A View From The Ground War…

Yesterday, we received a leaflet from the local Conservatives, the first for some time. Now, I live in the hardly-marginal constituency of East Ham and in the even less marginal London Borough of Newham.

The leaflet itself, and I write as no friend of the Conservatives, is a pretty amateurish effort with only one line of attack and that is or are the expenses of the Labour Mayor and Councillors and the expenditure of the Council itself.

Now, there are doubtless legitimate questions to be asked about Councillors’ expenses but my first thought was “Is that the best you can do ?”. Nor was there any iota of a commitment that a Conservative administration in Newham would scrap or reduce these allowances.

Asking questions about how much the Council spends on electricity in its buildings shows that someone knows how to ask a Freedom of Information question but little else. Reducing energy costs in Council buildings is far better achieved through a ruthless quest to source electricity from willing suppliers in a competitive market – one Council has achieved a 40% reduction in its gas and electricity costs by switching supplier – than by turning off a few lights.

Of course, the Conservatives won’t win control of Newham in May and nor will Paul Shea capture the East Ham seat though he’ll probably finish second. The point is that the line of attack is weak and nowhere in the leaflet is there a mention of David Cameron.

Is Cameron Clever on Cuts ?

Since David Cameron and George Osborne commented at Davos that in Government they would NOT be instigating a policy of rapid and deep spending cuts, the Conservative blogsphere has worked itself into a real frenzy.

In addition with a couple of weekend polls hinting at the first signs of slippage in the Conservative lead, we are perhaps seeing the first signs of real nerves in Tory ranks as we close in on the start of the real election campaign itself.

The problems for the Conservatives began with the publication of the terrible Q4 GDP figures last week. At just 0.1%, the "growth" figure was far worse than expected and points to ongoing serious problems for the economy. The other consequence of the weak economy is the real risk that rapid and deep spending cuts, while helping the public finances, would have the effect of pushing the country back into recession by weakening economic activity.

On the other side of the coin, analysts such as Allister Heath from City AM have continued to warn of the consequences in the markets of the continued weakness of the public finances. These include problems for sterling, problems with gilts and the very real risk of the downgrading of the country's credit status and all the issues that would follow. Heath has been persistent in his call for any new Government to take rapid action to cut public spending and reduce borrowing.

For the Conservatives, there is another dimension. While an overt policy promising rapid spending cuts might suit the markets, it doesn't resonate well with many voters and lays the party open to the traditional charges of wanting to destroy public services and the undercurrent of that still resonates with voters familiar with the Thatcher and Major years.

In his desperate attempt to hold the Cameron Coalition together, the Tory leader is determined to say and do nothing which will alienate his coalition of followers. He can be hard on crime, immigration, benefit scroungers and the like because that's what his supporters want him to be
but the same supporters are much less disposed toward cuts in public services and indeed Cameron has gone out of his way to be seen to be protecting the NHS for example.

Thus, Cameron is caught between a rock and a hard place and it remains to be seen how the markets will respond to this apparent indecision. Indeed, Labour and the Liberal Democrats now seem much more convincing on the public finances than the Conservatives and this has to be a concern.

The public mood however seems determined to be "anyone but Labour" and this is hardly surprising. I have long had doubts about an incoming Conservative Government and this has only increased my worries. I have no time for Labour's authoritarian policies but I am just as unconvinced by the current Conservative indecision.

There is a real vacumn in the debate now which Nick Clegg should be seeking to exploit and it's disappointing that he seems unable to break through though his speech at Barnado's yesterday had a raft of interesting ideas which played to the well-worn theme of taking the lower-paid out of tax and taking more tax from the wealthy. Not perhaps a vote-winner but entirely sensible.

Statistics and Perceptions..

There are two interesting statistics worth mentioning this morning. The first is the preliminary estimate (based on about 40% of the data) that GDP grew by 0.1% in the fourth quarter of 2009 and so technically we are no longer in recession.

Yes, I know, hardly earth-shattering stuff but to be fair the figure could be revised upward as more information arrives. It's still pretty bad and with what is coming over the horizon in terms of public spending cuts and tax rises it's not hard to conclude that growth figures of this order may be the future with the odd negative figure thrown in.

The far more interesting figure comes from last night's ICM poll and shows that 66% of those asked now want a change of Government as against 25% who want to see Brown remain in office.

