Do more than half the British population support Johnson in ignoring Parliament.

According to a front page article in the Daily Telegraph 54% of “British adults” would support the suspension of parliament to achieve a no-deal Brexit.

Not surprisingly, this came as news to many British adults who couldn’t recall ever being asked. And, not surprisingly Twitter was rather sceptical of the veracity of this claim.

Twitter user Alan Travis showed that the figure of 54% was at odds with the data from ComRes
which appears to show very clearly that in answer to what was a quite leading question the response
was, in fact, only 44%.

Another user Sarah Mackie figured out that the 54% figure was achieved by excluding the don’t
know’s. Of course, it is common practice in survey work to exclude don’t knows to present a picture of those who hold an opinion, rather than those unwilling to express one. However, it is unusual for a
respectable polling company to allow figures to be manipulated in order to turn a minority into a
majority.

Indeed, this misuse of the data has led Mark Pack, an ex-election strategist with the Lib Dem’s to report the Telegraph to press regulator IPSO. He cites the Editors code which states:”The Press 
must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information    “

Many people on the left are understandably sceptical about opinion polls, though often on the
grounds that they were not personally asked. But, this is to entirely misunderstand the nature of a survey. Statistics tell us that a sample of around 2000 can be as accurate as a census of the entire
population. Most opinion polls are based on samples of 2000 people, so does this mean they can be trusted?

That figure of 2000 is based on a random sample of the population being studied. A random sample should be representative of the population and the results of a survey are then +/- 3% of the entire population.

The problem for polling companies is that drawing properly representative samples is expensive and time consuming. Margaret Atwood’s novel ‘The Edible Woman’ is based around a pollling company interviewer whose job was to knock on doors to fill a quota of specific segments of the population.
As far as I know no mainstream polling company now employs an army of skilled interviewers
preferring instead to invite people to join a panel.

Polling companies no longer employ professional
interviewers and rely on online surveys instead

The downside of online panels should be obvious. They are self selecting. They tend to be older than average, are more likely to be middle class and also more likely to exclude ethnic minorities. To
overcome the shortcomings pollsters use a variety of techniques known as weighting. Each company
has its own weighting methodology, but for all of them they are attempting to overcome the
limitations of their own panel in order to appear representative.

The 54% figure is grossly misleading leading to the Express quoting it as meaning:

     End of line for MPs: Public BACKS bid              to SCRAP PARLIAMENT so Boris can get on with Brexit

They lead the story by repeating the blatantly false claim:

BORIS JOHNSON has received support from more than half of the UK public to deliver Brexit by any means possible, including suspending Parliament.

Now, let’s be clear. The Express and Telegraph are no strangers to telling lies. They are both
newspapers that support Brexit, the Conservative Party and, of course, Johnson, who once made up stories about the EU for the Telegraph. So, the fact that they have lied and manipulated figures to suit
themselves is no great surprise.

ComRes, on the other hand, is a respected polling company. It is also a member of the British Polling Council and is expected to abide by their rules. Their objectives, include the following:

• To advance the understanding, among politicians, the media and general public, of how polls are conducted and how to interpret poll results.

It is likely that ComRes themselves assisted the Telegraph in manipulating the figures to provide an entirely misleading headline. In other words as Full Fact point out in their report the claim is misleading and based on a leading question.

Ben Page of rival polling company Ipsos-MORI also took the Telegraph to task in this tweet.

Strangely enough neither Ben Page nor Full Fact choose to highlight the intrinsic problem of online polling using self-selected panels which has become commonplace in opinion polling.

The conclusions for those of us on the left are rather obvious:

• Tory supporting papers cannot be trusted to tell the truth (no change there)

• Opinion polls are inherently unreliable (that includes those giving Labour a lead)

• Too much public policy is being driven by polls that have no scientific validity

• Polls are being used to create public opinion, not reflect it.

How to choose an MP

A General Election is coming. Perhaps not as soon as most people would like it, but probably earlier than 2022 when there will have to be one.


The last General Election was a massive boost for the left who, perhaps for the first time ever, were undoubtedly the dominant force in the Party. However, the organisation and work that so many people put in was largely to elect MPs who have turned out to be hostile to the left project. We all know why.

