« The Blair hair scandal | Main | Michael Ancram: Troops out now »

Comments

"Is it anymore significant than that? Probably not."

Let us hope this analysis is correct. Burrying our head in the sand is a risky strategy.

It is interesting that there appears to be a significant amount of Tory supporters defecting to the BNP (the Tories being the biggest losers). Whether those questioned are *lending* their votes or not is still to be seen. But I think you have to be very dissatisfied with your own party to use the BNP as your protest.

I also think that 33% is a rather symbolic number. This is the poll rating that we saw most often under Michael Howard. We're back to where we were again?

This ignores the Blair factor. What happens if you take him out of the equation?

YouGov overestimated UKIP during their big electoral "challenge". I think their methodology skews in favour of minority parties.

"It is interesting that there appears to be a significant amount of Tory supporters defecting to the BNP (the Tories being the biggest losers)."

The BNP have been emphasising on their website how they've been taking "traditional Tory" votes as well as "Old Labour" votes. If this is so then the Tories still have the support of some floating voters but the advantage has been wiped out by right-wings defecting. Or maybe it's swing voters who are just fed up supporting the BNP.

Although it's pretty early to make predictions, this poll confirms my hunch that the next general election will see precisely none of the parties receive more than about 33% of the vote, if they're lucky. Minor parties are starting to encroach on the percentage shares of the main parties in quite a significant way.

John Hustings is right - 33% for Cameron after all his recent campaigning is pretty dismal. Hague and Howard will be wondering why their efforts in 2001 and 2005 were so derided when Cameron can't seem to do any better.

That 33% figure is strange because usually YouGov gives the Tories a relatively high share of the vote compared to most of the other polling companies. Surely not the BNP eating into the Tory vote? I thought everone said it was Labour who suffered when the BNP does well.

This is part of this week's Spectator's prescription for beating the BNP:

"Part of the answer, therefore, is a new localism that acknowledges the very different needs of each area, gives voters a true sense of control over their public services and tears down the last vestiges of municipal socialism. Specialist, academy and technology schools are most urgently needed in areas where the traditional labour market is undergoing radical change. Housing policy, often the source of the most bitter grievances, must be governed, and visibly governed, by more than political correctness. Policing must take account of the anxieties of all community groups, not just some."

Well Editor are you sure the existing parties are able to adapt to these circumstances ? They have spent 30 years centralising - it was Edward Heath who nationalised water by seizing it from local authorities; it was he who pushed through plans hatched under Labour for Metropolitan District Councils and we saw a parish council for 15.000 people replaced with a Metropolitan Council for 550.000 -

The Police were removed as City Forces into regional forces, now super-regional......


The pattern of Democratic Centralism continues in modes of candidate selection, publicity, and in government to the point of closing County Courts, Police Stations, Post Offices, Aerodromes, Schools, Hospitals et al

There is no way these existing parties can generate localism from top-down structures - the Church of England was built on The Parish where the local squire built the church and provided the living. The Bishop was the King's representative to ensure his decrees were read out to the public who were fined for non-attendance at church.

The decline of the Squire has made the Bishop the dispenser of subsidy to keep parishes alive, and the tax-levier on richer parishes to cross-subsidise.

Thus even the church with a foot in every part of England has become de-localised under a Regional General Manager called a Bishop

They say British political structures have 23.000 elected representatives and 90.000 unelected - we pay £11.000pa for our Councillors - and whether this is money well spent is unclear


Yougov did overestimate UKIP in 2004; however, they were the first polling company tp identify a big rise in support for that party, when other pollsters were putting them on well under 10%.

BNP won't win 7% of the national vote on May 4th (they're only contesting 8% of the seats) but it does now look as they will poll very strongly.

This surge in support is both a creation of Labour led publicity (making it OK to say you'll vote BNP) and a reflection of distaste for all three major parties so like the Greens & UKIP in EU elections people are looking for an alternative protest.

Overall I'm not too taken with YouGov's questions - while not accusing them of asking leading questions the survey overall looks close to their clients agenda. However as regards the Conservatives & Dave the interesting responses are 60% saying its not clear who we stand for, 54% saying we haven't changed and 50% saying we still don't reflect modern Britain. The good result is that only 33% see us as a party of sleaze as against 64% for Labour. The Labour lead on the economy is also disappearing (now only 5% compared with 22% last year)

I agree that we need to talk about more than Green issues but it is important that we don't leap into positions that constrain our future policy directions - no flip flops. Hague, IDS & Howard all retreated now is the time for the leadership to stay with the plan. Unlike the last time we were on 33% our two major oppenents are also well down so there are a lot of Don't Knows to be won over.

so there are a lot of Don't Knows to be won over.

That should be real easy then - considering polls do not reflect turnout.

Let's factor in 41% nationally on local election turnout and 56% on the next General Election.

Wonder whose constituencies and wards will melt down fastest ?

The Bishop of Sheffield (who he ?) is leading a parade of "Interfaith" worthies against the BNP; the Bishops of Wakefield and Pontefract (too many bishops) urge the masses not to vote BNP.

Why does it seem that having heard nothing of these "Bishops" over Easter of any significance they suddenly perk up when the BNP gets a chance to be elected/rejected.

