8-Jan-2022 : LAB: 39 / CON: 34 / LDEM: 11 / GRN: 5

[jimjam]

Rich ''Hi steve I was still at school then doing my A-levels. My best friend and I did some campaign work after school and at weekends - stuffing envelopes mostly, did a bit of door to door at weekends. We were so sure Labour would win (oh to be young and innocent again) - but some of the older more experienced party activists were very pessimistic in the two weeks before polling day, a couple actually said they thought we were going to lose based on the overall reception we were getting on the doorstep.''

I was one of the more experienced activists in 1992.

I did think we could deny the Tories an OM and did come close but even most seats was never realistic imo from 2 weeks out or so.

[steamdrivenandy]

Thinking back to 2010 GE, I'm wondering how things would've panned out if Cameron hadn't agreed a referendum on the EU.

UKIP would've damaged the Tories, maybe more than Labour and Labour might've won.

That would've left Cons and UKIP fighting in the background but no pressing need for any action on the EU and possibly no austerity, or maybe austerity lite.

It would've been interesting to see how long Brown continued as PM and who came after him - maybe the other Milliband.

2015 Cons and UKIP still sparring and Labour through on the rails again. No Brexit ref, no years of hoo hah in parliament, no May, no Johnson and the Tories still with some really good MP's and shadow ministers.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 10:21:20 GMT moby said:

Jan 12, 2022 9:56:47 GMT tancred said:

I was 25 in 1992, and still fairly 'wet behind the ears' in many ways. I was so surprised that Labour lost because I had the impression people were tired of the Tories after 13 years. I attributed the Labour defeat to the hostility of the Tory press, especially the Mail, Express and Sun. In those days the papers were much more influential than now; it wasn't just the old who read them but the younger age groups as well. 

The Sheffield rally didnt help.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TOgB3Smvro

The main impact of the Sheffield rally was to boost turnout by bringing out the Tory vote. It probably made the difference between the 7.6% Tory lead reflected in the actual outcome and a lead of - say - 6.5%. The latter would have delivered a 2017 type result with Major needing Ulster Unionist support to continue in office with a Minority Tory government. A further GE in 1995 would have been likely too.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 11:39:59 GMT jimjam said:

Rich ''Hi steve I was still at school then doing my A-levels. My best friend and I did some campaign work after school and at weekends - stuffing envelopes mostly, did a bit of door to door at weekends. We were so sure Labour would win (oh to be young and innocent again) - but some of the older more experienced party activists were very pessimistic in the two weeks before polling day, a couple actually said they thought we were going to lose based on the overall reception we were getting on the doorstep.''

I was one of the more experienced activists in 1992.

I did think we could deny the Tories an OM and did come close but even most seats was never realistic imo from 2 weeks out or so.

I rather agree. The polls were wrong all along - as in 2015. Methodologically they were clearly badly flawed.

[tancred]

Jan 12, 2022 11:47:17 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Thinking back to 2010 GE, I'm wondering how things would've panned out if Cameron hadn't agreed a referendum on the EU.

UKIP would've damaged the Tories, maybe more than Labour and Labour might've won.

That would've left Cons and UKIP fighting in the background but no pressing need for any action on the EU and possibly no austerity, or maybe austerity lite.

It would've been interesting to see how long Brown continued as PM and who came after him - maybe the other Milliband.

2015 Cons and UKIP still sparring and Labour through on the rails again. No Brexit ref, no years of hoo hah in parliament, no May, no Johnson and the Tories still with some really good MP's and shadow ministers.

Cameron was a typical Tory, i.e. an unprincipled opportunist. He buckled under pressure for the simple reason that he would faced a leadership challenge otherwise. Whenever the Tories see a threat from the right, they generally gobble it up and digest it.

[steve]

tancred

Welcome to the deity club.
Basically uncapping national insurance at the time impacted anyone on over about £19,000 a year . Met Police pay for a non probationary police constable in receipt of rent allowance started at £19000. I earned around £30000 Faith about the same between us it was nearly a £2500 a year tax hike.
While people working in emergency services tend to earn a bit more than average pay the pay bands don't make anyone wealthy.
It impacted millions of potential Labour voters even if it was as low as 10-15% there were plenty of people earning slightly less who anticipated earning this in the near future.

