Forget voting intention: What about the country’s “mood”?
March 11th, 2010Research by Dr Jane Green and Dr Will Jennings, Manchester University
A new measure by researchers at the University of Manchester shows a significant problem for Gordon Brown: the mood of the country is against Labour on policy competence. It is as serious for Gordon Brown as it was for the Conservatives before Labour’s landslide victory in 1997. The current decline against Labour is precipitous.
Green and Jennings argue that it is important to study the public mood across a large number of issues: public ratings of party policy competences move together.
This graph shows the authors’ measure, “macro-competence” over six incumbent governments, annually, from 1950 to 2010 (the final data point is February 2010 – the most recently available).
The measure is constructed using a comprehensive dataset of policy questions about trust, competence, and handling, obtained from recorded opinion polls and surveys since the 1950s. Around 2,500 administrations of question were used by Green and Jennings to compile the measure. The data are analyzed extracting the common variance using an algorithm developed by Professor Jim Stimson (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill). This provides an indication of the mood in the country about which party is most competent on policy issues.
The following graphs show macro-competence, annually, for Labour and the Conservative party.
These data point to an important advantage for the Conservatives, although the increase is not of the same order as the decrease for Labour. This may explain why the Conservative party is not doing better against an unpopular Labour government and Prime Minister. The measure is highly correlated with vote choice, leader approval, and many other indicators. For most governments a small up-tick precedes an election. It is yet to be seen whether this will be true for Labour this coming May.
Further information is available from the authors.
william.jennings@manchester.ac.uk
Mike Smithson’s polling column for the News Statesman is here
MessageSpace Advertising
“important advantage for the Conservatives”
yes!
Would it be possible to blow up 1997-2010 in the first picture, with significant events labelled?
It seems that changes in “mood” are rather discrete. The electorate obviously evolves using punctuated equilibria.
Maybe it is only because the scale is too small to show it, but I’m surprised that there doesn’t seem to be an uptick for Labour, and a downtick for the Conservatives, in the most recent data points. From opinion polls and general media mood, wouldn’t you expect to see the macro-competence gap narrowing recently?
These data point to an important advantage for the Conservatives, although the increase is not of the same order as the decrease for Labour
Correct Mike, that is the key factor that Camerons declining leadership lead has held back sufficiently for the election to be back up for grabs.
4. It would also be interesting to compare that potion of the graph with raw polling data of voting intention, probably from the ICM series.
More accurately, changes in direction of mood are rather discrete (at least in the New Labour era). Shifts in mood itself only seem to jump when a new party takes over, not when a new PM from the same party takes over - which I find a bit strange.
Interesting that during the consensus years of the 60s and 70s both were equally low on this measure.
Mike, really interesting article and graphs to compare, and where the spikes appear seems to correspond very neatly with election times when the electorate seem more tuned in politically.
Interesting the long period of tory flatlining from 1995 to 2005. Whereas Labour have been in decline since 2000 when they stopped following tory spending plans.
The more useless a government becomes the less likely even its own supporters are to get out and vote - makes sense.
All points to a hammering for Labour on May 6th.
That’s fascinating stuff - thanks.
It makes a lot of ‘commonsense’ to me and explains the frustration with many voters who *want* to vote Tory but are still struggling to find a clear *reason* that will clinch it for them.
NOTE: I did not write this or have anything to do with it
Very interesting. I thought I was in the monority of anti-Labour people but these graphs reinforce my view.
FPT With Anna Span as their candidate, the Lib Dems can bring a whole new meaning to the slogan BJ4BW.
Blogging and new media coverage of the coming election:
Guido Fawkes & Will Straw on BBC’s The Daily Politics.
The last two graphs seem fairly compelling.
Is it just me or do the Tories improve and fall in both government and opposition, whereas Labour only fall in government and rise in opposition?
5 - I’m not sure the data runs past the new year.
If you wan’t to read the theory its here.
http://www.dcern.org.uk/documents/JenningsGreenECPRMacroCompetence.pdf
17. Labour at its lowest level in 60years ?
Mike. URGENT please remove immediately my post on last threat mike no.438.
by weathercock March 11th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
14.Mike, pretty clear that it was not an article penned by you, but except the compliment for putting it on PB.com.
Very interesting. The graph clearly shows Labour down at the level where governments are usually turfed out.
Wilson, Heath and Thatcher/Major had upswings to the end of their period. But Brown hasn’t (yet)
Author’s homepages (I think)
http://www.socialsciences.manchester.ac.uk/disciplines/politics/about/staff/green/
http://www.ipeg.org.uk/staff/jennings/index.php
Really interesting bit of stat-porn there Mike!
Would be interesting to see how these curves correlate with changes in the economic cycle.
19 tim - In the text above it says the final data point is February 2010.
weathercock @20, don’t worry, nobody else will be able to see what you linked to unless they’re already logged into your gmail account.
Mike, when are you expecting to get the Angus Reid poll up?
I am guessing this work is a development of this paper (which looks at the relationship between “competence” and public opinion between 1971 to 1997)
http://www.unc.edu/depts/europe/conferences/poc2008/papers/Green&Jennings_IssueOwnership.pdf
22 - And it shows the Tories at a level where oppositions don’t usually get elected.
Two parties, two shit leaders, one solution.
NOM + Darling/Cable coup.
That might explain, partly the raw resentment and nastiness Alan Johnson exudes:
“I know what it’s like to be hungry and cold”
I ask about the house in Southam Street where he grew up with his mother and sister after their father abandoned them. “It was horrible,” he says abruptly. “We lived in various Rachman houses and then in another rented property. The owners were slum landlords. We had no bathroom and an outside toilet. Hard to imagine in that area now … but that’s what it was like.”
…I ask about his father, whom Johnson hasn’t seen since he left when the boy was nine.
“My sister got in touch with him. I didn’t want to,” he replies. Was there never a desire to say, look what I’ve achieved without you? “No,” he says and looks down. His sister, Linda, was 15 when their mother died, and fought social services, preventing them from taking her little brother into care, to bring him up herself.
…”it’s in my Labour DNA to do something about that. But there’s more help available. We felt very much alone.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23814237-alan-johnson-i-know-what-its-like-to-be-hungry-and-cold.do
24/29 - Wibbler, see 18.
Thans Mike.
30. I don’t know Tim. The Conservatives looks a little bit above where there were in 1951 and 1970 and only slightly below 1979?
Oh dear http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/03/how-brown-has-cut-defence-spending.html
30. Is that the plan? I’ve no doubt Vince would be up for it.
Surely to measure the “mood” of the electorate is a futile excercise …by definition mood is not tangible so how can you measure it…how non-commited voters cast their vote will ultimately depend on what they decide the moment they enter that polling station
30. Higher than all incoming PMs bar Thatch and Bliar - good enough…
30 And it shows the Tories at a level where oppositions don’t usually get elected
Not how I read it. Currently Tory macro-comp level is mid to high 30s.
This is as good or better than the starting points in the 1st graph…
I have always believe the Conservatives will win because the voters think they are a slightly better option than 5 years of Labour. I don’t think a sceptical mandate is necessarily a bad thing.
30: ummm no tim, they’re about 35, which is about the level most parties get in at.
5 tim, for comparison please produce Browns leadership ratings. Otherwise you simply sound like Rod Crosby.
This is yet more evidence of how the ’soft’ factors are far more significant than the ‘hard’ factors (by which I mean polls). All pointing to a Tory landslide. Soft factors include the general mood in the country as mentioned here, the sheer horror that millions of people will feel as they stand in the lonely polling booth and realise that they might be voting to have Gordon Brown rule over them for another five years, and the fact that if Brown wins then every leftist commentator I can think of (Rawnsley, Ashley, Toynbee, Bright, Freeland…) will have been wrong.
OT- in the last post, there was a (now traditional?) discussion about Labour posters.
I’ve noticed I’ve cut down my frequency of commenting here. Not because it’s a “tory” site, but the sheer scale of the comments means that if you post something that a significant number of people disagree with, you find yourself picking up many, many replies, and responding becomes a huge time sink - but if you don’t you look like you’re ignoring both insults and good counter points.
I think that’s why some leftish posters stick out so much - you end up being on your mettle much more than if you are with the tide. (The same applies to non-labour “controversials” from SeanT to RodCrosby to Martin)
I also find that when I’m commenting on labour issues, I feel like I’m derailing the thread and ending up in a lengthy series of me-based rows that don’t add much to other readers.
It’s a problem of the PB.com’s success - and I’m not sure that there’s anything Mike could or should do about it. there’s tides to these things, and I suspect more Labour posters will pop us now, some of whom will be greeted by disbelief until they become part of the community.
32 tim
Thanks.
Can anyone explain what the “recursive metric” is? Used in the formula on page 10.
Also how do they get an estimate of u_i^2 (the common variance between mood and competence rating)?
Never mind the nation’s mood, my mood today is very mixed.
Nervous, because a large fire has raged within 50 yards of my flat.
Pleased, because the media have routinely described the area as fashionable.
Annoyed, because more than one media outlet has described it as “east London”.
Perplexed, because the fire has been described as taking place in Shoreditch, which stretches estate agents’ definitions of boundaries to the very limit and beyond. Shoreditch is in Hackney. This fire is in the borough of Islington.
35
Excellent stuff form C4. ‘Gordon Brown’s claims are fiction’.
He’s lying.
34 - The further you go back the less poll evidence they find to uses.
1951 only has 2 Gallup polls for instance.
What it does show is that although the Labour ratings were in decline from 1996/7 the Tories took until 2004 to pick up.
The genius of William Hague proved yet again.
“For most governments a small up-tick precedes an election.”
So the slight narrowing of the Tory lead is expected and not necessarily related to the performance of either party leader?
46 Fingers crossed that those 50yrs were enough.
44 - Hopi Sen, the swing leftwards on here is definitely underway and I hope you could contribute to it. While I disagree with many of your views, they are always extremely thoughtful.
My polling column for the News Statesman is here
49:swingback!!
41. Thats right Slackbladder.
What you can clearly see is that the level Blair reached before he took over was historically highly abnormal (which we all know anyway) and the situation the Conservatives are in right now looks very, very typical of where a party would historically expect to be before they take over.
These graphs seem to comfound all those hysterical rantings from the likes of Hefferlump and Mad Hitch that somehow the Conservatives are vastly more unpopular than they should be.
50 - It seems to have been, thank goodness. It was a bit alarming this morning leaving for work and walking past film crews and endless fire engines. I nearly missed my train because taxis couldn’t fly down the City Road as usual. The pb news service provided by Kristin and The Screaming Eagles put my mind at rest.
A small uptick usually precedes an election - isn’t it rather the case that a PM will try to time the election to coincide with the uptick? But Brown, of course, no longer has that option. He should have gone in ‘07 when he had the chance.
From Slugger O’toole. Cameron pissed off with Reg Empey.
http://sluggerotoole.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ulster-unionist-tory-alliance-in-danger-of-collapsing/
Antifrank, unless your fashionable flat has air conditioning, you might want to stay in Leeds or with friends for the night. Although the fire is out, the smoke in the air is still very thick and acrid. Visibility is very poor - 5 minutes ago I could not see the facade of Lowndes House from outside the M&S on Moorgate/Finsbury Pavement.
On the plus side, the Master Gunner and the Curry Leaf are OK.
54 The phenonenom that was Tony and the media love-in has distorted the narrative completely. And that together with the overstating of Labour’s polling lead makes it hard to see previous elections in context.
It’s great to see analysis like this. More please!
58 - The Curry Leaf may well be my destination tonight. Refuge will have to be found somewhere.
If I’m not their top customer, I must be in the top five.
44 Hopi Sen
We are already seeing a big influx of Labour posters.
Whilst I welcome the likes of RedRiding, and your good self, the Lilly Allens of this world are slightly tiresome (as are the Waynes). susanna(h) is an exceptional case amongst the trolls; she was hilarious and much missed.
The Economist interviewed Nick Clegg
The Economist: …There seems to be some obvious nervousness in the markets last week about the prospect of a hung parliament, and there is a real view that it is easier for a government with a majority to do the things that it needs to do.
Mr Clegg: I would switch it round. Any government, of whatever composition, needs to mobilise opinion way beyond its own ranks in order to do the difficult things that it does.
…we will be the guarantors of fiscal responsibility.
… The other big-ticket items are the ones that I hope you are familiar with: the tax reform package, the pupil premium, the new approach to banking, the macroeconomic approach and our political reform programme.
…
The Economist: Just one more thing. Following up on what you said about fiscal responsibility and holding their feet to the fire, and so on, if there is a minority Conservative administration, and George Osborne introduces a spending package during his emergency budget, which you disagree with, will you vote against it? Will you oppose a cut of any kind in 2010-11?
Mr Clegg: Clearly if there is a government – a Liberal Democrat, Labour or Conservative government – who does not have an absolute majority, then of course you need to listen to other people to get stuff through. …
…none of the things I have talked about that I really care about – tax reform, greater social justice through a revamped education system – none of this is possible unless we first clear up, or start putting the fiscal mess onto a sustainable footing. That what-if stuff just defies logic. Why would you play kamikaze politics with something as important as showing the British people that you are going to try to sort this thing out? I can tell you that now. We will be constructive on that, because we want this sorted and we think the British people are entitled to get it sorted.
http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15688184
One of the key things for me in this facinating series of graphs is the lack of up the upswing for labour. There was a mini one around 2008, but it was just a blip in the downfall since 2000.
46 - I don’t think you can blame the media AntiFrank.
Me and the missus went to the East Room, also on Tabernacle street a few months ago, and I was very confused when I got round to looking for it - the website clearly claims it’s in Shoreditch. I ended up walking the length of Tabernacle street having already headed to (real) Shoreditch without thinking.
48 ‘The genius of William Hague proved yet again’
tim, what are you so afraid of? You continually claim he’s an idiot, and yet you persist in attacking him. Doesn’t add up.
57 - Begging the question of what, precisely, he was expecting out of the link up?
Reading between the lines the main trend seems to be over the decades an increase in the perception of Labour’s ability to run the economy, even if the current recession has given this a bit of a bashing.
What ths will correlate perfectly with is the dumbing down of our education system; the socialists long-term plannign is working, much to my dismay.
looks like labour have clearly come down low enough to lose (=cons 97) but Conservatives only just getting to high enough level to win.
Samantha Cameron to speak twice a week on election trail
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23814353-samantha-cameron-to-speak-twice-a-week-on-election-trail.do
The data we used for the above post run to January 2010. These are the most recently available. Breaking the series down monthly does suggest that there may be an uptick for Labour, but it is too soon to say whether this will be significant. We will certainly be taking up any suggestions here. Thank you. Please keep the comments flowing.
Looked at from long distance, Heath looks like a minor perturbation/aberation in a long Con/Lab/Con/Lab pattern.
44 HS
surely one of the problems for left wing bloggers is after 13 years of NuLab they no longer know what “left” means ? It used to have principles such as freedom of conscience, advancing the workers etc.. Blair wrecked all of that. Now “left” simply resorts to the tribalism of “not Tory” without actually knowing what that means.
