Davis tops shadow cabinet league table again with Warsi at bottom

Listed below are the rankings given by 1,274 Tory members for twenty-seven shadow cabinet ministers.  The respondents supplied their answers from August 24th to August 28th with more than 80% of answers in by the close of business on the 25th.

David Davis reclaims the top spot with marginally more grassroots members satisfied with his performance than with William Hague.  His advantage may even grow if crime continues to be front-and-centre of the Conservative pitch to the electorate.

George Osborne's net satisfaction rating is now just +24%.  When the series began in January 2006 his net rating was +68%.  This is despite the underlying improvement in the party's standing on economic issues.  Last week's ICM survey found that Labour were now behind the Tories on a number of key indicators.  More people think that "the economy will deteriorate" under Labour.  The Conservatives also lead on interest rates, inflation and particularly taxes.

Members are more dissatisfied than satisfied with five of the 27 shadow cabinet ministers: David Willetts (-1%), Oliver Letwin (-6%), David Mundell (-6%), Francis Maude (-10%) and bottom-of-the-league Sayeeda Warsi (-20%).  David Willetts' position is improving from the -24% rating that he scored in the immediate aftermath of grammarsgate.  A lot of the members that were dissatisfied with him two months ago have become 'don't knows'.

1. David Davis: +79% | 88% satisfied, 9% dissatisfied
2. William Hague: +76% | 87% satisfied, 11% dissatisfied
3. Liam Fox: +49% | 71% satisfied, 22% dissatisfied
4. Lord Strathclyde: +43% | 55% satisfied, 12% dissatisfied
5. Alan Duncan: +40% | 62% satisfied, 22% dissatisfied
6. Michael Gove: +40% | 59% satisfied, 19% dissatisfied
7. Chris Grayling +36% | 55% satisfied, 19% dissatisfied
8. Caroline Spelman: +34% | 55% satisfied, 21% dissatisfied
9. Eric Pickles: +31% | 50% satisfied, 19% dissatisfied
10. George Osborne: +24% | 60% satisfied, 36% dissatisfied
11. Andrew Lansley: +20% | 54% satisfied, 34% dissatisfied
12. Nick Herbert: +19% | 37% satisfied, 18% dissatisfied
13. Philip Hammond: +17% | 33% satisfied, 16% dissatisfied
14. Pauline Neville-Jones: +15% | 37% satisfied, 22% dissatisfied
15. Andrew Mitchell: +10% | 33% satisfied, 23% dissatisfied
16. Jeremy Hunt: +10% | 30% satisfied, 20% dissatisfied
17. Owen Paterson: +10% | 26% satisfied, 16% dissatisfied
18. Patrick McLoughlin: +9% | 30% satisfied, 21% dissatisfied
19. Theresa May: +8% | 45% satisfied, 37% dissatisfied
20. Peter Ainsworth: +8% | 37% satisfied, 29% dissatisfied
21. Theresa Villiers: +7% | 35% satisfied, 28% dissatisfied
22. Cheryl Gillan +3% | 22% satisfied, 19% dissatisfied
23. David Willetts: -1% | 38% satisfied, 39% dissatisfied
24. Oliver Letwin: -6% | 40% satisfied, 46% dissatisfied
25. David Mundell: -6% | 19% satisfied, 25% dissatisfied
26. Francis Maude: -10% | 33% satisfied, 43% dissatisfied
27. Sayeeda Warsi: -20% | 19% satisfied, 39% dissatisfied

Comments

[Alan S]

As well as DD gaining from the spotlight, William Hague may be suffering from the attention given to the scale of his outside interests.

[Jennifer Wells]

It would be helpful to have this presentation every month.

Please Editor!

[Cleo]

These league tables are always very interesting but I sometimes wonder how much satisfaction/dissatisfaction ratings are related to the perceived position (i.e: are they "tradional" or "Centrist")of the shadow cabinet members rather than their performance in the job. I suppose it will inevitably be a bit of both but isn't effectiveness of getting the message across the most important?

