ICM: Tories have best policies for six out of nine key issues

The Conservative lead in the latest ICM/ Guardian poll is 6% (down slightly from 8% last month).  Mike Smithson, over at PoliticalBetting, suggests that Ming's pursuit of the BAe/ Saudi affair and a couple of assured Commons performances might have contributed to the 5% increase in LibDem support.  I find the jump harder to explain.  It may just be that last month's survey by Mike's favourite pollster understated LibDem support a little and this one overstates it.

The table on the right summarises how voters assess the parties' strength on the issues.  At the last General Election in 2005 the Tories only had a lead on asylum and immigration and were tied with Labour on law and order.  The Tories now lead Labour on six of nine issues.  Labour's largest lead is on the fight against terrorism (6%).  Their advantage on the electorally crucial issue of the economy has shrunk from 20% in 2005 to just 5% now.

Comments

[Tory T]

A very good analysis Tim. I am inclined to agree with the over/under thing on the LDs. We do well when they do well, broadly speaking, however, as they take Labour votes mostly.

[Tory T]

I must say those detailed figures on the issues are truly encouraging. Labour, down 15% on the economy, down ten on tax and services, down nine on Europe, down eleven on immigration...

worth also noting Mike Smithson's point that Labour do worse when Brown is named leader.

Good times, good times.

[Tory T]

make that eleven on education. On my first cup of tea.

[William Norton]

Perhaps the really interesting thing is that "Environment" was "not asked" in 2005. O tempora, O mores.

I wonder what important question is not being asked in 2007?

[HF]

The table that Tim produces on "who leads" shows some massive improvements by the Conservatives since the last GE.

Also Labour's polling figures for when Brown replaces Blair actually get worse. That is surprising given the state of Blair's image.

[John Irvine]

"At the last General Election in 2005 the Tories only had a lead on asylum and immigration"

Which gives the lie to the regularly-repeated but moronic mantra that "banging on about immigration turns people off"

[Tory T]

One other figure we should all take note of, another cheering figure, as pointed out on PB.com, is

"An early election? The poll found 76% of voters saying they would like Brown to call a contest within a year of succeeding Blair."

76% is an absolutely huge number. In my view, it would be massively to our advantage as the best-funded party with candidates in place to have an early election. I would feel very confident about that.

Smithson also sugests that the way data is collated in this poll, which differs in terms of voting headline vs. named leader, means that Labour with Brown do even worse than the present gap suggests. If so, they would be down at "core vote" levels of 30-29% or so.

[Tory T]

No, John; we still have our lead on asylum and immigration, thank you, it has not declined at all, but since we now focus on other issues that matter to people we also lead now on education, tax, services, the environment, and Europe, and we have massively slashed Labour's lead on Health by 13 points to a single point and on the economy by an even greater 15 points to 5 percent.

[Jonathan]

What policies?

[Tory T]

The ones we lead on, Jonathan. Sorry if the fact we used to lead on one issue, now we lead on six, bothers you.

There have been plenty of policy announcements on the issues. See yeserday's NHS thread. See the pronouncements on tax - less on marriage and business, more on pollutants, cut taxes over the course of a cycle, share growth. See our lead on the tax/service issue?

Europe - pull out of the Social Chapter, form a non-federalist reforming group, stop the Euro constitution

Education - streaming in schools, reform of the syllabus, synthetic phonics, all new schools to be foundation or other reformed schools, no new comprehensives

Law & order - build many more prisons, police to be accountable to local communities, police targets scrapped on day 1

etc etc

Anybody who says David Cameron has announced no policies is lazy or obtuse and simply does not bother to read the papers

[John Irvine]

My reply to Jonathan is "exactly". We have no policies to speak of. What is happening is that people are simply giving the thumbs-down to Labour blunders.

If you asked them what the alternative Tory policies were they wouldn't have a clue, and they'd be right, because they don't exist.

The "Tory lead" is down by 2% and the preposterous CCHQ plant Tory T is already braying about a new triumph. His assignment to CH must be money for old rope. No wonder he'll say anything to keep it.

[jorgen]

Since Labour is extremely weak and the Lib Dem is very weak, the Conservative Party should expect hordes of protest voters storming to them. So, there they are! 6% lead. Great.

[Tory T]

LOL! You think cchq assigns posters to a website?

The fact is, you little ukip Labour's little helpers can froth away on the thread below and the actual Conservatives - you know, the ones who spend their weekends canvassing in the cold, knocking on doors, getting ready to give Labour a kicking in May - we can discuss our colossal progress in the polls and on the issues, contrast it with 2005, and see just how well we are doing today and where we have to improve.

[Oliver McCarthy]

What's interesting to me is that despite Cameronisation and so on the Tories still have the same lead on asylum and immigration they had at the last election. To be quite honest, I think this an issue the Tories own really rather because no one else wants it. There was certainly no need for Dracula to keep going hyper about it at the last General Election, which lost us votes in stead of gaining them.

