling to take place which would give a conclusive winner. Both the polls and the hustings report probably suggest that Huhne will get a decent figure, probably to the extent of ensuring that Hughes gets third place.
However, the lack of any data on the non-internet active who get their political base from local activity, and the lack of the kind of demographic data that YouGov usually use to adjust their polling figures so as to prevent predominance from those sectors of society that are more prevalent on the internet, makes I think any polling done on the matter come with a severe health warning.
Huhne will probably put in a good performance, but it is probably far too close to call which way the Party will vote in the end.
My impressions on PMQT.
Good performance by Blair.
Cameron looked like an over-excited school boy. Not very clever to mention the flip flop word: he served the opportunity to Blair on a silver plate.
Ming Campbell was, hum, boh. He didn’t leave a sign. I’ve already forgotten what he asked. Something about police?
Decent hair by Gordon (compared to previous PMQT).
Good joke by Ancram about Blair not voting.
118. well, I think it was Ancram.
183, bally eric, maybe you should read how a Swede explains the Swedish wealth: http://www.johannorberg.net/index.asp?page=articles&articleid=73
Tend to agree with Chris Nelson - though I very much doubt even half of the armchair members will watch Question Time.
217 - The times husting poll was done in Cardiff
220, This one is better: http://www.johannorberg.net/?page=articles&articleid=45
fred at 155: “If you seriously hold these values, there is no point in wasting your time in an opportunistic left-wing populist party” - you’re not a Cameron fan, then?
ellen - different strokes for different folks. i like it.
217 The Slough hustings, er, haven’t taken place yet.
The hustings referred too took place in, er, South East *Wales* - Cardiff to be precise. Not a Huhne stronghold at all - more likely to be a bedrock of Hughes support.
Valerie - could you explain what Ming has said on any domestic policy at all apart from ‘X is a problem’? And how do his views differ from Cable on tax? By contrast Chris Huhne has made some detailed moves which have struck a chord with the electorate.
This is an interesting discussion - what it tells me is that despite Cameron’s posturing, what really gets Tories going is the idea that very rich people might be required to pay more in tax, but that homelessness, the proper funding of A&E departments in northern towns they’ll never visit are matters of little importance. Thank you.
121 - A fair few armchair members won’t bother voting of course (a fair few Tories didn’t). I suspect a decent proportion of those who are undecided, will vote and have not attended a conventional hustings will watch QT plus many of those who don’t will have a chat about it with a fellow member in the following few days. I think it could be very important if somebody really shines and somebody else falls on their backside, but suspect all three are too professional to make major errors - like the Tory Question Time where Davis “won” but not by enough of a margin to really matter.
223. That one refers to the study I mentioned earlier about low living standards. But it won’t convince the socialists on this site - who have now, as is usual in this kind of debate, resorted to arguing that living standards don’t matter, after being shown that socialism generally leads to low living standards.
sorry, for the stupid question, but who are “armchair members”? A new way to call non activists? Old people?
i know it’s a difficult concept to get your head around fred, but for many people money isn’t everything.
227 - John - don’t confuse what people find interesting with what they find important. I find county boundaries ferociously interesting and given the opportunity can bang on about them for hours - but that doesn’t mean that that’s what I’ll devote most energy and attention to when I’m PM.
This isn’t just confined to Tories by the way - raise fox hunting with some of the Labour Party or any one of a number of interesting but abstract constitutional ideas with the Lib Dems and see where it gets you.
Anyway, cutting taxes for the rich isn’t done just to benefit the rich - there aren’t enough very rich people to make it an electorally viable strategy. As Adam Smith points out, etc…
227 - how on earth does the above tell you that the Conservative Parliamentary Party, for it is that which will govern, not the membership, stands for what you have concluded based on opinions on this board that simply state 50% tax is too high?
That, I have to be honest, ranks among one of the most abstract conclusions I have ever come across on this site….
Armchair members are the ones who never get out of their armchairs and deliver some FOCUSes
Andrea - generally members but non-activists. Similarly, a team can have armchair supporters - they might want their team to win, but they’re not going to actually leave the house to cheer them on or anything. Stockport County have had the full benefit of my armchair support for fifteen years, and look where it’s got them.