Poorly considered move and it impacted at the election.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 12:03:34 GMT steve said:

tancred

Welcome to the deity club.
Basically uncapping national insurance at the time impacted anyone on over about £19,000 a year . Met Police pay for a non probationary police constable in receipt of rent allowance started at £19000. I earned around £30000 Faith about the same between us it was nearly a £2500 a year tax hike.
While people working in emergency services tend to earn a bit more than average pay the pay bands don't make anyone wealthy.
It impacted millions of potential Labour voters even if it was as low as 10-15% there were plenty of people earning slightly less who anticipated earning this in the near future.

Poorly considered move and it impacted at the election.

No obvious polling impact at the time though. The Labour lead and vote share did not fall back following the announcement.

[crossbat11]

@jimjam

"I did think we could deny the Tories an OM and did come close but even most seats was never realistic imo from 2 weeks out or so."

You cite an oft forgotten aspect of that otherwise depressing election for Labour supporters. It may have been unwinnable after Thatcher was replaced by Major, despite the recession still lapping around voters feet in 1992, but Kinnock provided Labour with an essential bridgehead and a distant route to Downing Street. Miles adrift in 1983 and 1987, Labour won enough Tory seats in 1992, aided and abetted by astute marginal seat targetting and, I think, some tactical ABT voting too,, to whittle the Tories overall majority down to 20 odd seats. Major got a huge and historic popular vote on the basis of a very high turnout (78%), but lost vote share and seats compared to Thatcher in 1987. Kinnock won Labour 42 seats and increased their vote share by almost 4%. Scandalously, the Lib Dems under Ashdown won 6 million votes and a paltry 20 seats. FPTP and all that.

Of course, the Tory OM was so slender that defection and by election attrition almost wiped it out by the time of the 1997 election. The history of the Labour Party, when written, should be kind to Neil Kinnock and his leadership. A very decent man but deeply flawed politician. On his day, one of the last of the great political orators.

An old anecdote. I was wandering around the shop floor at the Land Rover factory in Solihull, in my usual Friday morning after the election night before sort of way, typically crestfallen too, such was my rapidly accruing catalogue of political and electoral failure by then (I had to go back to 1974 for my last major trophy. A bit like the Villa. 1957 in our case!). I happened upon a staff TU rep near the Engine Assembly line. We got chatting and I always remember his consoling and wise words. "A good election to lose he said". He went on to explain, but I wasn't terribly convinced. By the time of 1997, some five years later, he'd left the company, but I often spend a wistful moment recalling that brief conversation with Alan. All those long years ago. Keeps me warm during long Labour years lost in the wilderness.

[thexterminatingdalek]

Good grief, I almost feel sorry for him

[tancred]

Jan 12, 2022 12:03:34 GMT steve said:

tancred

Welcome to the deity club.
Basically uncapping national insurance at the time impacted anyone on over about £19,000 a year . Met Police pay for a non probationary police constable in receipt of rent allowance started at £19000. I earned around £30000 Faith about the same between us it was nearly a £2500 a year tax hike.
While people working in emergency services tend to earn a bit more than average pay the pay bands don't make anyone wealthy.
It impacted millions of potential Labour voters even if it was as low as 10-15% there were plenty of people earning slightly less who anticipated earning this in the near future.

Poorly considered move and it impacted at the election.

£30k a year was very decent money in 1992 - around £65k in today's coin - well above average pay.  Your combined income today would around £130k - very significantly above the average household income!

Your reasoning seems that only the rich should be asked to pay more - sorry mate it just doesn't cut it.  There aren't enough rich people who can be taxed to make a sufficient difference to the Exchequer. The middle class also needs to pay their bit. I never get angrier when I hear of doctors whining that they are having to cough up tax once their pension fund exceeds £1M - this is exactly the sort of attitude I get from the 'champagne socialists' who slopey shoulder their way out of paying more tax while pontificating about the usual 'woke' issues.

[mandolinist]

Jan 12, 2022 12:13:19 GMT thexterminatingdalek said:

Good grief, I almost feel sorry for him

Whilst I am aware you say "almost", it is part of the problem isn't it? He stands there looking like a distraught schoolboy who will learn his lessons, this pretense that he is contrite is one of the defining elements of his personality.

[Deleted]

Almost never watch any political coverage but happened to notice the Graun were featuring the PM’s embarrassment just now, so briefly looked in.

