Which private EU poll should LibDem MPs trust?
March 4th, 2008
Was the LD survey designed to give the result the leadership wanted?
My general suspicion of ALL privately commissioned polls has been reinforced by two surveys in the past 24 hours which relate to the big vote in the Commons tomorrow over whether there should be a referendum on the Lisbon treaty.
This is an issue where the Lib Dem group of MPs could be decisive and the polls relate directly to them. One commissioned by the party from MORI was of voters as a whole - the other from a pro-referendum group was restricted to Lib Dem voters from 2005. The outcomes are remarkably different and this comes down to the way the questions were put. The LD paid for MORI poll asked two questions:-
The second sentence of Question 2 makes me very uneasy. Franky it stinks because it’s formatted as a forced choice - a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty OR on Britain’s membership of the EU altogether. The answer “both” was not put as an option although the pollster recorded the views of those who said this.
So amongst Lib Dem voters alone 30% wanted a referendum on the treaty, 37% wanted one on membership and just 7% said both - findings that are being trumpeted by the party to claim that there is widespread public support for its position of just wanting the “in or out” referendum.
That would have been fine except that within an hour or so the pro-referendum group Iwantareferendum produced an ICM poll giving a completely different picture. To the question “Do you think that voters in Britain should decide, in a referendum, whether or not to ratify the EU treaty, or should MPs in Parliament decide?” 67% of LD voters said “voters should decide in a referendum” against 30% who said “MPs should decide in Parliament”.
On the type of referendum 25% agreed with the Nick Clegg view that “We should have a one question referendum on simply being in or out of the European Union” while 70% agreed that “We should have a two question referendum: one question on simply being in or out of the European Union and then another question on whether or not to sign up to the new treaty”.
The difference between the two polls is that the LibDem funded one did not give the express option of both possible referendums - the ICM one did. For my money the latter gives a better representation of opinion.
The division between the two polls could be crucial today ahead of tomorrow’s vote. There are reports that Clegg is facing a rebellion amongst part of his parliamentary party who want to vote with the Tories. The polls discussed here could play a part in that debate.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Not sure why the Lib Dems would be trumpeting their poll as showing that there is widespread support for their policy.
Surely what their poll says, despite the shortcomings that you identify, is that as many Lib Dem voters want a referendum on the Treaty as support the official Lib Dem position.
Mike, bless you, and sawadee - a whole thread on Europe!??!
*takes big breath and prepares to rant for England….*
But no! Happily for pb readers I’m a touch busy today. Just three chapters from the end of my thriller. The home straight. May even finish tomorrow; certainly by the end of the week. Oo-er.
So for now I’ll restrict myself to just a couple of EU observations.
1. The Lib Dems - lying about Europe? Whatever next? File this story next to “Cockroaches Deemed Unpleasant”.
2. Gordon Brown is taking a pasting on his own Euro-fibs.
Here’s Simon Carr in the Indy:
“The Lisbon Treaty is in its last week in the Commons. “Eight full days of debate,” said the minister. Yes, “and only one in six” of his constituents voted for a referendum on the treaty. It was pointed out that “eight full days” was actually 19 hours, and that 85 per cent of his constituents who voted in the poll voted for a referendum.
It’s been a shabby affair. Low, dishonest and shabby. Never mind all that dare-to-dream Obama bollocks we heard from the PM at Labour’s spring conference. This treaty strategy is Gordon Brown’s personal creation, this is his specified treatment of Parliament, and visible to all is his definition of politics as cynicism in action.”
Ouch.
Seeing as people saying that
1) they want a referendum on the EU
2) they want a referendum on the Treaty
means
1) they want to withdraw from the EU
2) they want to stay in EU but reject the Treaty
then surely LibDem policy should be
1) to withdraw from the EU?
When I was sent this poll by the LD communications unit my first thought was “Oh god, what question did they have to ask to get that answer?”. I assumed it was push-polling until I saw it was a proper pollster and for a moment I was genuinely impressed until I realised all it meant was the electorate was even more EU-sceptic than I thought.
Now I know what the real question was. BTW they were claiming it was 2 to 1 in favour of the LibDem position overall… that must imply a pretty savage breakdown amongst non-LibDem voters?
PS I always said the sensible liberal position on this would be to ask for a referendum on both.
The public are being driven to a hard eurosceptic position by the duplicity of politicians. it will all end in tears.
Alex, surely the point is - for all the “simplisticness” of your contention - that there is a real and proper discussion to be had on our membership of the EU. The leadership of the Lib Dems believe that is the way round what Clegg (I think) has described as “europoison”. The tabloids could be beaten on it. Whereas, with the Lisbon Treaty, the tabloids would remain supreme, the arguments are too obscure, so any turnout likely in such a referendum would almost undoubtedly be of those keen on the referendum, and keen on the position you describe. Which means, rejection of the treaty, and as I have ranted before many times, more stasis, and the likelihood of being able to present the EU continuingly as “ineffectual, a gravy train” etc, which is what the phobes and the tabloids want.
And, btw, Alex, less of the cynicism, please - there can be referenda which can actually produce a different result to views as held before such referenda!
5 “Clegg is facing a rebellion amongst part of his parliamentary party who want to vote with the Tories”
I hope Cameron has been on the phone, inviting them to do the job properly - and defect to the Conservative Party. Otherwise their electoral prospects look grim, in a future GE campaign that will be a straight fight between Brown and Cameron. The Boy Clegg has shown himself to be useless in record time, even by LibDem standards. I suppose that next he will be doing Gordon’s bidding and support Labour’s glorious achievement of spending billions extra on the NHS - even though the BBC has discovered that under this Labour Government, average NHS waiting times are actually up:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7271772.stm
So what has my tax been spent on, Gordon?
Hi Jon, perhaps Lib Dem supporters actually are not so far away from everyone else on this issue (now there is a heretical statement!)
Coming on the back of the ten Constituency referendums, this all makes the Lib Dem position look extremely difficult. I can actually see the government winning through unfortunately but the repercussions for the Lib Dems if they are the factor that swings it against a referendum are severe. The trust issue will be exploited to the absolute limit in future elections and I can see them suffering extremely badly in the Locals in May.
Those of us campaigning from a Eurosceptic position will use every possible means to ensure people remember that the Lib Dems broke their promise.
More interestingly, if it is the 5 Tory pro EU MPs who swing it then I see their days in the Tory party as numbered. Certainly I would expect deselections against a couple of them.
9 Sorry, I can’t be bothered nor have the time to spend to give more detailed answers to you. Suffice it to say that you “we are back to 2 party politics types” despite all the evidence to the contrary, still keep banging on. This is more about your Tory propaganda than about any real situation. You may want it that way, but it is certainly not so!
I’d like Obama to be the nominee, but I want to see a brokered convention more.
11 My - a refugee from Planet Hague, 2001 style!
10 Morning Tim hope all is good with you and your. It’s always been my belief (as you know!) that the views of LibDem voters and indeed most members are very different to those of the party leadership.
I have never yet been able to understand why anyone who professes to be a liberal and a democrat would be keen on an institution that wants centralisation of everything on the flimsiest of excuses, hates diversity and has total contempt for the views of the people. It cheers me to know most of our voters agree with me!
[9] Average waiting times up; maximum waiting times down. I’m not defending the government’s record, MM, just giving the full story. You’ll also be delighted to hear that it is now government policy for managers, not clinicians, to decide who goes to which hospital when.
As to where your taxes have gone, they’ve been spent on management consultants, lawyers and other leeches associated with the Private Finance Initiative. To say nothing of shareholder profits. Surely a better home for them than the pay packets of public sector workers.
There’s something that doesn’t add up about the I Want A Referndum poll - a key result they claim in their news release isn’t anywhere to be found in the poll tables published by ICM:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/iwantareferendum-are-they-censoring-their-own-poll-or-have-they-made-up-the-results-2267.html
14 - Not at all. I just happen to believe the MPs should abide by their promises at elections. If you believe that MPs should be free to lie about their intentions and get away with it then you have a strange set of values.
And Hague was a fool. The ‘In Europe not governed by Europe’ idea showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the EU works.
The Lib Dems and most of the labour party have shown themselves to be liars. My hope (but not necessarily my expectation) is that they will be punished for it by the electorate. Certainly there are many of us who will actively campaign on the doorstep to ensure this happens and who will extend that to any Tory MPs who also broke their promises on the referendum.
Mark,
the first repsonse on the blog is from someone who says the question was definately asked.
So assuming that person is telling the truth then since the ICM data doesn’t show it I assume the error lies with ICM?
16 “Average waiting times up; maximum waiting times down.”
So for all those extra billions, the few get a reduced waiting time at the expense of the many. Er, is that Labour policy then?
18. Worth noting on all sides who is actually ‘breaking their promise’. MPs who themselves opted out of party policy on their personal manifestos at the last election can’t be said to support a referendum (in this case), any more than those Labour MPs who were and remain anti-Iraq War are now committed to it because of the Labour Party policy in 2005.
I understand that this only applies to Clarke and Curry on the Tory side although I am not sure that either made it explicit in their election literature and if not then they were campaigning under the general Tory banner of a referendum.
The attemted get out that some are using of saying “I didn’t think it was a good promise to make” doesn’t wash since in the end they did stand under their party’s commitment - and that applies to all three main parties.
12. The lib dems have gradually managed to make themselves look both irrelevant and disorganised. Cleggs stance on europe has dented him so far and could go even further if his party rebels. Surprising, seeing as the tactic of stretching the treaty debates over numerous days was meant to split the tories, instead its split the lib dems and made the tories look even more solid.
Setting aside the morality of all this lying, the politics is plain weird.
Clegg has totally cocked this up, and guaranteed his party and his MPs a lot of pain in future elections - and they’ve also given the Tories enormous ammunition - “the lying Lib Dems, the so called democrats, the traitors on Europe, never believe their manifestos cause they don’t mean it” etc etc.
And for what? What have the Libs gained from this? There are plenty of Lib Dems on this site, some of them honest, not all of them stupid, but I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why Clegg has handled this so ineptly. i.e. why he has opposed a referendum, when he could so easily have fulfilled his manifesto pledge and reaped all the electoral rewards.
The only explanation I have heard is that: “he didn’t want to upset Lib Dem grandees in the Lords”.
Duh? Is Shirley Williams really that powerful she can order the Lib Dems to self destruct to help Brussels? Can someone, anyone, please explain Clegg’s behaviour?
Yours
Clueless in Bangkok.
Richard: when this was queried with I Want A Referendum yesterday, they weren’t able to point out to any question missing from what ICM has published. So no, I don’t think it’s an ICM error. Either their press release misrepresented their own poll or something is being kept secret.
I agree, I would be surprised if the error was ICM. I just wonder what that Lib Dem respondent is referring to when he says that he was asked that specific question.
IWAR gain nothing from misquoting, since the questions as stated on the ICM polling report already effectively counter Clegg’s argument.
24. I can’t tell either, Clegg’s managed to manouvre himself with all the deftness of an elephant on roller skates. He’s managed to make himself look daft with his constant poor performances at PMQ’s, make his party look daft and arrogant with the walkout last week, and now managed to tie them in knots and split them at the same time over europe. I can’t see the advantage over his stance, all its done is confuse the public and make his party look increasingly isolated and out of touch.
Sean,
Clegg is one of those who puts commitment to the EU before anything else including his own party or country’s fortunes.
He knows that the Constitution is a fundamental part of the development of the EU as he wishes it to be and I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe.
On the general point, the biggest problem for Lib Dems, and indeed for Labour, is that they seem to have leaders with no courage and no vision. From a party point of view, it is better to lose an argument after fighting vigorously for it and making the case even if you don’t get the votes, than to win in a downbeat, somewhat technical manner.
The Lib Dems need a distinctive position to make themselves relevant; offering an in-or-out option (which many people don’t really believe they would offer anyway), doesn’t do that as it’s the UKIP position - and they at least are sincere in it, if a little bit loopy.
Arguing FOR the treaty, wholeheartedly and from a Pro-European view WOULD be a distinctive position and would guarentee them airtime every time the subject got covered in the media. The main problem for them would be those seats in the South-West which are a hotbed of both Euroscepticism and LibDemmary. Even so, for a minority party (which the Lib Dems are), taking a minority point of view is not too damaging providing that that point of view coincides with the views of their core, or is at least sufficiently close to their core beliefs that any new recruits won on the back of the campaign will not cause too much friction on other matters. As the Libs / Lib Dems have been pro-EEC/EC/EU for decades, there should be no difficulty.
