This week’s YouGov poll for the Times has topline figures of CON 42%(nc), LAB 40%(+1), LDEM 9%(nc). Fieldwork was Monday and Tuesday and changes are from last week. The two point lead is a little lower than YouGov have been showing of late, but nothing outside normal sample variation.

On the other regular YouGov trackers, 44% of people think that Britain was wrong to vote for Brexit, 43% think it was right. Just 22% of people think that the government are doing well at negotiating Bret, 62% think they are doing badly (including a majority of both Leavers and Remainers). While the poll was taken after the government’s announcement of extra funding for the NHS, it has unsurprisingly has little impact on which party people trust more on the issue – 34% of people think Labour would handle the NHS better, 24% think the Conservatives would. Full tabs are here.

While it’s not a particularly new poll (the fieldwork was conducted the weekend before last) there was also a newly published BMG poll yesterday. Topline figures there were CON 38%(-1), LAB 41%(+2), LDEM 11%(+1). Changes are since early May. This is the only poll since mid-April to have shown Labour ahead. Full tabs are here.

UPDATE: A third poll out tonight. Survation have topline figures of CON 41%(nc), LAB 38%(-2), LDEM 7%(-2). Fieldwork was Tuesday to Thursday and changes are from the start of the month. The poll has some more questions on Brexit – full details are here.


1,218 Responses to “Latest YouGov and BMG voting intentions”

1 22 23 24 25
  1. Joseph
    The only compromises May is offering are ones the EU has been consistently ruling out since before the referendum.

    My summary:
    TM: Let me run in this wheat field and otherwise I will do what you want
    MB: You are standing in a barley field Theresa
    TM: The people have spoken! They insist I run in a wheat field
    MB: There are no wheat fields round here! Why have you been telling people they are wheat fields ??
    TM: I insist on a wheat field! I am telling everyone it is a wheat field!
    MB: ok if it makes you happy, call it a wheat field…
    So long as you realise it is a really a barley field you are signing up to, along with Freedom of Movement, a frictionless Ireland border, full regulatory alignment, and jurisdiction by the ECJ

  2. @ Andrew111 – Indeed, good to see some rumour and you nailed it.

    The problem is wheat or barley there are 7+ ERG headbangers that want scorched earth and have laid mines, bear traps and toxic waste in the field (ie CON manifesto “promise”, the divorce bill and siding with Corbyn+co to remove May via HoC if needs be – the maths for May to stay CON leader is probably there but not as PM if she is led into a drought hit, locus infested barren wasteland – aka BINO)

    The only question then is does Corbyn take the poisoned chalice, laced with Mayb0tch, or does he desperately need to visit Venezuela or the Antarctic on a trip ending on April Fools day 2019 ;)

  3. Andrew111

    The EU has indeed ruled out this model that the Prime Minister has developed. However her position, being on the soft end of expectations, makes it easier to agree something the EU can accept, i.e. an EEA-type arrangement in all but name.

    It doesn’t make economic sense to exclude services from the single market and freedom of movement can be finessed.

  4. Havnt seen what has been happening, but it does seem to be a process of step by step compromise towards remain.

  5. Sounds like Single Market + Customs Union for goods with and end to unlimited immigration.

    Suspect that EU will not be keen to agree this and the four freedoms will need to be conceeded by the UK.

  6. Some areas of the Government’s proposal agreed at Chequers are okay – single market and customs union for goods.

    However I see two areas where the EU and UK will need to adjust this plan.

    First the Single Market will require to be extended to services too.

    Second I don’t think its acceptable to restrict freedom of movement as much as Mrs May suggests, so I would expect some compromises from the UK on this area in the direction of freedom of movement..

    Certainly though the movement is in the right direction as far as getting an agreement with the EU is concerned.

  7. Since services are what we seek to export – extending the SM to cover services will be something we will wish to do economically in due course. I can imagine that being an easy “compromise” for the UK to offer in upcoming negotiations..

  8. Looks alot like BINO, from what is emerging tonight. Further concessions likely as the talks progress, and not what Brexiters have been expecting it seems.

