Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results

Jag Singh Tue Jun 17, 2008 at 02:06:00 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The results of Labourhome.org's June 2008 survey of nearly 400 Labour activists and supporters has produced some rather interesting results. In addition to the monthly tracker questions on the performance of Cabinet ministers and the level of motivation to campaign for the Party, we asked what the Leader of the Party needed to do to ensure the best possible result for Labour at the next election, and we also asked how much time activists and supporters would be prepared to give Gordon Brown to begin reversing Labour's fortunes, before wanting him to step aside.

Here's a summary of the results (full results are further below):

Our activists and supporters are a lot more motivated to campaign for Labour, right now. Based on scales of 1 to 10, in May 2008 we were at 3.58, whilst this latest survey (June 2008) reveals an upwards shift of 2.28 points, at 5.86 points.

When asked, "After Crewe, what must the Leader of the Party do to ensure the best possible result for Labour at the next election?" - the majority responded with these three choices:

  • Provide direction and leadership, delegating detail to ministers
  • Bolster Labour's core vote
  • Restore the Party's financial situation
    •

When asked, "How much time would you be prepared to give Gordon Brown to begin reversing Labour's fortunes, before you would want him to step aside?"

  • More than a third of respondents said Gordon Brown should lead Labour into the next general election
    •



(Click on the header row to sort)
Minister Jun-08 May-08 Monthly Change
Prime Minister, Gordon Brown 3.93 2.69 1.24
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling 3.73 2.66 1.07
Foreign Secretary, David Miliband 6.02 4.35 1.67
Justice Secretary, Lord Chancellor Jack Straw 5.67 4.26 1.41
Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith 5.39 3.37 2.02
Defence/Scotland Secretary, Des Browne 4.26 3.02 1.24
Health Secretary, Alan Johnson 6.33 4.33 2
DEFRA Secretary, Hilary Benn 5.78 4.32 1.46
Int'l Development Secretary, Douglas Alexander 5.02 3.39 1.63
Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Secretary, John Hutton 4.45 3.47 0.98
Deputy Leader and Minister for Women and Equality, Harriet Harman 4.53 3.26 1.27
Work/Pensions Secretary, James Purnell 4.98 3.53 1.45
Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly 3.91 2.8 1.11
Communities and Local Government Secretary, Hazel Blears 4.9 3.25 1.65
Chief Whip, Geoff Hoon 4.58 3.04 1.54
Children, Schools and Families Secretary, Ed Balls 4.49 3.06 1.43
Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Ed Miliband 5.33 3.74 1.59
Northern Ireland Secretary, Shaun Woodward 4.38 3.13 1.25
Leader of the House of Lords, the Baroness Ashton of Upholland 4.53 3.24 1.29
Innovation, Universities and Skills Secretary, John Denham 5.71 3.92 1.79
Welsh Secretary, Paul Murphy 4.44 3.21 1.23
Culture, Media and Sport Secretary, Andy Burnham 5.38 3.61 1.77
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Secretary, Yvette Cooper 4.5 3.13 1.37
Average 4.88 3.43 1.45

How much time would you be prepared to give Gordon Brown to begin reversing Labour's fortunes, before you would want him to step aside?

  • 37.60% - He should lead the party into the next general election
  • 28% - He should be given until Party conference (September 2008) to turn things around
  • 17.90% - He should resign now
  • 16.50% - He should be given until the May 2009 elections (Europeean & Local Elections)

After Crewe, what must the Leader of the Party do to ensure the best possible result for Labour at the next election?

  • 62.8% - Provide direction and leadership, delegating detail to ministers
  • 61.50% - Bolster Labour's core vote
  • 56.90% - Restore the Party's financial situation
  • 40.40% - Fight to take back the centre ground and "Middle England"
  • 30.30% - Pass rule changes at Annual Conference to make the Party more transparent and democratic
  • 25.20% - Hold firm and ride out the headlines
  • 14.20% - Ensure unity and loyalty from Labour MPs
  • 5% - Address leaks from Number 10 and the Cabinet
  • 3.7% - Telephone more random voters


tags: (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results | 14 comments (14 topical)

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#1)

by Curlew on Tue Jun 17, 2008 at 09:15:17 PM GMT

More than a third of respondents said Gordon Brown should lead Labour into the next general election 

Meaning - more than 60% didn't.


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#3)

by Jag Singh on Tue Jun 17, 2008 at 10:12:21 PM GMT

I agree - but it is still interesting though; it's not exactly a done deal that everyone wants the Prime Minister out.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#13)

by lulu on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 09:28:23 AM GMT

No, just most of us.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#2)

by anjonaroy on Tue Jun 17, 2008 at 09:50:23 PM GMT

Over 82.1% think he should be leader right now (leader into the general election, leader for definate till the party conference, Leader till the 2009 Euro and Council elections).
Good enough level of support for me.


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#4)

by andycharlwood on Tue Jun 17, 2008 at 11:56:40 PM GMT

These results are absolutely meaningless. Because the survey is not based on a random sample (where you randomly select a sample of labour activists to participate in the survey from a list of all labour activists), but a sample of convenience (where you invite as many people as you can get to fill the survey in), you have no way of knowing whether changes from last month are the result of changes in the opinion of activists (which is what your analysis implies it is), or changes to the type of person particpating in the survey since last month. As last month's survey got considerable publicity here, it seems reasonable to think that a different type of person may have been participating this month compared to last month.