But at the moment, Clegg just looks to be a me-too version of Brown. A better-looking and nicer-sounding one perhaps, but with no mind of his own. Even the in/out option sounds to have been crafted to please the government, in the way that East European Communist leaders used to pursue ‘independent’ lines that were only ever acceptable to the Kremlin. Unless he can move out of his comfort zone - and for goodness sake, being criticised by The Mail and The Telegraph is surely not THAT far outside his comfort zone? - he will find himself leading his party to irrelevance.
Thanks Mike for pointing this out. The original PR spin from Clegg had a 2:1 claim and a 2 out of 3 claim added.
It was really 4 out of 10 (38%) preferred just the inout option.
Things must be really desperate for the LD party. One wonders why Clegg and Ming devised this “policy” without understanding where their MPs stood. Is it too much to ask them to consult 60 people?
Instead we have about 1/4 of the LD mps looking at their conscience or their majority and then deciding to call for a Treaty referendum.
I’d like to see a third question put in a putative referendum. “If we stay in the EU, would you like Turkey to join?” It would be a logical extension to the argument, and would not be difficult to understand. The answer would be emotional (like capital punishment) rather than arcane. It would be sensible to vote no to the Lisbon treaty/constitution, no to staying in the EU, but yes to Turkey joining if we were to stay in (which would be my choices).
28 “I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe”
Then Clegg must be taking a calculated risk that his Party can’t afford to throw him out. Did nobody ask him what his position was going to be on the referendum during his leadership campaign? If at any point he said he would uphold the manifesto, then the Party have a right to be very angry with his subsequent performance - and I would suggest could ask him to resign. If he wasn’t asked at any point, then the LibDems don’t deserve to have a role in overseeing legislation - their ensuing rapid destruction as a Parliamentary party will be most welcome.
28 “I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe”
Even Clegg can’t be so stupid as to think the LibDems can actually achieve anything?
After this debacle, their chances of achieving anything post the next GE have imo fallen a lot. Clegg is living up well to my estimates of him: another LibDem failed leader.
29 Surely the problem was that the Liberal democrat policy of an In/Out Referendum was cobbled together before the last Conference when main concern was the rumblings about Ming Cambell’s leadership. It wasn’t developed with any intellectual rigour but as a tactic to reconcile those supporting the manifesto and those against so that the Conference, widely expected to be last one before a GE, presented a united party.
The Lib Dems are now casting around to try to underpin this policy and present the arguments after the event, which is difficult. It exposes Clegg’s inexperience in leadership and unless he handles it well could undermine that ongoing. The Ed Davey stunt was quite unnecessary and damaging.
He was of course asked and his position was the same and Huhne and indeed the same as it is now. It’s probably not a good idea for fanatical Tories to try to understand the workings of other parties based on the nonsense spouted so far today.
28. That is certainly one way of looking at it: and it does explain Clegg’s bizarre behaviour. We know for a fact that the LDs have a traitor for a leader in Europe: Andrew Duff, who openly yearns for the “defeat of the English”.
Do they also have a traitor for a leader in London?
I’m not sure it’s a great political slogan: Vote for the Lib Dems, we will always betray you.
Hm.
However, before we tar Mister Clegg with the same quisling brush as the noisome Andrew Duff, I’d like to hear from some Lib Dems. There are some nice sensible ones on this site.
Can they explain Clegg’s self-destructive stance? Is there some deep, clever, underlying plan that I’m missing?
The public are fully aware that no lib dem govt would ever abide by a no vote so the entire policy is laughable.
35. I understand what the position is, just not why they’ve taken it. It’s confusing, has partially split the party, and is fairly unpopular.
35 So in the Leadership campaign, Clegg (and Huhne?) both said that they would disavow their Manifesto commitment - and impose a three-line whip on LibDem MP’s voting against a referendum? Is that what you are saying?
36. And of course a former leader - Kennedy - who openly proclaims he considers himself to be ‘European’ (whatever that means) rather than British.
35 - So both Huhne and Clegg were happy to break their promises. Not surprising the Lib Dems are losing support across the board.
It seems that it is not only the Tories (of which by the way I am not one) but also the rest of the country that doesn’t understand the workings of the Lib Dem party.
40 But that was so that Kennedy could avoid answering the question “Are you Scottish or are you British?” “I’m a European….”
Typical LibDem response - give an answer to a question not asked…
Clegg’s played a blinder. I bet Ming’s wishing he stayed on. This fiasco makes “he’s too old” look like a bit of a playground taunt when compared to Calamity’s yoga-like array of bizarre positions.
Mocking the idiot leader of the Lib Dems aside, (fun though it is), there are serious implications here. If Clegg had balls (the manly sort, not the sort that blinks a lot and no-one likes) and a brain he’d be able to put the government in a tight spot, keep his election promise and hold his party together. It would also be very popular with the electorate.
Instead, he opts for snuggling up to Big Gordon, breaking his manifesto pledge, leaving his party disunited despite a three-line whip and annoys the electorate into the bargain.
Lib Dem kamikaze tactics aside, that leaves Brown’s plain old-fashioned approach of just reneging on electoral promises looking almost honest by comparison, and is almost certain going to allow this treacherous government to get their way.
Calamity is certainly going to pay a heavy electoral price for his behaviouir starting with the Euros next year.
At least this will stop the Lib Dem MP’s in southern England pretending they are anti Europe at the next GE.
Not the expected surge in Hilarys price that I expected overnight on betfair - still around 3`s -anyone else thinks this still represents excellent value -perhaps with a view to laying off later in the day ?
43 “is almost certain going to allow this treacherous government to get their way.”
And for this he will be remembered. Long after he is gone from the political sphere, the name “Clegg” will still be carved large in the rock of the Pillar of Infamy…
Though my political predictions haven’t always been good this time I think I’m on to a winner. I predict that this thread-which with one or two exceptions has started well-will soon spiral downhill to the level of the one or two exceptions?
44 - well, one would think. Does anyone have any take on how this is playing in the traditionally anti-EU LD strongholds in the South West?
On the suggestion that Clegg/Ming were “fearful of Lib Dem Lords”, we could see some clarity on that very soon in Ming’s autobiography.
He has already had his publishers asking him to revise it to by being more open on what went on.
Did Shirley Williams really threaten to re-join Labour if the LDs backed a Treaty referendum? That is what Nigel Lawson said happened and to date neither Ming nor Shirley have denied it.
47. havent always been good is an understatement, like saying gladstone and disaraeli had the occasional tiff.
I just cannot understand the Lib Dem’s position on this, there isn’t a deep abiding principle being tested here and the politics are frankly awful. I think the only plausible justification is that they are trying to shore up their support in the south west, which is their English heartland. A few weeks ago Clegg accused Brown of running scared of Cameron and the Conservatives, if the Lib Dems really are shoring up their South West vote then Clegg is running scared of Farage and UKIP. It looks even more bizarre.
39 I think it is pretty obvious what I am saying.
48 Well I have reason to believe there are LD MPs who have been surprised by their postbag on this issue. I suggest we wait for the vote tomorrow to see how they perceive it. A lot could happen in the next 40 hours or whatever.
Its perfectly simple. The Lib-Dem’s and Labour both promised the country a referendum in their 2005 election manifesto’s and they should both honour that promise. Really, whats so difficult for people to understand about this? The contortions from the Liberals over this issue is stunning, even for them.
52. In reality I have no problem with the ld’s (Up until this issue). I like to see them doing well to try and pressure labour, instead they’ve taken a route which helps the government, harms themselves, and splits the party. I just don’t understand why they’ve done it!
7 - “The public are being driven to a hard eurosceptic position by the duplicity of politicians. it will all end in tears.”
Yes! Spot on.
I definitely agree with that.
I know there are maybe a couple of MPS reading, all of whom went into politics to do The Right Thing - well, here’s your chance. Trust us. You may just be pleasantly surprised at how sensible and intelligent we are, if you’ll let us.
Incidentally the ICM poll was taken from a 1000 voters who voted Lib Dem at the last election. My maths isn’t brilliant but in normal ICM polls the number saying they will or have voted Lib Dem out of the 1000 questioned is usually about 100. Does that mean this poll is ten times the size of their normal one?
52 - Do you think, even if the MPs vote for the amendment, they will entirely escape being tarred with the official LD whipped position? I mainly ask because re: betting on the next GE, I just couldn’t see how the LD seat numbers could collapse to the point where a Tory majority was plausible; this might be just the catalyst to induce that, however.
re 36. I think that Clegg has strong emotional links to the EU because of his early career. His first main job was in Brussels and for several years was a top aide to Leon Brittan then Vice-president and trade commissioner. His first elected position was as an MEP.
Trying to understand LibDem Euro-policy - the Eternal Sunshine of the Clueless Mind - without even having had the benefit of a bacon butty is beyond barking.
Anyway - about these primaries….
56. I should have said does this mean ICM had to contact ten times the number they usually contact? If so it must have been expensive.
58 “a top aide to Leon Brittan….”
I’m sure we here can all agree on one thing - having that on your CV should disbar you from politics for life…
re 56. Roger - my guess is that ICM will have chosen a randown sample of people previously polled who had said they had voted Lib Dem in 2005.
Roger @ 56: Nope (or at least, not necessarily), one of the questions ICM normally ask is whether people would mind being rung up again, so I expect what happened is they rang up 1000 people who had told them in past polls that they had voted LD in 2005.
“a randown sample of people previously polled who had said they had voted Lib Dem in 2005.”
Peeling them off the bumper of a MORI vehicle to ask them their views does seem a rather harsh new approach to polling….
Saying endlessly that Clegg has messed it up doesn’t make it so. His position is actually popular. It has produced no sign of a slide in the polls and given the Lib Dems a strong alternative position to Labour and the Tories.
Posts on this thread speak more clearly of anguish and anger amongst Tories who won’t get their own way, but frankly it will just not resonate with the public if they plan to campaign in the local elections against the Lib Dems on the issue.
Except in Euro elections, eurosceptic campaigning by the Tories just hasn’t worked for them. Remember 2001?
Richard Church
58. Interesting, Mike, thanks. So you seem to be saying Nick Clegg has split his party, embarrassed himself, betrayed his voters, destroyed his reputation, and broken a solemn manifesto pledge - because he has an “emotional commitment to Europe as he worked for Leon Brittan”.
I think I’d like to paraphrase Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons at this point:
“Why Nick, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for LEON BRITTAN?”
‘I just cannot understand the Lib Dem’s position on this, there isn’t a deep abiding principle being tested here’
Have a look at Mike’s post at 58. Clegg is a servant of the EU, and he will do whatever he can to try to support the institution to which he has pledged his primary allegiance.
Rather than be open about this, however, he is trying to confuse the issue by holding up the idea of an in-out referendum - apparently in a cynical attempt to attract anti-EU supporters.
Disloyal. Untrustworthy. Inarticulate. And a bad tactician too.
Bring back Ming?
66 - perhaps, to paraphrase Henry of Navarre, he feels “Brussels is worth a mess”.
65. but the lib dems claim no-ones that interested, so how can it be popular?
69. That spin line was from last week I think.
70. I’m confused. Clegg may have not managed to make the party unpopular (give it time) however he’s managed to split his party and tie them in knots. This has given the tories tons of ammunition to use against them.
71. Understandable. I think a lot of Lib Dems are confused too, though I must say they have shown admirable determination in coming on here day after day with the latest cobbled together spin lines.
Having to defend the indefensible day in, day out, frequently contradicting things you said just 24 hours earlier is a great test of resolve.
It’s very tricky to have a referendum on a treaty. People will agree with some parts and disagree with others. The Lib Dem position seems to be the only honest one.
A referendum can’t list all the provisions of the treaty and ask which ones the public like or dislike. If the EU is to function it’s got to have rules which are regularly updated. Those who would vote ‘NO’to the treaty obviously don’t want the EU to function so must want out. So ‘IN’ or ‘OUT’ is the honest question.
73. people will have agreed or dissagreed on the various parts of the constitution, however the lib dems were quite happy to have a referendum on that. why is this any different?
65, Richard
“His (Clegg) position is actually popular”
With whom, do you have any evidence to support this claim?
“It has produced no sign of a slide in the polls”
The events are far too recent to have registered with anyone outside the Westminster village, nor was I aware any polls had be carried out to substantiate your comment.
“speak more clearly of anguish and anger amongst Tories”
A quarter of LibDem MPs are threatening to rebel, or had you forgotten.
If you have nothing to add other than partisan rhetoric you are simply adding to the general EUrosceptic feelings of dishonesty and mistrust.
73. Does that warped reasoning apply to France and Holland as well?
I think there is no doubt the Lib Dem MPs will trust their own poll, published under MRS rules and there for all to see.
