ICM: Tories on course for fifty seat majority

A new ICM poll for tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph would put David Cameron into Downing Street and he'd have a parliamentary majority of very nearly fifty according to electoralcalculus.co.uk.

The poll offers four other interesting findings:

1. If electors were allowed a second preference as well as a first preference vote - a scheme apparently under consideration by Team Brown - the Tory majority would be wiped out.  David Cameron would have 325 seats; the same as all the other parties combined.
2. Exactly the same proportion of voters - 36% - identify Brown-Darling and Cameron-Osborne as best-placed to run the economy.
3. 23% say they are more likely to vote Conservative if there was a promise to cut spending and taxes.  8% say that it would make them less likely to vote Conservative.  We're still waiting for someone to ask if people would be more likely to vote Conservative if they slowed the growth in spending and cut taxes!
4. Britons are split on whether Britain should adopt the French idea of boycotting the opening of the Beijing games in protest at the Tibet crackdown.  Earlier today ConservativeHome commended such a boycott.

Comments

[anthony scholefield]

All British polls exclude Northern Ireland which means the Tory vote is actually 41.5% of the total electorate not 43%.
Has account been taken of differential turnout in this poll
Also the vote given for all minor parties exclusive N>I at 7% is far too low-it should be about 9%

[CCHQ Spy]

VERY good to see Cleggover falling -- perhaps because of his silly bragging this week.

[Gloy Plopwell]

At least we lib Dems are not back on 11.
We have enough momentum to get our show back on the road, and there's just enough time before May 2010 to be redy to win the general election.

[Tony Makara]

I've got a terrible gut feeling that a Lib/Lab pact of some sort will bail Labour out and our country could be stuck in a recession with a patchwork government. A way needs to be found to make the Liberals state openly that they won't prop up an ousted Labour government.

[bluepatriot]

11% lead.

43% support.

50 majority.

I'll sleep well tonight!

[Alan S]

The finding on tax confirms the wisdom of the tax cutters' argument. Tax relief isn't just necessary for British business but good politics too.

[Sam R]

With Clegg doing so well (down 3 to 18) Gloy Plopwell (21.55) must be already at home preparing for government!
Meanwhile, those minded to support socialism don't seem to be able to make up their minds between the Lib. Dems and the Brownies (Brownie up 3; Clegg down 3).
Good to see the economy is in safe hands - 36% each for Brown-Darling and for Cameron- Osborne. Did anyone ask what the figures would be for Cameron-Redwood?

[Joe James Broughton]

Tony - I know a Tory who thinks if there's a hung Parliament Labour and the Lib Dems will do a deal to keep us out.
I think he's a bit of a pessimist though.

But they really wouldn't be able to do that if the Tories were 5 or 6 points ahead.

Discussion about hung parliaments should be avoided because it elevates the Lib Dems to an importance they don't deserve. We should just warn against it generally - as John Major did in 1992 - and win.

[Tony Makara]

Joe James Broughton, I agree fully. Perhaps it needs pointing out that any anti-Conservative vote is a vote for 'more of the same' and that the only way to get real change is to return a Conservative government with a healthy majority so that two terms can take our country in a different direction. I've already resigned myself to the fact that a first term is going to be a damage limitation exercize given the state of the economy and public finances. I expect things will get worse before they get better, rather like the early Reagan years.

[Northernhousewife]

Not sure I agree about hung Parliaments. The Lib Dem Election strategy, recently revealed on this site showed they fear that such speculation will cost them.
Mike Smithson recently posted a piece on Lib Dem Voice to the same effect, namely that the electorate like certain outcomes and the more real the prospect of a hung Parliament becomes, paradoxically, the less likely it is to happen.

The Lib Dems are Labour's little sibling who can't wait to be invited to the party but have no idea how not to embarrass themselves when they get there. A vote for them is a vote for more of the same.

Any gerrymandering by the pair to deny power to the party with the popular vote would backfire in the long run. They would be out later, but for longer, with one of them possibly fatally wounded.

The only way the Lib Dems can survive the squeeze is to align themselves with us against the Gov. Anyone who spends any time on the blogs realises that whilst all the polls show their voters are more Tory than Labour right now, the activists are not. This is a major problem for Clegg.

We need to stay united and remember all shades of opinion in this party share a common purpose.
Brown is the most embarrssing PM we have had since Michael Foot and his reckless mismanagement will cost us and our children for years to come.

[Joe James Broughton]

"With Clegg doing so well (down 3 to 18) Gloy Plopwell (21.55) must be already at home preparing for government! "

Probably he/she will have a very long wait...in the toilet.

I agree with Tony Makara and Northern Housewife, and some other comments.
In 1992, Paddy Ashdown ran the whole of his campaign on PR and posing as a statesman who would rescue the country in a hung Parliament - inevitable of course. I was very pleased to see polling evidence afterwards which confirmed the result of the election (albeit shattered on Black Wednedsday in Sept 92) - which confirmed that the electorate strongly disliked the Lib Dem campaign and their demands of what they wanted in a Hung Parliament.

But like I said - still very wary that we must warn of the dangers of this (partly because it won't provide any real change in policy) - whilst avoiding giving the impression that the LDs are important.