  9. Just for once I’m interested to hear some Brexit opinions about the Chequers deal. I have no idea if it’s good or bad myself, I’m just happy that they may finally have agreed a position (maybe, until someone breaks rank perhaps). But what’s going to be most revealing is how people from the various factions react to it. Hopefully there will be some polling on public reaction to it coming soon too.

  10. Kier Starmer – the well-thought-of Brexit Shadow Minister – thinks there are many gaps in the plan. Sounds like Labour party will oppose the shortcomings of the plan – e.g. on freedom of movement and exclusion of services from the Single Market.

    Its odd to exclude services from the Single Market, since that is our comparative advantage in trade terms, i.e what we hope to export to the EU.

  11. Avoids a border both on Ireland and between Ireland and Great Britain.

  12. Sounds like a compromise that nobody is happy with.

    Inevitable, really. And for once, not Theresa May’s fault. The task facing her was utterly impossible.

    Still, at least the can-kicking is over. Now comes the actual hard part – negotiating with the EU.

    Anyone remember when the Tories confidently asserted they could pick off the EU27 one by one? I’m looking forward to watching them try…

  13. Bingo! Bino

  14. Bearing in mind that whatever the UK proposes, the EU just rejects and demands further concessions, the news tonight is very depressing. I agree with Danny, it seems to be step-by-step crawling back towards Remain.

    I think the Tory party will suffer badly at the next GE if a very soft deal goes through because they will lose most of the several million UKIP voters who moved to them last time. That does not necessarily mean they will lose next time because Labour’s position is so illogical and inconsistent.

    Ironically it may be that Leavers best hope is that Labour will oppose a very soft deal because McDonnell in particular wants the freedom to nationalise everything that moves.

  15. Bingo. Plan entirely unacceptable.

  16. Unacceptable to EU.Unacceptable to Brexiteers.

  17. On a separate note, Labour has got off very lightly with its decision that it knows better than actual Jewish groups what constitutes anti-Semitism.

    This post makes the point well:

    https://www.theredroar.com/2018/07/revealed-what-may-now-be-allowed-under-labours-new-definition-of-antisemitism/

    It is true that criticism of the state of Israel/Benjamin Netenyahu is not by itself anti-Semitic. But some of these people talk about little else – they are disproportionately obsessed with the actions of Israel compared to other foreign powers, and that belies a form of motivated reasoning whereby the actions of the world’s only Jewish state are exploited for political leverage, while a blind eye is turned to other regimes committing similar or worse atrocities. In other words, anti-Semitism.

    Similarly it’s totally correct to be revolted by child-grooming in Rochdale, Telford etc, but if you mention it all the time, even when it’s not relevant to the topic at hand, you’re probably an Islamophobe.

  18. Wow.

    Two years down the line, and the Government has just agreed within Cabinet something a hair’s breadth away from our current set up.

    Most of the positions are just tweaks in tautology.

  19. CMJ

    It was already agreed in December and ratified by Parliament the other week in the N Ireland settlement, but few people seemed to notice at the time.

    Now that the Brexiteers finally realise what is happening we will see what they do…

    It is quite a long way from our current setup though because we have much less influence over what happens going forward. Nourishing but not very satisfying. Better than starving…

  20. @Andrew111

    This just confirms to me that whatever Brexit was supposed to mean, and yes I know – “Brexit means Brexit” – that is this agreement it?

    Is it worth two years of paralysing Government in the UK so that pressing problems have been ignored?

    (Sorry those are entirely rhetorical….)

  21. CMJ,

    It is pretty much what Dan Hannan was saying Brexit was in the referendum campaign…

    The elephant in the room is that if the EU agree this deal it will come with a price in £ (beyond the divorce bill and continuing into the future). And they will want precision not fudge over the role of the ECJ and “FOMWSSO” (Freedom of movement without saying so)

  22. CMJ

    Remember, the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.

  23. @ SAM
    “Unacceptable to EU.Unacceptable to Brexiteers.”

    To some maybe, but this is the reality of Brexit – compromise.

  24. so we have CU in all but name an a SM in goods and agriculture; and Brexit cabinet ministers endorse.

    Subject to negotiation of course and compromise.

  25. PeteB.

    Re ” Labour’s position is so illogical and inconsistent.”

    It may be illogical that is an opinion but inconsistent is only if you believe the inaccurate reports.