Why on earth should they trust a poll that apparently doesn’t exist, that has been made up by an organisation funded by the Tory Party, that is campaigning to unseat them at the next election.
It’s a no-brainer - a bit like the majority of the Tory posters who have posted on this thread so far…
77. If in doubt, insult. What poll doesnt exist?
77. Oh dear, now resorting to childish abuse. And after being so brave in supporting one untenable position after another, as I mentioned earlier…
Roger: “The Lib Dem position seems to be the only honest one.”
Yes, the only honest position is to call for a referendum on a Constitution in your manifesto, then completely go back on that promise when it is politically inconvenient, then try and cover up your lies by calling for a vote which no one had requested, and which everyone knows you would never hold anyway if you ever got to power - just in case you got the wrong answer.
So, yes, the Lib Dem position “seems to be the only honest one”, IF you are a decadent old ad man like Roger, whose entire life has been spent in the moral vacuum of the advertising industry.
80. If only the Lib Dems had hired Roger to do their PR, it would have been OK. They could have been supporting the re-introduction of burning at the stake and Roger would have guaranteed overwhelming public support.
77
So telling the truth about the LibDems makes me a Conservative?
Interesting logic. Typical of a LibDem supporter?
If so, heaven help the party.
77: I’ve seen Lib Dem polling at work, admittedly at a local level, and it is designed to produce the answer they want.
re 77 . Absolute rubbish Dan and I am appalled that you should try to defend it. The Lib Dem poll was defective and brings disrepute on your party and mine. It did not give the proper options and as I suggested in an email correspondence with party HQ yesterday afternoon appears to have been designed to show that the leadership was right.
Who does Nick Clegg think he is - Ken Livingsone?
80. Just a point of interest. Rules concerning ‘truthfullness’ in (TV) advertising are unmatched in just about any other sphere I can think of.
PS. Pleased to see you are a fan of writings of the keen socialist Robert Bolt the late English teacher at Millfield.
7 /55 No, some of the public are being driven there by the misrepresentation from the tabloids.
In answer to Sean T’s question about why the Lib Dem leadership has taken the line it has. First, a disclaimer, I have no special line to the leadership. I am not sure whether I qualify in Sean’s book as a “nice, sensible” Lib Dem - probably not, after some of the comments I have made to him! First point, the Giscard devised Constitution was an attempt to put the EU on a Europe - wide accepted footing, but obviously tripped up when the voters of France and Netherlands said no. However, incorporated within the Constitution were the various measures trying to enable the now larger EU to function more effectively. Europhobes in this country generally felt that those proposals had been overthrown. However, unless many in Europe were prepared to just lie down and say they were prepared to accept that kind of veto on effectiveness, that was clearly not going to be the end of the story. So, the measuures, or similar ones were put forward to Lisbon, having been shorn of the constitutional stuff.
Lib Dem leadership, being generally sympathetic for the need for an effective EU (and Clegg and Huhne having personal experience of working against minority blocking positions as former MEPs), felt there was a need to discuss fully with the British people what it means to be in the EU, why it COULD be so useful etc. And, as I said at post 8 and previously, a low turnout referendum on what a lot of people would see as a technical issue would not be a reasonable proposition to turn around the small number of europhobes (”sceptics”) who would wish to vote no in such a referendum. This “no” vote would then build up pressure for the future on any further issues where people are trying to develop EU effectiveness. Hence a wide and we would hope, deep, debate on the EU and our membership of it.
Yes, it’s a sort of nuclear option, but those in favour of democracy at an international level cannot see any other way forward. This increasingly small world has enough problems without arguing interminably over dots and commas.
It may well be that people who do not accept one another’s assumptions or priorities will continue to argue over this. But this is an explanation which fits with current Lib Dem policy. It is one which is neither dishonest, as many here are saying, or, unless you think the people of the UK are just totally and incorrigibly nationalist of a Little Englander type, which I don’t accept, one that is necessarily politically naive. It is trying to raise the debate above the trees, better to see the wood.
As an observation the Lib Dem blogosphere has very little discussion on this issue.
As a rule they are generally more “on message” than the Conservative blogs but this time the silence is deafening.
Both Labour and the LDs are going against what 9 out of 10 voters want.
If only 2% get very angry about this, the Conservatives will gain a lot of recruits from this. People prepared to deliver, become members and stand as candidates.
85 - “plurissima leges, corruptissima republica”.
84 - Ouch!!
Clegg really hasn’t got a grasp of this situation. He was forced into pushing for an in-or-out referendum when faced with a front bench rebellion and now he is trying to use flawed statistics to back up his case!
Huhne must be gutted watching this circus.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
86. Another brave effort, but really just long-winded rubbish.
If the Lib Dems were being ‘honest’ they would announce their wholehearted support for a federal European state and campaign positively for that - not resort to subterfuge, smokescreens, rigged polls and the breaking of manifesto pledges.
86 So the system underpinning the identity of our democracy is viewed by the LibDems as just “dots and commas”….
86. Piffle. Just give us the vote you promised. And stop pretending you would actually call a vote on EU membership. We all know you wouldn’t - cause of the huge instability it would produce, and the very real fear of an Out vote. It’s student politics. It’s a gimmick. It’s why everyone laughs at your party.
Are we really to believe Nick Clegg’s first objective on assuming office is to threaten the UK’s position in Europe? And what would he do if we got an Out vote? Do you expect us to believe the Lib Dems would actually lead Britain out of Europe? Where? Would we join the scouts?
Your post is prolix gibberish, yet another failed attempt to hide the basic objective of the europhiles: which is to smuggle Britain into a quasi-Federal Europe, by fair means or foul.
I think Peter the Punter got it right yesterday. He is an open Federalist, and he accepts that’s where the EU is heading, and he is pleased cause that’s what he wants. That’s fair enough - because he also wants to ask the people first, and he will abide by their decision.
He says is is embarrassed by europhiles, like you, who try to pretend this isn’t where the EU is heading. I’m not surprised. You are embarrassing.
It’s this kinda crap which is turning people right off politics. Stop it, please. This endless series of lies on Europe may not damage the Lib Dems fatally in the short term, but it is doing terrible damage to British politics overall.
We are all suffering because of europhile lies.
91 Thanks Harry - sorry I am not the most concise person on earth!
92 No.
94. I could have lived with the long-windedness had the content had any merit.
In the past I really had a lot of affection and respect for Shirley Williams. It was diminished somewhat when she jointly endorsed Nick Clegg along with Paddy Ashdown early on in the LD leadership contest which I believe strongly influenced early voters in the contest and thus won it for their chosen one. If she and some other LD peers are truly the ones that have influenced Nick Clegg to adopt the Party’s current illiberal and bizarre EU referendum position I really think it might be better she returned to the Labour Party. I am actually pro Europe but it is not acceptable that parts of our national sovereignty should continue to be given up without the assent of the majority of the British people. If the federalists’ goal of a United States of Europe is stalled for a while so what!
77 this site is these polluted with the inane ramblings of the LD trolls - it used to be a civillised place where proper lefties like Roger and Tyson could chew the fat with completely impartial experts such as Ave It.
this site’s definitely gone downhill since the LD trolls took over.
97 - At various times there are accusations of Tory Trolls, Labour Trolls and now LD Trolls. I think what these people mean is there are lots of people who are disagreeing with me.
93 Frankly it’s hyped-up melodrama like yours which causes people to lose touch and confidence in politics. Perhaps better to stick to the fiction!
99 - see 84. If even our mild-mannered host is moved to this kind of comment, I’d suggest there’s a serious problem.
OFF THREAD ……. Yippee !!!!!!!!!!!
Meanwhile …. Michael Tomasky in the “Gruntfutock” analyses the ‘Yeldarb Effect’ at play in the Democrat primaries. A good summary with useful links.
Will the Yeldarb tip Ohio and Texas for Obama ???
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_tomasky/2008/03/the_yeldarb_effect.html
99. Clegg is surely the main producer of fiction in UK politics just now. How output is certainly prolific - at least one new piece per day recently.
99 Tim13 - The LDs had a perfectly reasonable position in their Manifesto; that the Constitution was acceptable and advantageous to UK and Europe and they would campaign for it to be ratified but that it should be subject to a referendum. They could have said and argued as Labour has that the Lisbon Treaty was an entirely different document and having regard to its scope and changes they now believed ratification through Parliament was the right course.
Sceptics may well have disagreed on their judgement of Treaty v Constitution but that course would be a straightforward one.
Why on earth choose an entirely different course and then try to back it up with a not very good Poll?
99
No,it’s just politicians blatantly renegeing on promises,nothing more complicated than that,however much you would like it to be.
And if you think my 86 was “prolix”, what do you think would happen if we had a “debate” on the Lisbon Treaty - yes more of the same. And, yes, you believe your side would “win” with that kind of referendum, and I am inclined to agree. You mention PtP’s views on this - I am sure my views are rather similar. And again, I agree, people must then be given an option. Sorry, to resort to lies about “smuggling”, and to try to misrepresent a genuine attempt by me to answer your question as “student politics” etc is nonsense, and frankly, more than a bit insulting. If you don’t want to hear answers that may have truth embedded in them, I don’t know why you bother with a discussion site.
97 quite right - my comment was specifically aimed at ‘Dan’ a stunningly ill informed commentator who yesterday was droning on about ‘tory trolls’.
As far as I know my comment is the first there has ever been about “LD trolls” but that’s because the Joseph Rowntree Trust party doesn’t have the money for real astroturfers.
Trying to get off the EU-rabid ranting (from both sides) - which seems to exemplify all the worst aspects of poltical discussion forums - (I’ll shout at you and you can shout back at me and we wont listen or change our mind about anything so whats the point).
Can I introduce a betting angle to this to at least try and bring some sanity back to the discussion - spread bet, Number of Tory MP’s that don’t follow Cameron; Number of Lib Dem MP’s that don’t follow Clegg, and Number of Labour MP’s that don’t follow Brown through the Lobbys.
104. You really are getting very confused, aren’t you?
106 A bit of clarification, please, Lennon - is that the number who vote against their leader, or are you including abstentions, pressing constituency engagements etc?
Ted 102
Yes, I would agree with that representation. And I am not sure what to make of the “polls” situation that Mike presents today. At 86, I was merely trying to give a personal answer to Sean’s question.
102. I pretty much agree with this. I dissagree with labours stance, however at least they have one. The lib dem strategy of changing the question then backing it up with dodgy polls or derision of the subject itself (no-ones interested) makes little or no sense.
108 - I was thinking of including all who were present and actively voted, but assumes that all abstentions are active (ie vote twice, once in each lobby) which might not be very realistic.
106 Lennon a good idea on the referendum
Number of Tory MP’s that don’t follow Cameron;
Number of Lib Dem MP’s that don’t follow Clegg,
Number of Labour MP’s that don’t follow Brown
109. But in your rambling post earlier on you claimed to be outlining the Lib Dem leadership’s position, not a personal one.
[106] Yes indeed. This is quite the most tiresome thread we’ve had since - oh, the last time everyone banged on about the subject.
As to Clegg’s antics, it’s hard to disagree with Ted at [102].
And if the Tories think it’s that important, why not make an electoral pact with UKIP in Cornwall to rid the county of those pesky LibDems? Answer: because they don’t so they won’t.
Plenty of signs at the Scottish Lib Dem conference in Aviemore that Clegg has ordered a change in strategy for his dwindling Caledonian troops: no more “Labour’s lap-dogs”; but more cosying up to the Scottish National Party government. The vitriol being poured on Scottish Labour has been quite impressive.
Has Mr Clegg been reading pb.com?
86 An In/Out referendum makes little sense until you have negotiated the terms of withdrawal, and can put them to the electorate, or at the very least, can explain in some detail, what terms of withdrawal you would be seeking.
And that’s even before we start discussing whether the Lib Dems are sincere in this proposal, and would actually abide by the result.
Leaving the principle aside, though, you can’t really dispute that this is just bad politics. who ever heard of a party leader trying to impose a three line whip on his MPs to make them *abstain*, and with the real prospect that a significant number of them will defy him.
And while we may treat the I Want a Referendum vote as a big petition, rather than an actual survey of public opinion, the fact that 133,000 people in 10 constituencies did support a referendum on the Treaty has to indicate that some people will vote on this issue, and it wouldn’t take very many of them to do so to unseat some Lib Dem MPs in marginal seats.
114. cosying up to UKIP would be suicide, as they want to leave europe, whereas the tories don’t. It would prove the lib dems and labour right, that the tories are in fact anti-european reactionaries, when in reality they arent. That plus UKIP are smug basket cases.