Pleasingly, the public appears to be becoming more Eurosceptic, and so far Cameron's EPP-problem (i.e. his Tory Boy-problem) hasn't surfaced sufficiently to make him look either weak or deceitful (one of which -- though I'm not sure which -- he certainly is).

Otherwise, the Socialists' chucking money at health and education (so that it can be sucked up by wealthy donors to the Labour Party) has now lost them their leads on those issues. That's not to say they won't get them back, especially when GB takes over from TB, but for now the spend-spend-spend-regardless-of-outcome agenda, is no longer finding favour with taxpayers. (Maybe it's just that time of year again, but maybe the tax-hikes are finally biting!)

One of the Tories' two big problems for the future, I predict, will be that they have absolutely nothing to say about the War on Terror -- and that is a great mistake. The idea that the War will somehow fizzle out when Bush steps down in two years time is wishful thinking, regardless of whether McCain or Ms. Rodham becomes President; and, which is more to the point, Brown will be keen to bolster his national security/special relationship/internationalist credentials as soon as he becomes PM -- which is presumably why he's been dumbing down spending and undermining both the War and Blair for most of the last four years. (I predict that Brown the Briton, with his "GB for GB" spin, will be a good deal sounder on defence than Blair has been for various reasons. Cue more visits to war memorials and military cemeteries, etc.)

Their other problem will be that Cameron has sunk a huge amount of capital into a political non-issue, specifically all the enviro-crap. The MSM loves this sort of thing because it gives them an opportunity to get out their National Geographic photo-snaps and David Attenborough commentaries, and then use made-up computer graphics to predict Hollywood-style disaster-movie scenarios. (Nobody really believes any of it, but it's easier to make the news up than to report it.) And of course national governments of all stripes love it because it gives them excuses to yank up indirect taxation.

People living in the real world, however, who are concerned about health, education, money, and being bombed by Muslims, are not so interested. And the worst is that even after all the glacier-hugging and pedalling to work in the mornings the Tory lead on the issue is only a measley 2%. Is it really worth trying to get the hemp-brigade to vote Tory? I'm not convinced.

[Serf]

Good news.

If we continue to make hay about the state of the health service (no doubt this poll was done before yesterday's announcements on targets) then that 1% gap will disappear.

As for the economy, Gordon's follies are finally catching up with him, as the latest inflation figures show. With that issue we just let Labour hang themselves.

[Jon Gale]

Well said ToryT 09:13

[601]

we really really need to say more about "the war on terror".

[SmercB]

I agree with Tory T @ 9.13.
We are the best at in fighting instead of looking where we have come from and achieved over the past 18 months.
We were blown away, yes we got more seats but Not more of the vote share, we got the same as 2001. Now we have a chance, but we have got to start to unite behind the Leadership, take the positives and go forward.
Changing to win is not new to us, Churchill and Maggie both said in different words we have to change to win as the voters do not like our style. when we did change we Won!
Those of us who remember when Maggie took over will also note that it was not an easy ride with the changes she introduced to get to the St Francis Pray outside no 10 in 79!

[Gareth]

Odd isn't it that, despite the endless assurances we are given by posters on this site as to the blood-curdling Euro-scepticism of the voters, that we now have a lead on the issue of 'Europe' for the first time. In 2005, when our rhetoric was several degrees higher, we were 7% behind on the issue. How curious. Not, of course, that the Euro-nutters have ever been troubled by facts in making their arguments.

[Andrew Woodman]

How do people judge when we have very few policies? I think the poll shows just how weak Labour have become when the gap is 1% on Health and Education, in spite of us not really saying anything of substance on the subjects.

The economy is the most striking figure. The trend is pear shaped for Gordon.

[Tory T]

Andrew,

have a look at yesterday's thread on health or the education policies I have listed above. I think those are significant policies, don't you? They are certainly very different from Labour.

[EML]

The best news is perhaps that any appetite in the Lib Dems for Sir Ming's ousting will die down ... at least for a while.

[Alexander Drake]

The core questions are economic management and national security. Forget "Europe" or "Asylum or immigration". The two that will drive how people vote, will be how people feel they will be safer with on the economy and national security. The leads are with Labour but are trending to us, in a very satisfactory way.

When voters in marginal seats feel that the Conservatives are the better choice on economic management - as opposed to "tax cuts" - then we'll see the flocking hordes, Jorgen. In the absence of a Conservative lead on that question I think he's performing pretty well. I hope it comes with time.

[Andrew Woodman]

The Health one wasn't out when the majority of the poll was taken. I would expect the figure to become positive now this is out. There has been a few low key announcements on Education but nothing that major. I would expect the figures to rise when present major policies is what I'm saying.

