CommunicateResearch: 40, 29, 17

The Conservatives have an 11 point lead in this month's CommunicateResearch poll for The Independent. The Party has gone up 6 points from 34% in last month's CR survey, which would convert into a Commons majority of approximately 100 seats.

Labour have remained below the 30% mark and the LibDems have fallen 4 points.

The full breakdown of the results are on the CommunicateResearch website. This poll pushes the Conservatives ahead by 7 points in the ConservativeHome Poll of Polls.

Deputy Editor

Comments

[Peter Hatchet]

These sort of opinion poll results are very welcome!

Whilst I'm quite excited about it, I can't help but wonder which of the following it is:

(1) Just a random fluctuation, or sample error, to which ICM/Communicate seem particularly prone?

(2) A genuine reaction to recent polticial developments and increased support for the Conservative party?

If it is "(2)" the only hypothesis I can come up with is that David Camerons speech on the family has been highly successful and stunningly well received - but does one speech really have that much impact? Do people really take that much notice?

Does anyone have any other theories?!

Any other

[Robert McIlveen]

There often seem to be opposite movements in Tory/Lib Dem ratings, although they don't always cancel out exactly. I suspect that when the Lib Dems have gone quiet we are managing to be the natural home for anti-Labour votes but when the Lib Dems remind people they exist the reverse happens, or at least they take a chunk of that vote.

Good poll though.

[malcolm]

I agree with you Peter. Political Betting were very damning about Communicate a couple of weeks ago after their last poll and I'm struggling to think of reasons for why we are doing so much better now and the Lib Dems in particular are doing so much worse.Having said that I'd be delighted if this poll was accurate! YouGov has a much better reputation and if one of their polls gave us such a commanding lead then I think we can start to believe we are on the right track.

[Graeme Archer]

Please Tim do this for me, if only to humour me.

Make a list of all the polls which feed into the "Poll of Polls".

Write down the most recent Tory support in each poll.

In the adjacent column, write down the penultimate level of Tory support in each poll.

Calculate the difference between the two numbers, for each poll.

Calculate the average of those differences, and tell us what it is! Please!

[steve e]

several reasons

1 - the recent couple of weeks of speeches by leading tories have been seen to set the agenda.

2 - the linking of the higher taxes to wasted money to gordon brown.

3 - the linking of the labour elections to their union funders and the wasted tax money

4 - Ming looking like my drunk grandad

5 - the talk of leading lib dems coming over to the tories however 'made up' the stories are

[HF]

Have CR changed their approach and are now reporting only definite votes? Ed?

[Jack Stone]

How long before Alex Forsyth and the other pro UKIP loons get on and start posting what a dreadful poll this is. I give them till about mid-day!

[Richard Woolley]

I think that the more voters see Cameron the more they seem to like him. I think he's there for the long haul. There seems to be more substance about him this year, more policy clout, talking recently about family breakdown and today on the news he talked of scrapping I.D cards and using the money instead to police borders. This poll was one which didn't ask the question: Who would you vote for if Brown were labour leader? did it?. Which is also encouraging as Labour's vote seems to fall even further when Brown's name is mentioned. I think that the Tory poll rating would be even higher if they offered a programme of radical tax cuts, educational vouchers, reform of the bureacratic NHS and even EU withdrawal but they're moving in the right direction at least.

[Phil Whittington]

I think the polls are absolutely tremendous news, and I think they are a genuine indicator that the public is willing to look again at the Conservatives.

If anything the news is better than it seems, since most seem to agree that the public likes Brown better as chancellor than they will do as PM. While the polls ask the public to imagine Brown as PM, I think many find that difficult: they are perhaps giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Blair's number one strength has always been to demonstrate empathy - genuine or synthetic - with the people. Brown will be singularly unable to do this or to respond quickly and "capture the mood" - can you imagine him coining a phrase like "princess of people's hearts" within hours?

I am beginning to think I will have to concede I was wrong in my doubts about the Cameron regime. In this case, I'm only to happy to be proven wrong!

[Richard]

Excellent news. My opinion of Cameron has certainly shot up recently and I expect that is the same for many other people.