114, they don’t need to. Farage has said he won’t put up candidates to stand against eurosceptic opponents to avoid splitting the sceptic vote.
I’ve made what probably will be my final projections for Ohio and Texas. On the Democratic side I see Hillary walking away with Ohio and winning Texas by a small amount. On the Republican side I see McCain crushing Huckabee.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/hillary-leads-in-both-ohio-and-texas/
I think that Hillary’s chances should be 30-35% now although I think that if she wins McCain will still beat her (though it won’t be quite the landslide that he’d get if Obama was his opponent).
117. 188. Also pointless as UKIP is practically moribund anyway and will struggle to field candidates in many constituencies at the next GE.
[118] But we’re being told that all the Tories under 55 are eurosceptics, so it doesn’t look like Nigel and the Farragoes will be fighting many seats. And was the Tory candidate in that by-election he fought a Euro-nutter?
O/T According to Guido, Tom Watson is about to take over from Derek Conway as the biggest porker at Westminster,fabulous cartoon of Watson with snout in trough.
Overall, I’d expect Labour to win this by about 320 to 250 in the Commons. It could go either way in the Lords, IMHO.
123…where the Lib Dem peers will surely play an even more pivotal role given the closer party arithmetic?
So the Lib Dems will get a double exposure as the defenders of the interests of the EU against the democratic rights of the British people.
124. yep, and could rebel against clegg in either. could be interesting
UKIP are weaker than 2004 but still have a presence in many areas. Huhne’s Eastleigh is one key example where they already have selected a candidate.
UKIP do offer “non-compete” deals to BOO supporters. What if they extended it to “post ratification Treaty referendum” supporters?
It might get the backing of 30 to 50 Conservative PPCs in marginals and lower the chances of a hung parliament.
UKIP was largely setup to bring pressure on the Conservative policy on the EC. Could the next GE be the one where its influence is greater than at any other GE?
126. Personally, I think the hardcore UKIP supporters won’t forgive Cameron for his “loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists” remarks. And the hardcore is pretty much all they have left these days.
There’s one stark fact at the heart of this debate that should make all sincere Lib Dems stop and think: the political establishment in Europe has gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid any further referendums during the ratification process because it knows there is no longer sufficient public support for the project.
Rather than setting out the arguments for Lisbon and winning over their electorates the hard way (the democratic route), politicians have redesigned the Constitutional Treaty for the specific purpose of dodging the need to obtain popular consent (the bureaucratic route).
I would have thought that the Lib Dems, however enthusiastic they might be to see European integration, would have opposed such obviously dishonest, undemocratic manouevering. I honestly expected them to support a referendum on Lisbon under a slogan such as ‘We want a new Europe, but not like this’.
A transnational political entity created in this underhand way is built on sand. It has no legitimacy and commands little loyalty. When the EU collapses, I wonder if its creators will rue their impatience. Or do they still adhere to a high-handed, 19th century view of the populace as ignorant fools who need to be driven forward by wise, far-sighted rulers?
119 Poor Hillary. With your record of predictions Matthew…. that really dooms her. She’ll be beaten like a mule now.
128 - Great post Don. It wasn’t just politically stupid for Clegg to decide to get the Government out of a hole in the House of Commons vote tomorrow, it was immoral too.
128, Well said,
Will LibDems stop to think what is ‘Liberal’ or ‘Democratic’ about their party leaders actions.
127, UKIP has spent 10+ years of attacking the Conservatives calling them traitors and europhiles. There has been far more venom expended by UKIP than the reverse.
But pragmatically there is an opportunity to use the few % of votes driven by those who will be very very angry over being denied a referendum.
A Conservative Govt in 2010 with a working majority will be dominated by Eurosceptics. It will run a greater risk of clashing with the European federalists. Do UKIP recognise that they could help that situation occur or do they prefer a hung parliament where the europhiles will control the agenda?
I would have thought that the Lib Dems, however enthusiastic they might be to see European integration, would have opposed such obviously dishonest, undemocratic manouevering
Why? Anyone who has fought them at a local level would be surprised if they had been anything other than entirely dishonest.
[132] Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what a Cameron government would actually do about Europe, and why its troops would all be contented with whatever it is that it does.
“Do UKIP recognise that they could help that situation occur or do they prefer a hung parliament where the europhiles will control the agenda?”
In my experience, some UKIP activists are pragmatic, and would like to see Conservative eurosceptics in charge. But a significant number regard hurting the Conservative party as their raison d’etre.
135. Agreed. Which makes their decline into irrelevance all the more heartening.
The case for EU disengagement is far more likely to be advanced by intelligent cross party groups such as the highly effective anti-euro campaigns of 1999-2001. Leaving it in the hands of assorted spoilers, nutters and obsessives guarantees failure.
128. Very well put. That is the great shame here. I had some residual respect for the Lib Dems before this: as a party that, when push came to shove, was prepared to say unpopular and controversial things: simply because they felt they were right.
Their stance on Iraq was a prime example.
They have now totally squandered all that hard-won reputation, to deviously and mendaciously force through an unwanted Treaty, which is only going to make the EU seem even more elitist and undemocratic.
The Lib Dems are not even internally consistent: as their astroturfers upthread desperately try to claim the Treaty is nothing like the Constitution, their leader in Europe is on record as saying it is, in fact, almost exactly the same (check the Andrew Duff EP report - if you can be arsed).
The end result? The Lib Dems now look just like all the other parties - a bunch of crooks, shysters, and liars; even worse - they look like IRRELEVANT crooks and liars.
Why bother voting for them?
136
Unfortunately for the sceptics, the nutters make the most noise: in public and on bbs..
And anyone listening to them - and who is unconvinced - will go away thinking that if these are the real opponents, do i want to be associated with nutters?
And the answer usually for most of the public is: zzzz. We’re fed up with politics.. and nutters .. and pigs at the trough…
137. The Iraq stance was good niche marketing. There was always a large chunk of the public opposed to the war, and moreover it was a chunk whose votes could be actively shifted by the issue.
Sharing a platform with the SWP and islamic radicals was risky, and may have lost a few votes in parts of the south, but overall the electoral calculus was clearly positive.
Had an anti-war stance appealed only to a tiny minority of voters I somehow doubt the Lib Dems would have gone for it though. After all, they had no problem supporting the NATO bombing of Serbian civilians - something also unauthorised by the UN.
137, all the more remarkable is when you compare how the Lib Dems were just 3 years ago. Kennedy got them more MPs than they’d had since Lloyd George, their Iraq stance portrayed them as both principled and wise and they had a longstanding reputation for being quite nice and honest.
Now they’ve knifed one leader in the back and allowed a second to hang himself, become totally divided over whether or not to break an electoral promise and have managed to make Labour’s “We just lied to you in the manifesto” position seem straightforward.
A while to go yet, but should Clegg remain in place it’ll be interesting to see what happens to the Lib Dems at the next General Election.
83 - I’m appalled Mike that you are giving equal prominence to a poll that we have no provinence for. It does your site no credit.
The IWAR question does not appear on the ICM website and Roger raises the point that it would have had to have been of 10,000 voters to get a sample of 1,000 previous Lib Dems.
The questions asked by the Lib Dems are perfectly reasonable - if they weren’t neither MORI or the MRS would have allowed them to be asked in the way they were.
Shadsy’s odds on a 3-1 result for Hillary have now been cut to 2/1.
141. After your performance in smearing Rik on here a while back you are lucky Mike still allows you to post. That really was a case of doing the site ‘no credit’.
142 Goupillon. Very poor odds !!
If I was Tom Watson i might seriously consider suing Guido. if you read his story it’s seriously misleading. That his cousin works for some Euro politician can hardly be lumped into TW’s expenses. Infact if you remove the bile all you are left with is that his wife works for him part time.
Why bother voting Lib Dem? Good question.
First, they are not Labour or Tory (do I have to list the reasons why I would never vote for either of them - briefly, as parties, they mean me no good). Then, who else?
I live in England, so it can’t be nationalist (well I don’t think there is a serious Wessex National party devoted to restoring the Heptarchy - pity). Then again I have a helpful Lib Dem MP, who will, I fear, soon be replaced by an unhelpful Tory - I’d like to delay that. I don’t relish the populist, right wing, celebrity led bunch that will no doubt emerge soon.
Well, once the Lib Dems lose here and the seat reverts to safe Tory, it will be Green or nothing.
141 So Dan just because you don’t like a poll result you smear it in spite of it being on the ICM website?
Typical Europhile nonsense.
119 Hi Matthew.
Looks like it’s going to be a good nite tonite. I had feared an Obama landslide, which would have made for a very dull evening’s betting. Now I should say only Vermont is certain; all other results, indeed all other permutations of results, are possible.
Your projection looks to me a reasonable benchmark of what Hillary can achieve *at best*. Even if she does, it will still leave her a poor second favorite but she would still carry on and with every justification.
Can’t wait. See you about 8pm?
147 - No it’s now confirmed that IWAR made up their claim - their poll said no such thing.
Copied from Lib Dem Voice:
Confirmed: I Want A Referendum DID pull a fast one on poll results
Written by Mark Pack on 4th March 2008 – 10:30 am
So, now we have it nice and clear. The “I Want A Referendum” campaign was challenged yesterday to produce the poll question and answer to justify their statement about their ICM poll:
‘The poll also finds that if only one question is to be asked then Liberal Democrat voters would prefer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.’
Their answer? Neither could they produce the poll question to back-up this claim nor did they say, “Oh sorry, mistake in writing up our press release; we meant to say something different.”
144. Jack W - Yes, fortunately I took 4/1 earlier which i have also hedged with an equal bet for 2-2 at 6/4.
148 PtP. Good luck in the bunker tonight !!
Don’t forget when the Russians start shelling to ‘take care’ of Mighty Fella and save the last capsules for youself and Eva. Several litres of fuel will also be required to burn those betting slips and the other ‘body’ of evidence.
Hope to hear from you from Paraguay if you manage to get out !!
136
whilst not a UKIP member or voter (nor a member of any other party for that matter) I can understand how many UKIP members feel. Many of them are Ex Tory members who have suffered many years of lies and deception from that party and who feel utterly alienated from the Parliamentary party which has consistently said one thing and done another on the EU.
As a result they feel they have no reason to believe that any future Tory administration would be any more honest about the EU situation than previous ones. This is particularly the case when Hague comes out with his ‘In Europe not run by Europe’ which all educated observers realise is simply not possible given the status of EU law and Acquis Communitaire.
I happen to think that the UKIP position as it has been articulated over the last few years is wrong since far more Tory MPs are now Eurosceptic. But there is a question to be asked as to whether we would even be having this debate about broken promises if the pressure exerted by UKIP and other organisations had not been there in the first place.
149. that neutral website, lib dem voice.
145
I would wait for the next set of revelations,though £300,000 in expenses for family members makes Derek Conway look like a wimp.
He’s managed to outdo Ann Keen and her MP husband who have claimed around £175,000 between them for a second home,although their constituencies are only 10 miles from Westminster.
Dan,
and you actually believe anything written on Lib Dem Voice given that it represents the views of a party that has broken its election pledges?
Just a taster of what you and the other Lib Dems are now going to be receiving for the next few years every time you make any statement you want people to believe.
It no longer matters what anyone associated with the Lib Dems says whether true or not. The party has proved itself untrustworthy and deceptive over the issue of the referendum and that is what we will make sure sticks in the minds of the electorate.
Hilary has now difted back out to 3`s on Betfair -might be a chance of an arb as the exchange and the bookies are now calling Texas very differently …
112. 106 Lennon a good idea on the referendum
“Number of Tory MP’s that don’t follow Cameron;
Number of Lib Dem MP’s that don’t follow Clegg,
Number of Labour MP’s that don’t follow Brown”
Casino says;
Treacherous Tories - 4 MPs
Laudable Lib-Dems - 8 MPs
Bolshie Balls-to-Brown-”ites” - 32 MPs
Vote on referendum: 230 FOR 310 AGAINST
Vote carried…
SeanT
The depressing thing is that Federalist Europhiles like me are getting the worst of all worlds. Our hopes are being disappointed and we are losing respect and credibility because of the doomed efforts of those who think our ambitions can be achieved through stealth and dishonesty.
You understand me already, I know, but let me make it plain for others that if the European objective cannot be achieved openly, honestly and with the consent of the majority, it isn’t worth the candle. I’d far rather continue to live in a motley ragbag of incoherent European States which people actually want rather than a single Federalist Europe which people don’t.
