The UK General Election 2005 Thread

Blair in front as rivals slug it out

Sun Apr 17, 2005

By Mike Peacock
LONDON (Reuters) - The Liberals urged voters on Sunday to gang up on the main opposition Conservatives and wreck their high command as a clutch of polls showed Tony Blair set fair for re-election.

New opinion polls put the Labour Party ahead of the Conservatives by a range of 1 to 10 percentage points.

Even the lowest margin, if repeated on polling day, would give Blair a parliamentary majority of about 60 because of the way Britain's electoral map now favours the ruling party.

At the upper end, Blair would secure a third successive landslide victory and condemn the party that governed Britain for most of the 20th century to another term in opposition.

The Liberal Democrats, polling around 20 percent, twisted the knife, urging Labour supporters to vote tactically and wreck the Conservative Party's upper echelons.

"I think it's very clear that the Conservatives can't win," LibDem election strategist Lord Rennard told GMTV.

Rennard said with Labour all but unassailable, its supporters could afford to back his party in a handful of key seats where they are the main challenger in order to oust Conservative chiefs in a so-called "decapitation strategy".

"Labour supporters in those seats would be better off throwing in their lots with the Liberal Democrats and ending up with a Liberal Democrat MP," he said.

Labour chiefs continue to play down talk of victory for fear that their core supporters, many disillusioned by the war in Iraq, will not bother to turn out.

"You have to earn every vote, we don't take it for granted," Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott told BBC Radio.

HOWARD UNDER THREAT?

The LibDems are even aiming at Conservative leader Michael Howard. Rennard said if every Labour voter in Howard's southern England seat switched to the LibDems on May 5, he would be out.

Most analysts believe Howard is safe but the party's finance spokesman, Oliver Letwin, and home affairs chief, David Davis, are defending slim majorities and in real danger under an electoral system where each constituency elects one member of parliament and second place wins nothing.

Blair has already put in place his own plan to change Labour's leader by declaring he wants to serve a full third term -- a first for a Labour premier -- but not seek a fourth.

Most political insiders expect Blair to quit well before the election after next to allow a new leader, probably finance minister Gordon Brown, time to bed in.

"He's staying for a full term, why don't you accept it. You are getting it from the man himself saying that," Prescott said.

Blair called a truce with Brown early in the campaign, all but promising him he would remain Chancellor of the Exchequer after May 5 and putting him at the heart of Labour's campaign having stripped him of his traditional strategy role last year.

Party folklore has it that Brown allowed Blair a free run at the Labour leadership in 1994 in return for a pledge that he would one day stand aside for the finance minister.

Brown's allies say the deal should have been honoured by now and must be met early in the next parliament.

Archbishop calls on voters to think green

The Independent
By Francis Elliott, Deputy Political Editor
17 April 2005

The Archbishop of Canterbury has intervened in the election campaign, calling on voters to give politicians "electoral incentives" to tackle environmental issues.

Writing in today's Independent on Sunday, Dr Rowan Williams warns of a "steadily darkening" global environmental crisis in which the world's poor will suffer disproportionately.

He says political parties cannot be blamed for "minimal" progress on green issues unless voters give them a "genuine popular mandate for change". "Governments need strengthening in their commitments and need electoral incentives."

He believes the time is ripe for a new UN charter, committing nations to wilderness, bio-diversity and "access to natural non-poisoned foods".

To help political leaders have the courage to sign up to such international agreements, voters must make clear that there is "popular motivation" to head off the looming environmental crisis.

He attacks the notion that "unrestricted consumer choice" is a "fundamental human right". Even if we could satisfy our "addictive behaviours", this might not be a "desirable way of envisaging the human future".

The Archbishop's economic estimate is as flawed as is his sense of just what is in the provence of his moral role.

georgeob1 wrote:

Luckily, the Catholic and Anglican Churches have never shared this reticence ...

The Evangelicals/Protestants here are even more "politically" active, but generally, environment really is a big theme with all (Christian) confessions.

ELECTION A DAMP SQUIB

A few pages into the Guardian's election coverage is the headline "Campaign fails to catch fire". The gist of the story is that the press are finding this election a lot less newsworthy than the last, with the sometime- bickering, sometime-reunited couple dominating the red tops last week Wayne Rooney and his fiancee Coleen McLoughlin rather than Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. The Pope's funeral and the royal wedding also had an impact on coverage.

Even so, the Sun is alone among this morning's tabloids in finding a balance between civic responsibility and circulation. Below the front-page foldand underneath four female Bafta attendees in low-cut dresses is the announcement that the 18-year-old soul singer Joss Stone will lead its Rock the Vote campaign. "Britain needs your vote," reads the headline, next to a mocked-up image of Stone as a first world war recruiting officer.

The Mirror, by contrast, leads on Manchester United footballer Rio Ferdinand being snapped a second time in a London restaurant with Chelsea chief Peter Kenyon.

