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. GRAHAMBC
    Those MPs on the right of Labour making these noises, I think, are few in number and Umanna is the only one really with a high profile.

    Most are in safe Labour seats, and would be very unlikely to hold them in any subsequent election. It’s not like there isn’t a Pro EU centrist party already and its not like their polling is setting the world alight.

    If I were one of them, I would prefer to be an MP in a Labour government with a slim majority where I might be able to exert some pressure, rather than an ex-MP.

    Having said that, if Open Selection is passed, they may feel they have nothing to lose.

  2. @Colin

    “I know a lot of people object to Trump’s Bull in a China Shop directness. But sometimes beneath the bluster & lack of diplomacy is a nugget of an uncomfortable truth.”

    I’m taking your advice and deconstructing some of Trump’s thoughts to see if I can detect any” uncomfortable truths”. I started with “some very fine people” amongst the Neo-Nazi protesters at Charlottesville, then mulled over Kim Jong Un being “very talented” and running North Korea “tough”, “rapists from Mexico” and then gave up when reading the thoughts he shared about what he tended to do when confronted with “available pussy”.

    Not much interested after that, to be honest.

  3. Colin,

    On Saturday I suggested ‘chequers’ and A CU was the same in practice and you disagreed, now we both seem to be saying the opposite; as I guess we don’t really know although the White Paper may makes things clearer.

    As I stated above it suits May and Labour to overstate the amount of space between the proposals and A CU.

    It seem to me on further reflection that there is some space but is is largely theoretical in the short term at least. In A CU tariffs are decided and members apply whereas in the chequers plan the UK would set its’ own tariffs and if different to THE CU transfer payments of some sort would be required so an infrastructure of sorts would need to be established.

    In practice, and this is where I think we disagreed on Saturday I suggested, as did BFR I recall, that in reality the UK would set the same tariffs as The Customs Union.

    The theoretical space is important I believe to Tory leavers like Gove who are on board for now as they can maintain that over time an infrastructure can be developed to cope with more divergence and that the prospect of UK trade deals more possible.

    Final sentence, I have felt for a long time that A Customs plan of some sort is achievable but that the Single Market part of the new arrangements are much more difficult to solve while respecting the Referendum result.

  4. @ALEC

    Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty (the attack on one is an attack on all article) expressly applies to Europe and Northe America only. This was purposely to exclude colonial stuff like the Falklands. So that’s something of a red herring.

    Exactly what “Europe” is may be critical when the nearest we have come to conflict in 20 years may have been the Russian-Turkish air engagement on the Turkish-Syrian border but some islands in South America it ain’t.

  5. Whilst the Chequers agreement is still live and a possible solution, no other customs union would ever be passed by the HOC:

    – Ken Clarke, Greive etc wouldnt support it whilst a remainey agreement is in progress and knowing that the vote could bring down the government
    – the leavers in Con wouldnt ever support it as its contrary to their beliefs

    So zero Con/DUP votes would mean it would be dead on arrival

  6. @Peterw – agreed, but the point still stands. The US expects NATO to jump when there is a relative small (in the context of war) terrorist attack in New York, but declines to give wholehearted support to it’s oldest and closest ally when part of our territory is invaded by a military junta.

    I posted on the previous thread about my view of Trump, and this was that he is not a short term aberration, rather that he is a return to the historic norm for the US.

    The majority US stance for most of it’s existence has been of global disengagement. It declined to enter both world wars until absolutely necessary, and after WW1 refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles or join the League of Nations.

    After WW2 it proposed the Marshall Plan and joined NATO because it recognised the threat to the US of Soviet communism – not because it wanted to help Europe. When the USSR collapsed, the US then did something historically highly unusual, which was to stick with it’s global alliances while the threat to the US had disappeared. In the seventy odd years in between, both they and us have allowed the myth of the US as the Defenders of the Free to emerge. This has never been their historic role.

    All Trump is doing is returning the US to a more normal position, and Europe is gradually beginning to realise this.
    Against this backdrop, Brexit, and the UK antipathy to pan European military cooperation outwith NATO is a mistake, in my view. Brexiters are seeking an enhance Atylantic Alliance just at the point when the US is seeking to return to a state of withdrawal.