[Andy D]

I have a little sympathy for those who point out that our lead maybe should be greater - while wishing to observe that at least we have a lead these days - but the fact we're ahead on a majority of policy areas is very heartening.

[Sean Fear]

Alexander Drake, economic management and national security are certainly two of the core questions. But I think immigration is certainly another, now.

The best feature of MORI polls is that for about 20 years, they've asked people to rank issues by importance, and immigration is now regularly at the top.

One of the most interesting questions (which has attracted very little comment) that was recently asked by Yougov was "What makes you Most Ashamed of Modern Britain?" 39% replies "The Unfair Treatment of White Families" - an extraordinary proportion IMHO. Ten years ago, I doubt if it would have been higher than 10-15%.

[Michael McGowan]

Good to see the one-club golfer, Gareth, in action: why reason with people when you can indulge in adolescent playground abuse instead?

I for one am not even sure what Conservative policy is on Europe and how, if at all, it has changed from 2005.

[Tory T]

That's a ludicrously leading question if ever I heard one, Sean - not that immigration is not a very important issue after the fiasco of 13k Poles vs 1 million in one year. But such a "question" is a bit of a joke.

Anyway, as pointed out above, Cameron has maintained our immigration lead and simply added to it a lead on loads of other stuff too.

[Alexander Drake]

I should have elaborated on what I meant as "core", Sean. I agree that immigration is an important issue to many UK voters - but I don't think it's a vote changing issue from Lab to Con.

There is much I dislike about Max Hastings' article in the Guardian today, but I feel this kernel is true:

A recent opinion poll showed that, while many people feel dismayed about Britain as a society, most feel amazingly content with their own existences. As long as this remains true, Gordon Brown has a fair chance of remaining prime minister past a general election.

[Sean Fear]

A leading question can still be a useful question, Tory T. I think that ten years ago, a lot more people would have felt embarassed about answering "Yes" to that question than is the case today.

That may be so Alexander. But I think that a growing number of urban Britons do believe that immigration is damaging their quality of life.

[Scotty]

Sean, I disagree. I think that immigration is very much an issue in some area's but not in other's. Where as the economy, crime, education, health, environment and national security will remain the most important issues everywhere.
These should be the key campaign issues we need to be "banging on about".
We need to have clear policies on immigration and Europe as part of a balanced manifesto, but to highlight them, or make them "core" campaign issues would be a mistake.
We have got to send out a positive message about what we would do in government, to run a negative campaign would be a costly disaster.
We cannot rely on Labour losing the election, we have got to try and win the arguments on policies and show that we would "make a difference".

[Yet Another Anon]

I don't really see anything much different, opinion polls have been known to way out on actual support in the past, if it is assumed to be correct for the sake of argument then it shows Labour and Conservative on about the same levels they have been for most of the past 9 months - levels of support and election results at the General Election in the past generally have been very different from those approaching 2 years into a parliament - especially when one party has won a third successive term.

[Tory T]

Andrew Woodman @ 10:49, fair comment, I agree.

[Andrew Woodman]

I would agree that immigration needs to be part of a balanced manifesto. Last time it was not balanced in any way. there seemed to be at least 10 times as many immigration leaflets as Health and Education.

On the subject of immigration, I believe you have to think about the way it affects certain people. I know people in the building trade who are anti because they are being undercut by immigrants living 4 to a house and sending money home, where as an office worker mat think immigration is great because he can get an emergency plumber and not be forced to take out a second mortgage. The Builder may agree with our policies but have a long standing hatred of the party and not vote for us. The office worker may have no problem with immigration and think we're too right wing and vote Lib Dem. It's a tricky subject to get right.

[Oliver McCarthy]

Honestly! The Tories have regained their lead on Europe probably because the public is more Eurosceptic now (and, with the longterm rise of Little Englander mentalities in the tabloid press, and with the shorterm Euro-Presidency of Angela Merkel, this is a very real possibility). Of course for all his faults Cameron is more Eurosceptic than his immediate predecessor: IDS vowed to withdraw from the EPP/ED; Dracula completely reversed his position; now Cameron has revered the reversal, albeit "in the long term" or "after the next elections" or whenever it's going to be. In my book that makes the Tories more Eurosceptic than they were at the last General Election. Hey presto! They've got their lead back.

[Oliver McCarthy]

Doh! He's reversed the reversal, not 'revered' it.

[Simon]

Those of us who do 'yougov' know that they have been doing 'who has the best policies for...' surveys for a good while. What i'd like to see are the actual results for these surveys.

[Sean Fear]

Andrew, indeed, there was a lack of balance at the last election. That is probably because immigration was one of the few issues where we had coherent policies, and on which we had our biggest lead. My own impression was the issue was in net terms, beneficial to us, but then my campaigning was limited to parts of Hertfordshire and North London.