    Starmer has been consistent throughout as has Corbyn and I have never had any problem understanding the Brexit position whilst not always agreeing with it.

  26. Jim Jam

    The compromise being that for the sake of convenience we end up calling them the Single Market and Customs Union?

  27. Enough of a national humiliation that we might as well withdraw the article 50 notice and get the full benefit of EU membership. Contemptible.

  28. This week’s yougov (fieldwork Tuesday/Wednesday)

    Con 41 (-1)
    Lab 40 (+3)
    LibD 9 (-)
    UKIP 3 (-)
    Green 2 (-1)

    In line with the general idea that Conservatives have a small lead. Be interesting to see what the next polls produce – will Con-leave desert to UKIP in significant numbers, or the ex-labour voters in that total go back to Labour? Might some remainers go back to the Conservatives thinking that at least a no deal is now off?

    Wrong to leave had a 5 point lead over right to leave for what its worth. Interesting the raw figures have Labour ahead of the Conservatives by one point.

  29. JIM JAM

    @”so we have CU in all but name ”

    Don’t think so-not as I read it anyway. A Customs Union requires a common external tariff.This proposal doesn’t.

    As i understand it, the existing collection of EU duties at the border will continue in order to address NI/RoI-then importers who did not sell on into rEU will claim a refund.

    The big questions are :-

    * Does a bilateral UK FTA with a non-eu country get jeopardised because UK importers have to temporarily pay & then seek a refund, of duty which doesn’t exist under that FTA ?

    * Does the EU accept that a “third country” collects import duties at its own external border, rather than at the common border with EU ?

  30. JIM JAM

    @”so we have CU in all but name ”

    Don’t think so-not as I read it anyway. A Customs Union requires a common external tariff.This proposal doesn’t.

    As i understand it, the existing collection of EU duties at the border will continue in order to address NI/RoI-then importers who did not sell on into rEU will claim a refund.

    The big questions are :-

    * Does a bilateral UK FTA with a non-eu country get jeopardised because UK importers have to temporarily pay & then seek a refund, of duty which doesn’t exist under that FTA ?

    * Does the EU accept that a “third country” collects import duties at its own external border, rather than at the common border with EU ?

  31. Have to check Colin but on radio 5 last night Chris Mason read out from the 3 page pdf release and the phrase ‘as if we had common customs arrangements’ or some such.

    Was in car could not write down.

    It is the sophistry I predicted in that we are in control of treaties but are choosing to go with EU terms for other countries and determine how we match them.

    Hard Brexit peeps unhappy of course.

    Anyhow Transition will sort out in practice.

  32. Same old cake. Beginning of the end of negotiations.

  33. Sorry for second post.

    We have ‘common rule book’ – customs union by another route but with withdrawal ant any time subject to notice period possible I guess to give us control of our won trade policy in theory.

    Then we learn from the BBC that ”Agreement includes proposal for UK-EU free trade area for goods”

    Single market for goods and agriculture.

    Forgive me but this has clearly been the direction of travel for a long long time and what remains is the detail in the white paper, the EU respsonse and sensible remainer reaction.

  34. @FROSTY
    This week’s yougov (fieldwork Tuesday/Wednesday
    Con 41 (-1)
    Lab 40 (+3)
    LibD 9 (-)
    UKIP 3 (-)
    Green 2 (-1)

    Looks to be coming back in line with what most of the other polls are saying

  35. test

  36. Does this link sum up the current Brexit position ?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/1015482997737426944/photo/1

  37. So where does this leave us? I think I understand it but I am not 100% sure.

    1) We are asking to – for all intents and purposes – stay within the SM for Goods and Agriculture but with unspecified concessions on FoM and freedom to drop out of the ‘de facto’ SM at any point by Parliament refusing to adhere to future changes to EU regulatory standards;

    2) We are asking to remain in a Customs Union for the purposes of collecting EU tariffs in respect of on-shipped goods and products, but be able to set our own external tariffs for items retained in the UK

    3) We are suggesting that we would not be formally covered by ECJ rulings but would agree to follow them in practice