Seemingly everything else is splendid - abortion, immigration, social decay, alienation - but a chance of Guardian Politics is energising for the Church of England......................in much the same vogue issues way it seems to be for David Cameron.

They used to comment on the Church of England and the Conservative Party.............my they are so very similar nowadays.........and once they were so central to the nation's life


Given the size of their congregations, I doubt if this will have much impact overall.

Electoral Calculus now shows a predicted increase in Labour's majority at the next election. This is the first time this has happened since Cameron was elected.

This YouGov poll does seem to show the rise of the small parties as disillusioned voters finally throw in the towel and give up on the big three.

Cameron's proposals for state funding of political parties that is heavily skewed towards the big 3 will annoy voters even more and increase the pace of drift from the big 3.

Well well. 33%. Looks like Tebbitt was right.

Sorry [typo]'Tebbit'

Giving the BNP the oxygen of publicity is IMHO a rather stupid thing to do - though it might energise those anti-BNP voters to get out and vote tactically to defeat BNP it also gives credence to the party as one deserving of protest votes and stimulates the disaffected to support them.

Far better would be to look at the issues that drive disaffection - perceptions of favouritism towards one community over the other, perceived enforcement of multiculturalism at the expense of native traditions etc. and deal with those issues.

We started to address local community issies in the last PPB - graffiti, local environment - but need to do more about how we would locally deal with the more inflamatory problems through strengthening local policing and giving local people more say over that, by supporting integration, etc. and yes by managed migration. But not by trying to move into the BNP's agenda.

Frank Field has a persuasive aticle in the Telegraph comment section.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/04/21/do2102.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/04/21/ixportal.html
"Three moves would show that the Government is intent on radical reform. Move one would be to instruct all housing authorities that length of service as good tenants should be the crucial determinant of housing allocation. Other groups would be afforded the accommodation thus released by those tenants with a track record of good citizenship.

Move two would be a partial freeze on the benefit levels for single people until the rate for a couple equalled twice that of the single person. The welfare system would then be seen to cease discriminating financially against those who lived together, particularly so if they have children.

The third reform would be to impose a contributory period before welfare can be drawn. The debate should centre on how long the period should be. Linked to this should be the roll-out of ID cards so that NHS treatment was strictly linked to people's residency in this country."

I disagree with his last sentence - ID cards aren't necessary for managing access to NHS but I think the three paragraphs could be a good basis for Tory policy in this area. Can't we find a way of getting Frank into our policy development team without making him cross the floor?

Matthew Sinclair - in the European elections YouGov prompted people with UKIP as one of the choice (i.e. when they asked people who they were going to vote for UKIP, and the Greens, were given as options as well as the usual Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem, Other) In hindsight this over inflated the reported level of UKIP support.

Todays poll on the other hand was a normal voting intention question where people are only given the main three parties, the SNP, PC and "Other" to chose from (people who chose other then get taken to an extra question to say who that "other" is). Hence the same problem shouldn't arise.

Well after I was derided by some posters by suggesting after the Spring Forum that we were not selling either the right message or in the right way, 33% would appear to vindicate my original opinion.

However the 7% total for the BNP makes me sceptical. Maybe I'm horribly complacent, but I just can't see them polling that high, either on May 4th or at a general election. If the 7% figure is true then that suggests the BNP is gaining support in areas such as my rural Devon seat, or even my university seat, something I find extremely unlikely.

According to the Telegraph's graphic, BNP support has gone from 0% to 7% in 20 days. What could cause such a meteoric rise? Was it that Britain become like a foreign country over the last 20 days? Was it all those Muslim terrorist attacks over the last 20 days? Was it all the jobs given to Asians over whites in the last 20 days? Or was it that Margaret Hodge and the media coverage of this are either very cynical or very stupid (or both) to give credibility to such an obnoxious party.

Ted: "I agree that we need to talk about more than Green issues but it is important that we don't leap into positions that constrain our future policy directions - no flip flops. Hague, IDS & Howard all retreated now is the time for the leadership to stay with the plan."

Ted: As a matter of fact Iain never retreated. He wasn't given time to start selling his policies. His last major policy announcement was to relink the state pension with earnings - a key recommendation of the Turner report and very much geared to social justice. Iain consistently talked about poverty and crime, public service reform and taxpayer value for money. He may not have been the right leader for the party but he didn't retreat from any strategy. He had put his policy agenda in place and was ready to sell it through regional roadshows and targeted campaigning for two years up until the general election.

First of all that looks like a very loaded poll.

Secondly, The Conservatives drop 3 points, the BNP rise 7 points, and you are all saying its the Conservatives fault for not addressing these issues ?! It's something all the main political parties need to address, and you are very naive if you think a tougher line on immigration will suddenly regain the support of these people.

Tim
Withdraw comment on IDS - agree he was never given chance to demonstrate his agenda. Comment stands for Hague & Howard though.

Forgive me Editor but I remember at the time media reports saying IDS was going to switch focus back onto tax-cuts. Or is my memory failing me?

Anthony - This is why YouGov is a better indicator of polling position than companies that use the sloppy "Other". On the ballot sheet, the BNP, UKIP and other assorted minor parties will be there as discrete options, not folded into a nebulous "Other" category.

