Aggregated UK political opinion content, stakeholder research and policy consultations.
Andrew Gwynne\'s blog

There may be trouble ahead…

June 7th, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

Ok so now we have another example of the push-me-pull-you government.

On the one hand, yesterday, that nice Mr Clegg, full of youthful charm, told us all that there would be no return to savage Thatcherite cuts. Today of course it is the for the Coalition’s bad cop (that’s the equally youthful Mr Cameron!) to break the news that times are going to be hard and the cuts will run deep.

Now Cameron comes to this cutting business with much better credentials. After all, it was the Conservatives’ position not just at the General Election, but throughout most of the recession not to intervene in the way the Labour Government did.

I don’t particularly want this to be a piece on the economic rights and wrongs of fiscal stimuli; the point I am making is that the Conservatives’ had a clear position on the deficit for some time – I did not agree with it – that the economy needed significant cuts in public spending to kickstart private investment.

Of course the Liberal Democrats agreed with Labour throughout the period running up to and including the General Election, that to cut £6bn immediately would be a  complete disaster for the economy and could tip us back into recession.  Again a very laudable and clear position.

So here we now are, 7th June 2010. Almost a whole month has gone by for the new government and there’s the emergency budget on the horizon too; and despite Nick’s nice smile the blunt fact is they’ve completely signed up to the ‘Tory Cuts’ all of their pre-election Focus newsletters warned the electorate about.

The Lib Dem record player has certainly changed its tune from ‘More, more, more‘. Now it’s more like ‘There may be trouble ahead‘.

In real terms what does this mean? Well in my own patch, Greater Manchester Police have been ordered by the new Treasury to find an extra £7 million savings this year alone. That will have a disastrous impact on policing in one of Britain’s largest conurbations.

How far things have come since Stockport Council passed a motion condemning (I kid you not) the Labour Government and the borough’s Labour MPs for the 4% increase in police grant settlement, and claiming this would impact on frontline policing.  Of course, this was back in March 2010.  It is strange that we’ve not heard a peep out of them since the latest government announcement was made!

And therein lies the problem for the LibDems. They are comfortable with opposition; it’s what they know best. It is easy politics and the narrative is clear: Nasty Labour/Tory [delete as appropriate]… [insert local campaign]. Now in government those tough choices are theirs to be made. Over the coming weeks and months, some of their previous statements may well just come back to haunt them.

Tags [ , , , ]

Categories [ UK Politics ]

Comments [ 4 ]

Leave your comment

Our push-me-pull-you Government

June 1st, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

If a week is a long time in politics, then a full five year parliament is an eternity.

In the immediate aftermath of the 2010 General Election, commentators speculated that the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition government wouldn’t last; that this marriage of convenience would crumble under the pressure of tough decisions in office.

Now I never subscribed to that scenario, although it is still very possible. The Coalition is undoubtedly fragile and there are two competing agendas with people in both parties (let alone the Labour opposition) who want the whole project to collapse in failure. It reminds me of Dr Doolitle’s push-me-pull-you.

For the Lib Dems, the challenge is to remain a distinctive and relevant political entity. The risk is they become seen as one with the Conservatives, and particularly so with every unpopular decision made. Is it possible, over a five year term, to maintain a degree of independence whilst equally maintaining effective collective cabinet government?

The Lib Dems like to portray themselves as the ‘nice guys’ in British politics. When they have to start making very unpopular decisions in government, how will they cope? Presumably this is where Simon Hughes’s ludicrous suggestion at still having Lib Dem ‘shadows’ despite being in government (as well as to snaffle some opposition Short money) comes from.

But the fragility of the Coaltion should be a worry for Labour too, because it breeds complacency. There were quite senior people back in the early 1990s, following the party’s fourth consecutive defeat at the polls, who wanted to halt the whole process of ‘modernisation’. Their theory was that Labour needed just one more heave to propel it to power, irrespective of the policy platform which had been resoundly rejected by the electorate.

Thankfully, Tony Blair accelerated the process of modernisation, setting the foundation for Labour to govern for thirteen years. As then, Labour should not now put off making the changes it needs to make to win back the support it lost in 2010. To sit back and hope for the Coalition to implode would be disastrous for Labour. The party needs not just to be a credible opposition to the Coalition, but a real alternative government to it.

