Jeremy's Den: Where Should We Go From Here?

Human progress is not measured by industry

It’s measured by the value you place on a life

An unimportant life, a life without privilege

That’s what defines an age, that’s what defines a species

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Thin Ice, 2017)

The universe shows his true face when it asks for help

We show ours by how we respond

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Oxygen, 2017)

Five weeks after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there is more and more compelling evidence that not much is going according to plan. There is no doubt the initial strategy was a blitzkrieg, despite the Putin apologists saying it was never considered, and this is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the victory editorial prepared by the Russian state-owned agency RIA-Novosti just two days into the invasion, and then quickly 'disappeared'. There is also evidence, published in French media, that it was coupled with sending a platoon of Spetsnaz to remove Volodymyr Zelenskyy from power 'by any means necessary'. Which was foiled by the Ukrainian air defence shooting down both planes that carried them. And, of course, it assumed that the people of Ukraine would welcome the Russians as 'liberators', and the exact opposite happened. So all Putin has left now is waging a criminal war of destruction against the civilian population, and hope he will have some aces up his sleeve when he is unavoidably forced to end the aggression and negotiate. Which is obviously the right time for Ukraine's allies to apply more pressure on Putin, as multiple sources report that his 'special military operation' is losing momentum.

In this context, the attitude of public opinion all over Europe is essential, as a way to ensure governments maintain a tough posture against Russia. Several pollsters, but mostly YouGov, have surveyed the British public about courses of action available to counter the Russian aggression and help Ukraine. YouGov are the most useful source here, as they polled their panel about the exact same items at regular intervals. So what we have is not a snapshot, but a cinematic vision of how public opinion evolved over the last five weeks. Let's start with what you can call the 'hard' options. Public opinion is definitely not ready for the really hawkish options that would mean direct involvement in the fighting. Which is just as well, as you can't predict Putin's reaction to these, except that it would be a violent one. Then the two options just below, on the scale of escalation, do have steady and massive support. Strong military presence within the borders of NATO is quite a given, and the best way to warn Putin off further military adventures. Delivery of further weapons and supplies to Ukraine is even more massively supported, though there have been some differences on its actual meaning, in some countries and in some political circles.

On the issue of weaponry, the NATO countries have been positively adamant they will only deliver defensive weapons to Ukraine, while Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the Mayor of Kyiv Vitali Klitschko, insist on offensive ones. Military experts will tell you there's a pretty fine line here. After all, defensive weaponry can be pretty offensive too, no pun intended. Which also why Vladimir Putin holds to his view that all weapon deliveries to Ukraine are offensive and threats to Russia. And why NATO regularly refuse to send tanks or aircraft, even old Soviet models available in their inventory. Obviously some level of secrecy, or even just discretion, is necessary here. Which is probably why the Biden administration made so much noise about the hypothetical transfer of Polish Mig-29s to Ukraine, because the USA's line is to avoid such transfers at all costs, even cacophony among allies and bad PR. In the opposite corner, France has been much more discreet, to the point that the exact list of equipment supplied is treated as highly confidential, and the Russians were reportedly surprised when they found out that Milan anti-tank missiles had been used against them. There is also an array of what you might call 'soft' options, though Putin also considers them pretty aggressive, that have strong popular support in the UK.

Support to political opposition is basically a no-fly zone of its own. First you would have to identify whom to support. Quite challenging when the official parliamentary opposition, Communists and Liberal Democrats (who are actually anything but liberals and democrats, and nothing like ours) are pretty much part of the Putin system, and all others have already been poisoned or jailed by the FSB. Media campaigning within Ukraine is certainly best left to Ukrainians themselves, lest we allow Putin another propaganda stunt against Western intervention. Then economic sanctions are certainly our strongest option, providing they are actually enforced by all parties involved. The sad truth is that companies with significant activity in Russia are not too keen, and are not short of oven-ready and more or less credible excuses. So a higher level of undecideds probably just reflects doubt on the actual efficiency of sanctions, rather than an actual lower support for them. Which is of course not a valid argument against them, or broadening and extending them. Public opinion is definitely ready and willing to go further.

There is good and there is evil, by any analysis evil should always win

Good is not a practical survival strategy, it requires loyalty, self-sacrifice and love

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Twice Upon A Time, 2017)

So, why does good prevail?

What keeps the balance between good and evil in this appalling universe?

Is there some kind of logic? Some mysterious force?

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Twice Upon A Time, 2017)

In the same sequence of regular polls, YouGov also tested the level of support for sanctions, when some of the plausible effects on ourselves are mentioned. Four surveys so far show that the level of support has increased since the start of the Russian aggression, and that undecideds are moving step by step towards support, no matter what hardships we may have to face as a consequence. Even the prospect of an increase of the overall cost of living, which pretty much sums up the predictable fallout, does not weaken support. This is again evidence that a tougher stance is a win-win strategy for the English Government. The various crosstabs in YouGov's most recent poll show that Conservative voters are more supportive of sanctions than average. And so are respondents aged 55 and above, classed as middle-class, or living in the South of England. Pretty much the standard Conservative territory within the electorate, yet another reason for Boris Johnson to read the room properly and act accordingly.

Of course the real question is: would the British public actually put their money where their mouth is? That's what Ipsos-Mori asked in another poll, literally. They did not ask just about a 'significant' increase in energy prices, but spelt out what the exact amount would be, in pounds per year. Even an increase of £1,000, which is a massive amount for people already hit hard by the cost-of-living crisis, delivers a majority supporting the sanctions. This shows in the crosstabs, with 53% of middle-class respondents supporting sanctions with a £1,000 price-tag, and 48% of working class respondents supporting them. Here too, Conservative and those aged 55 and above offer the highest level of support. London and the South offer higher than average support, the Midlands and the North lower than average, while Scotland exactly fits the average. Of course this question is less relevant in the UK, who buy only 8% of their oil and gas from Russia, than it would be in Germany or Finland. It makes sense though in a broader hypothetical context where continental Europe would embargo Russian oil and gas. Which is probably not bound to happen in the very near future but, if it did, it would certainly trigger a combination of both shortages and rising costs as other producers would be unable to cope instantly with increased demand.

