Earlier today I posted on today's ICM poll for The Guardian.
I've now had a little more time to look at the survey and the most interesting detail comes in looking more closely at the newspaper's regional analyses (summarised in The Guardian graphic on the right - click to enlarge).
A leader in the Guardian makes this conclusion:
"In the north Lib Dem support is firm: 22% now, against 23% in 2005. But in the south - where most Lib Dem MPs are elected - it has collapsed, down nine points at 19%. That means the Liberal Democrats are now stronger in the north than the south for the first time since their formation. The party has also dropped back seven points in London. Polling day could be brutal."
The Guardian has consolidated a number of different polls in order to get its regional breakdown so we shouldn't draw strong conclusions but it would be appear that southern Conservatives are prospering in the Cameron-versus-Ming-contest. This is potentially good news for Conservative candidates like Zac Goldsmith in Richmond and Philippa Stroud in Sutton and Cheam although LibDem MPs may be better dug into individual constituencies.
Anthony Wells at UK Polling Report takes the regional breakdown and forecasts a Commons with 249 Conserative MPs, 335 Labour MPs and 35 Liberal Democrats - a Labour majority of just 20. Anthony writes: "The seats Labour gain in London and the North on these figures are not enough to outweigh the losses they’d make in Scotland and the South."
I certainly hope this is true. Phillipa would be an especially good addition to the Conservative benches. We would have a very able woman who has given much of her life to homeless and other vulnerable people.
Posted by: Umbrella man | August 27, 2007 at 14:58
LibDem weakness is hugely disguised by their recent success at the by-elections although they didn't do as well in those as they have in the past. If these figures are half true we should be able to unseat a good number of southern yellows.
Posted by: Jennifer Wells | August 27, 2007 at 15:02
This is even less evidence of a Brown Bounce, as it suggests huge increases in majorities in safe Labour seats, with a Labour (and, to some extent, LD) wipeout in the south. Little Tory progress in the north still according to this poll.
As a geographer, I'm not impressed with the Grauniad for lumping together the Midlands AND the East of England. I would like to see figures for the E & W Midlands, with key marginals such as Wolverhampton SW and Loughborough.
Posted by: Mountjoy | August 27, 2007 at 15:34
I am not a geographer but why on earth are wales and Scotland lumped together they bear no relation whatsoever in respect of results gained in both 2005 & 2007.
Wales is streets ahead of Scotland in respect of Conservative votes.
Posted by: Dick Wishart | August 27, 2007 at 15:55
I too would be interested in seeing East and West Midlands split. The district council swings in some of the East Midlands seats were very significant this year.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | August 27, 2007 at 15:57
I agree with both Dick and Andrew - breakdown by all 'Government Office Region' and by Scotland & Wales would be more helpful ... but then with these opinion polls, the sample size is often not up to scratch.
Posted by: Mountjoy | August 27, 2007 at 16:12
For example, if the East Midlands local elections swing were replicated in a general election, David Taylor's 4,477 majority in 2005 (down from 9, 639 in 2001) in NW Leicestershire would be wiped out, sending Andrew Bridgen to parliament. The Guardian poll doesn't tell us enough to know what is happening at the regional (GOR) level.
Posted by: Mountjoy | August 27, 2007 at 16:19
Paul Burstow (Sutton) and, to a lesser extent, Susan Kramer (Richmond Park) have substantial personal votes.
The Tories took a hammering (having put council tax up over a quarter in 3 years) in the council elections in Richmond in 2006. Twickenham is a basket case.
The Lib Dems remain strong in Kingston & Surbiton where the divided local Tories deselected the popular Kevin Davis who had gained a substantial swing against Ed Davey. Davis's A list successor is struggling to make an impact.
The main effect of the Lib Dem collapse will be to put Wimbledon and Putney back within Labour's reach.
Posted by: SW London Tory | August 27, 2007 at 17:33
Yes I hope this is good news for candidates like Zac and Phillipa. But would some seats where Labour is the main challenger (e.g. Enfield Southgate) be under threat? We need to keep plugging away that brown is just a continuation of the “Blair/Brown Govt”, and that being in no.11 he must have had at least some level of responsibility!
I agree with Unbrella man (1458) that Philippa would be an especially good addition to the Conservative benches for the reasons he says, except I would add ‘front’ before “benches”.
Posted by: Philip | August 27, 2007 at 22:08
Living in the area, I am delighted to see that these figures suggest that Tom Brake's majority will be hacked away still further at the next election, and he will be unseated. Paul Burstow next door has a good personal electoral rapport, and he and Tom Brake benefit from the support of the Sutton Guardian, but we have a good candidate and I think we've a good chance of a Con gain there too.
Posted by: IRJMilne | August 27, 2007 at 22:30
This is simply an effect of a move to the centre-ground. Those voters who are naturally conservative, but more centre right will switch to us under Cameron. This won't happen to any significant extent in Scotland, as the Tories are pretty much treated with open hostility post Thatcher, here the nationalists pick up the protest vote. If we can remain united and avoid episodes like grammargate we will regain the recent losses as trust is built and Brown's bounce fades. Unfortunately the message that Brown has had his chance has not got through to vast swathes of the electorate or the media. Most still tell me he deserves a chance. This is what we need to counter, or we will have to accept reducing his majority at the next election to dangerously low levels is a positive outcome.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | August 28, 2007 at 09:03
How annoying that the Guardian chose to lump regions together - Scotland & Wales (politically very different right now) and North-West, North-East & Yorkshire (so vast it could hide all manner of polling changes).
Posted by: Adam in London | August 28, 2007 at 12:55
As I live on one of only a few Labour seats in the South, I hope that we will be able to oust our incumbent Red and replace with a Blue.
Posted by: William W | August 28, 2007 at 13:38
Hi SW London Tory,
I am keen to know how you worked out that Paul Burstow has a 'substantial' personal vote? I'm not seeking to undermine what you have said, I'm just keen to know if there is something I'm missing?
I agree he has a personal vote, but then again, so do most MPs who have been in a seat for nine years. I think his personal vote is based on name recognition, rather than achievement, and is, therefore, fragile.
Posted by: Alex Robinson | August 29, 2007 at 10:39
I have a vague memory of the 2007 Local gov't elections being described as a disaster for the Lib-Dems (LD -246, Lab -505, Con +911).
As they lost councillors in the areas they would be defending/challenging for parliamentary seats at the next general election, and won them where they had no chance to win at the next general election.
Posted by: Dave Bartlett | September 15, 2007 at 12:35