Tory MPs prioritise security - not environment

A Dods/ ICM poll for the House Magazine suggests that Conservative MPs are much more concerned about international security than the global environment.  The survey (which, I am told, included not less than 40 backbench and frontbench Tory MPs) asked MPs of all three main parties to identify their top three priorities.  81% of Conservative MPs said international security was a top priority.  38% said financial stability.  Another 38% said NHS reform.

21% of Tory MPs agreed with David Cameron that the environment was a top priority.  The LibDem MPs were most concerned about the environment (75%) and 40% of Labour MPs put green issues on their list of three priorities.  The ICM/ Dods survey chimes with a year-old ConservativeHome survey of Tory members which suggested that economic competition and terror threats were perceived as much bigger international challenges than global warming.

This is the third survey in a row which has attempted to suggest a gap between the party leadership and the wider party.  A YouGov survey for Channel 4 on Monday suggested that voters saw the Tory Party as significantly further to the right than David Cameron.   Earlier this week The Times and Populus got together to suggest that Tory MPs were conflicted on issues of multiracial Britain and gay equality.  Peter Riddell's conclusion:

"Labour and Conservative MPs are often portrayed by critics of the party system as like Tweedledum and Tweedledee: essentially alike for all the sound and fury of their battle. But this is a false impression. A striking new survey by Populus about the attitudes of MPs reveals not only deep underlying disagreements between Labour and Conservative MPs on key social values, but also big divisions within the Tory party. David Cameron has failed to persuade a large number of his own backbenchers to accept his liberal views on morality and race."

A Tory spokesman disputed The Times/ Populus survey in a statement to PinkNews:

"This Populus survey is hardly conclusive. There were so few responses to the survey that it is unfair to suggest it is representative of our Parliamentary party.  Anyone involved in the Conservative Party will know that, just as in the rest of society, there is widespread acceptance of equal rights for homosexuals and one could expect a proper survey of our MPs to reflect this."

My guess is that a survey of selected candidates would find a much closer correlation with the leadership's worldview.

Related link: Peter Riddell answers questions about opinion polls on today's Interviews blog.

Comments

[Andrew Lilico]

The Times survey seems to me to confuse various things. For example, the statement "one of the things that would most improve life in Britain today is people being more tolerant of different ethnic groups and cultures" might be disagreed with by someone that felt we were already tolerant and that that was a Good Thing, as well as by someone that thought such tolerance is (or would be) a Bad Thing.

Similarly, the statement "the diverse mix of races, cultures and religions now found in our society has improved Britain" might be disagreed with by someone that did not object to the mix, but thought it made things neither better nor worse - say, because they believed that Britain was already wonderful - or by someone that was in favour of greater diversity in principle, but was concerned that some ethnic communities might be intolerant.

Thus, one reasonable interpretation of these results seems to me to be that Conservative MPs are more optimistic about Britain and Britishness than are Labour MPs - hardly something for us to be concerned about (or, indeed, surprised by).

[Andrew Lilico]

Incidentally, I'd have liked to comment on the statement in the article: "against the view of Mr Cameron, just 46 per cent of Tory MPs agree that gay couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples, with 54 per cent disagreeing." However, without being able to read Populus' exact question it is difficult to interpret. What does "the same rights as heterosexual couples" mean here? Is it supposed to mean, for example, that they should be equally permitted to marry in Catholic churches? Does it mean that all heterosexual couples should have access to gay bars? Without understanding Populus' precise question, it is hard to say what answer one might have hoped for from Conservative MPs.

[Jack Stone]

Personally it doesn`t bother me in the slightest that the leadership may be out of tune with the party at large on certain matters as I expect leaders to lead not follow.

[David Belchamber]

I think the leadership has been fortunate that they have not yet come under much pressure to define their attitudes to really important issues, such as homeland security, immigration and Europe.

That is fine until we get a situation, as now, when our PM until next week is possibly signing away yet more powers to Europe.
What is the tories' current stance here?

[michael mcgough]

I expect those prioritisting environment issues are also very pro EU.

[Ken Stevens]

Security certainly prevails over environment. Ain't much point being Green as you lie there injured and surveying the aftermath of a sudden carbon emission (i.e. an explosive one).

As regards Andrew Lilico:"Conservative MPs are more optimistic about Britain and Britishness than are Labour MPs", hopefully that is because they are more fervent believers in the possibility of retaining/regaining sovereignty from EU, thereby enabling us to continue feeling British. Mind you they have to do something about reuniting the Kingdom as well, otherwise read as "England and Englishness".

Jack Stone: " I expect leaders to lead not follow." Yes, but with the proviso that the followers are persuaded and inspired to follow in the proposed direction.(That is a general comment, not aimed at any specific current circumstance.

[Umbrella man]

completely with you Ken and the Tory MPs. While DC is attaching his windmill to his roof the Iranians are building nuclear weapons. Get real, Dave!!!!

[Erasmus]

The irony is that reducing our dependency on fossil fuels is vital to our security as well as to climate stability

Umbrella Man: "Get real, Dave"

What are you doing to reduce our dependency on Iranian oil exports, Umbrella Man?

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"The Times survey seems to me to confuse various things. For example, the statement "one of the things that would most improve life in Britain today is people being more tolerant of different ethnic groups and cultures"

Having recently seen the flag of the patron saint of England burnt and the Queen insulted over her right to confer knighthood I think it may have been more to the point for the above paragraph to read "one of the things that would most improve life in Britain today would be for some ethnics accepting and being more tolerant of the indigenous culture.

[Felicity Mountjoy]

Would Tory MPs have agreed with Thatcher's monetarist agenda if they had been polled in 1977? These polls are meaningless.

[ToMTom]

Would Tory MPs have agreed with Thatcher's monetarist agenda if they had been polled in 1977? These polls are meaningless.

Posted by: Felicity Mountjoy | June 23, 2007 at 14:37

That is a very peculiar comment Felicity and one can only assume you were in kindergarten in 1977 or perhaps not even conceived.

It was in fact Labour that started discussing Monetarism and the Prime Minister's son-in-law Peter Jay who started the ball rolling in a Times column where he was Economic Editor.

The issue was simply that Monetarism was old hat - it was based on the old Irving Fisher model which Friedman had tarted up with his Permanent Income Hypothesis.

There were fanatics like Enoch Powell and John Biffen who certainly knew more about it than Thatcher or Keith Joseph; and Tim Congdon and Harry JOhnson were quite keen.

In 1977 you may recall the country was still living with the consequences of Heath's CCC Act in 1971 which had created a credit boom and caused high inflation. THe problem wih mOnetary Economics was that it required the Treasury to borrow less and it was congenitally unable to do so.......

I don't think Tory MPs would have resisted voting for Monetarism....things were so dire I think they would have gone for any remedy - Callaghan did.

[Sasha]

I would expect that PPCs would be more loyal to the party line as it is easier for CCHQ to remove them. Also many will have hopes of more than the back benches, whilst a significant proportion of current back benchers will have accepted that is where they are likely to stay, so express their own views. I think the questions themselves do distort the outcome, as said by Andrew.