Conservative party

The result might be in, but that doesn't mean there's nothing useful polls can tell us about the Eastleigh by-election. What swayed the voters? Why did they vote as they did? And — perhaps of most interest — how might they vote next time? Yesterday, Lord Ashcroft's polling operation phoned 760 Eastleigh residents, 654 of whom had voted in the by-election. All sorts of warning labels need slapping across the figures: they aren't weighted, so are subject to a much higher risk of selection bias than other polls, and even if the sample were representative and random, the margin of error would be 3.5 points (and higher for subsets of those 760 respondents). But here are a few interesting nuggets from the data: 1. The Lib Dems won the ground game.

George Osborne spent an hour in front of the 1922 this evening. 40 Tory MPs took the opportunity to promote their own Budget ideas to him. From what I understand, the tone of the meeting was cordial with Osborne in relaxed form. A big theme was the cost of living with three MPs including Rob Halfon pushing the Chancellor on fuel duty. Osborne’s responses were non-committal but significantly he didn’t say that binning the fuel duty rise scheduled for September was unaffordable. Instead, a distinct vibe was given off that these MPs concerns would be accommodated. Two other MPs-- Steve Brine and Henry Smith—made the case for a cut in air passenger duty, something that the influential chairman of the ’22 Graham Brady has been a public advocate of.

By-elections are catnip for the media. But they are also, almost invariably, subject to greater scrutiny than they can reasonably bear. Only occasionally do they herald a new era or political realignment. Eastleigh is unlikely to prove an exception to that general rule. True, as Brother Payne suggests, Labour's likely dismal showing may demonstrate that Ed Miliband's still struggling to "connect" with southern voters but - though as a Miliband Sceptic it pains me to say so -  I'm not sure we should make too much of this. Similarly, UKIP's good showing is likely to be over-interpreted too. So, for that matter, will the Conservatives' (predicted) failure to win the seat, though this failure will cheer the anti-Cameron brigade on the Tory right.

Now Lord Ashcroft has withdrawn his funding (£) from the Tory party, what implications does the move have for David Cameron? Much like losing Britain's AAA rating this week, it's less about the actual impact for his government but the message it sends out about where they are going. As the Sunday Times reports today, the Tory peer has lost all faith in Conservatives' ability to win the next election: ‘It comes amid mounting pessimism among Tory supporters about the prospects of victory. Although Ashcroft has not publicly expressed doubts over the party’s ability to win, privately he is said to fear Labour is likely to secure more seats. A source close to Ashcroft said: “He feels he has done his bit.

By-elections are notoriously hard to call. But everyone who comes back from Eastleigh says the same thing, UKIP are the party with forward momentum. This morning’s Populus poll bears that out. They are in third place with 21 per cent, with the Tories second on 28 and the Lib Dems ahead with 33. But, as the indispensable UK Polling Report points out, if you don’t reallocate some of the undecides to the party they voted for last time, UKIP are doing even better. The numbers then are UKIP 25%, Tories 26% and Lib Dems 31%. As I said in the magazine this week, UKIP are picking up support from all three parties. Things could get very interesting there if more Labour voters shift to UKIP as the best anti-coalition vote.

The United Kingdom’s triple A rating is now lost with one credit rating agency, Moody’s. This is a politically difficult moment for George Osborne. Back in February 2010, he set keeping the triple A rating as one of the key tests of a Conservative government’s economic policy. His opponents will delight in pointing out that he has failed the test he has set himself, while nervousness on the Tory benches about the coalition’s economic strategy will be heightened by this news. Economically, though, I doubt that this will have much impact. In recent weeks, Britain’s debt has been trading more like that of France, which has lost its triple A rating, than Germany, which still has it.

The good news for Nick Clegg—and the bad news for David Cameron—is that the Liberal Democrats are racing certainties to hold Eastleigh in the by-election next Thursday. As I say in the magazine this week, the Liberal Democrats' base in the constituency - they hold every ward in the seat - has given them an insuperable advantage. This victory means that Clegg will be spared the Spring conference crisis that would have followed a defeat there; for if the Lib Dems could lose Eastleigh where they are so well dug in, they could lose anywhere. Cameron, by contrast, will have to deal with an intensely restless party. The Tories' failure to take Eastleigh in these circumstances highlights just how difficult it is going to be for the Tories to take seats off the Lib Dems in 2015.

Andrew Mitchell’s piece in the FT today marks his return to normal politics post-Plebgate. Up to now, Mitchell has confined his post-resignation comments either to his old stomping ground of development or to the sequence of events that led to his premature departure from government. By contrast, today’s piece sees Mitchell getting involved in a frontline political issue, Britain’s relationship with Europe. The article is full of suggestions, joint-sittings of the UK-Polish parliament and meetings of the UK-Dutch Cabinets. But Mitchell is clearly determined to work within the framework set out by Cameron’s Europe speech. No one could say that the articles rocks the boat. But what makes it significant to my mind are two things.

One of the key strands of the Conservative campaign in Eastleigh is trust: not just because campaigners can remind voters about Chris Huhne, but thanks to a contrast they can draw between Maria Hutchings and Lib Dem candidate Mike Thornton. The party's latest poster underlines this: it accuses the Lib Dems of 'facing both ways on development' and contrasts quotes from Thornton on protecting green spaces and his voting record. The bottom of the poster says: 'Maria Hutchings has consistently campaigned with local residents against these developments.

So far, MPs have only been able to raise concerns about the effects of the end of transitional controls for Bulgarian and Romanian migrants in departmental questions in the Commons. But one Tory is calling for a full backbench debate on the issue after recess. I understand that Mark Pritchard wants the government to extend transitional controls beyond 2013. He has applied for a debate, and tells me: 'I am pleased that the government is looking at the pull factors that will draw thousands of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants to the UK. However, time is running out and action rather than words are required. There also needs to be a recognition that there are also push factors and reducing pull factors alone will not be sufficient.

John Major knows a thing or two about naughty Tory MPs and Europe. So David Cameron would do well to listen to his Chatham House speech today in which he advised the PM to give up on the 'irreconcilables who are prepared to bring own any government or any Prime Minister in support of their opposition to the European Union'. He made two particularly strong points: 1. The Prime Minister should start preparing for the negotiation now. Major doesn't want the UK to leave the European Union, and neither does Cameron. So the former Tory Prime Minister gave a detailed briefing on how Cameron can avoid this. A referendum would only prevent a gradual drift towards the exit if the renegotiation preceding it is successful, and to ensure success, the PM needs to get planning right away.