The people may be daft, silly, feckless, xenophobic, short-sighted, self-interested, insular and apathetic, but they still shouldn’t be treated with contempt by their Governments. The pro-European standpoint is a worthy one. It has been poorly served by its shyster protagonists.
137. Sean T, I think you’ll find very few Lib Dem supporters, on here or elsewhere, who share Andrew Duff’s position on European integration - which you invoke in every post as evidence of the party’s treachery. (Obviously I can’t speak for the party members in the East of England who put him top of the LD list there in 1999 and 2004.)
As it happens, I’m a moderate eurosceptic, and have had some vigorous disagreements with Lib Dem friends about the Euro - which I think would be a disaster for Britain. And I would probably have campaigned against the EU constitution in a 2005 referendum.
However, the shrill harpings of IWAR and the Tories in the Commons have been a complete turn-off. The Lisbon Treaty is no more constitutional than Maastricht, Nice, etc, and I think the Lib Dems are perfectly justified in claiming that their manifesto commitment can be met by an in-or-out referendum. I’ll admit, though, that what started out as a cunning trick designed to keep SW eurosceptics on-side is rapidly turning into bad politics.
150 Goupillon. Ladbrokes seemed to have taken a position on Texas. Mmmhhhhh ….. To stay level in popular vote delegates Hillary has to manage around 54-56% of the vote to reverse Obama’s in-built districting advantage. Then she has to keep the show on the road in the subsequent caucus !!
I just don’t see it !! ….. Also Rhode Island is trending Obama and Vermont is a slam dunk ….. and then there’s the ‘Yeldarb effect’.
158. I used to be pro-europe, but after watching as the EU shows time after time how arrogant, corrupt and beauracratic it is, I’ve lost all hope in it.
O/T What IS the purpose of Margaret Hodge?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7276684.stm
159. The main problem is instead of keeping them in lines its driven them more towards the tory position. Instead of Clegg being clever he’s miscalculated, the tories havent been split or damaged by the issue, and he’s left with his eurosceptic MP’s now worried about their seats, and perhaps rebelling.
149, 155. I have to say that I’m more inclined to treat Anthony Wells’ UK Polling Report as a site of record than I am Lib Dem Voice. If Anthony Wells reports it as a bona fide poll, then it’s a bona fide poll.
137 - Thanks Sean T. That’s praise from the master.
As an instinctive pro-European I’m particularly p**sed off with the Lib Dems. I was impressed by Kennedy’s original decision to support a referendum. Here’s a party that wants to build a closer Europe the right way, I thought. Now Clegg has thrown it away and lined up his party with the arrogant bureaucratic elite against the people.
My thinking on the whole issue of the EU has been heavily influenced by Hugo Young’s seminal book, This Blessed Plot (now there’s a clever title for you!). As a Guardian columnist and grandee of the liberal left, Young was as pro-European as anyone but he doesn’t pull his punches about the dishonest and unaccountable way that the politicians of Europe (particularly in Britain) have chosen to construct - and sell - the EU.
From a party political point of view Cleggs best option is to go for something that distinguishes him from the other two parties. Being a Cameron mark 11 is his worst option and supporting the government not much better. as has been shown in umpteen polls only loonies are remotely interested in this treaty-and Tory loonies at that-so he’s taking a punt to nothing by going for his ‘in’ or ‘out’.
I happen to agree with his approach anyway. The sceptics are getting away with murder led largely by the US owned British press and it’s time for the British to start trying to make the EU work better or get out. This no-mans-land is a pathetic place to be.
Peter the Punter:
Despite my snipings at you the other day, I now need to ask for your gracious advice!!
Having a “New Hampshire” moment..
Do I lay off some of my Obama profit today, or hold out till the result tomorrow?
I need the cash from Betfair and I want to lock in the profits, I just don’t know how the odds will move if Hillary does ok tonight. I might have a wait a while for my cash…
Your advice: Hold the bet, or lay off now??
155 - Of course Lib Dem Voice is not nuetral - but then neither is IWAR.
The point is that IWAR was lying when it said, ‘The poll also finds that if only one question is to be asked then Liberal Democrat voters would prefer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.’
The ICM poll asked no such question and Mike should not treat the claim with equivalence to the MORI questions.
As for the Lib Dems going back on a manifesto pledge - the Treaty is not a Constitution.
In fact in my view the so-called constitution wasn’t much of a constitution as it contained a huge amount of stuff about EU governance that should have been in a treaty. But the Treaty (like all treaties) is amendable through the normal processes - a constitution is not and takes precedence over all other laws. That’s why a referendum is needed for a constitution, but not for a treaty.
The content may be 95% similar, but its effect is not.
Put it another way - humans share 99.4% of their DNA with Chimpanzees - we don’t give them a vote do we? (even if they post here under the pseudonym Sean T
)
162 - I don’t know, but she should really engage brain before opening mouth!
164 - read the Lib Dem Voice extract again - it’s not the poll that’s legitimate (although I’d like to see how they got their sample of 1,000 previous Lib Dem voters). It’s the question that IWAR is claiming was asked - when it wasn’t.
169 - She probably has…that’s what is so alarming
170 that should read ‘illegitimate’ do’h!
163. Agreed.
Clegg’s big mistake has been to raise the salience of the issue. If the party had gone quietly into the lobbies with Labour on the grounds that the Lisbon Treaty wasn’t a constitution, or had backed a referendum on Lisbon with a view to making the case for the Treaty and for Europe, then the repercussions at the next election would have been nil. Outside sites like this no-one would have known or cared what the LD position was.
Now, although I still suspect that the position will do the LDs less harm than posters above are suggesting (remember Maastricht), it’s clearly a stick for the Tories to beat them with.
What was Shirley thinking?
158 - if only the actual politicians had such a sense of honesty and decency.
158 - Bravo PtP. One honest pro-European is worth a hundred dishonest ones.
159
Jack,
that sort of gets to the heart of the matter. Why is it that only in the UK can people like yourself can get away with claiming the Lisbon Treaty is no great shakes whilst across the rest of Europe the politicians are saying it is exactly the same as the Constitution which you claim you would have voted against?
There are those like Peter who are honourable in their position - which I happen to disagree with - that they wish a Federalist Europe. But the Europhile movement in the UK is dominated by those who try to claim we can have our cake and eat it, that sovereignty (the exclusive right to control over ones affairs) can be shared with another authority and that the treaty is nothing more than a tidying up exercise.
It is the downright dishonesty of that position that annoys so many people.
- Vermont is Obama’s
- Texas is Obama’s (on delegate count at least)
- Rhode Island was moving sharpish towards Obama in recent polls
- Ohio weather is set to be atrocious today - keeping Clinton’s voters home more than Obama’s?
Some of that Obama winning all four states looks tempting…
I can’t believe the hostility I really can’t. The EU constitution rejected in 2005 wasn’t a really constitution. The changes it makes are tiny (eg there will never be an EU army or foreign policy no matter how much a few might wish it so). Lisbon is almost identical but has some sensible ideas about making the EU run a bit smoother. What’s the problem with that if you support the EU? Also, after all this caper you can be sure this will be the last treaty for some decades.
Personally I don’t care whether Lisbon happens or not, but I wouldn’t want the UK to be the one doing the killing. It would be rightly seen as a mindless, petulant act. I admire Clegg’s steadfastness of standing up for what is right.
And it will all be forgotten come May 2010.
158. Fine post Peter.
Re Mr.Duff. If a Tory had said that the ‘Germans need to be defeated’, can you imagine the howls of outrage from the Lib Dems, and their Labour and media chums?
Cameron would have been asked to denounce the individual concerned, probably sack him from the party. There would have been a concerted chorus of outraged ‘nasty party’ jibes from all the usual suspects.
But saying that your own people need to be ‘defeated’ is apparently OK. A few Lib Dems on here have expressed reservations about this remark, but nothing very serious.
Unless the Lib Dem leadership disowns these appalling comments entirely, it seems reasonable to assume they don’t have any problem with them.
I agree with Peter the Punter’s comments at 165 “if the European objective cannot be achieved openly, honestly and with the consent of the majority, it isn’t worth the candle. I’d far rather continue to live in a motley ragbag of incoherent European States which people actually want rather than a single Federalist Europe which people don’t.
The people may be daft, silly, feckless, xenophobic, short-sighted, self-interested, insular and apathetic, but they still shouldn’t be treated with contempt by their Governments. The pro-European standpoint is a worthy one. It has been poorly served by its shyster protagonists.”
I am a LIBDEM and broadly supportive of the EU but do not believe it can progress, maybe even survive without the consent of the majority
The only way in the UK of ensuring that consent is now to face up to the pros and cons of being in the EU in a proper debate. A referendum on the Lisbon Treaty alone would not achieve this.
141, 149, 155, 168,
Dan’s point that the question that was highlighted on Lib Dem Voice (”If there is only one question asked …”) was not in the ICM poll appears valid. He claims that this was a deliberate lie; on that we can’t be drawn.
Of course, the questions that are in the poll (linked directly from the ICM website here support Mike’s argument in the post itself.
A too-quick reading of the posts above seemed to give ,e the impression that Dan was questioning the ICM poll’s very existence and thus the credibility of the results (less the “if there is only one question …” one, of course), which of course he wouldn’t.
I do wonder why Lib Dem voice seem to be making a huge thing over this one question - the published and verifiable results (67% of Lib Dem voters want a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; 32% would be less likely to vote Lib Dem without it; 71% want Clegg to give his MPs a free vote (21% for whipped for referendum, 4% for whipped against referendum, 2% for whipped to abstain), 25% support a one-question IN/OUT referendum, 70% a two-question IN/OUT, Lisbon YES/NO referendum) seem to be plenty of food for thought for Lib Dems - as Mike has highlighted.
It does seem as though the “keep the SW EU-sceptics on-side” idea has backfired.
I just can`t for the life of me see Obama taking Texas - its been a lucrative play so far to lay favs in primaries -particularly when they have been 1.7 or less - can`t see Texas been any different to be honest …
171 - She does seem to be on a kamikaze mission doesn’t she considering what is festering in her back yard.
158 - I agree Peter. But the treaty was that b’stard Chriac’s price for enlargement. It is a price well worth paying. And with an EU of 27 this should never have to happen again. 2005 is year zero for a new, liberal EU.
168
It seems that you are therefore in disagreement with almost every other political leader in Europe outside of the UK including the ones who drew up the Constitution in the first place.
It should surely say something to you when Gisela Stuart - whose European affinities cannot be questioned and who was actually involved in the original Constitution is campaigning for a referendum against the wishes of her own party.
145. It’s a bit pathetic from Guido. He’s always banging on about how he leads these stories where no-one else dares tread, but he neglects to mention he lifted the story from a west midlands local paper. Doesn’t even link to it. Why? I suspect because it would be obvious that he was handed it on a plate.
In any case, how “members of Tom Watson’s family employed by other people entirely” is supposed to be a story is a mystery to me. Just a bit of afters, I suspect.
176.
Okay Richard, an agreement and a disagreement.
I think, like Peter at 58 (whose federalist tendencies I don’t share), that the European case should be made openly and visibly. That’s a fundamental point about honesty and engaging with the public, and it probably means we should have a referendum on Europe at some point - maybe on the Lisbon Treaty, maybe on British membership. Incidentally, I think Lib Dems have generally been much more willing to be open about the case for Europe than Labour have, though maybe that is changing.
The “breach of promise” argument is different. I don’t think Clegg et al are breaking a manifesto promise by calling for an in-or-out treaty. It’s not a great strategic move, but it’s not a breach of promise.
Unlike the Tory tax rises after 1992 and Labour’s introduction of top-up fees after 2001. There, the government had really won office on a false prospectus.
Slightly OT - the question of whether the Lisbon Treaty should be covered under the original requirement for a referendum on the constitution or if it’s fundamentally different seems to be a little woolly from both sides.
I’ve seen “92%”, 95%”, “98%” similarity figures, but what in effect are the crucial differences? What are the critical similarities? Is it possible for these to be summed up simply (eg loss of sovereignty over x number of areas, change in voting laws, etc)?
164 I’ve reread Mike Smithson’s article. I’ve also read the full details of the poll. It appears to me that Mike Smithson reports the findings of the poll absolutely accurately. 25% of the Lib Dems surveyed want an in/out referendum, 70% want a referendum on *both* our EU membership, and the Lisbon Treaty. You are correct to point out that IWAR’s press release says something different, but you are wrong to criticise Mike for giving prominence to this poll.
WRT the Treaty, I’m sure the sort of people who sell timeshares could accept there is a distinction between the Lisbon Treaty and the EU Constitution, but no one else would.
