It's confirmed: LabourDoNotDo

A few weeks ago I posted about the possible power of YouGov's new daily tracking polls.  More data has just been posted by Anthony Wells on his indispensable UK Polling Report blog.

Take a look at the data yourself but there are at least three trends worth highlighting:

1. John Reid's time at the Home Office is not endearing him to voters.  Since replacing Charles Clarke his positive/negative impression rating has fallen from minus 10 in mid-May to minus 19 now.
2. The closer-than-expected Bromley by-election result has lifted Sir Ming a little.  His rating has risen from minus 22 to minus 16.
3. The best news for the Conservatives, however, is that "the sharp drop in the Labour party’s reputation for competence" has been maintained.  Anthony concludes that "there has been a genuine change in peoples’ perceptions of Labour’s competence and it is this and disillusionment with Blair that has pushed them behind the Conservatives in the polls."  It is ConservativeHome's strong belief that incompetence rather than sleaze will be Labour's undoing.  Voters expect politicians to be sleazy but they hope they might be able to exhibit basic competence.  But as we are increasingly learning... LabourDoNotDo.  It is vital that as voters come to judge Labour for its incompetence the Conservative Party displays professionalism in the ordering of its own affairs.

Comments

[Andrew Woodman]

'Voters expect politicians to be sleazy but they hope they might be able to exhibit basic competence.'

Nice to know.

[Annabel Herriott]

Another basic flaw in the nulab psyche is that they will not, under ANY circumstances, admit that they are wrong about anything!!!

[Patsy Sergeant]

The most they will do is to side-step the issue with an excuse.

[orlando]

no wonder they are so nervous about another Blair summer holiday with Prescott in charge of the country - no more visible reminder of their managerial incompetence in no more prominent position...

[Henry Mayhew]

Competence must be about conducting debate properly rather than banning it.

[william]

The reason Prescott can cope well enough with Blair away is that Blair does not actually do anything.

Brown runs the economy.

Murdoch controls our relationship with the EU. (See Lance Price's view - ex-Labour spin doctor in Guardian)

Prescott controls the regions, planning, elections and local government.

Blair smiles for the camera. He can do that just as well in Tuscany as Downing St -if not a little better. He is not actually required to make decisions anyway.

Cameron's Conservatives look like youthful geniuses alongside Labour's line-up of ageing gorillas all at each other's throats.

[David Belchamber]

Ed - I am delighted that you highlight Nulab's incompetence; what major department is actually delivering the goods (Home Office? Defra? DfSS? MOD?)?
We can save money on a slogan for the next election and just dust down the one Saatchi(?)produced years ago: "Labour isn't working - again!". That should save us some money.
However, the tories have to produce some solid positive qualities in order to win a GE.
I bang on quite frequently about the need for the tories to convince the electorate that they will manage these same shambolical departments more professionally and competently than Nulab. David Davis for the Home Office? OK. But who for the economy and, crucially, for the NHS?

[comstock]

Oo est-ce-ca la Labour parti? Inest der Dansk las partis polictis est der populis que la. Minda offla te-iskquil.

Comme ce est l'anglais systom politis!!!

Jookle goom, ja?

[Chris Ryder]

'Voters expect politicians to be sleazy but they hope they might be able to exhibit basic competence'

As a voter myself, would it be to much to ask if we had politicans who were unsleazy and had a bit more than basic competence and dare I say it in touch with the thinking of the voting public? ..oh well one can only but dream!

[Tory Solicitor]

I agree with David Belchamber about the need to demonstrate competency and whilst the policy reviews are appropriate I still think we need a much higher profile NOW on health and education.

We have to show we care and that job need not wait for the outcomes of policy reviews

We have to talk more about health and education..and less about the EPP

[TomTom]

As a voter myself, would it be to much to ask if we had politicans who were unsleazy and had a bit more than basic competence

You have not even got a competent Civil Service, and you can forget politicians who have no competence apart from sounding off like ill-prepared barristers who have not read the brief....................

It will not get better so it is best to give Government much less to do

[Matt Davis]

We have to talk more about health and education..and less about the EPP

No you're wrong on that one, because the EPP debate is largely an internal one mainly ignored outside of the party and we do already talk about Education and Health more than enough to start to persuade an electorate who can see that Labour have failed them in these areas.

Sadly all those who wish to bury the EPP debate only seem to want to do so because they are pro european federalism and are hoping that if enough time passes then everyone might just forget that they have completely lost that argument and have no support from the voters for their views.

In the end the three issues which will affect our children and grandchildren's lives more than any others are 1) The Environment and the effect (if any) of climate change, 2) The outcome of the confromtation between radical violent islam and the rest of the world and 3) The EU experiment and who will actually be running our country in the future, elected British politicians, or unelected Brussels technocrats.

[David Belchamber]

TomTom @ 22.22: "You have not even got a competent Civil Service, and you can forget politicians who have no competence apart from sounding off like ill-prepared barristers who have not read the brief....................
It will not get better so it is best to give Government much less to do".

Depressing though that statement is, it is probably very true, though I hope that the last sentence suggests a way forward. Smaller government must be desirable, though putting it into practice will mean redundancies and greater unemployment.
Luckily not all tory MPs are lawyers; many do have experience of actually running things and I hope that there are sufficient "heavyweights" among them to remotivate the now thoroughly demoralised departments who should be providing the due process that government is really all about.
Blair normally pinches any good tory policies: if we make competence a tory policy, at least we know that he can't pinch that one with his present team!

[Tory Solicitor]

Matt, I am NOT a federalist. I was one of the 33% in the editor's survey.

Do you really believe that our party is giving sufficent media time to health and education? Maybe I'm tuning into the wrong stations but I'm just not hearing it. These issues are at the top of the voters' hit list. If we don't win these issues, we don't win the next GE and we will not be in a position to do anything about the endless stream of legislation coming out of Brussels

[David Belchamber]

I am sure that Tory Solicitor @ 08.10 is absolutely right. I really want to hear an argument in favour of DC's stance about grammar schools (and how welcome was Kate Hoey's question at PMQs today on the decision to abolish grammar schools in NI). In fact, many of us would like a full-ranging debate on education, since a good - or bad - education informs an individual's feeling of self-worth for a lifetime.
I also agree with Tory Solicitor that we have to come up with a vastly improved management structure for the NHS - and we therefore need a real heavyweight to lead that - and I would add to his items, the management of the economy, which is fundamental to the winning of elections - and the winning over of business.