[DF]

Dear Editor

I understand that not long ago you refused to take part in a "relgious based debate" because the muslim relion was present. Is this true and if so is this the reason your delight at Sayeeda cominng 27th delights you.

[Editor]

DF: What you say is not true at all. I have taken part in many fora with Muslims present and would be happy to do so again.

I'm sorry that someone misled you.

I am not delighted that Sayeeda Warsi is at the bottom of the league and did not express any delight.

[DF]

The time was when IDS was the leader., Are you sure, I mean are you absolutely sure my sources are very realiable?

[Editor]

Unfortunately your sources are very unreliable DF. I am absolutely sure. I would not take part in fora with Muslim extremists - eg Hizb ut-Tahrir - but am very happy to publicly engage with mainstream Muslims.

[DF]

We are not talking extremist. So lets puit that to bed.

The debate was a multi cultural event that apprently you refused to take part in. Are you sure you didnt refuse?

I suppose the question is will you accept an Asian who is from the muslim religion as the leader of the Conservative party?

[Editor]

This is beginning to look like your enquiry isn't genuine DF. I have given you a clear answer and you are repeating an unfounded suspicion.

I would accept a Muslim Asian leader of the Conservative Party if they had the right qualifications - I would judge them by the same criteria that I would judge any other leadership candidate by.

[Editor]

I've just checked your IP address and you are the same person making very different allegations against me on another thread, DF. It appears that you are not a searcher for truth but a smear merchant.

[mike clarke]

Tim

Your figures are calculated on responses by members of the Conservative Party. I was a member until I resigned earlier this year and now respond to your surveys as a "Supporter of the Conservative Party". It would be of considerable interest to me, and no doubt to other "Supporters", if you would publish percentages which include the opinions of us mere "Supporters".

[Editor]

I keep promising to do that mike and keep failing to do so. Many apologies. Please give me to the end of the week and I'll make amends by then.

[mike clarke]

Thank you Tim.

[sparrow49]

I am a member of our party and I like David Cameron. I like David Davis and I like William Hauge. My affection stops there.

Its not that I dislike all other members of the shadow cabinet, I have no reason too dislike them. Its more a case of disappointment. Even Fox, Duncan and Lansley haven't made the impact thier respective roles grant them. Duncan has the whole of the North to play with alongside T&I, Fox has no shortage of ammunition at Defence (excuse the pun) while Lansleys Health portfolio was meant to get a starring role in our end of summer offensive.

However I'm also bored of hearing about thier outside intrests, anything that gets them out the Westminister Village isn't all bad. Plus fighting a battle to make them give up the opportunity to earn money is a silly one to have with any good Conservative after all.

All I want as your average party member is a bit of passion. Shake your fists a bit - get a bit louder at the end of your speeches, anything to remind us getting into Government bothers you. Thats all I ask of my Shadow Cabinet.

Am I asking too much?

[Traditional Tory]

To be fair to Warsi I don't suppose most of the respondents have ever heard of her.

I have no problem with Muslims and I would have no problem with debating with anybody of the Muslim religion - however extreme. However, I would have great difficulty in accepting a Muslim Asian as a leader of the party. I think the idea is utterly absurd.

The Conservative Party is almost entirely a party of Europeans steeped in the Judeo-Christian tradition and it should therefore be led either by a Christian or a Jew.

I would not accept an atheist, either.

[Londoner]

This list highlights how large the Shadow Cabinet is: 27 is ridiculous. It's no wonder that half of them make nil impact, even with anoraks like us who visit this site. It also must make it nigh impossible for this body to act as any sort of decision-making body, which does not bode well for any revival of Cabinet Government if DC becomes PM. Whoever heard of a Board of Directors, or an Executive Management committee this size?

What is the reason for this? Is it:

1.Deliberate, i.e. there is no desire for the team beyond the top 3 or 4 to make any impact and no desire to have any proper decision making body beyond the leader and his office;

2.Incompetence - they just don't realise the consequence of this structure;

3.Weakness - DC doesn't want to offend by leaving people out; or

4.Driven by the original spin when appointments are announced, e.g. Neville Jones and Warsi, who clearly don't really have (Shadow) Cabinet-level jobs, with no care for how the thing functions afterwards.