As I have said before, given the methods you use to carry out this survey, I think the results are largely valueless for finding out what activists think - it's just a bit of poor quality sensationalism which can be used against us by our enemies. Labour Home should be better than this.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#5)

by gibbajibba on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:50:17 AM GMT

While this survey is subjective and does not stand up on a number of levels, sample selection and sample size being the most obvious, at least Labour Home have asked some activists their thoughts. It is along the same lines with the grassroots views I hear.

The sad fact is that the party is run by a bunch of goons, take the behind the scenes infighting on the NEC, look at some of the reps!...come on Ellie Reeves? She'd need a sat nav to get out of London and would be supporting Cameron if she was born five years later, and she is one of the better ones!  


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#7)

by RedRooster on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:50:14 PM GMT

I always thought the rating of cabinet members was a pretty useless feature of the survey.  The verdicts on how long Brown should stay are the most interesting, where you've basically got 2/3 respondents still unconvinced that he should lead the party into the next General Election.

You really need to publish the sample size though Alex, otherwise there's no real way to tell how meaningful this is. 


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#8)

by RedRooster on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:51:18 PM GMT

Oh wait, there it is, right in the first line.  Oops...


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#9)

by ChrisPaul on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 01:58:28 PM GMT

82% of respondents give Brown at least until party conference, 54% just under a year from now, 37.6% back him now ... whatever may happen. 82% of respondents basically think Brown should stay. This is being widely misreported. What were Blair's figures in 2005 and 2006? How about 2003 and 2004?


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#11)

by NorthernMonkey on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:06:08 PM GMT

I hardly think it's fair to compare Blair's figures when he'd been in the job for 8 years with Brown when he's only had less than 1 year in the job!

Compare these figures with Blair in 1998, then we'll see the difference!


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#10)

by alexhilton on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:00:28 PM GMT

Comrades,

You raise a lot of good points. The opinions I form are mine and they are based on the conversations I have with very many party members, but which are skewed a bit towards the Westminster Village.

But that said, I still want to ask the people I can what is important to them, even if I don't know them.

Frankly, I believe the party itself should be far better at asking members and supporters what they think. If they gave me their membership emails, I'd poll far more scientifically.

So I'm agreeing what we do is flawed, but until the party starts asking what we want in a meaningful way, then this is the best available alternative.


Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#12)

by gibbajibba on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:44:50 AM GMT

Alex,

You make a good but conflated argument. Firstly, you can never have a scientific poll, you can only limit the bias. Secondly, would all of us handing over to you our membership details produce a better result, well yes to a degree, if sampled correctly.

Thirdly, the party should be more concerned with asking the wider electorate what they want, if the party reflected most of the memberships views we would be unelectable. We just don't get it in the Labour party the dog wags the tail, not the otherway around. Are we happy with GB? well no the man inept...should he be replaced? no, that would make the situation worse. End of story. I just hope we all remember the Tom Watson's of this world when GB loses the GE, it is because of TW and the Brownites that we didn't get rid of Blair two months before a GE and go onto win under GB. These aren't young turks, they are young turds.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#14)

by Free Radical on Sun Jun 22, 2008 at 03:52:17 PM GMT

 "if the party reflected most of the memberships views we would be unelectable"

Gibbajibba - so how should party policy be determined? Perhaps by following focus groups - basically what is being done at the moment - not with great success... That would be a disreputable, cynical, unprincipled and ultimately unproductive view of politics.

Or, maybe you think we should rely on the wisdom of great leaders we elect (or, er don't elect) to determine things that we accept sheep-like?

Actually I don't agree at all. The members were right about Iraq and Blair was totally wrong.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results (#15)

by gibbajibba on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:13:22 PM GMT

Yes, I can appreciate your point, but the membership would have been wrong on many other issues too, we should play to the electorate and not just membership;
for example whether we like it or not deregulation of financial markets has made all of us richer post bigbang - certain people way too rich, who did it? Thatcher, did we agree no. Any of us can form a list of policies which we didn't agree with in the grassroots which were actually beneficial in the long term, I admit I was wrong on that one back in the 1980s.

Do we rely on focus groups? well I think between you and me you should get out there more and listen on the door step, the public can quite clearly reflect their views to us outside of formal structures. Has sitting through CLP policy reviews not convinced you of anything, people have opinions but don't turn up to structured debates.


Also, I think you'll find that focus group selection is far more representative vis-a-vis a poll of your own people!  

Lastly, what is with certain members and this 'Blair was wrong on Iraq and we told him'; the arguments pre-war were about the legal basis of the war, that was the position of the anti-war movement (as well as not wanting people to die and cheap oil).

The arguements of members like you post-war now orbit;

a) we told them there were no WMD (no you didn't not unless you have a £12bn spy agency in your garage)

b) we told them there would be a long insurgency battle (yet again, you didn't, this argument was never made pre-war)

I notice you bunch now nolonger mention 'cheap oil' at the core of your anti-war arguments...I wonder why?
I wasn't pro-war, I was against but not because I thought I knew more than Blair, but because I believe the average Iraqi is no more or less evil than me. The human cost and legal argument should have been more widely hung onto by all of us pre and post-war.


[ Parent ]

Labour Grassroots Survey: June Results | 14 comments (14 topical)