Now we have the very real possibility of removing a number of MPs who have shown their colours as careerists, closet Tories and anti-working class. But exactly what do we need to do?

Beware of careerists

We have to be very careful not to rid ourselves of right-wing and centrist MPs merely to replace them with left-wing careerists whose main aim is the enlargement of their own ego.

It is important that in CLP’s where the left are not happy with their MP that trigger ballots are organised at Branch level for September. It is also important that these meetings are well attended. Which means people like me who rarely attend branch meetings need to turn up.

The Party rules state that the trigger ballot is a yes/ no ballot asking whether the branch wants a selection to take place. It is decided on a simple majority vote.

If you feel that a selection should take place then it is probably important to contact your CLP and Branch Secretary to ensure that the ballot is on the agenda. It is also important that the left organises to get people to branch meetings.

You need to attend a branch meeting (taking part in the
Photo op is optional)

Assuming the one-third branch rule is met, the sitting MP is automatically included in the selection process. The left will need to find a candidate that they can unite around. What will be completely unhelpful is that the left splinters and starts pitting candidates against each other. That will simply ensure that the
right win.

The sitting MP has a built-in advantage in that they will able to point to their parliamentary experience (in some cases including ministerial experience), all the satisfied constituents they
have helped (expect to hear letters of thanks),
the network of local businesses and charities they have good relations with, and of course their media appearances.

Let’s be clear on the whole we are not criticising MPs for what we might term “doing the job”. We
expect MP’s earning £79,468 per year to be present in their place of work, we expect them 
to be available to their constituents (though we might also note that they all have case-
workers who help manage this work), we expect them to meet with organisations in their
 constituency and, as the local face of the Party, we expect them to appear on local (and, sometimes national) media.

Some MPs work very hard (mainly at undermining
their own party) and then leave

However, we also expect MPs to support the party, it’s principles and its democratically arrived at decisions. We do not expect our own MPs who members trudge the streets supporting to undermine party policy on a whim, undermine the authority of the elected leader of the party (though they are, of course, free to disagree with specific policies and/or statements) or to collude with organisations and individuals whose sole 
motivation in life seems to be to prevent a 
Labour Government.

We all know the issues that have divided us and we all know how some MPs have used their media contacts to distract from the very real 
need for a General Election to pursue an agenda which is all about controlling the Labour Party rather than bringing about real change to a 
society in which 14.6 million people are living in poverty.


So we probably know who we don’t want representing us but how to decide who should be our representative. Here I can only offer a personal opinion. My ideal candidate would 
be representative of the constituency meaning that they have lived in the area for a number of years. They would have been active in local and national campaigns. I want to know that my MP has been seen at demos and on picket lines before they thought it might be good for their careers (and not just because their parents dragged them along, Jess). 

MPs need to support workers and be able
to reach out to ordinary people

They would, ideally, be known on the left of the party but not show their experience by the number of committees they have served on. Personally I am slightly suspicious of people whose CV boasts a progression of various roles and committees as it can indicate a commitment to a political career rather than a commitment to political ideals.


I am genuinely shocked when talking to other members when somebody says they want to be an MP, but seems to have no real opinions on anything. 

I would personally prefer candidates who can campaign genuinely on the manifesto and who are genuinely committed to change. 


As well as being politically committed any candidate of the left has to be able to reach out beyond their base. That means the ability to get on with other people, to listen (lots of us like to talk but are not so good at the listening thing) and to be able to find compromise and common ground where necessary. Although this sounds obvious it is surprising how many people rely on dogma and loud talking rather than analysis and thought. 

The centrist wing of the party are full of people who seemingly stand for nothing but self-enrichment but it would be naive to think the left is immune from such individuals and given the possibility of a well-paid career we need to be on our guard not to change Tweedle Dee for Tweedle Dum.

Sitting MPs cannot be expected to take being ousted lying down. We can expect them to trawl through social media for anything that can be used to undermine a rival. We should 
do the same. That is, we need to ensure that our candidates history cannot easily be used 
against them. We do not want to have to fend off accusations of racism, sexual harassment or bullying. Although the dirty tricks will be more likely with high profile sitting MPs we 
should probably assume that they will be used against any candidate who defeats a sitting 
MP.

