Jeremy's Den: April 2023

The essence of oligarchical rule is not father-to-son inheritance, but the persistence

of a certain worldview and a certain way of life, imposed by the dead upon the living.

A ruling group is a ruling group so long as it can nominate its successors.
(George Orwell)

Any social revolutionary upheaval in Europe must necessarily miscarry, unless the English

bourgeoisie or the industrial and commercial supremacy of Great Britain is shaken.

(Karl Marx)

Remember to click on the images for larger and easier to read pop-ups.

It had all the ingredients of a total non-story, yet it was revealing. When sitting MPs, including former Cabinet Secretaries, can be lured into discussing a £10k-a-day lobbyist job on behalf of foreign business interests, it says a lot about the sorry state of British politics and the Conservative Party. Rishi Sunak obviously can't be arsed looking into that, as he is too busy tackling anti-social behaviour (ASB). Which can be anything from a bored spoilt brat setting the neighbour's bin on fire to a Labour MP sipping a tinned mojito on the Tube, through out-of-control electric scooters, or whatever. This used to be a typical right-wing dogwhistle against the working class, and has sadly been embraced too by 'responsible progressives'. Surely Rishi will find a way to create some sort of boot camp for dangerous nitrous-oxide-addicted hooligans. But of course he will do nothing about toxic sewage spills, or massive tax evasion, because there isn't anything anti-social about it, is it? And he has friends and donors involved in both. But he may be playing a winning card here, as a recent Omnisis poll has found that a majority of Brits feel ASB is on the rise. Except, quite oddly, Scots and LibDems.

It is quite irritating to see that Rishi Sunak may score a point with the electorate here, when his initial proposal, that triggered the whole debate about ASB, doesn't really hold water. It would also need some creative juggling between the Misuse Of Drugs Act 1971 and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 before it could be implemented, which could even plausibly result in lesser sentences for the same offence. But any honest discussion about crime and policing must also address the root issue, when and why people might feel unsafe, regardless of how they assess the local police's performance. Or lack thereof. Redfield & Wilton definitely sensed it was a hot topic, and devoted a whole poll to it outwith their usual polling cycles of voting intentions. Let's see first in which circumstances the British public feel safe or unsafe. As usual, there are multiple crosstabs in this poll, though most will probably not really enlighten us. So I have deliberately chosen the one that looks the most relevant, the sex divide.

There is a very clear pattern here, in all twelve items selected by Redfield & Wilton. Whatever the event mentioned, whether it's a routine activity we all perform on a daily basis or something more specific or occasional, women feel more unsafe than men. Sometimes the gap is tiny, but in most cases it is massive enough to point at a very real problem. And we all know by now what the causes are. A general feeling of indifference to violence against women and girls, especially in supposedly 'safe' environments. A feeling of impunity for rapists and sex offenders, reinforced when a Scottish court sent the message that "first time's a charm" to potential offenders, under guidelines that clearly work in favour of the perpetrator over the victim. And also the toxic influence of the highly misogynistic gender ideology on society, the police forces and the political establishment.

I'm only surprised that there are not more women feeling unsafe in the presence of coppers. Conclusive evidence has been disclosed this year that the very low rate of convictions for rape is correlated to police forces endorsing misogynistic rape myths. And we can't forget that Sarah Everard was murdered by a copper she met at night. Quite clearly, any sound crime and policing policy has to take this into account, and restore public confidence in the police forces, that has been quite damaged recently. Rishi Sunak also has quite a challenge on his hands here from another perspective. How to tackle, not just the reality of unsafety, but also the people's feelings of unsafety, which might be just a wee smitch exaggerated at times. And without resorting to some sort of populist social Darwinism, which is a trap Conservatives are most likely to lay for themselves and fall in.

None so fitted to break the chains as they who wear them

None so well equipped to decide what is a fetter

(James Connolly)

Some people work very hard but still they never get it right, I'm beginning to see the light

There are problems in these times but none of them are mine, I'm beginning to see the light

(Lou Reed, Beginning To See The Light, 1969)

The aforementioned Redfield & Wilton poll also asked their panel some direct questions about their feelings about the police forces. There is no doubt that Louise Casey's damning report about London's Metropolitan Police has left its mark in the public's mind. But I don't think that the other police forces are victims here, just guilty by association with a disgraced Met. Evidence of police misconduct has come from all over the UK in recent years, a lot of it directly linked to mishandling of violence against women. A feeling of impunity for bent coppers is borne out by factual reports, even when the number of documented cases is rising sharply. So it surely will come as no surprise that a strong plurality of the British public has a negative image of the police.

Again, women have a more negative image of the plod than men. But Scots have a better opinion of Oor Polis, who very nearly bag a net neutral rating, while the forces in England bag a net -18. Of course, we all know situations in real life, where we dislike a person but still acknowledge they're good at their job. Alas, poor Suella, the poll reveals it doesn't work for the police when the panel are asked how confident they are in the police's ability to protect them from crime. The panel is split almost exactly three ways here, definitely not a ringing endorsement.

Scotland again stands out here, with a net rating of +10 on our level of confidence in the Polis. Oddly, women are a wee smitch more confident than men here, which is not what you could infer from their replies to other questions, or from factual evidence of police misconduct being more detrimental to women. Redfield & Wilton's findings here are for the most part confirmed by another poll conducted by Omnisis in the same period. Omnisis used a different approach, asking their panel how much they agreed or disagreed with a series of select statements about policing in the UK. Their results don't paint a better picture of the forces, they actually make it worse in several instances.

The breakdown of opinion about the police being effective is quite similar to the levels of confidence found in the Redfield & Wilton poll. I also believe that general distrust in the police is not the result of some 'contagion effect' from the report on the Met, as the panel agree it was fed by recent cases involving police officers, which were reported pretty much all across England and Wales. More worryingly, there is also a low level of confidence in the police's ability to uphold the law. Which might also rest on many police forces reneging on their duty of political neutrality, and endorsing the promotion of gender ideology, including some talking points that are blatantly misrepresenting current legislation. There is certainly no miracle cure here, not even Labour's pledge to recruit 13,000 extra 'neighbourhood police'. This has been tried already, both in the UK and some European countries, and there has never been conclusive hard evidence that it does work as intended. But neither has there been conclusive hard evidence that it doesn't. So the jury's still out on this one, and likely to be for a long time.

Confusion will be my epitaph as I crawl a cracked and broken path

If we make it we can all sit back and laugh but I fear tomorrow I'll be crying

(Peter Sinfield, Epitaph, 1969)

These are the Dark Ages but we're so happy, happy to be here today

Might be the Dark Ages but we're so happy, happy to be here with you

(Rob Brezsny, Dark Ages, 1991)

The trend of general election polls remains extremely favourable to Labour, though there are more and more hints their lead over the Conservatives is shrinking. Like more polls showing this lead to be in the mid-10s, rather than in the high 10s like a month ago or the low 20s like two months ago. Which does not mean Labour are on a downward spiral. Just that they should think twice before doing something that even some of their own elders find fucking stupid, and then doubling down on it because Sly Keir has painted himself into a corner about it. Honestly, that ad was a fucking own goal, not just because it was ill-advised and ill-conceived, but also because it came so close to racist dogwhistle it could have been Britain First. And there is no doubt it will stick. Not to Sunak, to Labour, because the Conservative spin doctors will make sure it does, at least until the local elections in England. Negative campaign ads are an art form in and by themselves, which should perhaps better be left to the Americans.

It is definitely odd that Labour chose to resort to such a low form of 'tough on crime' talking points, when they had much more popular issues on which to bruise the Conservatives. Like the much degraded state of the NHS in England, which has led to further unrest and strikes. Contrary to what the English government expected, the momentum behind industrial action in various sectors has not died down. The latest announcements from unions say that there will be strikes each and every day in April, even in sectors where the government thought they had extinguished the fires. But the better pay deals offered in several cases have had the opposite effect, allowing the unions to boast that determined action wins, thusly convincing other workers to increase the pressure. Labour should also concentrate on positive campaign ads to make their own proposals more popular. A recent YouGov poll has illustrated the need for this, as voters are still mostly in the dark about what Labour actually wants.

YouGov asked their panel whether they find Labour's proposals on various issues clear or unclear, and published the results with a reminder of the replies to the exact same question in September 2021. Neither the current results nor the comparison make good reading for Starmer's spads. Even if the public's understanding of Labour's proposals has improved, only 27% on average now find them clear while 42% find them unclear. When voters remember you going off-piste, but can't make sense of your actual messaging, it's time to reframe your campaign and up your fucking game. Especially in the current atmosphere, when Labour are reportedly now openly preparing for a snap election in May 2024. Which, quite ironically, would have been the legally scheduled date of the next election if Boris Johnson had not repealed the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act. And is also, in my opinion, the earliest realistic date if Rishi Sunak fast-tracks the final boundary changes through Commons with first and second readings in July and the third and final reading before this year's Conference Recess.

Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream, it is not dying, it is not dying

Lay down all thoughts, surrender to the void, it is shining, it is shining

That you may see the meaning of within, it is being, it is being

(John Lennon, Tomorrow Never Know, 1966)

It’s not about what’s right and what’s fair. It’s who tells the most convincing story.

(Annalise Keating, How To Get Away With Murder: It’s All My Fault, 2015)

There has been quite a dearth of polls recently, because of the Easter Bunny Break. So I have just two polls right now to offer as evidence for my voting intentions snapshot, one from Omnisis fielded last Thursday and one from Redfield & Wilton fielded on Sunday. That's still a super-sample of 3,328 with a theoretical margin of error of 1.7%. These are the last two of a long line of 495 polls over 491 days predicting a Labour win at the next election. Today we have Labour ahead of the Conservatives by 16.2%, which amounts to a 13.8% swing since the last election. Which is still better than what Tony Blair achieved in 1997, with a 12.5% lead on a 10% swing. Rishi Sunak surely has an eye on the polls, as he is less keen now on calling a snap general election at the earliest opportunity, and is reportedly planning on pushing it until the autumn of 2024. Though we should probably take this with a wee pinch of salt, as only The Scottish Pravda is reporting it so far. But it would definitely make sense if Rishi's Master Plan is to revive the Magic Money Tree and dosh-bomb the electorate at both the Spring Statement and the Autumn Statement next year.

As always, the key part is how Labour are doing in England outwith London, where most voters and seats are located, including most current Conservative seats. There Labour are leading now by 16.4%, on a 17.2% swing from the 2019 results. As an added bonus, Labour have also increased their lead in London and Wales, and are closing the gap with the SNP in Scotland. What could possibly go wrong now? Well, if history teaches us any lesson, pretty much everything. Labour had been leading in polls for about 18 months when Margaret Thatcher resigned in 1990, and John Major then enjoyed a totally unexpected Honeymoon Bounce that put the Conservatives back in the lead for like six months. Then Major started losing all by-elections, doing worse at these than Thatcher, and something like 80% of the polls predicted a Labour win at the 1992 election. The very last poll, on Election Eve, had Labour leading by 4%, which would have been enough for a majority on the then-prevailing voting patterns. On Election Day, the Conservatives won by 7.6% and secured a 21-seat majority. So nothing is truly signed and sealed until it's delivered. Just saying.

Imperceptible the change as our votes become mere gestures and our lords and masters

Determine to cast us in the roles of serfs and slaves in the new empire's name

(Peter Hammill, Every Bloody Emperor, 2005)

At first flash of Eden we raced down to the sea, standing there on freedom's shore

Can't you feel it, now that Spring has come, that it's time to live in the scattered sun?

Waiting for the sun, waiting for the sun, waiting for the sun

(Jim Morrison, Waiting For The Sun, 1970)

As you probably expect, today's seat projection is not as spectacularly good for Labour as it used to be in the aftermath of the Truss Interlude. But neither is it a spectacular downturn. More than a bump into a pothole on a dark country road. The enforcement of the new boundaries would just slightly dent Labour, as we are a hare's breath outwith the Dummymandering Zone where the gerrymandering would benefit Labour as much as the Conservatives. On current polling, Labour would command a 171-seat working majority on the current boundaries, and a 167-seat working majority on the new ones. Both numbers assuming no change in the Northern Ireland seats, Sinn Féin still not taking their seats and the SDLP still taking the Labour whip. Just remember that nobody would have waged even a penny on such a result three years ago, when Starmer inherited a badly bruised and demoralised party from Jeremy Corbyn. The paradox is that Starmer has probably not healed any of Labour's wounds, he has even poured fresh salt on some of them. But he has quite successfully remodeled the party to his own image, which is much closer to the image Middle England has of itself.

You surely remember that I first selected the 2005 election, Blair's Last Stand, as the benchmark to assess Starmer's success or failure at the next election. Then moved to the 1997 Blairslide as Labour progressed in the polls, thanks to the Conservatives' genetically engineered ineptitude and the SNP's race down the rabbit hole of political suicide. This still works, even with a slightly lower number of projected seats, as we're still strongly into 1997ish territory. The main criterion of success is met, as Labour is still projected to bag more seats in England than Blair did, 358 now vs 328 then. Starmer wouldn't even need the Welsh and Scottish seats for a majority almost as big as Johnson's in 2019. The Boundary Review will even make it better, as current polling credits Labour with 363 seats in England on the revised boundaries, even closer to Johnson's Miracle Majority. I will go into more detail later about the make-up of the Starmerite coalition. How it differs, sometimes significantly, from the Blairite coalition of yore. And how its paradoxes and contradictions could potentially make New New Labour more fragile than New Labour.

What is England? A French colony gone wrong!

(Georges Clémenceau)

You know 'pissing contest' is just a metaphor, don't you?

(Todd Denver, How To Get Away With Murder: Wes, 2017)

There is nothing really new in the trends of the perennial 'Preferred First Minister Of England' polling. People have come to like Keir Starmer just a bit, but not too much. People have come to distrust Rishi Sunak just a bit, but not too much. The way things go, they will soon select None-Of-The-Above as the next First Lord of the Treasury, Minister for the Civil Service, Minister for the Union and Dominic Raab's Character Witness at the Commons Select Committee on Standards. The last thirteen years have spawned major distrust in all politicians of all shades, and often quite deservedly. But it's still quite worrying that the man, most likely to be the next tenant of Mr Chicken's Cottage, enjoys both favourability ratings and PMability ratings well below his own party's expected vote share. Lukewarm approval ratings are common late in a term, but it's never a good omen to start with them. Though I know someone, just one Eurostar away from Starmer's constituency, who would kill for such ratings. But we will deal with him later.

Of course, the Westminster System is pure parliamentarism. But in fact it's not, as members of government, and indeed every MP and Lordship on the government payroll, is part of both the legislative branch and the executive branch. Like most of the English constitutional conventions, the parliamentary nature of the regime is a fiction. And the people know it, as they de facto vote, and have been voting thusly for at least two centuries, as if the UK worked under the current German system. Where political parties are required by law to nominate a Spitzenkandidat, a top candidate, who is their party's candidate to become Bundeskanzler if their party wins the election. Just like we know that the leader of the winning party will become Prime Minister. So, this creates an environment where the party leaders' perceived qualities and flaws do matter, as much as at presidential elections in other countries. Survation tested both Sunak and Starmer on a range of character traits, and the results are quite enlightening, and not really what you'd probably expect.

I find it quite ironic that the alleged pub bore wins on the items that make a human 'human', empathy, honesty, authenticity, reliability, while the poster boy of Compassionate Conservatism 2.0 scores his biggest win, or loss, on being out of touch with ordinary people. And is also beaten on competence and leadership. Negatives that he brought upon himself, nobody can have any doubt about that. The list of examples is well known and too long to quote in full. It probably can only get worse, as it looks like Rishi is making it a habit of governing by handbrake reverse ferret, and it has now become his preferred modus operandi. No matter how much I love the sight of him standing up to the deranged Brexit maniacs led by Jacob Rees-Mogg, I'm not sure this will improve his standing with the electorate. The people love a principled leader, not an opportunistic one who prioritises extinguishing short-term binfires over fixing his broken party for good. Just saying.

You must know what you want. When you know it, you must have the courage to say it.

When you say it, you must have the courage to do it.

(Georges Clémenceau)

Sometimes, we’re not responsible for our own actions, because sometimes,

we behave not like thinking, thoughtful human beings, but as animals.

(Annalise Keating, How To Get Away With Murder: He Has A Wife, 2014)

Boris Johnson's testimony before the House's Privileges Committee was quite an event last month. If we can actually call that a testimony, as it looked more like an ill-prepared stand-up routine. The reactions of David Pannick, Bozo's £5,000-an-hour taxpayer-funded ermined lawyer, to some of the punchlines, were quite revealing. When even your luxury five-star barrister facepalms, looks up at the ceiling and rolls his eyes for the benefit of the camera, you do know that you did fuck up. Of course, pollsters were eager to probe their panels about Bozo's award-winning performance. In the sense that he may well be awarded a ten-day suspension from Commons. Savanta was the first to shoot, and were careful to preemptively fend off any accusation of horrifically abhorrent Bozophobia. So they asked their panel if they consider it important that any politician should be investigated under similar circumstances.

