What’s Dave going to do about the men?
November 15th, 2006
-
What’s the truth behind the gender gap reports?
Over the past couple of weeks there’s been a lot of focus on the big gender gap that is said to have developed in support for the two main parties. This was sparked off by the November Populus Poll in the Times when this was given splash treatment and has been followed up a number of columnists.
One of the problems with the Times report was that it was based on just one survey from a pollster that, as Anthony Wells reports in an excellent analysis on UK Polling Report, had shown some very big swings on the gender split. The same is also the case with ICM.
To get a much wider spread of data and to look at this over a longer term Anthony has taken every single published YouGov over the past two years and has produced the chart above. As he points out in his article the internet pollster tends to have bigger sample sizes than other firms which iare by the fact that it does not cut back its voting intention number by whether or not respondents are likely to vote.
Clearly there might be something about YoUGov’s methodology that produces this very distinct gender difference but it is hard to see what that could be given that its overall numbers have not been out of line with the other main firms. The trend from the chart is very clear.
As Anthony concludes “The bottom line, therefore, is that the gender gap in one single Populus poll probably doesn’t signify much at all - but looking at the longer term picture women voters do seem to have swung more heavily to the Conservatives than male voters have.”
Judging by the latest position of the chart the Tories have made almost no progress amongst men since November 2004 which should be worrying for the party.
MessageSpace Advertising
Isn’t the embarrassing truth that women find Cameron attractive and the sort of person they would be happy to take home and show their parents and that is why they seem more likely to vote for him? The same factor that has served Blair well though interestingly I think that since the war women - who were initially his biggest fans - have now become most disillusioned with TB?
Admittedly, Cameron has also tailored his policies to play up to the female vote by giving himself a soft edge with hug-a-hoodie, lone parents and the environment.
Even though I am absolutely not a Cameron form in any shape or form I thought his Queen’s Speech performance on Sky was pretty strong - all the stuff about polices on terror, crime, NHS we’ve heard it all before must resonate…it plays on the fact that any administration struggles for impetus and to appear fresh after this long in power…
Bally Eric and Roger (on the last thread) disagree with you about Camerons performance this afternoon.
2. Partisan Labour posters not impressed by Cameron. Hold the front page.
Wow. Blair tearing Cameron a new one on Nuclear power.
PS. Re Labour artisan comment, as a Labour partisan… I didn’t think Cameron was that bad actually. Some good jokes, but fundamentally lighweight- he seemed to spend most of his time talking about Gordon Brown and how horrible he was.
When he sat down I thought Blair really ripped into him.
Right now I’d say this is the first really successful anti=Cameron broadside, why becasue it’s a debate on policy and cameron looks soft, not because he made a bad speech or his jokes fell flat.
I think it is fair to say that Blair got the better of Cameron today. However, that does not necessarily mean that Blair is right.
His Queen’s speech programme has been described as legislative diarhoea. The emphasis on crime and security is clear but is the Home Office ready for this new legislation and do our police and security forces have the capability or time or resources to carry out what this new legislation will require. The Home Office was apparently not “fit for purpose” not so long ago. now it is ready for even more of a shake up.
Btw notice the tactic by Cameron to be very rude to Brown, i think that he is trying to get Brown to snap in anger at him and do something stupid. Also notice that Labour’s party political broadcast tonight is reverting to the facts and figures argument - x000 police, y0000 nurses, minimum wage etc.
I agree with Brit Spin. There was another occasion when Blair made Cameron look ridiculous -perhaps the budget but I can’t remember. The same technique. Reading lists of contradictory statements. It was the time Cameron claimed to be a ‘liberal Conservative’ and it was Blair at his best. To-day wasn’t bad though!
Bazz always eulogizes about Cameron and adds the rider that he’s no fan! I cant imagine his drooling if he was!
6.”Btw notice the tactic by Cameron to be very rude to Brown, i think that he is trying to get Brown to snap in anger at him and do something stupid.”
yes, but he sometimes shows anger too…infact when he do his “angry” face, it looks like he’s taking part into a “let’s a do a Clare Short impression” contest.
Osborne is better in doing it and probably more successfully because GO is more irritating (the voice above everything) per se.
Hug them, obviously.
Dave has a plan to tour Premiership football stadiums to do some male bonding……
yes cameron flopped and flopped big time - you only have to observe at the faces on the tories behing to realise that they realise that they are being lead by a dud and a light weight - they were many grim and ashen expression on tory feces which should give you an idead of the deepth and horror of their realisation.
in some ways though i feel a great amount of sympathy for cameron - it must be horrible facing up to a prime minister who has blessed democracey to many nations throughout the world and has made our streets safe and our land prosperous and free!!!!!!
brian dead - hilarious.
9 - Indeed – he could fondly reminisce about watching Gazza score the winner against Scotland at Euro ’98.
10. I realise you’re a comedy acount, but I think your description of the Tory Backbench is rather harsh. Not all of them are tory Faeces, some are quite pleasant.
Another thought.. If Brown really does hit Cameron with a honking great fist as Blair promised, will that mean Cameron will then have to love and hug Gordon?
1. Women don’t fancy Cameron, they like him - there’s a difference. He’s the Dale Winton of politics and has the same un-threatening features that make women like (but not fancy) Winton. But these same characteristics irritate men big time.
12- I think it was 1996…and you lost it, get over it!
14. yes, and then he’ll ask him to enter a civil partnership (in Bromley preferably with the whole council group present at the ceremony)
14 – I doubt DC will worry about anything that has the words ‘Blair’, ‘Brown’ and ‘promised’ in it. Not much chance of it happening on past form.
Good to see you again Max! If you’d stayed away any longer someone would have accused you of being ‘the spoof Eleanor’!
14. I thought Prescott delivered all the punches?
8. yes andrea, Cameron can look a bit touchy and the clare short - bulldog chewing a wasp look is pretty close to it. I think Brown is too clever to be openly riled by this though but it cheers up the backbenchers who British spin has described as Faeces! nice.
16 – No chance – it was Uri Gellar’s fault. He said he got the ball to move just before Gary McAllister hit his penalty. We wuz robbed!!!!!!!!
“the same un-threatening features that make women like (but not fancy) Winton. But these same characteristics irritate men big time”.
Like a piglets bum?
18 - Afternoon Roger – been horribly busy and had a very heavy weekend (although I did sample a new gastronomic delight – a deep fried mutton pie in a buttered roll with chips – bet you can’t get that in Italy Andrea!) so haven’t been posting. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one intrigued by the true identity of Eleanor!
20. Jimbo Jones, I wouldn’t rule out Gordon throwing something at Boy George though.
A good physical fight…like the ones in Asian Parliaments
Thank you Roger laughed out loud at that. Not having the best of days - being made “redundant” - no probs with that but wont pay me my 12 months notice - just carry on working for 12 months - any ideas, have already thought about his brake pipes.
15. Snowflake You are back where have you been. I have missed your postings telling me what I think. I am pleased to find out that I do not like Cameron cos he looks like Winton. wondered why i wasnt sure about him and now thankfully i know!
Max, think you should have had Flora on the roll instead of butter.
25.” being made “redundant” - ”
24. yes i just found this gem http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnR-BAhA2WE beware it probably is certificate 15 for pacifists. somewhat challenges the argument that women are less confrontational than men in politics.
25 - Sorry to hear that Icarus…
but hey, at least you have 12months of what should be work time to idle away on here instead. 
26. There’s nothing wrong with liking Dale Winton/Cameron, jimbo. Don’t be shy!
Thanks Andrea. No ‘cos then I wouldn’t get the pay in lieu of notice and - I want him to pay out even more than I want the cash. Probably try and work on my own helping people import textiles from China and Turkey.
Political betters should always bear in mind how the wonderful Commons performances of William Hague led to the fall of Tony Blair and the destruction of New Labour in the subsequent general election.
29. This one is more shocking:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beI0R8_zREk
32. Icarus, I wish you luck!
25. I would have suggested a fire but if he’s in textiles he’s probably thought of that himself!
What to do with your partner? Just remember the old Spanish saying ‘If you sit by the river long enough the body of your enemy will come floating by’
31. you are right i fancy them both. Blair too but Brown is such a sulky old goose.
