The final Sunday before the election. There should be plenty of polls out tonight (certainly we should see ComRes, YouGov, Deltapoll and Opinium – and perhaps others). I will update this post as they appear, and then round up at the end.

The first to appear is SavantaComRes. Slightly confusingly they have two polls out tonight, conducted using slightly different methods, over different timescale and showing slightly different results.

The first was conducted for RemainUnited, Gina Miller’s anti-Brexit campaign, and was conducted between Monday and Thursday. It has topline figures of CON 42%, LAB 36%, LDEM 11%, BREX 4%. The second was conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, with fieldwork between Wednesday and Thursday. Topline figures there are CON 41%, LAB 33%, LDEM 12%, BREX 3%. Tables for the SavantaComRes/Sunday Telegraph poll are already available here.

The previous ComRes poll was conducted for the Daily Telegraph with fieldwork on Monday and Tuesday, so the RemainUnited poll actually straddles the fieldwork period of both polls. It was also asked a little differently. The most recent two ComRes polls for the Telegraph have prompted people with the specific candidates standing in their constituency (i.e. someone would be asked if they will vote for Bob Smith – Labour, Fred Jones – Conservative, etc, and not be given the option of voting for any party that is not standing in their area). In contrast, it appears that the ComRes poll for RemainUnited was conducted using their previous method, where candidates were just prompted with a list of parties – Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and so on. For some reason, ComRes seem to find a higher level of support for “other others” when they prompt using party names.

Putting that aside, the SavantaComRes poll for the Telegraph earlier in the week had a 10 point Conservative lead. Comparing the two SavantaComRes/Telegraph polls that used the same methodology shows the Tories down 1, Labour up 1. A small narrowing in the lead, but nothing that couldn’t just be noise. I’m expecting a fair number of polls tonight, so we should be in a position to see if there is a consistent trend across the polling companies, rather than getting too excited about any movement in individual polls.

UPDATE1 – Secondly we have Opinium for the Observer. Topline voting intention figures there are CON 46%(nc), LAB 31%(nc), LDEM 13%(nc), BREX 2%(nc). Fieldwork was conducted between Wednesday and Friday and the changes are from a week ago. There is obviously no movement at all in support for the main parties here. The fifteen point Tory lead looks daunting, but it’s worth bearing in mind that Opinium have tended to show the largest Conservative leads during the campaign.

UPDATE2: The weekly YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 43%(+1), LAB 33%(nc), LDEM 13%(+1), BREX 3%(-1). Fieldwork was Thursday and Friday, and changes are from their midweek poll for the Times and Sky. Again, no significant change here. YouGov’s last four polls have had the Tory lead at 11, 9, 9 and 10 points, so pretty steady.

Finally (at least, as far as I’m aware) there is Deltapoll in the Mail on Sunday. Changes are from last week. Their topline figures are CON 44%(-1), LAB 33%(+1), LDEM 11%(-4), BREX 3%(nc). A slight narrowing there, leaving the Conservative lead at 11, but again, nothing that couldn’t just be noise.

Looking at the four companies who’ve released GB opinion polls for the Sunday papers, we’ve got ComRes and Deltapoll showing things narrowing by a little, YouGov showing the lead growing by a point, Opinium showing no movement. The clear trend towards Labour we were seeing earlier in the campaign appears to have petered out. The average across the four is a Conservative lead of 11 points, though of course, these are tilted towards those pollsters who show bigger Conservative leads. Taking an average of the most recent poll from all ten pollsters producing regular figures gives an average of 10 points.


2,060 Responses to “Sunday polls – as they are published”

1 2 3 4 5 42
  1. * devastated

  2. @TonyBTG

    I’ll save your excellent rhyme for Thursday.

  3. But beards are so ‘in’ at the moment.

    Wouldn’t you think that Corbyn would get a beard bounce in the polls.

    No more limerick silliness now.

    It was a good way to fend off the depression that set in after the hope raised by the Comres was dented by the next polls and then dashed against the rocks by Opinium.

  4. An old man from Islington said
    “I’ve got in right over my head,
    They won’t vote for me
    Whatever they see
    While my stance is so blatantly red”

    (Trying to be a bit more like Edward Lear)

  5. TonyBTG
    Sorry, I was composing when you posted :)

  6. JIB

    You’re welcome.