[Valedictoryan]

Poor Ming, he can’t weather this much longer. As we write his MPs are probably plotting behind his back for their political survival. The only question is will they choose defection or regime-change? Without a credible alternative Lib Dem leader, my money is on defection.

[Daniel VA]

Would somebody please pass me the salt?

Allow me to pre-empt the usual Barbara Villiers Memorial Handbag (with matching stilettoes) contenders by pointing out that CommunicateResearch polls are not really as reliable an indicator of form as ICM, Populus or YouGov, and as Malcolm pointed out above, Mike Smithson in particular has been rather dismissive of CR polls in the past.

Keep the champagne on ice for now.

[comstock]

"Poor Ming, he can’t weather this much longer. As we write his MPs are probably plotting behind his back for their political survival. The only question is will they choose defection or regime-change? Without a credible alternative Lib Dem leader, my money is on defection"

But defection to whom?

[EML]

I'm waiting for the Poll of Polls to creep past 40 before I go dancing in the street, but good news nonetheless.

I agree with steve e at 9.39, especially point one. The Conservatives have been leading the agenda on a wide range of issues. The Cabinet is divided, Brown is hamstrung by being kept as Chancellor, leaving a gaping hope for Cameron and company to tell us all what they would do.

[Peter Hatchet]

Malcolm 09:38

Absolutely. I trust YouGov implicitly because of both its consistency and its exemplary record. If it showed, say, 41:32:18, I'd be much more confident, but it hasn't - yet.

My own personal view is that there has probably been a further small shift in our favour over the last 2/3 weeks, but I doubt if it's more than the order of a 1-2% swing.

Happy to see it continue!

[Curly]

Yes, things are looking decidedly shaky for some Labour members, the polls seem to be confirming a distinct trend, in that voters are starting to "firm up" their intentions.

[Michael Rutherford]

Good news indeed, let's hope we can keep it up, with a few really good opinion polls recently, maybe we gained reasonable support.

Let's hope this can be translated into victories in Yorkshire in May.

[kingbongo]

as nobody else has done it:

this is a terrible poll for the tories; Cameron should be at least 35% ahead by now. No wonder the Eton toff is running so frightened now he has seen the UKIP performance in local council by-elections blah blah blah.

Editor - any chance of doing as Graeme Archer suggests; or giving Graeme the numbers so he can do it, it would be very interesting.

[Editor]

Graeme, kingbongo - please do the calculations and I'll post them prominently. There aren't enough hours in the day for me to do all that I'd like to do!!

[Toryboy]

Fantastic news, the second poll to put us at that all inportant 40%. While I certainly wasn't a cameron fan to begin with he is winning me over more and more as each day goes by

[Graham D'Amiral]

Another excellent poll, Labour must be getting more worried by the day.

[Yet Another Anon]

Mid term problems for the government in what is a third term, at this point in the 2001-05 parliament the War in Iraq had not yet happened, the problems for Labour from the War in Iraq hadn't begun to kick in, at most the Conservative Party have slightly higher support than they had last time around - 35% of the vote and about 225 seats is most likely at the next General Election with probably more total votes than under John Major in 1997, the higher the turnout the better Labour and Conservatives will do, lower turnout will probably mean that the 2 main parties are failing to enthuse their own supporters and the Liberal Democrats and smaller parties will do better than they would have done otherwise.

The days of 179 and 167 seat majorities for Labour are gone but I think with the Liberal Democrats slipping back that a 100 seat majority or thereabouts is quite possible even with the Conservative Party recovering.

[Dave Bartlett]

The days of 179 and 167 seat majorities for Labour are gone but I think with the Liberal Democrats slipping back that a 100 seat majority or thereabouts is quite possible even with the Conservative Party recovering.

You're dreaming. Your only charasmatic front man is about to retire, and your policies have failed. Get ready for unemployment or opposition. :-)

[Geoffrey G Brooking]

Second poll putting us streets ahead in a week hey?

Keep up the work everyone.