In the normal course of events the Lib dems should do well in Dunfermline its only the recent scandals that have presented any doubt. The constituency has a Lib dem local government base for the by-election team to build on. If its true and not just hype that they have emerged as the main opposition then they should do well given labour unpopularity on some key local issues.
Its a “credit” to them that they are able to get away with some of the stunts they pull. It is a credit that they have managed to turn out so many activists to help in the by-election.
The SNP have been doing well in local government by-elections and did respectably enough in the two previous by-elections(where the lib dems made no impact) . It seems whichever of the LIb Dems and SNP emerge as the main challenger to Labour reaps the benefit. The advantage the Lib dems have is that Labour voters can vote for them knowing they will get a Labour led government.
128 - For the definition of fall on your backside on Question Time, I would refer you to Rhodri Morgan last week by the way!
From the Times article on the Cardiff Hustings, re: Huhne - “Charlie Pearcy, 51, of Cardiff, said: “Huhne went from third to first, basically because of his commitment to electoral reform.”” I think this summarises Huhne’s approach to the campaign - tickling activists’ tummys without really looking outwards enough. It is a clever approach but doesn’t really answer the questions more thoughtful Lib Dems (naming no names, modesty forbids!) are asking. He is a capable man and CAN look outwards but I really haven’t heard any of that during the campaign - Basically, we have yet to hear how he would lead given the chance, which doesn’t mean he would be a bad leader just we don’t know.
134/35. Thanks. I assumed that they were people who stayed at home. For some bizarre reasons armchairs make me think to old people too!
232 - not that I mean to imply that fox hunting or constitutional issues shouldn’t be discussed at all, of course. Just that certain people are more interested in those issues than their importance to the man in the street might merit. But every subject needs it’s followers.
233. It’s just an observation about the rhetoric. Cameron appears to be trying to get the Tory party concerned with matters that have traditionally been viewed as the strong issues for their opponents. However, the evidence of the admittedly unrepresentative - but still quite numerous - contributors to this site is that he has not had much success in enthusing the rest of the party for the NHS, no cuts in tax and spend etc.
134 - I would count many Focus deliverers as armchair members; the sorts you leave a bundle of leaflets to do now and then but who wouldn’t go to an action day, meetings or fundraisers. Bit unfair to say “armchair” in those circumstances - they are sane people with other, much greater, interests in life.
241 Yes, I agree with that, as used, but the derivation is ones that won’t get up off their armchairs…
226. Why should Campbell have different views from Cable on tax?!
Campbell’s manifesto contains numerous concrete suggestions on all manner of domestic issues. Having said that, while I completely agree on the need for the LDs to highlight their solutions to problems rather than just the problem, I don’t think the leadership campaign is the place for detailed policy-making.
Campbell will give the party direction and a well-articulated and positive vision; the detail is there to be filled in by others (including Huhne) and the policy commissions **which are already sitting**. The leader’s job is to take the policy brief like a QC and convince the electorate, while of course also managing the whole process in a consultative way.
241. so, armchair members: normal party members
activists: people who irritate the whole electorate going around delivering lots of leaflets no-one really want.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
Interesting all those people who condemn other countries on the basis of policies they don’t like, ignoring the possibility that it might work…
Finland and Sweden, then (13th and 2nd) then as apposed to inequitable UK then (15th) where the gap between the median and upper 10% has been growing every year since 1997…
Can us just say the previous opinions of people regarding choosing where there money goes make me sick, worse still when these people purport to be “christian”. Love thy fellow man as long as he spends my money where I want it…
225 - Bally eric, I don’t know what you mean. I think I have been very consistent, but people might have not fully understood my views.
Didn’t Cameron make himself look foolish at PMQ’s today? And isn’t it embarrassing to have to watch loyalists like Rik trying to duck and dive in the wake of their new leader. I must say I was happy to see him making his party more user-friendly to the likes of me but he is now making himself look like the worst kind of opportunist. I fear the fightback is about to start and his inexperience is really starting to show. When the leader writers and columnists start he could become mincemeat
Curiouser and curiouser.
Whatever ’strict’ denials Peter K is making here about the details of the leak on the Yougov poll, it is clear that the poll commissioner was either (officially some long way) ‘behind’ either the Campbell or Hughes camps - the former looking for a bandwagon-stopper and the latter hoping for a lifeboat to stop the haemorhaging of support to Huhne in 2nd place. Whoever it was they are not playing ball with publication because the results can’t be ’spun’ their way, which is presumably good news for Huhne?