There are also concrete ways to help Ukraine and the Ukrainians who are forced out of their country by the war. YouGov surveyed the level of involvement of the British public, through humanitarian aid and social media. It's quite reassuring to see that a majority have either already donated, or are considering doing it, which is obviously the most efficient option available for most of us. I guess a lot of people have some perfectly good clothes that are just a few years old, and that they haven't worn for a while. So right now is the right time to make some room in the wardrobe, innit? And thus make life better for people who found asylum here after they were forced to leave with just a few things in a suitcase. I'm not so sure about donating items that would have to be sent to Ukraine, but that can be solved by donating money to organisations that are equipped to deal with that kind of operation. They're easy to find online.

Nevertheless, you have to wonder why so many people refuse to consider doing anything, but I don't have similar data from earlier crises, like Kosovo or Afghanistan, so maybe this is just the same as happens every time. Another poll, by Survation on behalf of 38 Degrees, found that a majority support a humanitarian visa and resettlement scheme, though the exact details are not totally clear, and also full government funding for Councils rehoming Ukrainian refugees. And another poll from Opinium also found a majority thinking that the UK Government has not done enough to welcome Ukrainian refugees in the UK. We definitely need the public to be more open and generous than the government, enough to make it a major issue and force the Home Office to soften their stance on immigration and asylum. One can hope.

Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence

(Steve Arnott, Line Of Duty, 2017)

Like sewage, smartphones and Donald Trump, some things are just inevitable

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Doctor Falls, 2017)

YouGov, as always the most prolific pollster of the Realm, love taking the British public's pulse on a regular basis. They call it Political Trackers, and there's actually like a goldmine of information to dig out from those. I guess the lads in the basement at SW1 read these polls too all the time, as they have a set of standard questions coming back again and again, so you get the ebbs and flows of public opinion. Then they also have more targeted stuff on a rotation, and sometimes some that comes out of nowhere just because it's something the public have been talking about over the last few days. One of the staples is asking people to rank the three main English parties on an eleven-rung scale from 0 or 'will never vote for those wankers', to 10 or 'will definitely always vote for that lot'. Which is then quite easy to map into your favourite five levels from Definitely to Never. Here 0 is Never, 10 is Definitely, 5 is Neutral, and the intermediate rankings are Likely and Unlikely. The SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens are not tested.

There are interesting geographical differences here between the Three Nations, as Northern Ireland was not surveyed in this poll. In Scotland, the level of positives for the Conservatives is quite close to their voting intentions in the most recent polls (more on this later). But spontaneous support for Labour and the Liberal Democrats is much higher than their voting intentions. A strong showing by the LibDems is obviously more worrying for the Conservatives than the SNP, but the SNP should definitely pay more attention to the public's view of Labour. Recent Scottish polling (again, more on this later) definitely supports the idea of some Labour revival in Scotland, coupled with a strong probability that their returning voters would come from the SNP rather than from the other unionist parties. The levels of positives for the Conservatives and Labour in England are also quite counter-intuitive, when you remember that the Conservatives were 13% ahead there in December 2019. But England is not of just one monolithic shade here, as there also noticeable differences between the English regions.

London being massively supportive of Labour is not a surprise. But the level of spontaneous support for Labour is lower that their share of the vote in 2019, while support for the LibDems is twice their latest vote share. This could lead to some interesting situations at the next general election, and quite possibly as soon as the London local elections in May, for which polling is quite puzzlingly contradictory. The other ratings, though obviously distinct from actual voting intentions, confirm Conservative weaknesses in the South and Labour's weaknesses in the Midlands. And also an interesting situation in the North, where rebuilding the Red Wall looks tougher than Labour Central believes. More on the actual snapshot of voting intentions later.

Don’t be daft, there’s no such thing as aliens

Even if there were, they ain’t going to be on a train to Sheffield

(Graham O’Brien, Doctor Who: The Woman Who Fell To Earth, 2018)

I eat danger for breakfast. I don’t, I prefer cereal. Or croissants.

Or these little fried Portuguese… Never mind, it’s not important.

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Arachnids In The UK, 2018)

YouGov also asked their panel to rate the UK government's handling of various issues from 'very well' to 'very badly', and the results are pretty damning. If you calculate the usual 'net rating', the average is -27, somewhere between discontent and a general strike. Worst ratings are on immigration on -52, inflation on -51 and housing on -47. Taxation on -44 and the NHS on -40 come close to the top three. The only net positive is for terrorism on +26, probably because the last massive terrorist attacks on UK soil happened in 2017, and official discourse dismissed later isolated attacks as 'lone wolf' incidents. The government also get a net zero, obviously not on climate change, but on defence. Probably because most people aren't really fluent in the basics of defence matters, and can't see how much conventional forces have been depleted over the last ten years. And probably think "I'm all right, Jack, because we got them nukes". Just as the war in Ukraine has again proved their uselessness and the futility of spaffing billions on them. Just saying.

The verdict on immigration is the most ambiguous here, as you can oppose the government's policy from opposite standpoints. Either you think the 'hostile environment' is a disgrace and should be scrapped altogether, or you think it does not go far enough and we should lay minefields across the Dover Strait. Both land you in the red zone of opposition. Nevertheless, the overall verdict is quite damning, and anyone in a private job would get their P45 on the spot with such assessments. Which makes the trend of voting intentions all the more puzzling. But we'll burn that bridge later, won't we? YouGov also asked their panel about what they consider the most important issues at the moment, or their main areas of concern. This one is quite enlightening too, and again not really good for the English Government.