34. absolutely mad, i wonder whether a good ruck would help our lot let off some steam. maybe they just needed a hug or a bit more love?
So can aynone give an objective account of DC’s and Blair’s relative performances for an absentee (hides behind sofa
)
36. “i wonder whether a good ruck would help our lot let off some steam”
They should go for Minuster vs Shadow fights:
Tony vs Dave vs Ming
Gordon vs Boy George vs Cable
Reid vs Davis vs Clegg
Beckett vs Hague vs Bruce
Browne vs Fox vs Harvey
Straw vs May vs Heath
Darling vs Dinky vs Davey
Nanny Patty vs Lansley vs Webb
Johnson vs 2 Brains vs Teather
and so on
Pick your winners…I wouldn’t underestimate Theresa May’s shoes as an attack weapon…I suppose Gordon can win literally throwing all his weight over the other 2….Reid and Davis is too close to call…Beckett always survives somehow
38. That has some potential as a Celebrity Death Match style send up.
I’d look forward to a Mummy Returns contest between Thatcher and Blair. 
37. I think Teather is the scariest prospect, despite her diminutive stature, there lies a resolve behind those beady eyes that terrifies me. I would put good money on her winning the all against all bout.
38. Thatcher would handbag him. he wouldn’t stand a chance.
37 John O. I always think it’s telling to watch and listen to the rows just behind the leader. Both sides not genuinely enthusiastic. IMO Cameron missed the mark today. Even his jokes, normally decent and well timed seem to lack conviction. Similarly Blair seemed off the pace but with enough ammo to see Cameron off today. So not the best from either but a win for Blair on points.
Didn’t see Ming, perhaps someone else might assess his performance.
You need to be careful in distinguishing the Conservative lead from the Conservative vote share here. We’ve not conducted anything like the thorough analysis that Anthony Wells produced over at UK Polling Report, but our impression from the ICM and Populus polls was that when there was a Tory lead among women, this was not in fact because Cameron was doing any better among women than among men.
Instead, it was because Labour was doing a lot worse - but the “missing” women weren’t going over to Cameron, they were going in to the “Don’t Know” column plus a few to the Lib Dems and Greens. More here…
http://thedaily.wordpress.com/2006/11/14/the-gender-gap/
37 JohnO. Cameron was brilliant! Blair sounded tired and weary was obviously overwhelmed by the younger more handsome man.
I would go into more detail but Matron says it’s time for supper.
Jimbo Jones the Dour One lost it with George recently, throwing his handful of papers at George.
I think TDO will lose it big time with the right prodding. Perhaps at his first PMQ’ s George will stand in for his boss and William Hague will be away. TDO is very, very sensitive about his rank and position, and its a button that is easy to press.
41. I saw Ming….not bad, not good. Normal.
He even made a joke IIRC.
39/40. Yes, with the handbag, Maggie wins!
41 - Jack, Thanks. That’s also my ‘benchmark’ for PMQs…people know when their man is on a roll (cue for double entendres ;)) and when the animal noises are authentically full-throated or merely for form
43 -
I hope the strait-jacket is made of velvet!
44.”Perhaps at his first PMQ’ s George will stand in for his boss and William Hague will be away”
so versus Hain or Hazel or Alan or Jon or Harriet or whatever will end up as Deputy PM.
Btw, Boy George was pretty awful on Sky News this afternoon commenting the Queen’s Speech. Bolton continued to ask him about nuclear power and he continued to try not to avoid answering. They went on for around 5 minutes in that way. Then a Plaid guy came in.
re 42. I would prefer the serious analysis from Anthony Wells to your “impression”. I agree that we need to distinguish the Conservative lead from the Conservative vote share and I agree that it is the last figure that matters. But just check out the table here of every single poll - http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/voting-intention/
and look at autumn 2005 compared with the same period in 2006.
ICM up an average of 5%
Populus up an average of 4%
YouGov up an average of 4%
Dave has done the job. All news at 6pm carried one of his sound bites.
“Dave has done the job. All news at 6pm carried one of his sound bites”
Phew! Thank god for that.
Andrea It doesn’t work quite like that. Usually its the government side that is ‘absent’ and so the subs stand in. But if its the opposition leader who is away, then the leader can nominate anyone to stand in for him, and has done so in the past.
Its then up to the PM to decide whether to do the PMQ as a result. If it were the first PMQ of a new PM and the opposition leader and his normal deputy were ill then…… Brown would look silly not taking his very first PMQ.
Not a likely scenario I know, but fun none the less.
Also re 42. A lot of the point you are making is based on the full dataset from Populus which is highly confusing. For some questions the firm splits the sample into two. The discrepancy that you quote is based on a misunderstanding of how the pollster then extrapolates a half sample figure into a full one.
I think that the Populus boss Andrew Cooper gave a detailed response some months ago here on how this is done.
50: Yes good spin for Dave on the news, who looked calm and reasonable. Blair just appeared crazed and unpleasant, ranting about punching David Cameron and a Labour fourth term.
52. Blue2Win, ok…I’ve never reflected about it, because I’ve never seen it…when was the last time that the PM didn’t face the leader of the opposition but someone else?
55 - Andrea, Could be wrong about this but didn’t William Hague face Blair when DC took paternity leave?
54 Camerlot. Until Nick Robinson said Cameron was “devasted” by Blair’s response.
In any case this is just the warm up for next years main bout Brown V Cameron ….. with Andrea and John O in their speedos holding up the round numbers for the baying PBers beyond !!
56. John, yes, you’re correct.
My memory is already fading fast
56/58. I think I really missed that PMQ’s…I can’t recall it..infact looking at the pb.com thread of that day, I found a comment by me saying I didn’t see it!
So am I pardoned?!
58. I might be wrong (and disagreeing with Andrea is obviously a dangerous thing to do), but I thought Hague faced Prescott and produced one of the most entertaining, though not very enlightening, PMQs. Or was that a different time?
Didn’t see the debate as I was at work, but I’d agree that from the clips Cameron came over better. Presumably it wasn’t quite that good, hence Nick Robinson’s comment.
60. David, I recall a Hague/Prezza PMQs which was amusing (the Prezza being Punch and Hague being Judy joke)
But looking at the Hansard of Feb 15, it seems that Blair faced Hague
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060215/debindx/60215-x.htm
The entertaining Prescott/Hague PMQs was on March 29
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060329/debindx/60329-x.htm
Just watched the news, ITN more interested in the Lord’s mobile phone going off than anything political.
Thw whole thing seemed dull and boring, lots of blah, blah which we’ve heard before and we know is never passed or implemented. What was Blair on about with that macho punching stuff? Labour wionder why theyre losing the women’s votem that sort of macho crap just shows why.
Wasn’t even the first item on the news, it just all seems so tired and pointless.
that is it exactly, even when cameron is a bit angry he comes across as still ok on the tele, whereas blair nowadays comes across as a complete and utter f…ing lunatic. why does blair not realise that his aggressive performances in debates and at pmqs makes him look like a c..k and nobody believes a word he says.
61 Andrea. A bit slow responding to David - 9 minutes !!
61. I had a feeling you’d be right.
On the tenuous link of punch/ing, I thought that Blair’s description today of any part of Brown as ‘clunking’ was not the highest of praise he could have offered.
63 And with that dispassionate overview “herb” rejoices “Vote Labour”.
One day Cameron will be up against a heavyweight and there will be a big fist within his reach. Oh what praise ITN News poured on bully-boy Blair for saying that. How boring can politics get? No more boring than that. No wonder why people disengage with politics.
There’s murdering thugs and peadophiles being set free every day and reoffending, violent people entering the country with no checks, violent crime and drugs out of control and all Blair can do is act like a school bully-boy and pass more and more laws, rather than actually seeing that anything gets better.
64. yes, Jack, you’re totally right. I’m not in a great form tonight (I also got the Deputy PM in PMQs rules wrong) I probably studied too much today.
57: Sorry Jack, didn’t see that - switched over to Sudo-Q when Robinson’s knowing mug appeared on the box.
