On tightening polls

Will it be a closer race as the election approaches?

Cllr Denzil Coulson responded to my post on the seventeen-point post-DC speech poll lead with a Tweet that a 45% Conservative poll rating at the next election was “very unlikely”. Lo and behold, another poll put the Conservatives on precisely 45%, which I duly tweeted for his attention.

“You and I know that polls tighten during the election campaign”

came the response via Twitter and it’s not an unreasonable one, so I thought I’d look into it, starting in 1992. Back then, polls weren’t as frequent or, as we subsequently came to realise, as accurate as now. But looking seven months out from John Major’s photo-finish election win, ICM/Guardian on 14 September had Con 39, Lab 39 and LD 17. That was the same result in MORI/Times 10 days later. By 12 October, there was a Lab 43, Con 41 LD 12 poll done by ICM/Guardian. I’m not being selective – those are the polls I can find. In the end, the result was Con 42, Labour 34, LD 18. Not much sign of a tightening there – except for one away from the October 12 ICM Labour lead.

In 1997, it is a slightly different story. A November 1 MORI poll has Lab 54, Con 30, LD 12 and a Lab 47, Con 34, LD 15 poll followed the next day by MORI. All other polls in November had Labour above 50 and the Conservatives on around 30. The final result - Lab 43 Con 30 LD 17 – is indeed a tightening of the polls seven months out; but which way are the polls tightening? As in 1992, the move was away from Labour as people who, when questioned, said they would vote Labour stayed at home.

In 2001, four polls in December put Labour on around 46, the Conservatives on 33 and LDs on 15. The actual result – Lab 41, Con 32 and LD 18 – was similarly due to Labour voters staying at home, a lack of enthusiasm for the Conservatives and aggresive Lib Dem campaigning. Yes, a tightening – but a tightening away from Labour. During the last election polls seven months out showed Labour at around 38, the Conservatives on 31 and the Lib Dems on 21. The election result was Lab 35, Con 32 and LD 22 – very close to the polling figures in November.

A few things to note:

1) The Labour vote has always been lower in the election than the average polling figures seven months out, probably due to lower turnout among Labour voters

2) The Conservative vote in polls seven months out since 1992 has been very close to the results on the night

3) The Lib Dem vote has always been higher in elections than polls because they campaign so well

It is also worth stating the obvious – that it depends which polls you look at and where the votes are cast is more important than how many are cast. But the evidence above suggests that Labour’s percentage on the night will be lower than their current polling, that the Lib Dems will do better (just as well given that they are on 16% today)and that the Conservative vote will hold around about where it is now ie the average for the month.

We are, of course, all hostages to fortune and whatever surprises the next seven months may hold. But a quick glance through records shows that the Lib Dems relying on a tighening of polls during an election campaign to produce a hung parliament might be a little misguided. It’s still a possibility if we don’t work hard enough, though.

Cam’s the man

The Camerons after DC's speech

I’ve now had a chance to watch DC today and I’ve got to say that I was pretty impressed overall. To a certain extent, he’s played it safe – no new policy and not too much fire in the belly (no-one likes an angry man) except for poverty, where people will think he’s right to be angry. I was impressed with his fluency as always and also with his humanity and straightforwardness. The voters wanted honest, they wanted straightforward, they wanted transparent. Is DC perfect? No – but I think this is about as close as we’re going to get to any leader meeting those requirements.

So overall I was very happy with his vision and values – he appears to understand that voters want a Conservative government that belives in free enterprise, in wealth creation, a small government and low-tax economy but they will not tolerate that at the expense of social injustice, reduced public services, increasing gap between rich and poor and unfettered corporate greed. I think DC projected that sentiment well today.

But he has got a couple of challenges. Firstly, like any opposition leader he can’t show that he is as good as his word until he gets elected – but he would find it easier to be elected if he could demonstrate he was as good as his word. Trust is an important factor in any opposition leader – and let’s not forget no Conservative has been elected from opposition for 30 years. DC has that trust personally but I don’t think the public yet trust the Conservative Party corporately in the same way; it’s a very fine line to tread and there is opportunity here for PM and the PM to locate inconsistency. And every inconsistency will have a dampening effect on DC’s personal trust level, even if it’s nothing to do with him. We need to stay consistent to maintain trust.

In addition, I still feel that the economy is weak point – unusually – for the Conservatives at the moment. Back in 1998/9, when Tony Blair wiped the floor with us about who was more trusted to run the NHS, the education system etc, the economy was usually the only element on which the Conservatives scored well. Ironically, it’s now the one area where Labour still has a chance – partly because of the above ie they’ve had the opportunity to demonstrate action but also because we have a Shadow Chancellor who’s about as economically literate as I am. Luckily, we also have Philip Hammond and Ken Clarke on board, who do understand economics - but it’s hardly ideal.