The different items are ordered by the proportion of respondents who mentioned them, and the total is more than 100% because they could select up to three. Government approval is the sum of 'very well' and 'fairly well' at the previous question. The public's two main areas of concern are certainly to be understood as 'the dismal state of the economy' and 'the dismal state of the NHS', and the government's low level of approval on both is proof of that. Interestingly, the Very Tory Issue of Brexit doesn't make the Top Five. It's not at the fore of the public's mind and they massively think the English Government has fucked it up. Good luck to anyone who feels like campaigning on 'Make Brexit Work' or 'Get Brexit Done Again'. There is a clear sense here that these are rearguard actions, and that the public wants the political establishment to move on to solving more pressing problems. Which obviously do not include who has a penis and who hasn't, despite the media's obsession with that. I have no doubt that the combined shockwaves of Covid, Brexit and Ukraine on the economy will become a more and more prominent key issue as time goes by. It would be a good idea for everyone, Conservatives, Labour and the media, to refocus on this and its collaterals like taxation, cost of living and welfare. These will be the next election's dominant issues, not some fight from the past. Especially when we certainly haven't seen the worst of the economic debacle yet, if the English Government's botched energy strategy is any indication.

Just because you’re offended doesn’t mean you’re right

(Ricky Gervais)

Mondays are fine, it’s your life that sucks

(Ricky Gervais)

YouGov also surveyed their panel about a more existentially philosophical question, their assessment of the Westminster System, on a scale from 'works extremely well' to 'is badly broken'. The first surprise is that 2% of Brits are deluded enough, or not paying attention enough, to think that it works extremely well. Then the general feeling is, quite obviously, that the system is broken. Only Conservative voters beg to differ somewhat, though a plurality of them still think the system is broken. Labour and LibDem voters are merciless, but you just have to wonder what their assessment would be if their own party had been in power for eleven years. Possibly quite different and more similar to Conservative voters. The geographical divides within England are also quite consistent with each region's political leanings. Unsurprisingly, a massive majority of Scots also think the system is broken, which could be an incentive to break away from it and invent something better. But other polls prove we haven't reach that stage yet. More on that shortly.

This low level of approval for the system is what happens when the clerk of Handforth Parish Council is held to higher standards of conduct in public service than the Prime Minister. Or, more seriously and significantly, when its own MPs hit hard at the government over a botched selection process for a high-ranking position in public office. There's also a fun side to this, as the panel were also asked how they think the UK's Parliament compares to foreign ones, and we all know how good Brits are at international comparisons. Turns out 14% think Westminster works better than most foreign Parliaments, 31% that it works just as well, 20% that it works less well and 35% have no idea. You can't really fault Brits for not paying attention to what is happening abroad, they've been told that the massive success of Brexit invalidates international comparisons, haven't they? If they paid attention, they would have noticed that public opinion in a lot of other countries also think their own system is broken. This is definitely the case in the USA, France, Italy or Spain. Germany is more ambivalent and Russia hasn't been asked. For a nice finishing touch, YouGov also asked their panel about their level of confidence in some of the key players in the system, and the verdict is again far from stellar.

The pattern of answers about Commons is not too dissimilar to the assessment of the system in general, though there are some obvious contradictions too. For example, you have to wonder why Labour and LibDem voters have a better opinion of Commons that of the whole system, when Commons are the main part of it, its most visible, and possibly the most dysfunctional in their everyday workings. A low lever of confidence in the Lords is understandable on the basis of principled opposition to the very existence of an unelected chamber. But most people probably forget that the Lords have repeatedly opposed the most outlandish pieces of legislation over the last couple of years, only to see them reinstated by Commons. This kind of principled opposition should earn them better rankings. Finally, it would be interesting to know more about how people shape their opinion of the Civil Service, and why Labour and especially LibDem voters have a better opinion of it than average. There is massive evidence that the upper rungs of the Service's food chain are still filled with overpaid and underperforming clones of the Humphrey Applebys of yore, and that the lower echelons are pretty much happy enablers of petty bureaucracy wrapped in red tape, as the treatment of Ukrainian refugees has again shown. So, such a positive assessment in some circles is quite puzzling.

I’m gonna name a town after you, a really rubbish one, and maybe a pig

(Nardole, Doctor Who: The Doctor Falls, 2017)

I only know one way, that’s full throttle

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2021)

The Russian aggression in Ukraine has offered Boris Johnson more opportunities for underhanded legerdemains, like wiping the fallout of the Tory Sleaze scandals under the rug. Or letting Liz Truss pat herself on the back in Commons after the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, when the Humphrey Applebys at the Foreign Office tried to discourage public support to her in a most insulting way. Then you have to wonder what is the exact reasoning behind the Conservatives launching a two-year election campaign, when a lot of parties and leaders elsewhere prefer shorter campaigns, which afford the opposition fewer opportunities to expose the incumbents' shortcomings. It was an odd alignment of stars indeed, or collision or galaxies, that this happened on the same day the English Government admitted they knew about P&O illegally sacking 800 staff the day before it happened, and did nothing to avoid it. And now we also have the Old Boris back, the one we knew so well and never loved, who did not even realise that comparing Ukrainian resistance to Brexit was, err..., how shall I put this? Fucking disgusting? But numbers don't lie, unless they do, and the trends of voting intentions clearly show the Conservatives gaining back lost ground and Labour losing some.

We have pretty much the same trends in England outwith London, where any election is won or lost. Down there, the Conservatives started with a bigger lead in December 2019, and the ebbs and flows of voting intentions have paralleled the UK-wide average. Labour have not succeeded in decisively turning the tide across England, though they know it is the key to their return to power some day. Besides, a tie in the popular vote in England means the Conservatives bag a majority of seats even without the next round of gerrymandering. So Labour would have to make up for that in London and Wales, since Scotland is a lost cause for them. But the Conservatives still have some strong areas both in London and Wales, so Labour's task is bound to be more difficult than they probably think and hope. This is the price to pay for the current climate of forced national unity, but also a damning verdict on New New Labour's failure to offer a fully credible social-liberal alternative to New Thatcherism.