Made me wonder if his supporters in high places have installed nod-ometers to check how enthusiastically, and how many times, members of his ‘elite’ front bench nod at his replies.

Truss seemed by far the best toady in the room - but I am not privy to the official figures of course.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 12:09:32 GMT crossbat11 said:

@jimjam

"I did think we could deny the Tories an OM and did come close but even most seats was never realistic imo from 2 weeks out or so."

You cite an oft forgotten aspect of that otherwise depressing election for Labour supporters. It may have been unwinnable after Thatcher was replaced by Major, despite the recession still lapping around voters feet in 1992, but Kinnock provided Labour with an essential bridgehead and a distant route to Downing Street. Miles adrift in 1983 and 1987, Labour won enough Tory seats in 1992, aided and abetted by astute marginal seat targetting and, I think, some tactical ABT voting too,, to whittle the Tories overall majority down to 20 odd seats. Major got a huge and historic popular vote on the basis of a very high turnout (78%), but lost vote share and seats compared to Thatcher in 1987. Kinnock won Labour 42 seats and increased their vote share by almost 4%. Scandalously, the Lib Dems under Ashdown won 6 million votes and a paltry 20 seats. FPTP and all that.

Of course, the Tory OM was so slender that defection and by election attrition almost wiped it out by the time of the 1997 election. The history of the Labour Party, when written, should be kind to Neil Kinnock and his leadership. A very decent man but deeply flawed politician. On his day, one of the last of the great political orators.

An old anecdote. I was wandering around the shop floor at the Land Rover factory in Solihull, in my usual Friday morning after the election night before sort of way, typically crestfallen too, such was my rapidly accruing catalogue of political and electoral failure by then (I had to go back to 1974 for my last major trophy. A bit like the Villa. 1957 in our case!). I happened upon a staff TU rep near the Engine Assembly line. We got chatting and I always remember his consoling and wise words. "A good election to lose he said". He went on to explain, but I wasn't terribly convinced. By the time of 1997, some five years later, he'd left the company, but I often spend a wistful moment recalling that brief conversation with Alan. All those long years ago. Keeps me warm during long Labour years lost in the wilderness.

I actually believe that Kinnock was more effective in the 1987 campaign than in 1992.At the outset of the 1987 election many commentators were predicting that Labour would be overtaken by the Alliance in terms of vote share - Labour had suffered a humiliating heavy defeat at he Greenwich by election in late February. Kinnock was able to turn that around with Labour emerging 8% ahead of the Alliance rather than the mere 2% managed by Foot in 1983.

By 1992 he had lost his novelty - and I believe that at Sheffield he threw away the prospect of a Hung Parliament. The 1992 Tory win was far from inevitable.

[mandolinist]

Watching PMQ's, for the first time in months, I noticed the silence in the house when Kier Starmer and Ian Blackford were speaking. It is almost as if the Conservative Party has abandoned him.

[domjg]

Jan 12, 2022 12:13:19 GMT thexterminatingdalek said:

Good grief, I almost feel sorry for him

thexterminatingdalek No I reserve that sentiment for us. I fear now the party of misrule will succeed somehow in foisting Sunak on us and enough useful idiots will believe this is all fine and dandy to allow them to present themselves as reformed but continue with the destructive hard Brexit Johnson bequeathed us. 
I want Johnson to remain and the hard Brexit he gave us with all the nonsense flag waving to go down the plughole with him.

[tancred]

Johnson getting roasted.....and rightly so.

[steve]

tancred
I wasn't disputing it was above average pay but police officers and nurses from ward sister upwards all earned above average pay at the time.
Pro rata now it's no where near as good.

Can I point out that Faith and I both voted Labour despite our misgivings so kindly don't give me it's middle class self interest bollocks.

It's simply an attempt to look at what might have impacted the actual votes not the polling.

Meanwhile back to the present and it looks like it's taxi for Spaffer time

[tancred]

Jan 12, 2022 12:20:28 GMT graham said:

I actually believe that Kinnock was more effective in the 1987 campaign than in 1992.At the outset of the 1987 election many commentators were predicting that Labour would be overtaken by the Alliance in terms of vote share - Labour had suffered a humiliating heavy defeat at he Greenwich by election in late February. Kinnock was able to turn that around with Labour emerging 8% ahead of the Alliance rather than the mere 2% managed by Foot in 1983.

