Prorogation polling

Three polling companies – YouGov, Ipsos MORI and Survation – have so far released polling on the government’s decision to prorogue Parliament in mid-September.

YouGov polled on the issue twice – a snap poll on the day of the announcement itself, with the same question repeated overnight. The on-the-day figures were 27% acceptable, 47% unacceptable, 26% don’t know. The follow-up poll had a similar split, but with the number of don’t knows dropping off as people became aware of the story – 31% said it was acceptable, 53% unacceptable, 16% don’t know. Tabs are here)

Ipsos MORI did an unusual online poll (almost alone among pollsters these days, most of their polling is done by phone). They found 30% thought the decision to prorogue Parliament was right, 46% thought it was wrong. Tables are here.

Finally there was a Survation poll for today’s Daily Mail. This found a closer result, with the public fairly evenly split – 39% were supportive, 40% opposed (note this is rounding the totals for support/oppose after they’ve been summed, hence the apparent discrepancy with the tables). Tables are here.

Overall it looks as if the public are opposed to the prorogation decision – though it is unclear to what degree. Whether that really matters or will make any dent in the government’s support is a different matter. Opposition to prorogation is concentrated among Remainers (in YouGov 82% of Remainers think the move is unacceptable, but only 24% of Leavers, in MORI’s poll 74% of Remainers think it was wrong, only 20% of Leavers, in Survation 74% Remainers, 14% leavers). If most of the opposition to the move comes from people who are opposed to the government’s policy anyway (and I expect the more fervent opposition comes from those who were most fervently opposed already) the government are hardly likely to worry too much over losing the crucial “people who hated us anyway” vote.

Both YouGov and Survation included voting intention in their surveys:

YouGov’s topline figures were CON 33%(-1), LAB 22%(nc), LDEM 21%(+4), BREX 12%(-1), GRN 7%(-1)
Survation’s topline figures were CON 31%(+3), LAB 24%(nc), LD 21%(nc), BREX 14%(-2), GRN 3%(nc)

Changes in the YouGov poll are from a poll earlier this week, before the announcement. In Survation changes are from a poll three weeks ago. There is a little movement up and down, but certainly nothing that suggests the announcement has done immediate damage to Conservative support.


3,389 Responses to “Prorogation polling”

1 2 3 4 5 68
  1. Pure speculation on my part but I wonder how many Conservative MP’s, who are in danger of being kicked out by Johnson if they do rebel, have already been in talks with the Libdems to find a safe harbour if that does happen

  2. Charles

    Have the Skegness and Stacation factions considered the Lake District model as an option.

    Of they can coalesce around this alternative they may have the votes to defeat the Torquay lot.

  3. Just pondering how (I think) @Somerjohn, @Hireton and myself (and possibly a few others) got into hot water amongst Brexiters around three years ago when we suggested that the Irish border would be the big sticking point.

    There was quite an angry and contemptuous response from those who dismissed the idea as nonsense and claimed that the EU only cared about the cash, and that the UK would use this as the big stick with which to beat them into submission.

    It’s so long ago, yet still seems completely symbolic of how little so many Brexiters have actually understood about this process.

    Reading Barnier’s article this morning, the misunderstandings look like continuing all the way to November.

  4. I see from newspaper reports that the Prime Minister is reported as saying that he would respond to parliamentary defeat next week by calling an election.

    Leaving aside for a moment whether and how this is possible under the fixed term legislation, I hope that an election will be held either well before or after 31 October.

    This would clear the air and I hope restore sovereignty to parliament rather than government by referendum. I would point out that it is unknown at this point who would win an election, though readers of this site should be in a better position than most to make a reasonable prediction.

    I think most people can accept that their party can lose an election from time to time, and if they see for example that utilities like water can be privatised they know that these can also be nationalised by a future government, without necessarily waiting one or two generations for a referendum.

    So it should be with the our alignment, and if a future elected government should decide to take into trading partnership with some other grouping as yet unformed that can be decided at the time, as no government can bind its successors.

    I will return tonight to read any discussions.

  5. Jim Jam,
    Correct. The only purpose of the caretaker government was/is to avoid Brexit happening during an election campaign. If Parliament somehow manages to force a delay beyond Oct 31st there will be no need because one way or another that will bring about an election.