[Yet Another Anon]

People are getting sick of Tony Blair, they are sick of image consultants and all that razzmattazz and David Cameron has so far come up with very little in the way of policy - people don't want a Blair Lite and they don't want John McDonnell, Michael Meacher or Meinzes Campbell either - most people are sick of hearing all the time from politicians and a more laconic approach will go down well, if David Davis had become leader I am sure that the Conservatives would have built up a far stronger more sustainable position even though Labour still would probably have held on, if IDS had stayed leader through to the 2005 General Election I think his principled clear well thought out position might well have been enough for Labour to have narrowly lost it's majority - but the image focused spin crazy media of course didn't like him and favoured Blair, Portillo, Charles Kennedy and David Cameron.

The Conservative Party or a Conservative Party will return to power at some point - but only when it starts doing things people want such as pulling out of the EU and not just talking about it and ending up signing up to every bit of detritus coming out of Brussels; and actually pushing to restore Capital Punishment rather than just many saying they want it but it will never happen now, people want a vision - they want a concept of how things will be and they want someone who will do anything to achieve that vision - this is why Margaret Thatcher succeeded and went on willing, because she fought unpopular arguments for what she believed was right - the same with Ian Paisley, Oliver Cromwell, William Gladstone, John Knox, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, John Smith, Clement Atlee; people no more want dilute to taste crap than they want solid crap, they want politicians to make the right things happen and get things done - they want efficency, the opportunity to shop whenever they want without restriction, an end to bureacracy, bad people dead, children safe from perverts, the dangerous mentally ill locked away where they can't harm people and they don't want human rights or other excuses getting in the way, a government that doesn't compromise with terrorists. They may be a bit uncomfortable with some of the solutions at first but leaders have to persevere because no one will thank them if they do something or don't do something and they take the wrong decision for short term political expediency.

[Yet Another Anon]

What anyone wants to happen and what is likely to happen is 2 very different things - Out of current MP's my favourite for Prime Minister would be Jeffrey Donaldson, MP for Lagan Valley.

[Jack Stone]

Yet Another Anon. Its not the present leadership thats putting forward crap its you.
If the party went to the country at anytime on a platform of restoring capital punishment and pulling out of the EU they wouldn`t only lose the Parliamentary Party would be able to hire a taxi to get themselves back to the House of Commons.
The Conservative Party is a centre-right party not a far right one. If you want to belong to one of them I suggest you sod off and join one.

[UKIP@HOME]

Sorry the poll is fatally flawed. It is blatantly misleading. It is not worth the paper it is written on.

It only gives UKIP 1%.

This must be some dort of sick joke by the pollsters.

You can hardly open a newspaper or switch on the tv without some story about UKIP.

With all thi publicity I would have hoped for 10% or 11% in the polls.

If Nigel Farage continues with his good work I expect UKIP to start overtaking the Liberal Democrats in the next month or so...

[Ted]

Graeme
If you need source for the figures Anthony Wells site has them:
http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/voting-intention/

Good scatter plot showing the blues gradually moving from below to above the reds!

[Og]

The current Tory position is not centre right, Jack Stone. As things stand, it will contest the next general election with a manifesto that proposes to take a higher percentage of GDP and turn it into government services (minus a decent handling fee, of course) than any Conservative party has done before when not involved in World Wars. Also, that it accepts a current arrangement by which a greater percentage of its laws are created by alien legislators (EU) than ever before. Also, that it has agreed - seemingly - to accept that selection in education and reform of the NHS to introduce consumer choice in place of state monopoly are no longer policy directions that they intend to pursue.

You may say that the current size of government is down to Gordon Brown, and that a Conservative Party advocating a significant cut in the size of the state would not be elected. And you might even be right, though I don't think so. You may also have good arguments against re-introducing grammar schools or deveoping a patient's passport, though again I would not agree.

But what you can't do is to maintain that the current Tory position is centre-right, because it simply is not. It is consensus status-quo politics with little or no radical divergence away from consensus being offered by any of the three main parties.

I contend that it is a centre-left consensus.

[CDM]

Sorry Og, but sharing the proceeds of growth between public spending and tax cuts means that the state's percentage of GDP must fall.

We can't just abolish the NHS. At least not at first.

