Party conference season is sometimes a period of volatile polling – each party typically gets its own week of media coverage which, if all goes well, they’ll use for some positive announcements. This year it also immediately followed the Salzburg summit and Theresa May’s Brexit statement that followed. Below are the voting intention polls since my last update.

YouGov (18-19th) – CON 40%, LAB 36%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 5% (tabs)
Opinium (18-20th Sep) – CON 37%, LAB 39%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 8% (tabs)
BMG (21st-22nd Sep) – CON 38%, LAB 38%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 4% (tabs)
ICM (21st-24th Sep) – CON 41%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 4% (tabs)
YouGov (24-25th Sep) – CON 42%, LAB 36%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 4% (tabs)
ComRes (26-27th Sep) – CON 39%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 5% (tabs)
Opinium (26-28th Sep) – CON 39%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 6% (tabs)
BMG (28-29th Sep) – CON 35%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 5%

They are a mixed bunch – the YouGov poll showing a six point Tory lead got some attention, and I’m sure the BMG poll out this morning showing a five point Labour lead will do much the same. As ever, it’s wrong to pay too much attention to outliers. Normal sample variation means that if the underlying average is a Tory lead of a point or two, random noise will occassionally spit out a 6 point Tory lead or a small Labour lead, without it actually signifying anything. Collectively recent polls don’t suggest a clear impact on voting intention from either the Salzburg statement (while YouGov showed a larger Tory lead, ICM did not), or from the Labour party conference (while BMG show an increased Labour lead, Opinium showed the opposite).


1,527 Responses to “Latest voting intentions”

1 29 30 31
  1. QUOTE

    “Milliband was also branded left wing, but this failed to win in 2015, so is Corbyn’s image really so much better that he personally explained the big boost labour got at the last election?”

    ————————————————————————–

    The short answer is yes.

    If the average person in the street was asked for a couple of words to sum-up Milliband, you can bet that the words “bacon” and “sandwich” would feature heavily.

    Also, he looked like a rabbit caught up in the headlights half the time. Also, despite what the press were saying, his move of Labour to the left was a tiptoe – and one that he tried to mask.

    By contrast, the more definitive left term under Corbyn was owned. The right wing press couldn’t skewer him on actual policy as Corbyn was shouting from the rooftops “yes! this is what a Labour government will look like!” While presenting policies that a fair few people would find attractive.

    The press tried to attack the man rather than the ball, but, there was no defining “bacon sandwich” moment, so the attacks became more and more ridiculous.

    Add to this that Corbyn is a seasoned campaigner – he’s been doing it all his life – and he’s good at it.

    It was inevitable that Labour would close the gap this time.

    Also, Corbyn had one major strength – he offered HOPE to young people, disillusioned people and former Labour supporters who had drifted off to fringe parties.

    Indeed, around 5-6 weeks before the general election, on these very pages, I predicted L39, C42 – and got ridiculed at the time.

  2. @ HAL – “some additions to minimise/disguise the different treatment of Northern Ireland”

    I had hoped for NI getting “Special Status” but “disguising” that is proving somewhat tricky to say the least! SCON also onto it now!

    @ ALEC – Are you saying they don’t ignore the rules?

    Did I miss Barroso actually acting on the trade surplus (current account surplus) issue back in 2013ish. Were they fined 0.1% of GDP and/or required to take remedial action (e.g. boost domestic demand)?

    Perhaps in your revisionist parallel universe that happened but not in this one!

    EC have a long history of selective interpretation of “rules” depending on who is bending/breaking them and for what purpose – something you really should know by now ;)

    The EC are very naughty when they want to be or need to be.

  3. @ JIB – The re-hash that EC would accept is CU+SM+ECJ+ongoing payments. If you want to call that Norway+ then that is up to you.

    “…we lose NI and probably Scotland going there (Canada)”

    Some would call that the cherry on the Brexit cake and plenty of polling to support that in the CON and Leave X-Breaks! LAB being correlated with Remain makes them less willing to “lose” NI which is quite ironic given Corbyn+McDonnell’s long held Republican views!

    Unfort the CON full name is the Conservative and Unionist party though and having made her bed with DUP then May is going to have to lie or die in that bed.

    Corbyn would be far more willing to “lose” NI and Scotland – that is the one silver lining I see with Corbyn as PM and needing SNP C&S.

  4. @alec

    ‘re limits on CAP payments, IIRC they are capped in Scotland, Wales and NI and the administrations there decided to do so as soon the flexibility to do so became available after the 2013 CAP reforms. The SG also made non agricultural sporting estates ineligible.

    This briefing from the NI Assembly library is a very good summary of the development of CAP and the different ways in which it has been implemented within the UK and Ireland.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/Documents/RaISe/Publications/2014/dard/allen10314.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi6l7aIlYbeAhUJB8AKHYlKAQQ4ChAWMAF6BAgJEAE&usg=AOvVaw1ygysamqArud1KY-B4Qa7f

  5. “Raab off to Brussels”

    Is that an instruction…?