    However I suspect Cummngs and Mogg have calculated correctly and will succeed in blocking the legislative route. If it does not succeed this week (yes, that is where we are, with Monday already wasted on hoilday even the schoolkids dont get), then trying after the undemocratic lockout will be delayed by the Queen’s Speech debate until there is less than 14 days before Brexit.

    I think the ONLY way may prove to be a call for a VONC on the 14th Oct and then hoping a temporary government can be cobbled together one way or another. As far as I can see there could be more than one VOC in the 14 day period, so Corbyn could have a go, then someone else if he does not win. Since there is no precedent for what happens I suspect the Speaker will be in charge…

  6. It is also not clear what happens if a VOC succeeds before 14 days is up. Does Porkpieman get to clutch onto the lifebelt with the sharks unable to get a bite as he stubbornly refuses to see the Queen?

  7. It is also not clear what happens if a VOC succeeds before 14 days is up. Does Porkpieman get to clutch onto the lifebelt with the sharks unable to get a bite as he stubbornly refuses to see the Queen?

  8. @Neilj – I do think it’s quite a big gamble for Johnson to tell his MPs that ‘it’s time to decide which side you are on’.

    This isn’t a George Bush 9/11 Twin Towers moment. The other ‘side’ isn’t a global terror network, and if his MPs decide their party has been highjacked by Faragists, such an ultimatum could push them away more than unite them, especially with so many standing down.

  9. Some here have deep and wide interests in environmental matters. The excellent Trade Policy Observatory blog at Sussex Uni has this post (and other interesting ones).

    http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2019/07/16/a-look-at-new-uk-pesticides-regulation-part-2/

    “In May we published a blog analysing the EU Exit statutory instruments (SIs) on pesticides prepared under the EU Withdrawal Act 2018. One of the key concerns that we raised was that EU restrictions on pesticides with endocrine disrupting properties had been deleted. After this omission was identified, DEFRA responded very swiftly, clarifying that the deletion had been accidental and releasing a new Statutory Instrument (SI)……

    …..However, the new SI does not address other issues, some of which are significant. For example, as we outlined in our blog:

    *UK ministers have discretionary powers to amend, revoke or make new legislation on pesticides
    *responsibilities and working arrangements between the four UK countries are opaque, in ways that could create complications for intra-UK trade
    *the requirement to take scientific evidence into account is weakened.”

  10. There may be a number of people (WB61?) looking forward to the unfair dismissal claim Sonia Khan is likely to make.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49532243

    “A Downing Street source had previously pointed the finger for the leak at an unnamed former minister, prompting the then chancellor, Philip Hammond, to write to Mr Johnson and ask him to “apologise for the misleading briefing from No 10″.

    At the meeting with Mr Cummings, Ms Khan, who worked under Mr Hammond, handed over both her personal and work phones, and her phone logs were checked.

    Evidence was found that she had been in touch with former colleagues who had worked for Mr Hammond, but not that she had been involved in leaking any sensitive government information.

    No reason was given for her dismissal, but the BBC’s Iain Watson said it was suggested the issue was about whether she could be trusted to be transparent with No 10.”

  11. Oldnat – yes you’re right it is possible that rounding could do that.

    Delta poll more generally:

    Delta’s previous poll saw a 10 point increase for Con so thats 15 over two polls – which was I suppose the time period since the depths of conservative woe back in May/June.

    It must be a bit disappointing for remainers to see that the combined Con+Brexit vote is about 49% in that poll.

  12. Sam, If she has been there long enough she would have a case at a tribunal.

    ”Evidence was found that she had been in touch with former colleagues who had worked for Mr Hammond, but not that she had been involved in leaking any sensitive government information.”

    I have changed jobs a couple of times and one had a very stringent non-compete carry over from my contract. None stopped me talking to former colleagues and business contacts as long as we did not discuss sensitive business matters.

  13. Andrew 11,

    Genuine question.

    Should the LDs, or any party, in local Government be propping up minority Tory Councils given that parties cynical disdain for democracy in the view of the LDs (which I share by the way)?

  14. @ALEC “(and possibly a few others)”

    Oldnat, Prof howard, Peter W, WB61, me and possibly a few others….