Talking about spinning, the early attempts on here to spin away a coming Tory disaster in the Dunfermeline by-election show how important pb.com is these days. Mike have you thought of merging with Google?
185. Oh Roger - just a couple of points that might interest you on this government’s fantastic record on homelessness. ODPM figures show the number of families in temporary accommodation has doubled since 1997 to over 100000. Figures from voluntary organisations put the number of rough sleepers in England at about 2000 in 1998, of which perhaps half were in London. Not quite the numbers you mentioned.
All Camerons chickens came home to roost today, suspect it is a case of give someone enough rope etc.
I am sure he will learn from that, but he has got himself and his party into what he most hope is just a temprary corner, trying to be all things to all men. Put it down to inexperience?
Other parties know this does not work.
Time to sit down quietely perhaps, and ensure his position and then come back in a few weeks time.
He may find being leader of the opposition is better than supporting the government.
248. Campbell’s camp denied to be behind the poll.
Ah yes, Andrea - ‘plausible deniabliity’.
But what of the camp camp behind the camp? And I don’t mean the one which has just made Slough the new capital of Wales apparently!
245 - I am by no means christian. But I think even the christians should be able to choose where their money goes, regardless to whether they fit to your definition of “christian” or not. And I’m not very concerned about you feeling sick.
There was a thread last night about vote counting in which (as usual) Rik said I was wrong for insisting that votes should be counted face up.
He might want to visit the Department of Constitutional affairs website - http://www.dca.gov.uk/elections/ge2001/procedures/02.htm
The relevant passage is…
“Secrecy
12.4 Secrecy is maintained at the count. The acting returning officer must keep the ballot papers with their faces upwards and take all proper precautions for preventing any person from seeing the numbers printed on the back.”
It’s why political parties are able to judge the outcome of counts before the official announcement.
BTW - any news on the second PV count in Dunfy?
Andrea - the armchair members are the ones who don’t do any work except pay their subscription. They are the overwhelming majority and because they are much closer in outlook to the average voter they are much more likely to make the right choice for leader - i.e. not the one the activists want.
On another subject Hughes has made quite a stinging attack on the other candidates. Not sure that is such a great idea…
Society is all about understanding how we are all interconnected, without lower earners there simply would not be the opportunity to live the kind of life styles that the richer posters here obviously do. The spirirt of Thatcher (misquoted or not) clearly lives on…
Demanding that you have the right to chose exactly where your money is spent over and above your democratic right is exactly how this society starts to unravel.
As for the christianity bit, that makes me sick for the reason that comments like “charitable organisations spend it better” are factually untrue, especially religous ones, to the point of being offensive. Explain your point to AIDS effected Ugandans denied free condoms, Polio victims in Nigeria denied access to vacines (Islam in that case). Then you might feel as ill as I.
250. ‘trying to be all things to all men’…’other parties know this does not work’….from a Lib Dem of all people!
254. Dan, that is the procedure at the count. I suppose the count will take place on Thursday.
The Electoral Commission and the Association of Electoral Administrators have advised that papers be checked face down.
http://www.bhhrg.org/mediaDetails.asp?ArticleID=127
David Monks, leader of the returning officers, admitted it wasn’t always possible to do it at GE
258. The problem is that if you open them facedown, may be possible to associate the serial number on each paper with the name of the voter.
i remember seeing the postal vote piles in a marginal seat in 1997 and the tories being slightly ahead on guesswork. they ended up losing by 12,000 votes. they mean nothing.
I shall reserve judgment on PMQs until I actually see it this evening, but judging by the comments above and on the BBC website, I suspect the electorate, the House, and journalists alike are all going to get pretty fed up soon of Blair’s continued failure to answer questions and resort to his “where do the Tories stand this week” wheeze. And that’s before we start looking at the rank hypocrisy of Blair accusing Cameron of changing his position on things.
I do hope PMQs isn’t going to degenerate into a slanging match between the two leaders, each trying to point-score against the other by dredging up old quotes from the other one.