Keep your eyes on the prize

This might be the most critical time for the UK left since Jeremy became leader. If, and it’s still a big if, Labour come to power it will be vital that the PLP is united behind the leader 
and the manifesto. It is vitally important that Labour MPs command the confidence of their 
CLPs, but equally important that they can inspire confidence in the many millions of Labour voters who are not party members.

Postscript: The Open Selection Campaign have brought to my attention that whilst the rules clearly devolve the trigger ballot process to CLP’s the NEC have given themselves the right to decide a timetable, and latest estimates are that it could take up to 9 months to complete the process. Such a timetable will almost certainly ensure that a snap election in late 2019 or early 2020 will be fought with many candidates who were not chosen by members and who will be hostile to the leadership and could well result in a Labour Government being defeated from within. Having said that, I am told by a left-wing member of the NEC that it is regional offices (in England) and the equivalent in Wales and Scotland who are overseeing the process. It is probably important that individual members keep up the pressure through branches and CLP’s if you really want your candidate to be democratically chosen

Best of the left web 7th August 2019

Welcome to this new page on Thinking and Doing. I’ve been blogging for about 2 years now with varying degrees of success (highest 520 views, lowest 4 views), but it has always been exclusively my content. This page, which I hope to publish regularly, is more a round-up of what is out there. I hope people see this as a good resource. If you know of any leftie blogs please let me know. Incidentally, this is all compiled by hand with not an algorithm in sight.

From Labour List: We need a United Left 

Jade Azim’s LabourList article ‘The real battle for Labour’s soul? Lansmanites vs cranks’ certainly caused a stir. Reactions ranged from cheering to weariness, but also from the perplexed to the very personalised. I want to start by making a defence of Jade, though I disagree with much of her piece. Continue reading here

From Vox Political: How the right are baiting the left

If you’ve never heard of “Torrancing” before, don’t worry. I don’t think I have either, although I certainly believe I have been a victim of it. Continue reading here

From The Morning Star: War with Iran looking ever more likely

A DISASTROUS war with Iran has “just got more likely,” peace campaigners warned today. Continue reading here

From Middle East Eye: EHRC has broken its own rules in investigating Labour says Jewish Group.

The UK equalities watchdog charged with investigating alleged antisemitism in the Labour Party has broken its own rules, according to a group of Jewish members of the party. Continue reading here

From UCU Left: Support the climate strike on September 20th

Greta Thunberg has called for the next global school student strike on the 20th September. This strike will kick off a week of climate action which finishes on the 27th September. It looks set to be one of the biggest days of action for climate justice yet. Continue reading here

From Counterfire: Johnson’s turbo-charged alt-right must be defeated

‘Turbo-charge’ appears to be the soundbite of choice for members of Boris Johnson’s newly installed cabinet of horrors. First off the mark was the racist buffoon himself, telling the House of Commons in his first address as PM that he will ‘turbo-charge’ preparations for a no-deal Brexit. Continue reading here

From The Canary: Twitter tells the truth about the Brecon by-election

The Brecon and Radnorshire constituency was a Liberal Democrat seat until the party’s electoral wipeout in 2015. The Lib Dems have now won it back from the Tories in a by-election, reducing Boris Johnson’s working parliamentary majority to just one. Continue reading here

From the poor side of life: 

Today is the Unite Union Day of Action against universal credit and I hope that there’s lots of demos outside Jobcentres today.Continue reading here

From Thinking and Doing Archive: The case for putting morality into politics

What character traits ought we to look for in our elected representatives? The question may seem odd at a time when our expectations of our representatives have never been lower. The idea that politicians should be “respectable” and that they, if not we, should aspire to some higher ideal, seems to belong to a bygone age. Political idealism is to be sneered at, and politics, it seems, no longer has any place for outmoded concepts such as truth, honesty or integrity. Continue reading here

Is the Remain Alliance a threat to Labour?

The Liberal Democratic candidate Jane Dodds won the Brecon & Radnorshire by-Election last Thursday with what on the face of it looks like a game-changing “progressive alliance” with Plaid Cymru and the Green Party.