It is disappointing that most of the BNP support is coming from the Conservatives; however, as Sean Fear says, they are only contesting 8% of seats, so damage is likely to be localised and probably in Labour-held wards in any case (to believe Hodge et al.). Furthermore, we must not forget so-called "shaky hand" syndrome: it is one thing to select the BNP on an online poll, quite another to actually vote for them, and many people may quaver at putting a cross next to their box come election time. The trend is certainly worrying, but probably not as alarming as the headline figures would suggest.

Wicks

Anthony Wells on another thread says that BNP wasn't a prompted response - people who said Other were then asked which. So result demonstrates IMO a high evel of disatifaction with Labour (only polling 35%) but no great desire for either Cameron's Conservatives or Ming's LDs (back down to 17% same as in depths of leadership crisis). BNP response probably reflects the publicity received following Hodges remarks and the BBCs prioritisation of the so-called news (surely news is what is happening/has happened not tittle-tattle from a single source)

Agree entirely that we don't jump in as hard line anti-imigration party but do think the points Frank Field makes should be addressed. Plus the elephant in the room of British Muslim disaffection and resulting majority viewing this community with distrust and fear.

With three years to go to a general election we are consistently either just behind Labour or in front of them a situation that as not happened for a long time.
You do not go from losing a general elction by sixty six seats to gliding towards a victory in the next election in five months.
Popularity is built slowly over a long period of time as people learn to trust you and start to support your policies. It is not instant and it is not built easily.
I am afriad too many on this site take too much notice of the latest couple of per cent movement in the polls. Too many don`t seem to realise that the only way to victory is to stick to the path that as been set and have the courage to stick with that path when we may hit a rocky section.
There are also those who have an agenda not for change but for revenge. They can`t stand the fact that the majority in the party have turned there backs on the right-wing agenda that brought this party three defeats and they just want todays more moderate leadership to be defeated so they can take back control of the party. Those need to be taken on and defeated.

PS Sorry Anthony, didn't read your post fully. In fact, if YouGov did use the aforementioned sloppy "Other", those prepared to tick the BNP box *in an online poll* might be higher than 7%. "Shaky hand" syndrome would probably still apply in the ballot box.

sorry Anthony was earlier on this thread.

I was shocked yesterday to hear from a friend that they felt spoiling their ballot was a good thing. Needless to say, she got a lecture on the Suffragette movement. I think shes learnt her lesson now.

AlexW - it seems sloppy, but it gives the most accurate results. If you don't prompt by party name at all then the Lib Dems get underreported. If you prompt by all party names the minor parties get overreported.

It might not seem fair, but when compared to actual election results you get the best response by prompting by the three main parties (or 4 main parties in Scotland and Wales), but not prompting by the minor parties.

"Shaky hand syndrome" is always a problem - people do use polls to send a message and, in fact, if you ask them a "how would you vote tomorrow question" and then a "how do you think you'll vote at the next election in x years time" you'll sometimes get different answers. Its one of the reasons why polls can only ever be snapshots of opinion at the time and not predictions of the next election.

Voice from the South West: "Forgive me Editor but I remember at the time media reports saying IDS was going to switch focus back onto tax-cuts. Or is my memory failing me?"

Things are always complicated with the media, VftSW, but the media interpreted IDS' awfully-named 'help the vulnerable' campaign as ruling out tax cuts. That was never said and, of course, targeted tax relief can be an important component of a compassionate conservatism. Iain's intention was always to cut taxes once the cost of the public service reforms was established and his last party conference made that clear.

I hope this helps.

Wicks: "you are very naive if you think a tougher line on immigration will suddenly regain the support of these people."

What rubbish! I can tell you from experience in my own borough in Thurrock that a tough conservative line on immigration stops the BNP. Last time they put a slate up in a quarter of the seats and came second, or below to the tories in most seats we contested. It was also the first time the conservatives had taken outright control of thurrock council, and it is no coincidence that we ran a strong immigration campaign.

It's areas like Thurrock that we need to hold at council level and take at the parliamentary level, if we are to be seen as 'reaching' out to non traditional, working class areas.

Lady Thatcher got Essex Man on her side by creating policies that brought Essex Man into politics, not excluding them. Combating this alienation in working class England is key and we can do it, just as we did it before.

But we will not win an election again if we let Essex Man get so far out of our reach that they habitually vote BNP or Labour. We should forget Notting Hill Harry and start looking at polices to recapture Essex Man if we are to look to win again.

"perceived enforcement of multiculturalism at the expense of native traditions etc. and deal with those issues."

Short of stopping anybody who isn't white moving into these areas, what can be done?

"However the 7% total for the BNP makes me sceptical. Maybe I'm horribly complacent, but I just can't see them polling that high, either on May 4th or at a general election."

Thank goodness we don't have PR!

I wonder what Jack Stone has to say about all this?

Just been looking at YouGov's archives. In the previous 9 polls, the Tory share was at least 36%.

One explanation is that the last few remaining elderly, working-class Tory voters in inner-city areas have finally abandoned us. They probably couldn't stomach Cameron's new direction for the party, although I personally think he's on the right track. We were always going to lose those voters in the end.

"I wonder what Jack Stone has to say about all this?"

I imagine he's too busy drafting his response to the reshuffle speculation which will inevitably call for William Hauge (sic) and David Davies (sic) to be sacked as Shadow Foreign Secretary and Shadow Home Secretary respectively.