“I do hope PMQs isn’t going to degenerate into a slanging match between the two leaders, each trying to point-score against the other by dredging up old quotes from the other one. ”
DE generate??
Postal Vote opening is not the count or even the verification so they are supposed to be face down.
That said I am personally quite good at reading through the paper. You do need to knw the layout of your ballot paper. That can make it awkward if it is long (say more than 6) with key candidates close together.
It is also lousy on your back as you are standing and peering over papers for hours. At the 2005 GE I did 2 seats with associated County papers. On polling morning my back went into spasms and all I could do was lie on the office floor for 5 minutes. So it seems to be a game for a person with good eyesite and a good back.
You also need to know the difference between your overall vote and how the postal voters go. My experience says that even now with mass PVs Labour is underestimated compared to the Tories in seats where all 3 are contending.
261 - Nobody in the wider public has been greatly interested in Question Time since 1936. The point is principally how it feeds to the public via party morale and media perceptions. Everyone has the odd off day at PMQs (I speak as a Ming supporter!) but if Cameron repeatedly gets hammered by Blair for being a little twerp who doesn’t know where he stands from one day to the next it becomes a problem. No doubt the big brains at CCO are currently reviewing strategy - DC can’t just try to be a breath of fresh air for the next eight or nine years.
It is always tricky for the Lib Dem leader with two questions because the PM can always evade without looking evasive (as he would if you have more than two). My tip to Campbell, or whoever gets it, is that you should know the answer to your first question and it should be devestating if at all possible, then use the second to state your titbit of info and point score about his evasiveness. Campbell is picking sensible topics but Blair is playing forward defensive at present. Again, needs to go back to the drawing board although the rethink is not as urgent as for Cameron as it is no score draw territory on the basis of performances since that first one.
Erlend! Get back out and deliver some leaflets - there’s still time before tomorrow!
263 - I see the point of straining your eye at postal vote verification in local elections as you can switch resources between wards in the last few days. It has always seemed rather a waste of valuable campaigning time going mob handed to postal vote openings at general elections - it is basically just idle curiosity. I never understand it when the PPCs show up as they occasionally do.
261: Don’t be too hard on Tony, Bob. His slapstick at PMQs is probably the last thing his supporters have left to admire him for.
Bob. The difficulty of being all things to all men was sussed by Blair in about 2000. And unfortunately the electorate have now become wise to this sort of opportunism. It doesn’t take much for ridicule to stick to politicians. Witness Blair and the Ecclestone “I’m a pretty straight sort of guy” and Prescott and his two Jags. Eight years later neither of them has really brushed them off. When you get to your recording tonight you will see the a Royal Command performance by Blair in exposing Mr Flip Flop. Even those with black and white sets will see the red faces of Tory backbenchers!! Of course it’s inexperience but so what? If they want the glory of choosing a young PR man they have to accept the downside. And what a downside! He has flipped his last flop. If he tries any new ones he’ll be the Sketch writers dream.
268. So Cameron has his first bad day and sunddenly he’s finished. Good effort at a wind up Roger but you’ll have to do better than that.
Shame you missed it Woody! I guess you missed it otherwise you’d know it wasn’t a wind-up. Anyway there’s always the Lib Dems?
267 - Not the line of you and your chums when Cameron was holding the slapping stick at PMQs a few weeks ago if I remember rightly, Robusticus! Suddenly PMQs turns out not to be a challenging environment in which big Dave excels and becomes an irrelevant sideshow. What goes around comes around I suppose.
270. I saw it and commented earlier that Blair had won. Still about 5-1 to Cameron though. You accuse Tories getting over excited by one performance and then you do exactly the same thing. Are you flip flopping Roger??
272. woody, DC hasn’t won all other PMQT! Most of them hadn’t a winner.
273 Depends entirely which party you support!
273. In your opinion Andrea.
274. or depends on if you want just spin or not.
275. And in the opinion of many others who aren’t tory partisans.
276 Well… Not having a TV (or a free Wednesday lunchtime) I have to watch the spin on the BBC news website every week… and so far Cameron does seem to have won a majority…
277. Name them.
279 Calm down Woody! Andrea’s just winding you up!
279 woody. Me ….
265 - Isn’t he doing the printing?
