A brief note about the Survation poll in today’s Mail. A lot of responses to this have really got the wrong end of the stick – the Daily Mail have, quite obviously, written it up with a very pro-deal slant and have not focused upon elements of the poll showing support for no-deal or for a fresh referendum. Nevertheless, the core of the story – that more people said they wanted MPs to vote to support the deal than wanted MPs to reject it – is quite correct.

Firstly, lets us address social media claims that the poll actually showed opposition to the deal and that the Mail has lied about it. This is untrue. What actually happened is that when the Daily Mail front page was published yesterday Survation has not yet put up the full tables, so people looking for the full results on Survation’s website stumbled upon their previous poll for the Daily Mail, which had shown people opposed the deal. Today’s poll is different – and that’s the point of the Mail’s splash – the poll suggests public opinion has changed.

The two polls asked identical questions about support for the deal (so there’s no jiggery-pokery, so changing the wording – it’s a straight comparison).

Survation’s poll conducted on November 15th found that 61% of people had heard about the deal and of those people 27% supported it, 49% opposed it. The full tables for that poll are here (the chart that lots of people were posting on social media this morning was from this poll)

Survation’s new poll conducted on November 27th asked the same questions, and found 72% had now heard about the deal. Of those people 37% supported the deal (up 10), 35% opposed the deal (down 14). The full tables for that poll are here (Wednesday’s Daily Mail story is about this poll)

In the next question Survation asked how people wanted MPs to vote on the deal. 41% said they would like MPs to vote for the deal, 38% would like MPs to vote against the deal.

So far, so good. The poll shows a sharp increase in support for the deal since it was first announced – a fortnight ago the public were opposed by nearly 2-to-1, now it is pretty much neck-and-neck. While this is only a single poll and one shouldn’t read too much into it until there is other polling evidence to back it up, it does appear to be a very clear shift.

However, before one concludes that the public are now leaning in favour of the deal, it’s also worth looking at the other questions in the poll. The poll also repeated questions asking how people would vote in some hypothetical referendums. These suggests that people continue to prefer remaining in the EU to the deal (Remain 46%(+3), Leave with the deal 37%(+3)) and that in a choice between the deal or leaving without one, they’d go for no deal (No deal 41%(+7), deal 35%(+3)).

This leaves us in a bit of a quandary. People narrowly approve of the deal and think MPs should approve it… but they also prefer both of the two obvious alternatives to the deal. For the record, the poll also finds people in favour of a new referendum on the deal by 48% to 34%. It is hard to resist the conclusion that the public are as unclear as the political classes about their preferred way forward.

2,428 Responses to “Does Survation show the public warming towards the Brexit deal?”

1 44 45 46 47 48 49
  1. So-Rees Mogg says she still has to change policy -ie remove the backstop from the WA.-or he will vote against it.

    Soubry says she still has to change policy-ie call for REf2 after losing the WA vote.

    The Conservative Party is now ungovernable.

  2. I’m pretty sure that JRM and his group expected to win, or at least get so close that May’s position was untenable. They have failed but pretend that they haven’t because they are desperate for one of their number to take over. No Deal may be slightly more avoidable as the ERG have overplayed their hand. In practical terms, May has more freedom than she did before as she cannot be challenged

    We now have a game of chicken unfolding as I don’t think the EU will be willing to move the end date for anything other than a second referendum and there is only one deal on offer. I don’t think MPs will have the nerve to cancel brexit altogether.


    your posts make me laugh-one of the more amusing of the endless Groundhog Day experiences available here on UKPR.

    re @”doesn`t deal well with foreign leaders (such as Trump),”-so which global leaders qualify on that one in your opinion.

    :-) :-)

  4. Rees Mogg on television saying that TM has lost the confidence of parliament and bring it together. I wonder whom he has in mind?