  7. Roland,

    And just what Do you think the political consequences of tory anger would be for May and the Government.

    The only viable option would for those feeling betrayed to vote UKIP.

    From the referendum result that would be two groups, Older middle class more ruraTory l voters and poorer more likely northern urban labour voters.

    So under FPTP what is the impact?

    In tory seats depending on whether the sitting MP defects UKIP might not hurt the Tories enough to unseat them and are unlikely to make the leap for UKIP to win, but it could let in the LibDem’s or even less likely Labour.

    Result; net loss to the Tories and the harder Brexit party net gain to softer brexit Parties.

    In the Labour seta, where most Leave referendum voters still voted Labour and UKIP never made the gains it hoped, the up kick in UKIP vote is unlikely to cost Labour any but a few seats and would probably hurt the Tory vote more.

    It’s more likely to make the LibDem’s the second place challenger than the Tories than anything else. Even in Labour LibDem marginals Labour voters turning to UKIP might give the LibDem’s a better chance but then that just means more seats for the Party that wants to rejoin the EU.

    Worst case scenario for the Tories and brexit is that like Scotland where the Unionist vote split between Labour & Tory giving the SNP power a deep split in the Leave vote would let labour walk into power with a big majority on the back of the Remain vote.

    It really is hard to see what a Voter rebellion against soft Brexit would do in electoral terms under FPTP than make soft Brexit more likely or less likely but in this scenario more possible a referral of the referendum and us remaining in the EU.

    As is typical of Brexit anger from the start it’s all about venting frustration without thinking through the consequences, which in this case are to be so angry with your gout that you take a shotgun to both your feet!

    Peter.

  8. One other observation related to Trump: The US is deeply divided, with it’s political system deeply dysfunctional and becoming increasingly partisan.
    Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court appears highly likely to ensure the US goes backwards in terms of social development for the next few decades as well, and given the geographical distribution of political support, this raises an interesting thought.

    After Trump’s election, there was a largely humorous petition started in California seeking to declare independence. It was a joke, but in this age of national breakups and questioning of long established international organisations, if US politics continues to diverge in such a bilateral fashion, and if that divergence continues to be embedded in geographical separation, why wouldn’t the prospect of a split come into play?

    The more Democratic states tend to be the wealthier areas, and they continue to face a scenario where a right wing president loses the popular vote but wins the White House, and if they see social progress reversed by partisan judges, how sure are we that the 50 state US is a sacrosanct concept?

  9. Alec,

    The partisan nature of US politics is indeed increasingly stark but I think it’s far more likely they’ll battle for ownership of the US than break it up.

    The key will be the Independents. Trump is growing in popularity with republicans, over 80%, but there are indications that the number of republican’s is static or falling rather than going up and that those who are joining as less Liberal than those drifting away.

    I think a similar thing might be happening might be happening with democrats, there support and numbers are probably ring a bit but in a more balanced way with some, radicals, on the left of the party but also independents more from the centre getting politically active.

    Net result and it’s only my guess;

    2020 onwards;
    Republicans;
    Smaller than today but more to the right radicalised and motivated but increasingly white and seen as such without a unifying national message.

    Democrats; Same or larger and slightly to the left, but more diverse and more likely to appeal beyond their Party base.

    Independents; Probably the biggest growth, many sick of both sides and forced to choose between , either “the Lesser of Two Evils” or indeed “the Evil of Two Lessors!”.
    more likely to vote Democrat than Republican.

    Peter.

  10. @Peter Cairns (SNP)

    “The only viable option would for those feeling betrayed to vote UKIP.”

    This thought has occurred to me many times. “Farage Rides Again” may well be a consequence of anything other than a hard Brexit, leading me to think that the UKIP obituaries may have been premature. I can see Farage now, tilting his coffin lid aside, blinking into the daylight with cries of betrayal. Johnson has written his first speech with his words of the “Brexit Dream” dying through needless self-doubt. All nonsense, of course, but absolute music to the ears of disgruntled Brexit voters who had invested their trust in May’s Government to deliver for them. Most voters, both Remainers and Leavers, will probably buy a version of May’s Chequers fudge, but the hard core on the British Right never will. Where do they go when the fudge becomes reality.