[Yet Another Anon]

The Conservative Party is a centre-right party not a far right one.
It means nothing, all this left, centre, right talk is a load of rubbish - people have objectives and policies are formulated to meet those objectives without reference to where people might have sat in the French National Assembly in the 18th century.

More than half the British public support Capital Punishment, it used to be almost universal among Conservative MP's and large numbers of Labour and Liberal MP's also supported it; these days those within Labour and the Liberal Democrats running for office would not admit to supporting Capital Punishment because they would know that they would be hounded by fanatical elements within their parties but it still has substantial support.

As for withdrawal from the EU - this too has substantial support among the British public and is favoured by people from a variety of different philosophical standpoints including people who would are described as centrist by many, by people throughout both main political parties and in smaller parties.

[comstock]

"If Nigel Farage continues with his good work I expect UKIP to start overtaking the Liberal Democrats in the next month or so... "

One of the funniest things I've heard today. (you were joking, yes?)

"More than half the British public support Capital Punishment"

I wouldn't be so sure on that one YAA. Even in the US the tide is turning against it.

But lets not get too far off topic.

[Yet Another Anon]

If Nigel Farage continues with his good work I expect UKIP to start overtaking the Liberal Democrats in the next month or so.
Somewhat optimistic I am afraid, UKIP have the problem that they are not yet established in any parliamentary constituencies as one of the main challengers, this is one of the major problems that even the largest of the small parties face - if people think a UKIP candidate can win, then they have a chance, if they get 5% of the vote at the next General Election that would be a major success that could be the beginning for a breakthrough, the Liberal Democrats will benefit from tactical voting by people wanting to keep candidates of either main party out by supporters of the other main party where that party can't win and this will limit the fall in their support and they are likely to get around 15% of the vote at the next General Election.

I would be delighted if UKIP were going to sweep to power at the next General Election, but as when Labour rose in the early 20th century it took some time for them to emerge as a government, more likely pressure on the Conservative Party might influence it towards UKIP's agenda and a future Conservative government might then withdraw the UK from the EU and UKIP could then be woundup, really in much the same way that the pressure of the Alliance especially the SDP eventually led Labour to adopt SDP positions.

[comstock]

"I contend that it is a centre-left consensus."

Is that a bad thing?

Obviously as a centre left guy I'm gonna say no.

For all my ranting on here ,even I'm not daft enough to think Labour can stay in power forever and if this forces the Tories to change then it certainly means Blair will have some sort of legacy beyond failed wars in Iraq.

Whether this is a real and lasting re-alignment I don't know. Part of me wants to believe left wing friends who say 'a leopard never changes his spots', yet Labour could and did change forever.

An interesting few years ahead for the one nation faction in your party, especially if Labour squeak a fourth term.

[Yet Another Anon]

I wouldn't be so sure on that one YAA. Even in the US the tide is turning against it.
And many other EU states carried out executions long after the UK abandoned it and yet I think that restoration of Capital Punishment in the UK is probably now more likely than in Eire or France or Italy. These things change about and there is no reason to suppose that the UK will always remain more socially liberal than the US.

[Yet Another Anon]

And in fact interestingly enough it is places such as Texas where Capital Punishment is being suspended and traditionally liberal states such as Massachussetts where decisions are being taken to start executions, who knows.

[comstock]

Back on topic, anyone got any idea why Labour still hold my constiuency,Derby North, despite Dave having a ton majority?

Labour only won the seat in 1997, before that it was Tory. I was under the impression I lived in a marginal.

[Yet Another Anon]

Presumably Boundary changes.

[comstock]

"Presumably Boundary changes."

Aye, that were what I thought. But I've not heard anything about any.......if they have I'm not best pleased as I was under the impression my voted counted for something.

[kingbongo]

Tim

following Grame suggestion earlier I have prepared the average difference in polls

AVG DIFF DEC / JAN JAN / FEB
CON -0.5 1.25
LAB -2.25 0.5
LD 3 -1.75

[kingbongo]

whoops pressed a button by mistake

what I think it shows is a dip for us Dec/Jan followed by a decent performance Jan/Feb

this pattern is followed by Labour but their dip is sharper and recovery weaker. Interestingly it is the LDs losing out. Ming Campbell to be gone by summer?