65: I don’t think that even the most tory die-hard would put the period 1997-2004 as a ’sucess’ in any shape of the word.
“Details of her upgraded role emerged after David Cameron used a TV interview to announce that his wife of 14 years would be rivalling Sarah Brown at the hustings: “You’re going to see a lot more of her. Britain get ready.”
Is he installing a Sam Cam in her dressing room??
63 And incumbants usually engineer the economy if they can to get a boost which they then attempt to ride on the back of.
Gordon can’t use this one as a) he’s left no room to move b) the country is effed.
71. I fear if I answer that point I’ll be drawn into the sort of long involved argument of interest only to us two that I was talking about! Suffice to say i disagree with your premise…
Correction to my post. Feb 2010.
74. Typical Tory. Talking down the country again!
62 Philippe - Interesting. Clegg is speaking utter gibberish in the last paragraph you quote. I understand he doesn’t want to answer the straightforward question, but that is a pretty incompetent piece of obfuscation.
In fact the whole article comes across as rather waffly. I wonder how well he will actually do in the debates?
For those wondering about the “Tea Party” phenomenon in the USA, here is one of their major blogs:
http://townhall.com
We could do with a similar movement in this country, fighting for individual freedom and an end to socialism.
Jim Devine doorstepped by the Daily Telegraph before his appearance in court
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/uk-politics-video/mps-expenses-video/7420120/MPs-expenses-Jim-Devine-says-he-is-innocent.html
76. Typical Tory. Talking down the country again!
LOL!!! You’re funny…
31 - Alan Johnson “We had no bathroom and an outside toilet.”
Same for me and I’m somewhat younger than Mr Johnson, maybe it’s just my upbringing but I presumed that, in his time if not mine, it was the rule rather than the exception.
I’ll stop before this turns into the four Yorkshireman sketch!
75 HS
I don’t see why you should feel your view is not of interest. I have had similar discussions with Scottish Bloggers on issues north of the border. Indeed anything which explains the Left’s view would be a welcome relief from tim’s standard “Hague is an idiot”. At present many people on this site are asking what are the two major parties offering as a positive agenda ? It’s a pretty short list.
Afternoon all
It’s hard to argue with this and corresponds with all the surveys asking people about “a change”. This is the millstone around Labour’s neck now as it was for the Conservatives in 1997. However long and loud Labour exhort the electorate to judge them on their record and not to be taken in by the Conservatives, the desire for a change will be too strong.
I do think the Conservatives got it badly wrong by kick-starting the campaign on January 4th. There’s only so much politics most people are prepared to take and given the contempt in which most politicians are held, offering four months of daily policy announcements was a bad move.
Even four weeks of nightly campaign reports, opinion poll analysis and all the rest will try everyone’s patience. The debates will be a central part of the campaign and while I suspect they will have less impact than some, they will for many be as much of the election as they want or can take especially if the message isn’t going to be sugar-coated.
80 - it really does worry me that these Labour shills think criticising the government and talking down the country are one and the same. There was a recent time in European history when certain moustachioed leaders thought the same, and it’s disconcerting to see Labour - both its supporters and elected representatives - saying similar things.
77 — ” I wonder how well [Nick Clegg] will actually do in the debates?”
I have no idea, Richard. Other posters might answer that.
But I can reming you of this :TV is not about thinking, and competently answering a straightforward question. It’s about feeling, and making an affective effect of masses : by channeling confidence or nervousness, coolness or stiffness; by making people feel hope or fear, sad or happy.
So the body language, the physical appearance and the voice tone of a candidate is much more important than anything he will say — in regard to affecting the masses of voters, in regard thus as to how the debates will affect the next Election outcomes.
82 Spot on Mr Brooke.
57 -another strategic triumph for Cameron and Hague, the Laurel and Hardy pair who specialise in forming alliances that damage both parties
“No one saw that coming, William”
81, when I were a lad I had to clean old razorblades with my tongue, and pay for the privilege!
31: ‘”We had no bathroom and an outside toilet.”‘
Well, I’ve got an outside toilet! Had it installed so that the gardener doesn’t have to tread mud into the house if he’s caught short. What’s the big deal?
FPT - SeanT - “It is noticeable, by contrast, how the SNP appear to be over-represented on pb. This is for the opposite reason to Labour under-representation. Whether you agree with the Nits or not, they have a positive argument to present and a moral fire in their bellies - they believe they are RIGHT.
This gives them the motivation and cullions to come on here and state their case.
QED.”
BritNit SeanT saying nice things about lil ole ScotNit me and my ScotNit colleagues?
I’m so touched I could weep.
The Health care bill is to be slaughtered..
The twisted scheme by which Democratic leaders plan to bend the rules to ram President Obama’s massive health care legislation through Congress now has a name: the Slaughter Solution.
The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill.
You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.
An article in this morning’s edition of National Journal’s CongressDaily breaks the story, starting with the headline: “SLAUGHTER PREPS RULE TO AVOID DIRECT VOTE ON SENATE BILL.” Excerpts:
“House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.
“Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.”
http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=23538
Also, the latest wheeze is to accept that a cost of $1 trillion over 10 years is ‘neutral’. The taxes etc kick in right away but the benefits are phased in over 10 years. After 10 years the cost of Obamacare explodes through the stratosphere but nobody wants to talk about that.
There are issues with using reconciliation on a bill which has not passed the House.
Oh, also it was revealed yesterday that part of the Healthcare bill says that the government will take over the student loan business in the US.
90 SD
save it for Piers Morgan !
894 It’s equally disappointing that some people can’t engage in political debate with their opponents on the merits of the issues and have to resort to equating them with dictators. FWIW I believe that everyone on all sdies on these boards is a democrat and should be treated as such.
87 tim, you claim they’re so inept and yet you’re scared of them. Like you, it doesn’t add up.
84 It’s equally disappointing that some people can’t engage in political debate with their opponents on the merits of the issues and have to resort to equating them with dictators. FWIW I believe that everyone on all sdies on these boards is a democrat and should be treated as such.
So, from the graph is looks a fair assumption that;
1. Labour are at a level of unpopularity that sees them lose the election.
2. The Conservatives, whilst not as wildly popular as Labour before 1997 are at a level that should see them win the election.
However, points one and two don’t automatically mean the Conservaives will get enough seats to form a government.
If Labour end up clinging on to power despite the mood of the nation being against them, they really will be risking the wrath of the people.
85 Very good point, Philippe.
84…
It’s a natural result of the left’s tendency to conflate state and country. They see them as one and the same, so to attack the government is to attack or do down the country. It’s a nice easy way for them to shut down debate or to ignore opposition.
87 tim
yes, but even with that they’re better orgnaised in NI than the sectarian Labour Party. Shows how low you have sunk Hague’s better organised than you are.
85 Following up on that, Phillipe, an old colleague of mine used to be in the am-dram theatrical group with Clegg when they were at Cambridge together. She said that he was not the best actor there as such, but that he did have a “stage presence” which made him noticeable and memorable. If that transfers to the screen, he may have a better chance of making an impression than the other two.
(I hope to be having lunch with her again soon - this time I am going to ask if she was one of the 30!)
Tim B @ 91 — I was scared for a second there. So the *slaughtering* of the Bill means it has a good chance to be signed into Law, right?
Sounds like good news for my wallet; bad news for America.
It shows the Tories on about 35% and Labour on about 25%. In 1979 Labour were on about 30% and the Tories were on 35%. So the Tories are not doing badly it is just Labour are doing extremely badly.
97.EdP Tim is trying to get a schoolyard gang together….very sad…no-one wants to join..
78 - one of the interesting aspects of the Tea Parties is they only want to be active in the areas of the constitution and financial and tax matters.
They deliberately do not have policies on - things such as abortion. Most of them anyway, as it is somewhat of a loose confederation.
This one of the reasons for the alliance problems with the Republicans.
If you look at the graph the Tories are at their highest since last being in power.
96 ‘If Labour end up clinging on to power despite the mood of the nation being against them, they really will be risking the wrath of the people.’
GIN, what good is ‘wrath’, when put up against politicians cocooned in high security bubbles and demonstration is largely outlawed? It will simply be business as usual behind the protective screen of locked gates and armed policemen, until the next election 5 years or longer down the line.
107. Yes, the Toriesthere or there abouts to 51, 70 and 79.
1951 Labour and Conservatives were almost neck and neck look at the ratings then they are identical.
Greek protesters clash with police
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/11/greece-nationwide-strike-austerity-plan
A vision of our future.
The key thing about these graphs is that we can understand the overall trends, over time. They don’t rely on just one issue, as polls do, but represent the general movement, up and down, or many, many issues. When voters think the Labour party can handle one issue, they tend to rate the party more positively overall. The series is associated with leader ratings, but not the same thing. Macro-competence matters, even controlling for PM approval, for example.
The economy is just one issue of many. We have analysed these trends with - and without - the economy, and modeled the effects of mood on vote, with other economic measures in the frame. Macro-competence stands out as a very important predictor.
Bottom line: yes, there may be small uptick for Labour (and the monthly series indicate this may happen) but Labour’s position is very precarious. Also, the trend isn’t symmetric. The Conservatives are not gaining all that Labour is losing. This could change. We’ll go on updating the data as it becomes available. Its a huge task, but well, well worth it!!
Then when Churchill was leader 1951-55 you see how bad he was as a peacetime leader. (Although we owe so much to him for his wartime leadership).
108. Well, it depends how bad things get doesn’t it? If Labour end up somehow clinging on to power with a minority government you could evisage demonstrations. Keep in mind the economy and currency would probably be crashing and I reakon you could easily see the government collapse under a vote of no confidence and extreme unpopularity within a year.
97 - on a real issue, I will properly engage in debate. But I’m not willing to be told that speaking against the government is somehow unpatriotic. It’s a very dangerous argument to make, and worth of a comparison with dictators.
112. Good to hear you will keep monitoring. These graphs are very, very interesting and give us an insight into political trends over a very long period.
Louise Slaughter is an excellent name and should have its own television programme.
101- the problem remains what it has always been - the Dems do not have enough votes to pass this thing.
3 out of 4 Americans oppose it. Now 60% oppose reconciliation. It is getting more unpopular as time goes on. Now the trillion over 10 years figure is in the open, and people realize that the costs kick in right away but the benefits don’t for almost 10 years, meaning that Obamacare is much costlier than advertized, support is ebbing ever faster.
The fact that they are looking to stunts like this shows how concerned they are.
At the end of the day, as I’ve said before, something has to pass, and Obama will sign anything. He has invested all his political capital and very possibly cost his party control of the House, possibly the Senate too, in November - an all in order to ram through a bill that nobody wants.
You can’t make it up.
“No bathroom and an outside toilet, that’s terrible.
I went to stay in a Hotel while my builders were in”
Kirstie Allsopp advises on Tory Housing Policy
112 Jane Green
Thanks for some very interesting research.
Could you perhaps explain Stimson’s algorithm, which seems to underpin the mood calculation? I don’t quite get it.
Very interesting stuff.
I find it interesting that in virtually all cases before a change of government there is an ‘up flick’ in the mood in the last year or so of an administration. I guess this is because people feel a change is about to happen and feel optimistic about that. I certainly remember a general mood of growing optimism in 1996 or so based on an assumption that Major would be gone and Blair in power within a year.
Interestingly this didn’t happen at the end of the Callaghan government, and also no evidence of this happening now. I wonder why? Is it that in both cases, although the government in place was unpopular there was no general enthusiasm for the likely new government. Perhaps rather than ‘Things can only get better’, more “Things will be just as bad but with a different guy at the helm’.
tim having a touch of the 99%’s
Jane Green @ 112 — “Macro-competence stands out as a very important predictor.”
*Takes note.*
“We’ll go on updating the data as it becomes available.”
Do you have a blog à la http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ ? If not, please keep us posted here.
121. There may not have been an “uptick” in 78/79 but Labour were generally very high for a party about to be thrown out of power - That was really down to Jim Callaghan’s personal populaity, IMO.
112, thanks for your article here and the research in it
121 - the effect is so marked that one is tempted to worry that it’s actually an artefact of an increased density of available surveys in these periods. Of course the model should not behave like this… but one is suspicious these days!
121 – Professor, a much more likely scenario is that as the Callaghan and Brown governments had both destroyed the British economy, there was little to look forward to - other than nasty medicine to come, irrespective of how took power.
Leaders (Harman, Cameron, Clegg + various other) answer questions from schoolkids
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/school_report/8560930.stm
128, where’s Brown? Attending a critical meeting with the Andorran Junior Minister for Fish?
121: Interesting to note, potential when judging if this is a ‘79′ election, or a ‘92′ election.
Jane Green,
I you had to, would you bet on a Conservative Overall Majority or on a Hung Parliament?
(I was waiting for our Eagle Man to ask it; but he’s probably busy changing diapers, or making push-ups.)
28. Leaders (Harman, Cameron, Clegg + various other) answer questions from schoolkids
No Brown?
O/T BBC ticker - ‘Defence Secretary announces US forces to take over security of MusaQuala from British troops’. No link.
I have been posting on and off for six months that this period feels just like the run up to 1979. That was much shorter though the mood for change was palbable - just as now. This research seems to give some scientific support to that gut feeling. A tory majority of between 40 and 60.
127 - What a nuanced comment - no chance of a balanced view from you then.
I suspect if you had done the same analysis in the USA during late 2008 your would have found a define optimistic feel about the possibility of Obama becoming president, despite a similar destruction of the US economy by Bush (or if we are honest here - destruction of the global economy by global financial irresponsibility) and similar recognition that whoever won in 2008 would have to put in place painful measures.
No I think there is more to it than that - while there may be enthusiasm for the ‘time for a change agenda’ there is simply no great enthusiasm for Cameron as that change, and frankly there hasn’t been for long before the credit crunch came a-calling.
Followng on from some of the discussions on the last thread and invitations here to try and identify positive reasons for supporting a party I thought it might be worth trying to identify some policies the majority can agree on.
Here are some suggestions. As a natural Tory the list does worry me a little.
SNP policy: no jail sentences under 6 months. Totally common sense. Short sentences disrupt housing, benefits, employment and make a return to criminality more likely.
SNP policy: minimum price for a unit of alcohol. Surely a public health no brainer.
Lib Dem policy: no-one earning less than £10K pays income tax. Simplifies the tax system and encourages the employment of the low paid.
Tory policy (at last): NI holidays for new employers. Best bet I can think of for creating employment through small businesses.
All parties (to varying degrees) a high speed train link.
Tory policy (now partially adopted by Labour): freeze on wages in the public sector except for the low paid.
There are of course areas of policy that are rather more complicated like deficit reduction but can others think of clear simple policies that would make this a better place (or for that matter disgree with the one’s I have identified?
Mood…
I am standing as a council canditate in a solidly working class part of North London. I was out getting nomination signatures from neighbours last night, neighbours I know well enough to chat to but have never discussed politics with before.
If their mood is anything to go by, Labour is in for a dreadful night on May 6th - Brown came in for a repeated monstering - he is loathed.
I think there something badly wrong with the polls.