158. PtP. “The pro-European standpoint is a worthy one. It has been poorly served by its shyster protagonists”
We’ve had years of dishonest propaganda from a mainly non-British owned press who believe the interests of their proprietors are better served by keeping on the periphery of Europe. What exactly are you referring to when you talk about ’shyster protagonists’? Trying to introduce a treaty that would have no chance of getting through a referendum because ’shyster’ propagandists in the media are unanimously hostile?
Liberal EU - now there’s an oxymoron.
You are right of course that this wouldn’t happen again. One of the problems with the Treaty/Constitution is that it won’t have to happen again as one of the clauses allows for future changes to be made without the agreement of the individual countries.
Politician and bureaucrat heaven.
189. Mike proves more accurate than a rabid Lib Dem spinner and mudslinger.
Quelle surprise!
162, she’s a damn fool. I love the Proms, and the Last Night’s great. If people don’t feel comfortable with it they shouldn’t bloody well watch it. God knows I find those BBC Asian Network ads as much as fun as visiting the dentist, so I don’t tune into the station. Hardly rocket science.
168, if you’re comparing DNA with text you’re an idiot. You can alter words, length and language and retain the same meaning of a text. Reorder DNA and you’ll end up with a cow with its internal organs on the outside.
178, maybe anti-democratic EU-philes will conveniently forget it, but it will mobilise sceptics, democratic philes and those who believe manifestos should be kept.
Gosh indeedy- tonight is probably the most important night in US and world politics for the next 8 years most probably deciding who will be the next 2 term president and more than likely influence world politics for a generation,
and, dear oh dear, a thread on the LD’s and europe. What more can I say!!!
158. “Our hopes are being disappointed and we are losing respect and credibility because of the doomed efforts of those who think our ambitions can be achieved through stealth and dishonesty”.
Peter - not simply that they think the ambitions can be achieved by those means, but effectively can only be achieved that way. It is as if the leaders of the Euroenthusiasts have accepted that they have lost the public argument - which of course is true given that they have chosen not to make the case.
Speaking personally, I used to be an enthusiastic supporter of the EU. If it could show some credibility as an effective and efficient administrative system, I still would be. Given the choice, I would vote Yes - though with reservations. But the argument is massively undermined when the ‘Pro-’ side has people on it who believe it cannot win a free and fair debate.
194 Agree the pressing need for a US thread today.
Does anyone know if Paddy Power’s definition of the Texas winner is the same as Betfair’s and Ladbrokes. I’ve asked but had no response yet.
181 Andy Cooke “I do wonder why Lib Dem voice seem to be making a huge thing over this one question ”
The sad fact is that the person on LDV who is leading on this is a paid employee of the Lib Dems campaign team.
Nuff said?
re 141. Dan - you personally, the Lib Dems generally and Lib Dem Voice are coming out of this appallingly.
Before I did this article this morning I looked at the full data from both polls - something which you and others have failed to do.
In my book fiddling around with polls and poll data is a heinous sin which is why I am so opposed to what Ken Livingstone does with his private polling data. I cannot criticise him and ignore it if my own party does the same.
Clegg has gone down several notches in my book.
182 “I just can`t for the life of me see Obama taking Texas”
Maybe not on popular vote (although that is too close to call); but because of the weird set-up, he will almost certainly take most delegates today. Check to see what measure of “winning” is being used if you are betting.
Roger,
you attack the newspapers for an anti EU stance whilst the Eurosceptics attack the BBC for its vehemently Pro EU stance. Given that the BBC receives large amounts of hard cash from the EU (in addition to the taxpayers money) whereas the newspapers presumably have to sell copy to make money I think I know which one more accurately reflects public opinion.
But your insistence that the nasty newspapers are the reason we are all so Eurosceptic is a typical patrician’s argument. It is predicated on th assumption that people are too stupid to make up their own minds and have to be led to every decision.
Perhaps you might consider for a while that people are perfectly capable of doing their own research, evaluating their own experiences and coming to their own measured and intelligent conclusions.
Or does that go against your socialist principles?
re 194. A US thread will be appearing soon. Watch this space.
195 - what free and fair debate David? The issues are so arcane and the press so hostile for so long how can a debate be fair?
Chirac wanted to end his career with a treaty-monument to himself and he held the destiny of the freed ex-Warsaw Pact countries hostage until he got it. This is the crucial fact but you can’t, for reasons of diplomacy, have our leaders saying this.
We’ve had one of the busiest 24 hours of the campaign so far at Ladbrokes. Slighty unexpectedly, Texas and Ohio have been the liveliest betting heats we’ve seen, excepting New Hampshire. Hillary backers have been hammering all of our markets today.
As has been pointed out by others, we did take a bit of an anti-Clinton stand in these contests and it’s fair to say it will be a bleak night should she win both. On the other hand, this is all good news for McCain in the general election, in particular the cracks appearing in Obama’s candidacy. A Republican victory in Novemeber will be a very welcome outcome for us as things stand.
195. David Herdson - Euro federalists have been arguing that their project needed to proceed by stealth since its very inception. There is nothing new about any of this.
The EU project has always been anti-democratic, both in terms of tactics and in terms of its ultimate goal.
198 Kudos to you Mike for telling it how you see it, even though it reflects badly on your party. An object lesson in objectivity.
200. Richard, I’m not necessarily agreeing with Roger, but it is well-known that the British press is predominantly pro-Conservative. Do you believe it’s inconceivable that the kind of people who own newspapers (Murdoch, for instance) might use their papers as vehicles for their own views? Or that populist campaigns (eg on immigration, Europe and IHT) may be a proven way to sell papers, even when voters’ considered political views are more moderate or leftist?
205, I agree entirely.
204, as was stated in the excellent post 128, an undemocratic EU will collapse. I suspect it could happen in a few decades, especially if the corruption, lack of proper accounting and lack of electoral accountability continues.
Far better the EU ceases trying to be a nation, concentrates on trade with a low level of political integration.
The 95% DNA thing is a feeble canard. Everyone knows Lisbon is the same document as the Constitution, but “in a different envelope” - as Giscard himself put it.
And he should know.
To scotch this lie once and for all, according to the EU website EUractive, here are the solitary differences between the Constitution and the Treaty:
* The ‘Constitution’ label was discarded. The Reform Treaty will go back to the traditional method of Treaty change thereby amending both the EC and EU Treaties;
* reference to the symbols and anthem of the EU was dropped;
* the full text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights was replaced by a short cross-reference with the same legal value. However, due to strong British opposition, the Charter will not be legally binding in the UK. Poland has joined the UK in asking for an opt-out of the Charter, while Ireland has backed away from this option, and;
* a reference to free and undistorted competition as the EU’s goals was taken out at France’s request; French President Nicolas Sarkozy argued that competition was not an end in itself. However, this will not raise doubts over the general competition policy competence of the Commission (EurActiv 27/06/07).
So they took out the flag and anthem. But everyone knows they flag and anthem are not going away. Thanks.
Then they called it something else, but its still the same document. Then the French got an amendment negating the very principle on which we signed up to the EU in the first place- free ttade.
Finally, the solitary other difference is that we slightly strengthened our opt-out on the charter, an opt-out we were going to ask for anyway. However many EU legal experts, and the House of Commons own committee, thinks these opt-outs may prove legally worthless.
And that’s it. Those are the big and major differences betwen the Lisbon Treaty and the Constitution according to the highly respected website EurActiv.
So when Europhiles spin their poncy lies about chimps and DNA and all that drivel, you can safely ignore them.
They never actually specify what the major differences are - coz there aren’t any, really.
Europhiles lie. They lie, they lie, they lie.
162/193. This sort of thing makes me spit blood. Typical middle-class liberal lefty hatred of our nation and its history.
What on earth is more inclusive than having some fun, singing songs and waving your nations flag?!
A bit more pride in our country is just what the doctor ordered.
This sort of debate wouldn’t even take place in America. Everyone joins in.
Labour were behind the BBC dropping the words to “Rule Britannia” and altering the schedule of the last night to end the crescendo of patriotism that used to occur with Land of Hope and Glory, Rule Britannia and Jerusalum all at once.
*SHAME ON THEM*
198 - In what way have the Lib Dems ‘fiddled with polls and poll data’?
The only fiddling (as noted by Andy Cook and Sean Fear) has been from IWAR.
210. oh dear, be prepared, i think mike’s gander is up!
209 - I just think it is ironic that every year they have to add more Proms in the Park events!
206 Most of the press backed Labour in 2001 and 2005.
On the EU issue, the Guardian, Independent, Financial Times, and Mirror would back the Treaty/Constitution. So would Channel 4, and the BBC. The Telegraph, Times (probably), Mail, Express, and Sun would oppose it, as (probably) would Sky. So, while the antis would have an advantage in the media, it would be far from decisive.
206. We now seem to be degenerating back to the old argument that the voters are pathetic sheep who can easily be persuaded to vote one way or another by a ‘Tory dominated’ press.
If that is true, why have the Tories lost three general elections in a row?
And more fundamentally, if it is true, why allow such shallow fools the right to vote at all?
Certainly we should ensure that even if they can vote, their voting patterns will not be allowed to make any real difference to the way things are run.
Ah yes - that’s what the EU is for, isn’t it?
Dan @ 170: The ICM tables on their website have got the explanation of how the sampling was done - it’s as Mike & I both guessed further up the thread, ICM rang back people who had identified themselves as 2005 Lib Dem voters in their previous polls.
209 Which group is more socially exclusive than new Labour?
212. James - you’re right. Everyone loves it!
Even my Lib-Dem/Labour friends have enjoyed it. Quite a few of us went to Proms in the Park 2005 - and it was awesome.
Great music. Great atmosphere. Really friendly. A few glasses of Pimms and everyone was up for a bit of flag-waving!
And, just coz we did it doesn’t mean we want to go and invade Zululand again….
198.Mike. “Clegg has gone down several notches in my book”
After what you’ve written about him in the past I didn’t think there were any notches left to go down.
200. Richard. A full page in the Sun will cost about £40,000. Other publications cost more. If you really think newspapers have no influence on people’s thinking there are a lot of advertisers out there who are throwing their money away.
210 I won’t comment on the Lib Dems, but you said this at 76.
“Why on earth should they trust a poll that apparently doesn’t exist, that has been made up by an organisation funded by the Tory Party, that is campaigning to unseat them at the next election.”
The poll does exist, and most definitely has not been made up, and Mike reported its findings correctly.
203. Whilst hoping you getting hammered on your anti-Hillary position as it will mean quids in for me, fair play to you for showing a little imagination in this market with your correct score odds. Do you have any insight as to PP’s definition of the Texas winner?
213. Fair enough - though I’d put the Times squarely in the anti column (remember its peculiar conduct in 1997), whilst the BBC and Channel 4 wouldn’t be able to come down squarely on either side. I think if you take newspaper circulation into account, there is an imbalance.
My point was that newspapers can and do lead opinion, and do so in the direction of the politics favoured by their proprietors (unless, as in 1997/2001, the Tories appear so weak that cheer-leading for them appears to threaten sales). I didn’t think that was controversial, but Richard seems to be suggesting otherwise.
209. I thought for a moment it was a spoof…….but then it dawned on me that it wasn’t!
An absolutely cringeworthy post!!!
190 I’m not interested in how bad the other side is, Roger, I still don’t want my own side to be dishonest.
Shyster propagandists? I didn’t have anybody particular in mind. I tend to think of senior European politicians but simply anybody who does not own up to the purpose and ultimate goal of the European project will do. No shortage of candidates really.
218. The tedious europhile bleating abut the eurosceptic press making it impossible to win a debate in the UK ignores one major fact.
The EU Constitution was voted down, by big majorities, in France and Holland. In both countries the entire media and political establishment campaigned for a Yes.
Oooh. What happened thee? Maybe the French were secretly translating the Daily Mail, like Samizdat literature, and handing it around while playing boules.
Protected from reality by their pompous little world of self congratulation, Europhiles find it hard to understand that their project is simply…. unpopular. And that people do not like being treated as idiots.
So can we also see an end to this lie as well: that the media make that much of a difference.
Stop whingeing, europhiles. Just come out and make your case and fight like men. And stop lying.
219 - my mistake - I meant ‘question’.
221. The Murdoch papers and others have supported Labour because Labour has been popular and the Tories have looked like losers.
Ergo they are following opinion, not leading it.
Much the same can be said for many of the TV channels. It is very notable how the coverage of the Tories has improved over the last couple of years, as their poll ratings have risen.
215 - so should it then then not be considered a randomly sampled poll, like the MORI one?
195 Moreover David, it would be dangerous and destructive if they somehow did win by deceit.
We sing from the same hymn sheet again.