    Cue the Second Coming of Farage.

  11. It seems to me that May has pulled off a remarkable coup, that her team had probably been planning for weeks if not longer. At the moment ‘mad Boris’ ( I like the phrase!) looks like a busted flush, and the Tories look as if they’re heading back to being the party of mainstream business. I’m looking forward to reading what Danny has to say about it!

  12. Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 41% (-)
    LAB: 39% (-1)
    LDEM: 9% (-)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 3% (-)

    via @ICMResearch, 06 – 09 July

    Another small rise for UKIP and another 9 for LD, carrying on their July figures of 9 and 10.

  13. Patrick,

    “It seems to me that May has pulled off a remarkable coup, that her team had probably been planning for weeks if not longer.”

    Ayr Right, and the guy that fell from the burning plane and landed in the haystack had it’s location marked on the map before he took off.

    Pull the other one!

    May might have ended up with a better brexit position and a cabinet more supportive of it, but she’s been push prodded, and dragged their rather than leading the way.

    As to a Plan, in the words of Edmund Blackadder;

    “There’s A Plan!!!!!

    Peter.

  14. “May has pulled off a remarkable coup”!!

    Come on, Patrick. All May has done is obtain a temporary truce within the Tory party, but this achieves nothing.

    It will be rejected by the EU and most voters in the UK, and so she will have to soften much further in the next few months.

    Meanwhile the UK is suffering from awful austerity, and promises to ease the squeeze on public-sector workers have not been delivered. So our NHS, schools, local authorities are in crisis, just temporarily forgotten because of the England football team.

  15. Peter and Davwel

    She’s got rid of Boris, she’s got the cabinet signed up to support her, and she’s got the ONLY plan going , that looks remarkably like a very soft Brexit indeed, wrong-footing Labour. Papers and public are partly distracted by footie and cave rescue. Of course, you’re both right that it’s just political with no bigger vision and will probably unravel by the autumn, but for now, as the recess beckons, she looks in a much better position than two weeks ago.

    I liked the haystack image, though…..

  16. JIM JAM

    It is time for someone on both the Con & Lab sides to say precisely how their proposals differ. Because at the moment a lot of MPs on both sides are talking through their backsides about something they clearly do not understand.

    It frankly is an insult to the voting public.

  17. PATRICK BRIAN

    She has recognised the demands of UK plc.-and RoI

    She had to-jobs are at stake.-and luckily the two demands require the same solution.

    If she gets Barnier to accept it then a “remarkable coup” it will be.
    But the Conservative Party will then tear itself apart & I will be transported back in time to the GE of 1997.

  18. Colin
    “But the Conservative Party will then tear itself apart & I will be transported back in time to the GE of 1997.”

    Music to my ears!

  19. I agree with @Patrick Brian, in large measure.

    Boris was outflanked on Friday (completely) and his resignation ended up being a tortured and humiliating affair – Davis got in first, and holds the mantle of principled objection (even though he was worse than useless in post) and Boris’ humiliation as the worst Foreign Sec since – well, ever, possibly, is now complete.

    On top of this, little discussed, but on Friday Barnier said in public that if the UK can move a little on it’s red lines, then the EU might be able to move as well. The scene is set for a slow coming together of their positions, with more concessions likely from May, and a reasonable deal in the end. May’s decision to brief Labour MPs reminds us of what has been blindingly obvious for two years already – that the hard Brexiters will be defeated by a coalition in the HoC, and this is what May worked for all along.

    Like @Colin says, this won’t help the Tory party, but who really cares about that?

  20. Colin

    If R-Mogg has his way, it seems he’s using 1846 as a reference point.

  21. Does anyone know which Labour MPs briefed if any?

  22. @Alec: You seem to take Barnier at face value.