    Apologies. I am not drunk just demented. What Rees Mogg obviously said was that TM had lost the confidence of parliament and should resign and be replaced by someone who could get their business through and unite parliament behind them. I imagine he wants the replacement to be a Brexiter. This is, of course, inconsistent with the other ultra Brexit line which is that they are the sole interpreters of the people’s will and that Parliament has a majority of remainers who are busy betraying it.

  5. Like I said before May’s leadership saved by her MP’s.
    Corbyn’s leadership saved dispite his MP’s.

  6. @Davwel

    I suspect she is pretty snug now until March.

    The only cliff edge decision facing anyone will be that facing MPs in January or February.

  7. Now she’s won will someone please replace that little machine she has inside her? You know the one I mean; when you pull the string it speaks one of a set list of phrases. They got rid of ‘strong and stable,’ but I’m getting fed up of ‘the will of the British people,’ and ‘take back control of our money, borders and our laws.’

    It’s all very tedious.

    How about ‘we need to be honest with those who voted leave,’ or ‘I’m afraid freedom of movement will have to stay if we are to avoid a catastrophe’?

    Or ‘by 2022 we will have had six years for leave voters to die off’?

  8. turk

    Corbyn’s leadership wasn’t facing any challenge today. You are just boring on with your pathetic blinkered obsession.

  9. 117/200

    So it would take just over 40 MP’s to move over to ‘no confidence’ for May to lose. And how many are on the government payroll?

  10. It was also an interesting day at Holyrood – which is why I watched the proceedings. Since proceedings in the main chamber in both Parliaments (as opposed to committee hearings) are normally appalling, I usually avoid both.

    Today we had Mike Russell make a statement on Brexit. When the business was planned, it was assumed that he would be talking about the “Meaningful Vote” on Brexit expected yesterday. However, other than the not unexpected support from SLab, SGP and SLD for the Scottish Government’s position, an intriguing addition was the SCon policy head talking approvingly of the Norway + scenario.

    If that was serious, then it would move SCon closer to the Scot Gov compromise proposal – just as Scot Gov seems to be edging away from that compromise which had been developed to accommodate the vote in E&W.

    We also had the announcement of the draft Scottish Budget. The responses of the 2 largest opposition parties were the usual rhetoric –

    SCon – Cut taxes on the better paid
    SLab – Spend more
    SLD – We’re not going to engage unless SNP drops idea of indy.

    We are in the interesting position where none of the GB parties even pretend to have policies that would encourage voters to install them as a party of government.

    Greens raised the question of local government tax reform (which they have long signalled as their price for supporting the Budget) and the Finance Secretary indicated his willingness to engage in such discussions.

    I’m an old political cynic and that struck me as the initial moves in a pre-arranged dance between SNP and SGP, whereby a strategy that had been privately agreed as being worthwhile would be implemented in a process that allowed the Greens to get the credit.

    Clever politics IMHO.

  11. Perhaps worth noting that, if the Tories hadn’t rapidly lifted the suspension of two MPs (for sexual impropriety), May’s vote would have fallen below the psychologically important 200 number.

    117 to 198 sounds much worse – as every retailer selling things at £7.99 knows full well.

  12. Steamdriveandy,

    “And how many are on the government payroll?”

    As it’s a secret ballot it doesn’t matter, what could she do if it was clear some had voted against her…sack all on the Payroll and recruit from those who didn’t want her!


  13. On hearing the result Jack continued to lie under the lounge curtains, with his black nose just poking out from underneath and Pippin rolled over on her back with her legs in the air on ‘her’ sofa. They congratulate Statgreek on the stunning win but believe it wasn’t really anything worth barking about.

  14. @ON

    Lovely story about the Missouri City election won with no votes. I believe there is a commune in France with only one resident. He probably refuses to vote as he was unhappy with his performance, and stormed out of a recent meeting.

  15. Oldnat,

    “Perhaps worth noting that, if the Tories hadn’t rapidly lifted the suspension of two MPs”

    Again, regardless of what they might have promised…it was a secret ballot, they may have voted against May!