The election was largely seen as a disaster for both the Conservatives (who somewhat strangely kept the same disgraced candidate who had prompted the by-election in the first place) and Labour who, it has been claimed, were victims of a remain alliance.

It is a compelling narrative. The Conservative majority in the House of Commons was slashed from 2 to 1. Whilst Labour came close to losing their deposit. Labour’s right-wing detractors were soon out in force claiming that this was the proof, as if they needed it, that it was time for Jeremy Corbyn to step aside for a new leader (though who they have in mind that would get the endorsement of members they have yet to reveal).

I am always curious at the way in which by-elections, often run on a single issue (obviously this time it was Brexit), are used by political commentators as harbingers of future General Elections.

Let’s see if this was really a triumph for remain. If we add all the Brexit parties (Cons, Brexit, and UKIP) and all the remain party votes (that’s Lib Dem’s, Labour, and we’ll throw in the Monster Raving Loonies) a more complex picture emerges

Pro-Brexit 15,974 (50.2%)
Pro-Remain 15,840 (49.8%)

So, the idea that this was a triumph for the pro-remain alliance is actually not consistent with the evidence, particularly as Jo Swinson has claimed that a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party is “bottling it” on Brexit which if true would shift Brecon & Radnorshire even more into the pro-Brexit camp.

The result of this election certainly did not make great reading for supporters of the Labour Party.

Fourth behind the Lib Dem’s, the Conservatives and the single-issue Brexit Party. This is not quite where we would like to be. But it is important to treat these figures with caution. First, those crowing about the performance of the Lib Dem’s are conveniently overlooking the low turnout (compared to the 2017 General Election). On Thursday turnout was just 56.9% compared to 73.8% in 2017.
So a claim that, for example Labour lost over 5,000 votes, whilst technically true, is slightly  misleading, the fact is over 1200 Labour voters from 2017 decided to sit this one out.

In 2017 the Labour Party had 7,335 votes. In order to get a truer picture of the loss we have to recognise that when nearly 25% of voters simply did not vote in the by-election that the vote for Labour was already down. Indeed had that additional 25% of voters actually voted, Labour would have got 2,276 votes. Still not great and still 5,000+ votes down but not the “almost lost your deposit” disaster it was mooted.

In order to get a sense of what Labour should read into this vote it is necessary to compare like with like. Crudely using a comparison of a General Election with a by-Election is likely to create more fog than clarity.

This table shows the numbers taking the 2017 turnout as the base. In other words, I have adjusted the actual vote for 2019 to assume that the turnout was identical to a General Election.

This helps us to see where the various votes have gone. What seems likely is that the increased Lib Dem vote is made up of Labour and Plaid Cymru voters. We know that Plaid Cymru encouraged their voters to vote Lib Dem. We know that Labour did not, but it seems many of them did so anyway.

We can also see that the loss of voters from the Conservatives was almost entirely explained by the growth in the Brexit Party vote.

This suggests that the Brexit Party ate into the Conservative vote, and the Lib Dem’s did the same to Labour. This fits the analysis that the by-Election was equally bad news for both of them.

However, some historical context is needed. Labour has not held this seat since 1974, during which time it has been held by either the Conservatives or Lib Dem’s.

It is possible that Labour voters have deserted Labour for the Lib Dem’s. It is also possible that this is entirely due to Brexit. But, one by-Election in a seat only held by 2 parties since the mid-70’s is not the conclusive proof that some would claim.

If Labour voters did vote tactically in Brecon & Radnorshire there is no reason to suppose that they would do so in seats where Labour had the sitting MP or where Labour was second in 2017.

Moreover, whilst it is relatively easy to turn a by-Election into a mini-referendum on a single issue that is not so easy during a General Election where many issues compete for the attention of voters.

The Brecon by-Election was a triumph for the Lib Dem’s, and it could have been better for Labour, but it is important to keep perspective. There was very little chance that Labour would win a seat they have not held since 1974. This was a two-way contest between the Lib Dem’s and the Tories. Were it not for the Brexit Party it is likely the result would have been much closer, but this was a seat that eluded Labour even in the high tide of 1997. To paint a failure to win it now as a disaster is not taking the context into account.