Hmmm. The 70/19 split on for against looks in tune with the overall findings in other polls, but I suspect the wording on the could work/can't work questions on effectiveness cld be affecting the results there - what do others think?
Really noticeable how hostile lot of UKIP supporters are to Tory position though - 39% saying they're in bed with the energy cos - almost as many as Labour.
Hmmm. The 70/19 split on for against looks in tune with the overall findings in other polls, but I suspect the wording on the could work/can't work questions on effectiveness cld be affecting the results there - what do others think?
Really noticeable how hostile lot of UKIP supporters are to Tory position though - 39% saying they're in bed with the energy cos - almost as many as Labour.
Some of the wording could be a bit more neutral/less absolute, but it won't have that much affect, if we compare it to the other polling we've seen with ComRes other YouGovs and others, the findings are in the same ballpark.
"One of the loudest cheers on BBC’s Question Time last week was reserved for someone who suggested that the solution to rising energy prices in Britain was re-nationalisation.
I would not normally grace this kind of abject nonsense with a detailed rebuttal – suffice to say that anyone who sincerely believes the cost of fuel would be cheaper if the industry was once more owned by the state and paid for through general taxation is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Yet the remark was also very much indicative of the infantile and, frankly, quite harmful level of debate to which Britain’s wider “cost of living crisis” has descended."
The state already intervenes in the energy market: it intervenes through green taxes and it intervenes by guaranteeing prices for the providers of nuclear power. It intervenes via OFGEM and it intervenes by ensuring - or trying to - a properly competitive market.
The ordinary person can see that. It's not that unreasonable (even if nationalisation is almost certainly the wrong answer) for him to ask why the state does not intervene to do something for him. Neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have come up with any sort of answer to this. Ed has - however much of a crock his answer may be.
Really noticeable how hostile lot of UKIP supporters are to Tory position though - 39% saying they're in bed with the energy cos - almost as many as Labour.
A genuine question for you Hopi: are you not a bit queasy about this?
My other minor concern with the YouGov polling is that some of the questions refer to the government, whilst some of the other questions reference Conservatives on their own.
I know in the past, that has some variation, not much, but some on the poll findings.
Edit: But Labour will be chuffed with this polling, they've positioned themselves on the side of the consumers, and effectively put the Tories on the side of the evil energy companies.
If they do form the government and aren't able to deliver on this, there's going to be some unhappy bunnies.
The ordinary person can see that. It's not that unreasonable (even if nationalisation is almost certainly the wrong answer) for him to ask why the state does not intervene to do something for him. Neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have come up with any sort of answer to this. Ed has - however much of a crock his answer may be.
They haven't come up with an answer because there isn't an answer - in fact, there isn't even a question. Given that we have the second lowest energy prices in Western Europe, and given that there is no profiteering and that the market is already heavily regulated (by a body run under rules set up by Labour and run by people most of whom were appointed by Ed Miliband), what exactly are they supposed to answer, other than possibly reducing taxes?
Coming next: A price freeze on petrol prices, those wicked oil companies have the temerity to make profits! A cut in bus fares - those wicked bus operators pay dividends, the bastards! Oh, and what about supermarkets? Those crooks at Sainsbury's pay over 4% dividends - oh no, better not pick Sainsbury's.. Tesco's then.
My other minor concern with the YouGov polling is that some of the questions refer to the government, whilst some of the other questions reference Conservatives on their own.
I know in the past, that has some variation, not much, but some on the poll findings.
Edit: But Labour will be chuffed with this polling, they've positioned themselves on the side of the consumers, and effectively put the Tories on the side of the evil energy companies.
If they do form the government and aren't able to deliver on this, there's going to be some unhappy bunnies.
Wonder what the odds will be on CON majority on the first day of Ed Miliband's premiership... ?
It`s quite bizarre the PB obsession with Falkirk and Ed Miliband.
Now whatver trouble Len Mcluskey or Stephen Dean may get into and it`s not clear they will,Miliband is completely insulated as he called in the police.
“LABOUR has cleared Unite of trying to rig the selection of a party candidate in Falkirk – claims which led to a major row between the union and leader Ed Miliband.”
Except, with the release of 1000 e-mails that clearly implicate Unite’s intent on dirty tricks and intimidation we now know different.
The obvious questions are why did Ed back down in such a spectacular way? Was he duped by UNITE, or is he complicit in a cover up of possible illegal activities?
How long can Ed insist keeping his inquiry report secrete?
Warner pours a bucket of cold ice over those who try to create a positive aura around the ever clueless Osborne:
The UK is supporting unearned demand by loading up on credit again, the very reverse of what’s required. It is small wonder that UK business is still so reluctant to invest; a lot of faith is required to believe in the long-term sustainability of the British recovery
One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy.