224. Correct, and the Danish voters rejected the euro even though only a single regional paper came out against it.
But perhaps voters in other European countries are more intelligent than UK voters.
Or perhaps these other European countries don’t exist. Certainly you might think so based on the insular perspective of so many UK EU supporters…rather ironic…
O/T - More damaging Jasper stuff for Livingstone to contend with in the Standard.
210, 218,
I’m completely with Sean on this.
Mike highlighted the “push-polling” natire of the Lib Dem leadership’s question (ie give option of Lisbon referendum OR In/Out referendum only; despite this, 7% took the “write-in” option of both.
If you quickly read your own posts, Dan, until post 170, you seemed to be implying that the ICM poll was fictitious, based on picking on one comment on one question from IWAR. The actual issues raised seemed to be glossed over in favour of an approach would could be characterised as “IWAR lied on one of the statements, so only look at the official Lib Dem poll”
224 - In France the constitution lost because it was seen as being too liberal. The press is almost universally left wing in France
113 Harry Sorry, I have been busy. What I said was that I had no special line to the leadership. I assumed that would be read by people to mean it was my opinion. Harry, I don’t immediately assume you are quoting verbatim from any Tory playbook just because you mainly seem to support them! What gets me is the way people here on the phobic wing (whether Tories, UKIP or other) seem to think there is somehow dishonesty involved in the Lib Dem position. And I think you also mentioned dishonesty in fighting Lib Dems at elections. Well, frankly, I have normally found that the Tories are the ones with half-truths at election time. And I have seen this time and time again.
227 You are getting really desperate now.
Quite frankly, whilst not wanting defend Hodge (a pretty ghastly woman) i think she was trying to refer to the audience within the Albert Hall for the proms season. Which lets be honest does tend to be a certain section of society (clue not very working class, not very young and not very non-white).
Hodge unfortunatly failed to realise that the Proms has done quite a bit to get a different audience e.g. proms in the park, proms specifically for a younger audience (i.e. with TV/film music). Which perhap sums up the skills of Hodge - someone please remind her put the brain in gear before opening her mouth.
I think more could be done to get more people into the proms. I mean throughout the season there are acres of empty seats and making free tickets available to kids from deprived areas would in my book be a good thing.
222. “An absolutely cringeworthy post!!!”
Only for those ashamed of their own country.
Prat.
209:- The most embarrassing post I think I’ve ever read on here.
228. Hi Peter.
Do you have any advice on my question at 167?
Casino plays nicely with you today. Promise!
Nice Peter, Generous Peter!!!
236, it seems your evil patriotism is smoking out lurking lefty liberal traitors:p
237. Post under your own name Wodger.
235 I think she’s the only person who could lose Barking for Labour.
239. Hehe!
167 Casino Royale
Tonite looks extremely unpredictable, but on the balance of probabilities I should say Hilary is likely to have a good one.
If I’m right, his price will drift as punters (over)react, so if you really need the cash, now might be a good time to sell, and maybe buy back in later at better prices when the excitement subsides.
Personally though, I am sitting tight. It’s not certain that she will do well tonite and if she doesn’t, it’s over. Long term, you Obama money is safe. As numerous posters here have commented, and demonstrated at great length, she has to win massively tonite to put her back in the game, and even then has to follow up with great results in the remaining Primaries. To put figures on it, I reckon she has to win Texas by 10% and Ohio by 20%. That’s off the scale of all projections, so naturally I expect him to move on to the nomination in due course.
My own guess is that she’ll win Ohio by about 10, and lose Texas on the delegate count but maybe sneak it on the popular vote. That would be a very good performance, but well short of what’s she needs.
Hope that helps. It’s not an easy one. Should be fun!
Casino Royale, instead of spouting your usual arrogant claptrap, why not list some of the reasons that make your proud of ‘this nation and its history’. Because I’m struggling to think of many things in our history to be proud of.
This is why I despise your party so much. Emphasis on ‘tradition’ and ‘history’. Posts like your one above show that you still have absolutely no grasp on modernity, and that the vast, vast majority of this country are not patriotic at all in the sense that you imply.
The only reason I ever feel patriotic is during sporting events, and even then, it encourages utter scum, aka Sun readers, to resort to attacking other nations’ cultures for the sake of ‘our national pride’.
I am not proud of England’s history, I simply hope for a brighter future. And people like you are stuck in the past.
O/T - The Clunking Fist is working as well as ever, assisting Mugabe in his election campaign in this case:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7276790.stm
160. Jack W - I think the “sisterhood” will see Hillary through today. I agree it is very unlikely she will bounce back to win the the whole race unless Obama falters badly for some reason. IMO she has still has substantial support and US voters do not want to ditch her yet. Her fighting skills and spirit are formidable and the most recent polls certainly suggest she is gaining support at the present time. We will not know how much ground she has actually regained until tommorrow. Apart from Shadsy’s sideshow I have now got all of my money on McCain in the “next president” market who I feel will only gain from the current Democratic turmoil. I do not rally understand why the odds on Betfair/Intrade are almost 2/1 against McCain at the present time while opinion polls consistently show he has a near evens chance of beating either of the main Democratic candidates.
…Which lets be honest does tend to be a certain section of society (clue not very working class, not very young and not very non-white).
So what - most people in this country are white, not children, and middle class. Is that a crime?
237. Then you haven’t been around here very long. Or have you?
“the vast, vast majority of this country are not patriotic at all in the sense that you imply.”
Speak for yourself. I think normal British people can find quite a lot things to admire in their country’s history, as well as things to regret.
248. I generally only pop up for American election nights. Though I read the comments most, if not every day.
249. Name some, please.
IWAR is not a perfect organisation. But it does have Labour and Lib Dem people agreeing the form of words used in the poll and the constituencies chosen.
So it is simply mendacious of the Lib Dem PR people to call it a Tory organisation. It has all 3 of the main UK parties represented.
If the Lib Dems have a problem with the questions, why don’t they take it up with Mike Hancock the Lib Dem MP in IWAR?
I seem to remember in a recent poll (can’t remember the company), there was an in the event of a referendum on the lisbon treaty how would you vote?
Yes 10% No 18% Don’t Know 72% Ignoring don’t knows that’s about 64% against 36% for.
While the majority want a referendum, most people don’t know how they’d vote. This is a big problem for Labour and LDs, they can take large hits from denying the public a referendum, which is easy to understand and was a manifesto commitment. While the treaty is hard to understand and voters would be bored. However, i think those for whom the EU is a vote changing issue switched sides a long time ago.
A two line referendum would force voters to engage with the issue of the Treaty as a reform treaty, whether it improves or makes worse the EU in it’s current form. Secondly it’d settle the issue for a long time. Yes/No, we move towards a permanent semi detached form or renogatiate the treaty. No/No, phased withdrawl from EU, not EEC. No/Yes, same as before. Yes/Yes, continue integration into the EU. Matter settled, will of the people decided. No party is proposing this at the moment, though the Conservatives and LDs could make a coalition proposing this option. (Do i remember badly or did Mike Martin select a proposal for a two line referendum?)
244. Hilarious - but not, I fear, a spoof.
In fact that post illustrates nicely that much of the pro-EU sentiment on the left in the UK is actually a hatred of Britain masquerading as internationalist idealism.
It’s not the patriotism, but the naffness of the whole thing. Imagine a character whose patriotism is not at question - James Bond. You should know who he is CR. Would you ever see him poncing around in the Albert hall waving a flag. Not in a million years. Would the Queen do this. No way. Are they patriotic. Sure.
British patriotism at it’s best is understated and quietly confident. Having to wave the flag is a sign of insecurity IMO.
You should ditch the Casino Royale, title you’d be more at home on It’s a Royal Knockout.
201- thanks Mike. I genuinely feel that victories in Texas and Ohio will haul Hillary back into this thing big time. She has risen by 7 points on the in trade market from her trough last time I looked.
203-Shadsy- do not think that old boy Mccain stands an earthly in November. All that face surgery makes him look particularly grotesque, he has a whingey, whiney voice to boot- you expect your US presidents to have great speaking voices. I love listening to Bush. Obama speaks with soul and rythymn; Mccain sounds like someones grabbed his gonads.
The date: 21st April, 1993.
The subject: A consultative referendum on the Maastricht Treaty
The following 72 Tory MPs, who still sit for their party in the House of Commons, voted against a referendum:
Peter Ainsworth, David Amess, Michael Ancram, James Arbuthnot, Peter Atkinson, Tony Baldry, Henry Bellingham, Sir Paul Beresford, Tim Boswell, Peter Bottomley, Julian Brazier, Angela Browning, Simon Burns, Alistair Burt, Sir John Butterfill, James Clappison, Kenneth Clarke, Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Sir Patrick Cormack, David Curry, David Davis, Stephen Dorrell, Alan Duncan, Nigel Evans, David Evennett, Michael Fabricant, Liam Fox, Roger Gale, Edward Garnier, Cheryl Gillan, John Greenway, John Gummer, William Hague, Oliver Heald, David Heathcoat-Amory, Charles Hendry, Douglas Hogg, John Horam, Michael Howard, Michael Jack, Robert Key, Greg Knight, Jacqui Lait, Edward Leigh, David Liddington, Peter Lilley, Peter Luff, Andrew MacKay, David Maclean, Patrick McLoughlin, Michael Mates, Andrew Mitchell, Malcolm Moss, Richard Ottaway, Jim Paice, Eric Pickles, John Redwood, Andrew Robathan, Nicholas Soames, Bob Spink, Richard Spring, Sir John Stanley, Anthony Steen, Gary Streeter, Ian Taylor, David Tredinnick, Peter Viggers, Nigel Waterson, Ann Widdecombe, David Willetts, Tim Yeo, Sir George Young.
Here’s the roll-call of the 12 Lib Dem MPs who supported a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty (sitting MPs are denoted by an *):
David Alton, Paddy Ashdown, Alan Beith*, Menzies Campbell*, Don Foster*, Nick Harvey*, Simon Hughes*, Nigel Jones, Charles Kennedy*, Liz Lynne, Matthew Taylor*, Paul Tyler
And here’s the four Lib Dem MPs who voted against a referendum in 1993:
Alex Carlile, Sir Russell Johnston, Robert Maclennan, David Steel
Hat-tip: Philip Cowley of Revolts.co.uk, courtesy Ben Brogan.
220. PPs site says they will settle Texas on the popular vote in the primary only.
243. Very sound advice Peter. Very helpful!
I think I will lay off 50% now and hold the rest.
Thank you so much!
Dan @ 227: Depends how you look at it - it is a sample drawn from people who were originally randomly sampled (or as close to random as pollsters come), I suppose it is most akin to sample drawn from a panel, albeit a randomly recruited one.
That said, attempted randomness isn’t everything. MORI’s polls are not normally random - with their face-to-face polls at least they use quota sampling, not quasi-random sampling.
The potential drawback to the technique ICM used is if only a certain type of person agreed to let ICM ring them back in the future, which could have skewed the sample. To deal with that ICM weighted their sample to the demographic profile of all Lib Dem voters they had found in their samples over the last 3 years.
Here’s some good news for the Libdems, Paddick has a new recruit.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23447881-details/Senior+London+Tory+defects+to+support+Paddick+campaign/article.do
Sorry tinyurl not working!!
257 how many of those tories in 1993 promised a referendum at the earlier GE?
Answer = zero, none, diddly squat….
238 Casino
Sorry for the delay in responding. It wasn’t huffiness. It needed a serious answer and I had other stuff in the in-tray. I don’t like ignoring posts addressed specifically to me and if I see them I try to answer.
I may have missed the previous post you refer to in which case, apologies. I am away and have limited cyber-access. If you were sniping, that’s fine. What’s the point of PB if you can’t have the odd snipe? Anyway, we understand each other OK and I look forward to crossing swords with you again in due course.
Good luck tonite. You may need it. We all may.
244 - This shouldn’t be about who is a patriot and who isn’t!
You’re letting the gadawful Margeret Hodge win.
This is about a wonderful festival of classical music, featuring the many great orchestras and ensembles, that sees the flags of a hundred nations on its final night, attended by thousands of people in the Albert Hall and around the country, of all ages and races. It is about great music, independent of who you are.
To want to hijack that by making it ‘more representative’ is not only vomit-inducingly awful policy, it is completely politically retarded, and she deserves nothing but our contempt.
251 The industrial revolution, the agricultural revolution, the development of representative institutions and the common law, the defeat of Napoleon, the Reform Acts, the suppression of the slave trade, and our role in both World Wars seem admirable to me.
