Hague pays a price for EPP and Israel controversies

Deciding on who should win the Inaugural Conservative Movement Awards was the special purpose of the July survey of the ConservativeHome Members' Panel and those results will be announced at an awards ceremony next month.  The votes of all 2,435 Panellists will decide those Award winners but the analysis below only reflects the votes of the Panellists who are Tory members (1,746 in total).

THE MOST INTERESTING FINDING FROM JULY'S TRACKER QUESTIONS IS A FURTHER RISE IN DISSATISFACTION WITH WILLIAM HAGUE.  The former Conservative leader, who was interviewed in the Sunday Times yesterday, enjoyed a net satisfaction rating of 90% in February when just 4% of Tory members were dissatisfied with his performance.  The number dissatisfied increased to 13% in June and to 21% by the end of July.  Although Mr Hague still enjoys a net satisfaction rating of +55% he is paying a price for authoring the delayed exit from the EPP and for his criticisms of Israel.

David Davis remains the most popular member of the shadow cabinet with a net satisfaction rating of +81%.

After going negative in May, Party Chairman Francis Maude commands a few more satisfied members than dissatisfied members (+5%).  For the first time in the series he no longer sits at the bottom of the league table, however.  Theresa May's rating has fallen to just +4%.

DAVID CAMERON'S NET SATISFACTION RATING HAS ALSO DROPPED THIS MONTH (TO +49%).  79% of members were happy with his performance in June.  5% fewer members (74%) were satisfied at the end of last month.  The dissatisfieds rose from 20% to 25% over the same period.  The ConservativeHome Members Panel is probably picking up similar trends as YouGov's daily tracking.  This is the first Panel survey since the hug-a-hoodie controversy, the EPP announcement and the stalled opinion poll progress.

DOWNLOAD a pdf of the Panel results.

Comments

[Graham Parks]

I hope William Hague takes note. Had his criticism of Israeli strategy in Lebanon been set in a broader context of support, understanding and total opposition to the fascists of Hizbollah then he might have received a better reception.

Instead, he cynically took up the cry of the anti-Israel Left: "Disproportionate" was the propaganda word on the lips of every Guardian/BBC/Arabist self-hater that week. "Ah," though Hague - tactically clever but strategically stupid as ever -"here's a chance to position myself and the Party between Galloway and Blair. Clever politics, eh?"

No, actually. As subsequent events closer to home have demonstrated, this is a war against an Islamist fascism that uses terror as its weapon of choice. All those who seek to appease it, triangulate it or downplay it are going to end up looking very stupid.

That's what happened to William Hague and, if he carries on down this particular road, he'll continue to sink in the esteem of Conservatives.

[malcolm]

If I was Cameron I would be quite pleased with these numbers.The last couple of months have not been particularly productive for the Conservative party and several members of our frontbench have been invisible so to have all of them with positive numbers is good.
One wouldn't get the impression that things were all going DCs way from reading this site he can't rely on members remaining so deferential forever.

[Hertford Tory]

Let's hope William Hague continues to remain strong and of independent mind, and will never cave in to fanatics who support terrorism or terrorist states.

[Richard Weatherill]

Can I suggest that, in addition to your 'satisfaction' ratings, you also publish an 'invisibility' rating? This would highlight those members of the Shadow Cabinet who attract the greatest number of "don't knows" in the monthly survey.

[TomTom]

Let's hope William Hague continues to remain strong and of independent mind, and will never cave in to fanatics who support terrorism or terrorist states.

Posted by: Hertford Tory | August 14, 2006 at 11:00

India wll be most gratified if he does. Time to end Kashmiri terrorists being funded from Great Britain

[James Maskell]

The +49% really depends on how many were voting very satisfied and how many were just satisfied. A significantly higher proportion on the latter and Cameron should start getting concerned.

[anon]

Wow, so with members resigning, the donors threatening to take their money elsewhere and the pro-terrorist, pro-apartheid, pro-Israeli fascists that almost runs the party in uproar, all he loses is a few points?!?!