Of course, there is just a possibility, too, that in five years time the Coalition- having held it together and directed Britain through the economic morass – will have re-found political popularity. If that happens then people may start to believe that a more consensual style of politics, transcending the traditional left-right splits, has worked and that Britain, perhaps with a new electoral system, will have genuinely entered into a new era.

We shall see!

Tags [ , , , , , , ]

Categories [ General musings, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 4 ]

Leave your comment

Pomp and Policy

May 25th, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

Today is the State Opening of Parliament.  I am going to admit that it is a day I always enjoy.

Ok I accept, this year’s isn’t the Queen’s Speech that I would have wished for (it’s not Her Majesty’s fault, she didn’t vote for this lot either), but in my opinion, a bit of pomp and ceremony is what we do best, and it does no harm at all once a year.

To some, I imagine the spectacle of the Monarch travelling from Buckingham Palace to Westminster in the State Coach, with the Crown Jewels in tow, is irrelevant or even a complete anathema.  But I still think this ceremony serves a real purpose in the 21st century.

Firstly, whether we like it or not, it reminds us all that we do live in a Monarchy, and Queen Elizabeth II is our Sovereign.  The State Opening is also the one time that all three branches of government come together under one roof.

It further reminds us that it is a Constitutional Monarchy – in that the Queen comes to Parliament to summon the new House of Commons to come to the House of Lords to listen to her read a speech written by her Prime Minister, a member of the elected House of Commons.

It also reminds us, through the slamming of the Commons’ door in Black Rod’s face, of the battles scattered throughout history for power to be relinquished from the Monarch and then eventually, the Lords too, and given to the elected House of Commons.

The pomp and ceremony is actually relatively new; introduced by Edward VII in the early 20th century because his mother, Queen Victoria, couldn’t really be much fussed with the event.

Of course, the real purpose of the State Opening of Parliament is to set out the new Coalition Government’s business for the next year; much of it we already know through the Coalition’s programme for government, which was published last week, or via the ‘leaks’ to Sunday papers.

After the pantomime finishes today, then the real business of Government, and for me, Opposition, really begins.

Tags [ , , , , , , , , ]

Categories [ General musings, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 4 ]

Leave your comment

Back to the future. What now for Labour?

May 14th, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

I’m back (both blogging, and as an MP!)

To the loyal band of followers of this blog, my profound apologies for not posting anything for quite some time!  Secondly, congratulations to Rene Kinzett, a Tory Twitter mate (between you and me I have quite a few of those too!) for agreeing to blog with Think Politics too.

Well what can I say? The polls were right and we now have a hung parliament!  The electorate has spoken, and nobody has won the 2010 General Election. And after the extensive negotiations, the dust has settled and Britain has a new Conservative/LibDem coalition government.

I profoundly disagree with much of Mr Cameron and (though slightly less so) Mr Clegg’s platform.  But those of us in the Labour camp must accept that, although the Conservatives failed to win the election, we also lost the contest.

Indeed, it is easy to disparage the coalition government – and there will undoubtedly be difficulties for both the coalition partners along the way – but part of Labour’s problem this time round was that our own coalition, which saw us through to victory in 1997, 2001 and, to a smaller extent, 2005, essentially broke up.

The blunt truth is we need to win that support back.  We need to convince not just our core vote (which proved to be extremely resilient last week), but a swathe of people who aren’t instinctively traditional Labour voters.  The task is immense in parts of the country.  Anyone looking at a new electoral map will see just how few Labour MPs there now are in the South East and South West regions of England.

But all is not lost.  Certainly we will have a new leader in place by summer. Personally, I hope the contest won’t be a coronation – we’ve done that.  I also hope it won’t be acrimonious (we’ve done that too!).  Let’s use the situation to move beyond the old Blairite and Brownite divisions.  Whoever wins needs the support of the entire party behind them in the challenges ahead. We won’t win at the next election by perpetuating the politics or, indeed, the ‘new’ Labour divisions of 1994-2010.

