It was a week of polls in Westminster and one which left many scratching their heads as to what they all mean.

It had started well for Labour. Ipsos MORI in the FT on Monday found both declining personal approval ratings for the Tory leader and a narrow lead for Labour, by 37 to 35 per cent, on voting intentions among those "absolutely certain to vote".

Meanwhile YouGov in the Telegraph showed mixed views on Conservative tax policy, perhaps not surprising given the mixed messages put out last week.

And a Populus poll for the Opinion Leader Forum group found that the likely next Labour leader Gordon Brown leads David Cameron by 27 points among swing voters as a potential prime minister when party preferences are put aside.

Then it got a bit worse for Labour. On Tuesday Communicate Research in the Independent had the Tories on 38 per cent, Labour on 32 and the Lib Dems 14 per cent (others were on 16 per cent).

On Wednesday ICM in the Guardian had Labour down three points in one month on 29 per cent, with the Tories up three on 39 and the Lib Dems unchanged on 22.

By Friday Populus' Brown/Cameron comparison appeared to have been turned completely on its head. YouGov in the Telegraph showed a "Conservative government led by David Cameron" on 46 per cent support, compared to 33 per cent for a "Labour government led by Gordon Brown".

On voting intentions YouGov steered more of a middle course, with the Conservatives on 39 per cent, Labour 32 per cent and the Liberal Dems on 16 ('others' 13).

Amid this mass of apparently conflicting information, one answer might be to draw no conclusions at all. All the samples were taken at a similar time so there were no earth shattering events that might have caused the public mood to shift away from Labour and towards the Conservatives.

But all the samples were taken by respectable pollsters so none are inherently wrong.

Opinion Leader Research's Deborah Mattinson sought to offer one explanation in the Times on Monday.

She blamed media misreporting of polls and said Brown was being unfairly done by because of an agenda to talk him down. Yet her own group's Brown/Cameron comparison still seemed to veer widely from YouGov's.

However she is right in the sense that most polls are often presented purely through a prism of either good/bad for Labour/Tories (delete as appropriate).

But a better explanation might be that all are asking different questions using different methods. Populus asked swing voters to choose between Brown and Cameron putting party aside, YouGov asked everyone with party included; Tax policy isn't exclusively what people vote on.

MORI uses those absolutely certain to vote as their headline figures because it thinks that provides a more accurate reflection of the numbers who actually do turnout at a general election.

And, as UKpollingreport's blog points out, on voting intentions most of the polls are actually pretty similar when the three per cent margin for error is considered, with the Tories in the mid to high 30s and Labour a little lower (although it is unusual to see the Lib Dems around the same score as the 'others').

But that didn't stop it being a difficult week for Brown. While he waits to take over he was attacked over school sports and education spending, as well as in the Commons.

He also knows that voters can't make a direct comparison between him and Cameron until he actually becomes prime minister. But until he does the prospect of him failing is slightly heightened by the polls.

Debate also continued to rage on Iraq, fuelled by yet more polls.

Elsewhere the government confirmed that it won't extend the same working rights to Romanians and Bulgarians as it did to a different set of Poles.