Tories announce new crime and tax policies to regain momentum

An ICM survey for tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph shows that the political situation is tightening but not as worryingly as a MORI and previous ICM poll had suggested.

If translated into seats at a General Election, the ICM poll would put the Tories on 273 seats; 19 fewer than Labour.

In tomorrow's newspapers there is set to be a great deal about MPs (particularly Tory MPs) and allowances.  In moves to distract attention from sleaze and in order to regain some hare-like momentum, David Davis and George Osborne are both making significant announcements:

• David Davis has told The Sunday Telegraph that he wants to give the police more freedoms to charge a wider range of offenders themselves - reducing the bureaucracy that is currently involved in the police making referrals to the Crown Prosecution Service.
• Again in The Sunday Telegraph, George Osborne confirms that Conservatives will vote against Alistair Darling's £700m Capital Gains Tax hike and he promises to "plot a path" away from it once in Government. If Mr Osborne wasn't copying Labour's spending plans he would be able to afford to scrap it immediately.

We'll have more detail on both of those sets of proposals tomorrow.

The 21% rating for the Liberal Democrats in the ICM poll is a warning to the Conservatives that voters unhappy with Labour do have a choice of alternative parties.  They can also sit on their hands.  As the Conservative Party looks to attract (1) voters floating between the parties and (2) voters floating between voting and non-voting it has a number of policy options.  ICM asked about a few of those options and the desirability of those options is summarised in the graphic below:

Two immediate comments on the above findings:

• The second column would have been much more interesting if it referred to undecided voters rather than all non-Tories.
• The 'Cut taxes and spending' option doesn't tell us much.  '£75 off council tax paid for by slower growth in public spending' would, for example, come a lot closer to what some of us are arguing for.

Comments

[bluepatriot]

The LibDems are probably gaining because both two main parties are now seen as sleazy. Thank you Mr Conway.

[bluepatriot]

Interesting that Tory voters are so keen on longer detention without trial.

[tim]

Peaked at 37% it seems.
The intersting thing about rough economic waters is that acouple of untried, smug posh lads just may not be trusted.

[David]

"The 'Cut taxes and spending' option doesn't tell us much"

Arf!

[Politico]

"Labour was anxious to take the heat off itself because of pressure on Gordon Brown over Alan Johnson and Peter Hain. This was a golden opportunity - clearly supported by some Tories, some of whom may well have had their own agenda."

Can you believe this man? Conway is an embarrasment. Labour may have loved it, but to suggest there was an agenda to get rid of him, when he stole from the public purse is just madning.

[Gloy Plopwell]

I told you before we lib dems have stupendous momentum and we will win the next general election. Conway was a fool, and we libs are skweeky clean. A pague on both your houses. We have stupendous momentum. Yes we can do it.

[Sally Roberts]

"skweeky clean"???? Love the spelling, Gloy, if I do find the idea of Lib Dems being "skweeky clean" rather a strange one...

By the way, how on earth did you invent your name - someone else on here said it reminded him of a drug addict with the runs and I had to laugh at that I must admit...!!

[Mark Fulford]

The 'Cut taxes and spending' option doesn't tell us much. '£75 off council tax paid for by slower growth in public spending' would, for example, come a lot closer to what some of us are arguing for.

C'mon, it tell us lots. Undeniably voters do not see current tax levels as a button issue. You can't be selective about which polls you're going to live and die by.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Well it seems 'tim' @ 21.50 - that the even more interesting thing is that the tried and found wanting, smug, posh, Scottish 'lad' is not to be trusted!

[Mr Angry]

A distinct lack of clear blue water is providing a distinct lack of election winning opinion polls.

[Alex Swanson]

I've read Davis' article in the Telegraph. It all sounds great, but in practice it won't work, because it starts from the statist point of view: it assumes that a peaceful society can be obtained through efficient policing of a passive population. This isn't true unless you take it to Stasi-like levels, and then you will end up with a society that collapses under its own weight.

