Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Mind the gap : Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey and Reality
The Northern Ireland Life and Time surveys are often quoted in debates on Northern Ireland, so it might be an instructive exercise to compare how the survey on political attitudes stacks up against the harsh reality of the results of a ballot - last weeks European elections in Northern Ireland.
Reality Gap 1
NILT says 40% of people in Northern Ireland do not regard themselves as Unionist or Nationalist
European Elections say 8.8% of voters vote for parties that are not Unionist or Nationalist.
With a Single Transferrable Vote, voters could have voted for their non-tribal party of choice, before transferring to their least worst tribal candidate.
Reality Gap 2
NILT says There are 50% more Unionists than Nationalists in Northern Ireland (12 is 50% of 24)
European Elections say There are 16% more Unionist voters than Nationalist voters in Northern Ireland. (6.8 is 16.11% of 42.2)
Reality Gap 3
NILT says their margin of error is +/- 2.85%!
—-
Despite the low turn out there were 486,914 more participants in the European elections than in the NILT survey.
Adds: The inspiration for this entry was a conversion with Andrew Gallagher here
Mack @ 04:20 PM
Mack: With a Single Transferrable Vote, voters could have voted for their non-tribal party of choice, before transferring to their least worst tribal candidate.
That’s the liberals and greens sorted out, but what about conservatives, socialists, euro-sceptics and social-democrats?
Mack: NILT says their margin of error is +/- 2.85%!
Ask a different question, get a different answer.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 05:54 PMCan someone explain what makes the Alliance Party non-sectarian, wikipedia describes them
“The Party’s founding principles were expressly in favour of Northern Ireland remaining part of the United Kingdom, although in contrast to the Unionist parties, this was expressed in socio-economic rather than ethnic terms. It also placed great emphasis on the consent principle and therefore only supported the Northern Ireland’s position within the UK as long as the people of NI wished it.”
Has this change, because otherwish they are exactly the same as any unionist pro-agreement party.
‘NILT says There are 50% more Unionists than Nationalists in Northern Ireland (12 is 50% of 24)’The most amazing stat is that across the age groups the % of people claiming to be nationalist remains consistant, however for unionists the younger the age the more those claiming to be unionist drops dramatically and the more claiming to be neither rises sharply, it appears that young people don’t want to be unionist. Good news for a united Ireland
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:08 PMFor the benefit of those who haven’t read the discussion between Mack and me in Another Place, I’ll repeat what I said there:
I find it quite easy to believe that many people who consider themselves as “neither Unionist nor Nationalist” may vote for a Unionist or Nationalist candidate come polling day. I also find it easy to believe that a greater proportion of the self-describing “neither” category are which-primary-school “Nationalists” as opposed to which-primary-school “Unionists”.
Just because someone votes for a Unionist party does not mean that they consider themselses a Unionist - it just means that they would rather the Unionist candidate win the election than some other candidate. In the current era of political domination by the extremes (and obsession with getting more first-preference votes regardless of their utility) it is not surprising that “neither” voters may be tempted to vote for soft Unionist or Nationalist candidates to prevent the extremes from gaining political ground.
In short, I don’t agree that Mack’s “reality gap” really exists…
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:14 PMTaking a mild position on the constitutional question makes you sectarian? Are you demented?
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:15 PMSorry, I meant to say “people who consider themselves neither” rather than “neither voters” in the penultimate sentence above. Where’s the edit button when you need it?
And “fin” - how does Alliance’s statement of its constitutional position differ from that of /any/ pro-Agreement party?
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:19 PMThe main reason I continually treat the NILT survey as a piece of rubbish is the only verifiable aspect is always miles away from the only figure that is tested in a much wider demographic.
Have a look at their which party do you identify with section over the years, compare it with election results and witness polling that has demonstrably major sampling issues.
When the only one you can check is so far out the rest of their findings become immediately questionable.
If you believe their data we have lived in a stable society governed by the SDLP, UUP and Alliance for over a decade. A nonsense poll.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:27 PMSorry, should add - the ‘leaked’ secret polling of the NIO before elections that used to take place or the Belfast Tel polls pre-election (now discontinued) that showed equalling stupid results when tested run the NILT a close 2nd.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:30 PMAndrew, Reader -
I don’t think non-tribal parties have ever come close to achieving that proportion of the vote. If that consitutuency does exist, why hasn’t it produced more parties, candidates and votes?
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:37 PMMaybe the Tory thing and Alban’s socialism and desire to serve all ‘the people of Northern Ireland’ are an indication that the 42% of people that don’t vote DUP,TUV or SF do demand at least the pretence of cross-community feeling.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 06:45 PMAnd “fin” - how does Alliance’s statement of its constitutional position differ from that of /any/ pro-Agreement party?
Hold on Andrew, that was the question I asked!!
But Otto, I see you’re here, we crossed briefly on Micks elction day feed. I’m not trying to bait you but you seem quite adamant that the Allaince is not a unionist party and I don’t understand that position, especially after reading their wiki posting, is it incorrect?
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 07:02 PMI don’t think you can compare a survey with election results.
The NILTS survey samples a cross-section of everybody in NI, not just the half of the population that vote. Research shows that people with a ‘neither’ identity feel politically alienated, and therefore may tend not to vote. This helps explain why unionists and nationalists always outpoll moderates at elections.
But there is a more important reason for the difference, and that we always like to see ourselves as nice people, so moderate views are always always over-represented in surveys (‘are you a racist?’ - of course not…). Even though surveys are anonymous, people don’t like to admit to extreme views. It’s not necessarily that they’re lying, they’re just trying to give a good account of themselves - and this can coexist with or be overridden by more extreme gut reactions in the polling booth.