Being thusly established that there's nothing personal in that poll, it's still quite amazing that 12% of Brits are willing to let any politician get away with lying to Parliament. It's even so evenly spread that Conservative voters and Leave voters, Bozo's two most likely blocs of support, don't even stand out as more lenient than the rest. Then it does get personal, with Savanta asking their panel if the think Johnson did or did not mislead Parliament. Without further characterisation like reckless, inadvertent or endemic. So the panel are left to decide what exact variant of misleading it was, and conclude that Boris did indeed gaslight his fellow MPs. But this time there is a political divide, as Conservative and Leave voters, the ever-faithful, are significantly less likely to condemn Boris.

Once the verdict is reached, there remains the sentence. Commons have a choice of options, between giving the public the finger and shoving one up Johnson's ass. The magic number is 10, like Johnson's old office address. Fewer than 10 days of suspension and Bozo lives to fight another battle. More than 10 days of suspension and here come a recall petition and a by-election. Savanta offered their panel other options, less legal and more political, but still lethal in the end. Two thirds say Johnson should resign, no matter what, including preemptively before the verdict. And Conservative and Leave voters still stand out as Bozo's last defenders.

A lot has been speculated about how much support Boris still have. We have some clues here, one third of Conservative voters and/or one third of Leave voters. But they are not the ones that matter. Only those sitting in Commons matter, though the exact number might not make such a difference when this Great Matter comes to a vote. We certainly have a hint in the vote on Rishi Sunak's Windsor Framework, where only 22 other Conservatives voted with Johnson against it. Or, technically 21 other Conservatives and the disgraced Andrew Bridgen, who was sent to the Naughty Corner for breaches of Commons' standards. Can't make that up, can we?

Masquerading as a man with a reason, my charade is the event of the season

And if I claim to be a wise man, well it surely means that I don't know

(Kerry Livgren, Carry On Wayward Son, 1976)

Well, I was there and I saw what you did, I saw it with my own two eyes

So you can wipe off that grin, I know where you've been, it's all been a pack of lies

(Phil Collins, In The Air Tonight, 1981)

Omnisis also probed their panel's feelings about Boris and his Great Matter. And I wouldn't have wanted any of the panelists called as a character witness, if I were Boris. Omnisis started their search way upstream of the Committee hearing, or even of the whole Partygate fiasco. One of the key questions might even have brought back memories of Bozo's Bullingdon Club days, as it harked back to his attitude to life in general, which seems to have been deeply embedded in his neurocircuits even before he faked studying at Eton. The question was quite straightforward, do the people think that Boris Johnson considered himself above the rules imposed on the country or that he abided by them?

Of course we think that he always considered himself above the rules. He told us himself, for fuck's sake. The only surprise is that 30% don't think he did. Bozo was genetically engineered to show nothing but disdain for the rules that apply to the common people, and for the common people themselves. It's part of his heritage and his Weltanschauung, and there is nothing here that even a life sentence in a Trappist monastery could cure. Boris was born and bred an entitled bully, and will die an entitled bully. End of. That's the foundation of his character and his politics, and anyone thinking otherwise is either Nadine Dorries or a fucking moron. Omnisis then asked their panel if they think Boris lied or told the truth about what really happened during the various episodes of PartyGate. Though this one is actually not as much of a no-brainer as you might think it is. Results first and explanation later.

I guess it all depends on what a trained psychiatrist would define as 'truth' from Bozo's point of view after ninety hours of sessions dedicated solely to this. It's a bit like Dylan Mulvaney saying he is a sexy woman, or Vladimir Putin saying he is fighting to save the world from gay Nazi Satanists. If this was a court trial, your carefully chosen medical expert would tell you it has to be accepted as truth because the patient... oops... the defendant genuinely believes it is and can't envision a world where it is not. Then any good lawyer would have the expert admit on cross that maybe it's not that simple, and that the defendant is just a fucking pathological liar who would say anything to save his fat sorry ass. Your own expert opinion is as good as mine here. Yet 30% of Brits can't be brought to say out loud that Boris lied, so there must be something pathological in them too. Like limitless gullibility. Omnisis then moved on to Bozo's future, and whether or not he should be 'forced to stand again for his seat in a by-election'. Their words, not mine. And again, this can go any of several ways.

I guess most panelists interpreted the obviously hastily-written question as 'should there be a by-election for his seat?', as this is the only way any normal brain would make any actual sense of the awkward wording. But my non-normal brain immediately spotted the added level of subtlety in the question, which makes it in fact two questions. Should there be a by-election? And should Boris be forced by law to stand for it? That's the kind of weird interpretation you come up with when the question is poorly phrased. Here we are at the crossroads of two planes of reality. One where there has to be a by-election, because it becomes unavoidable as soon as the Committee rules for a suspension of 10 days or more. And Labour get all the necessary signatures for a recall petition in a matter of hours, having probably gone hunting for them preemptively even before the verdict was read. Then you move on to the other plane of reality where you would have to force Boris to stand at the by-election, as if he needed even a soft nudge. He will stand. And he will lose. Or he won't because Labour have already selected an unelectable nyaff as their candidate. Or he will because Labour will think twice, move the unelectable nyaff to Islington North where he has better chances, and adopt a more Uxbridge-compliant candidate. As is often the case in our plane of realty, this is not Bozo's battle to win, it's Labour's to lose.

Have mercy on the criminal who is running from the law

Are you blind to the winds of change? Don't you hear him any more?

(Bernie Taupin, Have Mercy On The Criminal, 1973)

Their bravest fell and the requiem bell rang mournfully and clear

While the world did gaze with deep amaze at those fearless men but few

Who bore the fight that freedom's light might shine through the foggy dew

(Charles O'Neill, The Foggy Dew, 1916)

Im Norden nichts Neues. Nothing is happening in Northern Ireland. Well, not really nothing. A lot is happening, just not general election polls. But we have a handful of polls for the next election of the Northern Ireland Assembly, which is scheduled for 6 May 2027, unless the DUP again force a snap election by refusing to take their seats in government. Which is plausible, as it is the only way they have to put spanners in the cogs of any agreement with the European Union. In their infinite wisdom, or not, the Conservatives in the House of Commons have pushed the deadline for this option to 18 January 2024. It would undoubtedly be beneficial for the English Government to get a snap Assembly election out of the way in 2023, so it would not collide with a snap general election campaign. Two of the polls we have in store were fielded by the Institute of Irish Studies at the University of Liverpool, and the other three by Belfast-based pollster Lucid Talk. The comparison between past election results, for both Commons and Stormont, shows that the polls we have now should be handled with care.

There are clearly different voting patterns at work in different elections, and we have already seen something similar in Scotland and Wales. Just like their Celtic brethren across the sea, Northern Irish voters are smarter than the pundits and politicians give them credit for, who resort to stereotyped talking points. We had evidence of this in 2019. Republican Remainers were frustrated that their voice was not heard during the endless Brexit debates, as the SDLP had been eliminated from Commons in 2017. Then they seized the opportunity offered by the snap general election, switched back from Sinn Féin to the SDLP and brought them back. There was also a significant break from the ancestral community divide at that election, with the Alliance Party more than doubling their votes. This will certainly have a more lasting impact on the future of Northern Ireland than voters switching back and forth between SF and SDLP on one side, or DUP and UUP on the other side. Now, even with no real visibility about plausible vote shares at the incoming snap general election, it's interesting to scrutinise the impact of the 2023 Boundary Review on the Northern Ireland constituencies.

The details of the boundary changes, as published by Electoral Calculus, show that it was en even more careful recarving than in the other nations, bordering on cosmetic surgery. It looks like the Boundary Commission's mandate was to propose just the minor adjustments needed to bring all constituencies in line with the new electorate requirements, while correcting discrepancies with Council boundaries if possible. And, above all, all of this subservient to the political necessity to not upset the apple cart and preserve the status quo. Which worked to perfection, as all parties are notionally getting not just the same number of seats, but also the exact same seats. Unsurprisingly it wouldn't have worked at previous elections, as the proposals are deeply rooted in the minute details of the 2019 general election results, and some of the council elections results from earlier the same year. There is an underlying risk here, that the mechanics to protect the status quo may prove far less robust if there are significant changes in voting patterns in the future. Further progress of the Alliance Party in Belfast and the neighbouring districts (Lisburn and Castlereagh, Ards and North Down) might lead to just the kind of tipping point that would make the whole construct tumble down, as it would put three key DUP seats (Belfast East, Strangford, Lagan Valley) squarely in the danger zone. But we would need a very detailed general election poll to assess the actual chances of this happening.

O'r the green mountains and o'r the green valleys

I've walked through the country and felt me an age

A people so strong they resist for so long the boundaries that hold them

(Jon Anderson, Boundaries, 1982)

Struggle and revolt always involve a certain amount of hope, while despair is silent.