281 Have you read the BBC’s report? I particularly like the comment about Halley’s Comet…
280. I know. Just seeing if Andrea was going to research my question.
279. ok, where do you find in these analysises that DC was the clear winner of the PMQT?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4669768.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4646766.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4623764.stm
OK, lets get back to safer ground (for us Tories!!) - Hughes has slapped back at Huhne in his Manifesto launch (see Guido for details) - apparently Lib Dem members wanted a contest between two war horses with established track records, and Huhne is just an 8 month parliamentary upstart….
handbags anyone? suddenly QT seems like it could be more of a bun fight tomorrow
84. yes, you should have knew I would have gone to search some articles. Especially because I was starting to get a bit irritated!
‘No wonder he’s against identity cards’ was a real killer line from Blair. Like ‘He was the future once’, I don’t think it’ll be forgotten soon.
88. TB should have answered to the “He was the future once’ comment with “I’m the present and the future sits on the benches behind me”.
288 - As a non-Tory, I would say “he was the future once” is by far the more memorable of those two lines. The ID cards one is good and Blair one by a knockout today but I don’t believe it will feature in any books of quotes in future (even those not published by Mr Dale).
289 - would be seen as a thinly veiled criticism of Brown on the bench beside him!
290. do you think will they publish tge “he was the future once” comment?
well, I suppose it’ll depend on the future DC will have.
291. But he was standing, so even Gordon was behind it at the moment.
280,285 told you.
294. what? I can’t understand
cameron made his bigest mistake as leader on day one when he left osbourne as shadow chancellor.
gordon brown has been getting some good press lately and the tories have missed the oppurtunity to damage brown beynd repair when he downgraded- the economy is on the up and so will his popularity.
292 - I think they will reprint it whether Cameron himself flops or not. It is not an absolute classic but it is still a very, very good line. It also works because it is timeless, whereas with Blair’s ID cards line you would need to explain to a future reader that there was a debate about ID cards in 2006 and Cameron had been shifting policy. Cameron’s line works even if all you know is that Blair had been PM for a fair while when it was delivered and even if the 2026 reader has no idea who obscure ex-Tory leader Daniel [sic] Cameron was.
297. yup, I see what you mean.
296. What good press? I haven’t seen anything apart from him being told to smile more.
299. The Mirror piece full of his family life, his desperation for the death of his daughter, him playing with his son, waiting to be father again,….
But I think the notion that he has no identity may well resonate, beyond the ins and outs of the ID cards debate.
300. People who read the Mirror will vote for him anyway.
285 - Actually, my friend, I would say in all three :).
But, yes, DC stumbled badly to-day - there’s no point in denying that. The Iraq comment about agreeing with the LibDems was misconceived. But these things happen: that cliched week is a long time in politics and the show will swiftly move on.
Pro bono publico, no bloody panico ….
301. And what’s Blairs identity?
“He was the future once” was possibly the quote of 2005 and will be inscribed on Blair’s political gravestone. The “ID cards” one today sounds more akin to a sixth form debating society.
Can someone explain what is wrong with a new leader coming in and changing some of the party’s specific policies where he thinks they were wrong? Isn’t that the point of changing leader? Are people saying that all 3 parties should take fixed positions on everything and never change them one jot? Come on, let’s get real here.
Anyway, we’ve got a couple of outings for Hague coming up at PMQs soon. That should be interesting viewing!
303. I asked Ginger and she disagrees with you
305 - and when I say “outings”, I mean “appearances at the Despatch Box” obviously…
306 - Well, she’s such a FICKLE filly
302. The press has been kinder with him than in December. Infact his figures in the “most preferred PM” question on yesterday’s populus were up.
308. So I won’t introduce her to you!
Even the Sun had a very flattering piece on Brown yesterday comparing his fans (Mandela, Alan Sugar,Joanna Lumley, Alan Greenspan, Richard Attenborough, Bono etc) with Blair’s (Mick Hucknell etc). I hope for the Tories sake Cameron doesn’t feel forced to retreat onto home turf as all his predecessors have felt obliged to do when the heat’s on.
307. Keep digging Bob. I agree it should be interesting.
310. Terrific stuff Roger. Ahead in the polls (even a populus one), one dodgy PMQs which the vast majority of the public won’t even be aware of and suddenly it’s meltdown in your eyes. I ask you again, are you flip flopping.