It is necessary to realise that low crime results not from repression but from citizens largely agreeing to the laws they live under and obeying them voluntarily, with enforcement confined to the few whose actions are generally recognised as being anti-social. I could write an essay on this but the following are absolutely necessary although probably not sufficient:

(1) Reform of assault laws which currently render the law-abiding helpless but have no effect on criminals;
(2) Reform of civilian weapons (especially firearms) laws, ditto;
(3) Reform of traffic laws, especially idiot ones like the mobile phone ban, the actual effect of which can be perfectly well covered under dangerous driving;
(4) Provision of jail places for the truly criminal, with Osborne making it clear how this will be funded
(5) Proper discipline being introduced into schools (everybody is in favour of this but nobody is prepared to actually do it)
(6) Proper, enforceable Bill of Rights intended to benefit citizens not criminals or politicians

[Editor]

Mark, David: I hope I'm not ignoring polls I don't like. I don't think 'cut tax and spending' is a fair way of getting at my belief that we should cut tax and reduce the rate of spending growth. The inheritance tax cut demonstrated that there is a strong appetite for specific tax cuts if voters believe that they are affordable.

[RobD]

Surely the inheritance tax cut was successful because it was affordable WITHOUT spending cuts. This poll seems to confirm that the public is failing to see that there is massive overspending in the system at the moment and therefore they do not want to see tax cuts at the expense of spending. This is a very difficult argument to win given the strong emotional counter-argument of cuts in education and health. I fear we will need to win the next election on the basis of other policies and then prove that we can cut taxes without adversely affecting services once we are in power.

[Old Hack]

With these figures Gordon Brown could easily be re-elected Prime Minister. It is an absurd and entirely self inflicted situation that the Conservative Leadership finds itself in, yet again.

Of course there is a bit of a pendulum effect, but the fact that the Conservatives trail Labour on ECONOMIC COMPETENCE for goodness sake, has nothing to do with Conway.

Instead it is everything to do with the amount of grey matter being put to the fundamental tasks of devising sound economic policy and then selling it.

We elect a Leader to lead. Inheritance tax is just a sop. We need a far bolder approach, a stronger critique of Labour's economic performance (lets demonise them for heaven's sake)and greater engagement with leading economic thinkers if we don't have the grey cells within CCHQ.

If this complacency continues the next Party conference may not have such a lucky ending.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

Gloy Plopwell, your party will never again (at least not in our lifetimes) form a government. The best you can hope for is the pleasure of shoring up the Labour government in the case of a hung parliament.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Yes I suspect the better showing for the Lib Dems comes on the back of Conservative and Labour corruption stories because there have been no policy announcements at all from Clegg. He's been really low profile for a new leader.Why I wonder?

[Traditional Tory]

Gloy Plopwell, your party will never again (at least not in our lifetimes) form a government.

Cann't you spot a screaming troll a mile off, Buckinghamshire Tory?

If you are one of Mr Berkov's supporters, probably not.

[CCHQ Spy]

The Editor is absolutely right about the tax and spend point.

The Sun Tel asked all non-tory voters (ie lots of Labour and LibDem voters) if they'd support tax cuts paid for by spending cuts. No surprise that they weren't keen.

Much more interesting would have been a question to floating voters about supporting a specific tax cut, paid for by a reduction in the growth of public spending.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

Traditional Tory, to answer your question,I am one of Thatcher's supporters.

[Marmaduke Bracegirdle]

Sally Roberts 23.38 descended to namism in attacking Gloy Plopwell, and this is to be regretted.
I happen to know the Plopwell family well. Originally the name was Popplewell, but a census clerk mis-spelled the name, and the family had to use Plopwell in order to be able to claim for welfare under the Speenhamland System. Plopwell has been used ever since, and the family have come to be proud of it.
Gloy Plopwell is a charming young lady. Her parents called her Gloria, and this is the name on her birth certificate. At her Christening, which I attended, the vicar, who had formerly been employed by the Gloy Paste company had an unfortunate lapse of memory and named her Gloy instead of Gloria, and the name has stuck.
It is time that the namism of the type often used on this site was dropped.
I intend to lead a march against namism next Saturday in Billericay, starting at the railway station, where placards will be handed out. The march will end at the Duke's Head, where I will address the assembled crowd, the national press, and television reporters. I will also take the opportunity to call for Thye Common to be renamed Thai Common.
We will then repair to the Duke's Head for refreshment and a game of darts. All welcome.
Namism!,Namism!,Namism!, Out!,Out!,Out!

