The weekly YouGov poll for the Times this morning has topline figures of CON 39%(-2), LAB 39%(-1), LDEM 9%(nc), UKIP 5%(+2). Fieldwork was on Sunday and Monday, mostly on Sunday afternoon and evening. The changes themselves are not signficant, but the disappearing Tory lead echoes the Survation poll at the weekend, and is the first YouGov poll not to show the Tories ahead since back in April. Note also that little uptick in UKIP support. It’s only one poll so may be nothing more than noise, but it’s worth keeping an eye on them.

The answers to questions on the Chequers Brexit deal were mostly negative (33% said the type of Brexit agreed at Chequers would be bad for Britain, just 13% said it would be good; 35% said they would be unhappy if the Chequers deal went ahead, just 19% would be happy.) However, relatively few people had any opinion at all – all the Chequers questions got over 40% don’t knows, only 38% of respondents said they had followed the story very or fairly closely.

However, the vast majority of the fieldwork for the poll took place before Davis and Johnson’s resignations. As well as potentially having an impact on perceptions of the government’s competence and unity, the resignations may well mean that this Brexit development has an impact when others have not. People who may not have noticed a report about yet another tedious internal Tory party row about the intricacies of Brexit may be more likely to notice the story when its Boris Johnson resigning from government because Theresa May has supposedly gone soft on Brexit.

In short, while this and the weekend Survation poll are interesting straws in the wind, the polls to really look at will be the ones conducted after the resignations…

Full tabs are here.


171 Responses to “YouGov/Times – CON 39, LAB 39, LDEM 9, UKIP 5”

1 2 3 4
  1. Good evening all from a very warm Winchester.

    Croatia has just saved the UK. Had England made it to the final and won the World Cup then I’m sure the Scots would had bolted and bolted fast.

    Lets face it…we can’t even shut up about 1966 which so many Scots boke at.

    Anyway moving on…It’s going to be interesting to see how the UKIP VI looks in a few days time. The polls I’m sure will show UKIP tapping into some of disgruntled Brexit vote. The Lib/Dems have made a hash of tapping into the re-moan vote and risk being taken over been the purple menace in terms of VI.

  2. EOTW

    The article didn’t mention whether it was a full page or not.

  3. Brilliant Danny, as conspiracy theories go and maybe that’s why Cornyn and Co. are acting so coy and uncommittal ‘cos they can see where it’s heading and are looking for a way out of the ambush.

  4. Allan Christie

    Times tweet

    Exclusive YouGov poll
    – Labour in lead
    – Public turning sharply again May Chequers deal; leavers says doesn’t respect referendum
    – Jump in numbers saying May shd quit now

    Sometimes poll stories don’t matter but if sustained, this serious

  5. Whoops on my prediction (done before the game in my defence).
    ————————-

    PTRP
    “The sad fact is that the electorate is pretty stupid.”

    This is exactly the sort of sentiment that gets the electorate annoyed. Our politicians may not be so explicit, but the sentiment comes across from most of them. It’s why UKIP, Trump and populist parties in Europe have been so successful lately.

  6. @DANNY

    I think you have misinterpreted the situation. I believe the the Tories are a Leave party but are not sure how to sell the consequences. If you listen to all sides there is a clear a present approach of taking credit for positive items and indeed completely excluding the EU component in this (the credit card charges is the latest in a long line of examples). Indeed May was reminded that it as an EU initiative at the press conference after she announced it with no reference to the EU at all.

    This has always been a problem for Tories, they saw the EU as a transactional arrangement and believed they needed to part of it because of the ailing economy and the opportunity afforded by the break up of unions and globalisation of capital and the protections afford by the Single Market. The problem is a single market is not the same as free trade and we seem to get that completely wrong. Indeed people are learning the difference . Yet Thatcher was aware and hence she wanted the regulations and the UKs opt outs such that it gave competitive edge.