Of course, there is massive irony in Labour, who were once so badly hurt by a criminal war of their own making, now being sent up on Shit Creek without a paddle by another man's criminal war. It has even reached the point where some Conservatives really believe they could score gains at the local elections in May, against common sense and all odds. Weirdly, some guy writing for The Guardian found it the right moment to tell Labour that they need 'a ruthlessly pragmatic alliance between progressive parties' (his words, not mine, of course). Which is actually just a pretext to peddle again the tired mantra about 'PR!PR!PR!' like a headless sheep baaing up the wrong tree, again and again. It's actually quite fun to see this lot are perpetually living in a dream world, where PR is the solution to all evils, and will happen some day. Because it won't, no matter what Labour say about it now to gain votes.

The secret to high office appears no longer to reside in revealing

The deepest truths, but in telling the most attractive lies

(Gail Vella, Line Of Duty, 2021)

Things get a wee bit fuzzy for me here

Maybe you could be a ray of sunshine and burn off the fog

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2016)

OK, gaffer, let me see... What can I tell you? It was bound to happen some day, and Putin's criminal war of aggression against Ukraine has probably just accelerated the process. Labour's voting intentions, and their lead over the Conservatives, are again below what they need to credibly hope assembling a strong and stable government coalition after the next general election. My current Poll'O'Polls includes the last four conducted by Redfield & Wilton, Survation, YouGov and Techne at some point over the last few days. 27 March to 31 March, to be precise. Super-sample size is 7,678, which means a theoretical margin of error of 1.12%, in case you want to do all the math about the overlapping likely spread of voting intentions. It doesn't look good for Labour, as it's pretty close to what we had three weeks ago and already six weeks ago, before they let Boris Johnson take back control of the narrative, if not of the UK's destiny.

What this reveals, among lots of other things, is how easily people fall for the Conservatives' legerdemains. Best example recently is the NIC hike, which Rishi Sunak has managed to make totally unintelligible by mixing it with a rise of the threshold. Hard truth is that those paid around £30k will lose £400-500, and those paid around £65-70k will lose £900-1,000 a year. Something nobody wants when there are already other hardships round the corner. There is also a lot of ambiguity on the Treasury's side, about how the hiking of the NIC threshold will impact the accruing of state pensions by lower paid workers. And, as usual, we can only guess that them muddying the waters means there is something fishy going on behind the smokescreen. And now's the time Labour choose to start some new witch-hunts in their own ranks, instead of working on a better and more convincing manifesto. Can't help thinking such attitudes also explain Labour's poor showing in recent polls, not just the basic flag-shagging reflex in times of crisis. But, if I can indulge in some fiddling-while-Rome-burns of my own, it's entertaining to compare the current snapshot of voting intentions with another item YouGov surveyed in their last tracker: how people rate the three main English parties, their leaders and themselves on the classic right-to-left scale.

Fortunately, the British public correctly identify Labour as on the left, the Conservatives on the right and the Liberal Democrats somewhere else. It would indeed be a fucking mess if they didn't, wouldn't it? The public's perception of Boris Johnson also fits their assessment of the Conservative Party like a glove, though there might be some feedback loop at work here, as nobody can genuinely claim they know what Bozo stands for at the end of the day. Interestingly, Keir Starmer and Ed Davey are both seen less to the left than their respective parties, and quite strongly so in Keir's case. Which sounds quite right in both cases, and also makes the case that the public would never understand what the fuck happened, if the LibDems chose to go into coalition with the Conservatives after the next election, rather than with Labour. Then I guess a lot of people also did not understand it in 2010. The fun part is obviously that the Liberal Democrats and Ed Davey come closest to how the public see themselves, when the LibDems are still predicted to do no better than fourth party status. Another sign that elections are won by solidifying support at both ends of the compass, not by herding hypothetical centrists towards a centrist manifesto, as Keir Starmer is trying to do.

Good, now we're sucking diesel

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2017)

Jesus and Mary and Joseph and the wee donkey

Can we just move this thing along before it drives us all round the bloody bend?

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2021)

Sure, gaffer, errr... Have to say it doesn't look really good for Labour this time, again. They've been stuck in this 290-300 seats region since early February, much earlier than Boris' Ukraine War Surge. They definitely had major opportunities to gain votes and secure them for good when the PartyGate shit hit Boris' fans, and they let it slip away. And it's a weak result for the Liberal Democrats too, when earlier polling had made them believe they could reach 20 or even 25 seats. Oddly, the so-called 'progressive' media have helped the Conservatives, when they opened a new front in the 'culture war' about sex and gender. There is something of a win-win situation in this for the Conservatives, who can pat themselves on the back for 'being kind' to Jamie Wallis despite the shady parts of his past, while playing the 'common sense' card that 'what you see is what you get'. Basically the view that former Stonewall executive and wannabe Labour leader Wes Streeting endorsed, to anyone's surprise, and much whining from the rainbow-socked metropolitan hipsters.

Interestingly, current polling puts us squarely in The Zone. That Twilight Zone were voting intentions lead to an inconclusive hung Parliament, and where the new boundaries currently under review would switch first and second place. Bear in mind that, under the initial proposals of the 2023 Boundary Review, the 2019 votes would have delivered 13 more seats for the Conservatives, 8 fewer for Labour and 3 fewer for the LibDems. We're treading pretty much the same waters here, in an even worse variant, with gerrymandering delivering 18 more Conservative seats, 13 fewer for Labour and 3 fewer for the LibDems, if the election was fought on the new boundaries. If that was already not enough, the Conservatives are also taking steps to gerrymander, not just the constituencies, but also the electorate, by granting the right to vote to elderly tax-exiles who haven't set foot in the UK for more than 15 years. Which proves that the Conservatives are not as illiterate as you might think. They are only following Bertolt Brecht's advice here: change the people to get things done your way.