121 IMO the optimism about Blair in 1996-7 was unusual - probably unique in my lifetime. I would guess that the upswings around the time of previous elections are more to do with the state of the economy at those times than with perceptions of the likely positive effects of a general election.
134 You are forgetting that Obama is the US Tony - all the hopey/changey stuff has already been used here - hence the background circumstances are quite different.
134: Yes and no. The fact is that Consverative (or right leaning) goverements don’t promise the earth, along with sunshine and fluffy bunnies. They’re there to sometimes do an unpleasant job. Thatcher did it well, and was rewarded with 2 further election wins.
Obama, on the other hand, came in on a high, and it’s all been downhill for him since. Which tends to happen with governments of the left. See Labour post 2000 on this chart.
136 vulpus, which party are you standing as a candidate for please?
Afternoon all. Welcome to the couple of people who have delurked.
The mood is sick of Brown rather than delight at the Tory leadership. It should be enough and definitely will be once we’ve seen Brown at the debates. Yesterday’s Lord Ashcroft masterpiece from the PM showed he’s going in like a punchy heavyweight.
He’s got a big clunking fist but bugger all footwork.
Really interesting research from the scholars at Manchester. Seen as today is ‘PB.com Review Day’ - I would say it is this kind of in-depth analysis that makes this website stand out from the crowd.
That and the host’s very sensible football allegiance which I share and which disgracefully I forgot to put in my survey results for why this site is excellent! Up the clarets!
137: The entire country was on a feel-good trip from the mid-90s. The era of Brit-pop, Cool Britannia etc.
142 - Honourable and admirable but surely not ‘Sensible’
Though this comment might be due to my spending around 100 Saturdays in the 1990s on Spotland’s Sandy Lane
129. “128, where’s Brown? Attending a critical meeting with the Andorran Junior Minister for Fish?”
Brown’s always hiding in schools, and now he disappears? Very odd.
A taste of things to come, no doubt:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/7420350/Network-Rail-workers-vote-for-strike.html
Presumably Labour will be trying desperately to head this off until after May 6th.
145, maybe he only likes visiting schools when the kids don’t ask difficult questions. Here’s an illustration of Brown enjoying himself:
http://toryardvaark.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/brown_swastika.jpg
Top 5 most read stories on Telegraph website..
Jennifer Aniston`s revenge on Angelina Jolie: a very s*xy photo-shoot
Chief exorcist says Devil is in Vatican
Romanian street sign warns drivers of ‘drunk pedestrians’
Kidnapped British boy ‘found’ in Pakistan
US school cancels prom to avoid lesbi@n student bringing a date
145: Those kids are too old for him…he only likes primary or infant schools. The kids might actually know something in a secondary (or they know who he is and might beat him up)
140 - Blue.
135 DavidL
Re: 10k income tax threshold.
Danny Finkelstein said of this: “The vast bulk of the money goes to those earning more than £10,000. It is a very expensive tax cut, very poorly targeted on the working poor.”
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2010/01/every-so-often-i-become-complacent-i-think-the-point-about-borrowing-has-sunk-in-and-that-no-one-is-going-seriously-to-adva.html
Thank you James M @ 2.31pm.
New details published of expenses charges against MPs and peer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/11/labour-mps-tory-peer-expenses-details
151: the point about tax thresholds is meaningless anyway in these days of tax credits. I expect lower paid workers have an effective tax free allowance of £10,000 anyway after you take them into account.
47 - “Excellent stuff form C4. ‘Gordon Brown’s claims are fiction’.
He’s lying.”
Yep, can’t believe anyone is surprised by this?
151 Dave B
what would Fink know about it ? He’s never done a real day’s work in his life. Take people out of the tax system and you increase the to work, so the benefit trap diminishes - better than the IHT proposal by a long stretch.
Philippe Magnan, I am still predicting a sure Conservative majority, although these data also hold a very serious warning for any government starting out without a strong groundswell of trust and support. If the Conservative government wins in 2010, it will be a very, very difficult 5 years.
A general note on up-ticks: it is hard to see from the graph, due to its size, but most of these up-ticks occur over a year or so. Labour only have a couple of months. It would be extraordinary to see a large improvement.
Christ - they’ve done it now
paulwaugh Great drama re 3 Lab MPs in court over exes. Refusing to go in the dock, declaring Parliamentary privilege being breached.
104 - If I may say so Paul that is a very very good point. I remember 1979 very well and I would say that David Cameron has better ratings than Maggie did who actually lagged behind those of her Party and was even sen as something of a drag in their reach for power.There was huge unease about this theory of monetarism and Sir Keith Joseph was seen as a bit bonkers - though of course he wasn’t.
Dave B.2.40pm Maybe it is more contentious but the Fink’s comment seems to be based on a number of assumptions. Clearly having a larger personal allowance means a marginally higher rate applied to those that do pay tax and it may be necessary to adopt the Government’s current policy of not giving the benefit of the band at all to higher earners. Nevertheless marginal rates of tax on low earners are far too high and it seems a step in the right direction to me.
158. Are any of the 3-4 MPs standing in the GE ?
Do you remember biorythms? My chart sort of when up and down, then started a big climb, it reached its peak at the end of the chart, so the best day of my life was the final one. Still there are a few who would agree with that.
Tories spike in the mid-eighties due entirely to the Falklands, so not an economic reason.
161 The Ghost of Harry Flashman
No
157 So true Jane - be interesting to see how the Tories strategy of being ‘honest’ plays during the campaign and if it gives them enough slack if they win.
158, what about the peer?
163. Bad news for Labour - they are going down swinging.
Sam West (actor and director) on R5 getting torn a new one by Dick Bacon, quite amusing…trying to witter on about how evil capitalism, but no ideas about alternations / solutions…
Best comment was his opinion that all share holders should be liable for everything a company does (even the little old ladies) and that fat cats never get locked up….only problem is his latest play about ENRON…erhhhh where is the CEO now (as Dick Bacon pointed out).
156 Alan Brooke, 160 David L
David Willetts gave us some numbers in a 2005 article:
“When I asked the Treasury last year how much it would cost to raise the personal tax allowance to £10,000, for example, it estimated the cost at £30 billion. Of this, only about £2 billion was spent on people who are taken out of tax altogether. The bulk went on the rest of us, who all gain from higher tax allowances. So raising the personal tax allowance costs an awful lot of money because it helps almost everyone. And it is worth least to people on low incomes who don’t get the full value of the policy.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article536372.ece
alternations -> alternatives
158 Parliamentary privilege? Troughing idiots. Crown versus Parliament; this is going to be fun to watch.
166. 3 way marginal
Just watching the repatriation of the servicemen killed in Afghanistan and the commentator has just spent the last minute plugging Gordon Brown - how he went to Afghanistan at the weekend to thank the troops etc etc - this is absolutely unbelieveable even by the BBC’s standards. Politics should be kept out of these events -what a disgrace. I’m going to complain AGAIN!
We must all pray these Labour MPs maintain their noble and principled stand. Parliamentary privelige is important, and the fact these three want to abuse it, to save their sorry lying arses, will remind everyone how most Labour MPs are grisly, amoral, greedy, hypocritical scum.
PS interesting article at top of t’blog. Ta
An interesting bit of analysis. But it really just confirms what we already instinctively know from the polls / general electorate sniffing - Labour are unpopular, but so are the Tories.
173. 270+ service men dead in Afghanistan, no of coffins met by Gordo = 0.
http://twitter.com/BBCLauraK/status/10325060390
Dave B. This again applies the traditional ceteris paribus principle so beloved of economists and so absent in the real world. As I said in my reply this would clearly have to be addressed and there are a variety of ways to do it. Do you dispute the principle of using such a policy to make the employment of the low paid more attractive at the margins or do you think credits make it irrelevant? My understanding is that in fact many low paid don’t get credits because they don’t have dependents etc. Was that not the problem when the 10p band was abolished?
169 Dave B
except that a major commitment to the tax system cannot take place just in isolation. It needs reform of both tax allowances and rthe benefits system. Anything which simplifies the tax system and incentivises the return to work and out of the benefit system is correct. Since the change “helps almost everyone”, that’s only fair, since “we’re all in this together”.
More than three quarters of electors – 77 per cent - would vote on the Internet if they could, according to a new survey released today.
The poll also found 56 per cent had visited political websites – signalling a substantial interest in online politics among voters.
The survey of 1,000 people by social media consultants LEWIS Communications was conducted to gauge public attitudes to the use of social media and digital technology by political parties.
http://www.redragonline.com/2010/03/kerry-mccarthy-irish-pop-star.html
181. Lazy b*ggers.
johnrentoul
Election-winning wheeze http://bit.ly/aBh2uc
Do I detect the tiniest hint, like a shy crocus peeping through frost, that the political narrative is turning against Labour again? After a long winter of Tory backpedalling?
Today has seen three developments, all bad for the government.
Gordon Brown is being openly accused of lying about Defence, and there are rumours he may be recalled by Chilcot
Labour have punted their brilliant new idea, a poll tax for the dead, which has gone down like a tankard of catpuke
Now we see three Labour MPs trying to get away with blatant thieving by claiming “parliamentary privelige”
Hmm…
Another note on up-ticks.
First, to reiterate a point: most of the upticks have happened over a year or so, not in a couple of months, although breaking the series down into monthly intervals does show some movement.
What causes up-ticks?
We don’t know…yet. However, this could just be timing. Governments can spend money, make popular announcements, and time elections to recoveries. The other possibility is that, faced with a real choice, voters begin to trust what they know, or make a more serious evaluation between two parties. That would be consistent with the current polls. Either way, its not a sure thing, and there probably won’t be a significant up-tick before May.
By the way. Will Jennings is in Vancouver at a conference this week but I’m sure he’ll chime in when he can.
185 Jane - Thanks for the original article and the feedback.
Is there somewhere we can track any updates over the next couple of months?
http://twitter.com/wallaceme/status/10325411297
It seems the gapping ideological chasm between the Tories versus the Labour, Lib Dems and Media is not going to be discussed in this election. The chasm between the parties is “Innovation”. The Tories state they aspire to achieve innovation in government and they believe in it. The other groupings are furious working to deny the existence of innovation because to admit its existence would make transparent the abject failure of Labour to the electorate. The best analogy to use is that the Tories believe the world is round and Labour, Lib Dems and Media believe the world is flat (due to self-interest).
What is Innovation? Innovation is the use of large quantities of intelligence to discover new ways of doing that gains a material benefit. Innovation leads to either efficiency (primary purpose: saving) or a new activity (primary purpose: new income). Innovation can seldom be theorized and require hands on experience to occur. It is not copying because the innovation has no identical example elsewhere unless the person working in extreme isolation.
Although, the current political debate is about innovation of the efficiency variant (cuts/saving money) e.g. the Tories state they will innovate and find extra savings and Labour + Lib Dems + Media saying that is impossible because innovation does not exist!
It’s, perhaps, better to focus on innovation of the new activity variant from long gone Tory Government. Every person lives in economy funded by the innovation of a unique Stock Market being the economy of a nation. An innovation greatly imitated – unsuccessfully – by many other nations. To the ignorant eye it may look like copy of Wall Street! Whilst WS is the expression of USA’s economic power, the LSE is Britain’s economic power (without it the nation would shrivel to nothing). The LSE was developed as a competitive rival to WS. The Tories rejected copying USA economic management in order to ensure LSE functioned differently and this gave it a competitive advantage. The entire idea of Tory innovation was to enhance performance from being dissimilar to the competitors’. It also required committed, enthusiastic and passionate Chancellors of the Exchequer to administer the nitty-gritty aspects of the LSE role as the UK economy.
Let’s face facts: Gordon Brown’s idea to copy the USA style economic management lock, stock and smoking barrel and encourage the LSE to be facsimile of Wall Street can be considered a catastrophic failure to the tune of several hundred billions of pounds. It can be said: to a certainty of 90% that this would not have been the outcomes had the Tories continued in power simply because the LSE would have evolved to be very different from WS. Clearly, Gordon Brown lacked commitment, enthusiasm and passion for being the Chancellor of the Exchequer (being responsible for the UK economy) and couldn’t wait to farm off responsibility onto unelected officials! Not that he’s alone in being turned into fool by the desire to be the “Hero”! Splashing out all those countless billions on lovey-dovey feel-good policies with scant regard to how the borrowing will be paid.
It should be of no surprise that no innovations have issued forth from the Labour Governments reign of ineptitude because the best lies are those that are genuinely believed by the speaker. Therefore, those of the Labour Party genuinely believe innovation does not exist! The Lib Dems have many of their current MP’s within direct defeat by Tory candidates. Finally, the vast majority of the Media are simply Liberal bigots akin to Rightwing Bigot. A bigot it a bigot regardless of the party they support (ineptitude or competency are irrelevant details to loyalties).
Which camp are you in? The camp that says the world is round? Or, are you in the camp that says the world is flat and venturing to close to the edge risks falling into a great nothingness?
Dr Green.
On the subject of leader ratings.
Do you work with leader approval rates alone or do you take into account negatives as well.
184: I certainly think a bit of momentum has been lost by Labour this week. If we look at what has ‘dominated’ the weeks previously.
Tears for Piers
Bullygate
Ashcroft
With Chilcote at the end of last week, its been quietish, and there has been more negatives for labour creeping in.
Labour needs more real voters. Not just You Gov voters which may not be the same thing.
In light of the Glenrothes postal vote debacle, can they simply go to housing estates where immigrants are living and register them?
They will fill the request in if they think it keeps their benefits going. Vote Tory get sent home etc, or no money for you and the family if they take over. I can picture the line on the doorstep now.
Problem is so many are illegal they have to separate the wheat from the chaff, with English as a 2nd language.
Still a sensible exercise in marginals I would have thought.
185
Jane
Thanks for the article.. enjoyed it..
What causes upticks? Well usually bribing voters with their own money I suggest.. giveaways before an election..
Callaghan had none to give so no uptick.. And Brown has little to give as well…
177 TGHOF, politicians should keep away from the repatriation ceremonies.
What friend or relative of a dead serviceman would want the PM grandstanding for his own nefarious means, on such a dignified occasion?
If Brown wants to make any form of amend to the dead and injured, he should provide the armed forces with the equipment and the funding they require for current military operations in Afghanistan, and stop lying.
190 Slackbladder
Labour have reached the same point as the Tories; they have harnessed the “we’re not the other lot” to death. Now everyone is going to have to produce policies.
190. It was Titmarsh wot won it
Hilarious. Parliamentary privilege was not intended to protect people taking the piss out of the general public.
If people think Ashcroft was bad for the Tories, this trial will be pure poison for Labour when it gets to Southwark Crown Court at the end of the month.
191.
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/editor-s-picks-ignore/revealed-the-100-000-missing-glasgow-voters-1.1012572
“The city’s record in maintaining an electoral register ranks among the worst in the UK with the accuracy of the list also called into question. The survey, by the Electoral Commission, found Glasgow’s roll was only 75% complete and numbers on the roll had fallen sharply in the last ten years”
Yesterday, I asked Gordon Brown if he’d like to rule out a “giveaway Budget” on March 24 and commit himself to spending any spare Treasury cash to paying off the deficit. He declined, as reported here.