That is a damning number and probably means, as I've thought for some time, that the game is up for Brown and Labour. If people want change and no longer care about the consequence of that change, there's very little the incumbent Government can do. Rightly or wrongly, a majority of voters directly or indirectly blame the current Government for the economic situation and believe not so much that any new Government will fix things but that we can't get on as we are.

Against that, no amount of positive spin or statistics will make any difference - as Conservatives rightly point out, they lost in 1997 despite the economy being in good shape.

So, we're left with perceptions rather than statistics. For many, the recession has already impacted directly but all of us have seen its indirect impacts and there is a grim sense of forboding out there that for many others the worst is yet to come as public spending cuts and job losses have a huge impact.

The Conservative majority on politicalbetting.com is in good form this morning with a liberal (so to speak) application of the f-word but the Tories will soon have to deal with these problems and while "vote for us on Thursday and the recovery begins on Monday" has a certain charm, beyond a short-term uptick in confidence disguised as post-election euphoria, there are undoubtedly dark days ahead for the Conservatives.

While the incoming Government may think it has the answers, it is among the 66% wanting a change that the problems lie and that is expectation management. People will expect things to get better with a new Government and when they don't, the clamour of opposition will rapidly grow.

I once thought it would take 24-30 months before the Conservatives hit serious political trouble but now I think it could be 12-18 months. There look certain to be industrial disputes with the public sector and transport unions among others as the real impact of Osborne's cuts begins to hit home and with tax and interest rate rises, it doesn't look good over the next few years.

Will Gordon Go For It ?

Much febrile speculation this afternoon about Gordon Brown calling a snap General Election tomorrow for February 25th or March 4th. It would certainly be a bold move and as such rather out of character for a man who seems to want to play it safe every time.

That said, going sooner rather than later has its advantages. The Conservative advantage in money would be neutralised to some extent and the likely announcement of the end to the recession (based on official GDP numbers) might be seen as offering a window of opportunity based on an uptick in consumer confidence.

I don't think it would make that much difference to be honest - the anti-Brown vote is strong and solid and this is confirmed by tonight's ICM poll. If Brown hangs on until May 6th or June 3rd he is only postponing the inevitable. It is indeed possible that going now might lessen the final defeat but that will be small comfort.

The Conservatives remain solidly at or around 40% with little sign of that vote cracking though the heat of a full-blooded campaign will be a test. The Liberal Democrats will be encouraged by tonight's 21% poll number which is where they were in January 2005. The base line figures show a 9% swing from Labour to the Tories which on its own is barely enough for a majority for David Cameron. The evidence from the marginals poll yesterday, however, suggests a stronger Conservative performance in the seats they need to win.

I don't expect Gordon Brown to go to the Palace tomorrow but you never know.....

De'bate's De Thing !!

The three "debates" between David Cameron, Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg which were to be the focal point of the coming General Election (apparently May 6th but don't tell anyone) have run into problems according to Mike Smithson on politicalbetting.com

The story in the News of the World suggests a protracted dispute between the Labour and Conservative parties over the format of the debates, the role of the audience and the answering of questions.

At a time when politics itself is seen to be discredited, there will be many who struggle to see why the parties should be at such loggerheads over what might seen to be trivialities but it's a clear sign of how significant these debates are seen to be in the leading echelons of the parties that such attention is being paid to such detail.

Programmes like "Question Time" show what can happen when partisan audiences get involved and the prospect of a debate descending into a "Jeremy Kyle" show type farce isn't that encouraging either. The US provides useful examples of how debates can be conducted in good humour and good grace but that might be construed as being as boring as baseline tennis.

However, neither party wants to run the risk of the bearpit. We know David Cameron has had problems with his temper and we know Gordon Brown struggles in the spontaneity of tv debate so we see the two main parties struggling to neutralise these deficiencies.

Irrespective of how the audience is constituted, what role should it have ? Should the audience be able to ask questions ? Should their response to the answers be auditable ? One proposal is to have no audience at all or that they should sit in silence.

From my perspective, I have some sympathy with the view that the audience, while adding to the atmosphere, aren't that helpful in other ways. The viewer at home should be able to make up his or her mind on the responses from the party leaders and not be swayed by the responses of the audience.

On the other hand, questions from the audience would in some ways be more akin to the questions asked by the average voter than the rather more detailed questions posed by moderators and other experts.