What we have here is the one good reason we will not have a snap election this year or the next. Boris Johnson might very well be taken down by the delayed fallout of PartyGate, or by some backbench revolt over planning permissions in the Cotswolds. But whoever succeeds him will have no urge to gamble their majority in a snap election, when they can wait for more auspicious days. New boundaries, reflecting the final proposals of the current review, and finalising the pro-Conservative gerrymandering, can't be passed before the last quarter of 2023. Then the effect on public opinion of the wee cut on the lower band of income tax will be felt only in April 2024. So why hurry? Thanks to the new Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, that received Royal Assent just a week ago unnoticed, and repealed the earlier Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the next general election must happen no later than 23 January 2025. But the actual date is, as it was before 2011, at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, so the election could just as well happen on 5 May 2024, the original scheduled date. Just as all taxpayers have digested the effect of the lower band going down to 19p, and before any more shit hits the fan. As for what will actually happen, your guess is as good as mine. Right now my tenner is on avoiding another winter election, so some time between late spring and early autumn of 2024.

Good, now we're cooking with gas

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2019)

We have to stop this recent culture of people telling us

They’re offended and expecting us to give a fuck

(Ricky Gervais)

Our usual tour of the devolved nations and the English regions now. Let's deal with the Imperial Capital first. This new batch of polls is mediocre for all three main parties in London, and would deliver the same number of seats for each as in 2019, and also the exact same seats unlike 2017, when one went from Labour to the Conservatives and one the other way. The main problem for the three main parties is that both the Greens and Reform UK are doing better than at previous elections. This is not really surprising for the Greens, but a bit more for Reform UK in traditionally Europhile London. As in many other regions, a minimal swing either way could be damaging for both Labour and the Conservatives. Iain Duncan Smith, Theresa Villiers and Felicity Buchan on one side, Jon Cruddas on the other, are clearly in the danger zone. Before you ask again, Boris Johnson is not. Yet.

Then we again have a variant of the Very Scottish Paradox. The most recent polls say the Westminster voting intentions are pretty much aligning with the Holyrood constituency voting intentions (more on these later), which is something we've seen before, sometimes with unexpected results. The noticeable difference is that the LibDems are doing poorly in Westminster polling, and quite well in Holyrood polling. In both cases, Labour does better than at previous elections, probably because some voters switch back from the SNP to Labour. So the Westminster seat projection is again quite mediocre for the SNP, who come out with a net gain of one only because of the LibDems' poor performance. On current numbers, the SNP would gain four seats: Moray from the Conservatives and the three mainland Libdem seats. But they would lose three: Gordon to the Conservatives, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Airdrie and Shotts to Labour. And it would take only a wee swing to see Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock switching to the Conservatives. Or Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill and East Lothian to Labour. A wee swing would also see Edinburgh West stay with the LibDems, so the SNP are again in an uncomfortable situation here.

As you might expect from the predicted votes, Labour would also achieve a landslide in Wales, in some cases helped by the slight LibDem and Reform UK surges, that deprive the Conservatives of enough votes in key marginals. Labour's predicted performance here is actually not a first. They bagged 32 seats in 1966, when Wales had only 36 in total. And then 34 in 1997 and 2001, when Wales already had 40 overall. Of course current polling predicts a very special alignment of the stars there, which also benefits the LibDems who would bag Brecon and Radnorshire again, and Plaid Cymru who would gain Ynys Môn. That would leave the Conservatives with just the Montgomeryshire seat held by Craig Williams, one of the non-descript backbenchers of the 2019 intake. Secretary of State for Wales Simon Hart, his junior minister David Davies, and his predecessors Alun Cairns and Stephen Crabb would lose their seats. Quite a feat to unseat three successive holders of the exact same Cabinet position in one go. Stephen Crabb was also once Secretary of State for Works and Pensions under David Cameron, so kicking out one of those involved in the dismantling of the welfare state would certainly be an added bonus for Labour. Revenge... cold...

There's no advantage to being nice and thoughtful and caring and having integrity

It's a disadvantage if anything

(Ricky Gervais)

Animals don’t have a voice, but I do. A loud one. A big fucking mouth.

My voice is for them. And I’ll never shut up while they suffer.

(Ricky Gervais)

Again, the Midlands do Labour no favour. You might remember, as I mentioned it earlier, that this goes a long way back before Starmer or even Corbyn. To Gordon Brown actually and the 2010 election, when Labour lost 40% of their seats in the region overnight. And never had a chance to get them all back. Gaining back 20 Red Wall seats that were lost in 2019 is indeed a good result, as well as the Liberal Democrats now predicted to hold North Shropshire. But the bulk of the rural seats in the various shires within the region are still conclusively blue. As long as Conservatives of the 2010 intake remain firmly entrenched in these, there is little hope for Labour rebounding to their level of successes during the Blair era. And Keir posing as the New Blair is definitely of little help here.

The North, in contrast, appears poised to reclaim its status as a true Labour heartland. New New Labour would even do better there than the Corbyn Surge, which would provide excellent PR for Sly Keir. But only a few Conservative big names would go down there, as most of the losers would be from the 2019 intake of Red Wall seats. All we have here is Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 Committee and four junior or sub-junior ministers (Trudy Harrison, Andrew Stephenson, Stuart Andrew, Damien Moore). But losing Brady might be seen as an unexpected bonus by some Conservatives, including Boris Johnson himself. Interestingly, the unexpectedly high level or Reform UK voting intentions helps Labour. Even if they haven't gained back all of their own Leave voters, a lot of these appear to be snatched away from the Conservatives, and this is definitely a welcome bonus in many marginal seats.

The South, as we have already seen multiple times recently, also promises to be kind to Labour. Not that they can entertain any delusion about becoming the first party down there, they might have to wait a couple of generations for that. But the gains on the last election are spectacular nevertheless. Especially it's not just about London's Commuter Belt any more and the influx of rainbow-socked hipsters fleeing atrocious housing prices and cost of living in the Imperial Capital. Gains are also significant in the South West down to the tip of Cornwall. With some interesting trophies from the Cabinet (Alok Sharma, Grant Shapps, George Eustice, Chloe Smith) and also the lower rungs of government (Will Quince, Iain Stewart) as well as prominent positions in Commons (Tobias Elwood, Stephen McPartland, Steve Baker). Sadly, the Liberal Democrats have unexpectedly lost ground there and wouldn't unseat Dominic Raab this time. But just by a hare's breadth.