Today, on BBC2’s Politics Show, Andrew Neil asked a very similar question of Liam Byrne, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
Mr Byrne replied: “I can tell you this is not going to be a big give-away Budget.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100029559/the-treasury-tells-gordon-brown-no-giveaway-budget/
196 Do we know whether Lord Hanningfield is using the ‘parliamentary privilege’ gambit?
181. “More than three quarters of electors – 77 per cent - would vote on the Internet if they could, according to a new survey released today.”
I find that very worrying. We have enough trouble with electoral fraud as it is without adding the Internet to the equation. I seriously doubt that Internet would prove to be safer or cheaper than pencil, paper and the ballot box.
196 Yes
Actually, Labour should call their poll tax on death, the Soul Tax. Seeing as every time a soul is made, the grieving relatives will have to cough 10 per cent of everything.
It’s SUCH an election winner. Labour: creating more anguish since 1997.
186 Richard Nabavi - if Mike is interested, we could update here. I’m on twitter @DrJaneGreen so could post updates there.
198
ScottP
Well as the reporter is Kirkup, it will be a giveaway budget. Kirkup is a prize grade 1 idiot.
Richard Nabavi 3.13 As a Lord I don’t think he can. It is the Commons that took on the King-most of the Lords were on his side.
AlanBrooke, DavidL
The CSJ have proposed ‘Dynamic Benefits’, which, as I understand it attacks the problem from the other end, by tapering the withdrawal of state benefits, so that low earners are not penalised by high marginal tax rates.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/5336871/how-to-spring-the-benefits-trap.thtml
http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/default.asp?pageref=266
I don’t know if this has been adopted by the Conservatives.
202. Watch out SeanT - could be a wild night with Oaten and Rennard
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/03/mark-oatens-off-to-thailand.html
“Oaten is one of a handful of MPs and peers who are off to the InterParliamentary Union’s annual gathering in the Thai city at the end of this month.
Labour veteran John Austin is also going to the event, which stretches from 27 March to 1 April. Most MPs will be busy defending their seats, but both Oaten and Austin are standing down at the next election.
Three peers are also going, Labour’s Lord Morris and two Lib Dems, Lord Rennard and Baroness Thomas.”
205 BBC reporting that he’s using it too. Argument is that the Parlimentary Auth ought to judge them not the criminal courts
Keens fined £1,500 - was nearly £5,700 but their mates in HoC gave them a discount.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7420345/MPs-expenses-Labours-Ann-and-Alan-Keen-ordered-to-repay-1500.html
202 SeanT - And I also think we should give credit to the Tories for flushing this one out. It was quite clear from the Guardian article of a few weeks ago that Labour were planning to keep it secret until after the election. I reckon the tombstone poster forced their hands, and (as I said at the time) was intended specifically to do that.
196, 201. Idiot.
However, luckily for Tories, he is a single obscure Lord facing three elected and LABOUR MPs; and for some reason, MPs’ troughing always seems worse than Lords doing it. Maybe someone less knackered than me (I have just finished writing a 100,000 word thriller!) can explain why.
This is what Tories need now. Some basic political luck, so they can get the old mojo back, and go on the attack. Labour have had a long streak of good fortune, perhaps the tide is turning.
It has to, eventually. Dunnit?
Jane/William - Thank you for an absolutely fascinating article. This is one area that the pollsters will always struggle to measure so this really adds something to the mix. I don’t think I’ve ever been so informed about the run-up to the election - that’s why I love PB.
I’ve just this ‘academic’ article from these 2 boffins at Manchester Uni. What a load of guff.
I too have studied poitics at University, and what i can tell you about academics is that if they add numbers and a graph to some concept or other, they will. And from that they will extrapolate the most bizarre conclusions.
The point i’m making is that while they are probably right to draw a declining line against Gordon Brown, they should assume that it has anything to do with his policies.
This is what academics and polsters just don’t get, namely that it is the mood of the country vis a vis the PERSON that counts, not his or her economic policies.
If one compares 2 ficticious people. One has a positive personality but is seen as an economic numpty, the other is gloomy, yet an expert in his field, in politics at least, it will be the positive twit that beats the negative expert every time.
Why?
Simple.
Because the positive person imparts a feeling of hope and change, whereas the expert who is negative imparts a feeling of imprisonment and despair. Firstly because they are negative, but also because they imply that they are needed for their fatherly stewardship which is open ended and could last indefinitely. And this is what people absolutley loathe.
So basically what i am saying is that if Gordon Brown’s ratings for economic competence are going down, it is because of the improving economic backdrop which is making people see Gordon Brown in a different light. People like him really have no chance of electoral success ever, because they are only appreciated when times are bad. They then set about trying to mend the situation and improve the economy, which people are appreciative of, but then as things start to improve, people want afresh start and don’t want to be reminded of the bad times, which in this case means Gordon Brown.
It just shows you how much of a poitical genius Margaret Thatcher was, when after she had stepped down and was replaced by John Major. The 1992 election was looming and the Tories were in danger of losing. Margaret Thatcher was interviewed about the Tories prospects, ans she quite simply said “Be Positive”. She didn’t say ‘Think Positive’ or ‘Act Positive’, or ‘Let’s fight on our record’, or ‘let’s fight to keep Socialism out of britain’, or any other such waffle. She just said BE positive. Being suggests actuality. Thinking and acting, however, suggests cunning and dishonesty and manipualtion, and people don’t trust that or like it.
And i’m afraid this is the trouble with Gordon Brown. He thinks far too much, as do socialists in general. Tony Blair on the other hand was just a positive person who naturally warmed to.
Tony Blair won those 3 elections, not the labour party.
So can Gordon Brown suddenly BE positive and change his entire persona?
213 jupiter1 And your credentials are?
207 Maybe Sean could arrange for some of his outreachees to help.
PAGING MORRIS DANCER !!!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/11/bow_down_before_the_ubertrout/
206. Yes I have heard IDS talking about this but I am not sure if it is adopted. It still seems a lot more complicated and bureaucratic to me. One thing I was tempted to put on my list was the withdrawal of WFTC for those earning over £50K. People earning twice the average wage (and paying large amounts of tax) getting the same money back). Plus I can tell you from personal experience that WFTC is a disaster for the self employed on variable incomes. If we are going to cut down on admin costs we must find ways to simplify the system and I am not sure if this is it.
207. lol. Actually, I will be in Bangkok the very same time as them, for the launch of the Thai language edition of Genesis Secret, at the Bangkok book fair.
Maybe I should invite Mister Oaten to the shindig? Otherwise, I think it is fairly unlikely I will run into him, as we probably won’t be visiting the same nightclubs.
174 - Sean T… I really feel you should stop sitting on the fence and say what you actually think.
p.s…totally agree.
217 DavidL
whatever is put in place has to be simple. When we have got to the stage when the people administering tax and benefits don’t understand them , how on earth are ordinary people meant to know what is going on ?
218. Rennard bats for the right team tho ?
http://order-order.com/2009/05/21/rennard-round-up/
214 Plato
Credentials ?
I rest my case.
189 Tim. What do you mean by ‘negatives’?
For the macro-competence measure we use as many issue handling/performance/trust measures as we can locate.
To compare the substantive meaning of the series with other indicators, we also use as many measures as possible, as long as they are repeated a minimum number of times (which is what allows us to extract the variance over time). We’ve compared this measure to PM approval and Leader approval, economic performance (subjective and ‘objective’), party identification, vote intention, and a great measure by John Bartle on left-right mood.
Alanbrooke. Maybe I can add simplification of the benefits system to my list? I am a little disappointed that no one has suggested any additional policies but maybe Sean T scared them off by pointing out it was off topic.
218. Mark Oaten would be rather useful in Bangkok, as a sort of miner’s canary. If he’s wandering towards a bar looking gleeful, it’s probably one to miss.
Greece postpones GDP, job data release on thurs due to strike
http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid=7787454&subject=economic&action=article
Eh? What does data have to do with strikes? Are the people who compile the data on strike?
213:
Gordon Brown - the flawed genius who no one likes. Yes, yes, we’ve heard all that from Kinnock…
Alanbrooke. Maybe I can add simplification of the benefits system to my list? I am a little disappointed that no one has suggested any other ideas but maybe Sean T scared them off by his reference to the topic of the thread. He seems to have given up now.
211. I suspect anything directly associated with expenses scandal is a ‘pox on all your houses’ issue.
While those of us who spend our time reading and posting to political blogs might be keeping a tally of Labour, Tory & Lib Dem miscreants, most of the voting public will see it as simply an indication that they are all at it and the only winners might be the smaller parties in a general sense.
Where this may have a more specific effect is in individual constituencies where the incumbent MP has had problems with expenses. A sort of reverse incumbent/personal support effect perhaps. This may help the Tories to a limited extent, as of course proportionately they have less incumbents. I wonder how many of the incumbents in the key Labour held marginals have been specifically fingered for dodgy expenses.
The Times seems to have the most informative article on the expenses prosecution:
Three Labour MPs and a Conservative peer pleaded not guilty to fiddling their Parliamentary expenses today as they insisted that they should not face justice in court.
Elliot Morley, David Chaytor, Jim Devine said they should be judged by the House of Commons authorities rather than endure a trial by jury.
During an historic court appearance a barrister for the three MPs said they were protected from prosecution by the ancient right of parliamentary privilege.
Julian Knowles told City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court it would also be unfair for the men to face a criminal trial when other MPs accused of fiddling their expenses had been dealt with by the parliamentary authorities.
…
The barrister requested that the MPs should be spared the humiliation of standing in the dock. He was denied. They spoke, from behind 12ft security glass, only to confirm their names and dates of birth.
Mr Knowles told District Judge Timothy Workman: “They also maintain that to prosecute them in the criminal courts for their parliamentary activities would infringe the principle of the separation of powers, which is one of the principles which underpins the UK’s constitutional structure.
“The principle of the subject matter of these proceedings is also covered by the Parliamentary privilege conferred upon [the MPs] by Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689.”
Lord Hanningfield also entered a not guilty plea in the court on charges relating to his claims for House of Lords allowances. His barrister indicated that he would also challenge the jurisdiction of the court.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7058379.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1
227 getting rid of the M4 bus lane
Mike. Will there be an update of the charts nearer the election? It would be very interesting, answering the question, will the Labour confidence figure continue to fall or will they get the up-tick seen in the past?
213
Jupiter1
<iSo can Gordon Brown suddenly BE positive and change his entire persona?
You mean admit to mistakes and be self deprecating and tell the truth?
re 197 GOHF - I hope that we’ll all be keeping an eye locally on how many people get added to the electoral register at the last minute once parliament is dissolved.
I see Jack Straw has visited James Bulger’s mum…whereas I have every sympathy with her loss are we not in danger of having Government policy decided by media driven hysteria
231. Even if there were an up tick, it wouldn’t be like those in 1996, 1974, 1969 etc that seemed to kick in up to one year before the election. This would be a much smaller effect, seeing as the data are still going down just a few months before the election has to happen.
232 madasafish, as you post Brown is probably undergoing an intensive session of smiling practice, with Fat Eddie Balls and Mandy the Cat.
Isn’t this were Gordo is today ? Launching the £30 billion high speed rail programme. Daft thing is we could have paid for it already out of the loose change from his economic cock-ups, and that includes the inevitable overspends!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1257042/30billion-high-speed-rail-plans-unveiled-Lord-Adonis.html
229 - “The barrister requested that the MPs should be spared the humiliation of standing in the dock” - who do these idiots think that they are?
233 DT
you mean like swine flu ?
228. Further expenses-related scandals will hurt Labour more for the reasons you say: there are simply more Labour incumbent MPs, and more Labour MPs being charged.
I would add that the stink is slightly worse for Labour, as they are meant to be the highminded party of the poor (you expect Tories to be greedy), and also, of course, they are the government, and they could have changed the rules but didn’t.
The differential effects won’t be great, but in an election that might be very tight, just 1 percent either way could be crucial. And this 1 percent, from ThievingLabourBastardsPleadParliamentaryPrivelige-Gate, will go to the Tories.
237: They’re MPs…you know that breed of human above us mortals. Homo Troughious Hypocricous.
Can’t believe those idiots are trying to claim they are above the law.
Where they do have a point is the seeming partiality of just them being charged when there are many others who have done similar.
237. They don’t want to do time - political considerations are long gone for the 3 banditos.
What the graphs don’t show - and what is critical to the nature of any change of government this time - is the impact of Others, whose support has increased from about 2% in 1951 to about 32% now.
229 It’s a pity they’re not being led into the dock in orange jumpsuits, and manacles.
“The barrister requested that the MPs should be spared the humiliation of standing in the dock”
Lots of innocent people stand in the dock and are proved to be so. Why should it be considered “humiliation”. Or is that just an admission of guilt?
222 - Jane.
I mean the negative side of the PM/leader approval equation.
What I’m suggesting is that a high negative side to the equation against Brown, say last summer, will feed through to a positive benefit for the Tories as voters react against what they dislike most more than for what they like (which after expenses issues was no one really)
In the same way the fall in hostility to Brown since the Autumn may be feeding through to a decline in Tory advantage since.
Perhaps the best period to look at would be the period around the calling off of the Autumn 2007 when Browns negatives jumped a huge 16 points overnight.
Did this feed through to an uptick in Tory competence by comparison?
238…I have a bit of sympathy for Straw - if he does nothing the press will slaughter him
IPCC guilty of underestimating future sea level rise:
Sea-level-gate
Professor Davey. If the last data is for Feb 10 and the election is in 2 months it is surely too late for anything more than a flattening of the curve?
To be honest I am not entirely sure what this is really measuring and whether comparators can properly be made over the period of the graph. Can one really compare the sychophantic and respectful media of the 1950s to what politicians have to face today (BBC excepted for Government ministers of course)? Would this not have an effect on something as amorphous as “mood”.
237. So if I’ve understood this right their defence isn’t “I didn’t do it” but is “Im above the law NYAH! NYAH! NYAHHH!!!????”
247. Well, he deserves a good kicking in the press. Not for this, but for other reasons.
246 - Autumn 2007 election
247 DT
oh come on , he’s done nothing for years but he’s still there.
138 - I was under the impression the enthusiasm for Blair in 1997 was a creation of the media (a bit like the Diana fuss). Remember Blair got fewer votes than Major in 92.
248. More voodoo science. No one cares any more. No one believes a word these people say. Sorry. That’s what scientists get for lying.
It’s also 5 degrees outside when it should be 12.
Case closed.
He’s not been the same since he ditched his specs…I guess the Himmler look went out of fashion
The right of peers to be tried by the House of Lords was abolished in 1948, Commoners have never had such rights, an MP committing theft would be tried in the courts.The MPs are accused of theft - theft is the accusation here. Can any lawyer reading this, explain on what grounds “privelege” can be claimed?
226 Stark Dawning
No i’m not suggesting Gordon Brown’s genius or numptiness has anything to do with his popularity or lack thereof at all. Its simply the atmosphere he projects.
A negative person can only ever be seen as a positive person if the backdrop is negative, such as depression or war or whatever.