Finally, there’s the wealth thing. DC isn’t going to escape the jibes over his privileged upbringing or personal wealth (or that of SamCam). I have to say I find it very strange that Labour and the Liberal Democrats think it’s okay to say someone isn’t fit to govern because of their background or schooling. We don’t say that Labour MPs are unfit because they grew up in poverty on a council estate or Liberal Democrats because they went to third-rate universities – so why should it make a difference that DC went to Eton and Oxford?

Many great PMs have come from Eton and Oxford and most have had comfortable, if not substantial wealth – if he’s up to the job what’s the problem? I don’t believe you have to be on a low income to understand the problems of it – nor do I believe you have to be state-educated to be passionate about state education, nor a user of the NHS to “love” the NHS (as it happens, DC has been a user of the NHS). To my mind, reverse snobbery is just snobbery – and I think people will see through it a la Crewe and Nantwich.

I think the Conservative conference has undoubtedly been the most successful of the three. There is still work to do to cement the trust with voters and DC will be vulnerable to certain lines of attack. But I think he’s done enough to convince people he deserves a chance as the next PM.

The nine-point plan

I don’t think that daily polls tell us much of a story anyway but the news that the Conservative lead over Labour is back into single figures isn’t surprising or worrying to me.

Despite everything that has happened during the past 18 months, George Osborne’s speech on Tuesday outlining cuts that need to be made if we to have any chance of bringing the country’s huge debts under control, will have come as a shock to some people. They probably don’t read a newspaper or listen to the news and use the internet for other things. The simple fact is that not everyone is going to understand the context of George Osborne’s message – for some, it might become clearer later – others will never see the necessity for spending reductions.

Others will understand the message and will have decided that they don’t like it much. Included in that may be thousands of public sector workers who fear for their jobs. For them, the Conservative message could be pretty glum – although it’s a glumness that we in the private sector have had to manage for the past 18 months. Today in the FT, there is an advert for a Deputy Head of Internal Audit at the DfT for £80,000 + benefits and in the Local Government Chronicle for an Interim Change Manager at £35-43k. I could go on.

This stoking of the public jobs market that Labour has indulged in not only has to stop – it has to be redressed. There are, for example, 99,000 soldiers in the Army and 85,000 officials in the MoD. That’s the equivalent of each soldier having a 0.85FT official to look after their needs – it’s clearly ridiculous. And turkeys won’t vote for Christmas – what is important is the creation and expansion of alternative economies for people to move out of the public sector into.

If you put 40%, 31% and 18% into Electoral Calculus, you still get a Conservative government – albeit with a majority of four (the same nine-point lead for Labour produces them a majority of 124). But I’d rather have a Conservative government that will sort out our national problems with a razor-thin majority than a Conservative government that tells people what it thinks they want to hear with a majority of 124.

If people then vote for five more years of Gordon Brown’s denial and escapism, they will get everything they deserve.

Keep facing out

Flagging appetite for the EU

Following on from my earlier deleted post about the Irish referendum, it now looks very likely that despite Czech efforts the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified before May 2010. I don’t think many Conservatives will be happy about that and I include myself among them - but one of the most important areas of judgement in politics is knowing when a battle is lost.

The public gets very annoyed with politicians who try to prolong battles – look at Gerry Malone in Winchester in 1997 - and knowing when to move on for the sake of the country, rather than continue the fight for their own personal reasons, is something that Conservative activists must understand.

There is a real danger that the Conservative Conference, aided by some elements of the media determined to make it every bit as disastrous as the Lib Dem and Labour conferences, will become dominated by in-fighting over Europe at a time when it ought to be looking outward towards the country. I think the opposition front bench understand this – but people like Boris and Andrew Rossindell need to take time to think about it too.

Europe put the nail in the coffin of the last Conservative government – it mustn’t be allowed to put the nail in the chances of a future one.

The Lisbon Treaty is in all likelihood here to stay. Conservatives should accept a defeat shamefully ceded by Labour and allow DC and William Hague an opportunity to step back and think carefully about how to deal with Europe in the future. Renegotiation may be an option – to take back those powers that we want – but this will not be achieved overnight, nor in opposition.

So let Europe rest for now while our UK problems are addressed first and don’t help the BBC and its friends ruin what needs to be the best conference yet.

Lib Dems all in a Pickles

There’s a strange inconsistency about the Lib Dem conference this time, not least in Chris Huhne – who for a member of the Association of Liberal Democrat Trade Unionists and the owner of no fewer than seven houses, seems remarkably keen to point out inconsistancies in others.