[Editor]

Thank you very much Marmaduke!!

:-)

[Yet Another Anon]

I told you before we lib dems have stupendous momentum and we will win the next general election.
The Liberals\Alliance\Liberal Democrats have so many times talked of making some kind of breakthrough over decades, yet at every General Election since 1918 they have been third in terms of both votes and seats, even in 1983 - the Alliance couldn't overhaul Labour in total chaos led by Michael Foot. At the moment the Liberal Democrats are likely at the next General Election to hold at least half the number of seats they have now, their chances of matching the number of seats and percentage vote they got in 2005 is slim and that vote was well lower than those that the Alliance got in the 1980s and in terms of total votes only just recovering to where the Liberal Democrats were in 1992.

[David T Breaker]

What shocks me the most is the apparent popularity of "force people to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions"! Force? "You will switch off your plasma TV and install flickery, dull and mercury filled light bulbs or..."

I find it shocking that something with "force" in the wording that would affect us all adversely is so popular.

[David Sergeant]

Sorry everybody, I just have to take this oportunity to repeat my point.

One reason Brown keeps in front on economic competence is the myths the Tories can't be bothered to deal with. If you think Brown saved the country from a Tory economic mess, if you think Black Wednesday was an economic disaster, if you think the Tories cut the public services and if you think the Tories hugely increased unemployment (and everyone of these is regularly trotted out still) constant references to Northern Rock are likely to encourage you to support Brown.

[THE EDITOR IS RIGHT!]

Anthony Wells at UK Polling Report agrees with Tim on the tax point:

"Cutting taxes and spending was a negative of -6: it would repell more people than it would attract, though as Tim Montgomerie rightly notes, there are some tax cuts like council tax or inheritance tax that polls suggest are more popular (Tim is also right to say that it these questions would be far more interesting if they were restricted to only those who might change - realistically many of the people answering these questions would actually never vote Tory whatever policies they promised.)"

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111

[David Belchamber]

David Sergeant is also right at 16.43.

[Bexie]

Depends on what is being cut. Cutting funding to the pseudo charities that get most of their income from government in order to spread propaganda, and cutting the quangocracy that undermines local democracy would find great favour.

Cutting "services" would not, and this is what is trotted out by ZaNuLab to put fear of the tories into the swiing voter.

[Joe James Broughton]

I'm pretty sure Gloy Plopwell is not a genuine Lib Dem supporter but is someone trying to discredit them with the absurdity of his/her forecasting statements.

Far be it for me to ever defend the Lib Dems but I think that's the case - a caricature of one parodying the kind of ridiculous predictions they make.

On this poll, well I'm not too happy but at least it appears to show there's no further damage. But with Hain and Conway within days of each other it's hard to assess...I do think we need some more material to look like a government in waiting.

[Simon Denis]

I hope that everybody has noticed the solid popularity of selective education. The grammar schools fiasco was a Cameronian own goal. Now that water has flowed under the bridge, the Tory leader should acknowledge as much and renew the support he was giving to selection as recently as 2005.

[Votedave]

Apparently a new poll puts us at 40% and Labour on 31%.

[Yet Another Anon]

Cutting taxes and spending was a negative of -6: it would repell more people than it would attract, though as Tim Montgomerie rightly notes
If you left out people who would never vote Conservative, I imagine you would get a plus - the fact is that it is not neccessary to have the support of more than oppose you to win a General Election, if those favouring maintaining spending was split between different parties, a party favouring cuts can still win on a minority vote and keep winning.

[Mygirlruth]

I come clean as a current labour voter but i felt i had to comment on some of the economic arguments above. This recession is clearly making peoples lives difficult but it is not as difficult for people in the north as the recessions under the tories. We suffered much greater than other parts of the country under the tories whilst many in the south were cushioned from the full effects. We had people who lost their house and jobs and whole communities decimated. This hasn't happened this time which is why the tories wont win the number of seats they should with their % of the vote. The north simply does not want the tories back full stop. Clegg goes down well when compared to Cameron and if anyone wins seats in the north it will be the lib dems.