    One moment he says that there cannot be a deal to include services as no such thing exists. Next he says there can’t be deal on goods only as they only include services.

    He changes his mind as soon as the government started briefing in terms of Single Market for goods.

    But yes, if he says he will compromise if we do – then take it at face value. Even though he has boasted about never compromises. And recently said he didn’t want to any. And still says that the four freedoms come as a package. But somehow we can get the same deal on Fisheries as a member state – or else.

    Anyway, you are going to end up with either staying in the EU or a deal that answers none of the reasons why people voted Leave in the first place.

  23. Colin – 3 areas Labour have a problem with.

    First as per KS.

    ”She hasn’t met our demands. We’ve been clear you need a comprehensive customs union and you need a single market deal with shared institutions and shared regulations.”

    As I said us doing the same as the EU’s CU is not the same as being treaty bound.

    Second – Labour are content to agree some special arrangement for EU citizens (and UK the other way) post Brexit; so-called easy movement.

    Third, the don’t believe that the FCA can work in practice which will have implications for the Irish border.

    Maybe other cigarette paper differences and people will argue Labour are manufacturing differences or exaggerating but they will make a case for not backing ‘chequers’ which may or may not be opportunistic.

  24. May doesn’t really have a plan, but she did have a strategy. Which was simply “Give them enough rope”. Given that most politicians are both vain and not very bright, and the Brexiteers have such types in abundance, she had a fairly good chance that not only would they hang themselves, but they would do it at the least effective time.

    If Davis and Boris had not signed the Chequers agreement, resigned, and denounced it immediately, it would have had more impact. If they had hung on and let things explode when the EU started having to point out that it is functionally nonsense, then they might claim justification and resign when May started making the inevitable concessions. But instead they managed to make it look as if they were chickening out.

    May is very like Corbyn in that she knows that the most effective thing is often to do nothing and let things play out. The inactivity over Brexit has meant not only that she has held the Conservative Party together, but that she can now try to impose what ever she comes up with – there simply isn’t time to do anything else and the preparations haven’t been made. Trying to overthrow her will simply tighten the deadlines even further. It’s probably not the ideal way to sort out the UK’s relationships with the EU, but it may be the optimal way to get something while still keeping the Tories in power..

  25. Meanwhile, on public opinion, the Conservatives should be in trouble.

    There are doubtless some natural Tories who might return home due to a shift to a faux Brexit. But in any election this year they’d be more likely to stay with a more reliably Remain party.

    But they have removed any real incentive for natural Tory-hating but Leave-voting Labour supporters to stay with them. A great Tory achievement is to fail to appeal to working class voters in the same way as the Republican Party. Brexit helped bridge that gap a little – but as soon as we get to the “employers have to simulate looking locally before bringing in Eastern Europeans” part of the deal – that will be lost.

    The whole EEA option was cut to shreds by Remain during the referendum campaign, and May cannot defend something that is going to end up worse in any election. All those Soft Brexit types will be back to pointing out that a Soft Brexit is stupid. Labour will pretend it had something different in mind – but as the government had messed up, we need to go back.

    What will motivate the Tory vote? How motivated would Leave supporters be?

  26. If May had a Plan it was Roake’s Drift.

    We can’t run, we can’t hide, we can’t surrender, so we’ll turn the wagons and man the barricades and hope for the best.

    If we’re lucky our enemy will throw themselves headline into our line of fire and if the are that stupid and we are really lucky, we’ll kill enough of them that they give up and we survive.

    If it works, you look like a hero and a military genius, if not your a failure and a fool.

    But of course your neither;

    Your just someone stuck in an almost impossible position with no real option but to stand and fight and hope it works out.

    Peter.

  27. Alec

    “This won’t help the Tory party, but who really cares about that”.
    Well nobody on the left for sure ,in as much nobody on the right gives a toss what happens to Labour other than they stay out of office.

  28. @Joseph1832 – Barnier said the EU would be prepared to shift on some things but made it clear that the Single Market is indivisible. That’s completely consistent with everything he’s said previously.