  16. So we still have a deal that won’t pass the HoC and the threat of a hard Brexit. I can’t see Parliament backing down and I can’t see May letting it go to Hard Brexit by default. So it looks like a referendum and why draw out the misery?

  17. Colin.

    For a simpering relationship with Trump, what stateswoman could have achieved more than Theresa, walking arm-in-arm with him soon after their first meeting.

    Angela Merkel has done better.


  18. I realise that it was a secret ballot, but how many MP’s are on the payroll as that would give us a rough idea of how many backbench Tory MPs supported her, give or take?

  19. Peter Cairns

    “it was a secret ballot, they may have voted against May!”

    Maybe, but the requirement that Tory MPs had to produce photo ID, and that those MPs produced rather explicit compromising images of themselves may have ensured that how they voted was actually noted by the scrutineers.

    If the suspensions are reinstated, we’ll know that they broke their word.

  20. Steam Driven Andy

    I don’t think that there’s a totally confirmed number of MPs “on the take” from the UK Government, but 165 has been quoted.

  21. Nick P.

    Re Turks:

    ”Like I said before May’s leadership saved by her MP’s.
    Corbyn’s leadership saved dispite his MP’s.”

    This is of course true in it simplest sense but perhaps the irony is that now Corbyn has MPs acquiescing while may has her MPs revolting. Or put another way despite May being supported by over 3 times a higher proportion of Tory MPs than Corbyn was amongst Labour ones his position is more secure and powerful within their respective parties.

  22. They congratulate Statgreek on the stunning win but believe it wasn’t really anything worth barking about


  23. Nice stage managing by No10/Graham Brady enterprises with a few dozen loyalist mps greeting the result with acclamation live on tv.

    On the other hand Nigel Evans face was a picture-must have swallowed a wasp.

    No doubt Graham Brady will now switch his phone off ,some backbench shop steward he turned out to be ,hand in glove with management

    Gove moving closer to turning into Francis Urquart.

  24. AW had better start a new thread soon, the clock is ticking. Still, it’s not like there’s much to discuss right now, perhaps we could all do with a few days off.

  25. Steam Driven Andy –

    There’s a bit of debate as to which roles are actually counted as being ‘on the payroll’ (there are some unpaid positions that some people consider also count), but the number is 150 – 160.

    So that basically means out of the 160-odd backbenchers, only around 45 actually support their party leader.

    Pretty damning.

  26. So apart from the usual rhetoric, both in Scotland and in England, Watching all this whilst here in Dublin I left with WTF has changed.

    I suspect May can actually say “Nothing has changed”


    I have constantly said that the problem of our politics is that it is not about policy but about tribe. It is like supporting a football team, in the end it is not about playing in it ultimately about winning for winning sake.

    I have to say that that your comments on May epitomised the problem.

    I think TURK you misunderstand both May and Corbyns position within each party. May cannot get anything done because she has gathered the leavers to her side. In terms of voter she has over 70% of Tory voters as leavers, in terms of her own party members 80% are leavers, hell in terms of her own MPs It is clear that to my mind half of them are converted leavers. her problem is that she understands that no leave plan represents a consensus and that no deal despite the rhetoric is something that even TREVOR WARNE baulks at if you move past his rhetoric but that is what the lack of consensus in teh Tory party has brought.

    Let’s be clear most of the MPs on the right hate Corbyn, they hate him for two reasons, he ate their lunch and more importantly he basically ate their power base. Most everything about Corbyn was said to be about the membership, the cult of personality, nothing to do with policy. You bearly hear about policy from the Anyone But Corbyn crowd it is something that is clearly been noted and secondly whilst Corbyn does not relate to socially conservative working class type (he is after all a tree and immigrant hugging, anti Semitic terrorist sympathising marxist) I believe that not a far form what COLIN actually believes he has managed to get together a fragile coalition that say Yvette Cooper or any other MP could not do.