  7. https://labourlist.org/2019/12/65-battleground-seats-for-labour-will-decide-the-election-result/

    This report indicates the seats that are no hopers for Labour and those that are more hopeful . I found it interesting.

  8. At the very least, can you have some respect for pentameter! Also, some of the rhyming attempts are ourageous! It reminds me of Chris de Burgh trying to rhyme ‘ dance’ with ‘ romance’. Those were dark days: let’s not repeat them.

  9. Thanks TonyBTG for the “good sense” endorsement of me in your limerick.

  10. If we assume that in the most marginal English seats, there won’t be sufficient tactical voting to elect sufficient non-Tory MPs, then I have a simple message for Labour – “Hell mend ye!”

    You embraced FPTP so that you could occasionally form governments from a pitifully small vote, to allow you to govern England against the wishes of its people.

    That does make you very “British”.

    Proportional Representation was abhorrent to you, because you were really only interested in power.

    You will have brought this entirely on yourselves – and condemned all the rest of us to suffer the consequences of your own inadequacies.

    Not that I want the Labour supporters of FPTP to burn in hellfire, or anything like that. Skewered and lightly grilled over charcoal would be reasonable, though.

  11. The man who became Baron Rievaulx
    Showed Salisbury only from rear view
    So of his facial hair
    Hdan was unaware
    Thank goodness Pete B finally came through

  12. @Oldnat

    I’m no fan of FPTP, but it does rather favour the SNP.

    Proportionally far more than any other party.

  13. Some killjoys want done with the limerick
    Well they just make me feel so very sick
    Whar better employment
    For polling enjoyment
    As some rhymes here are really just very slick

  14. HDAN
    :)

  15. JiB

    FPTP favours the largest party in a system, like the stupid one foisted on us by the Westminster alliance of corrupt parties.

    Unless English voters can’t produce a majority for one party, it doesn’t matter a damn how many MPs of other parties are elected from the devolved polities. The SNP got 56/59 FPTP seats in 2015. Did it get us anywhere? No.

    In Scotland, PR produces minority government – unless near 50% of the electorate chooses otherwise. The only proposals to change that are to introduce STV for all elections, to make our politics more proportional.

    The SNP will play the silly Westminster game, on the rare occasions that it can wield its votes, but doesn’t endorse the foolish system in any way.

  16. STV would be very welcome from my point of view. It would be very helpful for Westminster elections in NI. Recently the DUP was the only party in the house of commons which presented an incorrect picture. Scotland is not well served by it in terms of representation of different parties. And of course England ends up with some seats that are essentially not challenged – it is a job for life for some. A terrible system.

  17. As a fairly leftwing labourite, or at least I used to be left wing in the days of Blair and Brown (suspect I might be more towards the right of the party now), I’m all in favour of PR, preferably of the kind Jenkins proposed.

    Sadly there are too many who were against (Prescott etc) and Blair was no fan so the commitment to PR was reneged upon. Huge mistake in my opinion. Should have at least been a referendum on proper PR as proposed by Jenkins in Labours 2nd term.

  18. In Ireland STV works very well.

    They have a similar constitution to the UK though they deal with referendums in a more sensible way and in place of a monarchy with no power they have an AV-elected head of state with no powers, who is elected every 7 years (renewable without election for a further 7, if no parties challenge).

    OldNat do you think the parties in Scotland would be up for STV to Westminster even if England does not use it?

    At one point this was being considered for NI Westminster elections (around 2000) but the UUP under Trimble blocked it. There is no particular reason the same system has to be used everywhere. Indeed in the EU elections NI uses a different system to GB.

  19. @VoR

    Jenkins. My political hero. Best Home Sec in history, and one of the best Chancellors, and knew what the EU was about [1].

    [1] Not economics. Security.

  20. VOICE_OF_REASON

    I think the next time it comes up it should be introduced without a referendum. The AV referendum showed that this topic is not of interest to people generally.

  21. @John 33

    “I’ll donate £100 to charity if you stop these bloody limericks!!”

    Most of them aren’t strictly limericks anyway.

    This is a limerick:

    A sage of Islington was he
    Low key and without a degree
    Yet so hard he fought
    For those who could not
    If only the blind, they could see.

  22. Before the pedants jump in…

    I know when Jenkins was active there was no EU, only the EEC. But he knew the origins (F-GW, WW1, WW2), and as President of the Commision he knew the direction of travel.