He has produced figures from the Home Office (that well-known Tory-supporting institution) that shows that between 1979 and 1997, crime rose by 81%. Now I understand why he used to write leaders for the Grauniad.

These figures ignore population increases and the fact that the Conservatives had to lead 1980s Britain through a period of considerable social and economic change. Anyone who has seen those iffy election graphs in Lib Dem Focus leaflets will know how well the party deals with statistics. Next Huhne will want to compare these figures with those from the last Liberal government of 1906-22 while completely ignoring the social upheavals that went on during that time.

The Lib Dem conference generally has been less a rallying cry for the faithful, less even a sensible policy debate and more of a constant headline-grabbing exercise – from the savage cuts to conman Cameron, from the mansion tax to this party of crime junk.

I think the truth is nearer this. Nick Clegg’s messages – surprisingly - are mixed and confused and the Lib Dems’ seemingly insatiable need to be all things to all people will unravel unless the party understands where it is positioning itself.

DC has been backward about coming forward with policies and criticised for it – but that is not the same thing. While there isn’t much out there at the moment, make no mistake – the Conservatives know exactly what they are going to do in 2010 and how to pitch it.

But Nick Clegg, at the moment, is not quite there. That, I think is why Eric Pickles senses that some Lib Dems on the right of the party are there for the taking and why the Lib Dems have spent the entire conference trying to put clear water between themselves and the Conservatives through big headlines.

Whether or not many Lib Dems will go to the Tories I’m not sure. But if Pickles’s intention was to put the wind up the Lib Dems and get them in a spin, I think he has at least partially succeeded.

They don’t like it up ‘em

Up until three months ago, there was no regularly updated blog putting forward the Conservative view in Woking and the Lib Dems quite wisely ran amok, posting stories about Conservative councillors and taking political credit wherever possible.

In the last couple of months, they’ve not had it all there own way, as I’ve been checking their blogs and blogging on them myself where necessary – apparently some Lib Dems are not keen on the line I’ve been taking. It’s fair enough; no-one enjoys being criticised and I’ve been criticised myself in some comments (but then the LDs would know that, as I suspect one of two or three of them to be the author/s).

I only ever respond to LD posts and never initiate anything but it is important that cross-party co-operation be maintained where it can to work for the best interests of Woking. I don’t want to be unhelpful so in future I will only blog on individual LDs when they themselves have blogged about individual Conservatives or executive decisions.

I think this demonstrates very clearly that the Lib Dems love to dish out the mischievous, the exaggerated and stir endlessly (I quote from the LD campaign handbook) but they aren’t so keen to be on the receiving end. If they blog the scurrilous and ridiculous, they should understand that this blog will be right up in their faces to rebut and say whatever needs to be said.

That’s a part of the political system.

Press release: Conservatives support shops and shoppers with car parking freeze

Woking’s Conservative administration stepped up its support for the Woking Town Centre economy at last week’s meeting of the council’s executive with confirmation that it would not be foisting an increase in car parking charges on shoppers during the run-up to Christmas.

Proposals had been put forward that would have meant the half-hourly increments currently used for charging in the main town centre car parks would have been removed. Currently people shopping for an hour and 20 minutes only pay the hour and 30 minutes increment – removing this would have left them paying for two hours.

In rejecting the idea of increasing car park charges for a second time this year, leader of the executive Cllr John Kingsbury said that he was mindful of the recession and the effect that this was having on people’s pockets. The Conservatives have introduced a discount scheme in the car parks that allows people to park all day for £8 and up to six hours for £5.

“We are not going to make the same mistake that the Liberal Democrats made in 2006/7,” said Cllr Kingsbury. “The Lib Dem executive budgeted for increased charges in April and then again in August, which was totally wrong.

“The Conservative executive has agreed to invest money in the  Peacocks Shopping Centre, to allow Next to move into a much larger site and we will hopefully see further enhancements soon.

“This was not the right time to think about removing the half-hour increment, which would have had the effect of significantly increasing the cost of parking to residents. We want people to be able to support our businesses in Woking during the autumn and in the run-up to Christmas.

“Operating our car parks is not about raising revenue – it is about creating a balance between covering the costs of the service for the taxpayer, supporting businesses and providing an excellent service to visitors to the town in their cars.”

Six of the best

I know it’s a bit spurious of me to blog of the Woking PPC selection because I can’t mention details on here of who’s involved etc.

What I can say is that it was a pretty intensive experience that gave me an good insight into what people who want to be MPs have to go through and it must have been pretty nervewracking for them. A few were obviously very nervous and some showed it less although must have been inside.