So let's have questions from the audience but mute out the audience response though I'm sure in the era of Twitter the actual response from the audience will filter out one way or another.

We do need to get these debates right but they do have to happen and oddly enough, their proposed timings on the night of Champions League Semi-Finals, also seems a shade perverse. Perhaps someone should have a word with the American networks and get some advice.

Saturday Night is Polls Night (part 1)

As the General Election approaches, every opinion poll is going to be micro-analysed by the folks on politicalbetting.com and elsewhere and the spinners and supporters of all parties are already putting their individual slant on the data and what it means.

The two important surveys are first a poll of Conservative - Labour marginals produced by ICM for News of the World. The report on this from Anthony Wells is as always informative. The Conservatives are doing better in the key marginals than the headline polls suggest and the 8.3% swing suggests a big loss of Labour seats. The key Conservative-Lib Dem marginals haven't been surveyed to the same extent though they doubtless well be and will doubtless show big swings to the Tories.

The second survey is a ComRes poll in the Sunday Mirror which has the Conservatives on 38%, Labour on 29% and the Lib Dems on 19%. I've long posited that the parties have traded in a rough 40-30-20-10 (Others) range for some time. At the moment, I'm calling it 40-, 30-, 20-, 10+ meaning the main parties are just off their median levels and the Others are doing slightly better.

Talkin' 'Bout a (Social) Revolution...

The horrific case of two boys convicted of brutally attacking two other boys in Doncaster has caused a wave of angst and anguish in the blogsphere. There's plenty of blame being thrown around and those considered culpable include the Council, the parents, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and God knows who else...


At a time when David Cameron has used speeches to put forward his view of how society should function and in particular the importance of marriage the polarisation of opinion and the heat generated suggests we are a long way from concensus and more interested in attributing blame than with coming up with solutions.


The unpalatable truth is that there is no quick fix to the problems in British society. Anyone who thinks we can turn the clock back to some romanticised idyll of family life ca.1957 is deluding themselves. Others seem to think a more disciplined approach to children involving corporal punishment will help but there's little evidence of that to be honest.

There is a general acceptance that there are deep problems within communities but where to start ? I don't believe there should be a financial incentive or disincentive to being married - marriage is or should be a far deeper commitment than simply a tax break here and there. One of the biggest changes in society in the past thirty years has been the emergence of financially independent women.

Another big development, as highlighted in The Sun on Wednesday, has been the decline in the number of households dominated by a married couple (roughly 42% now, down from 70% thirty years ago) and the rise in the proportion of households with co-habiting couples (up from 1% to 11%) and the huge rise in single-person households to roughly a third now.

These changes were perhaps predictable given the enormous economic and technological changes of the past thirty years but it was perhaps harder to judge the impact. There has been undoubtedly a breakdown in the cohesion of communities and as people have been forced to travel further from home to work (and spend more time travelling), we have got onto a treadmill of working ever-longer hours and have become a time-poor cash-rich society.

This kind of rapid economic and social transformation was bound to have repercussions and these are becoming apparent. It seems evident to me that looking at narrow legislative and financial changes is looking at the edge of the wider problem.

The fact that we work much less than France and have fewer holidays is interesting - the fact that France is top of the international quality of life league table while the UK is twenty-fifth also speaks volumes. If we are to effect fundamental changes in the way we function as a society then we need to effect fundamental changes to the way that society operates.

It's time to get Britain off the treadmill - longer holidays and shorter working hours would be a good start. Business will scream but part of the cultural change we need to embrace is that life isn't just about making money or having the newest gadget - life is about having the time to enjoy life and in our quest for material wealth we seem to have forgotten that.

David Cameron proposes nothing of any value because he is as committed to the work-life treadmill (despite some earlier weasel words) as everyone else. What is required is nothing less than a root-and-branch overhaul of our working lives and this needs unions, business, Government and individuals to agree on a way forward that, while supporting business, recognises that life is actually for living and that means if we have to earn a little less, work a little less and that shops have to put up the "Closed" sign a little more, so be it.

The world won't end if that happens and we might just find time for what really counts - our families, our children, our friends and our communities.

If we do nothing, there will be further breakdown and further breakage of Britain. Change won't be easy and many will resent it but it may just require all of us to do without a little for us all to gain so much more.