Do you remember high school mathematics. -2 multiplied by -2, = +4
But -2 mulitplied by +2 = -4
This is the problem with Gordon Brown. While he was at the helm when things were quite frankly terrifying on the economic front, he was seen as an asset, despite his negative deportement.
Now that things are improving, Gordon Brown, is now seen as an impediment to further improvement.
If he can suddely transform his personality and show that he is truly dynamic and a man for all seasons, then he can win the election. But if he stays the with his current image of stoic, unbending, ascetic and gloomy, he will lose. And his economic competence or incompetence will have nothing to do with it.
And thats my whole problem with this research. It doesn’t ask why Gordon Brown’s ratings for economic competence are going down. It is because Gordon Brown, now that things are improving, is tranforming through no fault of his own, into a man who is in the wrong place at the wrong time. He really should have called the election when the economy was collapsing in 2008. Back then he really was the man for the moment.
But now. Hmmmm. I think he’s a fish out of water.
237 antifrank - Yes, that is a PR disaster and completely unnecessary own-goal.
248. Does anyone still care ? Global Warming RIP.
250 - It seems to be I didn’t do it but if I did you can’t catch me anyway na na ni na naaa.
239. Perhaps - but the abiding images of the expenses scandal will be the ‘Duck Island’ and the ‘Moat cleaning’ I’m afraid. Both Tory and there is of course something particularly distasteful about the super-rich unreasonably taking public money to support the upkeep of things the ordinary public can only dream of having.
From memory I don’t think either the ‘Duck Island’ nor the ‘Moat cleaning’ were allowed under expenses, even though the MPs in question asked for the costs to be met (please correct me if I am wrong here), but that actually doesn’t matter in the eyes of the general public. They are the symbols of the scandal.
Did Jonathon Aitken claim Parliamentary Privilege? Was he granted it?
If no the precedent has been sent and the expenses four can sit in the dock.
241 “Where they do have a point is the seeming partiality of just them being charged when there are many others who have done similar”.
A moral point perhaps but that’s all. I remember a taxi driver up in front of the Bradford Council Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Panel having got points on his licence for running a red light claiming that it was unfair that the police stopped him and not the car behind who must have been even later through. He too had a point (assuming he was telling the truth), but it didn’t change the fact that he broke the rules and his argument was duly dismissed as irrelevant.
262. Any estimate for % of voters who could Identify duck island MP and which party he stood for. 5% and 23% are my guesses.
264 David H - Yes, it’s always the case that not all alleged malefactors are charged. It’s a completely nonsensical defence.
259 - It’s the implication that not only does Parliamentary privilege give a defence against these criminal charges but that somehow these men are so refined that they shouldn’t be treated in exactly the same way as any other defendant. It’s an insult to all of us.
Pleading ‘Parliamentary Privilege’ won’t be much help in the showers on A wing, if any of them are banged up for ripping off the taxpayer.
I thought the image of ‘expense-gate’ was Hazel Blear waving a cheque for over £13,000.
Any experts on parliamentary law around? if these MPs want to claim parliamentary privilege then could the 3 MPs be impeached and then imprisoned?
With a Conservative majority in the HoC after May 6th could they put them away for 20+ years as a punishment?
223 DavidL
I’m a big fan of the Direct Democracy stuff, so where increased democratic accountability has been adopted, I see something positive for me to vote for.
Headline items here are probably elected police chiefs, and choosing parliamentary candidates by open primaries.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2010/01/daniel-hannan-mep-david-cameron-has-gone-further-than-any-previous-tory-leader-in-proposing-a-shift-.html
262.
Wrong.
Duck Island and Moat Cleaning were indeed symbols of the scandal. But they weren’t THE ONLY symbols. You seem to forget Mr Jacqui Smith’s state subsidised wank, and Hazel Blears writing a cheque for 20k on live TV.
The initial round of expensesgate hurt both parties. I suggest the second round will hurt Labour more, as these Labour MPs go on trial.
255.
248. More voodoo science. No one cares any more. No one believes a word these people say. Sorry. That’s what scientists get for lying.
It’s also 5 degrees outside when it should be 12.
Case closed
Clear stupidity on your part.
272:BenM Vs SeanT on AGW. This’ll be fun.
260 Well Labour are going to campaign on it! Another opportunity to back the wrong ‘mood’ horse
Svejk. The rights of Parliament are in Erskine May. Wiki defines them as follows:
Freedom of speech; (members speaking in the House are not liable for defamation)
Freedom from arrest in civil matters (practically obsolete)[1]);
Access of the Commons to the Crown (via the Speaker); and
That the most favourable construction should be placed upon the deliberations of the Commons.
Privileges not specifically mentioned:
Right of the House to regulate its own composition; (although election petitions are now determined by the ordinary Courts)
Right of the House to regulate its own internal proceedings, both as to matters and procedures;
Right to punish members and “strangers” for breach of privilege and contempt;
Right of freedom from interference (although members are no longer immune from all civil actions
For what is worth the view expressed there is that there is no imunity from criminal prosecution. I presume that they are going to argue that these expenses fells within their privileges and is therefore a matter for the House. I still cannot see why any of the would apply to the Lord. I think the prospects of success are very small but I am not a public law lawyer and this is a bit arcane.
262 I agree. People have already decided that all politicians are equally bad when it comes to expenses and the fact that these cases are now coming to trial will not change that view or cause it to attach to Labour more than the Tories. It will merely reinforce anger against politicians in general.
There is no party political mileage in this for anyone IMO - pots and kettles come to mind.
270. They are all standing down at the election so they could not be impeached as they need to hold public office (not even sure if MP counts as public office in this case). The last impeachment was in 1806.
The trial, if there ever is an impeachment again, is held in the Lords (having been sent there by the Commons) which also decides the punishment after the Commons decides it want a punishment.
273. Most misguided course of attack since tim played the “Labour won the cold war” card yesterday ?
Why on earth do we need a high speed rail link which will get people from London to Birmingham in 45 minutes - one of the benefits of Birmingham is that it is NOT just 45 minutes away !
Mr Dale is on the case using the trusty sword of Hansard
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/03/snatched.html
272
but Ben isn’t thid the “paradox of thrift” ? You argues against saving for a rainy day or passing things on to our children in the last thread. People on this blog will be dead by 2100 so shouldn’t we all be sat with the heating on and the windows open as per your principles?
279 DT
depends on your perspective. I should imagine the good citizens of Birmingham would be glad to get rid of Sion Simon and Jack Dromey to London even faster.
Jane Green — Thank you very much for your prediction.
seanT — “(I have just finished writing a 100,000 word thriller!) ”
Congrats, Sean.
281. GSM
273. You think I’m gonna bother arguing with a piece of colonic flora such as “BenM”?
Tish tish.
Pienaar on R5 thinks Byrne has either dropped a massive clanger on ‘no tax rises’ or he’s upped the game.
Who is going to believe Labour after Gordon’s stealth taxes?
277 nickc - Err, you do realise that the only MPs to have been charged with alleged criminal offences are three Labour MPs, don’t you? And a fourth (again Labour) is under investigation.
In addition, just take a look at the opinion poll graphs for last year. Although both main parties were affected, Labour took by far the larger hit.
It’s bad enough for Labour that these court cases are happening at all. The defence of parliamentary privilege is going to make it much worse, especially amongst Labour’s core voters, who used to be under the illusion that Labour MPs were honest, ordinary working folk.
276. The wish is father to the thought.
Three Labour MPs are claiming parliamentary privelige to avoid conviction and imprisonment for theft. Three Labour MPs are also asking to be spared the humiliation of “going in the dock” like any other member of the public charged with an offence. Why? Because they are MPs??
I cannot think of a better way to prove the public perception of Labour: that they have been in power too long, and they now believe they are above the law.
This will hurt the government more than the Tories.
I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made by the LibDems of the imbalance of unelected Cabinet ministers in the Government and the fact that they are unaccountable to the electorate
258: ‘No i’m not suggesting Gordon Brown’s genius or numptiness has anything to do with his popularity or lack thereof at all. Its simply the atmosphere he projects. A negative person can only ever be seen as a positive person if the backdrop is negative, such as depression or war or whatever.’
Fair enough. But if you’re right I’m puzzled by Labour’s tactic of berating the Tories for ‘talking Britain down’. Surely they should be welcoming such language and joining in: Gordon Brown - a dismal man for dismal times.
286: Clearest indication yet that labour do not think they will win the next election.
Designed to challenge the tories to do the same and box them in. Osborne needs to think long and hard before responding.
Richard Nabavi 4.10pm. It is a long time since I met anyone with that particular illusion.
287 It’s a curiosity than Lords just don’t seem to be seen in the same light as MPs - perhaps because we don’t vote for them or because their role isn’t as well understood/part of Establishment.
Either way - I’m startled that they’ll be up in front of the Beak at the end of the month and in a Crown Court too. I wasn’t expecting this to move so quickly and never before the GE was held.
290 - The ‘talking down the economy’ meme is there to shut down criticism of the Government’s failure over the economy, nothing more, nothing less.
Just look at those that scream it the loudest, both here and in the TV studios.
286. Tax rises are already in the budget
http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2010/03/finalr-chance-to-spring-trap.html
“Next months road tax will be around £5-£10 higher for all cars except the tiniest {announced 2009}.
For new cars bought after 1/4/10 the tax is between £70 and £500 more.
33% road tax increase for new cars in the common band ‘I’ bracket.”
A very interesting veiled threat to the BBC in the middle of this piece:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8561836.stm
“BBC technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones said the Conservatives hoped that the market will deliver most of their plan - making BT open up its network - but say they might have to use some of the BBC licence fee as well.”
276. You should also note that the Tory peer, Hanningfield, at least had the grace not to claim he should be “spared the humiliation of appearing in the dock”.
It’s this that REALLY sticks in the craw. They really believe that they are not like the rest of us plebs. They really believe they should be treated differently, given an easier time, spared all the nastiness endured by smelly proles.
UGH.
What about the new 50% top rate of Income Tax - that’s also in the Budget!
286. Plato. Pienaar on R5 thinks Byrne has either dropped a massive clanger on ‘no tax rises’ or he’s upped the game.
Unlike the Lib Dems…
That professional approach appears to have gone awry on Newsnight last night. The Tories have seized onto David Laws’ pledge to ring fence NHS, edcuation and international development from cuts. This appears to be at odds with Mr Clegg and Vince Cable, they say.
David Gauke, the Shadow Treasury spokesman, says: “Yet again Lib Dem policies have fallen apart under scrutiny. Nick Clegg is saying one thing, Vince Cable is saying another; and his education spokesman is busy ring-fencing everything in sight. It is impossible to take the Liberal Democrats seriously when they set out three contradictory policies in just one week.”
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/03/the-late-nick-clegg.html
291 Slackbladder - No, that’s an easy one for Osborne. He should repeat what he has already said: Although the Conservatives are strongly in favour of a low-tax regime, some tax increases cannot be ruled out in the short-term. However the bulk of the reduction in the deficit will come from spending cuts.
From the Tories’ point of view, the best possible outcome on this debate over the next few weeks will be for Labour’s economic pitch to look like a dishonest fantasy.
297 SeanT
I wonder if they had a line of black ZILs waiting to swish them away ?
296. They are talking about using the element of the Licence Fee ring-fenced for Digital Switchover (ie help for OAPs etc) - ie not a single penny of this is currently spent on programming.
279 - Have to agree. And I LOVE trains - I think I stand second only to Sunil in pb.com’s list of railphiles.
I’d love a high speed rail network in Britain, but - really - this is solving the wrong problem. People don’t not get trains because they’re not fast enough; they don’t get them because they’re expensive, overcrowded, unreliable and pick them up and put them down in places other than where they want to start / finish. A new high-speed rail link in places where we’ve already got trains which are pretty fast is solving problem no. 5 before problems 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been addressed.
300 - We won all our bets then.
241 If the Privilege defence works they can still be impeached and bought to trial before the HoL (the move of appeals from HoL & Privy Council to Supreme Court doesn’t affect the ability of Parliament to be the High Court of Parliament). Jack Straw and others don’t like the idea it can still take place but it can. The Lords can decide what punishment is, as long as its within the law.
A lelevised impeachment trial would be fun wouldn’t it?
303 Cookie
however at Brown’s current rate of spend we could have 6 high speed links each year, that would at least reduce congestion.
265 - My guess at the percentages who could ID the MP and his party would be <0.5% and around 10% respectively.
Even I can’t remember who it was and I’m a politics tragic.
299 Scott P
Forget policy… much funnier is the “Thick of It” style disaster on Heart FM
304 tim - Almost certainly. I cannot imagine what the odds compilers were thinking of.
Labour are at it again - they really need to shut up on this, Ainsworth is clearly implying Lord Guthrie is a Tory. What are they on??
“On the BBC’s Today Programme this morning Lord Guthrie, the Chief of Defence Staff between 1997-2001, restated his belief that as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown was “unsympathetic to defence”.
“Particularly in the early days when he was Chancellor,” said Lord Guthrie, “and there was a lot of money in this country and he showered it at other departments but he didn’t give much to defence.”
He added: “Nowadays the personal kit of soldiers serving in Afghanistan is better than it ever has been, but goodness me it has taken some time to get there.”
At Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday Labour backbenchers greeted mention of the former service chiefs by David Cameron with shouts of “They’re all Tories.”
Lord Guthrie called the catcalls “cheap” and retorted that he sits as a Crossbencher in the House of Lords.
On a visit to Helmand Province today, the Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth said Lord Guthrie appeared to “have an issue” with Gordon Brown. He also refuted the evidence given by a number of military figures to the Chilcot Inquiry who complained that funding was withheld from the armed forces.
“Lord Guthrie appears to have an issue with the Prime Minister. I don’t know what is the reason for that. I know of no request (that was turned down),” he told BBC Radio 4’s The World at One. “It is not for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to decide in detail how the money is spent that he allocates to defence. That is a matter for the defence secretary of the day and the MoD to decide.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7058425.ece
301. What possessed them - or their lawyer - to think the dock-avoidance line was a good idea? “Spare us the humiliation endured by normal people”?
Unimaginably stupid. Apart from being carried into court in golden sedan chairs, hoisted by blind halfnaked northern workmen bearing the scars of recent whippings, I can’t imagine anything more likely to antagonise the judge, jury, and watching British public.
307: I was going to say Douglas Hogg..but he was the moat cleaning, not the duck house.
It was Sir Peter Viggers of course.
285 - Awww, please Sean.
287, 297 IMHO the fall in Labour’s poll ratings last year was due mostly to the recession and Brown’s leadership failings. Expenses was not a major factor.
For a time Cameron did seem to have the edge on issues of expenses/party funding, however he has now thrown away that advantage with his cack-handed handling of the cAshcroft’s tax status.
287.
especially amongst Labour’s core voters, who used to be under the illusion that Labour MPs were honest, ordinary working folk.
Yep, no one in their right mind would assume this for the motley crew of self-interested Tory MPs!
**** BETTING POST ****
Paddy Power have some election debate specials up.
Who will win the most TV debates? 12/1 “Three way tie” looks value to me. Maximum stake £3.62. Must be a decent chance that they win one each.