  23. We do have to point out something however about STV.

    In Northern Ireland people thought it would lead to more moderate politics—people would be able to avoid extremes and vote for more middle ground politics. But when we introduced it in the 1970s it actually facilitated the extremes — that’s how the DUP and SF got their first toe-hold into NI politics. And the middle ground (Alliance) didn’t really prosper, though they were able to benefit from it a bit.

    In England you could find a whole lot of UKIP type MPs coming in, and on the left you might get some left-of-Labour types. You had some of those in Scotland I think though they seem to have diminished. (I often wonder if the hard left is due a revival in Scotland, but I am too far from things to have any feel for that). You’d also get more greens (tho if they’re all like Caroline Lucas that would be entirely welcome!).

  24. Let’s change the subject. Best ever goal scored in an FA cup final. I am going for Steve Mackenzie’s volley against Spurs in the 1981 final.

  25. Prof Howard

    You make an excellent point that there is no reason why all the polities in the UK should have to use the same electoral system. Indeed, that didn’t happen until the 20th century, when Westminster increasingly enforced the model devised for England on everyone else.

    The number of MPs for each of the 4 polities is determined by formula (with exceptions made for Scotland’s geography), so it shouldn’t matter how each polity elects its representatives.

    Indeed, there is no good reason why Scotland should have the extra MPs for the Highlands & Islands, unless Scotland so chooses to redistribute its allocation.

    As to the views of the parties? Currently, they’ll all tend to go for what advantages their position at Westminster, as long as we’re there. :-)

    But if a long-term UK constitutional settlement had been achieved which Scots were able to settle for, I don’t see why not.

  26. @John33

    Same final. Ricardo Villa.

  27. I suspect the Tory majority is going to be more than 42 seats – there has been little evidence that the Tory/Lab marginals are going any other way but blue.

    Is it just my imagination that most of the Shadow Cabinet have been sidelined this time round? I can see that the Shadow Remainers would constantly have been put on the spot when interviewed but their seclusion has allowed the Cummings policy of identifying Labour with Corbyn a free rein.

    Logically a spotlight on Corbyn and his far more free spending leftie manifesto (compared to 2017) should have enhanced the Lib Dem position but that logic only applies in a proportional representation system. It is fear of Corbyn that has weakened the Lib Dems, not any supposed failings on the part of Swinson.

    The spotlight on Corbyn has also meant that there has been no strong restatement during the election of the manifest stupidities of Brexit. I do recognise, however, that the format of the TV “debates” more or less preclude any sensible, detailed examination of the pros and cons of Brexit, or anything else come to that.

  28. There was a man called IDS
    Who said ‘Benefits are a mess’
    So he started UC
    Remarking with glee
    “It’ll give those d*mned losers some stress”

  29. MOG
    “I know when Jenkins was active there was no EU, only the EEC. But he knew the origins (F-GW, WW1, WW2), and as President of the Commision he knew the direction of travel.”

    We all look at things from our own point of view. My own is that the EC, EEC, EU etc are but the continuation of the wars you refer to. In other words, the Germans are getting a bit more subtle in their attempt to dominate Europe. I do remember one of their foreign ministers about 20 years ago saying that if they did not get their way over something (probably one of the treaties) that they’d have to revert to ‘traditional methods’, which I found rather chilling.

    Someone posted recently that various armies in the EU have parts under German command. I think the Dutch and Czechs were two examples.

  30. @MOG

    I am a life – long Spurs but I always felt that Villa was a tad overrated. My favourite Spurs goal was the 1982 quarter final at the Bridge. Hughton to Hazard; two neat little flicks and then Hoddle buried it. Sublime!

  31. Simon Wren-Lewis on how the fawning corporate media has “othered” Corbyn to make it open season on him. If you accept that framing has occured, it is pretty obvious that Corbyn is a great man to all except the brainwashed.

    https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/

  32. Prof Howard

    Since any PR system enhances the representation of disparate views in a society, it is inevitable that a highly divided society will produce representation that reflects that division. The more splintered the society, the more splintered the politics.

    FPTP doesn’t reduce splintering, it just conceals, or institutionalises it,

    If a polity is so splintered that it can’t cohere it may be a pointless exercise to continue it in existence.

    Polities are created by humans. They aren’t some magical creations of an Almighty!

  33. @ Voice of Reason
    “Sadly there are too many who were against (Prescott etc) and Blair was no fan so the commitment to PR was reneged upon. Huge mistake in my opinion. Should have at least been a referendum on proper PR as proposed by Jenkins in Labours 2nd term.”