    So we seem to end up somewhere that politically:
    – is a ‘soft’ Brexit in actuality but allows the Tory government to pretend that it is more of a ‘hard’ Brexit (” we have left the SM & CU, ECJ no longer has jurisdiction and we can write our own trade deals”)
    – allows the Tories to claim a ‘bespoke’ and ‘deep and special’ relationship with the EU as promised
    – allows them to claim that we have full freedom to make trade deals (although we don’t, as we have to abide by EU regulations…)
    – may well be rejected by the EU anyway; most critically it appears this may require treaty change, which the EU absolutely won’t do. Which makes it all the nasty EU’s fault…

    Presumably the last point is why the Brexiteers have reluctantly signed up – they expect the EU to say ‘no’ anyway.

    Economically it appears designed to appeal to the EU’s individual countries as it retains the status quo on goods but makes trading in services harder; but by doing so it actually harms the areas of UK competitive advantage?

    Have I understood this right? It feels like absolute classic ‘May’ fudge to me…

    One question that occurs to me:
    – if importers have to pay full EU tariff on imports and then claim back the tariff differential if they are not re-exported to EU, what happens if they are incorporated into products in the UK that are then on-sold?
    Does the non-EU component/input and its tariff differential have to be tracked through the whole process?
    Or do we expect the EU to effectively relax tariffs on components or process inputs?

    I genuinely can’t see how this works…

  38. Polltroll,
    ” at least the can-kicking is over.”

    What makes you think that? A stage managed show of solidarity, in the middle of the football news diverting attention, to produce a proposal which ought to have been on the table a year ago, and which many think will not be acceptible to the EU as it stands. Not to mention our agreement already concluded last year to essentially full membership of market arrangements in the absence of any other agreed solution.

    This isnt the backstop, just a proposed alternative.

    And it seems the government still hasnt released the text.

  39. Since we’ve been told that freedom of movement is indivisible from the other freedoms, and we can’t have the others without it, I give this plan until Monday lunchtime at the latest to be rejected as another batch of exceedingly rubbish cakes, assuming that Barnier has better things to do with his time than respond to this over the weekend.

  40. Sam,
    “Unacceptable to EU.Unacceptable to Brexiteers.”

    Did you leave out unacceptable to remainers?

    Rees-Mogg was just arguing the plan would reduce Uk sovereignty significantly, and (as a remainer) I agree with him. The problem, of course, would be he and I have incompatible definitions of what might be a better alternative.

    Colin,
    “@”so we have CU in all but name ”
    Don’t think so-not as I read it anyway. A Customs Union requires a common external tariff.This proposal doesn’t.”

    We dont have sight of the proposal. but if based on the previous one, it creates a complex system of record keeping and applying for rebates to externally applied tariffs identical to those of the EU.

    lets leave aside whether the EU would refuse the deal for fear it could not be implemented. Can this actually amount to a variation in trade terms with a potential external partner? Any trade on new terms would have to initially apply EU terms when goods are imported, and there will be a significant administrative cost in getting any refund and proving one is due. Presumably the government would have to subsidise the cost of this, or it would still be a trade barrier.

    In practice, it might be a very complex scheme to claim the benefit of any variance in trade with a foreign partner, which no one would bother to join. And no potential partner would be interested. It has white elephant in the room written all over it.

  41. Cherrypicking. No ECJ. No resolution of Irish (or other) border friction despite the apparent willingness to have a backstop.

    Throughout all of this is an unwillingness to negotiate with good faith. Undoubtedly the EU has this in mind. Mrs May’s willingness to renege on a backstop position that was agreed will not be forgotten.

    Behind Mrs May there is also negotiation in bad faith within the Cabinet. Mrs May thinks she will end this by threatening to sack people. i think she is mistaken. The meetings, letters, briefings against her will go on. The Brexiteers know the EU will not accept this stuff however it is dressed up. I suspect they know there is no deal to be done. There never was. The EU knows it too.

  42. Bigfatron,
    I think it would be a big problem if the Uk is demanding the right to choose to depart from any rule at any time. This would cause immediate trading problems, and the EU would inist on a quick and effective form of redress which would require Uk compliance. That is what being subject to the ECJ supplies.