  15. @ Sam

    The difficulty that Sonia Khan may have on ordinary unfair dismissal is that an individual has to have 2 years continuous employment (it may be that she has such continuity if she has been employed by a number of ministers as a SPAD for that period). However, that period of continuous employment is unnecessary if she brings an automatic unfair dismissal claim or a discrimination claim. She could possibly bring an automatically unfair claim if she could establish that she has made a protected disclosure (commonly referred to as whistleblowing) and her dismissal was for that reason, I cannot, without much more detail think any of the other automatic unfair dismissal categories might apply. Even that category is very limited in order to consider a claim under that head she would have to establish a qualifying disclosure (which means the information she relies on as a disclosure fell into one of the particular categories and was made to one of the particular persons to whom such disclosure can be made set out in the legislation). In terms of discrimination she might be able to argue that she was dismissed because of religious or PHILOSOPHICAL belief, this is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010 in order to qualify as a philosophical belief the case law asks that the following requirements are considered:
    1. Is the belief genuine? 2. Is the belief not simply an opinion in relation to particular circumstances? 3. Is the belief in relation to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour 4. Has the belief attained a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance? 5. The belief must not be contrary to the fundamental rights of others.

  16. @ PROFHOWARD

    “It must be a bit disappointing for remainers to see that the combined Con+Brexit vote is about 49% in that poll.”

    It merely confirms that positions have hardened and become entrenched.

    I am more sure that a General Election is likely now – December 5th being mentioned as a date.

    I assume BJ will ask for a short extension to the end of December (maybe January 31 = 3 months) if he loses the vote this week, be that VoNC or the imposition of handcuff legislation.

    Another referendum is now inevitable because of this – in Scotland, as expect almost all constituencies there will be SNP seats.

  17. @NielJ.

    I wonder how many Conservative MP’s are in danger of being kicked out by the voters anyway?

    There are many MPs in the south of England in seats with remain majorities that are clear targets for the Libs. I’d say a lot of those MPs already know they’re damned either way.

  18. After all the excitement we have seen from Remainers over the last few days I could not resist pointing out what polling actually tells us.

    Looking at the latest YouGov (this is after all a polling site) I was struck by the answers to two of the questions asked.

    Whether or not you agree with them, do you think MPs and politicians who SUPPORT leaving the EU without a deal are behaving in a way that respects British democracy?

    Are behaving in a way that respects democracy 36%

    Are not behaving in way that respects democracy 44%

    Don’t Know 20%

    A majority of 8% say undemocratic.

    Whether or not you agree with them, do you think MPs and politicians who OPPOSE leaving the EU without a deal are behaving in a way that respects British democracy?

    Are behaving in a way that respects democracy 29%

    Are not behaving in way that respects democracy 52%

    Don’t know 19%

    A majority of 23% say undemocratic

    So, whilst the public views both sides in the argument as acting undemocratically it clearly thinks those trying to frustrate the Government as much more undemocratic than those supporting the Government stance. This view seems to be supported by the levels of Conservative support in the lastest polls.

    I am a little surprised that this does not seem to have been picked up by other posters :-)

    Have a good day all, off for walk across the fields nearby with my wife. Next week looks exciting (Test match on Thursday)!

  19. Just a question to ponder….given that every single vote could be crucial, which way do you think Theresa May will vote when it comes to a vote on a No Deal Brexit?

  20. Gove refuses to confirm that government will abide by legislation passed in Parl.

    Instead, he says they would have to look at what the legislation was.

    Sorry, but that’s not relevant. Regardless of what the legislation is, the government would have to abide by it. This is a point of law, not a political point.

    A goverment that fails to confirm that it would have to abide by legislation, even if it was legislation it did not agree with, is trying to set itself above the law.

    What kind of tyranny is this?

  21. @Sam – indeed. In my mind was a specific thread that became quite heated, and I appreciate that at other times many others have stated the obvious.

  22. @JIM JAM

    I know your question was addressed to ANDREW 11 but, having been involved in Local Government for about 20 years, I feel I should point out that the national parties have no control over local arrangements.
    I have been a member of ruling coalitions of Con/Lab, Con/Lib, Con/Lab/Green and Con/Ind. In non of these cases did we consult the national party. I have always taken the view that what matters is what works.
    Incidentally, As a group leader, I saw myself as acting for my group and my electorate. The party affiliation, whilst demonstrating the general beliefs of myself and my group members, was always secondary. Nobody ever pulled me up on it.