I have a little spreadsheet but I'm no statistician so will leave detailed interpretation to others

[Ted]

Comstock
Yes its Boundary changes see:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/derbynorth

[comstock]

Thanks Ted.

[Andrew Woodman]

I thought you were Derby South Comstock. That's been shored up by the boundary changes.

The Lib Dems will be going for the new Derby North (takes in Littleover and Mickleover I believe). It's pretty much 3 way so should be an interesting one. Some of the wards from the old Derby North (e.g Allestree) have gone into the new safe Tory seat of Mid Derbyshire.

[Yet Another Anon]

Ming Campbell to be gone by summer?
No sign he's going to stand down and even for the Liberal Democrats hounding 2 leaders out in the space of a single parliament would look fickle. The Liberal Democrats had the problem that their levels of support dropped in 1992 and 1997 and only rose percentagewise in 2001 because of a fall in turnout of Labour and Conservative supporters, Charles Kennedy hardly did anything and in 2005 simply cruised on the issue of the War in Iraq, surfing on a wave of trendiness among the British public and by 2009 the War in Iraq will have diminished substantially as an issue, people either will blame Tony Blair for it or even a thriving Iraq could change people's minds about whether the war was a good idea or not - I don't think any other Liberal Democrat leader could have done much more, if Menzies Campbell were to be forced out then who would want to be leader - the probability is that Vincent Cable would succeed him at the moment, probably with Chris Huhne as his deputy, probably not much difference in policy although maybe more energy in presentation which Ming is a bit lacking in these days.

[Og]

comstock, you ask if a centre-left consensus is necessarily a bad thing. I would say yes, because it leads to low turnout, lack of debate and policy stagnation. And it is intellectually dishonest for centre-left social democrats to contest elections sporting a blue rosette. The hard left say the same thing about NuLab's "Tory" Blair.

[Scotty]

"comstock, you ask if a centre-left consensus is necessarily a bad thing. I would say yes, because it leads to low turnout, lack of debate and policy stagnation."
Og, I don't think that the shift of emphasis on strategy by Cameron & Co can be labelled centre left. In fact while we drifted ever rightwards and were not seen as a viable alternative to Labour, we have seen low turnout, lack of debate and policy stagnation.
We are simple shifting back to the centre right where we have been most comfortable and successful.
On the latest poll ratings I would normally not pay much heed to Communicate, they seem to have been producing wild fluctuations as they ?tinker with their polling methodology.
But I do think that this will settle down and we now have 5 regular monthly polls for various newspapers.
What is interesting is that it seems part of a trend which improves further when the pollster asks a named leader question which includes Gordon Brown.
Don't look at individual polls, watch the monthly trends on Anthony Wells UK polling report site, it is excellent.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php

[Og]

By your argument, Scotty, we were "far-right" before the Cameron election.

You are deluded.

[comstock]

I thought you were Derby South Comstock. That's been shored up by the boundary changes

No, I'm in Abbey ward but my street is in Derby North..... Derby South starts a couple of streets away.

(although from the link Ted posted looks like the rest of Abbey has joined Derby N now)

[Scotty]

"By your argument, Scotty, we were "far-right" before the Cameron election.

You are deluded."
Not at all Og, and in fact I would say that the impression given by our 2005 campaign and the way the media reported it, left the electorate thinking we were far too right wing. It probable cost us a few seats, and explains why we failed to make serious gains even with an increasingly unpopular government.

[comstock]

And I would counter by saying the problem with polarised politics (as we had 20 yrs ago) is you get all of one extreme or all of the other. Thatcher's govt was hardline free market and to be fair had Foot won we would have had pretty hardline Socialism.

If you look back at the time we did best as a country (IMHO 45-75) we had a centre-left consenus. There were obviously differences between the parties, but both subscribed to things like the welfare state and nationalised utilites.

The 'centre left' consensus might not be very exciting for the pasionate socialists and pasionate free-marketeers but in a system where one party or the other has absolute power it might be the least worst situation.