    I think the point is that May’s plan, as far as we can tell, is like the Swiss deal, but without overtly accepting that the Swiss accept free movement and pay an agreed annual fee. May seems to want what the Swiss have but certainly without free movement, and although she will agree to annual payments, she hasn’t told British voters this yet.

  29. The significant factor in these figures is the near doubling in UKIP suppport which is likely the entire reason for the disappearance of the Tories’ small lead.

    If Farage becomes its’ leader again the chances are it will rise back to where it was before the Referendum, and it’s unlikely that they’ll go back to the Tories at an election on promises again after what May has done.

    Tory activists are already making it clear they had enough of May

    And with Corbyn as Labour Leader it might be easier for UKIP to attract Labour voters as well.

    May and the Tory Remainers can’t say they weren’t warned.

    ‘Cheat me once, bad on you. Cheat me twice more fool me’

  30. PC(SNP)

    Roake’s Drift one of my favourite films with three of my favourite actors Jack Hawkins, Michael Caine, and Stanley Baker two English men and a Welsh man makes you proud to be British. :-)

  31. JIM JAM

    At the Wednesday event. Thornberry aked a hugely detailed question about the Customs procedures flowing from the Chequers Plan. Well a statement actually. It sounded garbled to me. All the Con benches shouted that she had it wrong.

    May’s stand in -Lidington-said she was wrong. But he didn’t explain why.

    This is ludicrous.

    MPs on all sides are taking deeply entrenched positions based what one suspects is a total failure to understand the facts.

    I only hope that when the White Paper is published either it or a Government spokesperson explains -in boring , lengthy, technical detail-what the Customs arrangement & procedure proposed IS.

    THEN a Labour spokesperson can say in equal detail how their proposal differs.& why it is preferable

    I do not live in hope.

    In which case, asking voters what they think -in a Referendum or GE will be a complete & utter waste of time.

  32. Turk,

    I think you mean “Zulu!” Roaches Drift was the place, not the film.

    Much like Dunkirk, you see stoic acceptance and bravery in adversity which is both commendable and admirable, what you don’t see is military genius or brilliant plan.

    Nor do you see anything that suggests any special national qualities, like being “Best with our backs to the Wall!” or “Good old fashioned British grit and determination”.

    From Stalingrad to Iwo Jima or Dresden and Tokyo compared to Coventry, other people in other places in similar circumstances have shown exactly the same qualities.

    Peter.

  33. JIM JAM

    This morning I all too briefly caught snippets of Benn’s Select Comittee on Brexit.

    Three technical experts answering questions about the EFFECTS of the Chequers Plan & No Deal.

    They made sense because they knew wtf they were talking about. There was no hype, no emotion……….and NO politics.

    People like this should be put on a National TV programme to explain it all.-with NO politicians in sight.

    I will try to catch up with it on i player.

  34. “Roake’s Drift one of my favourite films with three of my favourite actors Jack Hawkins, Michael Caine, and Stanley Baker two English men and a Welsh man makes you proud to be British. :-)”

    Well, it’s actually Rorke’s Drift, was a humiliating defeat, was historically inaccurate, involved the mass slaughter of thousands of foreign black people and was the result of a complete tactical cock up by the British commanders.

    I guess it might well be the kind of film that appeals to supporters of Brexit.

  35. JIM JAM

    @” they will make a case for not backing ‘chequers’ which may or may not be opportunistic.”

    If they do-for that reason-it will be truly shocking .

    For me it would confirm my view that JC is not fit for Office & I sincerely hope the voting public think so too.

    It would ranks along side the Rees Moggs & Johnsons for dereliction of duty to the country.

    This is FAR too important for political opportunists. It IS time for compromise & best outcome for THE COUNTRY.

  36. It was Rorke’s Drift – and James Rorke (who had a trading post at the ford) was Irish.

  37. Sorry about the spelling, it is indeed Rorke’s.

    As to the “mass slaughter of thousands of foreign black people!” I’d be intrigued to see the evidence for that.

    It’s true that in Southern Africa, as elsewhere in Colonial times, the technological miss match between the Invading European powers and the native populations meant that, like the America the outcome was never in doubt and local casualties were huge, but the slaughter was in battles.