My impression is that public opinion has radicalised on this issue since May 2005.

[Andrew Woodman]

There's a lot in that Sean. The other policies were just soundbite and when the Health Policy wasn't playing well, that had to be canned. The immigration policy was not a bad one, and I would be surprised if it was changed. It was merely the amount of time spent on it which was able to be spun as banging on and obsessive by the media and Labour.

[ukfirst]

The offical opposition should be ahead by much more than these figures show given public knowledge now of government corruption, plus inflation and most aspects of life in Britain having turned manifestly nastier. The best lead is 6% - not much.

[ukfirst]

Quote: "The immigration policy was not a bad one, and I would be surprised if it was changed."

It would be a good idea to change it because it tried to give the impression that British governments determine immigration policy, when in fact it is almost entirely a matter of implementing what Brussels demands.

[Milton]

Of much more interest would be this time last year. The aftermaths of elections usually see collapses in Government support anyway.

[ukfirst]

That the Conservative Party has a 2% lead over Labour on "Europe" suggests to me that the public have rumbled that the there is no essential difference between the two on this.

[Sean Fear]

UK First, leaving aside free movement within the EU, almost every other aspect of immigration policy is determined by the governments of member States.

Of course, that does mean leaving aside a pretty big element of immigration policy. So, if, for example, Spain gives an amnesty to illegal immigrants, they can settle anywhere in the EU. Overall, though, I don't think immigration from EU countries bothers people as much as immigration from third world countries.

[Londoner]

The issues findings are encouraging, but consider the possible causes of the gap narrowing on many issues. I wonder how much that reflects people who previously preferred Labour now seeing no difference between us. I follow politics, although not health politics very closely and haven't caught up with this week's pronoucements (will I bother? - yawn), and I don't think right now I could articulate any real differences between the parties on it. This may just be me being lazy but then so is much of the electorate. I suppose one difference is that Labour has made a complete hash of handling GPs by just giving them a massive unplanned pay hike, which I think people have noticed and has confirmed that increased expenditure does not necessarily do any good. I wish I was confident that a Tory Government might not have made the same mistake.

As for important issues not on there (as William Norton asks near the top of the thread), here are two: civil liberties and foreign policy. I think we probably have a good lead on the former (which may be a minority interest but of much greater interest to me than the health service, and increasingly important) and should have had a great opportunity on the latter but have largely wasted it. I have a child at University and he says these are the two issues about which today's students feel most strongly about and are most anti-Labour. How you reconcile these issues to national security is a major challenge.

[Scotty]

"My own impression was the issue was in net terms, beneficial to us, but then my campaigning was limited to parts of Hertfordshire and North London.

My impression is that public opinion has radicalised on this issue since May"

Sean, the campaign focus on immigration played badly for the conservatives in my area and I suspect in others too. I don't think it was beneficial, in fact I think we should have done better than we did.
It may have radicalised since May 2005 in "some area's" but it would still be poisonous and extremely negative to make it a focus of a future campaign. Just have a sensible and fair policy as part of a balanced manifesto.
For too long we have run negative "scare" campaigns which do not make attractive viewing or reasons to vote for a new government.
They are also more damaging when in opposition as William Hague discovered. Labour offered a referendum on the issue, diffused the concern and ended up looking reasonable in comparison to us.

[Tory T]

That 2% lead on Europe represents a 9 point improvement, a huge improvement on our 7 point deficit at the last election.

[Daniel VA]

Some quick observations on this thread:

- this poll thread's Barbara Villiers Memorial Trophy goes to John Irvine;

- signed portrait of Simon Heffer to first person to assert "we would be 10%+ points ahead with David Davis/William Hague/Liam Fox/John Redwood/Norman Tebbit as leader" goes unclaimed this time;

- actual poll result a little disappointing, but not the end of the world as it still shows significant progress since the pre-David Cameron era;

- at risk of provoking the usual gang of trolls and malcontents, it's interesting to note that David Cameron's more moderate, pragmatic approach to Europe is received more warmly by the public than the strident approach taken previously - the thought of Nigel Farage surfing into power on a tide of ardent public europhobia seems ever more laughable by the second...

[Michael McGowan]

It is always entertaining to observe the fervour of a True Believer: in this case, Daniel VA.

[Rachel Joyce]

I think we should be making more of the Conservative impact on the economy:
- Thatcher's economic changes that made this country the competitive economy it now is (based on a knowledge and financial economy)
- The risk this has been put under with high borrowing - not including the PFI's in health & education which has mortgaged our future
if we don't get the message out in a historical evidenced based message, the NuLab will continue to capitalise on this lack of understanding/ education about the economy with the continuation of the artificial feelgood effects it has created in recent years (which will all come crashing down probably soon after the next election).