In Wigan, you know, on the back of bakers’ vans

They’ve got a sign that says: No pies are left in this van overnight

(Jason Manford)

It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye

Then it’s fun and games you can’t see anymore

(James Hetfield)

The rebirth of Boris As Prime Minister is quite amazing, when you consider the various ways he mishandled the fallout of the Ukraine war, and also the earlier scandals still ominously looming in the background. So why would anyone in their sane mind genuinely think 'aye, sure, Boris is the man we need to deal with that Putin lad'? And yet they do. When you compare the trendlines, the most amazing thing is that voters have turned away from Keir and switched to Boris as 'Best In Show' faster and in greater numbers than they switched from Labour to the Conservatives in their voting intentions. Meaning that Labour definitely have a Starmer problem, that might at some point become more of a liability than their Corbyn problem in the run-up to the 2019 election. Even the usually Starmer-friendly Guardian can no longer ignore his weaknesses and how they affect Labour's overall performance. How the Preferred First Minister Of England polling has evolved recently is just more evidence of the public's disappointment in Keir.

One of Keir Starmer's many problems is that the British public still can't see him as a Prime Minister in waiting, and Labour as ready to govern. Which is another Very British Paradox, as strong pluralities also think that the Conservative government is incompetent, and that the Labour Party is more united than the Conservatives. Interestingly, Keir Starmer has now taken the lead over Rishi Sunak in these polls. Rishi's ratings have continued to go down while Boris' went back up over the last month. But there's also some sort of triple-whammy in here for Sly Keir and Labour. The next general election will probably happen pretty much as originally scheduled in 2024, after the next round of gerrymandering and the wee cut in income tax boost the Conservatives. The Conservatives won't be led by Sunak, who could have given Starmer a run for his money, fighting for the fiscally-responsible centrist middle class electorate, but would have conceded the Leave-voting leftists without a fight. Keir will have to fight Boris, who will tick all the nationalist, populist and anti-woke boxes as shamelessly as he can. Early leaks also show that Boris will try and revive the Brexit culture war, not good news for Keir who is just as unable as Jeremy Corbyn to define a credible alternative. Against all odds again, this might well be a winning combination for the Conservatives two years and some from now.

The funny part of the story is that Wunderkind Rishi Sunak looks kind of devalued now, pretty much as the post-invasion ruble, as he has done himself no favour with a Spring Statement that fell short of the public's expectations. The most amazing part is that the usually media-savvy Sunak totally fucked up his PR about it. His complete lack of awareness of real people's actual plights was also quite amazing, coming from a man we had previously seen pandering to pretty much all corners of the electorate. Voters also trusted the Chancellor with some sort of technical proficiency, but the omnishambles of the Spring Statement sadly showed that he lacks that too, as he is more zig-zaging than actually U-turning. Clearly not the sign of strong and stable leadership. So maybe Rishi has turned himself from a rising star into a shooting star, and the awkward way he compared himself to Will Smith surely did not help. His hope of becoming the next Big Dog is also quite shattered, as a number of Conservative MPs now openly oppose him and see him as a liability for the next election. Could we have just witnessed The Fall Of The House Of Rishi?

I take no pleasure in this, but the man had it coming to him in spades

(Ted Hastings, Line Of Duty, 2019)

You crack a joke and people start freaking out and get offended for nothing!

Just because you laugh at something, it doesn't mean you're condoning it.

(Ricky Gervais)

Just one week left before the first round of the French presidential election, and polls still look really good for Emmanuel Macron, though they have been better not so long ago. Since 18 March, the French presidential election has entered the 'période de réserve', the same concept as the British purdah. With government activity at a near standstill and Parliament in recess, except for listening to a live speech from Volodymyr Zelenskyy on 23 March, media are concentrating on just two major topics: Ukraine and the underwhelming presidential campaign. Emmanuel Macron's main talking point in 2017 was that the traditional left-right divide was no longer valid, and he has slightly reframed it during the current campaign, when he described the incoming election as a fight between progressives and populists. How he actually defines these two terms is a matter for speculation, but he pretty much implied that he is the only real progressive and that all other candidates are in some way populists. Which is of course quite simplistic, but seems to be working so far, as the trends of first round voting intentions show.

Of course, Macron's standing in the polls has been boosted by the invasion of Ukraine, which propelled him up to 33% in a couple of polls. He has gone down a bit after a few days and has now been flatlining around 28% for the best part of the month. Which is actually quite a high level for a French presidential first round, and potentially a better result than Jacques Chirac in 2002 and Nicolas Sarkozy in 2012, the last two incumbents to seek re-election. It's also about 4% up on what newcomer Emmanuel Macron himself bagged in 2017. French pollsters have also tested different scenarios for the second round, involving the four candidates, from the far left to the far right, who could possibly end up second in the first round. Of course, some scenarios are more credible than others, and there is a consensus now that the second round will be a rematch of 2017, Macron against Le Pen. This was not always a given all along the campaign, but the other candidates have either lost momentum (Pécresse and Zemmour), or not gained enough to be seriously considered 'in' for Round Two (Mélenchon).

Despite some signs of weakness in the early days of the Ukrainian crisis, the combined left-wing vote has rebounded to about 28%, an improvement over the early days of the campaign and now pretty similar to Macron's voting intentions, but split between six candidates. The total vote for all right-wing candidates stands around 45%, with the far-right accounting for about two thirds of it. Of course, there is still room for some upsets, and Macron has been criticised for his subdued campaigning, and relying on the international crisis to dismiss debate about his achievements, or lack thereof, during his first term and his proposals, or lack thereof, for a second term. Other candidates, mostly Mélenchon from the left and Le Pen from the right, are pulling no punches about two issues that will sound familiar to British ears. The soaring price of energy, though the rise of electricity prices has been capped to 4%, thanks to the existence of state-owned utilities. But the price of petrol can't and has also increased significantly in France, despite a cut on fuel levies that appears as insignificant as the one announced by Rishi Sunak. There are also concerns about an overall rise of the cost of living, though inflation is expected to be around 5%, lower than the UK's predicted 8%. There are no shortages down there, thanks to France not having any Brexit benefit, and relying far less on food imports than the UK. You can see some of the fallout of these concerns in the trend of second round voting intentions, featuring Macron and Le Pen, still the most likely contender.