49 - I too would prefer a full analysis which is why I’ve asked Anthony about it over on UK Polling Report. However, I think there might be a slight misunderstanding here - I’m not talking about the overall voting intention, I’m just talking about the gap between male and female VI.
Obviously, the Tory vote share overall is up, anyone who follows opinion polling trends surely accepts that. But has it risen more amongst women than men - isn’t that the question we’re looking at?
It’s not one that I claim to answer, btw, simply one that I don’t think has yet been addressed. If Anthony does so then it’ll be very interesting.
68 Andrea. You’ve probably not had your fix of “Poirot” to re-energize those little grey calls !
Jack W (Captain Hastings look-alike)
A Matlock (Miss Lemon look-alike)
62.”What was Blair on about with that macho punching stuff? Labour wionder why theyre losing the women’s votem that sort of macho crap just shows why.”
It’s often said that women are turned off by macho politics and punch and judy stuffs and they prefer a soft style and so on.
So some argued that having a female leader or deputy leader in case of Labour (or female MPs in general) can help to get women attentions back.
Assuming that the first assumption is right, I think that a “a female prominent figure will attract woment” thought is misleading, because not all women politicians have that type of style that is perceived as currently appealing to women.
Infact I think many pre 1997 female MPs aren’t afraid of macho politics and punch and judy and confrontational stuffs…the likes of Short, Mowlam, Hodge, Glenda on Labour side or Widdy, the same Maggie, Theresa Gorman the Con side aren’t exactly the kind of MPs who use a cuddly style
Nick Robinson seems to be on an ‘equalisation’ campaign. Perhaps he thinks it will ensure access to the Scottish governor when he is put in office without a vote.
Whatever it is, the comment can have no foundation in any factual sense as the debate was continuing as NR went on camera. Where is the beef NR? Did Dave blub? Did he need support out of the chamber? How do you know it was devastating?
The best of creative journalism on the BBC?
71. Jack…A stands for Alice? Arlette? Arlena?
69 Camerlot. Cameron didn’t get the nod on ITV news either ! …. and the networks seem to rate Blair’s performance more than I do !! ….. what do they know ??? … they didn’t see Lloyd George or Churchill in action.
74 Andrea. I wasn’t aware that young Matlock was moonlighting as a builder in Bedford yesterday !!
Channel 4 leading by saying that Blair will back Brown in a coronation.
Heard a bit more about the actual political ideas and it’s all terrorism and fear. More macho stuff, exactly why liberals cannot vote labour again. Just who are they trying to appeal to now? It sounds like the old tory right to me. They’d be the only ones happy with a speech like that.
(Time passes, John Snow waffles and we get to another bit)
Sorry folks, just listening and watching Blair and I think I want to punch him, it must be infectious. God, what an arrogant display he gave.
Hold on Men have always preferred Labour only the margin is in question. If all DC is doing is restoring the staus quo ante 1997 with the Tories enjoying the lion’s share iof the women vote then he is doing very well indeed. Perhaps the question should be not so much what DC will do about men but how will he get even more women to vote for him. It is women who made all but one Tory electoral success in the 20th Century. That was Blair’s genius at least temporarily to stop all that. If Brown can’t, then he will be up against it.
77 - I’ve wanted to punch Blair for 12 years - and I’m virtually a complete pacifist for goodness sake!
On the gender gap thing, I thought women changed there minds and moved before men. As in they switched to Tony first and now are switching back.
79 - I was quite surprise at the visceral response he gave me just then, I suppose it just goes to show that, the more you talk in terms of violence, the more violent a response you may get. Which pretty much explains why all this pathetic testosterone filled bellowing we’re getting from Blair/Brown/Reid is going to (already is) end in tears.
O/T but I was told that in the early 80’s Blunkett walked out of a play in a Sheffield Theatre because of the nudity. Anyone able to verify this? It’s too good a factoid not to use if so.
77. Have not seen the news but GB price has tightened in the last hour or so on Betfair from 1.25 to 1.22. Only £2 available at 1.22 then its 1.20.
77: ‘Channel 4 leading by saying that Blair will back Brown in a coronation.’
But then they had the blustering Hutton on, who tried to pour cold water over it.
’surprised’ not ’surprise’, I blame my eyesight……
Anyone watching that gladitorial combat today, would have to give it to Blair, Cameron’s face certainly did. What it also showed, was what a Herculean task it will be for the Tories, to win the next GE. Many of the Tory posters, must be feeling a little less certain of Cameron this evening, than they were yesterday.Some of the anti-Blair/Brown comments, smack a little of,’whistling in the dark’
85 - Missing the point, as Blair/Brown become more authoritarian then it becomes more likely that we’ll have a government next who will be much more liberal. Let them go even loopier, foaming at the mouth, it just makes the job easier.
What sort of socialist could support this labour party anyhow?
86. i disagree. Blair mentioned something about “prosperity and security” I have a feeling that that will be a key phrase over next few years for Labour. and i think a lot of people will buy it.
Men tend on average (naturally with countless exceptions) to be more into the details of daily politics, and more women tend to say ‘don’t know’ between elections, though there’s little turnout difference when the election actually comes. Arguably this makes male voting intention a better guide to their actual votes at this stage of a Parliament. But I think the main reason for the gap is the one identified by snowflake - the soft-focus stroking stuff, which DC does a lot of, does appeal to rather more women than men.
I think Cameron shoots himself in the foot by being consistently nasty about Brown, though. It just doesn’t work to say in effect ‘I’m a nice chap, I don’t do negative politics, and I hate that b******** Chancellor’. The Tory strategy to bash Brown at every opportunity is too transparent.
Blair’s hand seemed to be pointing to Brown as he spoke about the heavyweight taking on the light weight
‘Security’, a nice euphemism there. Fear of ‘the other’, fear of change, fear of the future. That’s all that’s left in the armoury and it smells rancid. Sure, some people are easily frightened and desperate but the use of fear is the last stage in a breakdown between government and governed.
As for prosperity that’s an easy one to attack the government over, the ammunition just keeps coming.
86 Don’t confuse socialism with Labourism, there’s about as much socialism in the Labour Party as Conservatism in the Conservative Party. Of course you could accept Herbert Morrison’s point of view, when asked, ‘What is socialism?’ he replied, ‘Its what the Labour Party does’ Isn’t his grandson, something to do with NuLabour?
88. “I think Cameron shoots himself in the foot by being consistently nasty about Brown, though”
Yes, especially as Brown never makes personal attacks. His responses are always policy heavy, facts, figures, the record of the previous tory administration and so on, but never personal attacks.
89. You forget that Labour is very tribal and don’t like any of our own being attacked. Blair is as tribal as the rest (remember how he stuck with Labour during the dark 80’s) - the Tory fantasy that Blair wanted Cameron to suceed him was just that, a fantasy.
“Brown never makes personal attacks”
snigger…….
RE 77, UKPaul, Balir has made my fists itch for years.
ukpaul at 81: I dunno, you always sound pretty angry to me with anything to do with Labour - it doesn’t need TB to wind you up. I don’t agree with your characterisation, of course, and it seems to me that socialists at the moment have no viable alternative option: the Tories are not a serious choice for a socialist, and the LibDems seem to be steadily marching back from the left into the centre ground.
Your position seems more libertarian than socialist, and I agree the LibDems are more libertarian. Their blind spot and the reason they’ve not made a real breakthrough on the left despite Iraq is the lack of real interest in poverty issues. I see their MPs all the time and like many of them very well, but they are by and large simply not there when things like child poverty or low pay are being debated. Even for overseas development debates they are thin on the ground (though better than the Tories, who with a few notable exceptions like John Bercow go MIA altogether).
93. You’re a bit upset at how the exchange in parliament turned out arn’t you? Proof, methinks, that it was a win for Labour.
95. “they are by and large simply not there when things like child poverty or low pay are being debated”
I find this hard to believe. Both Orange Book I and II (supposedly of the ‘not socialist’ factions) constantly refer to problems with income and asset inequality and specifically child poverty. They even praise Sure Start, or at least its intentions. I also find it hard to believe that the party of internationalism go missing when overseas development comes to the fore.