(Charles Baudelaire)

You certainly expected me to start today's Scottish Sequence with some not-too-subtle joke about 'The Manchurian Candidate' deserving inclusion on STV's schedule. Naw, been there, done that already, and we'll come to the Great Matter of The Continuity Candidate some time later. Let's deal first with Scotland's existential issue for the next generation, whether or not Independence is likely before Keir Starmer's third term at Downing Street. The general trends of IndyRef voting intentions are quite disheartening, as many polls have recently found No reaching the same high levels as in late 2017, after the SNP totally fucked up and damaged any cause they were standing for. But there is a more encouraging side to it, that the Yes vote is more and more disconnected from the SNP vote. The gap, when you exclude undecideds, was less than 5% in February, but has reached 10% in some of the most recent batch of polls.

The main factor here is that the proportion of Labour voters supporting Independence is increasing pretty much in direct correlation to the proportion of former SNP voters switching to Labour. It will be interesting to see how Anas Sarwar changes his tune when polls offer evidence that half of Labour voters support Independence. We're not quite there just yet, but the tipping point might be closer than John Curtice thinks. The snapshot of voting intentions, based on the four IndyRef polls fielded since Humza's Accession, is also quite revealing. It's better than the Scottish Unionist media would like you to think, and has even slightly improved over the last month despite the damaging effects of the SNP's Best in Show.

Starting from a core support of 44% might look like a bleak prospect for some, but it's far better than what Alex Salmond was sitting on when he signed the Edinburgh Agreement 11 years ago. And, once again, the key to victory in not to go after the hypothetical 'soft Noes', but to convince those who genuinely haven't made up their mind. I would even suggest to forget the 16-30s and the 65+, who are already pretty much locked in in opposite camps, and focus on the generations in between. They are more prone to be risk-averse, and recent world events can only strengthen this, as they have increased the levels of both threat and uncertainty. The case for independence cannot be based on principles only, no matter how much we like the sound of our own voice ranting about the unalienable right to self-determination. The case has to be rooted in solid economic foundations, that do not include just debunking the myth of the deficit black hole. In the prospect of returning to the fold of an international alliance of like-minded nations, that does not include only unquestioning membership of the European Union. In promotion of Scotland's presence on the world scene, that is not limited to being a junior partner in NATO. Or all points the SNP has failed to make in recent years.

By this we are all sustained, a belief in human nature

And in justice and parity, all we have is the faith to carry on

(Peter Hammill, Every Bloody Emperor, 2005)

Believe me when I say I will tell you when it’s time to freak out. We’re not there yet.

(Bonnie Winterbottom, How To Get Away With Murder: It’s A Trap, 2016)

We also had two more voting intentions polls for the next Holyrood election that came out of the blue. Both were actually fielded midway into the SNP's Best In Show, but released into the wild only after it had ended. One was conducted between 7 and 10 March by Panelbase on behalf of Scot Goes Pop's James Kelly, and he quite obviously withheld it deliberately until after The Continuity Candidate had been anointed as The Continuity First Minister. The other one was conducted between 8 and 10 March by Survation on behalf of the Diffley Partnership, whose founder and director Mark Diffley is partnering with Angus Robertson's think tank Progress Scotland. Which might explain why it was hidden from sight as long as Nicola Sturgeon was still technically the boss. Because both were quite damning for the SNP, and by rebound the pro-Independence majority. It actually does not matter if you regard these polls as the coda to Sturgeon's Firstship or the prologue to Yousaf's Firstship, there is no way you can lipstick these pigs into cute smiling puppies. But first things first, what did the pollsters find and how does it translate into seats.

The most striking result was that the Yellow-Green Axis would either miss a majority by two seats, per Survation, or scratch past the hurdle by one seat, per Panelbase. Or the real shocker might have been the massive loss of constituency seats from the SNP to Labour, and then some. Which meant that two Cabinet Secretaries (Neil Gray, Mairi McAllan) and eight Junior Ministers (Elena Whitham, George Adam, Tom Arthur, Natalie Don, Christina McKelvie, Siobhian Brown, Paul McLennan, Emma Roddick) from the Yousaf I Government would bite the dust. All would lose their constituencies to Labour, except Brown who would lose Ayr to the Conservatives. Roddick would lose her list seat in Highlands and Islands to Labour too. Some might yet hope to come through the backdoor on an 'unelected' list seat, as the SNP would gain two in Central Scotland and three in West Scotland. The SNP would also gain the Aberdeenshire West constituency from the Conservatives. It was neither a happy ending for Nicola or a happy beginning for Humza, when the pro-Independence majority was either lost or just hanging by a thread only because a higher than usual amount of Labour voters switched to the Greens on the list vote. It was also sadly not a surprise when you looked back at the trends of polls since the last election.

The starting points on the left are the 2021 results, with dots indicating the constituency votes and crosses the list votes. The writing on Hadrian's Wall was there already quite a long tome ago, with the steady decline of the SNP and the slow rebirth of Labour. But these two hidden polls were just the hors d'oeuvre. The plat de résistance was delivered on April Fools' Day with the much awaited new instalment of Savanta's Scottish Tracker for The Scotsman. Which, quite ironically, came out just one day after The Scottish Pravda has seen fit to headline with a Humza Bounce for the SNP, based on one subsample of 104 from one GB-wide poll. Clear evidence that you can be both droolingly sycophantic and highly unprofessional, and also a fucking eejit. And that does not disqualify you from employment as a 'journalist'. Fortunately we have The Scotsman to make our day brighter with evidence that the SNP is turning into a Sturgeon cult just like the Tories turned into a Thatcher cult. Which was of course trademark April Fool, and the reference to Ferguson Marine and a deposit return point might just have given it away. Just. But I won't elaborate further on all the post-Humza polls just yet. We'll burn that bridge when we come to it.

All those moments lost in wonder, that we'll never find again

There's no more time for us, nothing is there for us to share but yesterdays

(Bryan Ferry, A Song For Europe, 1973)

Anybody can make mistakes and blame them on others. That's politics.

(Georges Clémenceau)

Katherine Sangster, the National Manager of the Scottish Fabians, recently published a food-for-thought column in The Guardian. She couldn't help peddling Labour's usual talking point right from the start, that they urgently need more Scottish seats for a majority in Commons. Unfortunately for her, the very last poll that was published just before her column, fielded by Deltapoll between 24 and 27 March, again proved that this claim is blatantly untrue. With Labour only 15% ahead GB-wide, my model predicted them bagging 375 seats, including 11 in Scotland. Or a similar majority to Boris Johnson's in 2019 on the English and Welsh seats only, boosted by Labour still coming ahead of the Conservatives in the South of England. Seat projections show that Labour won't need more seats in Scotland as long as they lead by more than 12% UK-wide. Sangster's demonstration makes sense though, as gaining seats from the SNP is probably a safer strategy for Labour than targeting historic Tory Blue Wall seats. This is quite inconveniently supported by a poll conducted by Survation during the SNP's Best In Show. Mind-boggling results first, and explanations below.

Survation polled their panel with a familiar 'what if' scenario. First they established a baseline with the usual generic voting intentions question, which already delivered quite a shite result for the SNP. Then they asked their panel how they would vote if the SNP's Chosen One was Yousaf, Forbes or Regan. Astonishingly, all three would weaken the SNP and boost Labour and the Conservatives, the worst contender being quite surprisingly Ash Regan. All options also disturbingly validate Sangster's description of Labour's optimal strategy in Scotland, as the regional crosstabs again include Labour candidates over-performing in the usual wide arc from Greenock to Musselburgh including Glasgow. This perfectly fits with her advice to give up on slugging it out with the Tories for the Unionist vote, and concentrate instead on soft 'middle ground' SNP voters in former Labour heartlands. And, even more disturbingly, it also validates her claim that Scottish voters are now prone to dissociating support for Independence from an SNP vote. This is supported by the updated trends of Full Scottish voting intentions polling for the incoming general election.

Here we see Labour already doing better than the 29% vote share Sangster used to support her optimistic scenarios. In this context, it is interesting to revisit Keir Starmer's speech at the Scottish Labour conference. Keir Starmer's talking points pretty much mirror Katherine Sangster's reasoning because, what a surprise, Scottish Fabians do talk to the Labour leadership in London. It is of course philosophically quite shocking to see Labour challenging another opposition party in their own backyard, but it does make sense if you consider that Labour's current surprise performance in the Leafy Blue South is proving more fragile than anticipated. Starmer also counts on his 'radical federalism' to jeopardise support for both Scottish Independence and the SNP. Which is possibly not as much of a risky gamble as I'd like to think, as the trends of Westminster polling also hint that we might be close to the once implausible scenario where the SNP still come first on the popular vote, but Labour come first in number of seats because their votes are concentrated on a few key areas where the SNP seats are easier to toggle. The tipping point here is the SNP on 37% and Labour on 35%, which would deliver 25 Labour seats to the SNP's 24, with the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives unchanged on 4 and 6 respectively. Just don't be so sure it can't happen. I guess the now unavoidable by-election in Rutherglen and Hamilton West will be quite the litmus test, especially if Labour throw everything and the dog's bowl into the fight. Which they are doing because they smell blood.