    All v true. Labour were far too timid in 1997-2005 about PR & in many other ways. They had so much power & yet they spent weeks arguing about foxhunting!
    Corbyn is Old Labour & showed no ingenuity or flexibility in how to create a popular front in these extraordinary times to defeat a government that promises to be v nasty..

    Despite Oldnat’s “sermon-on the-mount, I told-you-so” rant, I can’t see the SNP or indeed the Lib-Dems have compromised either. If the Tories win a working majority in an election agreed to by the SNP then the latter are where they were in 2015 when, as Oldnat says: they “got 56/59 FPTP seats in 2015. Did it get us anywhere? No.” The Tories will be in no mood to do them any favours.
    No one but the Tories will gain from this election.

  34. Oldnat
    The number of seats in an STV system can be used to squeeze out smaller parties — if I remember right FF and FG voted at one time to move away from 5 member constituencies and to have more 3 member ones, which was detrimental to Labour. And both the DUP and SF seemed very happy to reduce the number of members in the Stormont constituencies from 6 to 5.

  35. Pete B

    “In other words, the Germans are getting a bit more subtle in their attempt to dominate Europe.”

    I do dislike the kind of Nationalism that whines when another state successfully, exerts domination over others which their own is inadequate, or can’t be bothered, to do any more.

    If you abandoned the UK Imperialism, and accepted that Mercia should just run itself, and co-operate with other states, you would be much less frustrated about life, the universe and everything. The answer is 42 (which, as a programmer, you should know).

  36. Don’t think this has been posted

    Scottish Westminster voting intention:

    SNP: 39% (-1)
    CON: 29% (+1)
    LAB: 21% (+1)
    LDEM: 10% (-1)

    via
    @Panelbase
    , 03 – 06 Dec
    Chgs. w/ 22 Nov

  37. @ Pete B
    “My own is that the EC, EEC, EU etc are but the continuation of the wars you refer to. In other words, the Germans are getting a bit more subtle in their attempt to dominate Europe.”

    One can always rely on you to come out with tosh!

    Think. When we leave the EU we will have considerably less influence on what happens in Europe. If we have less influence, the Germans must have more influence. Hence, their mission to dominate Europe will be enhanced & our abilty to stop them completing WW” will be weakened, If therefore you want to reduce or contain German influence then you should be arguing for Remain.

  38. Non-compulsory voting also increases political radicalism. As in the US, the emphasis is on firing up the base rather than attracting broad support.
    No government that crawls into office with less than 50 per cent of the vote is legitimate. 35 – 40 per cent of the vote is a travesty of democracy.

  39. Prof Howard

    Dead right about squeezing out smaller parties by reducing the size of wards/constituencies.

    The SNP is no better than any other party in that regard, having agreed with SCon/SLab that 3 or 4 councillors per STV ward was a good thing.

    At national level, it could be amended to create an additional seat or two for a group of multi-member constituencies on a similar model to AMS, so that smaller parties gain some representation.

  40. PS. Indeed one of the primary reasons the Tories under Macmillan & Heath became serious about joing the ECC was they were concerned about the strength, not so much of Germany, as of the Franco-German alliance, somehting which Brexit has immensely strengthened. Well done: you have helped achieve what you wanted to frustrate. Genius.

  41. JiB

    Thanks for that Panelbase summary.

    It’s pretty much what one would expect from them. Their methodology produces lower SNP and higher SCon/SLab numbers than other pollsters.

    As to who is right? We’ll find out on Friday!

  42. @CHARLES

    Thanks for the thoughts you shared earlier about the polling. A very interesting, and somewhat encouraging, post.

  43. If Panelbase is correct, then (according to Electoral Calculus) the higher SLab vote will gain them zero seats, and hand 6 or 7 to the Tories.

    I have oft pointed out that the essence of the UK Unionist position in Scotland has remained largely unchanged for centuries.

    It is that, however bad governance from London is, it will always be better than Scots governing themselves.

  44. YG Scots crossbreaks (possibly my last of these this year?)
    Average of Last 7 (N=1004 : changes from 2017 GE in brackets)
    SNP 44% ( +7)
    SCon 27% ( -1.6)
    SLab 14.3% ( -12.8)
    SLD 11.6% ( +4.8)
    BxP 1.4% ( +1.2)
    Grn 1.7% ( +1.5)

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/itsi0h01ub/TheSundayTimes_VI_Results_191206_w.pdf

  45. Oldnat

    The final Panelbase poll in 2017 was SNP 41 Con 30 Lab 22 LD 5. Are today’s figures so very different?