There is even a risk that they DO get credit for the recovering economy, but people note that they're not better off themselves (and in the next year or two few people will be) and feel that the Conservatives have engineered a recovery that only benefits someone else, fitting with the really widely-held view (cf numerous YouGovs) that the Tories only care about part of society.
Alternatively that the voters do feel better off, do give the government credit, and then say, "I'm glad we got the Conservatives in to sort out the economy, they're very good at that kind of thing, now that's fixed let's have Labour back to sort out the schools and hospitals".
They sorted out" the hospitals and schools the last time they were in power.
How did that go again?
Shiny new buildings and amounts of money spent do not equal good educational or healthcare standards.
Still, give them credit for one thing - Labour were very good at NOT holding an enquiry to find out just what the hell was going wrong in the NHS.
The ordinary person can see that. It's not that unreasonable (even if nationalisation is almost certainly the wrong answer) for him to ask why the state does not intervene to do something for him. Neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have come up with any sort of answer to this. Ed has - however much of a crock his answer may be.
They haven't come up with an answer because there isn't an answer - in fact, there isn't even a question. Given that we have the second lowest energy prices in Western Europe, and given that there is no profiteering and that the market is already regulated (by a body run under rules set up by Labour and run by people most of whom were appointed by Ed Miliband), what exactly are they supposed to answer, other than possibly reducing taxes?
At the risk of overestimating British voters, maybe there's a gap in the market for a party prepared to say that.
If the LibDem left has sodded off to Labour and the Tories have gone populist and BOO, maybe the Cleggites and business-minded Tories could make a normal mainstream free-market centre-right party in the space everybody else has evacuated.
''They haven't come up with an answer because there isn't an answer - in fact, there isn't even a question.''
You are correct of course, but the polls show that this line won;t be good enough to retain power in 2015. Not nearly good enough. Stick with this and ed wins.
We have got ourselves into a bit of a pickle wrt the energy market and as my dear old grandmother would have said "now is not the time for logic".
EdM has hit the public mood perfectly and if I was a Left-er I would also be dancing jigs. But this doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.
Ed has highlighted how globalisation works. Much is now out of our control including but not limited to the global energy markets. Immigration, bank lending, systemic risk, HS2 - all things that Britain must face as we take our part in an ever more competitive global market.
Canute-like(I know, Canute was proving a point to his advisors..), Ed has chosen to hold back energy and everyone loves him for it; of course they do. But it's not sustainable.
I'm not saying the general public are dim or not sophisticated enough to understand the various arguments but Ed is doing them no favours by such reductionism. He is in fact proving that he is the heir to Brown which may be his undoing come GE2015.
That said, god knows what the Cons can say which is both credible and which the public will want to believe.
At the risk of overestimating British voters, maybe there's a gap in the market for a party prepared to say that.
If the LibDem left has sodded off to Labour and the Tories have gone populist and BOO, maybe the Cleggites and business-minded Tories could make a normal mainstream free-market centre-right party in the space everybody else has evacuated.
I think that is basically right, and that the Tories should unapologetically go for that market. As I've said before, they have IMO been insufficiently robust on this - it's a complete hiding to nothing to try to out-snake Miliband's snake-oil pitch. It's a contest they can't win - he can always promise something even more lunatic - and it undermines the USP.
They should stop wobbbling, and go all-out for the grown-up market.
For those mulling the possibility of a tory s---- in Scotland, Mr Ashcroft has a very interesting article on what his polling suggests about the potential on Conhome.
"One of the loudest cheers on BBC’s Question Time last week was reserved for someone who suggested that the solution to rising energy prices in Britain was re-nationalisation.
I would not normally grace this kind of abject nonsense with a detailed rebuttal – suffice to say that anyone who sincerely believes the cost of fuel would be cheaper if the industry was once more owned by the state and paid for through general taxation is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Yet the remark was also very much indicative of the infantile and, frankly, quite harmful level of debate to which Britain’s wider “cost of living crisis” has descended."
Yes, but the point is to get into power, not do what is correct. All anybody needs to do is convince enough people.
Indeed - that is what the Unite-Labour party is all about.
"Over 80,000 people in London who tried to sign up for incapacity benefit since 2010 withdrew their claim rather than face an assessment, figures reveal today.
A further 70,000 were declared fit to work having been assessed, meaning only a third of those who began to apply were deemed eligible."
My brother went for his assessment for disability last week. He applied for the protected employment option but was turned down. He was told that his case would be reviewed again "never". Given that people with cystic fibrosis are apparently being asked to put themselves up again for review after 6 months (whether or not they have been to Lourdes, apparently) he did not take this as good news. At 50 years of age it really isn't.