Its election coverage, beginning on page two, is headed with a poll putting Labour ahead of the Tories, at 41% compared with 33%. It calls the lead a surge, and political commentator Kevin Maguire claims Michael Howard's party is on the brink of civil war as he looks set to do little better than William Hague. The forecast is more dramatic than most (though less so than it sounds, civil war being something of a Tory speciality since the days of Thatcher) but a Labour victory is predicted in all recent polls.

The Guardian reviews the most recent crop - which stretches from a 10% Labour lead in an ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph to a 3% lead in a YouGov poll in the Daily Telegraph today. The Guardian and Times acknowledge the volatility, but the Times's Peter Riddell argues that apparent variations are just exaggerating a stable underlying trend: Labour is in the lead.

Still, for the Tory papers that won't quite do. The Mail adopts the strategy beloved of John Kerry supporters in the US presidential election and argues that the margin of error - the statistical leeway - dramatically cuts or even reverses Labour's lead. The idea is that a 3% margin of error can move the headline figure either way. In effect, 40% for Labour could be as low as 37%, and 35% for the Tories as high as 38% - a Tory lead. The argument has statistical merit, but its main use is as a form of denial. The Telegraph instead opts to talk of "bouncing" voters and castigates the Tories for not campaigning on the promise of serious tax cuts.

In terms of the issues, Mr Howard's promise of £1.7bn tax relief to encourage low-income workers to take up private pensions leads the policy news in all the papers. Meanwhile Melanie Philips, in the Mail, attacks the Metropolitan police commission, Sir Ian Blair, for supporting Labour's plans for ID cards. "There are now TWO Blairs in this election," reads the headline.

Another commentator, Cristina Odone, takes the opportunity in the Times to call for a tax on obesity. The Independent more or less devotes itself to asking why the environment is close to being a silent issue ahead of the vote.

Keep track of what six different opinion polls say in the BBC Poll Tracker.

So far, Labour seems to be doing fairly OK, the Conservatives and Libdems both up & down, and the smaller parties are losing ground.

That's a cool "toy", nimh. I also liked the Seat Calculator that was there as well. Thanks for that.

Top Tories in plea to Howard

Leader asked to tone down immigration rhetoric as poll shows leap in Labour lead
Nicholas Watt
Tuesday April 19, 2005
The Guardian

A group of Conservative frontbenchers, including members of the shadow cabinet, have pleaded with Michael Howard to tone down his harsh rhetoric on asylum and immigration.

In the first signs of a Tory wobble - following a series of poor opinion polls - Mr Howard was warned over the weekend that he risked looking like the leader of a single-issue party.

And there is bad news today with a Populus poll in the Times which shows a dramatic leap in Labour's lead from two to nine points. No pollster has previously recorded such a dramatic jump in this election campaign.


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The poll put Labour on 40%, the Conservatives on 31%, four points down since the last poll, and the Liberal Democrats on 21%, two points up. It also showed poor ratings for Mr Howard, who in voters' personal ratings of the party leaders trailed in third place on 20%. Tony Blair scored 30%, and Charles Kennedy 23%.
Yesterday, Mr Howard again dismissed the polls, declaring that he was "very optimistic and confident" about the only poll that matters - the general election on May 5.

It is understood, however, that "representations" were made to Mr Howard's office on Sunday about asylum and immigration after a group of frontbenchers used the relative lull in campaigning over the weekend to discuss their concerns on the phone.

"There was a ring round on Sunday," one well-placed frontbencher said yesterday. "Our concerns about asylum and immigration have been passed on to the leadership."

"We should not turn into a single-issue party," said another. "There were a lot of weekend phone calls and our concerns have been transmitted."

Mr Howard came under fire on the issue last night when he appeared on ITV's Ask The Leaders with Jonathan Dimbleby. Members of the audience accused him of pandering to Middle England and playing on people's fears over immigration.

He rejected their claims and insisted that "controlled immigration is the key to ensuring Britain's security, managing demand on public services and guaranteeing good community relations".

The unease over asylum and immigration comes after Mr Howard repeatedly highlighted his hardline plans to impose a quota on immigration last week.

There is widespread feeling in the party that this is failing to make a serious impact in the election. Tories at all levels believe the party is much better placed than in 2001, but they are beginning to realise that Mr Blair is heading for a third successive victory.

Even critics of Mr Howard in the party say there is no ques tion of a Tory meltdown or a diversion from the party's five key commitments on schools, hospitals, crime, tax and immigration. But they want to see a more rounded campaign which emphasises all five elements.

Even the party's spokesman on asylum appeared lukewarm about the strong focus on the issue. Although Humfrey Malins last night described the government's handling of asylum as a "shambles", he made clear that he would not be campaigning hard on the issue in Woking, where he is defending a 6,759 majority.

"It is not a huge issue in Woking," he said. "We have a very large and very settled Pakistani community here who are terrific contributors to the local scene and the local economy in every way. We have become very close because of my position on resigning over the war in Iraq as a shadow minister and also my visits to Pakistan, Kashmir and Mirpur and my knowledge and work in terms of visas."

His remarks came as critics of Mr Howard said they hoped the leadership had heeded their concerns when it made the decision on Sunday night to focus on plans to encourage saving for pensions with a £1.7bn tax break for middle-income earners.