255. I think it goes back to the issue of identity and Hodge’s attack is reminiscent of council’s having “winterval lights” instead of christmas lights in case of alienating sections of society. I find Hodge’s comments pretty baffling. Some people find the proms a bit cringy, but so what, a lot of people like them hence it is one of the biggest music events in the world.
I don’t like little britain or catherine tate, i think it’s not particularly funny, a lot of people do though but that doesn’t bother me particularly.
259 Yes, the half and half strategy is a good one. I do that a lot myself. I backed Denman at 5/1 for the Gold Cup. I still think he’ll win, but I layed off half. It’s only sensible.
Marquee Mark
20 quid bet for fun?
If Obama wins all 4 i give you 20 quid.
If Obama doesnt you give me 20 quid.
Hows that sound?
264 - Hear, hear!!
265. I on the other hand would select:
The creation of the NHS, the welfare state, defeating fascism, our literature/culture, development of the scientific method, creation of a unionised work force, enlightenment values and representative democracy.
249. Quite Sean. Each has their own way of showing it & taking the good with the bad broadens the perspective.
254. Rubbish. I’m patriotic & pro-European, I know you think that’s irreconcilable but that’s your own bigoted response to those who have diffrent views from you.
268. Thats tonights 4 primaries by the way. Popular vote only.
261. SBS - great news wings are beginning to sprout on my piglets!
265
Mind you! We were major players in the slave trade, before we got the guilts. Then there was the ‘Opium Wars’ not nice that one, the Black-n-Tans, bit of a bummer really, still despite all that I’m pretty happy being British, but then I would be, ‘cos I am.
251/265 - Edward Elgar, Ralph Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Britten, Thomas Tallis, John Byrd, James MacMillan, the BBC Orchestras, and the Black Dyke Mills Brass Band.
263. Thanks Peter.
It was only a few pot-shots at your europhilia, nothing serious!
I am continually amazed by how mature, restrained and reasonable you are on this forum. It makes me feel guilty sometimes!
You are a credit to the community!
Good luck tonight to you too
265. Sorry to be pedantic Sean, but the agricultural revolution took place in the Middle East about 7000 years ago…
251 For starters…
Politics (Founding of the NHS, Churchill)
Science (Issac Newton and Alexander Flemming)
Culture (Shakespeare, The Beatles, BBC World Service)
270. This is far more sensible than the usual warmongering rubbish. Still, doesn’t make me want to turn into a flag waving imbecile.
BTW, haven’t seen a single news story on Cameron in recent days on the BBC news front page, when’s the next poll out?
249 Nor is it just a ‘history’ thing, SeanF. When I think of things that make me proud to be British, sense of humour springs immediately to mind.
The Proms too. They’re wonderful. Leave them alone, please.
271. Why do you think I was referring to you?
Or was that you posting bile under an assumed name at 244.?
270 Perfectly reasonable choices (although I’m a bit ambiguous about the unionised workforce).
279. your already one part of that.
270. I’d also add, the decision to join the EU and create peace in europe, and cooperate with our one time enemies after centuries of violence and war in europe.
279. doesn’t make me want to turn into a flag waving imbecile.
Well you appear to be one-third of the way there already.
HAS ANYONE HEARD FROM BETFAIR ON SETTLEMENT RULES FOR TEXAS?!!
Seems odd that no-one seems to know (I’ve tried) when the representative “experts” of PB.com are going to be sitting in a trading room in front of cameras when the results come in and no-one know whether to back or lay!
Mike can you call them? Maybe they will listen to someone with some gravitas…
270… yes a massively disproportionate selection of the greatest scientists and most important scientific advances sprang to my mind too.
BTW those upthread suggesting there was some regret the LibDems had not gone for Chris Huhne - I suggest a return to the real world. Chris Huhne’s published views are more like those of Duff - he makes Nick Clegg look like Nigel Farage.
277 Granted agriculture, per se, was invented thousands of years ago, there was a major revolution in British (and some European) agricultural practices in the mid eighteenth century, which permitted much higher levels of food production.
279 My impression is that you’re just trying to wind people up. If you are serious, perhaps you could consider emigrating to somewhere you’ll feel more at home.
OK, I admit, I enjoy waving.
282. Because you made a sweeping statement. I consider myself part of that broader movement so yes I take it as a personal affront.
289. No, not a wind up- I love living here. I just don’t appreciate being told that because I do not partake in these cringeworthy activities, that I am a traitor, as I believe I was referred to in another thread.
New thread - Will be being out-fundraised be what sinks Hillary?
257, and who promised a referendum in their manifestos for Maastricht? Still, don’t let historical facts colour your invalid analogy.
Thanks Casino.
When you know me better, you’ll appreciate what a right bas*ard I am, but meaanwhile don’t let me shatter your illusions.
He did it again.
244/254. I think Borat’s making a fair point, although I think there ARE some great achievements in Brtain’s past. But in a way that’s the problem. Most sane countires would prefer to focus on the present - I’m sure the French love their country as it is - but the way British patriotism is so focused on the past just makes us look a rather pathetic, defeated nation.
Of course, David Cameron had that phrase ‘I love my country as it is, not as it was’, but it just begs the question about what it is that Dave loves about modern Britain?
As for Margaret Hodge, I think her actual comments are pretty mild, but the BBC’s reporting of it, rather sensational.
289. I knew what you meant Sean, just indulging myself!
257,
Of course as the Maastricht Treaty was explicitly mentioned in the 1992 manifesto (8 times) with the commitment to press the other states into compliance with it as well, then those Tories who voted against could have been regareded as in breach of their manifesto committment.
Had the Labour Party praised the Constitutional Treaty in their manifesto and supported it, then there would be no leg to stand on - they would argue that they went to the people on it and won. However, in order to minimise electoral damage (and, implicitly that they did not want to go to the people on this if it could damage their electoral prospects), they kicked it into the long grass by invoking a referendum in order to legitimise it (as it would have been not legitimised by the normal parliamentary route). We could well argue that Maastricht was worthy of a referendum, and the Lib Dem stance at the time that it was of sufficient import to merit one is a sound one, but John Major had the accurate defence that the people had already spoken on it - it was explicitly a plank of their election campaign. This time, it was explicitly not a plank of Labour’s election campaign.
162
More importantly does anyone care what a token failed Islington leftie like Margaret Hodge says.
292/297 A good deal of what we enjoy today is thanks to the achievements of our ancestors.
186
The story according to Guido is how Tom Watson has pocketed £ 300,000 in expenses to pay members of his family.
Anything to do with how taxpayers money is spent should be exposed,as it’s a Labour MP you don’t seem to like it,there’s a surprise.
We are interested in how taxpayers money is spent or otherwise ,not who got the story first.
265. I wasn’t going to grace Wodgers sockpuppet with a response, but I agree with all that you list. I agree with most of “G’s” too.
But, in conducting a critical assessment of Britains history, you have to bear two things in mind:
(1) Judge actions by the standards of the time, not by the standards of today
(2) Consider what the potential alternative/s would have been
Applying these two axioms, I feel confident in rejecting any of the self-haters arguments.
Yes Mike, the Lib Dem poll was imperfect. The third option, “ask both questions”, should have been read out. However, the responses from those who volunteered that option were, at any rate, properly recorded.
This flaw pales into insignificance compared to the glaring faults of the IWAR poll. That poll presented an appallingly forced choice - between a one-question (in/out?) referendum and a two-question (in/out? then pro/anti Lisbon?) referendum. So, anybody wanting to ask the Lisbon question had to go for the two-question option.
The idea that while you are asking one question you might as well throw in another one sounds good, superficially. So lots of people followed IWAR’s prompting and supported the two-question option. Never mind that it would not actually work well in practice. A referendum campaign would make it pretty clear to most people that Lisbon is just one more part of the basic EU deal that is on offer, and so either you accept it, or you walk out.
So to answer your original question, on balance Lib Dem MPs should put more trust in the Lib-Dem funded poll than the IWAR funded poll!
288. Jon - I have no problem with Chris Huhne’s views on Europe. If he had won I suggest he could have handled the issue in an honest and more open way which did not involve Nick Clegg’s current illiberal and obfuscatory tactics.
305 We might possibly agree though they would have been openly and honestly insame.
I’d think the Nick Clegg would do well to learn from another often repeated facet of Britain’s proud history namely the orderly retreat when you have cocked things up…
47&50.”44 - well, one would think. Does anyone have any take on how this is playing in the traditionally anti-EU LD strongholds in the South West?”
I would widen that question to include LD strongholds throughout the UK, lets remember why ALL the parties thought it necessary to include a referendum on the Constitution in their manifesto’s before a GE campaign.
I still cannot believe the Libdems have got themselves into this mess with risks it poses both internally and externally for their party.
If they abstain in the referendum vote and continue with this IN/OUT narrative, how will it play on the doorsteps next time when they seek to be a relevant and distinct alternative to both Labour and the Conservatives.
What is the message going to be? “Well I know that we promised a referendum last time and then went back on that promise, but guess what, we are promising to team up with the equally relevant UKIP to push for a referendum on membership of the EU with of course ourselves being the only party who fights to retain our membership????
re 204. I don’t think your criticism adds up. The ICM had two questions on the referendum itself - one on whether there should be a referendum and the other on what should be asked. In my judgement this should have been approach the Lib Dem survey should have taken
The forced choice on that you refer to came after the central principle of a referendum or not on the Lisbon Treaty should take place. By that stage this was just about the only way of testing what those interviewed would like.
Nothing that has been said shifts my view that the Lib Dem survey, because of its design, does not give a proper picture. It would have done if the option of having both referendums had been given the same prominence as the other alternatives.
What do our attendant Tories think are the chances of trying to call the LD bluff and supporting a two question referendum?
260 - thanks for the response. it seems to me the lesson we can draw from this is that the ICM method is akin to a panel poll and therefore any conclusions drawn from it have to be seen as being representative solely of the panel themselves. Any wider significance is just guesswork.
Mike, you say -
“The difference between the two polls is that the LibDem funded one did not give the express option of both possible referendums - the ICM one did. For my money the latter gives a better representation of opinion.”
Surely it depends what you are trying to find out?
The Mori (Lib Dem) poll put the Lib Dem policy (in-out referendum) up against the Tory policy (Treaty referendum) and found people prefer the Lib Dem policy. That seems pretty unarguable in my book. The Lib Dems have not at any point I am aware of claimed the Mori poll covered a ‘two question’ referendum. I don’t think this was on the agenda at all or seriously being discussed when the poll was commissioned.
The ICM (IWAR) poll put the Lib Dem policy (in-out referendum) up against a two question referendum (among 2005 Lib Dem voters only) and found they prefer a two question referendum. IWAR claimed that their poll “finds that if only one question is to be asked then Liberal Democrat voters would prefer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU”. But they have had to withdraw this as their poll didn’t show that.
Both polls show valid things and they are not contradictory, even if you assume that 2005 Lib Dem voters would be broadly in line with the sample of all voters used by Mori.
What, among other things, the polls show between them is -
1) Given a choice voters choose an ‘in or out’ referendum ahead of a Lisbon Treaty referendum (Mori poll) (breakdowns show this applies to current supporters of all parties)
2) Given a choice between a one question referendum on ‘in or out’ and a two question referendum people who voted Lib Dem in 2005 prefer a two question referendum (ICM)
It is not an either/or between the polls. Neither poll gave people an open three way choice between the options.
Yes, the polls throw up questions for the Lib Dems, as has been highlighted. But they also throw up questions for the Tories. Voters may ultimately prefer a two question referendum (I suspect they would have gone for a three
Sorry, posted before completing. To conclude -
Yes, the polls throw up questions for the Lib Dems, as has been highlighted. But they also throw up questions for the Tories. Voters may ultimately prefer a two question referendum (I suspect they would have gone for a three question referendum given the choice) but their second choice appears to be the Lib Dem policy with the Tory policy third. Or have the Tories now backed a two question referendum and I’ve missed it?
308 - ICM began with a slanted question worded carefully to favour a Lisbon referendum:
“Q.1 Do you think that voters in Britain should decide, in a referendum, whether or not to ratify the EU treaty, or should MPs in Parliament decide?”
and then continued by inviting Lib Dem voters to turn against the Lib Dems if their MPs gave the “wrong” answer, etc. Having thus softened up their responders, they then offered a forced choice.
I am not defending the Lib Dem funded poll, it should have been done more carefully. But it was not so blatantly biased and unreliable as the IWAR poll!
308. Mike, neither poll asked a question with the options of referendum a, referendum b or referendum on a and b. One asked people to choose between a and b. One asked them to choose between a and both.