At the end of the initial selection, we have going forward six excellent candidates, any of whom I think would make a superb MP for Woking and would be in a good position to keep Rosie Sharpley safely out of reach of that honour. She has a decent record as a councillor but is in no way suited to being Woking’s next MP.

During the county elections, we only won in the Woking constituency by 1,609 votes – 5,000 short of Humfrey Malins’s current parliamentary majority. That kind of figure simply won’t be good enough in 2010.We need a candidate who is not only electable, likeable and normal but one who has a proven connection with the area and who is a top-notch campaigner. With the exception of 2007, the Conservatives have largely underachieved in Woking during the past 15 years. That’s not the fault of individuals, it’s a collective issue. We need greater coherence, better messaging and sharper tactics to respond to a very real Lib Dem threat. We need a PPC who is prepared to come in and lead from the front to shape and operate a smarter campaign and who has the track record to show they can.

If they aren’t that person, or don’t inspire that campaign, what looked like a superb opportunity to occupy a safe seat in parliament could turn into a bitter disappointment and one of election night 2010′s “shock” results.

Six gets narrowed down to four this Saturday.

Writs all round

Thank goodness that Nadine Dorries (left) has finally served libel writs on Damian McBride and Derek Draper for the scurrilous, nasty filth that they were bandying about for their Red Rag project.

The Grauniad reports authoritatively (along with a suitably unflattering photo) that Gordon Brown was not aware of the emails and was “furious” when he found out that they had been sent. One is inclined to be cynical about this kind of thing but I have to say I don’t believe such slanders are Brown’s style and for once am willing to take something other than a job ad at face value in the Grauniad .

Nadine Dorries is a canny individual though – she knows that the timing of her writs is likely to mean court hearings in around, say, six months or so when Gordon Brown needs them the least. I could drum through the Defamation Act 1996 but suffice it to speculate that even if they feel they were treated unfairly, McBride and Draper will come under some pressure to settle and avoid a courtroom soap opera in the press.

Whether they accede to that pressure remains to be seen but at least the writs have been served on the twits…

The (changing) thoughts of chairman Wells (part 3)

Another post from Cllr Olly Wells, although to be fair at least this one is about Knaphill rather than Burma or the Imperial plunder of British museums.

What readers of his blog might not be aware of is the revisions this posting had to go through in order to make it, well, accurate. Portfolio holder Cllr Melanie Whitehand spotted a more than “liberal” attitude to the facts and contacted Cllr Wells thus:

From: Cllr Melanie Whitehand Sent: 02 September
2009 17:23

To: Cllr Olly Wells

Cc: Councillors; Geoff McManusSubject: Dog
waste bins

Dear Councillor Wells,

It has been brought to my attention that you have placed on your web blog the question put to Council in July by Councillor Sharpley re. dog waste bins and the answer given by myself.

You have used those statements as a basis for further comment on the subject.

I was intrigued by this opening comment…

‘There are fewer and fewer bins for dog waste in Knaphill….

I contacted the Environmental Health department at the Council offices for clarification on this remark, as I was concerned that this was happening. The officer was surprised to hear this assertion as he felt sure that no bins have been removed. Should this have been the case they most certainly would have replaced them.

The second comment re. Barton Close and the lack of a dog waste bin in the area was answered by the officer that dog waste bins are never put that close to residential sites as both the County Council and Woking Council are restricted in this action. Dog waste bins are placed in larger recreational areas. i.e. The Brookwood Country park, Waterer’s Park and St. John’s Lye. The comment to me was that the desire to have dog waste bins close to residential houses was not encouraged from communities for the very reasons that you state, that dog
mess can harbour the parasite Toxi caricanis hence the enforcement of a fine if a dog owner is caught allowing their dog to foul in a public area.

Your third comment, that despite my assurance that…

‘.. where possible replacement or requests for additional bins will be accommodated…’

You report that requests for additional bins have been denied.

This was another comment I put to the Council officer, who again, was confused with this remark as he was of the mind that no requests for bins in appropriate areas have been denied.

Could you possible furnish details of the claims of where dog waste bins that have been requested in particular areas were denied please? And could you offer up evidence of where the losses of dog waste bins are as the Environmental Health department, I am sure, will be happy to replace them??

Regards

Melanie
Whitehand

A suitably chastised Cllr Wells replied, saying:

“I have amended the first sentence on my post as while it is my opinion, I am
more concerned with there not being enough bins in Knaphill and as these are
also being used as dog waste bins there are not enough bins for dog waste. I will
spend sometime checking the dog waste provision in Knaphill further (as I am
sure you will, perhaps we could do this together?)”

So the main premise of his blog post was, well, a bit of a guess, then.

As for whether Melanie has accepted his offer to audit the dog waste bins in Knaphill (but presumably not their contents??), I am yet to hear.