    The problem has been for the Tories how to sell. Brexit and its consequences and they have found that they have been unable to persuade themselves in the main although much of their support actually voted for it. most polls put the Tory members voted 80% to leave as an example

    I think the problem for the UK was that they underestimated the EU. having negotiated all these opt outs we thought the EU was weak. ineffectual against the UK and our superior approach. When it was pointed out that the EU could itself be very tough it was discounted as our experience as members has been rather pleasant, easy and view that we would get our own way.

    So most of the leave camp and even May felt that they would get a deal because of our blinkered viewpoint. I keep pointing back to the leaked meeting. I think it hardened EU views that the UK was looking to take the p155 .

    I believe some people got a rude awakening and hence the heading off of Nissan as an early indication of a scrambling to understand but I believe the overall view was the idea of the superiority of the UK argument and the weakness of the cheese eating surrender monkeys as it were.

    Why May published her red lines when the idea of rowing them back was going to be painful was beyond me and the election was an attempt to gain a mandate by stealth. You voted for me so you will have all my policies kind of thing.

    In truth leaving the EU is bit like the GOP repealing Obamacare. They really want to do because they believe it identifies themselves but actually none of them had even thought of the consequences, the process or anything of note and so having chased an caught the bus no one knew what the hell to do.

    Essentially the last two years has been the Tories negotiating with themselves . Those that led the leave campaign finding it impossible to deliver and lastly the rise of Corbyn providing a rally threat that just keeps everything from exploding.

    Cameron gambled like he did on gay marriage that he could face down Leavers with a combination of liberal tories in his oown party which are actually a minority (look at the gay marriage vote) and whole hearted support and shared platform of the Labour party and the others that help push through gay marriage. However the tactics that got him his overall majority and a win in Scotland basically alienated these groups and so the whole think looked like a blue on blue affair and the media ran with it. Boris thought that opposing and losing would make him the darling of the party (remember 80% of member voted to leave)

    It just that people did not vote like they were supposed to.
    Indeed one can say that for both EU referendum and GE2017

    We are left with massive levels of miscalculation that as I keep saying I have not seen since Iraq

  7. Pete B

    “PTRP
    “The sad fact is that the electorate is pretty stupid.”

    This is exactly the sort of sentiment that gets the electorate annoyed. Our politicians may not be so explicit, but the sentiment comes across from most of them. It’s why UKIP, Trump and populist parties in Europe have been so successful lately.”

    Very true, whilst at the same time reinforcing the point!

  8. Yougov 10-11 July.

    Lab 39%
    Con 37%
    LD 9%

    Times tweet via BritainElects.

  9. re the previous post:
    Here’s a link to a poem that I love about the people of England – i.e. the electorate (apologies to various Celts).

    http://www.gkc.org.uk/gkc/books/secret-people.html

  10. @PETE B

    Ok but take any set of issues and the electorate are pretty ignorant of the facts. take unemployment and welfare ask 100 people how much of welfare is spent on unemployment benefit and you get a good third saying upwards of 50%. No that is either ignorance or stupidity take your pick.

    but we are making policy based on the way people vote and peopel are voting based on ‘facts’. and you are right there isn’t politician that would say voters get it wrong indeed voters themselve will basically deny they have it wrong and would forget that they actually voted for said policies.

    I point to the John Harris article on local government as an example. My problem is that people are having to make complex decisions without a fair grasp of even a modicum of the facts and thus policy is based on memes. hence we have strivers versus scroungers as a brilliant example of policy that just does not match fact to such an extent that even when confronted with the evidence at the time Labour abstained on the welfare bill and Tories although complaining about it voted it through only for the government to have to backtrack.

    My other clear example was Iraq. where there was never a majority opposed to the war until it went bad/toxic but if you asked the public about it a good third according to some statistics could not remember that they supported the war.