Even though Le Pen finds herself in a better position than in 2017, when she bagged only 34% of the second round votes, Macron is still the obvious favourite. Though he should obviously be worried that his significant post-invasion bounce had also died down here, and more. What little is said by the two campaigns points to the same basic fact, that seven days might still be enough for an upset. Some in the Macron campaign have switched to panic mode, and are warning themselves and the electorate about complacency, which might result in a record number of abstentions. While the Le Pen campaign is appealing to potential abstentionists, counting on some get-out-to-vote effort to boost their result. Which is actually pretty much the classic action-reaction process, and might well end in a stalemate with little change in voting intentions before the first round. But of course the classic wisdom still applies, that the best predictions are those made in hindsight. Be seeing you after the first round.

You found it offensive? I found it funny. That's why I'm happier than you.

(Ricky Gervais)

Scotland are all over the place in space

Demanding independence from every planet they land on

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Smile, 2017)

Meanwhile in Caledonia, we've had the updated Scottish Tracker from Savanta Comres, as usual on behalf of The Scotsman. As usual too, Savanta Comres were in clear violation of British Polling Council disclosure rules as the poll was conducted on 10-16 March, the headline results were published by The Scotsman on 18 March, but the full data table were not disclosed until 28 March, after being requested thrice through Twitter. But the BPC can't be arsed to issue a warning, so what the fuck? This one did not make headlines in the Scottish Pravda, oops... sorry... The National, probably because that glimpse of the Scottish public's position was quite disappointing for the SNP. First, it showed No 4.5% ahead in the raw referendum voting intentions, up from a near tie in the previous Savanta Comres poll for The Economist, conducted barely two weeks before. Then there is a lot of interesting information in the poll's crosstabs as they again highlighted the demographic, geographic and political divides at work here. Let's see first what the basic demographics say.

This one confirms what we already saw in previous polls. The younger generations are far more supportive of independence that the old geezers. Which doesn't mean it will stay that way forever. There is massive evidence elsewhere that people tend to become more conservative with age. Just look at how the Blair Generation of '97 vote now. And don't tell me they just switched from one shade of right to another, because in their minds they didn't. Women are also significantly more supportive of independence than men. Before you ask, Savanta Comres actually labeled these crosstabs 'gender', 'male' and 'female', and I corrected them. And there wasn't any 'non binary' category. But I don't think there is anything actually strikingly useful in these basic crosstabs, as others are much more significant. But let's look first at the geographical divide.

It's interesting to compare these to what we know about the results of the 2014 referendum. Glasgow is quite a disappointment, as you don't see change from the 2014 result there when you factor out undecideds. Interestingly, the predicted results have also barely moved in the South, not what you would extrapolate from their strong support for the Conservatives. Quite unexpectedly too, Lothian has moved strongly towards Yes, Mid and Fife and the Highlands a little less so, while the North East has moved towards No. Central and West too have barely seen any change from 2014, possibly a sign of the contradictions within Labour, who still have higher than average support in both regions. Which is the perfect transition to a more detailed scrutiny of the political divides. In my opinion, the ones holding the keys to a Yes victory when the time comes.

First of all, obviously don't waste energy and resources targeting Conservative voters. Interestingly the proportion of Labour-Yes voters has gone down between 2019 and 2021, which I can only explain by a significant number of them switching to the SNP. Which, again, doesn't mean it will stay that way forever. If other polls are any indication, a number of them are willing to switch back to Labour. But this is not the most interesting part. First, there have been far more Yes-To-No than No-To-Yes switchers, contrary to the usual SNP narrative, that even denies that Yes-To-No exists. So it's up to new voters to swing the result back somewhat towards Yes, plausibly because most of them belong to that generation that wasn't eligible to vote eight years ago. But you have to wonder why the fuck would anyone go Yes-To-No. Is it because the Yes camp appears divided and still hasn't made a strong enough case? Or is it because some do want independence, but won't risk having the current variant of the SNP in charge after it? Your guess is as good as mine here. Same as your guess why 12% of SNP voters would vote No. Then the detailed picture we have here probably spells out which targets should be prioritised: undecideds, Yes-To-No switchers, SNP doubters. Pretty much in this order. Just saying, and the brains at SNP Central will do what they want anyway, won't they?

Perhaps you are aware that Vietnam had a civilisation

before your ancestors invented the haggis

(Choung Tran, Silent Witness: Sins Of The Fathers, 1996)

Good number, 51! Atomic number of antimony

Number of Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton

I love that show, I have seen all 900 casts

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Tsuranga Conundrum, 2018)

Of course a poll is just a poll, and we also have to consider the trends. And what they say is quite distressing for anyone genuinely supporting Independence. We're still on roughly 51% No to 49% Yes when the undecideds are factored out, which is pretty much where we were already four months ago. You have to wonder how and why voters have switched sides in such numbers since Peak Yes on 58% in 2020, or even Good Enough Yes on 52% just before the last Scottish Parliament election. Then, if anybody at SNP Central genuinely wonders, I guess they just have to look at themselves in the mirror and they get their answer. You can't expect the public to stay where they were when the drive to independence has been put on snooze, for the sake of pursuing divisive policies that don't have the support of the majority. Or when you dismiss any dissenting voice as 'non valid'. No, Nicola, you can't, You just can't.