And this is why I sojourn here, alone and palely loitering

Though the sedge is withered from the lake, and no birds sing

(John Keats, La Belle Dame Sans Merci, 1820)

I believe that the reader will discover here the essential nature of one of the strangest

and most awful chapters in human history.

(Arthur Miller, The Crucible, 1953)

Acta est fabula! Plaudite! Or don't, and absit omen. It was definitely not an upset that the Continuity Candidate became the Continuity First Minister after a divisive and unbalanced campaign that saw him gather the support of The Guardian, Patrick Harvie, Lorna Slater, Ross Greer, Kezia Dugdale and Jim Murphy. Humza Yousaf did himself no favours in his first few hours in office. The "women's rights" candidate reneging on his pledge to challenge Section 35 in court only after taking legal advice. The candidate who let his supporters make it all about Kate Forbes's faith celebrating his own faith, with the main picture on official premises featuring an all-male cast. A PR stunt topping a U-turn-on-a-U-turn is what we have come to expect from the Conservatives in Whitehall. Surely the leader of the SNP should have known better than duplicate it. Now is time to go back to what the polls, with undecideds removed, told us about that Best In Show, and what actually happened.

So we have had one third of the electorate abstaining and the winner prevailing by just 4%. It's just like the fucking Brexit referendum, innit? And also closer than the one poll of SNP members led us to believe. But there is nevertheless a fun part to the whole chain of events. Which might be Owen Jones's anti-Forbes tirade in The Scottish Pravda, which beats Owen's record for unreadable self-indulgent bollocks, though the bar was set pretty low already. Or Humza picking his first fight with the Greenies about the Deposit Return Scheme, which might be a casus belli nullifying the Bute House Pact. Or not, as the extra Ministerial pay is quite an incentive to shut the fuck up about minor matters that don't impact males' rights. Perhaps not coincidentally, this came just after the Scottish Third Sector urged Yousaf to stop indulging in performative virtue-signalling rhetoric, and start delivering. Because the people of Scotland know where their priorities are, even if the Scottish Government doesn't. And the Venn diagram of the people's priorities vs the the government's priorities looks like an empty set right now.

This chart shows what Panelbase, Savanta and Redfield & Wilton found, all after Humza"s Coronation, as the priorities of the Scottish people at large, and as those of SNP voters. Independence comes fifth in both the Panelbase and the Savanta poll. The Gender Recognition Reform Bill is not even mentioned in the Savanta poll, and gets just 4% of the vote in the other two. Clearly, it is not a priority for anyone outside the Metropolitan Woke Middle-Class Bubble including Stirling University. Interestingly, crime also gets a very low score. Which kind of validates the findings of other polls I mentioned at the very start, that Scots are less unsatisfied with our Polis, and more willing to trust them, than the average Brit. To drive the message about GRR home, Panelbase repeated a question they already asked six weeks ago on behalf of Wings Over Scotland, and the results are quite stunning.

Support for ditching the bill completely has increased by 13% in six weeks, 11% among the TikTok Generation and 12% among SNP voters. Support for a court challenge to the English Government's Section 35 Order has gone down by 4%, also 4% among 16-34s and 2% among SNP voters. Even support for a compromise solution, that would necessarily include amending the most outlandish provisions of the bill is down by 5%, 6% among 16-34s and 7% among SNP voters. This should definitely be a no-brainer for Humza Yousaf, but we knew all along he would prioritise the whims of a vociferous fringe of activists, rather than supporting the people's will. His mistake, and one that will certainly impact the SNP's public image and their standing in later polls. Besides being a huge waste of time and spaffing taxpayers' money up the walls.

I'm watching and I'm waiting, hoping for the best, even think I'll go to praying

Every time I hear them saying that there's no way to delay that trouble coming every day

(Frank Zappa, Trouble Every Day, 1966)

Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears

Bury the rag deep in your face for now's the time for your tears

(Bob Dylan, The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll, 1963)

The former French President Jacques Chirac once remarked that 'les merdes volent en escadrille', or 'turds fly in squadrons'. Which is what happened to Humza Yousaf around April Fools' Day. First there was the aforementioned update of Savanta's Scottish Tracker, and then a new Panelbase poll for The Sunday Times, an unsponsored one from Redfield & Wilton, and one from Survation, that all supported the same 'shit hits the fan in buckets' narrative. The findings of these polls range from fucking awful to horrifically abysmal for the SNP, and so are the seat projections. Even the 'SNP Protection Scheme' embedded into the new boundaries is not really working on these numbers. If such a scenario came true 13 months into Yousaf's Firstship, the SNP would have no choice but dumping him Truss-like, and then reframing their whole manifesto to prove that they are at last paying attention to what all Scots have to say, not just a small clique of metropolitan radicalised Greens.

After such polls, I fully expect a lot of huffing and puffing from the SNP about the very hypothetical 'smart voting' pact between Labour and the Conservatives, that The Sunday Times mentioned. I really believe it will never happen, as it would be fucking stupid of Anas Sarwar to do that. Labour have strong winds in their sails, so this kind of pact is useless. It might even very plausibly backfire badly, alienating more SNP-to-Lab swing voters that it would bring new Con-to-Lab tactical voters on board. What Anas Sarwar should do is both much simpler and far less risky. Just do nothing. Wait until the Scottish Greens field fantasy vanity candidates in all Scottish constituencies, and have a good laff when it makes more low-hanging fruit available for plucking. The same reasoning applies for the next Scottish Parliament election, which will also be a fucking disaster for the SNP if the voting intentions found in the newly-revealed polls come true.

I don't want to be unduly harsh on Humza Yousaf just yet, at least not until we have hard evidence he will live up to his potential of becoming Scotland's Liz Truss. The deadline here is the 11th of May, so we won't have to wait too long. And, to be honest, he did not bring all this awful polling upon himself. Nicola did, and it's just bad luck that it surfaces only after she has gone. Humza just has to own the legacy. That's the essence of The Continuity First Minister, after all. I guess The Scottish Pravda turning Full Black Knight about the real significance of recent polling won't help restore their credibility. Just as Peter Murrell's arrest will not help restore the SNP's image. But I will refrain from commenting on this any further, to avoid being held in contempt of whatever. Now there is a sunny side to these gloomy polls, as there is plenty of evidence, in the UK and abroad, that spending some time in opposition can be beneficial and rejuvenating. Look no further than Keir Starmer. Or maybe not.

Ach 'se sealladh leointe is gann tha an seo aig ceann thall an linn

Talamh alainn nan daoine fhathast an lamhan duine no dithis

Cuibhlean stolda mu dheas va fasaichean a tuath

An taigh-mor falamh an Dun-Eideann gun chumhachd gun ghuth

(Calum MacDonald, Alba, 1987)

This is "Lord Of The Flies", baby. Not every little Piggy's gonna make it off the beach alive.

(Michaela Pratt, How To Get Away With Murder: I'm Not her, 2017)

Humza is discovering now that it's no fun being The Continuity First Minister, with lots of evidence that there might be more booby-traps along the way than he ever expected. Even if the latest Survation poll, the last to be fielded in a series of disappointing ones, is somewhat better for the SNP, there's no way you can lipstick these pigs into fluffy bunnies. The current Scottish Government is under serious threat of being decimated, as most of them come from regions where Labour is predicted to over-perform, and even Humza Yousaf has more chances of losing his own seat in Glasgow Pollok than of keeping it, with only a remote possibility any of the constituency losers could come back through the back door as an 'unelected' list MSP. Now we have three out of four of these polls predicting the pro-Independence majority would be gone. And even the more favourable Survation poll has it surviving by only a tiny margin of three seats.

It doesn't get better if I use Uniform National Swing (UNS), the pundits' favourite method that you can use too from the Election Polling site, instead of my model. Admittedly my model is a wee smitch tweaked towards Labour, and against the SNP and the Conservatives in the constituencies. Or more exactly, it's not, the algorithms are neutral but the data that the model feeds on and digests are not. Regional crosstabs of voting intentions steadily show that Labour is over-performing in key areas where the SNP is already weakened, all the way from Inverclyde to East Lothian, and that the Conservatives are under-performing in areas thought to be traditionally bluer, like the North East and the South. Then the mechanics of the compensatory list vote tend to level that. But even if you erase all regional specifics with UNS, it's still a massive drubbing for the SNP. And the pro-Independence majority very likely gone.