  23. “Just a question to ponder….given that every single vote could be crucial, which way do you think Theresa May will vote when it comes to a vote on a No Deal Brexit?”

    She won’t support the vote ruling out no deal as she never supported those kind of votes when they happened when she was PM.

  24. Defeat for the government next week? Thursday October 17th, Johnson to win with a 30+ majority and every current Tory MP that didn’t back him next week (Grieve, Hammond, May, Gauke – the lot) deselected to boot.

    Job’s a good ‘un

  25. Has anyone asked – problem with legislating to not leave without a deal is – what is “a deal”? How is that defined?

  26. @Matt126: ‘The threat of deselection could be counter productive. It could force a few to resign the Whip and the majority if there is one would be gone. Some may join the Lib Dems and make then stronger.’

    Not only that – if a general election takes place as soon as many seem to expect, there’s a risk that some Conservative Associations may deselect their sitting MP, but then fail to get another candidate in place in time for the election.

    To drag myself back on topic for once – when I put the BritainElects data reported by @OldNat into the basic swingometer on this site, it predicts a Conservative majority of 28; when I put the same data into Electoral Calculus, it predicts a Conservative majority of 112. Those are really quite different outcomes. Does anyone know what the differences between the two algorithms are?

  27. @TonyBTG: ‘Gove refuses to confirm that government will abide by legislation passed in Parl. Instead, he says they would have to look at what the legislation was. Sorry, but that’s not relevant. Regardless of what the legislation is, the government would have to abide by it. This is a point of law, not a political point.
    A goverment that fails to confirm that it would have to abide by legislation, even if it was legislation it did not agree with, is trying to set itself above the law.’

    It’s disgraceful but not entirely surprising. Of course, those seeking to legislate to oblige the PM to request an article 50 extension have the option of raising the stakes by making it a criminal offence carrying a custodial sentence for the PM to fail to make best efforts to obtain the extension.

  28. @My How We Laughed

    “Defeat for the government next week? Thursday October 17th, Johnson to win with a 30+ majority and every current Tory MP that didn’t back him next week (Grieve, Hammond, May, Gauke – the lot) deselected to boot.

    Job’s a good ‘un”

    We’ll see how things pan out. There is precedent for a Tory PM seeking to to call an election under the slogan: ‘Who Governs Britain?’, only to be told by the electorate: ‘Not you’.

  29. @ Neilj

    Tory rebels have nothing to lose once they rebel but I’m not sure that they have many immediate prospects joining the Lib Dems either.

    Gauke- 58% with Lab second
    Harrington- 45% but Lab close second
    Letwin- 56%
    Hammond- 61% with Lab second
    James- 55% with Lab second
    Bebb- 45% but Lab close second
    Grieve- 65%

    So for them it is not a case of just standing in their constituency as a Lib Dem and having a chance. The Lib Dems would have to find them more winnable seats and I would imagine their target seats already have some “hardworking local” challenger lined up.

  30. TOH: Looking at the latest YouGov (this is after all a polling site) I was struck by the answers to two of the questions asked.

    Cherry-picking questions that suit you and trumpeting the responses doesn’t add much to the debate. So it’s with weary reluctance* that I counter with two other questions from the same survey:

    In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union

    Right 40%
    Wrong 50%

    … Parliament will not meet between mid-September and mid-October, in the run up to Brexit. Do you think it is or is not acceptable for the government to stop Parliament from meeting during this period?

    Acceptable 31%
    Not acceptable 53%

    * self-deprecating humour, or maybe irony, as everyone knows (probably) it’s nice to have a good reason for trumpeting the poll findings you like. It’s the partisan, gratuitous proferring of them that grates a bit.

  31. ANDREW111

    I suspect (and as you rightly say that’s all any of us can do as we’re speculating about an untested process) that you have the two events in the wrong order.

    The FTPA VoC has to be in the Government. To pass a FTPA VoC in the alternative, the alternative first has to be the Government. At which point BJ can no longer cling to office as he’s already out of it.

    But it’s getting there. It’s possible the speaker would find a way to hold an indicative vote (this House informs HM that it would have confidence in …). But nobody can honestly say they know for certain what happens then as it’s never happened before.

  32. @TBTG @SDA lol! thanks for elaborating my parable in imaginative ways.

