Will the automated phone survey change the betting?

I’ve just had word that the automated phone pollster, Survation, is carrying out a survey in Oldham East & Saddleworth ahead of the by-election.

The firm carries out surveys, like a number of US pollsters, by automated phone calls. Respondees answer by keying in their answers on the key-pad of their phones. ComRes used something similar for its post-debate general election polling when it was trying to produce an almost instant response.

Rasmussen used a similar approach for the Indy ahead of the 2001 election and came out with a pretty good result.

Survation tell me that as well as the standard VI question there are questions on past vote at the general election, how certain those questioned are about turning out and whether they have applied for postal votes. The latter could be very significant because both the reds and yellows have been working like crazy for weeks building up their postal vote bases.

Those interviewed are being prompted by both party and the candidate name – which seems sensible in a by-election where so much emphasis is placed on the candidates themselves.

Survation is not a member of the British Polling Council and I had heard little of it until now. According to its website it carried out polling during the Labour leadership race and I am told it also did a general election exit poll.

I don’t know where or when the Old & Sad poll will be published but it’s findings could play a key part in establishing whether the blues or yellows are best placed to challenge Labour. At the general election it was LAB 31.9%: LD 31.6%: CON 26.4%.

UPDATE: Survation tell me that they are applying to join the British Polling Council.

Mike Smithson

How many mistakes is one too many?

Michael Gove appears to have performed so many U-turns this month that perhaps he should have been the cabinet member on Strictly Come Dancing. He’s certainly required fancy political footwork to come out of the episode without too much damage, having firstly changed his mind on the funding of school sports and then again on provision of free books.

This comes on top of embarrassments during the summer when his department released inaccurate lists relating to the revised BSF programme. He took quite a hit for that, despite it being mainly the fault of the officials who put the lists together. Strangely, the damage he’s taken this time hasn’t been as bad even though the policy decisions were much more his responsibility. He’s lucky that higher education no longer falls within his department’s brief otherwise he’d have had tuition fees too.

Even so, he’s been an accident-prone member of cabinet so far which has to beg the question as to whether the 25/1 Ladbrokesare offering for him to be the next cabinet minister to leave represents attractive odds.

Both the U-turns have several things in common: the consequences of the original decision were not thought through, the likely resistance of high-profile lobbyists was missed, the proposed cuts were for relatively small amounts and apparently in neither case did Gove consult about the proposals.

This seems to be Gove’s way. He is driving through a substantial and radical programme and it’s true that one time-honoured way to prevent its implementation is to bog it down in reviews, consultations and so on – things he’s obviously determined to avoid. That said, a failure to consult even with those who should be on his side, combined with a repeated inability to spot a political landmine is a weakness and one that could potentially prove fatal. Given that the projects in question were concerning small amounts relative to the overall budget, it does beg the question as to who put them forward and why.

Gove has taken on a lot of vested interests within the education establishment. He’s not tried to win it over to his way of thinking, presumably either because he thinks there’s no way he could or because he can’t be bothered. There will without question be many who wish to stop him and the U-turns this month will no doubt serve to strengthen their resolve, especially as Gove retreated both times he was challenged.

The Next to Leave market is essentially about resignations before a planned reshuffle, and resignations tend to come because of policy disagreements, personal problems or serious political errors. Of those three, there’s almost no reason to see him leaving because of a policy disagreement, personal issues are usually nigh-on impossible to predict but he does look vulnerable on the final possibility. His odds imply he’s one of the less likely to be next out. I don’t think that’s making sufficient allowance for events and in particular, the potential to seriously mess something up in a big department carrying out radical reforms while his political antennae are malfunctioning.

David Herdson

David is a Tory activist in Yorkshire and one of PB’s three deputy editors

What do we think of the Blair biographer’s predictions?

The Indy on Sunday’s political editor and Blair biographer, John Rentoul, has published a list of his main predictions for 2011 and they are set out in the table above.

While I do think that Labour’s got a good chance in Old & Sad I think he’s stretching it a bit to describe such an outcome as a “Labour gain”. The notional 2005 result for the seat had Labour with a 10.4% lead and in May, of course, Phil Woolas won. Labour is the incumbent and of it was a lesser commentator than Rentoul writing this he could be accused of trying to spin the result before it’s happened.

Then there’s his forecast for the AV referendum. Rather than go for “Yes” or “No” Rentoul suggests that this will be a “Lib Dem loss”. Certainly it would be a blow to the yellows but the only party the party that had this in its manifesto at the general election was Labour.

As to the outcome that’s a pretty hard call. YouGov polling suggests that the no camp are winning by a margin while ICM have it the other way.

Everything depends on the campaign and here those Labour heavyweights from yesteryear lining up in the NO camp – Beckett/Prescott/Blunkett/Reid could make a big difference – though I can’t work out which way.

Whatever this is the time of year for predictions and in the next few days Double Carpet will be reporting on the outcome of the PB 2010 prediction contest as well as the question for the next twelve months.

Mike Smithson

Labour remain strong odds-on favourites

With the postal vote packs in the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election due to be mailed out in the next couple of days the latest by-election betting shows a weakening of the Tory price across the board. SkyBet has the best traditional bookie price of 25/1 while you get get 30/1 or better on the Betfair exchange.

The bookies tell me that there’s hardly any interest in the blues at all – all the focus has been on Labour and the Lib Dems whose candidate, Elwyn Watkins, was the one who created the contest following his successful legal action over Labour’s general election campaign.

On the face of it this should be an easy Labour victory and perhaps the party’s biggest challenge is ensuring their supporters are not so over-confident that they don’t see the point of getting out to vote.

What we haven’t got is any polling data or other hard information to guide us. The timing of the campaign over the Christmas and New Year holiday periods has made it difficult for pollsters though we might get something once the new year holiday is over.

The main impact of a poll could be if it showed the Tories doing better than the current betting suggests.

Bookmakers links:
Ladbrokes
William Hill
Bet365
PaddyPower
Victor Chandler
Smarkets
Betfair

Mike Smithson