Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If stepping up the rhetoric on welfare was supposed to boos
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If stepping up the rhetoric on welfare was supposed to boost CON poll ratings it has yet to work
3 out of 5 people in today’s YouGov believe that the majority of those receiving benefits are genuinely in need.See twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/st…
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Merkel has been fairly helpful to them on this up until now. I'd want to hear a direct quote from her before concluding that the Germans have given up pretending to think there's going to be a treaty any time soon - it doesn't cost her anything to throw Cameron a bone.
The game used to be that the voters didn't have to think you were good, they just had to think you were better than the other lot. So if you discovered that a lot of voters were concerned about something - in this case they think a lot of people are taking the piss out of the welfare system - you could talk up the problem, and make a couple of gestures towards doing something about it, and get their votes.
But that doesn't work if there are more parties. If you talk up a problem, you need to have a plan to actually solve it - otherwise people who believe you about the problem will vote for another party that sounds like they'll do more about it than you. It's particularly tricky for welfare, because as far as public perceptions go the problem is insoluble: Whatever the government does, the papers are still going to be telling the voters that people are taking the piss out of the system.
@skynewsniall: According to Sunday People poll 66% agree with George Osborne that welfare system is broken. Do you?
https://twitter.com/stevenjgibbons/status/320265274580422657/photo/1
In some ways linking this to the Philpott case is what's caused the problem. Everyone knows we're looking there are someone exceptionally wicked and that's not what welfare reform was supposed to be about. With that and Osborne's own goal car parking in a disabled spot the main point of the reforms has been lost in a tide of controversy. The Conservatives at the moment just look tawdry.
YouGov:
Doing well/badly:
DC:-23(0); EM:-30(-5); NC:-54(-4)
YouGov gets voters to split themselves by class:
Working class; upper working class; lower middle class; middle class and upper middle class.
UKIP supporters are; 15,12,10,10,9.
Philpott is more about the failings of the criminal justice system imo as he should have been put inside forever long ago.
Thinking about the current benefits system,
which of the following best reflects your view?:
Works well and doesn't need any reform: 2
Works well and doesn't need any major reform: 21
Works fairly badly and needs significant reforms: 38
Works very badly and needs major reforms: 32
DK: 7
Thinking about the current benefits system...
In determining who is eligible for benefits, do
you think it is too strict, not strict enough or
gets the balance about right?
Is not strict enough and too open to abuse and fraud:63
Is too strict and prevents some people who genuinely need help from receiving it. 22
Gets the balance about right: 9
DK 6
Net "Fair"
Benefit cap at £26 k: +68
Benefit increase 1%: +31
Bedroom tax :+7
Kids share bedrooms:+17
Child benefit for first 2 kids only: +32
We have the soft power of TV dramas, but the 'patriots' want to dismantle that like our industry by destroying the BBC.
Do not forget that Downton Abbey was ITV's response to the BBC winning the ratings' war.
If there was no BBC, there would have been no Downton Abbey.
Just my 10¢.
The public's instincts look pretty sound to me.
@MSmithsonPB: If stepping up the rhetoric on welfare was supposed to boost CON poll ratings it has yet to work http://bit.ly/12uoYLx
It's not about short term poll rating. It's about an election campaign where the Tories promise welfare changes and Labour remain the party of scroungers, shirkers (© Liam Byrne) and Philpott
Mr. Smithson, those statements (in the poll) are awful.
Take one that 42% apparently ticked:
The majority of people who receive benefits are genuinely in need or deserving of help, but there is a minority if undeserving cases who take advantage of the system.
A minority (NB not a very small minority at that's the category above) is anything from about 5% (still 1:20) to 49%. It doesn't matter if a majority receiving benefits deserve them if 49% don't, or even 10%. That's like saying "My body is 90% healthy, apart from my left arm which is infected with ebola".
I have been vaguely pondering this matter. Given about half of benefits are pensions it seems there may be an immovable object and irresistible force clash coming between morality and economy reality.
The elderly are becoming increasingly hard to afford. The problem is that life expectancy getting greater has not been matched by more years of productivity. Increasing the pension age is a must (if it's less than 73 by the time I get there I'll be amazed) but it would be better if we could keep more older people in work for longer.