To end this Scottish Section on a cheery cheeky note, something happened in Glasgow that isn't even news, but The Scottish Pravda found it worth a headline. The Curious Incident Of Graham At The Council, which is fucking hilarious, and also probably revealing of the kind of attitude the SNP's worst troughers think they are entitled to. I'm not even remotely trying to defend Frank McAveety here. He has already fully earned his Naughty Nyaff badges all by himself, quite deservedly. But Graham Campbell's total lack of restraint and self-awareness is a sight to behold, innit?

I prophesy disaster and then I count the cost

I shine but, shining, dying, I know that I am almost lost

(Peter Hammill, A Plague Of Lighthouse Keepers, 1971)

The cattle graze bolt uprightly, seducing down the door to saddle swords and meeting place

The prayers of all combined tear down the flags of ownership, the walls are falling down

(John Cale, Child's Christmas In Wales, 1979)

Is the Wakeford Effect wearing thin in Wales? Could be the case after the Welsh Government decided to press ahead with an unpopular plan to tax tourists in the name of responsibility. It's fucking hilarious to see them justify that with pretty much the same arguments as the Scottish Government facing opposition to the GRR Bill. "We have heard concerns, but will proceed regardless", which is a sure sign they may have heard, but not listened. Plus the generation-old paternalistic claim that "we're doing that for your own good and you will thank us later". Not forgetting either the proverbial reliance on 'best international practice' when there hardly is any. Of course the Welsh tourism sector is up in arms against this, as the fallout of the cost-of-living crisis is already jeopardising their post-pandemic recovery. I guess the argument that the Welsh Government is promoting loony policies without support from proper experts will sound familiar to Scottish ears. Drakeford has also been challenged recently about reports of failure and dysfunctional management within NHS Wales. Which is quite a familiar line of attack in Scotland and England too, and often with good reason.

So Labour's domination appears slightly dented this time, as they fail to bag an outright majority of the popular vote, while Plaid Cymru is challenging them from the left. As a result, Welsh Labour miss matching their 1997 peak performance. The three most marginal seats, that have a habit of bouncing back and forth between rival competitors of equal strength, now go to those who looked like the underdogs earlier this year. Ynys Môn to Plaid Cymru, Brecon and Radnorshire to the Liberal Democrats, Clwyd West to the Conservatives. It is quite possible that the Conservatives are playing the long game here, targeting the next Senedd election rather than the incoming snap general election. They probably have already conceded the latter, even it they won't admit it in as many words, and still hope to disrupt Labour's cruise to an outright Senedd majority in 2026. If that's actually the Conservatives' strategy, it's a smart move as the new electoral law, with full proportional representation in multi-member constituencies, will make any majority harder to get than the current mixed-membership system.

It snowed last year too. I made a snowman and my brother knocked it down.

And I knocked my brother down and then we had tea.

(Dylan Thomas, A Child's Christmas In Wales, 1952)

North was somewhere years ago and cold, ice locked the people's hearts and made them old

South was birth to pleasant lands but dry, I walked the waters' depths and played my mind

(Peter Hammill, Refugees, 1970)

Redfield & Wilton are of course continuing their series of specialist polls of Red Wall constituencies. But this time I will rely on J.L. Partners's latest poll of the area, also the latest instalment of a series. Their investigations obviously tread the same waters, but not from the same angles. J.L. Partner's panel is also not representative of the whole North and Midlands, just like Redfield & Wilton's. They rely on voters from 45 select constituencies who shifted from Labour to the Conservatives in 2019, with the full list included in their data files. So the main and constant caveat is that the sample covers only these 45 seats, out of 263 overall in the five regions of the North and Midlands under the current boundaries, and 149 currently held by the Conservatives in these same regions. This being said, they still offer an interesting perspective of how voting patterns have changed in these seats since 2019.

This translates into an 18% swing from the Conservatives to Labour. Which might sound a bit extravagant, but in the real world, we already had a 10% swing to Labour at two by-elections in Labour held seats in Greater Manchester. And also a 13% swing in Wakefield in West Yorkshire when Labour gained back the seat at another by-election. So, even if this does not fit with the trends found in standard polls, it does not look totally outworldly for this selection of seats. There also was a question about which party the panel think would do the best job at handling a number of issues. As you might expect from other similar polls in the past, the results are less clearcut and not a massive ringing endorsement of Labour. But it is of course worse for the Conservatives, so there is more to learn from the issue-by-issue results. And similar polls UK-wide also reveal a massive number of doubters, and are not as good for Labour as their voting intentions.

Nevertheless, Labour will find some reason to be cheerful here as they are doing extremely well on issues that have already been identified as major priorities for the electorate, like the NHS, education and housing. They are also doing quite well on issues that traditionally favour the Conservatives, like crime and the economy, and are not far off on immigration. So the overall picture is quite encouraging, when you consider we're talking here mostly about a more traditional working class electorate, those earlier summarised as The Workington Man, no matter how simplistic that sketch was. The media might as well have stuck with the Andy Capp stereotype instead. Anyway there is no denying that these voters are prone to be more socially conservative, more likely to endorse a dated version of Britishness and patriotism, and also to stick to speaking English on holidays in Benidorm. That last one was a joke, mates, capice? And that very profile is the key reason why Keir Starmer is seen constantly juggling between a hipster-compliant persona and an Andy-Capp-friendly one. Which is fun, actually.

Atmospherics after dark, noise and voices from the past across the dial from Moscow to Cologne

Interference in the night, thousand miles on either side, stations fading into the unknown

(Tom Robinson, Atmospherics: Listen To The Radio, 1982)

Sundown dazzling day, gold through my eyes but my eyes turned within only see

Old friend charity, cruel twisted smile and the smile signals emptiness for me

Ice blue silver sky fades into grey to a grey hope that all yearns to be

Starless and bible black

(Richard Palmer-James, Starless, 1974)

One of the first paradoxes of the Starmerite coalition is that it is right now not doing that well in the North of England. It is predicted to bag a majority only in the North West, with rather subdued voting intentions in the North East and Yorkshire. Interestingly Reform UK's best result England-wide is now in Yorkshire and the Humber, which is perhaps not that big of a surprise if you remember that the Brexit Party's two best constituency results in 2019 were in Barnsley Central and Barnsley East on 30% of the popular vote. Though I still have a hard time picturing the epicentre of Northern Brexitmania sliding down the Great North Road from the hinterland of Hartlepool to Downton Abbey.

This is of course reflected in the current seat projections. Not so long ago, Labour was predicted to get a full slate in the North East and Yorkshire and the Humber. It's far less stellar right now. The Conservatives getting better voting intentions now than a month or two ago may be just the tip of the iceberg. There are also reasons to believe the centre of gravity of the Reform UK vote has shifted. From capturing enough Conservative votes to drag them down into third place, to capturing enough Labour votes to jeopardise their full recovery in the North. The net result is that Labour's predicted number of seats is now the same as in 1997 in the North West, but below this benchmark in the North East and Yorkshire. Labour are six seats and three seats short respectively in these regions.

This has certainly a lot to do with Keir Starmer's unsteady handling of a number of issues. His reluctant and waffling semi-L-turn over 'trans issues' on April Fools' Day was certainly meant to appease the more socially conservative component of the Northern working class, but it certainly fell on deaf ears. It is certainly no coincidence that Sue-Ellen Braverman's racist dogwhistling about child abuse, denounced even from within her own party, has specifically targeted one Labour constituency in Greater Manchester and one in South Yorkshire, where local councils and coppers acted 'soft on crime' for not totally defensible reasons. Braverman's arguments would carry more weight if she had not drifted into inflammatory racist rhetoric, not as a momentary lapse of common sense, but as a deliberate and well-rehearsed stunt to attract far-right votes in seats that could become weak links in Labour's strategy to recoup their losses along the Red Wall. She has to own it now.

Up in the morning watch the North wind rise, bringing fire down from the skies

Hey, we got a long way to go, so keep on loving and make it slow

(Jorma Kaukonen, Watch The North Wind Rise, 1976)

Along the drifting cloud, the eagle searching down on the land

Catching the swirling wind, the sailor sees the rim of the land

The eagle's dancing wings create as weather spins out of hand

(Jon Anderson, Roundabout, 1971)

Contrary to what we have just seen in the North, and much to my surprise, current polls predict Labour doing pretty well in the Midlands. Labour's current voting intentions there not only turn the 2019 result on its head, but also significantly improve on the 1997 result. This is clearly not what I anticipated, based on earlier polling that showed Conservative incumbents quite solidly entrenched in rural constituencies they gained from Labour in 2005 and have held ever since. The Reform UK vote has also progressed there since 2019, which is probably why Sue-Ellen Braverman has also included a competitive Tory-held seat in Shropshire in her racist innuendo, but one where the Council has a Labour majority. Interestingly, the Liberal Democrat vote is also predicted to go up in the West Midlands, which strengthens their chances of holding their unexpected by-election gain in North Shropshire. One that would never have happened if Labour had not discreetly agreed to go along with tactical voting in a seat where they came second in 2019, but the LibDems looked better-placed to dislodge the Conservatives.