Of course, given massive public agreement with his view, all those losses among the Hendon crowd will quickly be offset by gains everywhere else from reasonably minded individuals.

Hague take note indeed - you need to be far stronger.

[Jon Gale]

I could be totally wrong here, but the net satisfaction rating seems odd.

74% Satisfied - 25% disatisfied = 49% Net satisfaction.

But the disatisfied have already been subtracted from 100% in order to reach 74%, and then are subtracted again. So the net satisfaction rating is 49% when in fact 74% are satisfied?

Likewise, Hague has 76% satisfied, 21% disatisfied, (3% DK) but the 21% was counted twice so his net satisfaction was 55%.

What is the net satisfaction supposed to be measuring? All we need is the 76/21 split.

[Jon Gale]

If someone asks that every month, then sorry!

[christina speight]

Anon - Remember this is a CH poll not a public poll. The YouGov poll of a national sample last had Cameron on a negative rating.

Since most of the missing Tory vote WENT missing when Major bullied and blackmailed the Maastricht treaty through THOSE lost voters are not in this poll - well a few of us are, but not many. The Party will not win (labour might LOSE!) till it gets those voters back on board.

So all this measures is the computer literate existing members who - by definition - are a pretty satisfied bunch.

The only thing one can rally read into these figures is that most regret not having voted for Davis!!!

[Richard Weatherill]

I agree with you, Jon - the 'net satisfaction' measure isn't terribly helpful. Someone who achieved a 51:49 poll (with no abstentions) would, if I understand the system correctly, obtain the same net satisfaction score (of +2) as someone who 'achieved' a 12:10 poll with 78% 'don't cares'. The message, though, would seem to be wholly different in the two cases.

[william]

This is a war against an Islamist fascism that uses terror as its weapon of choice. All those who seek to appease it, triangulate it or downplay it are going to end up looking very stupid.(Graham Parks)

Hague has never taken a decisive stance on any issue ever in his life. He only knows how to appease, triangulate, and downplay. Leadership he is not as he himself admits.

So why is he running Conservative foreign policy? Who is taking his decisions for him?

At this rate many Conservatives would rather vote Blair. Blair at least makes all the right noises, but never implements his promises. Hague/Cameron don't even make the right noises. What a bloody awful choice we are presented with in our hour of need.

[Peter Harrison]

Jon/Richard

This is the standard approach to net satisfaction scores used by all the opinion pollsters. Net satisfaction is the number who are satisfied minus the number who are dissatisfied. So yes, a 45/25 split with 30% don't know will give the same result as a 60/40 split with no don't knows.

You may feel the figure is misleading but it is calculated on exactly the same basis as the figures you see in the press.

[William Kellaway]

At least we heard from William Hague, I thought his views reasonable, considering the pictures we saw on CNN and Sky news

[anon]

"This is a war against an Islamist fascism that uses terror as its weapon of choice. All those who seek to appease it, triangulate it or downplay it are going to end up looking very stupid."

But it's OK to appease Israeli fascists that use terror as their weapon of choice???

When the whole world appeased that, we sure ended up looking stupid.

[Mark Fulford]

The only thing one can rally read into these figures is that most regret not having voted for Davis!!! -- Christina

Absolutely not true! These figures don't say that at all!!!

When looking at the 26% dissatisfaction with David Cameron you have to remember that 32% preferred him not to be leader in the first place. It would be more accurate to suggest that he’s won over 6%. It’s totally fanciful and probably spiteful to say that “most regret” their vote.

David Cameron has a controversial role to change the party. David Davis, by contrast, simply has to keep on top of his brief and everyone is happy.

I think that these latest results are amazingly good for David Cameron and show that, even compared to the Conservative Party, the ConservativeHome boards can become overly obsessed with individual issues such as the EPP.

[Eamonn]

Any more comments by Hague or Cameron parrotting the Lib Dem/Left wing of the labour party stance on Israel and I'm out of here. They must have really lost touch with the grassroots if they think it is OK to use "disproportionate" at this point in time.