  46. Above figures exclude 7% WNV and 13% Undecided (and I guess few of those will vote at this stage).

    Not all with a VI will vote either.

  47. Graham

    The final YG in 2017 was SNP 41 Con 25 Lab 26 LD 6 – which are a bit different, so the question remains, which methodology (if either) is correct?

    Has the net effect of the churn been that SLab voters from 2017 gone to SNP and SLD or not?

    Useless to speculate at the moment – get in the popcorn for the results!

  48. @JiB

    “42.4% back them gave them a landslide.”

    With Lab and Lib almost evenly split on mid to high 20s. The details are kinda important. If anything, the VI and seats suggest 1979 results, rather than 1983 ones (caveat of polls being accurate, which they never are).

  49. PETE B

    If you are really interested in the NHS you should at least be willing to read the articles that others access for you by posting links.

    Allysson Pollock, Professor of Public Health has done a good summary of the effect of the changes brought about as a result of the Health and Social Care Act 2012.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/05/debt-spiral-destroy-nhs-health-social-care-act-bill

    “The first things the act did were to remove the 64-year-old duty on the health secretary to provide services throughout England and to make commercial contracting virtually compulsory. Today, clinicians, nurses, managers and armies of consultants and lawyers spend their days preparing multiple bids, tenders and awarding contracts, instead of providing patient care. Every year thousands of contracts are put out to tender, many of them going to the private sector.

    Contracting leeches money and scarce resources from the system. It fragments and disrupts continuity of care and undermines training and staffing. And it is expensive. Although the Westminster government does not collect data on the contracts or the cost of market contracting, we know from the US that it accounts for around 30% of healthcare expenditure, compared to 5% in the non-marketised NHS prior to 1990.

    And as the money leaks out of the UK’s healthcare system, our hospitals and health services go into a deadly spiral of debt. This is the intention. In the absence of a duty to provide hospitals and community services, they can go to the wall. The act created a failure and closure regime and gave powers to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to reduce services and to trusts to charge patients. This is how it works. Since the act, foundation trusts are now only 51% public, which means they can raise up to half their income from private patients. The Royal Marsden, for instance, now generates 26% of its income from private patients and private cancer care, while the East London, based in an impoverished area, has none.

    A foundation trust hospital can now franchise out its wards like a department store, leasing out beds and clinical space to private healthcare companies such as Hospital Corporation of America, BMI, Care UK or Serco. All this at a time when NHS capacity is shrinking, it has fewer beds per person than most countries in Europe and almost 20% of beds have closed in the last decade. At the same time CCGs are drawing up increasingly restrictive criteria and the boundary between paid NHS and private care is being blurred. Access to services is being curtailed to pave the way for top-up insurance policies or out-of-pocket payments.

  50. PETE B

    As the Open Democracy piece to which I linked in this and the previous thread shows there have been links, since 2010, between senior members of the UK government and Optum, a company of which UnitedHealth Group is the parent.

    Lord Prior, chair of NHS England visited the HQ of UnitedHealth in 2016. Jeremy Hunt visited in 2017 and the health minister, Philip Dunne, also visited Optum twice.

    The current Chief Executive of the NHS: is Simon Stevens. Stevens was, from 2004-2013, vice-president of United Health. In that role he became a founder member of a US lobby group – the “Alliance for Health Care Competitiveness” – explicitly trying to use TTIP to force state-run health systems, including the NHS, to employ private health firms from the US.

    Nick Seddon was Special Adviser for Health from 2013-2016. Only four months after leaving the job he became Executive Vice President of Optum. Mr Seddon’s move to the private sector did not need to be vetted for conflicts of interest as was previously the case – because Cameron changed the law in 2014.

    David Sharpe was NHS England’s director of commissioning operation for the central midlands sub-region until in 2015 he left to join Optum as Senior Vice President for Growth Strategy in the UK.

    Former GP Martin McShane, director for long term conditions and mental health for a three-year contract between 2012 and 2015, left his career within the NHS at the end of 2015. He then joined Optum as chief medical officer for clinical delivery.

1 2 3 4 5 42

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)