95 - Nick, I never have been a violent man in any sense, angry, yes but never with physical intent, it’s rare that I actually feel roused in that way but I saw Blair’s grandstanding and body language as mirroring those you often see who use the backup of their mates to show their power, the sneering and the taunting. I found it distasteful and unworthy of a PM.
I am most definitely libertarian myself (tempered very much as I know it’s far too utopian) although I used to think that socialism was the answer.
Is the lib dem lack of passion over the issues you cite a reflection of a more laissez faire attitude? I don’t think it’s a case of not caring, possibly a difference in terms of the means to an end.
RE 88, Nick Palmer, do your voters know your sexist
on today I am not sure anyone in the real world was paying attention much more than when there was PMQs on.
In terms of the baiting of Brown, I think it is a bit like throwing a reducer tackle early on in a football match. not pretty but can make a difference.
Finally, its still all to play for but I am a little concerned at the £10′000 per year communications expenses that Labour MPS voted for themselves to help fortify their incumbency. £10′000 a year is a lot of leaflets on taxpayers money and well it could make a fair difference by 2010.
96 - Dream on, dream on. You’ve lost the liberal vote with all this sound and fury and you don’t seem to care. How you, as a woman, can laud that sort of post-pub stuff I don’t know.
Maybe you’ve just written off places like Withington and Cambridge for next time but can you really afford to do so?
As for Brown, he seems perfectly capable of making perosnal attacks on his own side.
According to the Torygraph,Downing Street has instructed lawyers to challenge any ‘cash for honours’ prosecution on the basis that ministers (meaning Blair) believe it has been compromised by unauthorised leaks. This is the same defence that is currently being used by Abu Hamza to overturn his conviction.
Blair must certainly be feeling the heat,I guess he realises that his friend the Attorney General may not be able to get him off the hook
96 - By the way, I didn’t see the exchange (far too busy teaching), only a couple of seconds worth on the news which made no impact either way.
I refer solely to the content, you know, *policy*, the sort of thing that we’re supposed to concentrate on……
95 Nick P. You rarely talk horse shit but that must be the Red Rum of gee gee doings !
If attendance in debates were the mark of concern then Labour MPs would have had little concern for foreign or defence matters for 40 years or more. Further your attempt to disguise these issues in terms of left or right is woeful
The reasons liberals like myself have fallen out of love with Blair and Labour is his and the parties insistance that the big brother state and its apparatus must take precedence over the hard won and cherished liberties of the individual. Labour has become the party of fear not hope, the party of authoritarianism and not liberty and finally and shamefully the party of illegal war and not reason !!
101. “How you, as a woman, can laud that sort of post-pub stuff I don’t know.”
LOL. You have an old-fashioned genteel drawing-room vision of women! Are Lib Dem women like that then?
I didn’t see sound and fury. I saw the PM defend one of his colleagues from a nasty attack - and good on him for doing it.
“As for Brown, he seems perfectly capable of making perosnal attacks on his own side.”
Such as? Brown has had policy differences with his colleagues, eg on the euro, and one of the papers today said that he’d not been convinced about introducing tuition fees and argued with Charles Clarke about it. This is normal in a healthy cabinet. It’s better than being like Alan Johnson and caving on every single difficult issue.
But personal attacks? None that anyone knows of. (Though you are clearly desperate to believe otherwise)
96: Aye, my beloved Snowflake, our Blair smacked that little Cameron chap all over the ring today till blood gushed from a gaping head wound and his ribs crumpled inwards. Thrilling stuff, was it not! Can hardly wait for round two when the muscular Brown lands his sickening blows on opponents heads, sending shards of mangled Tory skull all over the place. If Cameron’s bruised and nauseated after this afternoon’s thumping, wait till Brown steps up and gives the pipsqueak the absolute thrashing of his life.
:)
Julian and Jack: don’t take my word for it if you like: turn on the Parliament Channel for a debate on these issues that isn’t high profile and you’ll see what I mean. It’s not unusual to see 15-25 Labour MPs wanting to speak, plus the Tory and LibDem front-benchers and 1-2 backbenchers. Then try a debate on agriculture and you’ll see *lots* more Tories and LibDems. Both Opposition parties pay lip-service to these issues and many of the LD members are very keen, but their MPs’ heart isn’t in it. Similarly, my LD and Tory opponents in 2005 failed to mention overseas development or fair trade with a single word in their election addresses. The LD candidate, challenged on this, said he was extremely committed, but pressure of space had prevented it - in other words, other things mattered more.
105 - My workplace is nearly 100% female so I get used to working in a feminine environment, even with changes in society I can’t imagine that women approach men in the belligerence and violence stakes.
The thought that Brown has never made any personal attacks on others seems more than a little naive, can you imagine any politician not attacking their colleagues over something or other? Maybe someone can refer to one of the Brown biographies for information that might be in the public domain.
105 - My workplace is nearly 100% female so I get used to working in a feminine environment, even with changes in society I can’t imagine that women approach men in the belligerence and violence stakes.
The thought that Brown has never made any personal attacks on others seems more than a little naive, can you imagine any politician not attacking their colleagues over something or other? Maybe someone can refer to one of the Brown biographies for information that might be in the public domain.
Hmm O/T but back to Teather I still think she’ll have a better shout at Brent Central than many think, but why turn down the walk in the park H&K would have been. Still seems a trifle odd. Do we know who’s retiring yet.
re 104. Bravo Jack “The reasons liberals like myself have fallen out of love with Blair and Labour is his and the parties insistence that the big brother state and its apparatus must take precedence over the hard won and cherished liberties of the individual. Labour has become the party of fear not hope, the party of authoritarianism and not liberty and finally and shamefully the party of illegal war and not reason !!
Very well said. You ought to come on PBC more often.
Whoops, double post. The system usually stops that doesn’t it?
106:- if only that were true, but those who saw treasury questions a couple of weeks ago where brown totally lost it, was stopped by the speaker in mid flow and threw a load of papers at the shadow chancellor in fury will see that when he becomes prime minister gordon brown will self-destruct like the starship enterprise at pmqs.
108. ukpaul - the only person feeling violent and beligerant is you! All that happened in parliament was that Blair defended his colleague from a nasty attack. If one of your colleagues was being attacked, would you not defend him? I suppose not - Lib Dems are too genteel to be bothered with teh solidarity thing.
As for Gordon Brown, he’s a policy wonk - all his arguments are about policy. Even David Blunkett in his diaries confirms this.
111. Haha, hear hear!
107. Election lit naturally reflects what the voters in that area are primarily focussed on and (arguably sadly) that tends to be domestic and local issues. I cannot remember reading any election lit that mentioned overseas aid - a survey of which candidates mention it the most would be interesting. I suspect it would be those standing in areas where it is of unusually high concern.
107 Nick P. It may have escaped your notice but Labour enjoy a 6/1 advantage over the Lib Dems. Additionally it wouldn’t be too difficult to find Labour MP who didn’t mention overseas development in their election address. Are they less committed than you?? Did you mention AIDS in yours address …. it’s a easy game to play and not worthy of you.
I’m mighty disappointed by the way NuLabour has turned out, saddened as much as angered. So much potential and so much time and effort wasted on spin, half baked projects and a descent into the politics of alarm and panic.
Perhaps Brown will turn the ship(wreck) round. We wait to see.
111 Mike S. I’ve piles more like that Mike.
113 - Yes but as Snowflake will tell you the papers were thrown in a way that could only possibly be construed as representing a grown up, high level dispute over economic policy.
It certainly wasn’t a petutlent, bad tempered fit of pique!
Old, fat,crumpled,tired, dismayed, disgruntled, grey, grim, unhappy, worried. The Labour front bench during Cameron’s speech.
JackW, Don’t hold back, say what you really mean!
Re 118, Amx
“the only person feeling violent and beligerant is you”
“Beligerant”?
In any case, the two words refer to physical fights, that’s not something I’ve ever done. I’m pretty pacifistic (although only on a personal level as I see the need for some fighting force to counter those who are not similarly inclined).