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Raab

    :-)

  6. @ LASZLO – :-) :-) I do love a bit of banter

    I’ve spent 25+yrs following Japan – working with/for Japanese companies, meeting officials, etc. Less so in recent years but their problem has been the same for almost 30years (post bubble economy with an ageing population)

    If you see the @ reply sign with someone elses name then feel free to scroll on by but as you chose not to I’m curious if you could expand on:

    “If you test any of your causalities, you will see that they only work if you accept the business case of Hansel and Gretel at prima facie.”

    and highlight any meaningful success in the approach they have taken for the last near-on 30yrs.

    I’d have gone with a Sleeping Beauty analogy myself although like a few others I don’t find the urban sprawl in Japan beautiful in any way and Japan haven’t gone protectionist. So basically then just the pin and the 100yrs bit, so not that great an analogy after all ;)

  7. Somerjohn

    @”@”Or is it just that in your view, expressing empathy with homesick forced migrants is enough to prove “left wing prejudgemental sanctimony”?”

    No.

    It was quite simple.

    I was referring to your unjustified prejudgement that PeteB didn’t – “really believe that victims of the Highland clearances, or the potato famine, forced to emigrate to America could then just return to their former homes? Or the Okies displaced to California? Or, for that matter, the petty criminals ‘transported’ to Australia?”-purely on the basis that he observed that you are financially free to move between Spain & UK.

  8. JamesE

    :-):-):-)

    Brilliant and thank’s for bringing the derivation of Raab’s name to our attention. Maybe that’s why some of Raab’s staff insert an extra “a” or two into his name from time to time. They obviously know what it truly means.

    I may not be able to look at old Dommy in the same way again now. I hope Barnier is aware of his true negotiating style. If he does, he surely won’t get raabed again!

  9. @HAL
    Your scenario is predicated on a presumption that in a case where there is “no time” for the hypothetical new government to renegotiate there would nevertheless be time to pass legislation for and time to hold a credible second referendum and implement its result.

    I see no reason why the latter would obviously be the one that could be more easily be done in “no time”.

    If anything the reverse would be true as there is clearly an abosulte minimum of time for the latter, if only the time necessary to organise and hold the vote.

    In reality, we must already be close to the point where by the time such a hypothetical new government was in place it could in practice do neither without a suspension or extension of the process.

  10. TURK

    :-)

    Its good to ruffle them occasionally .

  11. TURK

    ………….and isn’t it interesting to observe the crashing lack of self awareness that permits hypocrisy without a blink?:-

    @” Play the man, not the ball. I’ve been on the receiving end many a time. At least you were spared a response in a mock northern accent ”

    followed by

    @”Brilliant and thank’s for bringing the derivation of Raab’s name to our attention. Maybe that’s why some of Raab’s staff insert an extra “a” or two into his name from time to time. They obviously know what it truly means.
    I may not be able to look at old Dommy in the same way again now. I hope Barnier is aware of his true negotiating style. If he does, he surely won’t get raabed again!”

    I think one must have to read the right newspapers to pull that sort of thing off & walk away .

  12. @ Crossbat

    It does seem appropriate that “Raab” can mean a rather-less-than-polite alternative to “have your cake and eat it”…

  13. @Colin

    I’ve ruffled your feathers again you silly old sausage. We’re having a bit of fun with Raab’s name definition in an Urban dictionary. Nothing to do with Raab, unless you know something I don’t. Are you suggesting that he IS offering sexual favours for nothing in return???

    You right wingers are so sensitive. No sense of humour. Crashing bores. No self awareness…..

    :-)

  14. @JamesE

    “It does seem appropriate that “Raab” can mean a rather-less-than-polite alternative to “have your cake and eat it”…”

    :-)

    Of course, we’ve all been raabed from time to time!! I just hope Barnier sees it for what it is.

  15. To add tuppenceworth to HAL’s post at 10.27 am.

    The DUP meeting with M Barnier has made it unlikely that the DUP would support any resolution of the backstop. M Barnier made it clear that resolving the backstop would require NI to remain in the CU. His attempts to de-dramatise the checks that would be needed on goods going from GB to NI were to no avail. It made no difference that 60% of these goods go first to Dublin and that the necessary checks could then be done at Dublin port.

    The position of the DUP (involves much cake) has been from the outset of negotiations that it wants no change at all to the present circumstances.

    Apparently, the DUP have been in discussions with the ERG. The threat to vote down the Budget is not a bluff imho.

    The framework for EU and UK relations is not straightforward either. If it is so vague as to be regarded as a “blind” Brexit it is likely to be widely opposed. The Labour party, the SNP and ERG and probably the DUP might all oppose it.