    His strength is actually the boring party of politics: Policy. In the same way that OLDNAT has pointed out where party’s north of the border are failing in respect to governance, the problem I see is that there is little talk of policy.

    Even today’s events round Westminster are less about policy than tribe which is why I turn round and say meh.

    Nothing has changed, May is neither formidable or weak, she is just meh. Her problem an d that of the Tories is that we have managed to deflect the issues of the day into a two new football teams called REMAIN and LEAVE both will claim they want to support the NHS etc but look at what TREVOR described as a dream team Raab he of Britain Unchained, sell more of our family silver and Javid well [that is a recipe that is as opposite as Corbyn and Blair. The problem has been for both party’s is that to win the tribe has to be big, to be big the tribe has to have massive contradictions, to have massive contradictions you do talk policy you talk tribe which is why Corbyn is a tree and immigrant hugging, terrorist sympathising marxist or else we would be talking about policy.


    I suspect the problem that May has is that no one believes she can win now. Go back but 1st June 2017. Everyone thought she could not lose and in fairness I suspect part of the problem is that when you start to believe your own rhetoric you are often suddenly left with nothing when it becomes clear people think the rhetoric is now to put it simply b0ll0xs

    May survived by using the rhetoric to show she was the only one that understood the British people, the TURKs and COLINs brexit means brexit, strong and stable, no deal is better than a bad deal red white and blue brexit. Even the Just About Managing seems to be rhetorical flourishes which are no substitute for policy. My contention was that it masked the reality of the fact there had to be a set of policy decisions and one of the problems that May and indeed parliament has is that they are unable to make them unless they are cornered with no way out.

    I remember the moment I knew we were pretty screwed when during GE2017 May wheeled out the magic money tree in response to a nurse that had not seen and inflation level pay rise in basically the time the Tories entered government in 2010. & year of declining literal declining pay. 80% of public sector workers are still in that position.

    Tribal politics says one thing policy would say another.

    The most damning thing is not that her troops as it were don’t support her. Blair Iraq adventure was not supported by Members, unions and most labour supporters. hell over a third of his MP rebelled consistently over the issue. The disagreed with policy but they still felt he was a winner. May problem is actually her troops don’t care about policy, just the winning.

    On Brexit what has amazed me is that many have seemed to have gone through a massive learning curve once touched by it. It was interesting what Raab chief of Staff said about the discussions, the problems they had annd his hinting at the fact that while Raab would have done things different the outcome I suspect both politically and economically would have been the same

    We sold brexit on a set of premises:

    1. That the EU basically decided our lives and our Government didn’t
    2. We had huge power to influence others
    3. The world was moving our way
    4. This would solve our underlying problems

    We would be happier if but a little less wealthier: was sold to the suburban and rural tories which make up a good third of leave supporters. We would control immigration since it is blight on us and would help your wages was sold to the socially conservative working class. hell we sold the fact that to immigrants form no EU counries that this would make it easier for no EU migration. These are basically conflicting/contradictory policies that at some point break down.

    What has been fun is the fact that slowly we understand our presumptions are not real. That has sparked anger, a view of betrayal and disbelief in some parts but no new belief as yet. The damning part for May is that there is no belief in May paradoxically her biggest strength is that there is even less belief in any of her contenders

  27. PTRP

    @”I suspect May can actually say “Nothing has changed”

    Yep-its nearly as boring as “I have constantly said”

  28. Well now, 117 against. Just who are they?

    There are two ways to analyze the vote. One is to consider the tory party as two factions, one hard leave and one remain. How would their interests be served?

    Presumably Rees Mogg voted against May. Leavers would seem to have concluded that May is not on their side, and it is time to show open opposition to anything short of hard leave. They must have concluded that the direction of travel is remain either under deal or revoke, and it isnt for them.

    Whereas ken Clarke still seems to be equably on side with the government. Remainers conclude the situation is going their way. Obviously Revoke gets what they want, but the deal essentially plots a course for the Uk to stay in all the EU market arrangements, once negotiations have opted us back into a lot more. The memoranda of understanding about the future direction make clear that a CU is to be the bare minimum of integrations between the Uk and EU.