Maybe you need to be reminded that Blair was talking about *boxing* and, after all, he was the one that took us into a foolish war. The belligerence and violence is pretty easy to find in the leader of your party I should say.
119 - Which one was which?
re 117. sorry to hear that you have piles
122. I can guess at least five
119 I just saw the clip on the news, but Cameron fluffed his timing. Turning around to look at his own benches he seemed rather desperate.
123 Mike S. Perhaps we’re related !
121. I think the issue is that you hate Blair and no matter what he does, you’ll find fault.
As for the war - yes that was a mistake. I was against the war too - but the difference between us is that I’ve calmed down and I can see how hard it can be to call these things. The previous government took the opposite approach on Srebenica, didn’t intervene, and got slammed for that. It’s only Lib Dems who live in a pious holier-than-thou world where no mistakes are ever made - and to make sure they never have to find out, they’ve ensured that they’ve been out of government for 90 odd years!
You must work very hard at being angry though. It’s hard to maintain that level of bile for years on end. Do you chant anti-Blair slogans to yourself before you go to sleep?
127 “It’s only Lib Dems who live in a pious holier-than-thou world where no mistakes are ever made - and to make sure they never have to find out, they’ve ensured that they’ve been out of government for 90 odd years!”
61 years.
Further pedantry from a non-pseudonym: the Lib DEMS have never been in government.
127: ‘…a pious holier-than-thou world where no mistakes are ever made.’
That’s Britain since 1997 isn’t it?
“the difference between us is that I’ve calmed down ”
Which is more than can be said for Iraq itself.
Your government has managed to be diametrically opposed to what I believe on a considerable number of issues, it’s amazing how it’s happened. If I was feeling more Kafkaesque i might take it personally. My odd vent on here is nothing compared to the way that those who have really suffered, feel and speak in any case. It’s clearly a good job you have insulated yourself from them anyway.
As for being anti-Blair, who isn’t?
And on the agreement front I’m very happy with the idea of road tolls (that was in the speech wasn’t it?)
122,
Ukpaul, I`m sure you are a visceral conservative at heart,
As you sure no balance on all things Labour,even without seeing the Blair v Cameron over the distpach box.
131 ukpaul - I’m not.
I used to think he was a good Prime Minister. I now think he is a good Prime Minister who made a bad mistake on Iraq.
You might not agree with it but I think it’s a balanced and reasonable view.
129 Julian H. Further pedantry from a Scottish centenarian: The Lib Dems are in government in Scotland.
131. Blair is responsible for the decision to take Britain into Iraq, but he’s not entirely responsible for how it turned out. Our troops were operating under American command, and strategy was also American, and Britain did not have a veto over any strategic decision. This was how Gilf war I and Kosovo were fought too. In future we might have to review this.
I think he made an honest mistake, he got trapped by Bush itno giving an OK in Sept 2002, when what he should have done was say that he was bound to discuss it with the cabinet first and used cabinet to wriggle out.
Also, if Iraq had turned out OK, we’d probably be in Darfur today, relieving all those people from being killed. One of the consequences of being slammed so for Iraq is that no one will intervene in any other situation because there is such public hostility to it. Then there will be some catastrophe (bigger than Darfur), and the pendulum will swing and the same armchair pundits will slam the govt of the day for not intervening. And I expect the Lib Dems will lead the charge.
133 - I’m interested as to how you think you know someone better than they do. Is this something to do with ID cards and DNA databases?
Conservatives want no change, I hardly think that describes me as I want wholesale change in a number of areas. Social conservatives are the total opposite to any view that I hold as well. As a social and economic liberal I’m just perplexed by your view, unless you think that lib dems are really soft labour supporters or something (granted thst a few on here probably are though).
136 - The British blame the Americans and the Americans blame the Iraqis, where does this all stop?
135. Argh! Indeed. Well this ultra-liberal Angle is going to finally leave the office after an over-worked day that has appalled a certain Milanese leftie (who has threatened to “tell the Unions”); so the pedantry from this side will stop here.
Goodnight all…
134
I agree.
134 - ’twas a jest PtP. In actual fact there are probably quite a few Blairites who will scatter to the winds once he goes. The man comands attention, whatever you think of his pronouncements and record.
Just slightly OT*, I know Labour party people post here. I am fed up wit getting unsolicited emails I have not asked for, nor will I unsubscribe from a mailing list I have not asked to be on.
I will get Labours servers reported as sending spam.
More details on my blog.
* Well, completely OT in fact.
RE 138, UKPaul, Ken Adelman blames us. No really see:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/11/mess-in-iraq-its-all-our-fault-offciail.html
Just wish I had spell checked the title before saving the document.
Isn’t it amazing? Blair embarks on an illegal war and its “an honest mistake”. Margaret Thatcher consigned to hell fire for eternity (even before she was PM)for scrapping free school milk.
136 Snowflake
I disagree with your second paragraph. His decision was entirely consistent with the Atlanticist policy he has pursued throughout his period in Office. I don’t buy the ‘lap-dog’ thesis at all.
I have argued this point here in the past but it falls largely on deaf ears. I do not think it is because it is not a valid point. I believe it is because those who opposed the war at the time and those who oppose it now are unable to accept the almost inevitable implication of that opposition.
Europe offered an alternative before we engaged in the war. Blair rebuffed it. A policy reversal now would inevitably mean allying more closely with Europe. However, Europe is not popular in this country - with the left or the right.
I have every sympathy with those who are angry about the war, so angry that their knuckles go white when they think of it. I would have a lot more sympathy if they were consistent in following through the implications of their opposition and proposed a weakening of our ties with the US and a strengthening of those with Europe.
A lot of blokes judge people by the simple test, would I go out for a pint with him. Cameron does not come over as someone you would do that with.
144 ‘Honest’ mistake, f.r.? Who are you quoting?
142 Benedict. Accordingly, may we report your recommendation to your blog as spam.
Spam, spam, spam wonderful spam.
Stop being silly Jack. I like it better when you get cross.
So masterful.
146: Ahh, the gannex, pipe and brown sauce test.
147 - Peter I think it refers to post 136.
145. I accept your point that Blair was/is Atlanticist. And of course, his first close contact with an American govt was Clinton’s, and he probably assumed all Americans were that good - that’s how they came to be a superpower. He probably also assumed that even if Bush was inexperinced, they’d have competent back-room people. In fact the Americans elected Bush in 2000 on this thesis - that even if he didn’t know stuff, he was surrounded by experienced players. There was even a sort of starry-eyed spin about Cheney being a wise elder statesman (clearly no one actually knew his character at the time).
Re Europe, yes, I’d like us to be closer too. Especially as it’s a relationship between equals and we can exercise vetos or opt-outs. There is the fledgling Rapid reaction forces (which consist of us, the French, the Italians and the Spanish). I’m also pretty sure that if we went into a war again with the Americans, the terms we do so will be different - we’ll probably insist on having an input and a veto over strategy.
145 PtP. But we’ve historically broken ranks with the US and survived - Vietnam, The Balkans.
Many are still angry with Blair over Iraq because it was so evidently a catastrophic tactical and strategic error. The fact that Bush was the mother and father of this terrible blunder just makes the situation worse.
In contrast I support the Afghan military intervention as clearly in the national interest.
115.”Election lit naturally reflects what the voters in that area are primarily focussed on and (arguably sadly) that tends to be domestic and local issues. I cannot remember reading any election lit that mentioned overseas aid - a survey of which candidates mention it the most would be interesting. I suspect it would be those standing in areas where it is of unusually high concern”
yes, I agree that what is mentioned in election literature strongly depends on the particular seat the candidates are standing on. For ex I wouldn’t be surprised if agricolture policies are featured strongly in election literature in a rural seat and not in Hackney.
For ex civil partnerships were featured in Brighton Labour MPs literature, but I doubt they were mentioned ofetn in Bethnal Green and Bow campaign.
145 - I’d be much happier with a European approach to foreign policy than an Atlanticist one myself so I think I fit your bill. I stop at co-operation on things beyond defence however as I’m much more of an autonomist.
