With a huge quantity of elections on Thursday, we also have a huge amount of opinion polling ahead of it. Here is a summary of the polling on this week’s elections and what we can predict about this week’s results from it.

SCOTLAND

The Scottish election race has been heavily polled and with fairly consistent results across polling companies. Everyone has the SNP clearly ahead in both votes, and we can be confident as confident can be that the SNP will win. The broad questions are:

a) How close the SNP will get to an overall majority in their own right, rather than with the Greens
b) Whether Labour or the Conservatives will be in second place
c) Whether Alex Salmond’s Alba party will win any seats

At least six companies have released Scottish polls in the last week or so (and we may well get more tomorrow). Most have shown the SNP around 50% in the constituency vote (SavantaComRes in the Scotsman were lower at 45%, but was conducted a week ago now, so I don’t know if they have another to come). In the regional vote most companies tend to show the SNP at around 36%-41%, with everyone showing the Conservatives in second place on around 22% and Labour third.

It is hard to translate votes into seats with confidence between so many of the final regional seats end up being won by extremely small margins, but it is probably the best way of understanding the interaction between the two votes. The most recent projections have tended to suggest that the SNP may just scrape a majority.

Sky projects 67 seats for the SNP based on the Opinium poll, John Curtice in the Times suggests 68 SNP seats based on the YouGov data. Panelbase in the Sunday Times at the weekend was projected to deliver them 65 seats by Curtice. The Herald’s BMG poll was projected to deliver 68 SNP seats. If the SNP do fall short then they will easily have a pro-independence majority with the Greens anyway, but an outright majority may give them a stronger moral case in the inevitable argument with the UK government over a referendum.

Finally, there is Alba – Alex Salmond’s new party. There has been some difference between polling companies on their projected level of support. For a while Panelbase were giving them around 6% while other companies were giving them derisory support. The final YouGov & Opinium polls did at least see them climbing to 3% (possibly enough to get a seat somewhere depending how unevenly their vote is distributed), while the most recent Panelbase poll had them dropping to 4%.

WALES

In the past Wales has not tended to attract much polling – there have been elections when it was YouGov and no one else. This year has been more interesting, with polls from SavantaComRes, Opinium and ICM. There are final Welsh polls from YouGov and Survation due out out tomorrow (and possibly SavantaComRes too) so we’re not done here yet.

The polling show far has also shown Labour ahead, but by differing amounts. Back in February and March YouGov produced a couple of polls showing the Conservatives within touching distance of Labour. Since then Labour have pulled back ahead, with a lead of 9-11 points on the constituency vote, 7-10 points on the list vote. We will see what the final polls show tomorrow.

LONDON MAYOR

Perhaps the most foregone conclusion that we have polling for – there has never really been the slightest doubt that Sadiq Khan was going to be re-elected as London mayor once Rory Stewart dropped out (even when Stewart was in the race polling showed an easy win for Khan, but at least Stewart had the potential to shake things). Given the race hasn’t been competitive there hasn’t been nearly as much polling as in past years, but we have had two final calls today (and perhaps more to come tomorrow). Both show Khan winning easily.

Opinium’s final call has Khan winning the first round by 48% to Bailey’s 29%, with Porrit in third on 8% and Berry on 7%. Khan wins easily on round two.
YouGov’s final call has Khan slightly lower on the first round, winning by 43% to Bailey’s 31%, with Berry on 10% and Porrit on 5%. Again, Khan wins easily on round two.

MAYORAL ELECTIONS

As well as London, there are elections for seven combined authority mayors (Cambridgeshire, Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, Tees Valley, West Midlands, West of England, West Yorkshire). We have polling for two of those, and in the case of the more recent polls, both show incumbents who were initially elected on a knife-edge now cruising to re-election.

The West Midlands mayoralty is being defended by the Conservative Andy Street. We have two decent sized polls there. Redfield & Wilton polled about a fortnight ago and found a 9 point lead for Street on the first round, but only a 2 point lead once second preferences were redistributed. Opinium released a more recent poll on Tuesday morning, commissioned by the Northern Powerhouse Partnership which projected a clearer win for Street – a 17 point lead and victory on the first round.

The only other poll I’m aware of is for the Tees Valley race. This was won by the Conservative incumbent Ben Houchen by an extremely narrow margin in 2017. The only poll is by Opinium. It has a sample size of only 387 (243 once you take out don’t knows and won’t votes) and the size was such that Opinium didn’t have the space to filter for likelihood to vote. For what it’s worth though, the shares were CON 63%, LAB 37% – suggesting a very easy hold for the Conservatives.