    I am not a politician so I don’t have to get anyone’s vote people are not voting for trump because they believe he is good most GOP supporters voted for trump because he was the GOP candidate and any GOP candidate was better than any Democratic one in their eyes. but by the same token they wanted Obamacare repealed but they loved the ACA provisions and many loved the ACA because they thought it was not the same thing. We see the same in terms of policy in the UK as many Tories as Labour supporters are in favour of re nationalising the railways as an example but associate the policy with a party they oppose then they revert to type. These are well known issues in terms of policy. And yes that makes us either tribal ignorant or stupid. Take your pick, Hell even Churchill said something rather similar

  11. Pete [email protected]: “The sad fact is that the electorate is pretty stupid.”

    This is exactly the sort of sentiment that gets the electorate annoyed. Our politicians may not be so explicit, but the sentiment comes across from most of them. It’s why UKIP, Trump and populist parties in Europe have been so successful lately.

    I would argue that Cameron got us into the referendum because he forgot this fact and that UKIP, Trump and the rest are so successful lately because they are aware of the fact and cynically exploit it, while hypocritically and shrilly accusing the rest of thinking it

  12. Pete B

    Chesterton seems to have disliked Jews. Presumably he didn’t consider them “English”?

  13. Norbold
    On the contrary. People throughout the West are becoming disenchanted with the attitudes of traditional political parties with their extreme social liberalism, lack of patriotism and general attitude of ‘We are educated sophisticated people so you must do as we say’.

    Therefore they vote for parties of which you may disapprove. The alternative is that the traditional parties learn to actually represent their voters. In the US, Trump has been successful using the banner of the Republican party, which is unlike the experience in Europe, where it is usually insurgent parties which become the repository of disgruntled votes.

    The fact that these movements are happening on such a widespread basis suggests that there is a real problem. We can’t just ignore it or dismiss it because the electorate is ignorant.

    I can see a few solutions:
    1) The mainstream political parties try to represent the actual views of their voters, rather than what they think the voters ‘ought’ to believe.
    2) Indoctrinate the voters. They are already trying to do this, with limited success. For instance though the death penalty was abolished for murder in this country over 50 years ago, there is still a significant number of people who think it should be restored for certain cases.
    3) Proportional representation.
    4) Stop or amend the universal franchise.

    Of these, my own preferred solution would be 1. What is yours?

  14. Pete B

    Your preferred solution is that “mainstream political parties try to represent the actual views of their voters, rather than what they think the voters ‘ought’ to believe.”

    An interesting idea that may contain some flaws –

    1. Do you mean that each political party should only represent the views of those voters who currently vote for them, or that every party should have identical policies – ie those that they think will appeal to a majority of voters (which is pretty well the current practice)?

    2. How are these voters views on matters to be determined? Opinion polls, or giving voters the choice of options via a system of participative democracy?

    3. If voters change their minds (and most people do on a range of things), how is that to be measured, and the policy direction to be changed?

    etc etc etc

  15. New thread

  16. ON
    Yes, there is a disparaging reference to Jews, as well as Protestants and others, but it’s the last verse that particularly strikes a chord with me.

    “We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
    Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
    It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
    Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst.
    It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
    God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
    But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
    Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.”

    For me, beer is best.

  17. Unless the Tories shift on freedom of movement to achieve “a” single market with the same benefits as those we have at the moment, and “a” customs union there is no need for Starmer to lift a finger to help the Tories, even if a few right wing moderates peel off towards their spiritual home.

    Doing so would destroy the Tories far more quickly and effectively than it would damage Labour.

    At this point all May wants is to keep the Tories in power. There is no conspiracy, there are no tactics, there is no plan.

    They are completely stuffed, Brexit is no longer salvageable and even the ERG know it. All they can do is to cling to government for the next three years, ceding a referendum if they have to, leaving the country and its public services in an even worse state than in 1997.

  18. RosieandDaisie,
    “Davis had been working for months on..”

    Then he has been spending his time on something other than the preferred government line. Not surprising the negotiations are going badly?

    steamdrivenandy.
    The question is whether the alternative scenario fits the known facts, and it would seem that it does.