(And, fyi, Merchant Ivory, the best - arguably the creator - of this genre is an Indian company)
The Brits do the work and the profits go abroad
RT @ianpuddick: Breaking 8000 #police officers have claimed compensation of over £70,000,000.00 (£70m) in last 4 years
http://t.co/ypsp8z8nBb
I think that's the first time such a thing has been attempted.
It's immensely impressive how they've managed to go downhill in terms of respect. There's Hillsborough, Plebgate, 'unkempt', sueing victims of crime when they hurt their ikkle selves, leaking to newspapers and, of course, ignoring the pleas of victims (and their families) of gang rape.
Police Oficer should be able to sue for compensation - net support: -38
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/liam-byrne-tory-benefit-cuts
"First, people must be better off in work than living on benefits. We would make work pay by reintroducing a 10p tax rate and supporting employers who pay the living wage."
Possible. The thing is, that's either a tax hike where there's currently a 0% rate, immensely expensive by making it from £10k to whatever the upper limit is, or could be neutral financially by straddling the top of the 0% and bottom of the 20% rate (although this would mean increasing taxation on low paid workers).
"Second, we would match rights with responsibilities. Labour would ensure that no adult will be able to be live on the dole for over two years and no young person for over a year. They will be offered a real job with real training, real prospects and real responsibility. This would be paid for by taxing bankers' bonuses and restricting pension tax relief for the wealthiest. People would have to take this opportunity or lose benefits."
Sounds good, but they've spent bankers' bonuses about twelve times already and pension tax relief has, I think, already been cut. The figures might be unexpected, but I'd be surprised if they actually added up. This is more of a PR message: "Evil bankers will pay for British jobs for British workers".
"Third, we must do more to strengthen the old principle of contribution: there are lots of people right now who feel they pay an awful lot more in than they ever get back."
This sounds very fair. No, really. Except, there's a problem. If this means being financially neutral then those at the bottom end would see their benefits cut, which flies in the face of everything Labour has said and done. If it means keeping the present rates as a kind of baseline, with extra payments for those who have paid in more (and is this across the board?) then it'll cost a bloody fortune, and there's no money left.
The Coalition should hammer Labour over the logical inconsistencies (which are all the same: sounds good, but it'll cost a fortune, show us the figures). They probably won't, though.
The Brit way is to allow others to take the risks and allow the financial class to skim the profits at no risk to themselves. Heads they win, and tails someone else loses.
Incidentally, could you confirm that the pb2 F1 threads are now monitored by a mod? I am sorry to keep banging on about this, but the last thread was cleaned up very quickly, which was a great help as there's been a significant increase in spam this year and it was ruining the comments. Either such monitoring or me being able to axe spam would be very welcome news.
Net "Fair"
Benefit cap at £26 k: +68
Benefit increase 1%: +31
Bedroom tax :+7
Kids share bedrooms:+17
Child benefit for first 2 kids only: +32
Very interesting. I suspect the figures reflect what people think is fair rather than there being any vindictiveness towards the feckless. Thus I suspect Osborne's rather creepy attempt to link them to Philpott has backfired which is why the Tories haven't gained from supporting reasonably popular changes
My brother spent the first part of his career as a staffer with the BBC and Granada. Now he's a very successful film maker running his own companies and getting Oscar nominations
Net approval among VI: (change)
Cameron: +80 (-2)
Miliband:+30 (-10)
Clegg: +33 (+5)
i remember in the early days of Yougov them asking 'Is Cherie Blair more likely to make you vote Labour or Sandra Howard more likely to make you vote Conservative?'. I think it appeared in the Mail. Fortunately they've cleaned up their act a little since then
That's Kim Il Sven, leader of the Swedish left party. It's a discussion about finding horsemeat in nuclear weapons. Or something.
All the talent on Downton is BBC trained and discovered. There is no chance Downton could have been made here had the BBC not existed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9976619/Nigel-Farage-I-could-work-with-Labour-or-Boris.html
(One reason for this is that he studies the polling and trends.)
@GuidoFawkes: RT @PatJHennessy: Polling in papers today @telegraph and @TheSunNewspaper showing Britain has never been more out of love with the welfare system.
On the other hand tory positioning has, at times, looked cynical and vindictive so they are not getting much credit either.