    @ Jim Jam – my concern about a VONC without a temporary government is that it would not be able to ask for a delay and might run out of time. An election after Brexit has happened seems to me likely to be disastrous for Labour.

  33. @HDAN

    In the list of things hard Brexiteers would do to get no deal we have:

    – trash the union of the UK
    – damage the economy

    We now need to add

    – damage our parliamentary democracy.

    Phew.

  34. @ JJ (and SHEVII) – HoC maths for VoNC from last thread

    Thanks to JJ for thoughts on LAB side and SHEVII’s input. Makes sense and would fully agree with JJ that it has to be Corbyn or no-one and see multiple previous posts (before and since Summer) about the issue that it has to be someone who writes a letter to Tusk.

    For LAB MPs though then Hoey is effectively DUP and has said she won’t stand in next GE and I thought likes of Mann(+co?) might well abstain (at least next week), see:

    https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1146369620489621504?lang=en

    Then you obviously have xLAB like Austin and Field and even possible abstain/not yet from xLDEM Lloyd. (note below issue on whether this is before or after EU Council meeting as in theory a deal is still possible[1])

    Some minor adjustments/thought on CON MPs who might end up hitting the “nuclear button”

    Next week: Beyond near certainty of K.Clarke (who was only CON MP to vote against triggering A50) then I’m not even sure you’d get Grieve but if you get Grieve then you’ll probably get Lee, Gyimah, Bebb as well (so n=1 to 5)

    After EU Summit (assuming no NEW deal). Above 5 for sure and then into the likes of Letwin, Harrington who have stated they won’t stand for re-election. Beyond that though?? Likes of Ellwood, Spelman, etc have made it very clear over the Summer that they’d never kick out a CON PM under any circumstance.

    Sandbach has been quiet but doesn’t appear to be ready to quit CON party. Gauke-ward squad are being egged on by Smogg but I doubt foolish enough to take the bait.
    SCON MPs?? Doubtful IMHO as on current polling they’d probably all lose their seats.
    (all IMHO of course)

    [1] The “possibility” is v.low in most people’s opinion but to jump in before EU Council meeting would be a gift to Boris – although leaving it too late creates an even bigger problem, especially for all those who have been yelling “coup” over the last week!

    Also not the Queen’s Speech issue (see next post)

  35. NF, Thanks my question was prompted as yesterday at a local anti-prorogation (in this way) demo the local LD leader berated undemocratic Tories etc.

    When it was pointed out she was propping them up with a local C%S she mumbled a non convincing answer.

    Whilst local arrangement must remain the decision of local parties it is incumbent on National Leaderships to encourage local parties to act in certain way. I await Jo Swinsons’ comments.

  36. 80 years ago today Nazi Germany’s Blitz Krieg assault on Poland began. As we know this event led to the UK declaring war on Germany, what followed was five years of modern mechanised warfare and the deaths of millions of people. When I am asked why I am a Remainer it is the post war settlement which attempted to ensure that this sort of horror was never repeated that I put as paramount amongst may many reasons. I have noted that exactly the same events lead many Leavers to consider the EU a problem because they see Germany as (in a way that I do not understand) somehow controlling the EU and making (again in a way I don’t understand) a Fourth Reich. This is merely one example of the many ways where the same facts lead to entirely different world views (EU v USA was mentioned in the previous thread).
    I have come to believe that it is these type of disjunct in Leaver v Remainer thought processes (thesis and antithesis if you will) that needs to be addressed and, if possible a “synthesis” achieved if we are ever to live together as a group of nations. At the moment I don’t see how this is to be done as when discussing Brexit with Leavers I know (not on here but in the real world) it feels like I am speaking to them in English but they hear Chinese and they are speaking to me in Polynesian whilst trying to talk to me in English.

  37. @ToH

    “Next week looks exciting (Test match on Thursday)!”

    ——-

    I think it might start on Wednesday? We don’t want to miss a day!

  38. MHWL

    “…every current Tory MP that didn’t back him next week (Grieve, Hammond, May, Gauke – the lot) deselected to boot.

    Job’s a good ‘un”

    It’s strange how the Right used to be up in arms every time a Labour MP was threatened with de-selection for not toeing the Party line as an affront to democracy, but now, when it’s Tory MPs being threatened, it’s a jolly good thing and they deserve it.

  39. @Prof Howard

    ‘It must be a bit disappointing for remainers to see that the combined Con+Brexit vote is about 49% in that poll.’

    Yes! I at least was disappointed. However the figures quoted by ON do not include PLAID, Greens, Sinn Fein, DUP, change or Scot Nats. That said, remain parties are presumably ahead 51 to 49 percent and given a bit of rounding, margin of error and other comforting considerations it is not yet time to throw in the towel.

    Also interesting and disconcerting were TOH’s statistics showing that people are more likely to see those trying to frustrate Brexit as undemocratic than they are to see this as applying to the Brexiteers themselves.

    I guess this is because until recently no one has ever really taken on the idea that Brexit might be anything other than democratic or that resisting the referendum could be anything other than undemocratic – hence all the talk about honouring the referendum and the genuine fury of leavers with anyone who suggests that it might now be time for a second look.

    Currently there are arguments to the effect that young people with jobs to lose are the ones who will be most affected and many were disenfranchised, there has been a genuine, if slight, shift in public opinion and the public has a right to change its mind, a small unrepresentative group have elected a leader who is pushing through a version of Brexit that we were certainly never promised and a majority do not desire, going for Brexit is riding rough-shod over the wishes of the people’s of Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    Taken together this seems a reasonable case to me, but I guess there are tipping points in opinion and if you come in too late you’ve had it.

  40. JIMJAM WB61

    Thanks for the comments.

    I was aware of the potential hurdle of qualifying service.

    Also, it seems likely that her post was a paid one given its relative importance so arguments about whether she was employed seem unlikely.

    She might argue discrimination claiming that no male spad has ever been or would be dismissed in the humiliating circumstances she encountered. To which the obvious answer from Cumming is, ” Yes he would, I’m a b4st4rd”.

  41. CARFREW

    Apologies, we certainly don’t want to miss a day!

  42. @Charles

    “We are all well up to date with the nature of our family’s dilemma. What do you think we should do?”

    The Torquay two should go to Torquay. The other two should paddle their own canoe (to any port in a storm). ;)

  43. A couple of thoughts on the prospects of possible Con rebels:
    – There are some who don’t intend to stand for Parliament again, so the calculation (assuming they believe strongly that ‘No deal’ Brexit is highly damaging for the UK, which I think is a given) is simple for them: which do they put first, Johnson’s version of the Tory party, or the country?

    – There may be some who hope to carry on but are so disgusted by the whole ghastly charade that they don’t much care if they door don’t – I get the impression Gyamiah is in this category for instance.

    – For MPs hoping to continue ti gets a bit more complicated. Yes, they will never switch to Labour, and yes, the LDems were generally a long way behind, but 2015/17 were unusually low election scores for the LDems.

    If, as the polls currently suggest, we see an increase from ~7.5% to ~20% in LDem support, this will not be a flat 12.5% increase in every seat – places like Barrow, Hyndburn, Glasgow and environs, the welsh valleys were only scoring 10% or less for the LDems even at their peak; they aren’t suddenly going to start scoring 15%+ now.

    Logic suggests that the LDem vote increase is coming primarily from pro-Remain centre left voters who loaned their vote to Labour in 2017 as the best bet to stop Brexit, plus centre-right voters who historically oscillate between Tory and LDems and voted Tory in 2017 to stop the perceived threat of a Corbyn government.

    These voters are disproportionately found in home counties and southern seats, especially the hinterlands of London and ‘progressive’ cities like Cambridge, Oxford, Bath/Bristol.

    The swing here is likely to be quite a lot more than the 10-11% average indicated by the polls; certainly more than 15% and maybe north of 20%, especially if the LDems can get some tacit tactical voting going with Labour (not a formal pact, just no national effort into seats with little or no chance of success).

    So IMHO Tory rebels in seats in the London, the South and Home Counties in relatively Remain supporting seats where the LDems were historically strong (1997-2010), with the advantage of incumbency, have a decent chance of holding on as a LDem should they wish to try – less than 50/50 but by no means negligible.

  44. Charles,

    I understand your worry but am confident that the UK would not leave on Oct 31st with no deal if the GE campaign was on going; some device would be found.

    Trevor – Field tweeted on Thursday that he would vote with Corbyn if he tabled a VONC against the Government which was a nice surprise for me as I had him as a possible waverer.

    I think Hoey and Fitzpatrick are the only 2 current Labour MPS I am not sure about but agree Austin a likely Government backer.

    I suggested 6 Tories needed and I think we almost have them in:
    Clarke, Bebb, Lee, Grieve, Harrington plus a number of possibles like Letwin, Sandbach, Greening, and a couple of Scots Tories more bothered about the Union than keeping their seat for 2.5 more years.

    I think Clarke saying he would not object to Corbyn leading a caretaker Government, alongside the prorogations and bully boy deselections threats actually improved the chances of a VONC passing, even if others measures stand more stand before reaching that point.

    It could be that a VONC occurs if the Government fail to act of the will of parliament who pass a no no-deal emergency motion on Tuesday or Wednesday.

  45. @ PETERW – The process of Indicative Votes to find new PM would need to be done BEFORE kicking Boris out in order to be SURE of success.

    Given the roaring success of IV1 and IV2 to “resolve” Brexit options then I very much MPs get that on next Thurs order paper.

    All those who have spent the Summer and last few days talking about “unelected PM”, “coups”, etc will obviously not see the hypocrisy but as AW points out in lead to this thread:

    “the government are hardly likely to worry too much over losing the crucial “people who hated us anyway” vote”

    Also it should be clear that Boris needs the opposition to be divided. What better than seeing them squabble over who becomes the new unelected PM to lead a coup ;)

    NB Of course SNP (and PC) will be happy to “play along” and be able to portray the “Westminster” parties and Union as the “problem” as it helps their cause. A “Red” on “Orange” fight suits them just fine.

  46. sorry bad English but the intent is clear I think

  47. @Charles

    “That said, remain parties are presumably ahead 51 to 49 percent and given a bit of rounding, margin of error and other comforting considerations it is not yet time to throw in the towel”

    You can only count Labour as nebulously resistant on Brexit.

    If they declare for full Remain, then I would be interested in your mathematical conjecture.

  48. @TonyBTG

    In the list of things hard Brexiteers would do to get no deal we have:

    – trash the union of the UK
    – damage the economy

    We now need to add

    – damage our parliamentary democracy.

    Phew.”

    Taking back control, old bean. Nothing else matters.

  49. There seems to be an assumption here by quite a few that if No Deal Tory members deselect a popular local MP for voting against it, their constituents will happily vote for whoever Central Office Nominated.

    It also assumes that the Local Party will all rally behind the new candidate and go out door knocking.

    As a lot of Labour supporters have commented new Momentum members were good at attacking people they didn’t like at meetings but rare seem knocking doors on a cold wet night!

    It might only be about a quarter of Tory voters who oppose what Boris is doing but how many seats can you afford to lose one in five votes and that’s before you factor in encumbrancy being worth up to 10% of an MP’s vote!

    Peter.

  50. @ PROFHOWARD – “Has anyone asked – problem with legislating to not leave without a deal is – what is “a deal”? How is that defined?”

    I don’t think any Remainer has asked that but they should have! Leavers have thought about but clearly we’re not going to mention it.

    So if EC-EU27 agree absolutely any kind of temporary arrangements in the event of “No WA” (as they have) then is that not a “deal”?

    One for the courts I expect[1] and that eats up more time and conveniently gives Boris the chance to show we’re not “crashing out” and there is no “cliff edge” (he only needs the marginal voters in marginal seats to think that, not die-hard Remainers)

    Also note if any future court (and not just talking UK now) states that any temporary arrangements constituted fulfillment of Article50 then after 31Oct we’d be rejoining via Article49.

    Just saying that in advance as Brown floated some kind of “unilateral” EU27 3rd extension “unicorn” this week and perhaps Barnier, Varadkar, Tusk, etc will morph their expectation that we’ll have to sign up the WA+PD after we’ve left with No WA into some kind of “promise” that we can rejoin on our old terms (ie Rejoin on our old terms). Good luck selling that “unicorn” to the electorate (ideally LDEM latch on to it and LAB don’t).

    [1] Really can’t be bothered going over A50 again until we get to above issue as it’s clearly not in Leaves interest to highlight the flaws in Remain’s “cunning plans” (although muddying the water is).

    498 MPs voted to give PM of the day the authority to trigger A50 (as per Gina MIller) although it seems a lot of them didn’t understand what they voted for ;)

1 2 3 4 5 68

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)