  19. ‘@TONYBTG
    Yougov 10-11 July.
    Lab 39%
    Con 37%
    LD 9%
    Times tweet via BritainElects.

    Cross over:-)

  20. passtherockplease,
    Surely we joined the EU at just about the maximum point of union power, so I doubt the tories saw it as a way to capitalise on their demise?

    Passtherockplease,
    “I think the problem for the UK was that they underestimated the EU.”
    Underestimated the importance to the UK of the EU, yes. Underestimated the stance and position of the EU, no. The uncompromising nature of the EU is an inherent property of its structure, which is a deliberate design feature. The treaties are designed to restrict its ability to change, because this guarantees the rights of members. It can only be changed from within, and the UK has had great sucess at reforming it over the years to the model we have chosen.

    The tories have on the whole supported the EU ever since we joined, and took us in. Sure, some of them dont like aspects of it, but even they think we need a deep trading relationship with the EU. Leavers want an alternative deal, not no deal.

    ” having negotiated all these opt outs we thought the EU was weak”

    We got opt outs because as a member we have an absolute veto to treaty change. The UK view had to be incorporated in the process, and the way this was done was by creating a two track europe. As a non member we have no veto, they can do what they want without any regard to us, and they will. But we will still have to follow the rules set by our most important trading partner. This simply is never going to change.

    The mistake the tories made was they failed to conside how important the EU is to us, and how brexit could not be implemented. This was simply hubris, because they never expected the public to vote for something so obviously idiotic.

    Well, they did. For multiple reasons including, as you suggest, that governments have derided and undermined the EU to boost themselves for just about the whole of our membership. For example, because the remain and leave sides consisted of people who have supported the policy of free immigration for decades, but could not bring themselves to fight out why immigration is good for the UK and the negative implications if it ceased. Still less bring themselves to talk about why the UK economy has been undercut by the policy of government ceasing to build houses, which in particular has been tory flagship policy for 30 years. If there is one single policy which has made the UK uncompetitive, this is it.

    Serious hard brexiteers want to leave the EU at any cost. They understand there is a very big cost, but they are willing to pay it. They are different to soft leavers, who like the idea of leaving but do not believe there is a cost. The leave side will become increasingly riven as the prospect of any one outcome becomes clearer, and the government has sought to avoid this by having no clear outcome. Because the leave at any cost and dont leave unless there is no cost factions cannot be reconciled.

    It is therefore predictable that leave support for the tory party must split once one course is chosen. This is yet another argument why the tories desperately need to please remainers, by remaining or getting as near to this as they dare. If they can get labour to commit to a tory version of brexit (or something near), they stand a chance of winning the next election. They have to get remainers away from labour.

    “Why May published her red lines when the idea of rowing them back was going to be painful was beyond me”

    May and the tories have to be seen to be wholly committed to leaving. They are content for it to be proved during the process that the red lines cannot be held. That way they would be seen by the public as having tried and failed. . Simply starting off by saying it couldnt be done was not acceptable

  21. Theexterminatingdalek,
    “At this point all May wants is to keep the Tories in power. There is no conspiracy, there are no tactics, there is no plan. They are completely stuffed, Brexit is no longer salvageable ”

    Which MP is going to be the first to say that! (long time ago, I suggested it might eventually be May, part of her job as expendable leader).

    To answer your points, yes its all about keeping the tories electable, whatever that takes. Of course there is a conspircay, politics is one huge conspiracy, so its only a question of what. Likewise there are tactics. Matthew Paris published an article about him and some mates gaming all the possible outcomes of brexit and seeing them all as disastrous for the tories. The party will have done this too, endlessly for months to identify the best way out. There are assuredly tactics and a plan, even if bad ones.

    I dont think they are necessarily stuffed, but they do believe they have to stop Brexit somehow, or dissociate themselves from it. A disastrous outcome for the Uk would be perfectly fine, just so long as the opposition parties own it too.

1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)