There’s a real connection between labour and some tories on this (Gove, for example, and Tim Montgomerie seems to be propagating the Atlanticist position), as such it crosses party lines.
137,
Its the economic liberal Adam Smith tendency in your comments, more alligned to more recent conservatism.
Rather than the conservative tradition of thought.
There is considerable fusion of thought between liberalism and conservatism in their approaches to the economy.
Therefore your knee jerk reaction to everything done by Brown on the economy, regarding any social reformism, makes me wary of Lib dems and where they stand.
149 PtP. I do “masterful” rather well.
151. Thanks Max. I couldn’t locate the source.
No I don’t think it was an honest mistake. I think it was a dishonest one in a number of ways. There is the obvious lack of honesty in presenting the case for war. I understand it was widely suspected, in mainland Europe as well as London and Washington, that Iraq had WMD. However, Blair and his supporters tortured the evidence in order turn it into a justification for war. That was dishonest.
It would also have been more honest to present the decision as part of a foreign policy in which consistent support of the US was of paramount importance, instead of trying to justify it as a response to what proved a bogus threat.
It was a mistake alright but not an honest one.
153. Britain didn’t really break ranks over Vietnam. Publically we backed them completely. But the wily Wilson stalled on sending troops (I understand that when Johnson used to phone him about it, he’d claim that he was close to a no confidence vote in the house and couldn’t do anything at the moment).
But reading accounts of it, the public reacted as though he had sent troops, with demonstrations and all the rest. They were furious that he hadn’t denounced the Americans. It’s only now with hindsight he’s a hero, as he managed somehow not to rupture with the Americans and not spill any British blood.
110.”Do we know who’s retiring yet”
Howard, Boswell and Spicer among the tories (+ Widdy if there won’t be a snap election). Mark Oaten in the Libdems. Battle, Cummings, Etherington, Grogan, Iddon, Khabra, Lepper, Naysmith, Des Turner and Alan Williams among the Labourites (I suppose Blair and Prezza will go too). And Clare Short.
Gorgeous George told Davina McCall something similar too when he was on BB.
157 I think I need to check that out with Andrea before I accept you word, Jack.
136: Shame, I thought until a few days ago that neo-conservatism was dead and buried, but I see from this post and that bloke with the Brideshead Revisited accent on the Today Program yesterday (Douglas Murray was it?) that the cult still has its adherents.
160. Ah is that Alan Williams Swansea West. Lib Dem gain methinks.
163. yes, that Alan Williams.
161. PtP..I can swear that Jack has never been “masterful” with me
159 snowflake5. When the US President is in the military do-do and asks for troops and you don’t send them, that’s breaking ranks. LBJ and Nixon knew it and the real reasons for Wilson’s refusal.
Whats going on with posting? Ive tried it 5 times and theres nothing dodgy at all in it and yet…it won’t allow me to post?
Whats the banned word(s)? Cameron? crab & prawn?…imported beers from Ecuador?
snowflake, good to see you back, i disagree with most of what you say, but you seem to have an “eleanor” like affect on posters here which makes it fun to watch the fireworks. However, you mentioned how an interventionist foreign policy is out the window post iraq. - I agree with that analysis
Nick P - are you looking forward to telling your electorate about international development issues with all the glossy leaflets that the new £10000 per year communications budget will bring.
Its the hypocrisy I cannot stand. We ALL know that if the Cons were in government Tony Blair would be thumping the dispatch box in anger at an illegal war, Labour MPs would be leading marches to Trafalgar Sq and Grosvenor Sq and John Reid would be ranting about the police state.
Jack, I think the Vietnam analogy, which holds up well in many respects, is not helpful here. Europe was a very different creature then and the cold war was still raging. Relations between London and Washington were wholly different and you had a very different crew in the White House.
I’m not saying we should wrench ourselves away from the US and all go European. International alliances are far too complex and enduring for that to be a practical possibility. We could however start being a bit more positive towards our European Allies. It wouldn’t turn things around overnight but the next time we were being called upon to support some ill-advised US adventure, we would have a bit more room for manoeuvre.
Btw, I agree wholeheartedly with you concerning Afghanistan. It is one of the tragedies of Iraq that it has crippled the wholly justified, worthwhile and achievable aim of bringing peace and stability to that country. I still hope it will be OK but fear the worst.
161/164 PtP/Andrea. Utterly vindicated ! …….. sadly.
167. I have an “eleanor” effect on ukpaul at any rate
156 - That’s a pretty accurate analysis, although you could also take a different strand of lib demmery and show how close it is to labour and social democracy. I also feel that labour’s attempts at social reform have floundered because, after throwing money at it, there was no realisation of where to go when it had hit a brick wall.
164. What is Khabra’s maj. I know Twigg was tipped for Hammersmith but I can’t help but think the carnage in May may have turned aways a few, and IIRC Khabra’s is rock solid, BTW is Beith standing again Thanks.
172,
Yes thats very true, undoubtedley the pendulum will swing back to a more stringent questioning of the outomes of spending on public services.
Nevertheless a third way was needed of social reformism in regard to minimum rights at work, minimum wage etc, after the zenith of Liberal Economics in the late eighties, early nineties.
173. Good boundary changes for Labour in Ealing Southall. Lab majority should be over 30%. And I’m pretty sure they’ll select another ethnic minority candidate in Ealing Southall.
Razi Rahman (Blair’s deputy political secretary) has been reported as interested, but there’re strong loical candidates too like Sonika Nirwal (if it’ll be an AWS, she’ll probably be one of the favourites)
http://www-test.ealing.gov.uk/Council/councillors/kiosk/councillor+sonika+nirwal+.asp
Twigg has been rumoured for Stretham where there’re rumours about Keith Hill going (according the South London Press).
175 Nothing escapes the on-line Andrea inquisition !! …. another twist on the rack my dears !!
I’m beginning to forget who said what here on this Atlanticism issue so can I just conclude by making one further point?
The discomfiture of the Conservatives on Iraq stems not so much from their support of the invasion but the more deep-rooted committment they have always had to an even more Atlanticist policy than that followed by Blair.
If Labour had been in opposition, would they have opposed the Tories taking us into war? Possibly. It really depends who you hypothesise as Leader. If it had been Robin Cook instead of Tony Blair, you might have seen a completely different bag of fireworks.
Britain stayed out of Viertnam for a number of reasons:
1. No strategic interest, it was withdrawing from Empire and had given up the idea of re-involving itself extensively in that region.
2. No useful political purpose
3. It didnt really have the resources to do much
There was no principle in the decision. It was practical.
169. Go European and we’ll be utterly incapable of doing anything when it comes to the crunch. The only significant Western European country with any willingness to intervene militarily anywhere apart from the UK are the French and most times thats to prop up one of their mates. The Americans make mistakes and in cases such as Iraq blatantly invade places but the Europeans are extraordinarily duplicitious and weak. In addition they have no miliatry capacity to intervene, totally and utterly dependent on the US and the grandstanding of many in Europe about a European defence alternative is nothing short of a joke. European nations have a long history of total uselessness, you only have to look at the lame response by some of them in Afghanistan. As for the Balkans, I was unlucky enough to get an interesting insight into that and all I will say is the Europeans fuelled that conflict.
176. “Masterful” Jack, what have I done now?!
170 Sorry Jack, but nobody gets the ‘masterful’ accollade until they have passed the Andrea test.
163. And Peter Tapsell will finally get to be Father of the House.
178. OK, Yokel, point taken, but can I ask you this?
If that’s what you think about Europe and its approach to international relations, do you support the Iraq war? Because if you do not, your remarks are hopelessly naive and impractical.
Just who do you expect to support us at the negotiating tables where the world’s political and economical struggles are played out?
By the way, Yokel, re 166, I’ve had trouble with lost post before so now, as a matter of routine, I copy my postings (ctrl A followed by ctrl C) before hitting the submit button. Then if they disappear into the ether, I only have to paste them back in (ctrl V) before editing and resubmitting.
It’s a routine that’s saved me hours of typing.
180 PtP. See 179 !! I rest my case.
Jack W the Masterful.