If he does comment on this thread, expect a Comical Ali-style 'we're on course for victory' comment, which he will somehow marry with a call for more of our supporters to 'sod off' and vote for UKIP.

"Short of stopping anybody who isn't white moving into these areas, what can be done?"

Controlling immigration effectively and ending a variety of public sector affirmative action schemes would be a help.

Cameron's strategy is based on the idea that if he fixes the Conservative brand image problem, he will win votes. Doing this requires him to ignore and avoid making many policy statements.

But he is making choices which indicate where he stands on policies which Conservatives hold strong views about. His pushing to comply with the European Directive on the Funding of Political Parties, for example and his cooperating with Blair, indicates a willingness to eliminate smaller parties that will be banned from receiving funds, such as UKIP and BNP.

They could also be declared illegal by the ECJ as holding 'xenophobic' or 'racist' views which Cameron is clearly mindful of, when he spoke of UKIP's 'closet racism'.

If Cameron will not represent the eurosceptic views of the British people, and as he is complying with the EU programme to eliminate the parties that do, it is not surprising that he is losing support amongst Conservatives. He is trying to close the door on Britain's exit routes from the EU.

IDS took us from 20% behind Labour to 5% ahead at 40% in October 2002 by pushing Conservative policies and principles - despite alleged lack of skill as a communicator. In fact he came across as genuine, which was far more powerful than the falseness of image-based politics.

IDS was eleiminated by a media campaign which MP's buckled to. It was a similar short and coordinated media campaign which promoted Cameron to the leadership, and Tory MP's again let it swing their support.

If Conservative MP's had stuck to Conservative values and principles, and backed Liam Fox, they would be in a far better state electorally than they are now.

Can they make a mental note next time the media want to tell them who to get rid of or who to promote, they should always do the opposite, and put Conservative policies first. Voters have much respect for a politician expressing genuinely held beliefs. In fact they have a hunger for it, which is leading them to other parties now.

"I imagine he's too busy drafting his response to the reshuffle speculation which will inevitably call for William Hauge (sic) and David Davies (sic) to be sacked as Shadow Foreign Secretary and Shadow Home Secretary respectively."

He's already done that minus the bit about Hague.

Far better would be to look at the issues that drive disaffection - perceptions of favouritism towards one community over the other, perceived enforcement of multiculturalism at the expense of native traditions etc. and deal with those issues.

Well Ted I think it is nearer home than that. A shop-assistant i spoke to today indicated it was the fact that when I read the front page of the newspaper about a young teenage tearaway who has a string of convictions and just stabbed one of his brothers to death, and another into hospital................for me it is a news item...............for her it is a neighbour.

She lives near such a hoodlum and wonders why she has no protection apart from soundbites. Before the Tories and then Labour started to close police stations there were physical police - now they exist more on TV than in the wild.

All Politics is Local..................but not in Britain, here it is part of Ad-Land and resides in Soho.

The only aspect of race which motivates people to vote BNP is the unrestricted immigration and talk to Pakistanis and hear them complain about the asylum seekers dumped in their areas, in their mosques. They live with this influx and know it drags down their property prices so they get pushed further down the ladder of good schools, good catchments.

This is the very reverse of ladders of opportunity.

"In hindsight this over inflated the reported level of UKIP support." Well, by 2%. Let's not forget that no-one else was showing UKIP doing well at all - Bob Worcester of Mori actually went on record saying that UKIP wouldn't break 10%! So let's remember we got the story right - UKIP did indeed make a (temporary) break-through.

I'm not sure what can be read from today's poll - it shows that there is another protest vote, and that this time BNP are getting some benefit, but of course it doesn't really mean that 7% would vote for them in a general election. There's an inherent falseness in the question (which all pollsters ask, by convention). As there is no general election tomorrow, but only local elections with hugely varying profiles, and with BNP standing in only some of them, it's hard to draw conclusions.

Tell me: you operate a travel agecy in Bradford which takes in £20 million a month during Haj. You run a hawala bank and you have good relations with the police.

Then a Somali gang comes up from London and guns down two policewomen, one fatally. One gunman is still at large.

Who do you vote for ?


That nice Mr Blair who is "tough on crime, tough on the causes..." ? and in 9 years he has just lost control of gun crime especially.

Or that nice Mr Cameron who thinks ecology is the key and doesn't want to restrict entreprenurs from Somalia seeking asylum then building community-based crime businesses ?

Just who can people look to to control crime in Britain ? Police are not locally controlled. In Yorkshire there will be a new super force imposed - 13.000 police officers, 6000 square miles, 6 million citizens, £1.000.000.000 budget.

That looks kind of local for a travel agency that has been knocked over by a Somali gang based in London !!

"What rubbish! I can tell you from experience in my own borough in Thurrock that a tough conservative line on immigration stops the BNP. Last time they put a slate up in a quarter of the seats and came second, or below to the tories in most seats we contested. It was also the first time the conservatives had taken outright control of thurrock council, and it is no coincidence that we ran a strong immigration campaign. "

Has the quality of life and the numebr of job opportunities in Thurrock improved thanks to this anti immigration line?