I genuinely hope Labour will take the opportunity, especially while the new government is bedding in, to talk about policy.  Let’s accept that Labour did brilliant things between 1997 and 2010; I still firmly believe we changed Britain for the better. But let’s also acknowledge the very real mistakes we made (such as Iraq, Lisbon and 10p tax to name three) and that, for some voters, we were just not radical enough – particularly in the days when we had a massive parliamentary majority, and the ability to push through transformational legislation.

If done properly, the next few months should allow for a process of party renewal; for fresh ideas, for policy debates and for the party to successfully begin to challenge the new Tory/LibDem agenda.

Tags [ , , , , , ]

Categories [ General Election 2010, General musings, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 11 ]

Leave your comment

Is it 1983? Fire up the Quattro!

April 17th, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

Last night I watched Ashes to Ashes on BBC1. For those who didn’t get to see it, it is set in 1983, and the storyline last night was linked to the General Election of that year.

The relevance to this post was a piece of footage of the election, showing Roy Jenkins, one of the gang of four who left Labour in 1981 to form the Social Democratic Party; The BBC news commentator said “Mr Jenkins is buoyed up by recent polls placing the Alliance ahead of Labour”… ominous stuff following the first-ever televised leaders’ debate this year.

As I type, the dust has barely settled on the YouGov/Sun poll last night showing a massive bounce for the Lib Dems, just pushing Labour into third place. Now there are reports of two other polls showing a similar trend (though ICM still has Labour in second place).

Of course none of us really knows how the debate will affect the dynamics of the remainder of the campaign. Can the Lib Dems solidify their position, or have they peaked too early? Who knows? And frankly it is pointless speculating. What we have seen is our politics (and this election) getting interesting. When I wrote my blog piece on the February polls, and the speculation of a hung parliament, it was just that – speculation. Now it is looking more and more likely as an outcome.

Even before the debates, the Tory leads in most polls were not quite enough to deliver them a majority in the new House of Commons on a uniform swing (though with local factors and a concentrated effort in the marginals and a non-uniform swing in key seats it was actually possible). Now, with each of the main parties appearing to be very close to each other with around a third of the votes each, a hung parliament is looking very likely indeed.

Back in 1983, and because of our electoral system, the surge in support for the SDP/Liberal Alliance didn’t translate into seats. It did however help to deliver a massive Conservative majority by depriving Labour of seats it needed to hold (and others it needed to win back which it had lost in 1979), and it pretty much kept them out of power until the Blair landslide of 1997.

If the current poll trends are to be believed (and they may settle back down into the pre-debate positions in a few days), and because of the same electoral system, Labour on around 30% would win just short of 300 seats and would be the largest party in the House of Commons. The Tories and the Lib Dems also on around 30% would win something like 200 and 100 seats respectively.

Unlike in 1983, the present Lib Dem surge is actually a disaster for the Tories. Undoubtedly, if replicated in the election, the current polls would spell the end of any hope of a Conservative majority. The Cameron project will have spectacularly failed. The scale of the Tory slump is really clear when yesterday’s YouGov/Sun poll is compared with the YouGov/Sun poll from just TWO days earlier:

14th April Con: 41%, Lab 32%, LD 18%

16th April Con: 33%, Lab 28%, LD 30%

17th April Con: 33%, Lab 30%, LD 29% (Update at 9pm)

Nothing yet is written in stone. There’s still two debates and three weeks left to go. The Alliance surge of 1983 didn’t in the end ‘break the mould’ of British politics. Will 2010 be different?

Tags [ , , , , , , , ]

Categories [ General Election 2010, Opinion Polls, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 9 ]

Leave your comment

Andrew’s addendum

February 24th, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

POLLS UPDATE:

Late last night on Twitter, @toryatsea (yes I do have quite a few Tory friends on Twitter, I know!) was bemoaning the ‘poll obsessives’ – something I concede from my sick bed, I have become. This was following the latest YouGov tracker poll for The Sun, continuing to show only a 6% Tory lead.

The tracker poll is an interesting beast. My understanding is there is a set sample and each day, the oldest data drops off and a similar new sample is added. In theory, any switches in support over events, should be immediately apparent, rather than having to wait for the next monthly poll to be produced. Of course, the usual points about margins of error, etc., still apply.