One former minister, who is a harsh critic of the Tory leader, said: "I was very encouraged to see the party focusing so strongly on pensions. It really is addressing people who need help, which is what Toryism should be about."

There were also signs last night that Tories on the right have swallowed their doubts about the leadership's plans to cut taxes by just £4bn.

David Heathcoat-Amory, a key figure on the right who described himself as a "tax cutter by nature", said: "I am pleased. The timing is right on pensions and we have got quite a big bang for our bucks. It is a start and shows we are serious about starting to dismantle the extra tax rises."

Writing in yesterday's Evening Standard, the former Conservative MP David Mellor was more explicit.

"The moment to tell the truth about the economy and about his own basic tax-cutting, expenditure-shredding instincts has surely arrived," he said, warning that the Tory leader would be "toast" if he did not.

Differences between right and left are likely to spill into the open after the election if Mr Howard suffers a bad defeat. Behind the scenes, various camps are making preparations for a possible leadership contest.

Eyebrows were raised at the weekend when David Davis, the shadow home secretary, appeared to be less than loyal when he told the Sunday Times that "it's his call" whether Mr Howard should stay on after an election defeat.

April 19, 2005

Howard faces flak as Labour stretches poll lead

By Peter Riddell, Philip Webster and Andrew Pierce



LABOUR is heading for another big majority in the face of a faltering Conservative challenge, a new poll suggested last night amid the first serious sniping from the sidelines at the conduct of Michael Howard's election campaign.
A Populus poll for The Times, taken over the weekend, suggests that Labour has strengthened its support since the election was called a fortnight ago, while the Tories have slipped.



Labour is now on 40 per cent, up 3 points compared with two weeks ago, and in line with recent non-internet polls. The Tories are 4 points down over the same period at 31 per cent, with the Liberal Democrats 2 points up at 21 per cent.

If these figures were repeated on May 5, Labour would have a Commons majority of more than 100, compared with 165 at the 2001 election. These ratings take into account the fact that Conservative supporters say that they are more certain to vote than Labour's.

The poll has Mr Howard trailing behind both Tony Blair and Charles Kennedy in his ability to impress voters. Mr Kennedy is ahead among floating voters who may change their preference before the election.

In a further blow to Mr Howard, the poll finds the public highly sceptical about promises to improve public services or to reduce crime. Despite Tory pledges to cut taxes by £4 billion, half of voters believe that they would be increased if Mr Howard's party won.

An NOP poll for The Independent put Labour on 37 per cent, 1 point down on the previous week, with the Conservatives and Lib Dems unchanged on 32 per cent and 21.

The findings came as a number of senior Conservatives levelled private criticism at the Howard campaign, one calling it too much of a "one-man band" and another saying that it focused excessively on shoring up the Tory core vote.

One senior Tory said: "This is a core vote campaign, along the lines of 2001. It is much more professionally organised, thanks to Lynton Crosby (the Australian strategist running the campaign). But in Australia Mr Crosby does not have to worry about the threat from a third party. What seems to be happening here is that when we make a hit on Labour, the Liberal Democrats get two thirds of the benefit."

There is no sign of a wobble inside Mr Howard's tight campaign team. Members of the close-knit group around him said last night that there would be no change of strategy.

There is disbelief that the Labour vote is holding up as well as the polls suggest. Senior Tories claim that polling errors made in the past three elections, which overestimated the extent of Labour's lead have not been rectified.

Liam Fox, the party co-chairman, will today present to colleagues his view of what the polls are saying. He will say that there are "mixed messages" from the various polling companies, and that his voting analysis, along with feedback from activists, suggests "a tight election race all the way until polling day".

Other advisers say that campaign messages on immigration and crime have been playing well on the doorstep, and that the focus on the ground would shift to tax cuts this week after Sunday's announcement of tax breaks on private pension contributions.

But another senior Conservative told The Times that he felt the campaign was "too harsh" and said too little on issues such as schools and hospitals.

One frontbencher said that Mr Howard was dominating the campaign. Oliver Letwin, the Shadow Chancellor, was used more than most but "the rest of us are pretty invisible".

"If Michael is not popular, should we not be showing ourselves off as more of a team?" he said.

A Times survey of the number of times that members of the Shadow Cabinet have been mentioned in the national media since the election was called bears out criticism that the campaign is centred on Mr Howard alone.

While the party leader has had 1,130 mentions, his deputy, Michael Ancram, has had 11, Andrew Lansley, the health spokesman, 37, and Mr Letwin 189, compared with 1,018 for Gordon Brown. Caroline Spelman, the party's local government spokesman and one of its most effective communicators, has had 19 mentions. But this is more than Theresa May, one of the party's best-known performers, who has 17. David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, has had 75 mentions.

Some Conservatives said that the unexpectedly prominent role taken by Mr Brown had caused problems. "Some of Labour's most disillusioned core voters who probably were not going to vote because they feel so let down by Blair may have been cheered up by Gordon Brown taking centre stage all of last week," one said.