    While conservatives still claim to repect the result of the referendum, their actions belie this, and the majority, still supporting May, is heading for remain or BINO.

    OR! The conservative party is carefully managing expectations. The party split is pure theatre intended to absolve the party from responsibilty for what happens next. The nation is pretty equally split on Brexit, with feelings running deep, but the party needs to get everyone back on side and for no one to be alienated at the end of the process. So it has to find a reason it would not be blamed for the decisions, and the way to do that is not to make them.

    Labour has refused to take a stance on Brexit. If it had, then this would by now be decisive, and we would be heading towards the sort of brexit (or no brexit) labour had chosen. Any blame for this would be labour’s, not the conservative’s.

    Instead Labour have refused to be the dealmaker, and the conservatives have had to take increasingly wild steps to divest themselves of power, until the threshold is crossed where parliament must take that power and make a decision.

    The tories have presented three options. Remain, total crashout or negotiated deal. The only sort of deal possible is on the EU terms, that to belong to any part of the system it is necessary to follow the rules of that part. May has obtained a guarantee for the Uk to stay in the CU, and to rejoin the rest in the future negotiations. That safeguards our membership probably as well as it could be done, given that in theory she was negotiating to leave.

    So is the tory party truly split, or is it all tactical moves by a united party to force labour to make the decision?

    If the situation is purely tactical, then the 117 votes against May is a sham, intended to prove her position is weak and the party is not responsible for whatever the outcome will be. Its a secret ballot, who knows who voted what, it could be 17 malcontents annoyed at her leadership and 100 loyalists who have been instructed to make her appear weak. The real revolt came a few weeks ago, and Ress Mogg found virtually no one would support him when he went for it.

    She has always been destined as scapegoat for the failure of Brexit (in whatever terms any side cares to define failure), and has taken this in good grace. I suspect she considers it a service to the nation to fulfill this necessary role at this time. Its a useful role heading into retirement to both fulfil her ambition to be PM, and save the tory party from Brexit.

  29. On the subject of constant repetition of boring, vacuous phrases my mind goes back to Blair who, in my memory anyway, rarely indulged in parrotism (have I invented a new word there) but always had fresh words to indulge in. Was it greater intellectual capacity, a faster brain, the realisation that such phrases aren’t believed, constant practice at explaining and expounding? Come to think of it I’ve don’t recall TM ever explaining why she sticks to her line, only her insistence that she will. She doesn’t take people along with her, but demands they trail behind.

  30. It’s interesting that Brexit was sold on the basis that we were big enough boys to make it on our own in the world. The reality is slowly dawning that there are much bigger boys who couldn’t care less about us. Seeing that realisation become clear has been rather sad and dispiriting.

  31. @DANNY

    I get it now. You are ghosting for John Le Carré. Is there a reward for spotting the connection? When do the Russians make their appearance?


    I think it was the big boys who broke our political system and then ran away.
    It certainly wasn’t me. I was just walking past when it happened.

  33. It seems to me that for some time now, had labour come out with a clear stance on Brexit, the tories would have fallen in with this, whether it was no deal, remain, or any particular soft Brexit.

    labour has wisely chosen to refuse to take a stance. Jim Jam and I do I think agree that to choose any position is to upset some group, so it makes sense not to until you have to.

    The question becomes, when does it make sense to stand up for a position? There must come a point where the advantage swings to leading the debate instead of standing aside.

    The slow movement of voters towards the remain side suggests that if you intend going for remain, then the very last moment is the one to pick, because it maximises your support. I still feel either main party could do this and would ultimately benefit. Everyone seems convinced that neither of the actual implementable options for brexit would succeed.

  34. At last-the obvious solution for this bunch of MPs


    And if they can’t find a majority for any of them then they have to hand it back to voters in another Referendum.