"One explanation is that the last few remaining elderly, working-class Tory voters in inner-city areas have finally abandoned us. They probably couldn't stomach Cameron's new direction for the party, although I personally think he's on the right track. We were always going to lose those voters in the end"

And who are we going to get to replace them?

Rick
I also said "through strengthening local policing and giving local people more say over that" - quite agree that police on the streets, based in local police stations is where we want to get back to.

Civil Servants & politicians don't seem to recognise deterrence works - crime, violence, graffitti all happen where there is no visibility of authority. When Peel set up the Met police he promised a policeman within sound of a cry for help or a whistle. Monaco & Palm Beach have little crime but high levels of policing - in UK the Home Office would say "low crime rates so lets redeploy the police/reorganise the police"

I'd like to see a return of local police established in neighbourhoods with directly elected district level commissioners - and supported by regional/national forces for murder, fraud, drug etc investigations.

Perhaps one conclusion to draw is that where people were not listening to the Tory Party before, thanks to Cameron's efforts, on the one hand the people are now listening, but on the other hand, they don't actually like what they are hearing.

The choice would therefore logically be for Cameron to take advantage of these now listening ears to review and change policy direction (really fuse core and conversion issues) or to plough on and lose the next election, but perhaps be the Tory-Kinnock for the next leader to go on and win.

People are listening now. Cameron deserves credit for that but that is far from enough.

You need people to listen, but when they are listening, you must offer them something that represents their views, instead of seeking to impose yours.

"Has the quality of life and the numebr of job opportunities in Thurrock improved thanks to this anti immigration line?"

Confidence and the feeling that we have addressed people's concerns has risen, yes. And quality of life, a feeling of inclusion in the political life of the borough, has risen too. Moreover, we've kept council tax down to a minimal rise, compared to the 20% nonsense under labour, added to that greater recycling measures then yes, quality of life has risen in thurrock.

We've addressed concerns over immigration and the environment. None of this either/or nonsense from Cameron. We can address people's concerns on the environment as well as immigration, tax and crime.

Has it occured to you that people are listening exactly because Cameron isn't spouting policies that lost the conservatives the last two elections?

Look above, they're not listening to us, they're listening to Labour advertising the BNP and taking out votes with it.

Edit: our, not out

"Confidence and the feeling that we have addressed people's concerns has risen, yes. And quality of life, a feeling of inclusion in the political life of the borough, has risen too. "

Not really answered my question there.

"Has it occured to you that people are listening exactly because Cameron isn't spouting policies that lost the conservatives the last two elections?"

Those policies didn't lose us those elections, it was oure excessive emphasis on them that did.

Surprisingly I don't have the economic growth figures of thurrock to hand. But the fact we won an election outright on a strong immigration campaign for the first time in the borough's history must be worth something. Or do you not believe we need to reach out to working class areas like Thurrock?

So people's solution to us having one or two dodgy polls 3-4 years before a general election is to put more emphasis on these policies? right.

Dodgy polls 2 WEEKS before a local election we should win on a landslide is of a concern.

To hark on about localism then lose seats in the local elections under a leader who is meant to be the new political messiah is a risky business, which his environmental campaign gamble seems to be heading towards.

My argument would be the reason these people are dissatisfied is because of issues like poverty and lack of opportunity, immigration doesn't make the slightest difference to solving these issues, it does however provide a good thing to moan about and pin all the blame on despite evidence to the contrary.

Hence winning an election on a strong anti immigration line, whilst a good for the short term, doesn't help solve the issues that cause people to blame the immigrants, hence come the next election you either have people disillusioned with what happened last election and not voting, or ending up voting for parties who offer even more extreme measures.

Always a good strategy to tell the electorate what they should be caring about, eh?!

I wouldn't get too distracted by the BNP issue. I think the real reason for us lagging in the polls is that people don't know what we intend to do yet - we need policies for people to look at and digest against the plans of the other main parties. Until we have that, our real performance at (say) a General Election will be hard to judge.

Given that, I think more could have been done centrally to boost our chances in the local elections, as much of the local agenda could have been rolled out early and test driven for just this purpose.

Unfortunately, ordinary voters will need to decide to vote for us on the basis of local activists hard graft and shoe leather, and a rather weak message percolating through to them centrally about what our objectives are in Local Government. I can’t help feeling that another opportunity has gone sauntering by without being grasped. We still have a long way to go before we are an election winning machine I think!

I hadn't noticed an either environment OR immigration approach. I have noticed that we haven't majored on immigration, taxes or Europe but I think we spoke too much on that in the past.

We can't be just a Green Party but neither can we succeed as a more respectable version of a UKIP/BNP (anti-Europe/anti immigration). Tim Akers view seems to be that we won Thurrock as an anti-immigrant party but that we'll retain it because of good management, care for environment etc. Our last PPB majored on the positives that Tories delivered rather than leading on fear - Tim would presumably have preferred the opposite?

As for taking our votes BNP up 8% Tories down 3% - 5% from other/don't knows. Stephan has the polling data but I'd be interested to know if our votes have fallen more in Labour constituencies than in Tory ones - the electoral consequesnces would be more serious if its Tories in Tory areas.

"Always a good strategy to tell the electorate what they should be caring about, eh?!"

What people care about and what's good for them are not necessarily the same thing.

"What people care about and what's good for them are not necessarily the same thing."

It's that sort of attitude that is helping the BNP.