The most interesting thing about the YouGov tracker (as at 24th February in any case) is that there has been very little movement, despite all the media hype over ‘Bully-gate’. Whether this factors into subsequent polls still remains to be seen, but the YouGov tracker is also in line with all the other current published polls (except the Angus Reid polls which are wildly out on anything else published!)

YouGov Tracker Poll:


 CON LAB LD Lead
24 Feb 38% 32% 17% Con +6%
23 Feb 39% 33% 17% Con +6%
19 Feb 39% 33% 17% Con +6%
18 Feb 39% 32% 18% Con +7%
17 Feb 39% 30% 18% Con +9%

-

VULTURE FUNDS:

My Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill has its second reading on Friday. As I mentioned in my earlier blog piece, Sally Keeble MP (pictured) has very kindly agreed to take the Bill forward for me on Friday – and until I can properly return to work following my recent health problems. The text of the Bill and Explanatory Notes can be found here.

And here’s a piece from today’s Guardian too.

Tags [ , , , , , , , , ]

Categories [ International, Opinion Polls, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 0 ]

Leave your comment

How hung? (The next parliament!)

February 21st, 2010 by Andrew Gwynne

A few weeks back, I did warn you that politicians were obsessed by the polls, and particularly as an election approaches. I suppose after this post, I now have to include myself in that category!

Since that earlier post, there have been a number of public opinion polls published and most (to a greater or lesser extent) showing the gaps between the main parties narrowing – so exciting times for political junkies like me!

The media narrative now is that we are in hung parliament territory, and indeed on the face of it, that is precisely where we are. Most commentators will tell you that, because of the electoral system, the Conservatives will need an 11% or 12% lead over Labour on polling day to be certain of a small overall majority. Today’s poll for the Sunday Times shows the Tory lead at just 6%, the lowest level with YouGov since 2008.

On a uniform swing, that poll would leave the Conservatives over 30 seats short of an overall majority, and only around 10 seats ahead of Labour. Of course, there are a few caveats here, not least that there isn’t going to be a uniform swing. Results will differ from region to region, seat by seat, and largely down to local factors.

Indeed this is starting to show through in more detailed polling. The assumption has to date been that the Tories are doing much better in the marginal seats they have to win than in constituencies like mine, which are completely off their political radar. Having said that, there was an interesting set of polls published by ICM/Kindle Research yesterday for the three Brighton and Hove constituencies showing that Labour has pulled ahead of the Conservatives in all three seats. These are precisely the kind of constituencies David Cameron must win.

So on that basis how hung will our next parliament be? On paper, it currently looks a likely outcome that no party will have a majority after the election. But so too, if we throw our minds back, did the 1992 election and yet the Tory government held on with a 21 seat majority in the end.

Our first past the post electoral system actually makes hung parliaments very difficult to achieve – though not impossible. Will 2010 be another 1992 or will it be another February 1974, the only post-war election with an inconclusive result?

Time will tell when Britain votes on March 25th, April 8th, April 15th, May 6th, June 3rd. *Delete as appropriate depending on this week’s rumours (the date of the election itself is a whole separate post!!!). In the meantime, we’ll just have to be patient and obsess over a few more polls!

Since I posted this earlier today, He’s Spartacus has added his views on the subject here

Brighton and Hove Kindle Research Polls – Feb 2010:

LAB CON GREEN LD
Pavilion 41% (+5) 25% (+2) 19% (-3) 8% (-8)
Kemptown 38% (-1) 36% (+2) 13% (+7) 11% (-6)
Hove 38% (+1) 34% (-2) 10% (+2) 10% (-8)

-

Latest National Polls:

CON LAB LD Con Lead
YouGov 21st Feb 39% 33% 17% +6%
ComRes 21st Feb 38% 30% 20% +8%
YouGov 18th Feb 39% 32% 18% +7%
YouGov 17th Feb 39% 30% 18% +9%
ComRes 11th Feb 40% 29% 21% +11%
ICM 4th Feb 39% 30% 20% +9%

Tags [ , , , , , , ]

Categories [ Opinion Polls, UK Politics ]

Comments [ 13 ]

Leave your comment