Personally I'm to the left of Labour on some issues like higher taxation for the rich, and to the right of it on others (especially crime)

[Og]

"our 2005 campaign and the way the media reported it, left the electorate thinking we were far too right wing"

Not in England, evidently, where the party won a small majority of votes cast. But that is beside the point; you reckon that before Cameron, the party was on the FAR RIGHT. Have you any conception what far right political parties advocate, either in this country or other western democracies?

This is a rhetorical question. I'm not looking for an answer. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[comstock]

where the (conservative) party won a small majority of votes cast

Interesting definition of 'majority' you have there. In terms of seats it was 286-194.

In absolute votes you were ahead of Labour by 0.28% (proberbly because Tory voters in safe seats are more likely to turn out than Labour voters in safe Labour seats), but 35% of the vote is hardly a majority.

Unless the conservatives support PR?

[Valedictoryan]

"Personally I'm to the left of Labour on some issues like higher taxation for the rich"

Comstock, if you’re saying that as a poor man, I understand why.

If you’re saying that as a rich man, keep your hands off my altruism.

[Og]

comstock - of course you are right. I meant "largest party" by votes cast. The seat count of 286-194 is another issue altogether. But my point stands - it is absurd to suggest that the Tories were seen as "far right". Unready for government, perhaps, still worthy of punishment for the foolish economic cock-ups of the 90s, perhaps, but obviously not Far Right. Cameron, after all, wrote the manifesto.

I never buy the argument that labour votes in safe labour seats are lazier or more complacent, as compared to tory votes in safe tory seats. People are either motivated to vote or not.

Polarisation is not necessarily the product of a move away from consensus. If politics were polarised in the 80s, it was because of the sheer incompetence of the previous labour administration(s), and the fact that the Thatcher administration recognised that placebos wouldn't solve the problems. Antidotes are by their nature opposite to the malaise being treated.

It does not seem fanciful to wish that the three main parties at the next election would offer centre-left, centre, and centre-right options to the electorate. The smaller parties can do the extremities.

[comstock]

I never buy the argument that labour votes in safe labour seats are lazier or more complacent, as compared to tory votes in safe tory seats. People are either motivated to vote or not.

I suppose I'm saying there are some people who see voting as some sort of civic duty, even if the result is a forgone conclusion they happen to agree with.

Those people are more likely to be middle class in my experience and whilst some of them may be Labour voters a greater share are Conservative.*

Yes it's a theory and like any theory you can agree or disgree with it, but 'getting the core vote out' is an established principle in the US.

*if you like stats, compare the turnout in Bootle (48%) with Brentwood (68%)

[comstock]

Comstock, if you’re saying that as a poor man, I understand why.

If you’re saying that as a rich man, keep your hands off my altruism.

LOL, it's OK . Most definately the former :D

Thanks for that, made me chuckle.....

[Og]

If I told you what I thought about Bootle, comstock, I'd have to make a Boris-like mea culpa visit to eat crow.

[Scotty]

"But that is beside the point; you reckon that before Cameron, the party was on the FAR RIGHT."
If you would actually read what I wrote before saying I don't know what I am talking about it might help!
"I would say that the impression given by our 2005 campaign and the way the media reported it, left the electorate thinking we were far too right wing", an emphasis on IMMIGRATION does tend to that.
As I have said before, the Conservative campaign in 05' and the way the media reported did not make us look very attractive to the electorate. The fact that focus groups reported that voters liked some of the policies put forward in the manifesto, but immediately withdrew their support when they realised they were Conservative backs this up.

"Not in England, evidently, where the party won a small majority of votes cast"
Yep, and we have a Labour government with a majority of around 60 MP's!

[Yet Another Anon]

Not in England, evidently, where the party won a small majority of votes cast.
34.4% of votes cast in England as I understand it, it was more a reflection of how badly Labour did in much of England rather than how well the Conservatives did, Labour in fact weren't that far behind in England - a 2% margin if I recall correctly. No one party won a majority of votes in England, Scotland, Wales or Ulster or even at a regional level.