"So people's solution to us having one or two dodgy polls 3-4 years before a general election is to put more emphasis on these policies? right."

The solution is to put more emphasis on them in the future but not as much as we did in 2005.

"It's that sort of attitude that is helping the BNP."

What attitude? Are you saying we should campaign on flawed policies to appeal to a minority of the population?

So people's solution to us having one or two dodgy polls 3-4 years before a general election is to put more emphasis on these policies? right.

No, some of us have been calling for this fusion from day one. Core + Conversion, not one nor the other in isolation, but both.

Cameron seemed to be offering this, and so won a healthy victory 2/1 against Davis and received a boost in the polls, but upon winning the leadership election, seems to have veered off into focussing in one area only.

Remember Cameron pledged EPP withdrawal, focus on Darfur etc. It was popular in both the party and the polls.

It is no coincidence that support is slowly but consistently ebbing away since his strategy post-win does not seem to match his leadership election platform.

When have the NF or BNP been strongest - IMO when the economy is hurting the skilled/semi skilled. We are seeing the first fruits of Gordon's tax & spend approach with its attendant centralisation/disempowerment approach.

What part of workforce is most hit by fall in manufacturing?
Who suffers ealiest when expenditure on house improvements, house building etc falls or grows slowly?
What are the jobs Eastern/Central European immigrants going for?

Add to that issues about access to public housing, about unfairness in benefits and you have a group of people who don't see a ladder of success in front of them but fear of falling.

I agree with Tim Akers on the need to get Essex man back - we didn't do that last time by following the BNP into the gutter but by offering the opportunities of home ownership, by rewarding the strivers not the shirkers. That is a positive agenda and one we need to expand.

"What attitude? Are you saying we should campaign on flawed policies to appeal to a minority of the population?"

Which policies are you talking about? Anti-immigration policies in general tend to be very popular but excessive emphasis on them admittedly does not come across well.

By the way, has anybody read Lord Tebbit's letter in the Daily Telegraph about their left-wing tendencies?

"Tim Akers view seems to be that we won Thurrock as an anti-immigrant party but that we'll retain it because of good management, care for environment etc. Our last PPB majored on the positives that Tories delivered rather than leading on fear - Tim would presumably have preferred the opposite?"

Again, people thinking that the solution is one or the other approach.

We won last time because we addressed peoples fears. We can win this time by showing where we have done well as well as addressing peoples fears over national policy issues.

As much as the Cameroons may want to believe, everything is not hunky-dory in Britain, and going on and on about "oh isnt everything fab in toryland" is going to annoy people as you're ignoring their concerns. We can show people what we've done well, but we can't neglect geniune concerns. If we do, then voters will go to other parties that will address their concerns, as the above poll shows.

Tim I don't believe everything is hunky dory though neither do I believe we are in some morass of iniquity and hopelessness. I agree with you that its about balance but I'd prefer balance on the positive side. I liked DCs take on prison works just as I liked the PPB on the good work our councils do.

What I dislike is the assumption we should have to be anti-immigration which ends up as anti particular people/races. I think the Australian managed immigration and asylum policy is a good positive model though even in Australia there are considerable tensions (a legacy of the looser regime in the 90s)

The BNP uses immigration as a scapegoat - its more about giving opportunity and treating people fairly, recognising & rewarding those who work hard, bring up law abiding families in difficult conditions than about blaming all misfortunes on a easily identified group of people.

"I agree with you that its about balance but I'd prefer balance on the positive side. "

How can it be balanced if you're favouring a side?

Moreover, im not saying we need to be anti immigration, im saying we need a policy on it that addresses peoples concerns and lets them know one party has an immigration policy that doesn't turn our borders into swiss cheese.

Excellent Tebbit letter on the BNP.

Editor, this poll is a rogue, an outlier. See Mike Smithson of PB.com on YouGov's overstatement of small parties. Furthermore Smithson also points out that Labour is oversampled in polls, by a couple of percent at least, and Tories undersampled (Smithson votes LibDem).

We are going to do well in the locals. Labour is going to do poorly. I'd wait for the concrete results before I started wringing my hands.

I'm very confident about them.


I agree with the commenter about Frank Field. His ideas are bloody good ones. Can we give him a peerage?

I don't know about that - the polls were spot on the money last May. Optimistim is better though, I agree!


One can't compare a poll of national voting intentions with the outcome of local elections

Over two months ago (long before Rowntree or Hodge) I predicted on this site a significant rise in support for the far Right on 4th May.

This view was formed after campaigning in several key marginal South London wards containing predominantly white working class / c2 voters - wards we need to win if we are to take control of the local authority.

Last Saturday the Mutual Aid team I was leading found 38 BNP supporters. Of these, 24 were former Conservative pledges. The view that BNP will hit the Labour vote is a nonsense and this has now been substantiated by YouGov.

Bobsleigh Dave can parade around the glaciers and talk about wind turbines till he is blue (or green) in the face. Until we address the real issues facing voters we shall continue to fail.

A disappointing set of results on 4th May might be unfair to the many local councillors who work tirelessly in their communities, but if it hastens the demise of the PC nonsense that now dominates thinking at CCHQ then it might be a price worth paying.