    If people with spears charge rifles they tend to get mown down like Rorkes Drift.

    If people with Swords charge muskets they tend to get mown down like Culoden.

    And if people with rifles charge machine guns they tend to get mown down like at the Somme!

    Do you blame those doing the killing for there defensive actions or those giving the orders for the stupid attack?

    Peter.

  38. ‘I only hope that when the White Paper is published either it or a Government spokesperson explains -in boring , lengthy, technical detail-what the Customs arrangement & procedure proposed IS.

    THEN a Labour spokesperson can say in equal detail how their proposal differs.& why it is preferable

    I do not live in hope.

    In which case, asking voters what they think -in a Referendum or GE will be a complete & utter waste of time.’

    I agree that without the detailed explanations of the two (or maybe one identical) positions there is no way for the electorate to understand the choice (or not). However it surely would not be a waste of time to ask their opinion because their perception and their votes follow their understanding, or lack of it. So they’ll still have an understanding even though it may be based on prejudice and misunderstanding, rather than reality.

  39. With regard to the latest YouGov and the other reported polls, I wonder if what we are seeing is less a fall in the Conservative lead than a normalisation of the YouGov figures, which until the last few polls had been consistently higher than anyone else’s. Whether they have made some subtle methodological changes, I don’t know, but the latest ICM figures (no tabs yet) suggest that the underlying situation remains level pegging or a tiny Con lead depending on exactly what figures you look at.

    The very intermitent Kantar TNS poll continues that story:

    Con 40% (+1) [36]

    Lab 38% (-1) [39]

    Lib Dem 9% (+1) [9]

    SNP 4% (-) [5]

    UKIP 3% (-1) [3]

    Green 3% (-) [5]

    Plaid 1% (-) [1]

    Other 2% (-) [3]

    (f/w 5-9 Jul – so some Chequers reaction possibly. Changes () since Feb)

    tables are here:

    http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/sites/tns-bmrb/files/July%202018%20-%20Voting%20Intention%20tables.pdf

    Kantar/TNS/BMRB have a few methodological oddities. They have always used a four point scale for likelihood to vote: Definitely vote/Probably vote/Probably not vote/Definitely not vote (plus Prefer not to say), rather than to more usual 0-10 one. They then do further adjustment “based on respondents’ stated intention to vote, their age and whether they voted in the last general election”. This seems to produce some odd results with only 58% saying they will vote.

    An upweighting of those who didn’t vote last time could also distort things – though possibly the other way. Ignoring LTV except the definite non-voters gives the [] figures above and a Labour lead. So a tiny Con lead that is caused by lower apparent Labour enthusiasm (which might alter in an election campaign), which is a similar pattern to other polls.

    Of course all this might be completely transformed by events surrounding Brexit, but “Events, dear boy” tend to be over-estimated as influencers of voters by the media – at least in the short term.

  40. Turk/Peter/Alec

    Rorke’s Drift was lauded massively by the army brass in Africa and the government in London to gloss over the terrible defeat at Isandlwana the previous day when a 1,700-plus force of British troops and African auxiliaries were over-run and about 1,300 were killed.

  41. May or may not I said Colin, that is for the electorate to judge.

    Cameron was of course accused of opportunism in embracing the idea of a referendum on a complex issue as was Clegg, while Milliband took a principled position that a referendum was not appropriate for this issue.

    Along with fear of the SNP tail wagging Labour’s dog this promise delivered a Tory OM in 2015 but at what cost?

  42. I said “I would like to withdraw the prediction i made yesterday that Mrs May would negotiate a Norway option and Labour would vote in favour of it.”

    Just to explain this a little more.

    When Mrs May’s deal with the EU which will be “Norway” comes to the House of Commons it will be up to Mrs May to decide what happens if people vote against. She is most unlikely to trigger a “no deal” outcome in that case and is more likely to either call a GE or apply for an extension to EU membership and go back to the negotiating table.

  43. @ Alec

    “Escape to victory” was a true story though wasn’t it? Please don’t tell me rest of world lost that game!