  35. joe james b

    “We listen too much to liberal elites who don’t like Britain (outside their bubble)”

    You are either a Russian bot or a useful idiot.

  36. So based on Danny’s prediction we have Labour only firming up their position at the very last moment and TM intent on running the clock down in order to try and bully Parliament into accepting her deal at the final moment.

    Brinkmanship all the way.

    Supposing that on that final day it all tips into Remain. Oh, the joy and the angst.

  37. 5 polls so far this month. Nothing changed, all showing around Con 38, Lab 38, LD 9 UKIP 4. I would expect some changes after this week’s affairs but would not like to guess which way any movement would go – Con down UKIP up (or vice-versa if kippers think Con is moving their way) or Con up with sympathy for May?


    I think you misread DANNY. If I understand him correctly, the offered deal, which is much more generous than anyone could have expected, was designed to be anathema to the DUP in order to be sure they would not vote for it.

    Provided that the HoC can’t come up with a solution which is approved then May would simply revoke A50 at the last possible moment.

  39. Supreme Court unanimously rejects virtually all of the UK legal arguments against the Continuity Bill (Scotland).

    As expected, they have identified those sections of the Bill which would have been competent when the Bill was passed, but would now not be, after the UK Act was passed.

    The UK Government does need to get some decent lawyers, or stop going to court to be humiliated.

  40. @TURK

    Because Corbyn’s Labour is a democratic, grassroots organisation whereas the modern Tory party is now controlled by a tiny faction of loons.

  41. I keep hearing the May supporters trot out the line that she hasn’t been damaged by the vote because she got 63% and they would be very happy to get 63% of the vote in their constituency at a General Election.

    Has it not occurred to them that at a GE, they are standing for election amongst an electorate which includes Labour, LibDem, Nationalist parties (In Scotland and Wales), Greens, UKIP and the rest, so, yes, 63% would be very good indeed? But in yesterday’s election ALL the voters were Conservative. To only get 63% amongst that electorate seems pretty abysmal to me and in no way comparable.

    Still, I suppose they have to say something.

  42. A tortuous route to a 2nd EUref via May sticking to her word (for once) – by Jolyon Maugham


  43. BZ

    I don’t think I mentioned the content of any deal, just the strategies that both parties appear to be running with.

  44. NickP

    “You are either a Russian bot or a useful idiot.”

    What about a Useful Idiotic Russian Bot?


  45. @ PETER – Steward’s Enquiry

    STATGEEK came in after 8pm. SHEVII was closest before 8pm.

    Surely it was only advisory anyway? I demand a “do-over” once she comes back from Brussles – we need “informed consent” and the first vote doesn’t count – Russian’s were involved I’m sure of it!

    Anyway 117 “Extremists” (as Hammond would call them).
    So much for this just being ERG then!!


    Corbyn’s turn next week? Hope so.

  46. @ OLDNAT – I’m suspicious about the “200” as agree it sounds better than 198.

    100% turnout and not a single spoilt paper?!?

    You’d have been “whipped” in order to be “seen” to put your ballot paper in the slot but every single MP put a mark in one of the two boxes??

    Also what does the Supreme Court ruling mean in “practical” terms (ie what changes does it make)?

  47. Clearly the UK needs a new Centre Right party.

    Time for the Conservatives to divide into two.

    Anything else is presenting a wholly false image (and choice!) to the British people.


  48. @ Bazinwales

    I think it’s worth noting that the three most recently released polls – from YouGov, Kantar and Ipsos – are all the worst results for the Tories from the respective pollsters since July (in terms of lead/no lead over Labour).

  49. @ NearlyFrench

    Re: Conservative split
    Stephen Crabb told a BBC Wales Journalist:

    the confidence vote was ‘entirely a waste of time’ ‘I don’t know if she can heal the divisions. In my more pessimistic moments I wonder whether the Conservative party is heading for a long term split.’

  50. Sorry not NearlyFrench but David in France

1 44 45 46 47 48 49