184 Nah, he’s just taking the p*ss.
183.”I’ve had trouble with lost post before so now, as a matter of routine, I copy my postings (ctrl A followed by ctrl C) before hitting the submit button. Then if they disappear into the ether, I only have to paste them back in (ctrl V) before editing and resubmitting.”
I’ve done the same once…it didn’t appear again, so I tried again (changing some words to see if they were banned) and again…then after some minutes they all appear!
Curious goings-on in the Blair Switch market on Betfair. Q4 2006 backed down to 5.6. Who could have done that?
Inspector Yates?
Blair in a quite patronising mood today in the Queen’s Speech debate:
“….I have to educate the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan…..”
188 - I would think it would be the other way round……….
182. ‘Just who do you expect to support us at the negotiating tables where the world’s political and economical struggles are played out’
Goodness PtP that is the sort of faintly hysterical stuff I expect from the time warped defeatists of the European Movement, not a wily punter like yourself.
187 - Nick Robinson was stirring it a bit on the 10 o’clock news, equated Blair’s behaviour with Thatcher ‘just before she left’ accompanied by a quizzical raised eyebrow.
RE 191, UKpaul I also liked the point about the need for more laws Vs. enforcing some of the ones we have already got, a point I have banged on about here and elsewhere for ages.
190 LOL AP!
Surprising as it may seem, I do have some opinions beyond what may win the 3.30 at Kempton.
175. What is Stretham like Thanks.. Labour solid like a rock I suppose. Have the Lib Dems selected for Alan William’s seats yet, would have thought on past form they’d be hard at it already. Do you know if Beith is stabding again at all.
Anyone who watched the exchange between Cameron and Blair to-day would say that Cameron was far more belligerent than Blair however much the ten second sound bites might have shown otherwise. I enjoyed Blair’s humour to-day. When he gets into his stride he can be very funny.
136. ‘Also, if Iraq had turned out OK, we’d probably be in Darfur today, relieving all those people from being killed. One of the consequences of being slammed so for Iraq is that no one will intervene in any other situation because there is such public hostility to it. Then there will be some catastrophe (bigger than Darfur), and the pendulum will swing and the same armchair pundits will slam the govt of the day for not intervening.’
Some who were anti-war predicted this and cited it as yet another reason to be against the conflict. In response we got Blair and his sycophants depicting many who were anti-war as Saddam Hussein lovers and the invasion as a humanitarian conflict, despite there no being a serious plan to get the country back on its feet after the war was over. Trying to offer this as a criticism of those who were against the war and critical of the government really is weak.
I’m sorry but Nick Palmer is talking absolute unadulterated partisan rubbish at 95 - dressed up as disinterested analysis. He exudes the smug and self righteous pieties one usually associates with earnest Liberal Democrats.
Of course Conservatives in Parliament campaign on “non traditional” social issues as Nick is well aware, whether its Stephen Crabb on Burma, Graham Stuart on community hospitals, Bob Spink on childrens’ hospices or John Bercow on Darfur, to name just a few.
More to the point, given their numerical superiority, why do so many Labour MPs fail to turn up and defend their own government in opposition debates on important issues?
Finally Nick, your party doesn’t “own” any issues and you would do well to remember, that if you take the electorate for granted on “your”(sic)issues, they will eventually find you out!
129 Thank you for that, Julian.
194. Punter. Stretham isn’t actually so rock solid: a 17/18% majority over the Libdems IIRC. Not a tight marginal, but not a safe seat either.
It’s in Lambeth though where Labour had a good local election results, but now they’ve to run the council (which isn’t always a vote winner thing)
I don’t think the Libdems have selected for Swansea West yet…their 2005 PPC defected to the tories earlier this year
I don’t know about Beith.
197. Nick’s mask of reasonableness has been slipping quite often of late. I wonder why?
Jack W 104. Is that really you? You normally leave political passion to the hot heads! At 103 you should be smelling the roses….
Benedict I thought for a moment that you complained about uncalled for spam from the Labour party and then realized I must be mistaken!!
201 Roger, What? Why must you be mistaken?
Hi guys, I’ve been away for a while, doing dad-stuff and writer-stuff, and next week I shall be in Hungary writing about Lady Vampires for the Daily Mail…
… a dream assignment, if ever there was one!
But it’s good to see everyone here on fine and partisan form, and I thought I’d stick my oar in.
Those who think Blair did well today obviously haven’t watched the 10 o’clock newstake. He comes across as weirdly punchy, slightly barmy, and definitely over the hill. ‘a big clunking fist’?? WTF?
Frankly, if Blair is looking to define his legacy, and the legacy of his ten year government, he should just have stood up and said:
‘Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq IRAQ.’
As we all know, Iraq is the only thing for which this government will be remembered. Everything else they have done is middle of the road managerialism, left wing Tory economics, centrist socialiasm, yadda yadda yadda, yawn zzz snore. They haven’t been wildly bad, just a bit boring, mediocre, forgettable, inept in places and competent in others. The 50s Tory party revisited.
The ONLY reason historians will ever recall this New Labour government, and those who served in it, is the 100,000-700,000 dead people in Iraq, the corpses piled high at the door of Number 10, the lying war led by a lying leader.
If the country once had a honeymoon with Blair, then Iraq is the dreadful and embarassing stain on the hotel bedsheets. This stain will not wash away for a generation, even if Labour do try and stuff it in the hotel wardrobe.
Stewart at 197.
“your”(sic)issues,”
Is this Parliameentary code for something?
PS. You sound angry? If it’s any consolation I don’t think Cameron was as bad as all the pundits say he was
Jack…did you see the new LD candidate in St Albans? it’s Sandy Walkington (who was the direction of communication during the GE campaign…unless it’s an homonymous). He stood in SA in 1983 and 1987.
The tories have selected in Cheltenham and Winchester tonight
182 Peter I did support the war though reluctantly. I had no problems with toppling Saddam Hussein or his regime, I had no problems with the idea of getting control of their oil either and eastablishing another strategic outpost in the Middle East and I did believe they had a WMD program based on their previous history (rather than the likes of the 45 minute claims). A history of the UN’s WMD control efforts in Iraq are very revealing and led me to that conclusion.
What made me reluctant were essentially miltary doubts.
1. It was obvious the Allied forces involved were too small, the build up of forces was well publicised and everyone knew the large formations involved. Strike forces can afford to be but smallish to hold a territory you need more. This shortfall became clear in the first week of the conflict as the US had issues with contstant pockets of resistance along the flanks & their lines of advance.
2. There seemed to be a potential misunderstanding of what the Iraqis planned to do as part of their defence. It was clear from news reports that a key feature of their war plan was a guerilla effort which, by it very nature, doesn’t stop when the big battles end. I trusted that there was a plan to deal with it but feared based on point 1, that maybe their wasn’t.
I support staying there with some kind of military presence, however large or small. Firstly because the job needs carrying through because we started it and also strategically, success is very important. I believe that an effective insurgency may take 10-20 years to successfully fight and if that requires an active miltary presence for ever one of those years, albeit on a smaller scale as Iraqi forces are built up, then so be it.
I would not, however, have supported British involvement in the war however if I had known there was no agreed post war plan. I couldnt believe they’d go to war without one in place, rehearsed and readied, but they did. It never occurred to me that they wouldn’t.
If I have two criticisms of the UK government its a) they put too much emphasis on one issue (WMD) largely due to political expediency (though I do believe they were genuine in suspecting such a capability existed) and gave the opponents a rod to beat them with. More fundamentally b) they knew there wasn’t a post war plan in place. That was just plain criminal, you dont go to war without planning for the peace, ever.
It’s one thing acting in concert with other countries on many issues strategic(eg economically in a trading bloc) or on an ad hoc basis in certain situations, but when it comes to strategic alliances at the deepest level, ie political/military alliances, theres no way I would trade the US for the Europeans when it came to it. I don’t believe they are mutually exclusive on most occasions, as the Europeans tend to be split anyhow but what gets on my goat is the nonsense that Europe is somehow some kind of military alternative to the US. It isn’t, can’t be and won’t be.