Bob Sykes, Hague at PMQs. I gather the man likes his food and that he gave up the Tory leadership after a bit of a bad time. Do you think that Blair will be able to avoid referring to deja vu when he has a ‘garlic-eating surrender monkey’ in front of him?
Re 257 Pot and Kettle
Not quite, I said other parties have tried that and failed!
You appear to jump without considering things properly, but we all do that from time to time, apparently even Cameron. Kennedy, Blair, one could go on and on.
258 Andrea: “The Electoral Commission and the Association of Electoral Administrators have advised that papers be checked face down.”
No they haven’t, not that one would put past these clueless people giving illegal advice. The law requires them (no discretion) to be COUNTED face down - but Postal Votes can indeed be VERIFIED face up before that as they come in before the count. And it is specifically related to postal votes only that the quote/link you gave out is about the latter case.
305 - You are slightly overblowing the worth of a very good Cameron quote and under-rating a decent Blair one. Cameron’s quote was a nice little inclusion in a book of political quotes in a few years, Blair’s is good for a chuckle in tomorrow’s paper. Neither was in the really big league of quotes. Jeremy Thorpe’s “Greater love hath no man than this than he lays down his friends for his life” is such a quote because it has all the timelessness of Cameron’s quote but is smartier and wittier.
Changing specific policies is one thing, but the charge sheet for Cameron reads: 1. Changing a few months after actually writing the manifesto is a bit much - it is not changing your views in the light of a genuine change of heart or experience; 2. The line on Iraq appears to be an outright lie - all the Tories bayed “Charlie Chamberlain” at our dear (!) departed leader on the eve of war and to rewrite history in that way is extraordinary; and 3. According to Rik and Marcus, it’s all cant anyway.
The line about Conservatives and LibDems being at one over the environment and Iraq comes from Cameron’s speech of December 16th (ish). His point was that both parties want British troops home as soon as possible, and agree that that would depend on leaving Iraq with a functioning democracy and in a position to defend itself. It is disingenous, though good politics, of Blair to suggest that Cameron was saying that Tories and LibDems agreed on the decision to go to war. He has never said that.
271: For your information, James, I don’t have any chums, at least not of the political variety: I’m a centrist and a floating voter. Anyway, I was trying to make the point that I find it ironic that many of the MPs who cheer Blair to the rafters during PMQs are the same people who scupper his beloved policies (the education bill being the latest example) and can’t wait to see the back of him.
316 - His leaflet clearly implied it though. It didn’t say, “we disagreed on whether to go to war but…” did it?
317 - I don’t doubt it on your first point and don’t believe it on your second.
314. zebidee, yes, they have
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/files/dms/Securingthevote_17643-12944__E__N__S__W__.pdf
Look at electoral commission recommendations: page 20.
Blair talking about ID cards just reminds me that he wants to introduce them and I’ll do anything to stop him introducing them. A better soundbite is one that isn’t related to policy, not alienating a significant section of those watching/listening.
Woody. As every advertiser will tell you convincing people of a truth is relatively easy. Convincing them of something they don’t believe can take years. “Flip flop” in relation to Cameron should now be a doddle for Beattie and Co when they get down to it. My guess is that they’ll choose 48 sheet posters. Lots of them!
Flip Flop reminds me of Bush, Kerry suffered because of his crazy notion that inflexible posturing is better than actually reacting to circumstances. If labour use ‘flip flop’ expect a riposte about being Bush’s poodle. Bush is someone who will be guaranteed to lose anyone linked to him votes (and as far as I’m concerned Kerry was still robbed).
319 - Andrea these are recommendations from the Electoral Commission. The law as it stands is that verification must be done face up.
The Electoral Commission is a a rag bag of luvvies and failed politicians who think the solution to low turn outs is supermarket and text voting. They have little concept of the need for assured secret voting and allow experiments to take place that fundamentally undermine the principle of the secret ballot - they are more concerned with gimmicks than substance.
Verifying ballots face down means the security numbers are on show which means potentially it is more likely that a voter’s paper can be identified. The Commission isn;t conerned as long as the ’show’ of the result is kept sacred.
Like the Local Government Standards boards they should be disbanded and allow the pols to get on with what they do best (dodgy bar charts et al).