Exactly the same thing happened in 1974. There was a surge in National Front support as white working class voters became alienated by Heathite Conservatism which ignored their concerns. Only the arrival of Mrs Thatcher changed that.

"Has it occured to you that people are listening exactly because Cameron isn't spouting policies that lost the conservatives the last two elections?"

Well having experienced these elections may I say how amateurish they were. 2001 was so cartoonish with Hague going to Save The Pound - well he succeeded we still have the Pound. It was such a farce of an election and in this area they could not manage a 2% swing to remove an unpopular Labour MP.

I was convinced Hague would be knighted by Blair for throwing the election.

2005 was a real farce. The policy on student tuition fees was buried and all sorts of incoherent and disjointed issues were raised without being part of a theme. They could have campaigned on Internal and External Security and Personal Liberty - but no.

This was also amazing in a key marginal to get the same kind of attention we get from PVC window salesman and block-paving, tree-loppers, and carpet steam-cleaning ie. a flyer through the letter-box.

It was hard to tell an election was taking place - it must have been in London or wherever TV cameras were pointed - but in this constituency I cannot believe there was an election.

The local elections are 2 weeks away and again flyers - we do not even have the option of BNP just 3 Vanilla flavours plus a Lime Green - hardly worth bothering really - after all you get Lib/Lab and two Greens - a Lime Green and a Blue Green.

If Cameron really pushes this half-baked notion of destroying manufacturing by taxing carbon emissions he can die with his party. A world where commodity traders and hedge funds pay much less tax than a metal-basher is getting bizarre. He may think decorating handbags and producing PR Videos is real business but the stuff we need is the stuff that fills the trade gap and will pay for those oil and gas imports we need to survive.

No, Editor--the very best that could happen to Cameron is a really bad victory, and unexpectedly good elections for UKIP and even, shudder to say, BNP.

Cameron has completely mis-interpreted the situation and the "modernization" strategy is obviously nonsense.

But there is still hope--he needs to change everything. Only a real nasty stinging defeat in May will bring him to his senses.

Surely our counter strike against the BNP should be on crime. People become anti immigrant when crime rises.

Tackle the root problem and they don't care about their neighbours ethnicity.

So we can combine being nice to immigrants with solving peoples problems.

HMMMMMM What a difference a poll makes. Yesterday DC was being praised, the feeling was, (as they used to say in the Labour Party) We're on our way brothers!
Lets look at facts, as I said yesterday, The DC strategy is doomed. You cannot create a party in which the Guardian reader and the Daily Mail reader will happily co-exist. DC initially attracted the flitting 5%, the 5% who have moved between the LDs and Labour for a number of years. Because of Iraq/green issues they have now moved into DC's camp. Another 5% because of DC's move to the left have moved to the right:
into the BNP

The Tory party had a lucky escape! due to the Kilroy-Silk fiasco, that did UKIP enormous damage. If that had not happened UKIP would be in a much stronger position today. Most Tories that I know, I must be honest are much closer to the UKIP/BNP position than they are to the DC position. I noticed that Christopher Gill ex Tory MP has defected to UKIP. If a well respected figure from the right of the Tory party were to defect to UKIP, (a defection to the BNP is unlikely) the situation would change dramatically.

It's true to say that many Labour activists, members etc have never been comfortable with New Labour, but there never was another party of the left for them to go to, that is not the same on the right, UKIP (I am not a member or supporter in anyway) is attractive to many Tory activists and supporters. The BNP will appeal to both Labour and Conservative white working class voters.

After nine years of a Labour government, the Conservative Party should be in a much stronger position than it is today! If DC loses in three years time, where does it go from here? The Conservative party has tried: left a bit initially under Hauge, then whoops right a bit, right a bit more.Then right abit, right a bit, whoops left a bit under IDS, Then right a bit right a bit right a bit more under Howard. Now its Left a bit left a bit and left a bit more under Cameron. What next!

Personally I'm dismissing this to be a combination of protest votes (Against all three main parties) and the increased publicity recently. However, I feel if the same people who were asked the voting intention question were shown the results, and then asked the question again the BNP share would fall by a hundredfold. People may want to register a protest vote, but I doubt they actually want the BNP to be elected, either locally or nationally.

As for the Cameron doubters, I say sit tight and don't start the infighting once more. I don't believe in everything that Cameron has done (Grammar schools, Tuition Fees), but I never expected to agree with all of the policies conceived, if everyone wanted everything to be just the way they wanted it, you'd have 40million independents all polling 1 vote each!

I don't think that our immigration policies are gone forever, they ahve merely been placed on the afterburner whilst the policy groups report. Anyone thinking that a policy group is going to tell Cameron to "Open the floodgates, and meet them with bags of cash" is clearly underestimating those who are involved in policy formulation. We may have the odd celebrity, or left leaning MP in the policy groups, but there are also a lot of sensible, right wing, clear headed conservatives in them too.

Thats just my $0.02

BTW, does anyone know the dates between which this was conducted?

I usually ignore polls because normally they are so unreliable but 7% showing for the BNP is indicative that Margaret Hodge has rather achieved what she was seeking to avert in giving the BNP a bit of free publicity that will focus much of a protest vote on them.

Probably the Honours Scandal has a lot to do with it - the 3 party support showing as being down to 85% is probably roughly right, false BNP dawns have been heralded before though - they now only have 15 Councillors nationally (only 4 more than the National Front have) and had lost quite a few over the last couple of years.