Maximum TV audience. 7/4 ITV. This I think is the value. It’s the first debate and the BBC one clashes with Champions League Football. Maximum stake £20.84.
308. Greenie in Gas Guzzler Gaffe..
291 - Slackbladd. Call their fcking bluff if that Budget is delivered.
Set out the sensible tax rises and if the public are stupid enough to vote for a Labour government who promise no tax rises then the country gets the Government it deserves.
A budget and election like that would be financial and political meltdown. Labour would have been to clever by half and would be on borrowed time as a party.
I don’t think Darling is that stupid though.
QT tonight has Monty Don and Kelvin on panel as well as Caroline Flint, Jo Swinson and Justine Greening.
This could be fun or a car crash. Kelvin gets more like a caricature of himself by the day!
318 DR
Labour are sort of hemmed in on the politics though, anything too ridiculous and the markets will be a problem.
It is getting tiresome hearing Tory politicians talk Britain down. They should be more upbeat, like this guy…
“We’re all f*cked. I’m f*cked. You’re f*cked. The whole department’s f*cked. It’s been the biggest c*ck-up ever and we’re all completely f*cked.”
319. Monty Don must be a filthy Tory as he likes gardening.
Once more no Brownite MP on the panel - first Labour MP in a while though - must have run out of Lords..
320 Byrne seemed to be arguing on DP that lower unemployment spending would save their bacon - I assume this is going to be predicated on more fairyland growth numbers in that case…
315 BenM - You’ve illustrated my point. New ‘Whiter than white’ Labour has been vilifying the Tories for twenty years, and Labour supporters have bought in to the line that somehow Labour MPs are morally superior. Of course that was always obvious nonsense - just look at the string of scandals from Ecclestone onwards, let along the Kelly and McBride affairs - but still the myth persisted amongst the core vote. The sudden realisation of the truth of course has a disproportionately demotivating effect.
318. I totally agree. If Labour think they can win on a “no new taxes” ticket let them try it.
294
‘The ‘talking down the economy’ meme is there to shut down criticism of the Government’s failure over the economy, nothing more, nothing less.’
In the same way that anyone who raised concerns about New Labour’s mass immigration policy was slapped down as a racist.
315..Tel me again Benboy How many Tory MP’s were up in court today
321 -
321 That is still the best quote ever in recent years
It just sums the whole thing up so perfectly and accurately!
322 TGOHF
self declared “window dressing” IIRC
Maybe its just Byrne that’s stupid? As has been pointed out here there are a number of pre-announced tax increases which will come into effect with the Budget. I am still amazed they are going for it at all. Following the January figures and the anticipated Q1 growth figures what sort of borrowing projection can they credibly give? Tax income is well down, expenditure is up and growth is lower than forecast last year. Is Darling really going to announce a higher defecit as a share of GDP than Greece?
Mr Dale is clearly in detail mode today…
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/03/nick-clegg-looks-both-ways-on.html
303 Cookie, check out this one http://www.rirtl.com we launched the Maharajas’ Express on Saturday. It’s the first luxury train to go all the way across India, and the first that the Indian railways have done as a partnership with a private company. Early reports are encouraging; just received this from one of the passengers “train is glorious, exquisite interiors and cuisine”. It ain’t cheap though, standard cabin is $800 per day per person, based on two sharing. Hopefully I’ll get to go on it (for free) one day…
Maybe it is only because the scale is too small to show it, but I’m surprised that there doesn’t seem to be an uptick for Labour, and a downtick for the Conservatives, in the most recent data points. From opinion polls and general media mood, wouldn’t you expect to see the macro-competence gap narrowing recently?
by Richard Nabavi March 11th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
One might, but the reason for this is reasonably obvious.
It is explained by people looking at their own personal position, and deciding to vote for what is, or seems to be in their own interests. For we have at this moment a record, and ever increasing amount of people surviving to various degrees on government benefits. Including many families on joint incomes of over £50,000 per year.
Therefore government ‘competence’ or indeed ‘popularity’ has an increasing little to do with the way people vote. I doubt very much that however much a certain group of people claim to hate this government and all it stands for, they are in the mood to take out this justifiable anger on their own ability to house or indeed feed their own children.
Perceived asset values have also a role to play.
People do have a habit of biting the hand that feeds them, although this is a minority sport normally played by the insane.
318 Could you give us some examples of “sensible tax rises” that you think would be electorally popular?
331: He probably means no ‘unannoucned’ tax increases, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
I don’t beleive I’m being kind to Zippy…something must be wrong.
What time is Angus Reid poll expected?
335. VAT on union subs.
316 — those bets stand only if ICM polls the debates, right?
335 nickc
how about removing MPs immunity from taxation on benefits ? You know that £400 a month for food gets taxed like the rest of us.
333 - Wow! That looks fantastic! Never really been tempted by India before, but I’d love to do that trip - that’s the way to see a country.
Why will you get to go on it for free?
336. Sadly, I must concur. Zippy said that they had previously announced tax rises in the PBR, but he did appear to say there would be no new ones in the budget. Not even 2p on a packet of fags?
Oh, joy unbounded…
David Cameron could have the most powerful Downing Street media operation in history at his disposal if he becomes prime minister in May.
Senior civil servants are planning to merge the communications operations at the Cabinet Office and Downing Street after a likely general election in May, creating what one political source describes as a “super press office”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/mar/11/downing-street-super-press-office
333. That looks stunning. Have you got any journalists covering this?!
Specifically, have you secured any press coverage in the Sunday Times or the Guardian? If my editors absolutely insist, I’d be prepared to undertake the wearisome job of going on one of these trains.
But you may have it all taped, anyway.
Just watched a recording of last nights Newsnight when the 3 men who would be Education Secretary went head to head. After also watching the 3 men who would be Health Secretary on Ch4 News, it seems to me that the Labour strategy in these debates is clear. Labour will compliment the LibDems, painting the tories as being outside the mainstream. On Channel 4 Jon Snow pushed the line very hard of, ‘why can’t you guys get together and present a consensus to the country’ which Lib/Lab were happy to accept.
The effect of all these debates might well be to give the LibDems a level of credibility they don’t deserve, as they receive the odd plaudit from Labour & the tories attack the bigger beast, Labour.
Labour will perversly hope that by being nice to LibDems, it will have the same effect on the smaller party to that inflicted by David Cameron, and in the process soften their own image with floating Lib/Lab voters.
The tory vision of the future of Britain is different to the other 2 parties, the challenge for them will be whether they can present even modest change to a conservative country.
M. Smithson : “David Cameron and his party look short of the seats they need for a majority.”
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/03/polls-seats-labour-swing
Mike — thank you for feeding the “hung parliament narrative” monster.
We need him well and alive to keep on getting better odds on COM.
As someone who is normally a technocynic, this Google device actually looks useful
http://sluggerotoole.com/index.php/weblog/comments/introducing…-google-public-data/
349. Know your audience
38
A gift to the” Vote LibDem , get Labour” line?
341 Because I’m very close to the majority share holder and CEO of the private company that’s in on the joint venture (I work for him, play golf with him, house sit for him, teach his daughters maths) and I also know the CEO of IRCTC (Indian Railways, Catering and Tourism Corporation, effectively the corporate side of the Indian railways) quite well; I had to take him on a day out when he was in London for a week and we went on a very jolly pub crawl around Oxford (13 pubs in total, I think!)
So I think I have a better chance than most at a free trip
Is it just me or does the plan for spending £30bn on a railway seem entirely irrelevent news right now??
I really just don’t get it at all - years away, costs a bomb we don’t have and there are good services already.
If voters want a breadnbutter issue - this is not it.
Hmm…
krishgm Carnage in the running order…an 18 minute long piece has barged its way into the show. But can’t say what its about yet.
Con targets for May 6th locals..
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/03/which-councils-outside-london-could-the-conservatives-gain-on-may-6.html
“Speaking to the BBC, Mr Darling said that the Budget would be “sensible” and “reflect the times in which we live”.
He reaffirmed his commitment to halve the country’s budget deficit over a four-year period.
But he said the government would continue to spend money to support the economy and keep people in jobs.
The Budget will be unveiled on 24 March, with a general election widely expected to be called for early May.
“I don’t think anyone’s expecting some sort of Christmas-tree-of-a-Budget. They’re not going to get anything like that,” Mr Darling told the BBC’s chief economics correspondent Hugh Pym.
“What you’re going to get is a sensible Budget, a Budget for the times in which we live, a Budget for the future of the country.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8562973.stm
354
Quite.
Airplanes are quicker and need NO government money to build aircraft or runways.
Oh I forget.. I’m being logical..
Planes are cheaper as well.. and more environmentally friendly…less embedded CO2..
355. Ashcroft ?
Sean, no Sunday Times journo yet.. We’re not expecting the Guardian to be interested (bit pricy for them)
357 Plato
shame he didn’t give us that last year.
353 - sounds an excellent opportunity to get yourself a free train ride! Hope it goes well.
348 - ” On Channel 4 Jon Snow pushed the line very hard of, ‘why can’t you guys get together and present a consensus to the country’ ” - what a ridiculous line to take. This isn’t a case of haggling over the best price for a used car, it’s case of choosing between the right way and the wrong way - and a compromise between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ is, in most cases, still ‘wrong’.
This argument works whichever side you think ‘right’ is.
For those who are interested in the health care bill here - As the battle among the democrats intensifies as they seem unable to get their own people in Congress to vote for Obamacare, a couple of articles on the mountain Obama has to climb: one on why Obama can’t move the poll numbers on health care, and the other on how Pelosi can get the votes she needs to get this through the House.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704784904575111993559174212.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703701004575113292688090292.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
346 “David Cameron could have the most powerful Downing Street media operation in history at his disposal if he becomes prime minister in May.
Senior civil servants are planning to merge the communications operations at the Cabinet Office and Downing Street after a likely general election in May, creating what one political source describes as a “super press office”.”
PR redux ad absurdum.
357 - Thank fck for that.
He’d better be on the level. This will be the most pored over Budget for many years, even if it’s not really a Budget, more a Budget manifesto.
I don’t think it matters REALLY what’s in it. Most of the press wil be on the rampage attacking it.
Can someone translate “Crown Court” into its nearest equivalent in Scotland? Is it like the Sheriff Court here?
358 - Where are planes quicker to?! Anyway isnt high speed rail backed by all major parties (even if there are disagreements over proposed routes).
216, once again Morris Dancer’s brilliant forethought leads the world.
We’ve seen the sub-aqua space cannon proposed years after I began work, and now the enormo-haddock principle is gaining wider interest.
I think it’s fair to say that my visionary eccentricity will be known in future year’s as one of the finest examples of pb.com.
358 - have you seen an electric-powered aeroplane recently?
More or less exactly what i’ve been pondering recently. Although events happen and they do have an impact there’s also a feeling sometimes that there’s a tide running and at the end of the day that’ll be what decides. In particular i’ve been thinking the ERM and sleaze meant the Tories set themselves a high water mark of aggravating people between 1992 and 1997 and nothing they could do would change that until Labour matched or exceeded that high water mark. Before that point is reached people won’t even listen to what you’re saying.
367
Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow..for a start.
I don’t care what the parties think…when they all agree, they are usually wrong. If we want more rail capacity we need more tracks.. Think of the cost and time. More land used ..
It’s stoopid…
341,343 These two responses, and the lack of any more, neatly illustrate the dilemma which Tory economic policy has got itself into. VAT on union subs and taxing MPs benefits (whilst being good ideas in themselves) would raise a trivial amount in taxation terms - well under £100m. That’s around 0.06% of this year’s £178bn deficit.
It’s almost impossible to present tax rises and/or spending cuts in an attractive way. The Tories need to very careful about presenting themselves as the Party that offers more pain than Labour. There are no votes in pain. The Tories are relying on people being convinced that pain now will mean less pain later, but this is a very hard argument to make.
298 – Oldnat, I think the nearest Scottish equivalent would be any court case involving a jury.
365.
Here’s the budget already
2010 : all tickety boo carry on as normal
2011 : spending down (details TBC)
2012 : more spending down (detail TBC)
2013 : spending up - growth saves the day (details TBC)
Anyone expects any deviation from that or an serious market reaction or BBC epiphany is likely to be disappointed. I refer you to last years budget for evidence.
372. the question was “electorally popular tax rises” - there are none.
372
<ihere are no votes in pain. The Tories are relying on people being convinced that pain now will mean less pain later, but this is a very hard argument to make.
True..
So Gordon can form a minority Government and all hell breaks loose…
372 - “It’s almost impossible to present tax rises in an attractive way.”
You have to admire Labour for their past ability to present NI increases in an attractive way. I dont think that’s possible any more though.
357 Plato. How long is this Government going to get away with this nonsense unchallenged? His policy is that in 4 years time (probably at the peak of the next cycle) the Government will only be borrowing 6-7% of GDP!! Why do the Tories not point out every day that that is twice the Maastricht limits and twice what even the feckless Gordon Brown said was sustainable? I think many still think they are talking about paying off half the debt not reducing the rate to which it is being added to a completely unsustainable rate. Its just incredible that they are not laughed at every time this policy is stated. Instead it seems to become the new orthodoxy. How do they do it? Wake up Tories, your country needs you.
368. MD. I have 2 concerns…
1. Are you being appropriately rewarded for your intellectual property rights?
2. Has the MD research facility been infiltrated by foreign spies?
The politicians do like to claim Britain leads the World in research!
354 ‘Is it just me or does the plan for spending £30bn on a railway seem entirely irrelevent news right now??’
A bit of meat for MP’s in the Midlands marginals and Birmingham?
372 nickc
not quite sure of the point of your post, but if you are saying all parties are lying to the electorate about the scale of the pain we have to take I agree.
365 Mr Roe - dizzy had a post on this earlier in the week
http://dizzythinks.net/2010/03/tories-must-crowd-source-during-budget.html
121.”Interestingly this didn’t happen at the end of the Callaghan government, and also no evidence of this happening now. I wonder why?”
Davey, I genuinely believe that is because we are at the two points where the perception that we are skint, in debt, and with nothing but tax rises and public service cuts to look forward too.
Query - was the budget date ever officially announced yesterday?
4 “I’m surprised that there doesn’t seem to be an uptick for Labour, and a downtick for the Conservatives, in the most recent data points.”
I think this is measuring gut feel. My take on what’s been happening recently at the Labour end of the polling is that the anti tide is just as strong but it’s being held back a bit by all the experts on the telly saying cuts = double dip recession i.e it’s a head vs gut situation.
373 SimonStClare
Thanks
383 - from HMT website:
“The Chancellor of the Exchequer confirmed in a Written Ministerial Statement on 10 March that Budget 2010 will take place on Wednesday 24 March at 12:30pm.”
379, industrial espionage is always a worry. However, I have increased the number of enormo-haddock patrols on land and at sea. Only yesterday an activist with sandals and a beard was savaged by one of my fish when he tried to approach the laboratory with a pamphlet about global warming.
377 I noted that Mr Byrne said today NI rises were to reduce deficit, whereas his boss Mr Darling said a couple of months ago they were to pay for increased NHS spending and I think I recall Mr Balls saying they wuld help fund his increased Education budget.