Now, is there any pattern here of history repeating itself? I actually don't think it is, but different attitudes may well lead to the same result. In 2017, the SNP were quite complacent after winning a third term, but also quite confused that they had lost some buoyancy after Big Eck resigned, and their majority too. A lacklustre performance at the Council elections wasn't even enough to convince them they were already on the wrong track, though the worst was yet to come. They also clearly took their eyes off the ball during the general election campaign and let the opposition parties take control of the narrative. This drove the Yes vote down to the low 40s both before and after the disastrous general election result in 2017. Today is no complete match for that period, though a key element is still there: the SNP still haven't their eyes on the prize. But the most recent election results, both Westminster and Holyrood, have been better for them than what we had five years ago, so that probably induces a feeling of false safety driving into arrogance, rather than complacency. Next stop is the Council elections, and the current breakdown of incumbent Councillors is not all milk and honey to the SNP's ears.

The comparison between the 2017 results, that were already quite disappointing for the SNP, and what we have now, is quite worrying indeed for the party leadership. The SNP have lost 9% of their Councillors during this term, through rebellions and defections. It will be interesting to watch what the various parties use as their main talking points during the incoming campaign. The SNP will certainly make it all about independence and gender ideology. Unless they feel they're going to lose, and then they will make it all about potholes and bin collections. I fully expect the unionist parties' campaign to be the exact mirror image of that, and not one of them will realise how silly they look. And all of them will certainly tiptoe around what is at the centre of Councils' remit: management and supervision of schools. Because, ye ken, you can't politicise children, you just can't. Unless you do, unleashing ideological indoctrination behind the smoke and mirrors of diversity and inclusion. Fortunately there are alternatives now, that are neither unionist nor genderist. As Their Majesty said before the Independence referendum, 'think twice before you vote'. Just saying.

Are you also experiencing comprehension deficiency?

(Ronan, Doctor Who: The Tsuranga Conundrum, 2018)

We are the most civilised civilisation in the universe

We’re billions of years beyond your petty human obsession

With gender and its associated stereotypes

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: World Enough And Time, 2017)

In the same poll, Savanta Comres couldn't be arsed to poll Westminster voting intentions. Or they did and chose not to publish it because it wouldn't have been a pretty sight for the SNP. But they did poll Holyrood voting intentions and it's not a pretty sight for the SNP either, who are down on 2021 on both votes. Just a wee smitch on the constituency vote, but considerably so on the list vote. Which pretty much kills the 'Both Votes SNP' mantra stone cold. SNP voters have, at last, realised that SNP list votes are wasted votes, and split the vote in favour of the Greens. Of course, it will be fun to watch SheHer and her cronies huffing, puffing and squirming about 'Both Votes SNP' when polls show that the bulk of switchers is from the SNP to the Greens, and seat projections prove beyond reasonable doubt that you do get more seats overall without 'Both Votes SNP'. Or will they still cling on to the delusional prospect of bagging an outright majority all by themselves with some list seats on top of the constituencies? All recent polls say it won't happen, but we already know listening to the public is not one of New SNP's fortes, so I'm really expecting some pop-corn moments during the next campaign. Like seeing SNP Central openly campaigning against their partners in crime, oops... sorry... government. Who wouldn't love that?

On these numbers, my model and uniform national swing (UNS) deliver pretty much the same seat projection overall. UNS says that just one constituency would change hands: East Lothian from the SNP to Labour. The injection of regional crosstabs into my model says three: East Lothian from the SNP to Labour, Ayr from the SNP to the Conservatives, West Aberdeenshire from the Conservatives to the SNP. Constituencies going to the Liberal Democrats remain unchanged in both cases, and the basic math of AMS does the rest. With one difference between UNS and my model: UNS says the SNP would get one list seat in the South, my model says they wouldn't and it would go to the LibDems. There are several interesting traits in this poll, besides the increased shift of SNP voters to the Greens on the lists. Labour are doing better than in 2021 on both votes, which is significant even if it gains them just two seats. Even more significant is that enough voters are predicted to switch from the Conservatives to the Liberal Democrats to seriously weaken the Conservatives. Which I assume is more a verdict on Oor Doogie Ross' pish-poor leadership than anything else. The breakdown of voting intentions by region is also quite enlightening and, in some cases, entertaining.

Here is evidence, if you still needed some, that Labour are still a force to be reckoned with in Central, Glasgow, Lothian and West. Half the regions, half the population, half the electorate. Compared to the 2021 results, we also have the SNP losing constituency votes in all regions except Lothian, North East and West. They also lose list votes in all regions without exception, quite clearly mostly to the Greens who gain votes in all regions, but oddly also some to the LIbDems in Glasgow and the South. Another table in the poll says that only 66% of SNP constituency voters would also vote SNP on the lists, while 20% would switch to the Greens and 7% to Labour. Sadly, only 4% would switch from the SNP to the Alba Party, better than Alba's national average but still not enough to bag any seat. The Conservatives are predicted to lose votes almost everywhere. The only exceptions are Central and Glasgow, though few enough that it has fuck all effect on the seats, and also oddly in Highlands and Islands. This is the only region where the Conservatives would benefit from the absence of any alternative right-wing unionist list, and bag their only predicted gain with five list seats instead of four in 2021. Will be fun to watch how all of this evolves over the next four years. My tenner now is clearly on Labour's return, with them gaining back the second place on improved results, including significant inroads in the Auld Strathclyde area.

I’m maxing out your adrenaline! Fear keeps you fast! Fast is good!

I’m here to save your lives, but if you don’t want me to, just raise your hand

(The Doctor, Doctor Who: Oxygen, 2017)

This version, featuring The Staple Singers, from The Last Waltz, directed by Martin Scorsese, 1976

In Memoriam

Richard George Manuel (3 April 1943 - 4 March 1986)

Richard Clare Danko (29 December 1943 - 10 December 1999)

Mark Lavon "Levon" Helm (26 May 1940 - 19 April 2012)

Left to right: Levon Helm, Garth Hudson, Robbie Robertson, Rick Danko, Richard Manuel

Promotional picture for The Last Waltz, 1976

Jeremy's Den

03/04/2022

Where Should We Go From Here?

No comments:

Post a Comment

We Must Be Dreaming