[MrB]

"Brown is the most embarrssing PM we have had since Michael Foot"

That sentence isn't factually accurate. Thank God!

This is more good news but bear in mind that according to "Smithson's rule", the more Cameron is in the media, the better we do. So by that logic we should do excellently in a general election campaign (bar any big gaffes), where Brown and Cameron will hardly be off the screens.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

I would actually say that Michael Foot probably was a more decent man than Brown ever will be.
The Lady herself described Michael Foot as a good man, and a gentleman, desppite his flawed socialism.

[NW Supporter]

I think that idea about having a first and second choice, and the fact that it would wipe our majority out, is a very worrying thing indeed. Brown is liable to do anything to cling on to power.

[Peter Harrison]

Anthony Scholefield - ICM weight for certainty to vote (and past vote) as do most pollsters. Their certainty to vote weighting is less harsh (and hence more favourable to Labour) than some others. That doesn't mean it is wrong, just that, with the same base data, many other pollsters would come up with a bigger Conservative lead. This kind of difference in methodology is the main reason why those looking for trends should compare with the previous poll by the same pollster. The perception that many have of polls swinging about wildly largely comes from comparing polls from different pollsters and may therefore have more to do with different methodologies than any real underlying changes in public opinion. This poll therefore shows a slight narrowing of our lead due to voters switching from the LibDems to Labour.

Northern Ireland is an irrelevance as far as the outcome of the next election is concerned. None of the seats will be won by the three major parties so they can safely be placed in the opposition column.

As for "others", ICM's figure has been low for a while. It may be correct or it may be that a high proportion of "don't know" and refusals will end up voting for others.

[Conand]

'We're still waiting for someone to ask if people would be more likely to vote Conservative if they SLOWED THE GROWTH IN SPENDING and cut taxes!'

This is a crucial point. Pollsters play into Labour's hands by promoting the false dichotomy of increases v cuts in public spending.

[David Bodden]

“Tories on course for a 50 seat majority” relies on major assumptions that there will be another election and that it will be free and fair. Neither of them is valid. The nuLieBore regime has previous form as long as your arm of lying with official figures; why should an election be any different? There is no reason why el Gordo will not contrive some circumstance where he can invoke the civil contingencies bill and suspend democracy. Sadly with things these days it is not as far fetched as it should be.

[Yet Another Anon]

Northern Ireland is an irrelevance as far as the outcome of the next election is concerned. None of the seats will be won by the three major parties so they can safely be placed in the opposition column.
There are 18 seats from Northern Ireland, probably 9-12 Unionist, 4-6 Fenian and 2 or 3 SDLP. The SDLP always back Labour in confidence motions and each consider each other sister parties so if Labour in its own right have 322 MPs and SDLP have 3 seats then Labour effectively has half the seats in the House of Commons and with the absence of Sinn Fein MPs effectively has a majority.

In the event of both main parties having 315-20 seats, Unionist support could avoid the need to form a coalition government - from 1974-79 and 1992-97 Unionist MPs were heavily depended upon in keeping Wilson, Callaghan and Major administrations in power.

In 2004 at the same point in the last parliament things were bad then for Labour - they got seriously hammered in the Local Elections, fell to 22% in the European Elections and (I have little time for opinion polls, but as others have I will mention this) the opinion polls showed the Conservatives not much lower than now and Labour not much higher than now, and Labour went on to get a majority of 67 in the 2005 General Election with nationally 3% more of the vote than the Conservatives, with a stronger Conservative Party turnout for Labour is likely to hold up more strongly, in Local Elections Labours vote has been firming up.

Tactical voting for incumbent Liberal Democrats is likely to mean that more keep their seats than their percentage vote nationally in the election would suggest, there is still a net tactical favourability among Liberal Democrat voters towards Labour, Labour can probably look forward to picking up Bethnal Green and Bow, Blanaeu Gwent and Wyre Forest all held by small parties currently and formerly held by Labour.

In Scotland, when the next General Election comes around I would expect Labour to have re-emerged as the main party and though the SNP might gain a few seats, I wouldn't expect much change overall.

I expect the General Election to be on 11 June 2009 and for Conservatives and Labour to advance in seats and votes and the Liberal Democrats to slip back, if you look back at past parliaments in most at this stage the media were reporting predictions of opposition victories.

[passing leftie]

Rather than whingeing about poll questions, why don't you raise the money from your loyal readership and ask them yourselves, or persuade the Daily Mail to pay for it? There's go to be a couple of merchant bankers on here with the spondoolies, or perhaps Lord Ashcroft would oblige.

[Joe James Broughton]

Passing leftie - what's wrong with merchant banking?

[passing leftie]

Posted by: Joe James Broughton | April 07, 2008 at 00:23
Passing leftie - what's wrong with merchant banking?

Nothing, as far as I know. Merchant bankers keep the cogs of global capitalism oiled. They initiates loans and then sells them to investors. You've got to keep your eye on them though or their admirable acquisitive tendencies can screw the world economy. It is also baffling and unfortunate that the Cockney, known for his cheek, has chosen this blameless profession as rhyming slang.

But merchant bankers tend to vote conservative, tend to have lots of money, and would hence be a potential source of funding for a poll which asks the questions you want to ask. That's all I was saying.