It’s amazing what one tax increase can achieve….
338
Tax on councillors attendance allowance
Tax on MP’s expenses e.g travel & food
Tax on UK EU commissioners
388 - That’s one of the reasons they wont be able to pull off that trick again
But, seriously, the post 2001 GE NI rises were relatively popular (or not very unpopular) despite coming almost straight after a GE.
Indeed - I’m losing count of how many ‘ring-fenced front-line’ budgets there are.
It’s simply not credible.
384 (cont) When i say “this is measuring gut feel” i mean the graphs up top.
389. Double employers NI for the BBC.
381. I do not believe the public can handle the truth, even though many of them know that things cannot carry on as they are.
“Vote for us, we are going to lop off 1/4 of public spending” isnt going to go down to well when it wont even produce any tax cuts
372 nickc, There are no votes in pain. The Tories are relying on people being convinced that pain now will mean less pain later, but this is a very hard argument to make.
Parents wish they could spare their children pain, quite often.
Given the time scales involved, the pain we’re looking at is definitely going to be a concern of future generations.
372
‘It’s almost impossible to present tax rises and/or spending cuts in an attractive way’
Tax on carbonated drinks and junk food.
372
‘It’s almost impossible to present tax rises and/or spending cuts in an attractive way’
Tax on carbonated drinks and junk food.
http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/03/11/borrow-even-more-genius/
“The historian Tristram Hunt was at this last Thursday on the BBC’s The Week. It is time, he said forcefully, for a government which stands up to the money markets. (How it is supposed to do this when it needs to borrow more than ever via the markets to fund its spending he didn’t explain). For his pains, he then got skewered by the host and cross-party panel on the show.
As they said: If you don’t want to be at the mercy of the markets you… er… don’t borrow so much money? Hunt looked like this hadn’t occurred to him.
Indeed, if you were to say that it might be wise for Britain to be less exposed and reliant on those in the markets buying its debt, the only logical thing to do is to borrow less - which in turn means spending less. You can’t hope to increase spending, increase borrowing even more and become less dependent on the money markets.
You could, of course, turn your back on several centuries of economic history and clear established evidence of what happens over the decades when debt triggers default and then even greater debt resulting in penury and hardship (ask Argentina). You might say that this does not matter and decide to put yourself out of the reach of the markets entirely. But this is called communism, and its track record has not been the greatest.”
394, voters and people generally are less interested in truth than a comfort blanket. To that end, the Tory line should be that they’re offering a bit of hard work to achieve something whereas Labour is offering a comfort blanket made of asbestos.
137. vulpus rex I am standing as a council canditate in a solidly working class part of North London. I was out getting nomination signatures from neighbours last night, neighbours I know well enough to chat to but have never discussed politics with before.
How on earth can you be collecting nomination signatures so early? The notice of election is not until 29th March.
381 What I am trying to say is that I think all this talk about deficits and public borrowing is over the heads of most people. All the average voter really cares about is what level of taxes they will pay and whther any of the public services they use are likely to be cut. The danger for the Tories is that they seem to be promising higher taxes and greater cuts than Labour and they justify this by vague talk about “reducing the deficit” which is not understood by most people.
In 1992 Labour managed to get themselves into a position of appearing to guarantee that they would put up taxes more than the Tories, and this did them enormous damage. Now the Tories are falling into the same trap - they seem to be promising that a Tory government offers a guarantee of both higher taxes and more cuts in services than a Labour government. This is a very unwise position to be in IMO.
394 notme
yeah, except that if people don’t face up to the problem it will be “we had to cut spending in half becuase we couldn’t borrow anymore money. It may be even worse next year.”
389. Councillors attendance allowances were abolished in the LGA (2000). They now receive an allowance which is not based on attending meetings, and is taxed in an identical way to all other earned income is taxed.
398 - Has Hunt been handed a constituency yet? (Harry Cohen’s?) His entering parliament has had a depressingly inevitable feeling for some time.
382 - Plato I commented on that yesterday. I don’t think the Tories have to worry that Labour’s Budget press will give Labour a wave to ride through the election. This Budget will be taken to pieces unless he announces figures that are greatly better than expected as well as a plan to get the deficit down significantly and quickly.
The Budget sets the battleground and I expect the Stanley family army of the press are about to finish off this rudely stamp’d PM.
Paul Dacre as Stanley himself.
‘It’s almost impossible to present tax rises and/or spending cuts in an attractive way’
Traditionally true, and certainly if you follow the New Labour “all spending is good” mantra.
I am curious to see whether the Tories can get any traction with their “Supermarket slogan” pitch, that is, businesses promise you more stuff for less money; why is government different?
I will look on with detached interest as to how the increased NI will be spent.
The pain will all be with you poor s0ds who are paying off mortgages and bringing up the kids out of reduced income.
Meanwhile we comfortably off pensioners won’t pay an extra penny.
402. I am sure people with experience of debt counselling could explain how a person with a history of bad debt, thinks very little about tomorrow, when today there is jam.
I think Hunt missed out on Liverpool West Derby for 2010. He’s one of my university lecturers.
R5L: The Treasury has now clarified that Byrne was only talking about “existing plans”….
401. You have a point - Brown is selling debt as the way out to a nation of debt addicts.
http://www.creditaction.org.uk/debt-statistics.html
Average household debt in the UK is ~ £8,939 (excluding mortgages). This figure increases to £18,623 if the average is based on the number of households who actually have some form of unsecured loan.
400. by not dating the nomination paper… Apparently
405
I wondered how long it would take for the blogosphere to take-off and have been amazed at the almost verticle rise in it’s influence over the last year.
Unpicking the Budget line by line will be great entertainment on the 24th
401 nickc
that’s one side of it, but the other side is the “economic competence ” argument. Promising voters one thing and delivering the reverse ( or having it forced on to you ) is political suicide also. Tories found this with the ERM debacle and were punished even more in the subsequent election. All parties are treading a fine line between the reality of the situation and how little the are recognising it. People might not like the cruel news, but they are not stupid either.
410. clunking fisted ?
398/404. Well, I see Nick Clegg has taken up a similar point to the one Hunt made -
“Mr Clegg described warnings by David Cameron, George Osborne and Kenneth Clarke about market instability in a hung parliament as “an act of economic vandalism and a political protection racket”.
He added: “They are basically saying, ‘Vote Conservative or the markets in the City of London will tear the house down’. It is a very thuggish threat – using the markets for short-term political benefit, warning people that their savings and jobs are at risk because their mates in the City would not tolerate anything other than the result we want.”"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/my-demands-for-a-postelection-deal-by-nick-clegg-1919439.html
For once - well said, Nick Clegg. If the electorate meekly obeyed the ‘advice’ of the markets we’d have been a voluntary one-party state since the year dot.
416. Yes - we should stand up to the market like those plucky Greeks. Years of penury are a small price to pay for vanity.
410/415 The war between Byrne-Darling vs Gordon-Balls is heating up by the looks of it.
Byrne had a very deadly look about his performance on the DP - it was like watching someone drop a bomb, he was perfectly clear, crystal even…
416 Was that before or after he declared his admiration for Margaret Thatcher?
The problem is that if the markets are funding one quarter of the government’s expenditure, then they’ve got the government by the short hairs.
417. Ah, so you favour the one-party state option then?
420. I don’t favour the Brown-ostrich approach of ignoring the people who are going to lend you all these billions.
420 If Labour weren’t so fiscally incontinent then the markets wouldn’t have an issue.
421. Clegg is talking about how the electorate should respond to the markets, not Brown.
420. Not really.
But, nor do I favour trying to fend off lightning with my fists.
“How on earth can you be collecting nomination signatures so early? The notice of election is not until 29th March.”
The forms are available and just getting it done early.
415: ‘clunking fisted ?’
You bet! Byrne has been strutting around for some time as Captain Cutter - the man who can erase the deficit by cuts and cuts alone. No 10 has clearly had a word in his shell-like - ‘If you think Labour will tolerate bringing a chainsaw to the public sector without tax increases you’ve got another thing coming…’
James @ 420.
Fine. Snub the markets all you want. Let ‘em lend money elsewhere.
Don’t take a penny from them. Cut the spending or raise taxes. Or a bit of both.
Still think you’re on a winner?
401 nickc - What you are saying is that Labour (a) can and (b) should win by lying.
On (a): You might be right; that seems to be Brown’s view, but Mandelson and Darling appear to have restrained him, to some extent at least. The problem is that it would only win the election if the voters believe it and the markets remain stable long enough to get those Xs on the ballot papers.
On (b): What would happen next? Either you immediately break all the promises you just made, or there’s financial meltdown. Neither is a good long-term electoral strategy.
The comparison with 1992 is not valid. The tax rises then were for pet projects of Labour’s, i.e. were discretionary. This time the pain is unavoidable, and every sane person knows it.
422. Well yes, I’m sure that if every party dutifully adopted the full policy programme of the Conservative Party, it’s just possible the markets could bring themselves to be more politically neutral. But I’m not sure that takes us any further forward on the ‘political protection racket’ front.
423. Easy for Clegg to say when he’s got zero responsibility - and just as well as he can’t even turn up to meetings on time - not the first LD leader to suffer from that trait.
Clegg/James Kelly : “I’m going to ignore my bank manager and not pay back my mortgage at the rate he’s asking for - I won’t be held to ransome by that evil capitalist”
Good luck with that…
418.Plato, make that Brown/Balls and Byrne vs Darling. Liam Byrne is the Brownite stooge in the Treasury to keep an eye on Alastair Darling just like his predecessor was.
360. jonny jimmy - I have emailed my editors on the Sunday Times Travel mag. It’s the sort of outrageously plutocratic travel idea they sometimes go for - “aspirational” journalism and all that (aka travel p0rn).
However it’s such a plum gig they may prefer to keep it inhouse if they do it, and not hand it to a humble freelancer like me.
I’ll keep you posted.
406 I am curious to see whether the Tories can get any traction with their “Supermarket slogan” pitch, that is, businesses promise you more stuff for less money; why is government different?
The short answer is that you can’t just import ever-cheaper public services from China (especially not if you want to reduce immigration) - about 75% of the cost of most public services is wages.
Afternoon all
I realise the Tory-inclined might not be too bothered because it works in their favour but the serious issue is the extent to which we should be influenced by the views of a few City analysts.
As there still seems a lot of confusion over whether tax rises and spending cuts will be introduced sooner or later, it seems logical to conclude that any outcome could lead to market instability.
The undertone is that somehow a Hung Parliament would be unable or unwilling to take difficult decisions and this is patent nonsense. Are we suggesting that if David Cameron had a majority of 1 he would act differently than if he were leader of a minority administration.
There comes a point when we shouldn’t allow unsubstantiated fear to be a motivating force but it seems we ain’t there yet.
431. I beg pardon? Clegg is talking about the markets’ implied threats to the electorate, not about a refusal to repay debts!
Perhaps James Kelly could let us know where he would raise the money if he wishes to turn his back on the politically biased markets.
434. Or the government could simply do less. Cost of Labour for that = 0.
428 Well if you want to go on the doorstep promising unavoidable pain to all the voters you meet than you are much braver than any politician I have ever met.
431 Indeed - if a country gets themselves in hock like HMG has done to the UK, what else can they expect?
The old adage that if I owe the bank £100 it’s my problem, if I owe them a £1m it’s their problem.
And the problem is ours rather than theirs in this scenario - we’ve got 40 credit cards that are all maxed out and now we’re casting about trying to find someone else to lend us more cash.
Any fule knows that when you’re paying more in interest than the entire schools budget [IIRC], something has to give.
It would appear that some (Tristram Hunt being an example) seem to think ‘the markets’ are about 100 very rich blokes in London who are somehow dictating policy in order to get even richer. John O Farell thought the same thing (”Sorry, who elected this ‘market’ bloke then?” (From ‘Things Will Only Get Better.’)) But this isn’t how it works - ‘the markets’ are the sum total of billions of individuals all over the world deciding how to spend and how to save their money. Much to the regret of everyone, they only have a finite amount of money and will only spend it on what they think they most need or lend it to people they think most likely to pay them a return and give it back. Most of them are outside the UK, but even if they we couldn’t ’stand up’ to them because we ARE them.
Trying to ’stand up’ to the markets is like trying to ’stand up’ to gravity.
417. You can stand up to the markets when you are not fiddling the books….
434. So they just cut all public sector wages. Slash and burn them.
I reiterate my detailed proposal: cut all public sector salaries on a rising scale: any state employee on £20k should lose 1% of his or her salary, rising to 20% for anyone over £100,000k.
It’s not like these recycling managers for Tower Hamlets on £150k a year can threaten to strike is it?
Oh god no, he’s on a work to rule, look, bags of potato peel across East Ham aren’t being properly mulched. Apocalypse.
Slash Their Salaries, the malingering overpaid featherbedded nonces.
437. “Perhaps James Kelly could let us know where he would raise the money if he wishes to turn his back on the politically biased markets.”
Perhaps Antifrank could let us know how that question is relevant in any way to the point I’ve actually been making, about how the electorate should not allow themselves to be bullied by a few people in the city with obvious vested interests?
Genuinely curious.
416 James K - That is Clegg at his worst, and shows how unfit the LibDems are to be anywhere near government. ‘Mates in the city’ indeed - what absolute unmitigated garbage. Does he know nothing whatsoever about international financial markets?
And what idiocy from you, James. If the electorate meekly obeyed the ‘advice’ of the markets we’d have been a voluntary one-party state since the year dot. That must be one of the most stupid things ever said on PB.com, and that is saying quite a lot!
The markets aren’t giving anyone any advice, never have, and never will. They are merely looking for the best risk/reward ratio when investing their clients’ money, as indeed is their duty.
There are plenty of other places they can lend to. Apart from well-run countries, there are also multi-nationals. Currently companies such as Coca-Cola are actually regarded as more credit-worthy than Britain.
“For better or worse, with me what you see is what you get,” said Mr Brown. It is a line so at odds with reality, so manifestly untrue, so utterly ridiculous that one barely knows where to start challenging it.
Was this the same Mr Brown whose shameless evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry was dismissed by Army chiefs as “disingenuous”? The same Mr Brown who unleashed the “forces of hell” on his own chancellor? The same Mr Brown who cannot walk past a national statistic without rebasing its measurement for narrow political advantage (crime, inflation, growth)?
When events defy the Prime Minister’s preferred view of the world, he has a remarkable capacity for applying the Tipp-Ex. History doesn’t haunt him because he either ignores or rewrites it. No British leader in my lifetime has embraced the technique of veracity evasion with greater enthusiasm.
Mr Brown’s most egregious abuse of our credulity, “no more boom and bust”, has been expunged from the script. In its place is a claim that his genius saved us from the ravages of an American-inspired crash. Rather than expiate his sins of profligacy, he seeks to exploit them. Financial disaster is repackaged as a tactical triumph: his triumph.