Anyway did we not do these sorts of figures a couple of months ago courtesy of IDS? And didn't they turn out to be, well, not particularly accurate or informative?
For those mulling the possibility of a tory s---- in Scotland, Mr Ashcroft has a very interesting article on what his polling suggests about the potential on Conhome.
Conservatives should do very nicely in Scotland (+3 seats) if the current polling holds true to election day... Electoral Calculus has Fife North East! on a knife edge
At the risk of overestimating British voters, maybe there's a gap in the market for a party prepared to say that.
If the LibDem left has sodded off to Labour and the Tories have gone populist and BOO, maybe the Cleggites and business-minded Tories could make a normal mainstream free-market centre-right party in the space everybody else has evacuated.
I think that is basically right, and that the Tories should unapologetically go for that market. As I've said before, they have IMO been insufficiently robust on this - it's a complete hiding to nothing to try to out-snake Miliband's snake-oil pitch. It's a contest they can't win - he can always promise something even more lunatic - and it undermines the USP.
They should stop wobbbling, and go all-out for the grown-up market.
Starting with a porn filter.
You could have a setting that filters out adult politics, that would be turned on by default. That way you avoid offending immature voters by showing them uncensored depictions of actual, hard-to-solve problems.
You could have a setting that filters out adult politics, that would be turned on by default. That way you avoid offending immature voters by showing them uncensored depictions of actual, hard-to-solve problems.
We already have those filters installed. The problem is that most people don't know how to switch them off.
I am a big supporter of Ed Balls usually but it was his behaviour of sacking Sharon Shoesmith to silence the furore over baby P which left a bad taste in the mouth.
The 70/19 split on for against looks in tune with the overall findings in other polls, but I suspect the wording on the could work/can't work questions on effectiveness cld be affecting the results there - what do others think?
Really noticeable how hostile lot of UKIP supporters are to Tory position though - 39% saying they're in bed with the energy cos - almost as many as Labour.
While there may be a small degree of 'rolling the pitch' in the questions - its nothing like the scale that Panelbase got into for their SNP poll that provided a 'win' for independence - which promptly disappeared once the preparatory questions were not asked.
YouGov generally ask fair questions - and much as some sport could be had nit picking 'Conservatives' vs 'government' and so forth, I doubt that has in any real sense affected the poll outcome.
UKIP chronically rage against 'the system' - their uncharitable conclusion on the Tories motives does not surprise me at all.
At the risk of overestimating British voters, maybe there's a gap in the market for a party prepared to say that.
If the LibDem left has sodded off to Labour and the Tories have gone populist and BOO, maybe the Cleggites and business-minded Tories could make a normal mainstream free-market centre-right party in the space everybody else has evacuated.
I think that is basically right, and that the Tories should unapologetically go for that market. As I've said before, they have IMO been insufficiently robust on this - it's a complete hiding to nothing to try to out-snake Miliband's snake-oil pitch. It's a contest they can't win - he can always promise something even more lunatic - and it undermines the USP.
They should stop wobbbling, and go all-out for the grown-up market.
Richard: your answer to me was a more coherent explanation than any I've heard from any Government Minister on the topic. That's the Government's problem. If they can't even make their own case, don't blame the public for listening to the Opposition.
The other point is that lots of people are freezing their prices anyway with the energy companies direct. Given that the energy companies can freeze prices for people directly, perhaps people don't see why that cannot be done more widely and for all customers.
There may well be answers to this but they're not coming from the energy companies and not from the government.
Oops, ooops, oops. Ed Balls really should not have said the sentence which begins:
What it can't do ...
I won't repeat the whole, possibly libellous, sentence here.
Ms Shoesmith has not been shy of talking to lawyers.....
The whole affair is still puzzling - Balls strikes me as smart & calculating - sacking Shoesmith (which he must have known was an abuse of due process) is neither - simple 'playing to the gallery...'
Just as well Ed hasn't entrusted him with any high profile projects where playing to the gallery might be tempting.....
This HoC Ctte not a patch on Home Affairs or Public Accounts.....
Comments
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/0h2rcc5zsa/YG-Archive-Labour-Party-results-251013-energy-price-freeze.pdf
Really noticeable how hostile lot of UKIP supporters are to Tory position though - 39% saying they're in bed with the energy cos - almost as many as Labour.
The state already intervenes in the energy market: it intervenes through green taxes and it intervenes by guaranteeing prices for the providers of nuclear power. It intervenes via OFGEM and it intervenes by ensuring - or trying to - a properly competitive market.