It reminds me of Alan Duncan using the appalling term "biffing each other" on Any Questions when referring to the dreadful terrorism suffered by Israel around 2002.

[christina speight]

anon - So you think that responding to an aggressor who rains down thousands of untargeted rockets indiscriminately can be equated to the one attacked responding robustly with airstrikes aimed at known hizbollah areas is Israeli fascism. I call it an obscene attitrude. And remember these Isrtaelis are fighting our war too.

=-=-=-=-

Mark - You can hardly claim that Cameron has gained 6% of the voters when his rating is getting worse, while Davis on 81% favourable is gaining

[Jaz]

Really Eamonn?

I think it's a GOOD move, following the silly US foreign policy is absurd, it's highly damaging for our nations credibility. We should persue our own foreign policy, we should more critical of Islamic leaders in Britain rather than those in the middle-east.

Afterall, it not them trying to blow up nine British planes. It is however, Pakistani/British born Muslims.

Any party who can recognise that even though the middle-east is a motive, it is not a motive strong enough to blow yourself up, but the responsibility of the parents and teachers in the Islamic community to stop their youth from doing it.

[Mark Fulford]

Mark - You can hardly claim that Cameron has gained 6% of the voters...

Why not? It's far more justifiable than what you wrote!

The good figures for David Davis are a rating of his role as Shadow Home Secretary. They're not transferable to what he’d get as leader (a role in which I suspect he’d have been disastrous).

[Eamonn]

Jaz

I was talking about Israel. What are you talking about?

[anon]

"anon - So you think that responding to an aggressor who rains down thousands of untargeted rockets indiscriminately can be equated to the one attacked responding robustly with airstrikes aimed at known hizbollah areas is Israeli fascism. I call it an obscene attitrude. And remember these Isrtaelis are fighting our war too."

No, as much as I think the Israeli response is completely disproportionate, what I would refer to as "Israeli Fascism" is the way Israel was created in the first place (not that long ago), which, by the way, included bombings and kidnappings of British soldiers.

By your logic, we (the British that is) should have targeted bombings at areas of known Stern Gang support and any civilians that got in the way, well, tough. Instead, we gave the terrorists power to the point where the leaders of that terrorist group became Israeli Prime Ministers!

Now that's obscene.

[Richard]

"By your logic, we (the British that is) should have targeted bombings at areas of known Stern Gang support and any civilians that got in the way, well, tough. Instead, we gave the terrorists power to the point where the leaders of that terrorist group became Israeli Prime Ministers!"

Probably because we only held Palestine under a UN mandate and therefore we weren't that bothered about it. The terrorist attacks by the Israelis were unacceptable but this is no longer 1948. Israel exists and the UK accepts that.

[christina speight]

Anon - Don't talk to me about the foundation of Israel - I was there in the months preceding it. I was attached to the army and was in the King David Hotel the day before it was blown up; I stalked and wounded an irgun sniper and I was there when the 3 British sergeants were found hanging by their necks from orange trees.

That was 1947 and this is 60 years later and Israel is an accepted nation.

The Arabs had only themselves to blame. They tried to wipe the new Israel off the map and despite 4 major armies against them the new Israelis beat the lot. The bitterness on both sides has been the outcome.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Could we please stop using the term fascism referring to either Islam or Israel? I know it's not an exclusive term but, to me, it is a slur on the name of all the millions of jews who dies at the hand of real fascists during the second world war.

That Bush used it was, I feel, unforgivable. Very unstatesmanlike and designed to draw stupid parallels which help no one, especially the Jewish community.

[william]

The word 'fascist' comes from the Latin Fasces - meaning 'a bundle of rods with a projecting axe blade, carried by a lictor as a symbol of a magistrate's power' - later meaning 'emblems of authority' used in pre-war Italy.

Fascism means extreme authoritarianism.