    The more precise the framework references, the less palatable Brexit will appear. There is still expectation (David Davis) that the payment of around £35 billion is for a good deal rather than, as the EU sees it, the legal settlement of debt. Commitment to a FTA (Canada) is likely to be necessary for ERG but would make a backstop difficult and be opposed by Cons Remainers, the SNP and the Labour party.

  16. PeterW,

    Any deal needs to be ratified and this takes several months, hence the EU have specified a cut-off in talks in mid-November. Maybe that can be stretched to December but that’s about it. So if Parliament refuses the deal in late November and then there’s a leadership contest, or a general election, it will be much too late for the new incumbent to renegotiate, which could take months (and then there is the ratification…)

    Having a referendum is not so problematic. The legislation can be done in a week, assuming there is a clear Commons majority (the HoL will not delay it). The standard campaign is ten weeks (but that could even be shortened). So to get a referendum done on Thursday March 21st would require to start at the beginning of January at the latest(*). The campaign would run at the same time as ratification of the deal (if there is one) because the other possibilities (no deal, or remain) do not require ratification.

    I haven’t gone in to the idea of an A50 extension. This may be possible by agreement by the EU but obviously can’t be relied upon.

    (*) There are people saying it will take much longer. That’s usually because they don’t want another referendum at all. Or they are just repeating the usual leisurely timetable for past referendums, where there has been no hurry.

  17. Despite Keir Starmer suggesting all Labour MP’s will vote against any Brexit deal that crosses any of their 6 red lines it seems a growing number are starting to stick their heads above the parapet and will back a TM “reasonable” deal whilst others, including shadow ministers, will abstain. This could make the maths very interesting come the vote.

    Raab (Raaaab) going to Brussels and all EU ambassadors bar ours having been called to a 16:30 meeting suggests either summats brewing or there’s trouble at’mill!

    I voted remain in the referendum but am very p*****d off with the scaremongering going on right now. Yesterday we had someone representing the “Peoples Vote” knocking on our door and trying to dictate to us on the virtues of actively promoting another referendum and how the world was going to come to an end if we leave Brussels.

  18. CB11

    @” We’re having a bit of fun with Raab’s name definition in an Urban dictionary. Nothing to do with Raab,”

    Yeah-of course-just a bit of fun-when its someone else eh Batty ?

  19. Jonesinbangor,
    “I’ve written before that Labour should extract a defined General Election date in return for supporting the Government.”

    If Corbyn did support the government in return for a definite date, he would be as much of an idiot as the libs, because he would lose that election.

    Labour cannot win an election during Brexit unless they are more remain than the government, which obviously they would not be if they had backed the government. Most likely they would see a masive collapse of their vote and a huge con majority.

  20. Guardian reporting that things aren’t going well, no deal reached so trouble at’mill!

  21. @Danny

    I think my point was that the election would take place after Brexit, June 2019?

  22. jonesinbangor,
    “I think my point was that the election would take place after Brexit, June 2019?”

    that wont be after brexit. Even if there is no deal at all, it would be slap in the middle of post brexit chaos. If both lab and con had supported that outcome, I predict big rise for libs at expense of lab. Remainers would jump ship, while hard leavers would presumably stick with con.

    If there is some sort of fudge to keep the process going, it will be the start of the next phase of negotiations over a future relationship. Not over at all.

  23. @Danny

    It will be after Brexit, as the flags come down on midnight 31 March 2019.

    Brexit delivered, so to speak.

  24. Jonesinbangor,
    “It will be after Brexit, as the flags come down on midnight 31 March 2019. Brexit delivered, so to speak.”

    Technically, we might leave on 31 March. But in just about every possible outcome I can see, this will still be an essentially unresolved problem. Brexit will not be over. I doubt it will be over in 50 years.

  25. Bantams.

    Re ”Despite Keir Starmer suggesting all Labour MP’s will vote against any Brexit deal that crosses any of their 6 red lines it seems a growing number are starting to stick their heads above the parapet and will back a TM “reasonable” deal whilst others, including shadow ministers, will abstain. ”

    Would like to see the evidence, actual quotes not just journos speculations. Several MPs including front benchers have re-iterated the party policy of supporting a deal that ‘addresses’ the 6 tests but I have seen no-one )not even uber-remainers) going beyond.

  26. “Technically, we might leave on 31 March. But in just about every possible outcome I can see, this will still be an essentially unresolved problem. Brexit will not be over.”

    Indeed – it will only just have started.

  27. @Danny

    “Brexit will not be over. I doubt it will be over in 50 years.”

    Maybe not, but the EU will be very different in 50 years time as well, far more integrated, single taxation and fiscal policy, single internal law enforcement, homogenised workers rights and in work benefits……..

    No pesky Brits to put the go slow on things!

1 29 30 31