>>>>As for taking our votes BNP up 8% Tories down 3% - 5% from other/don't knows. Stephan has the polling data but I'd be interested to know if our votes have fallen more in Labour constituencies than in Tory ones - the electoral consequesnces would be more serious if its Tories in Tory areas.<<<<
If Labour gets much the same overall percentage vote as last time, but in many formerly safe Labour seats a lot of their votes go to the BNP and if they strengthen in the marginals then Labour could end up gaining seats from the Conservative Party and losing seats to the Liberal Democrats, could end up with the Liberal Democrats having more seats with fewer votes and Labour maintaining it's majority and the Conservative Party back to where it was in terms of seats in 1997 & 2001, I think though that rather this is a blip and at the next General Election Labour, Conservative and UKIP will all be up and Liberal Democrats will be down, Labour will probably maintain their majority but facing more Conservative MP's and fewer Liberal Democrats.

The fact that the BNP are only contesting 8% of the seats must be really annoying for them after today's poll. If it's right, then they probably could have put forward a lot more candidates with the hope of saving their deposits.

Loads of local by-elections from diverse areas held in England yesterday- Tories gained 1 from the LibDems, lost 1 to the LibDems. UKIP a laughable collapse in votes. Labour slightly down in most. Tories well up in most.

Hmmmmm....real votes do not tally with this poll.

The BNP are claiming that they are picking up increasing middle class support based on this poll:

http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=876

I think we only need to start worrying if the next poll shows them at 7% - that will suggest it's not just a blip.

Loads of local by-elections

Do tell us what the turnout was !

the 3 party support showing as being down to 85%

That's a huge improvement on May 2005 General Election - then the 3 major parties could not manage 50% of the electorate

Rick

Highest turn out 45% lowest 17% mostly in low/mid 20%. Local elections always have lower turnouts and do have local issues so aren't any guide to GE performance.

Saying that they are actually important in establishing a Party's reputation and impact party morale.

Hi Rick

8 by-elections yesterday. Turn-out about 28 % overall.

Tory 5171 votes
LibDem 3205
Labour 1433
UKIP 328

Lots of 'hang on!'s' I know!....but it is an indication that the Tories are not doing nearly as badly as YouGov suggests.

STOP RUNNING AROUND LIKE HEADLESS CHICKENS!

The BNP are only bothering to stand in 365 seats (mostly Labour held!) out of a total of 4,600 up for grabs!

UKIP are only standing in 319 seats!

The BNP and UKIP will vanish off the political landscape until the next elections when the media and desperate research groups want a headline grabbing story!

...his cooperating with Blair, indicates a willingness to eliminate smaller parties that will be banned from receiving funds, such as UKIP and BNP.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Personally, I don't want to hold hands with these lunatics, I want to wipe them off the electoral map.

Can they make a mental note next time the media want to tell them who to get rid of or who to promote, they should always do the opposite, and put Conservative policies first.

Funny how in this Party it's always the parliamentarians' fault, isn't it? And I thought we were the party of personal responsibility. If you were a party member, you had a choice of candidates too - I am wholly satisfied that we made the right choice.

Voters have much respect for a politician expressing genuinely held beliefs. In fact they have a hunger for it, which is leading them to other parties now.

Even when, as in the case of the fringe parties being discussed, the "beliefs" you refer to range from the insane to the abhorrent?

"You say that like it's a bad thing. Personally, I don't want to hold hands with these lunatics, I want to wipe them off the electoral map."

Not if it's through the manipulation of state funding.

"Even when, as in the case of the fringe parties being discussed, the "beliefs" you refer to range from the insane to the abhorrent?"

I think it's the refusal to compromise that attracts some people. Also remember that the BNP have been successful at moderating their image, no matter how much we may see through it.

>>>>That's a huge improvement on May 2005 General Election - then the 3 major parties could not manage 50% of the electorate<<<<
I was referring to of the Popular Vote and actually between them they got rather over 55% of those eligible to vote, that is those turning out to vote, at the last General Election between them the 3 main parties got 89.8% of the Popular Vote including Ulster and I presume the YouGov Poll leaves Ulster out as most of the polls seem to and on the British Mainland the 3 main parties got roughly 92% of the Popular Vote, if Turnout next time is only around 60% again then as a percentage of the Total Electorate if they are down to 85% of the Popular Vote then you are talking barely over half those eligible to vote, who knows the country could even end up with a party winning a majority on under a Third of the Popular Vote.

"You say that like it's a bad thing. Personally, I don't want to hold hands with these lunatics, I want to wipe them off the electoral map"

I want them wiped off the electoral map because we out-argue them; not because we effectively ban them.

Why not ban not just the BNP and National Front but also Sinn Fein as well and other dissident Irish Nationalist Groups as well.


I think there's a good case for banning parties that practice terrorism. But that's not realistic politics; Irish Republican terrorism is okay as far as Tony Blair is concerned.

7% my arse. Id imagine 2% is more likely, 3% at the very most.

"Why not ban not just the BNP and National Front but also Sinn Fein as well and other dissident Irish Nationalist Groups as well."

Because banning parties is what fascists and communists do. Although I presume you weren't serious but were trying to make a point.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker