There are two new voting intention polls out today – YouGov for the Times, and Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor in the Evening Standard.

Ipsos MORI‘s topline figures are CON 38%(nc), LAB 38%(nc), LDEM 10%(+1), UKIP 4%(nc). Fieldwork was between Friday and Tuesday (1st-5th), and changes are from MORI’s last poll back in December.

YouGov‘s topline figures are CON 41%(+2), LAB 34%(nc), LDEM 10(-1), UKIP 4%(-2). Fieldwork was on Sunday and Monday, and changes are from YouGov’s last poll in mid-January.

This does not, of course, offer us much insight on what is really happening. At the weekend a lot of attention was paid to a poll by Opinium showing a big shift towards the Conservatives and a 7 point Tory lead. Earlier in the week Opinium also published a previously unreleased poll conducted for the People’s Vote campaign the previous week, which showed a four point Tory lead, suggesting their Observer poll was more than just an isolated blip. Today’s polls do little to clatify matters – MORI show no change, with the parties still neck-and-neck. YouGov show the Tories moving to a seven point lead, the same as Opinium, but YouGov has typically shown larger Tory leads anyway of late so it doesn’t reflect quite as large a movement.

I know people look at polls hoping to find some firm evidence – the reality is they cannot always provide it. They are volatile, they have margins of error. Only time will tell for sure whether Labour’s support is dropping as events force them to take a clearer stance on Brexit, or whether we’re just reading too much into noise. As ever, the wisest advice I can give is to resist the natural temptation to assume that the polls you’d like to be accurate are the ones that are correct, and that the others must be wrong.

Ipsos MORI tables are up here, YouGov tables are here.


541 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Ipsos MORI voting intention polls”

1 2 3 11
  1. first, first time ever?

  2. Although geographic crossbreaks are inevitably highly unreliable, “just as a bit of fun” (as Peter Snow used to say), I usually have a look at the Scottish ones.

    YouGov regularly shows much less erratic numbers than the other pollsters, and this may reflect some of the differences in weighting methodology between pollsters.

    Does YG still retain some of its partial weighting of the Scots samples to the relevant demographics as it was experimenting with?

    I doubt that Anthony reads any of the comments now, but if he happens to see this one ……… ?

  3. OK. Enough on polling! Back to Brexit

    “An EU source with knowledge of today’s meeting said: “Tusk suggested that the Corbyn plan could be a promising way out of the impasse.

    EU officials who have looked at the letter the Labour leader sent the prime minister on Wednesday believe that it is broadly compliant with the guidelines set out by the EU’s remaining 27 member states.”

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/tusk-brexit-corbyn

  4. Just a brief comment on the figures for the Tories in Scotland. I may be wrong, but my impression is that there has been a significant drop in support for SCon&Unionists over the last three months, though it may be influenced by the small number of Scots involved in producing the overall figures. By ‘significant’ I mean in likely outcome of winning seats – where dropping below a certain threshold leads to the loss of a large proportion of seats previously held.

    On the other hand, while a General Election any time soon might well see a drop in Tory seats won in Scotland, I don’t see SLAB picking up much support, which might mean an extra seat for two or the LibDems (e.g. in the Borders), but more likely, I think, an increase in SNP representation. Certainly Scotland’s position regarding leaving the E.U. stands out from every other column, apart from London, and the only Westminster parties likely to benefit from that are the LibDems and the SNP.

    But others may think differently, and know better, of course!

  5. An interesting map of the vulnerability of regions to Brexit.

    I have some methodological question, but it is still interesting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/07/world/europe/brexit-impact-on-european-union.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR0WvuvBuH8Mv7db3W7SuTQkyGxRJ8548tzXcvCDBvAlAG0ZhZygI8U0UdI

  6. The YG survey has the usual “hindsight” question: In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?

    Results (4 Feb) : Right 45(-1) Wrong 55(+1).

    The whole time series is shown graphically here:
    https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/?removed

    It shows Right ahead until mid 2017 but behind since then with the gap getting steadily wider (with small fluctuations of course). The ten point gap is probably about right for a smoothed average at present.

  7. John B

    “there has been a significant drop in support for SCon&Unionists”

    Hard to tell, but as money talks, Davidson’s value seems to have plummeted further among Tories.

    At the Black and White ball last night, the offer of a 2 day stay with her and a chance to walk her dog only raised a bid of £3,600, compared with £20,000 last year for having lunch with her.

  8. Polling:
    Ipsos mori say 72% think it likely brexit will be delayed. Interesting to consider how that unrolls when it proves impossible to do this.

    Yougov have 70% putting brexit as top issue, rising to 78% for con and 82% lib. Next most attention grabbing issue is health 34%, at half the score for Brexit.

    The economy comes in at 28%, which is quite low considering we here do nothing but argue about the economic implications of brexit.

    Immigration comes in at 40% for conservatives and 6% lib. Immigration is second for conservatives, but only 29% for the general sample.

    The raw voter support is 26% conservative, 23% labour. How are the mighty fallen. 19% dont know, many more than enough to blow the result away if they make up their minds. UKIP maybe half a percent up on last time (but small sample)

    The likelihood to vote question identifies leave referendum voters as a little less likely to vote than remainers. Presumably from the same base of 100% having voted in that referendum. If this translates to the result of a referendum, then it might suggest a little more support for remain in an actual re-run than the raw remain/leave support question suggests.

    Or it could just suggest leavers are a bit more disillusioned with leave parties than remainers are with remain parties. Yet in fact con seems to have picked up a bit over labour, so I’m not sure that explanation makes sense. Maybe then leavers are more disillusioned with their cause than remainers?

    The old are more likely to vote than the young, which as leavers are older, ought to bias the leave VI a little above remain. So the fact remain VI is higher than leave gains a touch extra significance?

  9. laszlo,
    “An interesting map of the vulnerability of regions to Brexit.”

    Yeah. Tis interesting. It might be a function of level of development, but looking at it, the moral seems to be the closer you are, the more trade you do. Which is great if we are planning to down grade trade with all our geographically nearest neighbours.

  10. OldNat

    Interesting point about the “less erratic numbers”.

    Sorry if some the points below at common knowledge, but I have to go through it.

    1) We have a huge sample that we hope (and make everything to be) representative – question: what does representative mean at this point (you know, like politically engaged or not and so on). SO, we are using inductive inference.
    2) But prior to this we used deductive inference otherwise we cannot have the aims for the board for sampling.
    3) it is impossible to reconcile deductive and inductive inference in the same model, so we take sides with our deductive inference (it worked particularly well in the alternative model in the 2017 GE).
    4) Now we take the sample. Raw figures are useless unless the sampling is done a huge number of times. So figures without adjustment carry a lot of errors (or not if the deductive inferential process was wrong).
    5) Now we adjust. Note that the factors of creating the composition of the board members and those for adjusting the sample are different (although there are overlaps). Again, the validity of the deductive inference dictates the validity of the VI from the adjusted sample. I have no doubt that some of the adjustments are results of human interventions and not simply automated processes.
    6) So, as long as the deductive inference is correct (whatever that means), with a large enough number of independent sampling the VI reflects the VI in the general population.

    Now come a few cautions:
    1) according to academic studies VI in some parts of the population is a dichotomous decision, but for some parts of is a nested decision-making process, this the sample may include heterogeneous groups.
    2) there is a major issue with DK (we don’t know where they belong to (hence the reallocation of exclusion). They are fuzzy sets. The problem is that they aren’t the only ones.
    3) The deductive inference cannot go beyond the assumed boundaries of the phenomenon, and the inductive inference cannot go beyond the sample. Moreover, they are in a.circular process.

    Consequently, while polls are statistically reliable their practical reliability depends on independent factors which then create the problem of attribution. A few years back it was the composition of the board, then the likelihood of voting, then some demographic characteristics and so on.

    The trouble with it is the transference of the deductive vs inductive inference to the precision of an individual poll and the improving precision of a series of polls (the same epistemological problem).

    The striking thing about the alternative YG model is that it clearly used a different set of parameters. It was more precise (it is difficult to compare as it was used to predict the number of MPs) by let’s say, 5%. So, it is better than the convention, but is the convention is correct.

    Just to close it: while I understand party affiliation and alike, but when the difference between two dominant parties is let’s say 5% in the polls – for common sense, it is not a difference, it is not really a choice, it is a calculation (of course in England because of the negligible role of minor parties it is a bit more complex). However, the principles of the calculation (and now not voting included) simply cannot be captured in a poll.

  11. John B,

    I think that even to talk about “figures for Scotland” is wrong-headed, since the pollsters aren’t trying to produce a poll for Scotland.

  12. @ OLDNAT (last thread) – Those petitions are a waste of time but we’ll add a few signatures. I’m the only half Scot in the Trevor’s collective.

    (This thread): I’m sure the EU would love Corbyn as PM. Even ex-LAB leader and arch-Remain Blair considers “far-left” populism to be the 2nd and knock out punch to the UK economy.

    We send enough jobs to EU as it is. Staying in CU with Corbyn as PM, probably relying on SNP.

    Since their main goal from Brexit is to make an example of UK for daring to leave they’d love us to punish ourselves and elect Corbyn!

    Fingers crossed the Blairite MPs and LDEM MPs would stop the worst damage the Marx Bros + Sis could do but the silver lining would be a higher chance of Scottish independence (no need for a ref just a Velvet divorce)

  13. @ Danny & Laszlo

    Yes – the map does indeed confirm that it is easier (and far more common) to trade with your nearest neighbours than with countries further away.

    We could have done with a few basic facts like this about international trade 2-3 years ago.

  14. No EU luvvies commenting on the EZ 2019 growth forecasts update?
    How about those that trust 15yr GDP forecasts to the 0.1%?

    (Changes from all of 3mths ago):

    EZ 1.3 (-0.6)

    Within that, the G7 trio :
    Germany: 1.1 (-0.7)
    France: 1.3 (-0.3)
    Italy: 0.2 (-1.0)

    They also do a forecast for UK as we’re still in EU:
    UK: 1.3 (+0.1)

    So, if you think the “mystic megs” in EC will win the pin on the donkey competition (for first time ever) then that puts UK =1st amongst European G7 members for 2019!

    If you don’t keep the data on a spreadsheet then you’ll need to go back to Autumn update for the country changes but most recent update is here:

    https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/economy-finance/ip096_en.pdf

    NB BoE updated UK forecast today, again a 3mth update: 1.2 (-0.5).

  15. Methodology check for Ipsos-Mori!

    The headline numbers are unchanged but the “all giving a voting intention” saw bigger changes more inline with other polls, giving CON a lead of +4.

    CON 39 (+2)
    LAB 35 (-3)
    LDEM 12 (+4)

    unfort they don’t publish the tabs, just the graphics.

    NB This is not a n=1 poll partisan issue, its a genuine question. My guess is that this is a large relative drop in LAB DK and LTV which gets added back in to the headlines but could an expert comment?

    Dec’18 link here:
    https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-12/pm-slides-december-2018.pdf

  16. @TW

    Without the raw data, all you can say is that the sample contains too many of the kind of people who support LibDem or Cons and too few of those demographics who are more likely to support Labour. So it might be that younger voters, or ethnic minorities are underrepresented.

    If there was a move among 2017 Lab supporters towards ‘do not know’ or a falling likelihood to vote, this would affect the headline figures.

  17. @ LASZLO – Yes, interesting map but those “methodological questions” (ie model assumptions) are whoppers.

    1/ Assuming “ceteris paribus” (ie no response from govts, central banks or supply chains adjusting to the “new normal”) makes a model “robust” but clearly all players would react to the change.

    2/ Within that UK clearly has more “levers” to use (budget deficit, interest rates (please not QE), free floating FX). Of course we rely on Hammond and Carney to do their bit (but we never saw the promised punishment budget and emergency rate hikes after Vote Leave did we – quite the opposite as it turned out!)

    3/ Gravity model is from 1950s, pre-internet, containerisation, globalisation, etc. It’s “track record” is poor and even within that it doesn’t adjust for the historic tendancy to do trade deals with neighbouring countries.

    4/ Is all trade good? Does it boost GDP? IMHO: NO, especially not when not everyone is playing to the same rule book and some tip the playing field their way!

    I just posted a link showing “other factors” dwarf model predictions and can change within a 3mth period. Whether it’s diesel cars, China slowdown, US-China trade war, pop of credit bubbles, or a “black swan” event plenty of external factors make predictions guesswork.

    All you can do is be as flexible and prepared as possible to deal with whatever comes at you, raise your “trend growth” and don’t be a patsy!

    In that regard UK is in good shape – provided we have HMG and BoE that respond to keep UK competitive, “help” businesses to stay/expand/move to UK and not just mitigate risks but capture opportunities from a “Clean Brexit”
    (bit of a party political broadcast at the end there – we’re still waiting the “phone call”)

  18. @ JAMES E – Those models have been around for decades (literally). They popped up when folks wanted us to stay in ERM, join the Euro, etc.

    It is not surprising that a “gravity model” produces forecasts that show…wait for it…. (drum roll please)… a “gravity” effect!

  19. The twitter exchanges on Berger are really interesting:-

    “The way people like you totally disregard and discredit the membership’s opinions is galling. It would do you good to remember that without us none of you would have jobs and you are there to represent us, not your little luvvie clique. We have every right to choose our mps”

    Note “MPs”-not “Candidates.”

    And this exchange which very neatly explains the difference between the two :

    “Don’t take my word for it. Listen to someone she represents. @lucianaberger is a boss MP.”

    ( Alison McGovern )

    “What about the Labour memebers who don’t want her Alison?”

    “And what about the non-members who do?”

    :-) :-) :-)

  20. @ TW

    My post of 8:38pm was in response to your question about Ipsos Mori, and the weighting of Opinion Poll headline figures so that these are representative of the electorate, even when the sample of people polled is not.

  21. Laszlo

    I lack your statistical and analytical skills but, having read your post a few times, I think I understand your points.

    Mind you, my question was much simpler! Crossbreaks are usually so small, that they can’t (at best) be much more than roughly suggestive of possibly interesting change in a subset of the sample.

    The very different VI pattern in Scotland, and the choice of that single polity as a geographic crossbreak, did lead to YG experimenting with weighting the Scottish sample to internal demographics.

    That wouldn’t make the crossbreak a reliable indicator of anything much, of course, but if the Scots sample in a GB poll had an appropriate number of 45-54 females in one poll, but randomly in another poll that group had been “used up” in E&W regions, then one might reasonably expect that the former polling approach might be less erratic than the latter for that crossbreak.

    It doesn’t greatly matter in a poll of c1000-1500, but in a large poll it would. Hence my frustration that YG still haven’t answered my question of 8 Jan as to whether in their “Large Poll” where they only published 2 geographic crossbreaks – London & Scotland – as to whether those geographic crossbreaks had been internally weighted.

    I’ve reminded then again, but am not hopeful that YG will be @rsed to respond.

  22. JE
    ‘We could have done with a few basic facts like this about international trade 2-3 years ago.’

    I can recall it being said and I even said it myself, often. It was met with bluster.

    Re the Right/Wrong graph. Wrong appears to have gained 10 points in 18 months in a fairly linear fashion. If it continues PTRP’s inference that all will say it was a wrong decision will be reached circa the end of 2026. 75% saying it was wrong is due around the beginning of 2022. By the end of this year it’ll be just over 60%.

    Of course in the run up to 30th March and after as the impact bites that ‘wrong’ rate might speed up.

  23. I was just about to comment on how refreshing it was to read a thread that eschewed ad hominem nonsense and stuck to the mission of this site. Then Trevor made his/her entrance with his pejorative rubbish.

    Given that Anthony polices the comments for adherence to his policies, one can only wonder at thee comments that don’t get past the moderation!

    The polls show no shift away from a desire to leave the EU. The proof or certainty that would help Anthony and YouGov will only come from a shift towards or away from a CU by Corbyn. If he’s challenged seriously on what’s the point of leaving if you propose to stay close, pay 39bn, have only a consultative role in E.U. trade and watch the E.U. competition salami slice away your industry, then the polls might become clear.

    TM can’t take no deal off the table because the EU would sit and wait for the endgame.

    The solution may appear if our leaders develop some backbone and try honesty for a change.

    First step is to call out the extremists. They are selling rotten ideas.

    Next, trust the public in a new way, supporting ideas with agreed facts.

    We should be leading, not wallowing in insults and nonsensical analyses of our place in the modern world.

  24. Bill Patrick

    “the pollsters aren’t trying to produce a poll for Scotland.”

    Presumably you are referring to GB or UK polls, in which case we agree.

    VI questions for the UK or GB are, of course, somewhat useless. All they do is to marginally distort the main purpose – determining VI in England. Much better to simply measure VI in each polity separately.

    On other questions, a measure of attitudes throughout the UK may be very useful, but what conceivable value is there in trying to determine attitudes to anything (other than, perhaps, encouraging NI to leave the UK Union) on a GB basis?

  25. Having said all that, generally this thread is rather higher on quality than the last one! Pace (lat.)

  26. @ SDA

    The trend is very clear if you look at the polling on ‘Right or wrong to vote to Leave’ over different intervals in the YouGov tracker.

    Dec 16/Jan 17 Average 3% lead for ‘Right to Leave’ (6 YG polls)
    Dec 17/Jan18 Average 3% lead for ‘Wrong to Leave’ (6YG polls)
    Dec18/Jan 19 Average 9% lead for ‘Wrong to Leave’ (8 YG polls)

    That’s a steady 3% swing in each of the last two years, so at this rate, we should be looking at a 15% lead in a year’s time.

  27. OLDNAT

    Ruth Davison

    “compared with £20,000 last year for having lunch with her.”

    I’m not a big fan and I doubt if Rosie and Daisie would get on with her dog, but I’d still have lunch with her for £20.000 – especially if she paid for the meal as well.

  28. COLIN

    ““And what about the non-members who do?””

    Therein, as my mate William once said, lies the rub.

    There is an tragic Catch 22 going on in politics, whereby it seems to be increasingly the Party membership – and, even worse, activists – who feel they should make all decisions about every detail of policy and personnel and yet it is average people, who don’t wish to give up their spare time dealing with political arguments, who are the ones who provide the votes.

    Yet, clearly, political parties need members and activists to survive.

    Anyway, I’m not going to any bleedin’ meetings – the girls would be dreadfully bored [and so would I.]

  29. R&D

    You sell yourself cheap! YG were asking folk if they would stay off the internet forever if someone gave them £1m.

    Sounds like a Brexit referendum question to me.

    “Forever” continues long after one’s death, so the cash would have be upfront to get any benefit – and then you could go on Twitter to tell your pals how you spent the dosh.

  30. “Trevors
    Are you all half Scots, or just some of you?”

    ——–

    Well one of them could be wholly Scottish and one not and then they take the average?

  31. John B:

    Just a brief comment on the figures for the Tories in Scotland. I may be wrong, but my impression is that there has been a significant drop in support for SCon&Unionists over the last three months,…

    On the other hand, while a General Election any time soon might well see a drop in Tory seats won in Scotland, I don’t see SLAB picking up much support, which might mean an extra seat for two or the LibDems (e.g. in the Borders), but more likely, I think, an increase in SNP representation. Certainly Scotland’s position regarding leaving the E.U. stands out from every other column, apart from London, and the only Westminster parties likely to benefit from that are the LibDems and the SNP.

    Worth taking a look here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwickshire,_Roxburgh_and_Selkirk_(UK_Parliament_constituency) which has the results for an area similar to Scottish Borders.

    It was LibDem in 2010 with SNP in 4th position but went SNP in 2015 basically as a reaction to the Coalition, I would think, with the LibDem losing 12,000 votes. In 2017, it went tory, with the tory being the only one with over 50% vote share in Scotland, I believe. This was as a result of the LibDems shedding a further 500 votes to the tory. UKIP, Lab and the rest are nowhere in this constituency.

    There is a tension between an anti-tory vote, which kept the LibDems in power for decades and a pro-union vote. The anti-tory vote swung it to the SNP in 2015, because after the coalition, the LibDems could no longer be considered anti-tory.
    I doubt that the LibDems will take it in the forseeable as the anti-tory vote is now centred on the SNP. And I think that the tories won out of love for the union rather than for the tories.

    The interesting people are the pro-union anti-tories for the next election – if they vote LibDem for the union, they risk keeping the tory in, if they vote SNP as the best bet against the tories, that doesn’t help the union.

    But overall, an Indyref may be perceived as the best way to be shot of the tories. While there seems not to be many doing a 180 flip towards Indy, there are many default unionists in Scotland who are thinking about the benefits.

  32. R&D

    @”Therein, as my mate William once said, lies the rub.”

    Indeed.

    Thanks for your other thoughts which I share.

    It fascinates me. And I think the role & purpose of a Member of Parliament is hugely important.

    THose twitter exchanges just encapsulated it so well.

    Two different models being promoted. They cannot both prevail imho.

  33. Interesting analysis from the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions on the funding that would be available to regions of the UK for the next EU budgetary cycle.

    https://cpmr.org/cohesion/cpmr-analysis-uk-to-lose-e13bn-regional-funding-post-brexit/20525/

    The 22% increase stems from “many areas of the UK are falling behind the EU average in terms of regional prosperity.”

    Of course, theoretically the UK could take action to redress such regional disparity, but since the difference between the most and least prosperous parts of any EU country are to be found in the UK under current UK policy, that might be thought to be an unlikely prospect.

    The report is likely to be of most interest to those in West Wales and the Valleys : Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly : South Yorkshire : Tees Valley & Durham : Lincolnshire.

  34. Just for information:

    On the previous thread there was a discussion about the Law and March 29. To be clear it is EU law (incorporated into UK law arising from the treaty of Lisbon and its implementation [retrospectively] via the European Communities Act 1972 [as amended]) that requires the UK to leave on March 29 2019. The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 only provides for the legal framework that will operate allowing repeal of the 1972 Act and the filling in the gaps in the law that the repeal will leave.

    Section 1 of the 2018 Act provides for repeal on exit day. Exit day is defined as March 29 2019 in section 20 of the same Act. However, there are then question marks around section 8 which provides the so called Henry VIII powers. The wording of which may be open to interpretation as to whether they could be used to alter the definition of exit day by ministerial regulation only.:
    Subsection (1) provides:
    A Minister of the Crown may by regulations make such provision as the Minister considers appropriate to prevent, remedy or mitigate—
    (a) any failure of retained EU law to operate effectively, or
    (b) any other deficiency in retained EU law,
    arising from the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU.

    Quaere: can an extension of Article 50 time limits amount to a withdrawal? If not can the failure of EU law to operate effectively, because exit day causes the repeal of the 1972 Act, although clearly problematic be said to arise from the withdrawal (which is the qualifying clause of the section). If it cannot the ability to alter the law by ministerial regulation is lost and only an Act of Parliament, through both houses, can repeal the provision.

    I am not an expert in Parliamentary Procedure but I believe the hope that such an Act could be filibustered by debate in the House of Lords may be misplaced. I believe a motion that “the previous question be put” is not outlawed in House of Lords procedure and such a motion requires an immediate vote which, if successful, causes a vote on the substantive issue to take place immediately afterwards (I stand to be corrected on this).

  35. Steve Bell’s view on Corbyn’s offer well worth a look (in the Grauniad)

  36. WB61

    As ever, you add admirable clarity to discussions on here.

    What might (I am no expert either) be relevant to your comment on the question being put is para 38(1) of gthe Lords’ Standing Orders –

    If a balloted debate or a time-limited debate is continuing at the end of the time allotted to it, the Clerk at the Table shall rise and thereupon the Lord Speaker shall ask the mover whether or not he wishes to withdraw his Motion. If the mover does not ask leave to withdraw, or if leave to withdraw is refused, the Lord Speaker shall put the Question forthwith.

    So it may depend on whether the HoL decrees that such discussion be time-limited or not.

  37. The results of the “Best PM” bit of the You Gov poll are breathtaking. How can anyone think that an aspiring PM with a score of 19% has an atom of credibility.

    I wouldn’t mind betting that if they chucked Larry or Palmerston (Downing St cats) into the mix, they wouldn’t do much worse!

  38. Andrew Myers

    That Not-Sure person is doing pretty well, though at 39%.

    If they drop out of the contest, then their supporters only need to break heavily against May, for the tables to turn – and few of the NotSure supporters seem to have a Tory VI.

    In any case, the UK PM is just an unelected bureaucrat, selected by a bunch of useless politicians – if we are to accept the line of the brainwashed nutters.

  39. Incidentally, for anyone daft enough to be watching QT, I see that Billy Mitchell (UKIP candidate and Orange Loyalist – guy in the red/orange jacket) has been “randomly” selected by the “impartial” BBC/QT team for the 3rd time!

    He’s that lucky, he should buy a lottery ticket.

  40. Colin

    While the trouble about the Wavertree MP is going on, this is also going on.

    I think equally important (and unimportant).

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/07/labour-mps-who-back-tory-brexit-face-moment-of-reckoning-say-activists

  41. @theexterminatingdalek – thanks for your post on the previous thread. It does get a bit rough on here at times, and there are some that can’t seem to post without belittling others, but as you say, hare and tortoise. I am content.

    @John TT – hello again. Similar thoughts as above.

    @WB61 – thankyou once again for giving your views. Your post encapsulates the very best of UKPR.

    From what you say, I read it that revoking or extending A50 would mean that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 does not dictate that we leave on March 29th, as some seem to think, as there would be no exit day?

  42. @COLIN

    “he twitter exchanges on Berger are really interesting:-

    “The way people like you totally disregard and discredit the membership’s opinions is galling. It would do you good to remember that without us none of you would have jobs and you are there to represent us, not your little luvvie clique. We have every right to choose our mps”

    Note “MPs”-not “Candidates.”

    And this exchange which very neatly explains the difference between the two :

    “Don’t take my word for it. Listen to someone she represents. @lucianaberger is a boss MP.”

    ( Alison McGovern )

    “What about the Labour memebers who don’t want her Alison?”

    “And what about the non-members who do?”

    :-) :-) :-)”

    With the Party system as strong as it is, it would take a brace soul to say that Berger would come anywhere near holding her seat as an Independent? After all that’s what it would take to prove that the electorate of her constituency voted for her rather than her party.

    That’s where I think your argument falls.

  43. RAF

    “With the Party system as strong as it is, it would take a brace soul to say that Berger would come anywhere near holding her seat as an Independent”

    As far as I know, the only politician in the UK in recent times to take on the party machine, stand as an independent and to be elected for 2 full terms until he retired was Denis Canavan.

    “when the first elections to the Scottish Parliament were held, the New Labour leadership rejected him as an official Labour candidate, despite the fact that he had the support of 97% of local party members. He therefore stood as an Independent, and was consequently expelled from the party. He won with almost 55 percent of the vote, the highest majority of any MSP in the 1999 election. He resigned his Westminster seat in 2000 to concentrate on representing his constituents in the Scottish Parliament. Canavan retained his Holyrood seat in 2003 with 55.7 percent of the vote, again with the biggest majority in Scotland. ” (Wiki)

    Canavan took virtually all of his local party machine with him in his stance, so a very different scenario from being deselected in an acrimonious division in his local party.

  44. @Hal

    “It shows Right ahead until mid 2017”

    Most likely the 2017 election triggered something in the minds of people. Whether it was Teresa May’s ‘strong and stable’ thing, or perhaps a Tory government being propped up by the DUP. Difficult to pin any one thing on it.

    @Oldnat

    “As far as I know, the only politician in the UK in recent times to take on the party machine, stand as an independent and to be elected for 2 full terms until he retired was Denis Canavan.”

    Margo MacDonald, if you’re counting Scottish Parliament elections within your definition.

  45. WB61,
    re leaving act.
    section 20 calls itself interpretations and defines leaving day. But in subsection 4 it also says,
    “(4)A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—

    (a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom, and

    (b)amend subsection (2) in consequence of any such amendment.”

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/20

    Any old minister of the crown, i take it!

  46. Rather interesting to see the continued reactions to Corbyn’s letter. It was clear I think that the EU would be able to come on board with such a plan. Probably the only real issue for them would be Corbyn’s desire to have some input into future trade deals, but in truth I suspect the EU would welcome this, as it just helps them get good deals.

    What is more interesting is the reaction on the Conservative side. Ollie Letwin has publicly stated that the Corbyn proposals offer a way out of the impasse, while Boles, Crabb and others have all welcomed the initiative.

    On the other side, there is much synthetic anger from Lab remainers. This is understandable, given most Lab members really want to remain, but you can cite the 2017 Labour voters all you like – remain wasn’t Labour policy.

    Going back a long, long time now I have always felt that a deal was going to happen (with remain the only other viable option) but to get a deal it was obvious that neither party would be able to keep their MPs intact. Obviously, this meant a cross party agreement had to happen.

    In the last few days we’ve had May rowing back from scrapping the backstop, and Corbyn putting forward a realistic plan that the EU would back, along with a decent chunk of Tory MPs. It only needs a net switch of around 20 MPs or so to support a CU, so I suspect Corbyn’s plan is going to be the basis of where we end up.

    Whether Corbyn gets the polling credit for this, or whether each of the big two parties survive this intact, is anyone’s guess.

  47. ALEC
    “From what you say, I read it that revoking or extending A50 would mean that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 does not dictate that we leave on March 29th, as some seem to think, as there would be no exit day?”

    I think the point is, and I think this is consistent with what WB61 said, that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 does not dictate that we leave on March 29th beacuse it doesn’t dictate that we leave.

  48. LASZLO

    Thanks.

    With apologies to Lesley Gore:-

    t’s their party, and they’ll cry if they want to
    Cry if they want to, cry if they want to
    You would cry too if it happened to you

1 2 3 11