This has an immediate and unexpectedly good translation into projected seats. On current polling, Labour are not just turning around the 2019 result, but also doing better than in 1997, by 9 seats in the West Midlands and a whopping 13 seats in the East Midlands. This includes the never-achieved full slate in Derbyshire, which they missed by one seat in 1997. But also an unexpected full slate in Nottinghamshire, unseating such luminaries as Lee Anderson and Ben Bradley. And finally another totally unexpected tsunami in Northamptonshire, leaving no blue seat there either, and defeating Brexit convert Andrea Leadsom in the constituency that elected her continuously since it was revived by an earlier Boundary Review in 2010.

Now I obviously have a caveat in a situation like this. Electoral history, especially in the 21st century, does not really validate the prospect of a massive Red Wave, neither in the West Midlands nor in the East Midlands. These are definitely regions where a strong Labour surge could be transient or even just an outlier, and probably more fragile than anywhere else in England. More than anywhere else, it might be supported by discontent with the current Conservative brand, which might not last until the incoming snap general election. There are a lot of rural constituencies out there, that are just the ones Rishi Sunak will cuddle with more common-sense and middle-class-friendly policies in the months between now and the election. Most district councils and unitary authorities across the two regions are up for election three weeks from now, so we will surely have some hints then, about the plausibility of major changes at the next general election.

Go closer, hold the land, feel partly no more than grains of sand

We stand to lose all time, a thousand answers by in our hand

Next to your deeper fears we stand surrounded by a million years

(Jon Anderson, Roundabout, 1971)

East was dawn, coming alive in the golden sun, the winds came gently, several heads became one

In the summertime, though august people sneered, we were at peace and we cheered

(Peter Hammill, Refugees, 1970)

We also have had a new instalment of Redfield & Wilton's Blue Wall polling in late March. Now we can really see if Labour are as good at convincing the Stevenage Woman as the Workington Man of yore. It's quite amusing that Labour Together, a think tank created by MPs commonly associated with the Starmerista right wing of the party, thought they had to come up with yet another stereotype to convey their message. Then it was probably that or the Milton Keynes Man, so we have been spared the worst. Then I guess think tanks eager to define the 'average swing voter' should remember the hilarious true story of the US Air Force's search for the 'average fighter pilot'. Back to the issue at hand, Redfield & Wilton also ask their Blue Wall panel how they voted in 2019, but use it only in crosstabs for other questions in their published data files. Which still conveys interesting information, that is obviously useful to define target audiences of a future campaign: how the 2019 voters have migrated to other parties, or not, in their current voting intentions, and how the transfers have evolved over time.

The data here are from polls fielded by Redfield & Wilton in the last week of January, the last week of February and the last week of March. The panel used is not a perfect representation of the whole Leafy South, as it is extracted from 42 select constituencies that all elected a Conservative MP thrice in 2015, 2017 and 2019, but with a margin below 15k in 2019. Which is pretty much the profile of vulnerable Conservative seats down there, and shows voting patterns that are in synch with what standard polls find in the South generally. The Labour lead over the Conservatives is going down, though still big enough to ensure literally dozens of gains. And the Liberal Democrats' messaging about the best placed to beat the Tories in key seats works, as fewer of their 2019 voters are now inclined to switch to Labour. There is definitely a readjustment of tactical voting, which shows in the regions' result we will come to after the next musical interlude. Redfield & Wilton also asked, as usual, which party their panel trust most to deal properly with an array of issues.

There are actually fourteen issues listed in the poll, but I have selected only nine that seem to be the most important in the electorate's mind, and thusly the most likely to emerge as main campaign themes after this year's Conference Holiday. I have also removed the undecideds to allow a direct comparison with the voting intentions. So we see that Labour do better than their predicted vote share on seven of the nine issues, while the Conservatives do better on only three. Quite counter-intuitively the Liberal Democrats are rated lower than their voting intentions on all issues, as if there was some convoluted reasoning unfolding in the panel's brains. Like trusting Labour more than the LibDems, but still wanting the LibDems to bag more seats, so they will have more of a say in the next Parliament. Which, of course, falls flat on its face when Labour are predicted to bag a massive majority and won't need any outside support. But it's the thought that matters, innit? And what matters most right now is that Rishi Sunak has failed to turn the tide in the South, Labour will still unseat a lot of Conservative incumbents in the most unlikely places, and it will make a Conservative return to power even more of an uphill battle.

We walked along, sometimes hand in hand, between the thin lines marking sea and sand

Smiling very peacefully, we began to notice that we could be free and we moved together to the West

(Peter Hammill, Refugees, 1970)

Bought myself a farm way out in the country

Took to growing lettuce, milking cows and honey

Spent time in the hayloft with the mice and the bunnies, spent time in the country

(Paul Kantner, The Farm, 1969)

The last batch of polls show Labour losing ground and the Conservatives recovering in the South of England. The updated voting intentions show and even smaller lead for Labour than Redfield & Wilton's last Blue Wall poll found. What we have there now is both paradoxical and predictable. The South is just the kind of Middle England Starmer is trying to seduce with his centrist policies. But the South is just the kind of Middle England Blair failed to conclusively seduce with his centrist policies. Now Labour are still predicted to be conclusively ahead in the South West, but it's a tie in the South East and the Conservatives are back in the lead in East Anglia. The predicted vote shares in East Anglia are also disturbingly similar to what they had in 1997. What are the fucking chances of that?

The Stevenage Woman might have been swayed by Starmer's naturally subdued appeal, as the seat is predicted to flip from Blue to Red. But the Letchworth Woman, just eight miles up the Great North Road, is now sticking to her blue roots. And their neighbour the Hitchin Woman has now decided to support the Liberal Democrats. Overall, the Conservatives have regained most of the past lost ground, and the Liberal Democrats are not living up to Ed Davey's expectations. The overall allocation of seats on this batch of polls is actually rather close to 1997, with Labour doing a bit better and the Liberal Democrats a bit less well. The only real disappointment comes if you compare this to the massive swing towards Labour earlier in the year. It was perhaps just wishful thinking to hope it would last, and the reversal of fortunes in two regions doesn't hurt Labour's chances to win the election. Yet.

Some in Labour would surely advise now to return to a more traditional strategy, to secure the current and past heartlands in the North and Midlands first. And venture into pursuit of further conquests Doon Sooth only as a secondary objective. Starmer would surely resist that and be right. A nine-region strategy all across England makes sense when your party is riding high in the polls nationwide. Just as a 50-state strategy made sense for Barack Obama and the Democrats, all over the USA in 2008, and worked. Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats are still smelling blue blood in the Leafy South. They have confirmed they intend to use next month's local elections in England and Wales as some sort of plebiscite against the English Government. Their best chances are obviously in the South, where the results will be closely scrutinised by the three major English parties. A strong showing by the Liberal Democrats will strengthen their claims that they are the best placed to beat the Conservatives, even in constituencies where Labour came second in 2019. They already have the by-election in Tiverton and Honiton, and also North Shropshire outwith the South, to make their point. And Labour taking a step back below the Severn-Wash Line would be the LibDems' best chance to prove it on a larger scale.

Here comes my next door neighbour coming down the road

He always looks so regal riding on his toad named Lightning

The toad's name is Lightning, he's ten hands at the shoulder

And if you give him sugar you know he'll whinny like a boulder

(Paul Kantner, The Farm, 1969)

Justice is the exception. You should know that by now.

(Annalise Keating, How To Get Away With Murder: We’re Good People Now, 2016)

Last week, YouGov published a quite sensational poll of London showing Labour 40% ahead of the Conservatives in the Imperial Capital. No doubt helped by some tactical voting from LibDem voters, and Reform UK biting some flesh off the Tories. This would be Labour's best performance in London since 1945, both in their share of the popular vote and the proportion of seats won. The number of seats won was sometimes higher, when Hipstershire had many more than the current 73 or the proposed 75. This would mean eleven Conservative incumbents unseated by Labour, including Boris Johnson, and one by the Liberal Democrats on current boundaries. Or twelve by Labour on the incoming new boundaries.

But Keir Starmer can't help it, he can't resist picking a fight with the Left. Which is often the same fight he picked the week before, and already the month before. Like announcing for the seventh time that Jeremy Corbyn will never be allowed to stand as a Labour candidate in Islington North. Which definitely sounds like an obsession, and also proves that woke post-Blairism is totally compatible with Leninist democratic centralism. This caused enough of a kerfuffle for YouGov to poll it, and the results as not as favourable as Keir certainly wished. Labour and London voters agree that Jezza has become a liability, but are not really convinced that ostracising him is the solution.