Applying that to people such a the Taliban seems about right. To the Israelis, I don't think so.

I use the term Eurofascist as I believe the EU is abandoning democracy and resorting increasingly to authoritarianism. Within the Conservative Party, eurosceptics are being silenced with threats of deselection. The pro-EU MEP's are demanding the right to be put back at the top of the Party lists without hustings.

The use of EU referenda is fraudulent. Results which are not approved are ignored. many elections are of dubious authgenticity. The EU is a fraudulent democracy - very much as was the situation before the Fascists seized power in the 1930's. It was a gradual process to begin with as we are seeing from the EU.

Our parliament is being bypassed. Regional government is being imposed with threats to local government from central authority. I see an incrementally fascist tendency starting to appear at all levels of the EU. That is why I believe the term eurofascism is appropriate.

The term 'europhile' sounds as if someone likes French cheese and Italian wine. I hope they do, but the willingness to subvert democracy is the hallmark of the fascist.

[anon]

"The Arabs had only themselves to blame. They tried to wipe the new Israel off the map and despite 4 major armies against them the new Israelis beat the lot. The bitterness on both sides has been the outcome."

So if you accept that there's a lot of bitterness on both sides, how do you reconcile that with supporting the bombing of hundreds of civilians in Lebanon?

How about a secular Israel, one that accepts muslims, christians and jews as all having an equal interest in the historic holy land and one that treats all these people the same, regardless of their religion?

What is more important, peace and an end to the lunatics on both sides or the protection of a jewish state in Israel at any cost?

I would consider myself to be a great friend of Israel but I am certainly not a friend of the jewish apartheid state of Israel.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

William - it does not fit either of them. Why do you want to upset the Jewish community in this way? It makes no sense to do so.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Just to add, it is appalling when the left use this term willy nilly and I expect better from the right. I have to be frank, and the way you link Europe with fascism in that way is sickening. I only have to presume you know the offence that you are causing but just do not care about other's feelings.

[christina speight]

Anon "So if you accept that there's a lot of bitterness on both sides, how do you reconcile that with supporting the bombing of hundreds of civilians in Lebanon?"
- There's a leading question based on a non-sequitor if ever there was one!!

The Israelis responded to the 3000 rockets rained on them - they didn't start it - Hizbollah did. Hizbollah and its Iranian masters are dedicated to attacking us too. The terrorists hid amongst the civilian population and moved their launchers out next to ordinary housing. The Israelis were fully within their right of armed response.

Anon also doesn't know that there is a sizeable ARAB Israeli population with elected MPs.

And the methios of the EU are the same undemocratic and authoritarian methiods of the original Fascist state - Italy.

[Editor]

I like your idea of an invisibility rating Richard (11:09) and will post something on this soon...

Such a rating will also, perhaps, reassure Jon that the net ratings are pretty real with only a small number of 'don't knows' in the survey.

[TomTom]

Probably because we only held Palestine under a UN mandate and therefore we weren't that bothered about it.

The League of Nations Mandate expired in 1948; The General Assembly voted Israel into being; the USSR recognised it first.

In 1946 Lord Keynes, in fact dying, was negotiating a $5.500.000 loan from the US and the terms were hard - it was repayable by 1967. In 1947 50% British GDP was Marshall Aid and Britain could not pay for imports - that loan was desperately needed but half the sum was spent on the Manadate in Palestine...........that's why the British wanted out.

Britain was bankrupt after 6 years of war and wanted out of India, Palestine, Greece to try to rebuild the country so it would not slide into Depression as in 1921

[Oberon Houston]

William Hague shouldn't be too concerned. Pollinhg on-line, by SMS etc. It is very suceptible to grudge voting. I remember once the BBC conducted a poll asking if you supported the firemen when they were on strike, despite the overwhelming lack of support for it by the general public, an amazing 96 percent suppported them. They were busy voting away at the picket line whilst everyone else was at work.

I'm delighted that Hague has begun to question things instead of pandering to entrenched views. Long overdue.