Thank goodness you are back, Sean T.
In your absence, the level of debate was getting dangerously high.
IMV the Queen’s speech wouldn’t have done too much good for either Blair or Cameron. however I think the “flyweight” charge has a chance of sticking - and is certainly getting some press.
Blair came over as a bit of a bully, Cameron as a bit of a wimp: I wonder how that will work in the gender split?
My (rather tangential) response to the event is here.
Good to see Jack around and Mike seeming well-recovered.
Sorry to go O/T - Does anyone know when the next lot of polls will be out? Their should be another ICM one for the Scottish Elections at the end of the month.
One poll you may have missed was in the Scottish Mail on Sunday carried out by the same firm that carried out a poll for the Sunday Mail a couple of weeks earlier.
It found - amongst other things that Labour would gain four seats, others would lose 14, and the Lib Dems share of the 2nd vote had fallen from 26% to 12% in around two weeks!
Which is why you should be wary of Scottish polls if and when any odds are given for the May elections.
By the way, has anyone noticed John Reid is lowering his voice in inreviews?
209.”others would lose 14″
who would be the poor souls left? Canavan and a couple of Greens, I suppose.
209..Polls polls, isnt there some kind of treatment program for poll obsessives?
I see a gap in the therapy market….not saying you are hooked yourself Max but some people on here are.
I’ll have to produce a short ‘Are You Hooked’ questionnaire to identify those who could be helped by my new, innovative 300 quid a day treatment program.
206. Thank you Yokel for such a clear and well argued post. I disagree with so little of what you write that I will just qualify my own position so that we understand each other a little better.
One theme of your post that I would agree with wholeheartedly is that we have to start, or rather continue, from where we are. Pulling out abruptly will therefore simply not do, no matter how much we oppose the war. We are in for the long haul and it may be a very long haul.
I also would not trade the US for the Europeans - as things stand. Europe certainly is not any kind of military alternative to the US - but again, as things stand. Whether it cannot or will not ever be is more questionable. What is indisputable is that if we ever want a set of military and political alternatives to the US, we must work with Europe. I should think Iraq is the very best example you could have of why such an alternative might be desireable.
People who rubbish this Government over Iraq without putting forward some long-term strategic alternative policy involving closer co-operation with Europe are for the most part being naive and superficial.
I can see that this does not apply to you and I retract my earlier criticism. I now think you are just being too pessimistic about Europe and maybe a little too short-term in your outlook. That’s all.
balls to europe i say
214. Jimbo, do you want to introduce MPs for British people living abroad and select Ed Balls to represent British living in Europe?
203 SeanT good to have you back and on such fine form with such wisdom as “Frankly, if Blair is looking to define his legacy, and the legacy of his ten year government, he should just have stood up and said:
‘Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq IRAQ.’”
Now remind me your parties poistion on this in 2003 was…….
Ah, I see we have the chief editorial writer for The Sun with us. (Post 214.)
Did anyone see that rubber-haired Blairite loon on Newsnight who admitted to finding it astonishing that Tone need give up being PM at all? An era is in its last days of decline and decay, yet a few lost souls still stalk the Earth believing that triumph and fanfares still await. It’s a bit tragic really.
201. That ‘Jack W’ post does indeed look like a fake - but postings exhibiting signficant dissonance with the usual Jack W style have been seen several times before. Perhaps the ghost writer got a bit carried away this time.
The post at 104., that is.
Evening, Textual.
Did we finish our ‘Eleanor’ debate?
214. Jimbo, that wooly bully cap must come in useful in this weather…a man who says what he means and means what he says, with brevity….
213. Peter, without going into detail, the Balkans put me off the European military alliance idea for life, shocking. The UN gets, desrvedly, a panning but the people who really failed where the EU including the British & French, who’s troops actually did some useful work. Ultimately it was the EU who played around when someone needed to actually do something, they could have walked through the UN and directed it. Instead they sat on their hands and fudged. To make things worse, Balkan factions had, not so much cheerleaders within the EU, as supporters,including surplus weapons mysteriously turning up in the hands of certain factions (someone should ask the German government in particular what they were playing at). The US wanted to Europeans to sort it out and they didn’t.
On a more practical level, the EU have little strategic miltary capacity, only two of its nations are capable of projecting power to any level. Even then they probably need American assistance. The US has forever been asking the Europeans to fork out more and build their capabilities and is comfortable with the EU getting some kind of projection power as long as it doesn’t actively interfere with existing alliances or indeed clash with US interests. Realistically, under most cricumstances there doesn’t have to be a clash. The problem is those who talk up a European defence capability as a direct rival to the USA led alliances when it could be complimentary/supplementary. Some of this talk is just knee-jerk anti Americanism and sometimes stinks of snobbery. The other problem is the Europeans just won’t fork out the money to get the capability. The US has many faults but by and large its prepared to do whats necessary and pay for it.
As it is the Britiosh have thrown their lot in with the USA, no matter what they say about the European dimension. Every major UK armed forces development project is designed to interoperate with one other nations armed forces above anybody elses, the USA’s.
222 So the EU did a crap job in the Balkans - agreed. (Actually, Blair did a brilliant job with Kosovo but that’s a different subject. I’ll try to keep to the point.)
And the EU has little strategic military capacity - agreed.
And the US is prepared to put money into arms and the EU is not - agreed.
And the British (under Blair…and of course it would have been no different under a Tory leader) have thrown their lot in with the USA - agreed.
So, it seems that you agree Blair was right to support the US led invasion of Iraq. At the very least, you are suggesting he had little choice. Well, Yokel, that is a thoroughly consistent and defensible position to take.
All I would add is that if we spent more time trying to make Europe work, we might not have a better alternative one day. It isn’t saying much, but I think it’s true.
Also (and finally I hope because it is late), whereas your position is both clear and consistent, most of those who bang on endlessly about their opposition to the war have not even begun to think through the logical implications the way you have and which you have elucidated so well tonite. Some of them seem to think it’s just the fault of that silly and wicked man in 10 Downing Street who does these things simply because he likes to cause trouble. They aren’t worth the time of day. And if anybody suggests improving European relations as a step towards avoiding the mistakes of the past, they respond with blank incomprehension.
I think it’s time for bed.
That should of course be “….we might have a better alternative one day.”
Tired.
Well here we are in LaLaland where youth and violent crime is ever increasing, and to get the measure of this social turmoil our PM eloquently threatens an opponent with violence and says his big galumphing friend will hit him with ‘a big clunking fist’ to beat the opponent senseless.
He went on to say that love had no role in bringing up teenagers who were tending to go off the rails while his colleague threatened to get tough with anyone who did not follow the rules he was about to introduce (although he would not say what they were).
However, the PM and his colleagues have affirmed their decision to use ASBOs on unborn children, lock up people longer in prisons despite having insufficient places, pay drug addicts compensation for abusing them and let the police throw people out of their houses for three months if they are uppity.
The PM deplores violence at home but refuses to condemn it overseas. He demands laws to drive religious hatred underground but believes threats of physical violence against opponents are fine as long as he is making the threats. If a Moslem preacher should make similar threats towards the PM then he will be locked up without trial as a threat to national security. If the BNP should make the same threats to a Moslem preacher they will be arrested for incitement to violence.
The PM will continue to be a role model of probity, honesty, rational debate and calm consideration. Young men will welcome a chance to model themselves on the PM and society will be better for it.
Yawn. I am off to bed as well. Just spent two hours (and to be fair several cans of beer) fisking the Queen’s Speech.
Has anyone noticed that “Eleanor” and “seanT” never post at the same time?
Men are tribal. Women are intuitive. Women look beyond Cameron’s class background to see the man. To appeal to men, Cameron should be broadening the class appeal of the Party, not just the sexual and racial balance. All the evidence is that the Oxbridge, public school, middle class, South Eastern emphasis is being maintained by Francis Maude’s A List campaign. If Conservatives want to broaden their appeal to men, they must break up the clique and open it to the regions and the classes. Until Cameron works alongside a ‘Prescott’ he’s too narrow in his appeal. Blair straddled the classes. Cameron must do the same if he wants the male vote.