The Garden of Eden

We start our series on the marginal constituency of Warwick and Leamington by looking at the electoral history of the constituency and in particular the first contest won by Sir Anthony Eden. He then held the constituency, often uncontested in the inter-war period, until his retirement following his resignation as prime minister.

I have been told that on visits to the constituency Sir Anthony, accompanied by his wife Clarissa, would progress through bunting bedecked streets in an open-topped car. Such was the Garden of Eden.

In his first election, what was originally going to be a by-election contest in 1923 (but became a contest in the 1924 general election), Sir Anthony faced as a Labour opponent the Countess of Warwick. She was a colourful character who had had what might be called an adventurous sexual life. One of her lovers for several years was the Prince of Wales, King Edward VII. It is said that she took him to meet agricultural workers leader Joseph Arch in the nearby village of Barford (his name is now on a pub there). There was not a meeting of minds.

When the election campaign began, The Times speculated whether the Red Flag would be raised over Warwick Castle. It was not. The constituency had been a Liberal seat and the Liberal candidate was a former agricultural labourer, George Nicholls, who had been a MP since 1906.

The Labour organisation in the constituency was comparatively weak. However, the woman who gave her name to the song 'Daisy, Daisy, give me an answer do' was not going to be daunted. Sporting the red and gold Labour colours, she drove a phaeton with a team of white ponies.

The Countess had a number of family connections with Sir Anthony. Her first son's wife was Eden's sister. Her daughter Queenie was married to a Conservative MP and her stepdaughter married Sir Antony as the campaign was about to begin.

Captain Eden played to his strengths, claiming that his party understood farming better than its rivals. With good looks and a commendable war record, he represented what was then 'middle England'. In hunting country, he was a supporter of hunting whereas the Countess was an opponent. He also declared that he would resist any attempt to disestablish the Church of England and would oppose any move to make divorce easier. This was somewhat ironic given that he got divorced in 1950/

The day before polling, the Countess addressed five open-air meetings, ending up in Warwick market place. Her Daimler was dragged through the streets by her supporters.

Eden's win with 16,357 votes was hardly a surprise. Nicholls came second with 11,134 votes. Lady Warwick came third with just 4,015 votes. It was a disappointing result, but it marked the beginning of a Conservative hegemony in the constituency that was to last until 1997.

Economy is where dividing line is opening up

The economy is where the dividing line between the political parties is opening up, said Manchester University's Jane Green at the Political Studies Association conference in Edinburgh. The Conservatives had a slight edge on the economy, but Labour was somewhat more trusted on the issue and it was thought that they would do a better job on the economy if they won. This sounds paradoxical, but it reflects voters' uncertainty. As Green put it, prospective economic voting was muddled.

Cameron's personal ratings were going down just as those of Blair did in 1997. But Blair had a bigger lead over Major than Cameron does over Brown.

On party identification, Labour identification had held up, but there was no increase in Conservative identification since 1992 when it fell sharply. This suggested that Conservatives were highly instrumental voters and that their support was more conditional.

Her overall conclusion was that this was an election in which the campaign would be very important.

Tories to win say experts

The view of election experts forming the 'Who will win?' panel at the Political Stdies Association conference at Edinburgh was that Dave Cameron would be the prime minister after the general election. They were less certain whether the Conservatives would have an overall majority or just be the largest party.

It was pointed out that it was puzzling the Conservatives were not doing better given the unpopularity of Gordon Brown and Labour policy errors. It was noted that all governments tended to experience a 'U' shaped trend in popularity during their time in office. It was also questioned whether this was really an election that anyone would want to win given the poisoned chalice they would inherit.

Vince wins, but what's the prize?

Vince Cable was the clear winner in last night's debate between would-be chancellors, both according to an online poll of viewers and my own judgement after watching the programme. Saint Vince did remind us that he had been right all long, but was also prepared to think the unthinkable and say we could not ring fence the NHS without leading to devastating cuts elsewhere.

George Osborne was wearing an over tight suit and was in a bit of a tight spot over the promise to reverse the proposed rise in National Insurance contributions. He claims to have discovered even more efficiency savings. We all know that they exist: on Saturday I got six separate letters with an accompanying leaflet about tax codes from Revenue and Customs. Some were for employers I had done a task for once and was unlikely to do again and once was for a pension fund I am not a member of. But as Vince pointed out, many of these efficency savings are 'pure fiction'. And if they can be made, why not use them to pay down the debt?

Darling batted well on a sticky wicket and did himself no harm. Unfortunately, the audience asked straight and clear questions, but rarely got straight and clear answers, although more so from Vince.

As George Osborne pointed out towards the end of the programme, we are either going to have a Conservative or a Labour Government sometime after May 7th, so there is no prize for Vince. One newspaper suggested this morning that we could have a Lib Dem chancellor, but the Lib Dems are not going to tarnish their identity by entering a coalition.

Rich hit hard by Labour budgets

13 years of Labour budgets have hit the rich hard, while the poorest tenth are the beneficiaries according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies: Wealth

Yet one of the Conservative posters mocking Gordon Brown that was launched yesterday states 'Vote for me. Under me, the richer got richer and the poorer got poorer.' The Gini coefficient, which measures the distribution of income in a society, started to deteriorate in the Thatcher years so that Britain became one of the more unequal advanced industrial countries. It has remained stubbornly resistant to Labour's efforts to create a less unequal society.

There are structural forces at work. Unskilled jobs are shrinking because globalisation transfers them elsewhere or brings in migrants to undercut local workers. If it hadn't been for the measures Labour had taken, things would have been even worse. What remains an open question is whether the latest measures are undermining incentives and making Britain less competitive by encouraging people and firms to locate elsewhere.

Polls not good news for Tories

The latest two opinion polls are not good news for the Conservatives. The latest YouGov poll shows them just two points ahead of Labour. A poll in 56 key Labour held marginals shows them trailing Labour: Polls

Although the poll results are somewhat erratic and, of course, subject to sampling error there has been a general downward trend for the Conservatives since last year. Of course, to some expect one would expect this as their policies come under closer scrutiny.

However, their overall message does come as rather negative: 'Isn't Gordon Brown awful?' The other message seems to be 'It's our turn'. That may have some resonance with voters, but it's not enough. One needs to a clearer indication of what the Conservatives would do that is distinctive and would help to improve the condition of the economy and society more generally. At the moment that message is not coming across and there is an over reliance on Dave Cameron's personal lead over Gordon Brown.

Worcester Woman is back!

The ultimate median voter, Worcester Woman, has been found alive and well in the Midlands cathedral city. Registered childminder Julia Langdale was identified as the Worcester Woman in 1997 when she voted for Labour as she found Tony Blair charismatic. Before then she had alternated between the main parties.

Radio 5 interviewed her this morning. Gordon Brown was dimissed as boring and uncharismatic (clearly politics is seen as a celebrity activity). Dave Cameron was found to be smug and uncharismatic. Nick Clegg clearly didn't feature on her radar at all.

She felt that hard-working middle income families like her were seeing their standard of living eroded by tax increases, making particular reference to fuel and beer. Her whole tone was weary and disillusioned. She was uncertain whether she would vote at all, although felt a sense of obligation to do so.

It is the likes of Julia Langdale who will decide who walks through the door of No.10 on May 7th.