  44. LK tweeting re White Paper

    1. Brexit White Paper contains plan for a ‘joint institutional framework’- cabinet source says – Brexiteers not happy, some push even for more edits to document today – concern that additional detail of paper sketches out even closer relationship with EU than Chequers implied

    2. We’ll see in its full glory/disaster tomorrow (delete as applicable) – govt finally, in detail, spelling out what it wants, or at least it’s starting point in negotiation to try – the White Paper matters for what the EU, Tory Party, and Parliament ready to accept

  45. Moreover its clear Labour is not happy with Mrs May’s approach and is very concerned that it will leave services out of the single market arrangements. Unless Mrs May brings those in as part of the negotiating process and is able to ensure that we are effectively in SM and CU, i.e. a jobs-first brexit, then it would not support Mrs May’s negotiating outcome.

    So I think Labour would not support or abstain on Mrs May’s package agreed with the EU.

    If the Commons were to vote against her package then Mrs May would never trigger a no deal Brexit, but instead would take an alternative option.

  46. LK seems to tweet a lot of rubbish doesn’t she.

  47. Oldnat encouraging to hear what you said about attitudes towards football support earlier. Combined with the Attitudes Survey results I mentioned its good to see attitudes becoming less negative across the board.

  48. Prof – not just tweet.

    She hears something and likes to show how connected she is by rushing out before checking or hearing alternative spins.

  49. Now I’Ve Heard it All!
    @ Colin re @ JimJam
    “This is FAR too important for political opportunists. It IS time for compromise & best outcome for THE COUNTRY.”

    Really?
    So the Labour party must “compromise” ie., bail the Tories out of the mess they have created, including the two wasted years since the Referendum: so the Tories can remain in power & pursue austerity & anti-Labour policies re Education, Public Sector, NHS, Local Government, Welfare Benefits, Environment, Boundary Reform, etc.

    Let’s remind ourselves that the Rees-Mogg gang have declared that the greatest betrayal would be a soft Brexit secured by Labour votes. In other words, the most ardent supporters of what you suggest are the most right-wing Tories!

  50. @ TURK / CR – “My view is when/if the EU turns down her third way policy, she will herself turn down the road of a hard brexit, not because that’s what she wants, but because there is no other choice on how to deliver brexit”

    I fully agree on that being the most likely scenario. BINO or WTO seemed the only two options way back but its taking time to get there. To save her job I do expect she’ll go back to Lancaster House Plan B but unless she also does something about those within cabinet and the civil service who want to BINO then she’s going to have a very difficult time making Clean Brexit a success – that is not pre-emptive blame, just how I see the reality of the situation.

    The worrying scenario is Barnier+co will just drag her along, small further concessions one by one. Each concession seems minor and doesn’t give her the opportunity to “spit the dummy”. It becomes Corbyn+ERG who take her down – I’m 99% sure enough ERG would vote against the “bad deal” that she has currently offered with more and more drafting confidence letters with every further concession.

    As CR and many others have pointed out, including myself, the problem is no obvious replacement for May. Javid might just about be “middle” enough. If someone like SMogg took over would the likes of Soubs, etc vote against him (I think Soubs would but not many others – also its quite easy to deselect the likes of Soubs before a new GE – the alleged CON-Remain MPs will know that!)

    The lead to this thread highlights the high DKs at the moment but all polls always show CON as 75%ish Leave. As the resignation, press and news continue to draw more attention to May’s opening offer I expect those DK’s to shift up into the high % of CON (and Leave, and Remain for that matter) not liking her deal.

    @ SAM – I read your link, clearly you didn’t read mine. If one misquote is all Remain have on Raab then that is par for the course on how weak your whole argument is. I see the ES are now trying to make out one of the main reasons Leavers voted Leave because:
    “Turkey would soon be joining the EU, and would, apparently, force everyone to become Muslims.

    Boris did mention Turkey but I don’t remember the bit about everyone being forced to become Muslim!?!?

    If the idea is to win over Leavers in some fantasy new ref then Osborne’s doing an even worse job this time than last time!

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)