The ordinary person can see that. It's not that unreasonable (even if nationalisation is almost certainly the wrong answer) for him to ask why the state does not intervene to do something for him. Neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have come up with any sort of answer to this. Ed has - however much of a crock his answer may be.
I know in the past, that has some variation, not much, but some on the poll findings.
Edit: But Labour will be chuffed with this polling, they've positioned themselves on the side of the consumers, and effectively put the Tories on the side of the evil energy companies.
If they do form the government and aren't able to deliver on this, there's going to be some unhappy bunnies.
Coming next: A price freeze on petrol prices, those wicked oil companies have the temerity to make profits! A cut in bus fares - those wicked bus operators pay dividends, the bastards! Oh, and what about supermarkets? Those crooks at Sainsbury's pay over 4% dividends - oh no, better not pick Sainsbury's.. Tesco's then.
Except, with the release of 1000 e-mails that clearly implicate Unite’s intent on dirty tricks and intimidation we now know different.
The obvious questions are why did Ed back down in such a spectacular way? Was he duped by UNITE, or is he complicit in a cover up of possible illegal activities?
How long can Ed insist keeping his inquiry report secrete?
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/unite-cleared-over-bid-to-rig-falkirk-candidate-1-3080800
How did that go again?
Shiny new buildings and amounts of money spent do not equal good educational or healthcare standards.
Still, give them credit for one thing - Labour were very good at NOT holding an enquiry to find out just what the hell was going wrong in the NHS.
If the LibDem left has sodded off to Labour and the Tories have gone populist and BOO, maybe the Cleggites and business-minded Tories could make a normal mainstream free-market centre-right party in the space everybody else has evacuated.
You are correct of course, but the polls show that this line won;t be good enough to retain power in 2015. Not nearly good enough. Stick with this and ed wins.
EdM has hit the public mood perfectly and if I was a Left-er I would also be dancing jigs. But this doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.
Ed has highlighted how globalisation works. Much is now out of our control including but not limited to the global energy markets. Immigration, bank lending, systemic risk, HS2 - all things that Britain must face as we take our part in an ever more competitive global market.
Canute-like(I know, Canute was proving a point to his advisors..), Ed has chosen to hold back energy and everyone loves him for it; of course they do. But it's not sustainable.
I'm not saying the general public are dim or not sophisticated enough to understand the various arguments but Ed is doing them no favours by such reductionism. He is in fact proving that he is the heir to Brown which may be his undoing come GE2015.
That said, god knows what the Cons can say which is both credible and which the public will want to believe.
They should stop wobbbling, and go all-out for the grown-up market.
My brother went for his assessment for disability last week. He applied for the protected employment option but was turned down. He was told that his case would be reviewed again "never". Given that people with cystic fibrosis are apparently being asked to put themselves up again for review after 6 months (whether or not they have been to Lourdes, apparently) he did not take this as good news. At 50 years of age it really isn't.
Anyway did we not do these sorts of figures a couple of months ago courtesy of IDS? And didn't they turn out to be, well, not particularly accurate or informative?
http://news.sky.com/story/1160859/baby-p-ed-balls-slams-shoesmiths-payout
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14057
Surely not.
What it can't do ...
I won't repeat the whole, possibly libellous, sentence here.
I don’t often feel sympathy for pirates - but this seems particularly harsh imho…!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478838/Britney-Spears-songs-used-scare-Western-culture-hating-pirates-Somalia.html
britishgas.co.uk/blog/articles/ian-peters-discusses-todays-price-announcement
Square that circle Dave/Ed....
YouGov generally ask fair questions - and much as some sport could be had nit picking 'Conservatives' vs 'government' and so forth, I doubt that has in any real sense affected the poll outcome.
UKIP chronically rage against 'the system' - their uncharitable conclusion on the Tories motives does not surprise me at all.
The other point is that lots of people are freezing their prices anyway with the energy companies direct. Given that the energy companies can freeze prices for people directly, perhaps people don't see why that cannot be done more widely and for all customers.
There may well be answers to this but they're not coming from the energy companies and not from the government.
The whole affair is still puzzling - Balls strikes me as smart & calculating - sacking Shoesmith (which he must have known was an abuse of due process) is neither - simple 'playing to the gallery...'
Just as well Ed hasn't entrusted him with any high profile projects where playing to the gallery might be tempting.....
This HoC Ctte not a patch on Home Affairs or Public Accounts.....
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/willheaven/100243467/labour-sends-overdrawn-email-to-supporters-giving-them-a-nasty-shock/
On the subject of bad taste in the mouth, and Ed Balls, is TSE around to make a comment on Yvette?
http://jobs.theguardian.com/job/4733553/business-editor/
I wonder if they advertised in the FT too - surely better targeted for a 'Business Editor'?