Omnisis also polled the same issues, with different wordings that deliver slightly different results. But the big picture is the same. Jezza is no good, but kicking him out ain't good either. I'm quite sure this isn't the last we hear of Corbyn's fate, if Owen Jones has it his way, that is. Corbyn's serious allies within the Parliamentary Labour Party obviously know this is an already lost fight, and not one that warrants jeopardising their own selection. Only 117 candidates have reportedly been selected so far, but the process is likely to be sped up if Labour are really bracing for a snap election a year out. So a lot of wannabe rebels will probably play it safe, as the Starmer camp is ready to shoot on sight at the slightest hint of public dissent.

If you consider electoral precedents, the situation is far less threatening for Labour that you might think at first glance. The rate of success of MPs standing against their original party is extremely low. The best examples are the SDP in 1983 and Change UK in 2019. Always remember that the common narrative about the SDP-Liberal Alliance's success at the 1983 election is fucking bollocks. The real story s that the SDP had 30 MPs on the eve of that election and lost 25, with only one new MP elected, Charles Kennedy in the constituency then known as Ross, Cromarty and Skye. Jeremy Corbyn should be the first to remember this, as he started his parliamentary career in Islington North by defeating not just one, but two former Labour MPs who had defected to the SDP. Then my best educated guess is that a campaign starting with chants of 'Oh! Jeremy Corbyn' might very well end as 'Ouch! Jeremy got binned'.

The cemeteries are full of indispensable people, all of whom have been replaced.

(Georges Clémenceau)

Tous ces moments perdus de l'enchantement, qui ne reviendront jamais

Pas d'aujourd'hui pour nous, pour nous il n'y a rien à partager, sauf le passé

(Bryan Ferry, A Song For Europe, 1973)

Always see the bright side of life. The cancellation of Charmilla's jolly to France, at the end of last month, spared Rishi Sunak a moment of Royal Embarrassment. The initial plan was for Charles and Camilla to travel from Paris to Bordeaux by the TGV, the world-renowned French high-speed train. Which has been operational for 42 years, and 34 years on the 'South West Corridor', with full high-speed travel all the way since 2017. Just imagine Charles coming back and casually asking Rishi, "By the way, Prime Minister, what about HS2?". Anyway, it's just as well Charles did not venture past the White Cliffs of Dover this time, as Emmanuel Macron's popularity is again sinking fast to an abyss of Mariana Trench magnitude. These trendlines show the proportion of French people who approve of Macron's action and his successive Prime Ministers' (Edouard Philippe from May 2017 to July 2020, Jean Castex from July 2020 to May 2022, Elisabeth Borne since May 2022), compared to Macron's baseline, his share of the popular vote in the first rounds of the 2017 and 2022 presidential elections.

Both Macron's and Philippe's popularity fell down sharply during the Yellow Vests crisis of 2018-2019. Castex first enjoyed high levels of approval because of his astute leadership during the Covid pandemic, but it never rubbed off on Macron and soon died down after the return to The New Normal. Borne has never been really immensely popular and then accompanied Macron's fall during unrest, strikes and protests against a hugely unpopular reform of state pensions. Which, ironically, would still leave France with a better state pensions system than the UK. Pollsters have already started testing the next presidential election, due in 2027. This is quite messy as France has nothing as clearcut as Labour vs Conservatives or Republicans vs Democrats. Ir's actually more like the kaleidoscopic mosaic of Gaul tribes described by Julius Caesar. The polls we have so far are mostly testing the same cast as at the 2022 presidential election. Which won't be recast actually, as Emmanuel Macron is constitutionally barred from seeking a third consecutive term. So any poll involving him should be taken with a pinch of salt, or at best as generic benchmark polling for whatever Macronist candidate will be trying his luck next. And I deliberately say 'his', as all aspiring candidates are of the straight-white-male variety for now.

Only one pollster, IFOP, has tried a cleverer approach with alternative scenarios starring actual potential candidates for 2027, for which they unfortunately don't have an English version. At this stage this is still polling of the quicksand variety, but has some merit as it tests people who may be realistically considering standing, or have already made clear that they will. Among the latter is Laurent Wauquiez for the right-wing Les Républicains, who is oddly more conspicuous by his absence from the media circus than anything else. Also of course the indestructible Marine Le Pen, banking on her National Rally's newfound respectability as a 'responsible opposition' to Macron. Meanwhile confusion reigns on the left, where veteran candidate Jean-Luc Mélechon is no longer the uncontested charismatic leader because of the unbridled performative aggressiveness of his party La France Insoumise, while Communist Party leader Fabien Roussel is starting to emerge as the flag-bearer of the traditional 'non woke' left. There's also confusion within the Macronist coalition, which might end up embroiled in civil war between rival candidates from its constituent parties. Who could be former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe, Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire, Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin or former Justice Minister François Bayrou. The only certainty is that it will be messy, may quickly turn out of control, and end up with Marine Le Pen at the Elysée Palace, as two shocker polls have already predicted this month.

Standing in the space that holds the silent lace of night away from you

Cringing in your room as the outriders of doom step on your threshold

You must pay the price of hate, and that price is your soul

(Peter Hammill, The Emperor In His War Room, 1970)

Now my finger points at you, another loser

You, an island, on your own, complete in every detail

Monumental, a precious jewel or just a fool

(Bryan Ferry, Casanova, 1974)

Emmanuel Macron has been described by his opponents as hors sol, literally 'off the ground', French 21st century NewSpeak originally referring to people lacking proper roots because they have never been elected to the National Assembly or any local authority. Now understood as some mix of aloof, out of touch, technocratic and whatnot. It's also liberally assigned to a number of deputies (which, as you know, is French for MPs) elected in the Macronist landslide of 2017 without any previous electoral experience, and thusly sketched as lacking true connections with the constituencies many of them were assigned to off the muff in the run-up to the election. This certainly contributed to the Macronist debacle at the 2022 legislative election, when 64 of the 2017 intake did not seek re-election, and the Macronist majority transitioned into a minority after losing 146 seats and gaining only 38. The polls fielded since about the next legislative election, due in 2027, are even more devastating.

French pollsters tend to prefer prompting their panels about the two main coalitions, NUPES on the left and Ensemble at the centre, though some offer a breakdown of NUPES votes by constituent party as a side order. But, whichever way you ask, the results send the same message. Ensemble is losing momentum and voters, drifting from first place to third over just ten months. NUPES are failing to make significant inroads outwith their voter base of 2022. In the meanwhile, Marine Le Pen's National Rally are prospering among the ruins. It's not just Murphy's Law, it's worse than that. It's actually that everything that could be done wrong has been done wrong by Macron and Borne. Culminating with the use of an uniquely French constitutional artefact, the much reviled Article 49.3 of the 1958 Constitution, to pass the reform of state pensions without a proper vote in the National Assembly. It says a lot that Borne survived a vote of no confidence, on a trans-partisan motion initiated by the centrist opposition group LIOT, by only nine votes. Bragging afterwards about this being a 'victory' did not improve the public's mood. And now seat projections for the next National Assembly show the Macronist minority coalition crashing to a disaster.

Seat projections for the French legislative elections are even less of an exact science than seat projections for the House of Commons. The two-round majority system adds a level of uncertainty, as the final results depend as much on transfers from eliminated candidates as on the first round votes of the top two candidates. French pollsters therefore project only ranges of seats for each party, rather than exact numbers. For clarity, I have transposed these ranges into numbers that are roughly the mid-point of the projected ranges, with some minor fine tuning on top to reach the required total of 577 seats. But even the most favourable scenario point to a major crash for Ensemble and the National Rally coming out of the election as the first party. This because the seat projections are at coalition level, and Ensemble would then split into three parliamentary groups, and NUPES into four, reflecting the seats won by their constituent parties just like after the 2022 election. But Le Pen has repeatedly said she would decline becoming Prime Minister after the hypothetical snap legislative election that Macron will understandably never call. There is a precedent for that. Jacques Chirac turned down the Premiership after a landslide victory at the 1993 legislative election, also to concentrate on his presidential bid. And he became President two years later. Only to lose an ill-advised snap legislative election two years into his term. Just saying.

Gentlemen, he said, I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes

I've moved your mountains and marked your cards

But Eden is burning, either get ready for elimination

Or else your hearts must have the courage for the changing of the guards

(Bob Dylan, Changing Of The Guards, 1978)

Jeremy's Den

13/04/2023

Fucked Up Beyond Belief

We Must Be Dreaming