I generally support what Cameron is trying to do as leader, and it's not the most important issue in the world, but he needs to get a grip. 20 should be top whack.

[Paul]

I completely agree Londoner, 20 should be plenty. I am surprised William Hague scores so well, he is in a job which does not do him justice. By that I mean he is unable to employ his skills to attack the government, especially as foreign policy under the Conservatives would be very similar to what is happening at present. If only he would give up his outside interests, he could begin to take advantage of what could prove to a difficult few months for the government economically by being moved to become Shadow Chancellor. By the way, when will Francis Maude and Oliver Letwin finally be put out of their misery?

[Graham Smith]

I suspect the result for Andrew Lansley would be much improved if the survey had taken place a few days later. The way he handled the recent media storm took me, and others I have spoken with, by surprise and did him much credit.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

The result is almost identical to how I voted!

[fr]

I am a party member and work about 3 hours a week for them, so you could say I'm reasonably interested in politics but I have to admit that there are 14 names on that list that I wouldn't be able to identify, even if named, if they suddenly popped up on the telly.

[fr]

The Glorious ConHome Don’t Know Index
Hague 2%
Davies 3%
Osborne 4%
Fox 7%
Lansley 12%
Letwin 14%
Duncan 16%
May 18%
Gove 22%
Willets 23%
Maude 24%
Spelman 24%
Grayling 26%
Pickles 31%
Strathclyde 33%
Ainsworth 35%
Villiers 37%
Neville-J. 41%
Warsi 42%
Mitchell 44%
Herbert 45%
McLoughlin 49%
Hunt 50%
Hammond 51%
Mundell 56%
Paterson 58%
Gillan 59%

[Editor]

Thank you fr

:-)

[James Maskell]

I agree with sparrow49 (except for the bit about liking Cameron). The only people I can give the time of day in our Shadow Cabinet is Hague and Davis. What are the others doing to justify their frontbench roles? Why is Cameron doing all the talking? I know Cameron is our key asset when it comes to doing the speeches but we have to have more involvement from the others.

[Lindsay Jenkins]

Editor may we have a little fun with a serious purpose? What about a regular question on backbenchers whom we might like to see promoted? It might need a write-in section too. I know you did something along these lines recently. Might be telling and pour encourager les autres?

[Iain]

What surprises me regarding this poll, is how high Osborne is listed, for I would have him challenging Warsi for bottom spot, and its worth noting the go to people are Davis and Hague in the fight back, Osborne is no where in the media, which would suggest CCHQ don't have too much confidence in him either.

[Richard]

I don't suppose there is any chance of publishing the full list for the last six months or so? Possibly as a graph to compare how the shadow cabinet and their jobs compare pre and post reshuffle?

[Alistair]

"The only people I can give the time of day in our Shadow Cabinet is Hague and Davis."

That shows how out of touch you are James for they are among the most unpopular politicians in the country.

Davis is disliked because he is a far-right Thatcherite and little Willie Hague has been detested ever since he played Mummie's Boy to Thatcher at that embarrassing conference of zombies.

As the late Joan Collins stated "I could never vote for someone who looks like a foetus"

[John]

The late Joan Collins?

[Alan Carcas]

I'm bemused by the anti feelings about Sayeeda Warsi. When she was selected as the Dewsbury candidate in 2005 she was head and shoulders abouve everybody else on the long list, and it was no surprise to me that she was selected. She was brilliant enough for the Labour candidate, Shahid Malik, to conduct the dirtiest campaign this constituncy has ever seen, and I was the professional agent here in the middle 60's.

Could it be that the antipathy towards her is because she comes from T'north? Don't forget, the popular Marcus Fox was from Dewsbury too.

I can't think it is because she is Asian!!!! Especially as she has a better handle on the problems Asian women have in our society than anybody else. Couple her with IDS and his policies on social justice and you have a principle that has been at the centre of Tory politics since I first became a member in 1951!!!!! What was that about the need to change???