I suppose from a slightly optimistic point of view the fact that UKIP is at a new high without doing yet more damage to the tory ratings is something but that really is looking for silver linings. Despite their best efforts, it still seems likely to me that the tories will gain in the long run if the focus remains on welfare but I suspect the circus will move on fairly soon. In terms of narrative the Q1 figures later this month will be important.
But that would involve logical thinking, so er.......no chance.
@AlanBrooke 'Vote Farage Get Miliband'
Well, standard stuff I suppose. People would likely discount it as just a tactic from his opponents, just as both sides claimed voting LD would help the other side in 2010, and it would only start to impact UKIPs current numbers if it actually happened, because while they might claim to be attracting people from all sides of the spectrum, that's the whole point of a protest party I would guess, so once you have actually had an impact like that, that is when you would lose some of those people. Depends on how many.
I can't recall any - I exempt NPEXMP because he was on the payroll at the time and therefore remained loyal to a fault.
Benefit system works:
Well/fairly well: 42
Badly/Very Badly: 51
Not strict enough: 47
Too strict: 33
About right: 16
Net fair:
£26k cap: +57
1% increase : -4
"bedroom tax" : -35
Kids sharing: -15
Child benefit first two only : 0
So even among Labour supporters the only significant support Ed has got is on the housing front - everything else, Labour voters support govt policy - which may be behind the slump in his approval ratings.
Her claim that Labour are looking to make work pay will be interesting, since it will mean pain for some of her supporters. labour will baulk at the first fence imo.
@tnewtondunn: YouGov/Sun poll: despite all the shouting, a small majority still in favour of 'the bedroom tax'; 49% v 44%. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4876917/Brits-say-benfits-are-too-generous.html
@politicshomeuk: Harman on welfare contributory principle: “This is a discussion underway. It will come to fruition in what we put forward for our manifesto”
But the fully socialised model that you are suggesting doesn't work either as it tends to stifle diversity (in the sense of variety).
" He's like a thin Alex Salmond."
A thin Salmond is beyond my ability to imagine.
"Those of you taking the occasional pop at OGH for chastising the Cons should perhaps remember that he was one of the lone voices from the outset criticising the choice of Gordon Brown as Labour leader and PM. As it turned out, how right Mike was"
Net "fair"
OA: +7
18-24: +13
25-39:+22
40-59: +7
60+ : -8
London:+16
ROSou:+17
Md/Wales: +9
North:-2
Scot: -24
@Richard."Most of the "Talent" on Downton was freelance..not BBC trained at all"
Of course they were freelance or they wouldn't have been able to work on an ITV drama but they learned their trade at the BBC. Their lead director was a commercials director who the BBC chose to shoot a four parter North and South. They put him with a well tried drama crew and an experienced producer and writer. They then gave him Shakespeare re-told where he won a Bafta. Then when he was approached by Julian Fellowes to work on Downton he took his BBC team of freelancers with him.
Even Ridley Scott learnt his trade at the BBC.
'What? Who apart from EiT ever thought Brown would be and remained a good choice as PM from the PB crowd?'
Roger was a big fan.
That part's true!
@iainmartin1: Two years from an election. Welfare v hot topic. Labour needs a proper policy. It has, it seems, a discussion paper for "debate".
RT @chrisg0000: #OwenJones84 on tv again????...is he the Labour Minister for the BBC?
http://0.tqn.com/d/urbanlegends/1/0/A/7/queen_and_soldiers.jpg
Up to then the BBC had "nurtured Fellowes' talent" by getting him to act posh fops......
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/john-prescott-wage-war-tories-1816307?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Welfare costs are out of control.
All this talk of 'reform' and 'modernisation' and 'making work pay' (etc) completely misses the point: the welfare State is over, finished, kaput: too many people's votes were up to be bought by politicians who wanted power more than they wanted sane economics.
[Random figures]
If underlying growth is 3% and a raft of incompetent regulations and policies reduces that to 1.5%, then people will see their standard of living rise and people may not be easy to persuade that The Alternative Party can do better.
When underlying growth is close to zero, those same rules and regulations (and there are ever-more of them, daily) mean growth is negative - at around -1.5%. Since that's political as well as economic suicide, the Treasury and BoE then throw the entire kitchen sink at the problem, from QE, to 0.5% interest rates to £120 billion pa of Keynsian stimulus - and all of those maintained for 5-6 years.