    I would assume the EU must insist that every bolt coming from anywhere under a divergent import regime has to be tracked and accounted in a tax return. Rather, manufacturers would have to prove that the toaster they just manufactured using such parts would never be sold into the EU. Maybe a non removable marking showing it cannot be imported into the EU, and implicitly customs checks to look at every single item transported into the EU to ensure they are compliant. Does that sound like a seamless border?

  43. BFR

    Yep that’s an excellent summary. Of course the proposals will be rejected by the EU. We will end up compromising further as there is not the will for a hard Brexit.

    By the time agreement is reached with the EU we will still be within the Single Market and Customs Union. The Brexiteers have lost. They were outgunned yesterday and can threaten all they want but their time is up.

  44. Mike Pearce,
    ” The Brexiteers have lost.”

    Bear in mind my argument that the conservative parliamentary part never wanted Brexit and has long agreed to stay in the EU. No tory politician will be much upset if we end up with full remain.

    Any really committed Brexiteers were in UKIP, and they never made it into parliament. It might be a question of definition, but all parliamentary brexiteers would end up with remaining in the EU just as they were expecting ten years ago, so what have they lost? If they continue to be in an electable party they will consider it a big win.

  45. @MIKE PEARCE

    I am not sure Brexit will actually happen, because I have a feeling that at some point Westminster will call a halt to the process, which Government cannot ignore.

    There are other bills going through Parliament, not just the EU Withdrawal Bill. If Parliament rejects other legislation or amends it in a way that can halt the Brexit process, it would not surprise me.

    LabourLeave are not happy with Theresa Mays latest statement on the White paper. Many Tory Backbenchers are unlikely to be happy. Many Tory grassroot organisations will not be happy either.

    Brexit will breakdown Autumn 2018 followed by a Tory Leadership contest, General Election and possibly a referendum.

  46. JIM JAM

    If it is a Customs Union we will be adhering to EU tariiffs at our border.

    This is Labour Policy-not Conservative Policy.

    I have seen no reports whatsoever which indicate application of EU tariffs & thus the impossibility of trade deals of our own, are the intent & effect of this proposal.

    Whether collecting EU Duties at UK’s external border to solve the NI problem is practical, or acceptable by EU is another matter-and the answers may well be no & no.

    But as far as I understand it this proposal is not the same as Labour’s acceptance of the EU common external tariff & loss of ability to strike TAs with others.

  47. @ DANNY /Mike Pearce,
    ” The Brexiteers have lost.”
    “No tory politician will be much upset if we end up with full remain.”

    Wishful thinking by “full” Remainers only.

    The June 2016 has been coming since the Maastricht crisis, cemented by the Lisbon crisis,

    This is realignment of our place in Europe to an association, not Federal Union. It’s sensible and what the British people want.

    “Full” Remainers are as much in fantasy world as “Full” Leavers.

  48. Jonesin bangor,
    “This is realignment of our place in Europe to an association, not Federal Union. It’s sensible and what the British people want.”

    It could be argued the entire problem over Brexit is that what the British people want has never been determined. Even less have they been given a choice between what is possible.

  49. A couple quick points:

    – Barnier said a couple weeks ago that they had room to move their position, but needed a proposal from the UK first – so a few comments above that the EU will reject the proposal out of hand I dont think is necessarily correct – all depends how close it is to what the EU might accept, which of course we don’t know yet…all we know is what they’ve said publicly which, given they have said that have room for movement, if just a negotiating position.

    Whilst we haven’t seen the white paper yet, the 3 page Chequers statement gives enough detail on what the UK would want, and includes some meaningful movements in the direction of the EU, so negotiations should now be able to begin properly…and then we’ll see what moves the EU are prepared to make in the direction of the UK

    – following on from the above, the freedom of movement issue is obviously key, and wording which is included in the statement at least provides a proposal: “…a mobility framework so that UK and EU citizens can continue to travel to each other’s territories, and apply for study and work – similar to what the UK may offer other close trading partners in the future”. Feels like the common sense middle ground which could potentially be sold to some/most brexiteers (“people cant just come here if they dont have a job offer”) but also not do too much damage to business if people really can easily apply to work here and get approval relatively easily. Obvious point is whether the EU would accept this…but I can’t see how the UK can weaken this much.

    Adam

1 22 23 24 25