By 1992 he had lost his novelty - and I believe that at Sheffield he threw away the prospect of a Hung Parliament. The 1992 Tory win was far from inevitable.

Kinnock should have quit before the 1992 election and allowed Smith to take the leadership role. I think this could at least have pushed the outcome to a hung parliament.

[Deleted]

Always found it odd how, on a political forum, there are so many incorrect spellings of politicians, that everyone here probably reads about daily.

It’s not Kier (or Keith) Stammer or any other mixture of letters. It’s KEIR STARMER.

[mandolinist]

Jan 12, 2022 12:26:09 GMT @crofty said:

Always found it odd how, on a political forum, there are so many incorrect spellings of politicians, that everyone here probably reads about daily.

It’s not Kier (or Keith) Stammer or any other mixture of letters. It’s KEIR STARMER.

Ooops, suitably admonished. I claim speed of posting and stupidity as my excuse.

[tancred]

Jan 12, 2022 12:23:36 GMT steve said:

tancred
I wasn't disputing it was above average pay but police officers and nurses from ward sister upwards all earned above average pay at the time.
Pro rata now it's no where near as good.

Can I point out that Faith and I both voted Labour despite our misgivings so kindly don't give me it's middle class self interest bollocks.

It's simply an attempt to look at what might have impacted the actual votes not the polling.

Meanwhile back to the present and it looks like it's taxi for Spaffer time

You did vote Labour but grudgingly. Fair enough. I think Smith's NI policy did put off the higher paid but I wonder how many of them would have voted Tory anyway. My feeling is that this did have an effect, no doubt, but Kinnock's unpopularity also had an effect and possibly a greater one. 

[leftieliberal]

Jan 12, 2022 8:32:13 GMT steve said:

lululemonmustdobetter

As I recall Labour were looking likely victors until John Smith handed the result to the Tories by announcing uncapping national insurance contributions to molify the left wing.
It would have resulted in a an effective tax increase of around 4% on such high flyers as police sergeants and nurse teachers, given I was one of these married to the other example I had to well and truly hold my nose and think of the public good when voting Labour.

Hundreds of thousands of middle income earners didn't.

Had he only announced that he would be equalising tax on earned and unearned income (including capital gains) the reaction would have probably been a big yawn. Yet it would have raised a comparable sum of money, just from different people.

[tancred]

Jan 12, 2022 12:31:46 GMT leftieliberal said:

Jan 12, 2022 8:32:13 GMT steve said:

lululemonmustdobetter

As I recall Labour were looking likely victors until John Smith handed the result to the Tories by announcing uncapping national insurance contributions to molify the left wing.
It would have resulted in a an effective tax increase of around 4% on such high flyers as police sergeants and nurse teachers, given I was one of these married to the other example I had to well and truly hold my nose and think of the public good when voting Labour.

Hundreds of thousands of middle income earners didn't.

Had he only announced that he would be equalising tax on earned and unearned income (including capital gains) the reaction would have probably been a big yawn. Yet it would have raised a comparable sum of money, just from different people.

Rather annoyed at this tabloid definition of 'middle income', which in 1992 was around £15-17k, not £30k and above.  Middle class does not equate to middle income, it equates to above average income.  Let's be clear on that.

[shevii]

Recent events and talk of humour reminded me of one of my favourites From The Day Today.

"government ship back on course"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qwpnKEf14s

[peterbell]

While I think Starmer did well on his first 4 questions, his last question was a mistake. It gave Johnson the opportunity to get back on the vaccine story. IMO, he should have said something along the lines of "are you waiting for the Sue Gray report so that you can dismiss it in the same way you did with the Pritti Patel report"

[crossbat11]

graham

"I actually believe that Kinnock was more effective in the 1987 campaign than in 1992.At the outset of the 1987 election many commentators were predicting that Labour would be overtaken by the Alliance in terms of vote share - Labour had suffered a humiliating heavy defeat at he Greenwich by election in late February. Kinnock was able to turn that around with Labour emerging 8% ahead of the Alliance rather than the mere 2% managed by Foot in 1983.

By 1992 he had lost his novelty - and I believe that at Sheffield he threw away the prospect of a Hung Parliament. The 1992 Tory win was far from inevitable."