The end result? The economy has not moved one iota, since the root cause of the problem - government itself - is not something that politicians are remotely interested in reviewing and looking at.
The mirror shows an unforgiving image - and it's a deeply unflattering one. The almost complete absence of supply-side economic reforms lies at the heart of our economic (and social) woes: Farage has tapped into this underlying discontent and national understanding of the problem. No other politician seems prepared to grasp what nearly everyone else instinctively understands - we're massively over-regulated and in an attempt to eliminate risk and danger, we're also eliminated the incentives to take risks and seek rewards.
@Antifrank:
I had thought better of you than that. Powell was one of the most gifted and principled politicians of his, or any other, time and had a phenomenal brain and drive - he was the youngest Brigadier in the British army, having risen through the ranks in astonishingly short order.
Farage has captured the public mood perfectly - but he was doing this not since 2010, but since 2001 or so, when anyone with eyes could see that spending and immigration were out of control and infrastructure spending woefully inadequate to cope with 50 million in the UK, let alone with 70 million plus.
Your comment is thus both inaccurate and insulting to both men- each has powerful strengths and equally powerful shortcomings. Powell: 'the finest mind in British politics - until it's made up!' and Farage is both a smoker and has a market-trader's mind:@ quick to seize and opportunity, not so good at long-term strategy.
Both, though, are genuine leaders, and both are far more in touch with the mood of the people than the metrosexual, metropolitan, middle-class mediocre men who have governed Britain for much of the last 45 years. Both are prepared to say what it is un-PC to say and both are prepared to speak 'to the people' rather than hide behind PR-speak sound-bites.
The exact antithesis, in fact, to the empty-headed, vacuous imaged Wilson/Blair clones who lead the other three Parties.
A better comparison, antifrank, IMO, would have been with Galloway (unkind) or Salmond (flattering): both are 'men of the people' in that they very succesfully articulate the aspirations of those they represent and are figureheads for A Political Movement - whether you like or agree with them or not!
Of course it won't work. It just reinforces that the fops are flapping around desperately in the gutter because they are terrified of the kippers and trying anything. It just reverses all the detox and reinforces that the tories are the nasty party.
"Ukip equal highest levels with both YouGov and Opinium "
The incompetent fops banged on about the EU, they banged on about immigration and now they are banging on about welfare. None of it will work.
Nor is Cammie's crumbling IN/OUT referendum on the EU going to help their cause one bit. FPT: Those poor gullible eurosceptics and tea party tories. Made to look like complete idiots after the flounce that wasn't and now Cammies cast iron referendum is falling to pieces. They just never learn.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/david-cameron-restocks-his-emotive-arsenal-8563080.html
No sign of the scottish tory surge in the polling and the real world scotty_P.
Every sign of just how toxic omnishambles Osbrowne is as Cammie tries everything to avoid confronting the obvious fact that he is the tories single biggest problem.
How soon do you expect your 'tory majority nailed' on now?
LOL
http://centrallobby.politicshome.com/latestnews/article-detail/newsarticle/enoch-powell-and-the-1974-election/
Nigel Farage is looking to pull the same stunt in 2015, but he does not lead the UKIP cohort, he simply acts as the repository for the disaffected. Polling has made it very clear that much of the UKIP support dislikes David Cameron but utterly despises Labour.
There is strong support for capping benefit at 2:
Net support: +32
Over 450,000 people have signed the petition now.
https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week
A triumph for the fops!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/poll-reveals-more-half-people-1815925
But they're not really in a mood to change voting intention anyway, for reason we've discussed before. The Government parties keep thinking they've found a killer issue - Europe, income tax allowance, benefits. Sometimes the voters agree with them, sometimes not, but it doesn't change the underlying position that 40ish% of voters didn't want the coalition, think it's worse than Labour, and plan to vote it out.
If you are going to try and troll like a PB Leftard, you need to up your game a little
Quoting from the Mirror for political opinion is akin to citing LHQ - they couldn't be more on message if they tried. Only Tony Parsons goes off piste - as an Old Labour stalwart. Even the Express is more independent of the Tories as they prefer Kippers.