Added to that a bit of tactical voting….
Neither the NILTS or elections give the ‘real’ picture - they just measure different things.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 08:21 PM“If that consitutuency does exist, why hasn’t it produced more parties, candidates and votes?”
Mack, it’s the timeless hollowing-out of the centre effect. Nobody will vote for a party that they don’t think anyone else will vote for. STV doesn’t get rid of the “wasted vote” argument - the political establishment still obsesses over who tops the poll. Also, most “neither” people still have a gut preference for one side or the other, and are reluctant to venture out of the trench for fear the “other” lot don’t. This has all been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere.
The real question should be “what can we do about it?”
“Hold on Andrew, that was the question I asked!!”
Er, not exactly. :-)
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 08:46 PMFIN
Alliance changed its position mid-90s - and its support fell dramatically, interestingly!
ANDREW
All good points - tho I still think the survey is nonsense, as showed by the political party question.
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 09:12 PMOr quite simply, people lie through their teeth to people carrying out these survies
Posted by on Jun 10, 2009 @ 10:56 PMThanks Junior, your obviously not an Alliance member as from recent experience Alliance supporters could actually teach the Provos (historically off course) a thing or two about not giving anything away.
I know I may be pushing my luck here but what is the Alliances position on the union at the moment?
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 02:01 AMThis is daft. Apples and oranges. A survey and an election are clearly not the same.
The original post bases everything on the assumption that a vote for a Unionist or Nationalist party makes the voter a Unionist or Nationalist; that the electorate can only be made up of single-issue automatons.
Do you really think those that place more truck in socialism/capitalism/libertarianism/conservatism than nationalism would only vote Alliance or Green? That if you care more about the quality and flavour of governance than the name of the country that will take your taxes, then your politics must be neutered?
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 03:58 AM42 / meaning of life? / 0b101010 -
If such a large constituency existed, surely members of that constituency would organise or vote for non-tribal parties that did inspire them when they came along?
Now witness the abject failure of the non-tribal socialist Workers Party, The Socialist Workers Party, the capitalist Conservative Party, the fall off in the SDLP vote in it’s ‘post-nationalist phase’.
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 08:13 AMClaire -
Of course you can - it is absolutely disingenuous to suggest that votes cast by almost 500,000 people are less indicative of the will of the people (and broad society) than a survey of almost 2,000 (some of whom also didn’t fill in their forms). Do you really place more faith in the competence of the surveyors than the ballot box?
Surveys are notoriously prone to bias errors.
On higher turn outs voting patterns have been the same. Non-sectarian parties - and many more have stood in the past than just the two today - and have completely and utterly failed to garner that level of support.
Incidentally, the survey also suggest 50% more Unionists. That also doesn’t ring true.
——
Never mind, these nasty voters keep electing the wrong people. Still we have the survey, it is correct. We can derive the mandate from that - great stuff! Now I’m off to an appointment in Pyongyang…
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 08:19 AMfin
To answer your question as an Alliance member (obviously!), as I said during the election campaign:
“The Alliance Party was the first party to advocate power-sharing devolution within the UK with cross-border bodies - and it continues to advocate it. The party’s focus is on making devolution and the cross-border bodies work more effectively”
I’ll leave you know to answer Andrew‘s question about how that differs from any other party in the Assembly.
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 08:21 AMBy the way, at least one person actually wrote “The answer is 42” on the ballot paper last Thursday - a Sluggerette, perchance? :)
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 08:23 AMAndrew -
The real question should be “what can we do about it?”
Well, I thought in your original blog you were very insightful in suggesting we needed a few broad churches inverted from the typical NI experience, of broad left / right and focused on the border - to broad nationalist / unionist and focused on economic & social issues (left / right).
I think that’s more useful, more based in reality, than pretending there are large numbers of non-Unionists and non-Nationalists in NI.
I certainly would not base any commercial decisions (such as investing money in a new political party), based on a survey that seems very divorced from political reality.
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 08:29 AMClaire -
Apologies, I responded primarily to the first part of your comment.
I don’t think that the survey is completely without value, I agree (at least I think you are saying this in the second part), that it’s not accurate. In particular it doesn’t match up with voting intentions or votes cast. My issue with it, is primarily that it’s used by people in debates on NI to give primacy to certain views over and above views actually expressed by the electorate.
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 09:54 AMMack - of course surveys aren’t perfect, and some can be really flawed, and response rates affect the results, and people interpret the questions differently, and all of that. But it doesn’t make them useless either. They do give us a picture of how people in NI like to see themselves - in this case maybe as more moderate than they are - and they do include people who don’t vote - in this last election more than half (and 48% in 2007 said that they are not very/not at all interested in politics). Very few of my friends voted, for example, but their views still matter in terms of how it feels to live here.
Of course voting ultimately matters more, as it determines who actually runs the show. But if you’re interested in society in general, then surveys are really useful - as long as you can interpret them, rather than taking them as fact.
I’m not sure where this 50% of unionists come from. In 2007, 36% said they were unionists (24% nationalists and 40% either). This seems a bit low for u/n, but not crazy either, given the tendency to over-egg moderate views.
I’m just going on about it of course because a survey popped through my own door this year ; )
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 09:57 AM40% either - LOL - 40% Neither!
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 09:58 AMMack - we sent those at the same time.
Agreed!
Posted by on Jun 11, 2009 @ 10:00 AM