An interesting argument. It was more "Neil Unplugged" in 1987 and he was allowed to freewheel more and be his natural self. This was high watermark, hegemonic Thatcher era, remember, and it was an election he was never going to win for Labour. Maybe, on reflection, and as you say, he deserves some credit for what, on paper anyway, looks a pretty cataclysmic electoral defeat. He pushed back the Alliance advance and steadied Labour's listing 1983 ship. Was that the Kinnock the Movie election? I remember that being a very well received PPB at the time. Joe Biden nicked some of the wording I think!

I think there was an element of personal political tragedy for Kinnock, wonderfully encapsulated in David Hare's brilliant play, "Absence of War". By 1992, Kinnock was almost frightened of his own shadow, over-cautious (apart from his Sheffield aberration when the genuinely rapturous and large crowd got him believing he was on his way) and inhibited. He fell between many stools in that election and had lost his campaigning zeal and sharpness. He looked unnatural and overspun, even allowing Major, of all people, to steal a march on him with his arch soap box mounting and son of a circus performer routine.

[hireton]

So Johnson thinks a work event involves an invitation to 100 people to enjoy the summer weather and to bring their own booze.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 12:24:38 GMT tancred said:

Jan 12, 2022 12:20:28 GMT graham said:

I actually believe that Kinnock was more effective in the 1987 campaign than in 1992.At the outset of the 1987 election many commentators were predicting that Labour would be overtaken by the Alliance in terms of vote share - Labour had suffered a humiliating heavy defeat at he Greenwich by election in late February. Kinnock was able to turn that around with Labour emerging 8% ahead of the Alliance rather than the mere 2% managed by Foot in 1983.

By 1992 he had lost his novelty - and I believe that at Sheffield he threw away the prospect of a Hung Parliament. The 1992 Tory win was far from inevitable.

Kinnock should have quit before the 1992 election and allowed Smith to take the leadership role. I think this could at least have pushed the outcome to a hung parliament.

Kinnock could - and should - have managed a Hung Parliament in 1992. His mistakes were avoidable.

[Deleted]

Jan 12, 2022 12:28:14 GMT mandolinist said:

Jan 12, 2022 12:26:09 GMT @crofty said:

Always found it odd how, on a political forum, there are so many incorrect spellings of politicians, that everyone here probably reads about daily.

It’s not Kier (or Keith) Stammer or any other mixture of letters. It’s KEIR STARMER.

Ooops, suitably admonished. I claim speed of posting and stupidity as my excuse.

Oh he gets his name spelt a lot worse than that....

However, if you use my simple “how to spell Keir properly” lesson, using easy-to-remember-poetry which is really easy to remember, you will never get it wrong again. Here it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ”I before E excepting after K.”

Hope that helped.

[graham]

Jan 12, 2022 12:39:12 GMT crossbat11 said:

graham

"I actually believe that Kinnock was more effective in the 1987 campaign than in 1992.At the outset of the 1987 election many commentators were predicting that Labour would be overtaken by the Alliance in terms of vote share - Labour had suffered a humiliating heavy defeat at he Greenwich by election in late February. Kinnock was able to turn that around with Labour emerging 8% ahead of the Alliance rather than the mere 2% managed by Foot in 1983.

By 1992 he had lost his novelty - and I believe that at Sheffield he threw away the prospect of a Hung Parliament. The 1992 Tory win was far from inevitable."

An interesting argument. It was more "Neil Unplugged" in 1987 and he was allowed to freewheel more and be his natural self. This was high watermark, hegemonic Thatcher era, remember, and it was an election he was never going to win for Labour. Maybe, on reflection, and as you say, he deserves some credit for what, on paper anyway, looks a pretty cataclysmic electoral defeat. He pushed back the Alliance advance and steadied Labour's listing 1983 ship. Was that the Kinnock the Movie election? I remember that being a very well received PPB at the time. Joe Biden nicked some of the wording I think!

I think there was an element of personal political tragedy for Kinnock, wonderfully encapsulated in David Hare's brilliant play, "Absence of War". By 1992, Kinnock was almost frightened of his own shadow, over-cautious (apart from his Sheffield aberration when the genuinely rapturous and large crowd got him believing he was on his way) and inhibited. He fell between many stools in that election and had lost his campaigning zeal and sharpness. He looked unnatural and overspun, even allowing Major, of all people, to steal a march on him with his arch soap box mounting and son of a circus performer routine.

I agree entirely with that. 1987 was indeed the 'Kinnock the Movie' election re- the PPB!