“I won’t let you down,” Mr Brown promises. Too late, old son, you already have
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7422606/Gordon-Brown-has-terrible-form-when-it-comes-to-keeping-his-promises.html
Evening all,
Excellent and informative article. I just wonder if there is a coincidence in the fact that the only previous Government not to get an uptick towards the end of the period in power was Gentlemen Jim’s. Could it be that when the British public get (if they haven’t already) the sense that Labour have once again wrecked the economy there will be no uptick for Brown. (apologies if someone has previously made this comment)…..
Off topic:
The BBC has set out a potential timetable for the GE (this has some dates I don’t recall being mentioned elsewhere such as the last date that a candidate can be nominated etc.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8496591.stm
441. The market is the ‘aggregate will of the people’, or at least their pension funds….
441. Absolutely right. Probably the only country in the world that has recently “stood up to the markets” is North Korea.
Before that it was Pol Pot’s Cambodia. And Hoxha’s Albania.
I’m seeing a theme here, anyone else?
The economic illiteracy of supposedly intelligent lefties is an endless source of dispiriting amusement.
444. I don’t get your point - you want the electorate to ignore reality ?
How about a policy of stealing Calais from France to raise income ?
“We won’t be bullied into giving it back by the vested interests of the UN !?”
438 Indeed, but the question I was answering was why the government couldn’t offer more services for lower prices like supermarkets. And the answer is that supermarkets generally offer manufactured goods largely made by machines whilst governments offer services which are largely provided by people.
And the easiest way of getting cheaper people is to allow greater levels of immigration…..
Anyone know when ARS is due?
445. “And what idiocy from you, James. If the electorate meekly obeyed the ‘advice’ of the markets we’d have been a voluntary one-party state since the year dot. That must be one of the most stupid things ever said on PB.com, and that is saying quite a lot!”
Good grief. If this is going to be a contest, I’d have a few choice nominations of my own.
444 JK
the electorate simply need to know what are the possible consequences of their actions. Similar issues have taken place in Ireland and Greece where it has been made clear to the electorate what will happen if cuts programmes don’t get pushed through.
o/t I see the knives are being sharpened in preparation for Sam Cam’s entrance into the election campaign. Both Telegraph and Coffee House have remarkably similar lines in vitriol (wonder where the Wintour line comes from) - tho’ David Blackburn is somewhat nastier. Who said grieving mothers were off limits?
Will Heaven has this:
But above all, as the creative director of the luxury stationers Smythson, she’s a highly strung businesswoman. As one former Smythson employee wrote last year, “We called her Anna Wintour, because staffers were warned never to try to greet or talk to her.”
David Blackburn has this:
If Sarah Brown is the damsel in distress, saved by her heroic husband, Sam Cam is the trouser-wearing uber-bitch. Allegedly, she is terrifying: cowering Smythsons’ interns refer to her as Anna Wintour.
Just what is Damien McBride up to these days?
450. “don’t get your point - you want the electorate to ignore reality ?”
What, to ignore the ‘reality’ that the only valid, rational or responsible vote is one for the Conservative Party? That is a patently absurd position.
****PEDANT ALERT*********
Re: 436 - Actually, SeanT, East Ham is in the People’s Democratic Soviet Republic of Newham, don’tcha know ??
As they say in these parts, “What Gets Recycled in Tower Hamlets, Stays in Tower Hamlets”
James Kelly, your question (and that of stodge) betrays a depressing ignorance.
We are spending more than we are bringing in. That is normal. It is the extent to which we are doing that that matters. As our debt gets larger, we become increasingly dependent on those who lend us money.
We have reached a point where, for whatever reason, those who have in the past lent us money may not necessarily do so in future. The question why they feel like that doesn’t really come into it.
The first question that you need to ask is whether they are kidding. They aren’t.
After that, the only question that matters is can we do without their money. If the answer is yes, tell us how. If the answer is no, you need to keep your lenders happy.
I strongly suggest the answer is no. Complaining that “a few people in the City” have “obvious vested interests” is childish and, incidentally, simply untrue.
re 440 Plato those earning under about £14k per year are paying income tax only to pay the interest on the deficit. If we had no deficit you could double the personal allowance.
451. To continue the supermarket analogy if you were to chop the in-house magazine and stop the managers final salary pension you could pass on those savings to the customers.
Watching the John Lewis programme last night they had a conference where all the top managers swanked around in a top hotel wondering how to cut costs - talk about elephant in the room.
A large % of the public sector spending is for the benefit of the public sector - not for the taxpayer.
455 - Unfortunately this kind of trash seems to be par for the course for British journalism. Cherie Blair was similarly monstered and more recently Mrs Bercow fell victim to it. It’s ugly, ugly, ugly.
444 “I’ve actually been making, about how the electorate should not allow themselves to be bullied by a few people in the city with obvious vested interests?”
You seemingly don’t have a clue, do you?
People are not ‘forced’ to lend to the UK government. There are plenty of other willing borrowers worldwide. It’s a genuine market; those that are good risks will get money those that aren’t won’t. The Clegg/Kelly approach amounts to lend us the money and f*ck you if you want paying back.
460 - Closing final salary public sector pension schemes wouldnt have that much effect on tax levels.
455, didn’t the Telegraph say a few weeks ago that there would shortly be a campaign to smear Mrs. Cameron?
455 PollyB
If she wants to go on the campaign trail she will have to live with the criticism.
That said, I have no doubt that Whelan, Balls and the like are busy trying to figure out how to sabotage her campaign. I suspect Coulson is doing exactly the same with Sarah brown.
458. Once again, Antifrank, you’re resolutely refusing to address the point I’ve actually been making, which is about whether the electorate should allow themselves to be browbeaten into voting Tory by the narrative that “the markets say it’s the only responsible thing to do”.
“Complaining that “a few people in the City” have “obvious vested interests” is childish and, incidentally, simply untrue.”
The notion that very wealthy people in the city have nothing personally to gain from the policies of a Conservative government is a rather startling proposition, by any standards.
451 nickc
to run the supermarket analogy, the fastest way to save money is to stop selling things people don’t want. If a shop did this it would go bust. In supermarket terms the governemnt has expanded in to a whole lot of areas it should not be in and was not in prior to 1997. Stop the activities and the spending will fall; the need to tax and borrow will disappear.
461. Neil: This is one of those rare occasions when we are in complete agreement with each other. Strange tho’ that Sarah Brown has never had any, not even the slightest hint, of criticism from the MSM. Not that I’m advocating it.
I’d like to see a government take on “the markets”. How are they going to do this? Go round to some hedge fund manager’s house on Curzon Street and… what… heckle him as he leaves for work? Throw parsnips at his wife?
Or what? What else do they propose? Perhaps they could kidnap some stockbrokers and menace them with firearms. “Lend us more money or else we’ll shoot you. And while you’re at it take your filthy business somewhere else!”
I see a flaw.
434. nickc “The short answer is that you can’t just import ever-cheaper public services from China “
That doesn’t explain the Supermarket performance either. You can’t use cheap Chinese labour to distribute spuds round the shops more efficiently…
Better data analysis, better use of IT, smarter logistics; all of these could be of benefit in the public sector.
463 Neil
not in the short term, but in the long term it would be one of the largest savings HMG can get.
462. “You seemingly don’t have a clue, do you?”
I’m beginning to wonder if anyone here has a clue about some of the basic principle of democracy - for instance the concept of ‘free choice’.
468 - I’m not sure that Sarah Brown has escaped from it completely (but neither can I remember any specifically egregious examples off the top of my head either). But, yes, it seems to me to be a real issue for the British press, I’m not aware for people going in for this kind of stuff elsewhere.
468. I think its called “pity”.
464 - As one of the prime baiters of Sarah Brown on here I’m surprised you are surprised at any of this, given that you’ve used Sarah Browns presence in the media to attack her.
Hopefully the non Tory posters will behave with a little more dignity re Samantha Cameron than the half dozen or so squalid posters on here have done towards Sarah Brown.
Jokes however are not off limits anymore.
Polly, interestingly, this ill timed article was penned by Mandrake in the same newspaper group.
Telegraph - Wheels of No 10 spin turn on Samantha Cameron
471 - In the short term it costs money. In the long-term it could save a fraction of a per cent of GDP. Not enough of a long-term saving to justify the short-term cost I dont think.
James Kelly, all of us can vote for who we wish to vote for. I probably won’t be voting Tory (though I have moved out of “probable Lib Dem” into “undecided” after this outburst from Nick Clegg). My criticism is of parties and their leaders who suggest that we can ignore the concerns of our lenders. If only the Conservatives meet their concerns, analysts are entitled to say so. The logical response of other parties is to change policy, not to bash the markets that we shall so desperately need.
474, I don’t. Magda gets gushing praise for every damned propaganda piece she organises. Mrs. Cameron (who I would prefer not to do any campaigning, incidentally) gets called an uber-bitch before she’s even opened her mouth.
475, Magda is close friends with the vile McBride creature. I wonder if she ever had any absolutely, totally brilliant chats with him. She’s abused the position she enjoys due to her thuggish and incompetent husband’s job to excellent PR effect, with a willing media.
There’s also the Brownian hypocrisy of his family not being props (presumably PR assets don’t count as props).
479 - Who on earth is Magda?
NEW THREAD
475. Oh Tim what rot. I criticised Sarah Brown for her line about ‘my husband my hero’ as you did. I have not made any personal attacks on her whatsoever, altho’ I have commented on her formidable PR abilities. Do stop spinning. And the idea that ‘non Tory posters’ are models of good taste and virtue is just laughable. I still haven’t recovered from the number of Labour supporters who defended bullying.
480, Female Colleague Number One. Eva Braun. Damian McBride’s best friend.
[Sarah Brown].
477 Neil
the government has an unfunded liability for CS pensions approaching £ 600 billion. If a pensioner lives 30 years after retirement thats £20 billion p.a. to come out of general taxation.
It’s not peanuts.
482 - I dont think 475 was meant for you.
480 Magda = Sarah Brown.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254764/How-Mrs-Brown-PMs-No1-spin-doctor-Downing-Street-aide-dubbed-Mrs-Goebbels-claims-controversial-book.html
466 James, I’m sorry, but you are being an A1 berk! Yes, London is an important financial centre, but it doesn’t single-handedly set exchange rates or credit ratings. Even if it were full of ‘Cameron’s mates’ - which it is not - it couldn’t buck international market forces.
I wonder if you’ve ever been to the City or Canary Wharf?
The ‘market’ comprises US, Swiss, Japanese, French, Spanish, German, Italian, UK and other banks, plus international pension funds and other financial institutions, some of which are in London, but the majority of which are elsewhere (New York, Singapore, Tokyo, Frankfurt etc). The personnel of these banks is extremely international. The idea that as a group they would benefit personally from a Conservative government is absolutely risible.
And they are not ‘wealthy people’ investing their own money; they are investing other people’s money - your pension, for example.
472. “I’m beginning to wonder if anyone here has a clue about some of the basic principle of democracy - for instance the concept of ‘free choice’.”
No need for the ’seemingly. It’s proven. You don’t have a clue.
You can have any government you like; pink, blue, green with spots on. Any one of them can behave how it likes.
Democracy in action.
Just don’t expect lenders to lend if they think you’re bad risk. And since we borrowing one pound in every four the government sends, it’s rather important that government behaves in a way that makes it a good risk.
But, go ahead. Vote how you wish, govern how like but don’t come crying when irresponsible government meets with a market that prefers to lend elsewhere.
484 - Longterm total public sector pensions cost less than 2% of GDP. Given that there will be something replacing the final salary schemes (so we cant save the total cost) you’re talking about savings of less than 1% of GDP. Of course GDP is huge and we are not talking about peanuts but saving a fraction of a per cent of GDP isnt, long-term, going to do much for us by itself. (And, of course, it takes a long time to realise these savings and in the short to medium term there are substantial costs.)
472
‘I’m beginning to wonder if anyone here has a clue about some of the basic principle of democracy - for instance the concept of ‘free choice’.’
If this government hadn’t prostituted itself to the markets courtesy of its massive debts and borrowing,it would not be a hostage of the markets.
Not so complicated,really.
483 - Oh, you’re one of them.
re 466 James Kelly yes they should. With all the damage they’ve done to the economy over the last several years you’ve got to be stark staring demented to even contemplate voting Labour this time round. If Brown is re-elected there won’t be an economy to speak of next time round.
489 Neil
From what I’ve seen the liability is growing significantly every year. The average I used was a mean in reality it’s probably closer to £ 10 billion to day heading for £ 30 billion as since the last set of actuarial analysis the CS has continued to grow.
switching to next thread.
493 - A total liability figure is pretty meaningless. HMT picks the assumptions for the published figures so dont trust them. These are PAYGO funds so cashflow is more important. And we are talking about longterm expenditure about the same level as today - under 2% of GDP. Not trivial, huge in fact, but not a source of great savings either.
Sorry, but is Hopi Sen a euphemism for mental-retardation?
c.f.:
Surely @rse-lickers for the Guardianistas need to look at themselves before commenting about others. [Where my bl00dy The Economist? Oh, it's in the morrow; bu99er!]
Hello Mike Smithson…couyld you e-mail me on a private matter…many thanks
197. Most of those will be labour clients, avoiding detection for payment of fines, bail offences, child maintenance , etc.
testing
test
test
test2
Sorry for the belated response, I’m in a Vancouver cafe. Here are some replies to points raised on the thread. Do let me know if any questions remain unanswered.
Will
#6 - Scott, if one plots macro-competence against voting intention over time, there is a strong correspondence (I can’t remember the correlation coefficient offhand, but it is high).
#37 - Davey, absolutely not. Stimson’s developement of the mood algorithm is premised upon a very intuitive idea - that a lot of people in the country are thinking along the same lines. John Kingdon asserted something to the effect that ‘mood was not the sort of thing that could be measure’ and Stimson set out to refute that. What is the national mood if not common variance in what we are all thinking. Note that our macro-competence measure captures around 60% of variance in issue competence - so it doesn’t explain everything. But, 60% of variance is resucible to this common dimension - which in itself is notable.
#49 - Eska, well it fits with the observed pattern (and conventional wisdom that governments tend to recover some support as voters take a harder look at the credibility of the opposition).
#120 - Wibbler, Stimson’s algorithm is a kind of factor analysis - measuring common variance - but where 85% of data is missing. The difficulty of this kind of research is that questions about issue competence tend to be asked infrequently and irregularly. So what the mood algorithm does is first of all measure variance in competence ratings for questions that are asked at least twice (so a question about handling of health in 1963 and 1978 for example). So this provides information about each of the parties’ ratings at various points in time, according to a lot of poll questions. Think of it as if on our graph there are 2,500 data points, each connected to at least one other data point - and some making up more regular time series (questions about handling the economy tend to be slightly more regular series for example). The algorithm then calculates the common variance of all those different dyadic ratios - recursively, starting at the end of the series. So it gets over the problem of all the missing data by using the ratios between different points in time. That’s the principle anyway.
#126 - Frederick, even if if there was more data in election years (and I don’t think there is a discernible pattern), the mood estimates are more robust when there are more observations. The up-tick is not an artefact, I think we can be fairly sure of that.
#189 - Tim, typically we use approval rates, though negatives tend to be the mirror image of this (variation in non-responses permitting).