HARTLEPOOL

Survation have produced two opinion polls of Hartlepool. The first for the CWU early in the campaign, the second for Good Morning Britain, conducted at the end of April. Constituency polling is a difficult challenge that has a somewhat patchy record, and small sample sizes mean they are large margins of error. That said Survation’s latest poll showed a very solid 17 point lead for the Conservatives, well outside the margin of error. The poll would have to be very wrong indeed for this not to be a Conservative gain.

LOCAL ELECTIONS

Local elections rarely get much polling because of the nature of the contest. There is very uneven pattern of contestation, so many people don’t get a choice between all parties. In many places people get more than one vote so can vote for different parties. From a pollsters point of view, it’s also difficult to know what you are measuring – the “Projected National Share” that the BBC calculate on election night is not the actual shares of the vote – its a projection based on the votes in some key wards – so even if pollsters did ask about local elections, the numbers wouldn’t match the numbers the BBC announced on the night!

Normally the only attempt we get to predict likely gains and losses in local elections is therefore the Rallings & Thrasher modelling based on how people have voted in local council by-elections. This time round the coronavirus lockdown means we’ve had hardly any local council by-elections, so even the Rallings & Thrasher model lies dormant.

Unusually though we have got a couple of predictions using polling data. YouGov released a poll last week of councils that cover Northern & Midlands seats that the Tories won at the last elections (the so-called “Red wall” seats) that was used to project gains and losses here – that predicted Tory councillor gains in those areas.

Meanwhile Electoral Calculus have make predictions of district and unitary councillor gains and losses based on data from newcomers “Find Out Now” (a company that polls people visiting the PickMyPostcode website). Not sure why the county elections were excluded, but there goes. That predicts gains of about 300 seats for both Labour and Conservative, at the expense of Lib Dems and Others (note the overall number of seats rises because council changes). Note that the YouGov fieldwork was mid-April, the Electoral Calculus data last week, so quite possible that it pre-empted some of the recent poor coverage for the Government.

POLICE COMMISSIONER ELECTIONS

The final set of elections on Thursday, and very much the poor relation, are the Police Commissioner elections. Given the lack of public profile these – rather unsurprisingly – don’t appear to have been polled at all (indeed, given the uneven pattern of contestation and the fact I expect many people have no idea they are happening and won’t make their mind up how they’ll vote before being presented with a surprise additional ballot paper on Thursday, they would probably be rather hard to poll if we tried).


17,509 Responses to “Polling ahead of Thursday’s Elections”

1 274 275 276 277 278 351
  1. Can’t expect anything else from a crooked Parliament. It’s designed to have laws changed willy nilly, according to the government in power.

    In the 21st century.

    The mother of all …

    … and I’m not thinking Parliaments. ;)

  2. Kay 9
    I was commenting on the phrase ‘ruthlessly selfish and predatory’ implying lack of intelligence rather than anything to do with destruction of the environment as such. I was just interested in Colin’s reasoning. I might well be persuaded. I do agree that the human race as a whole (or at least its usual leaders) fit that description.

  3. Statgeek
    “Can’t expect anything else from a crooked Parliament. It’s designed to have laws changed willy nilly, according to the government in power.”

    Isn’t that the whole point of voting a new government in? There wouldn’t be much point if all they did was keep things exactly as they were, though I do think some governments change too many things. Anyway, we can always kick them out and give someone else a chance, which we couldn’t do to the EU. Yes we could elect people to their fake parliament with no powers but that was it. If the EU Parliament had the ability to create and amend legislation I might well have been a Remainer. The EU is a stitch up. At least we can kick our own crooks out.

  4. Just because the issue of supply chain came up so many times. A different perspective.

    https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/weltwirtschaft/lkw-grossbritannien-import-export-101.html

  5. @Mercian

    “No. We left the EU because of the biggest popular vote ever – 17.4 million people in 2016. The losing side tried all sorts of crooked schemes to subvert the decision, but lost them all in the end.”

    Indeed. The tyranny of democracy, an alien concept to the stealth Federalists.

    Democracy won in the end!

  6. @JIB

    The problem with turbines, and these were going to be fast moving affairs, is that they mash up fish and other wildlife. There is also a lot of silt in the Severn Estuary. Good idea, wrong place springs to mind there.

    Wales has seen a lot of promised large scale infrastructure come and go…..nuclear on Anglesey, tidal barrage at Swansea, electrification of rail lines to West Wales….

    I was referring to the Swansea Bay project rather than the Severn. I know very little of the specifics of the technology (tho some interesting posts by others about it today), but as someone who has been a regular visitor to the Swansea seafront throughout my life, I’d be personally amazed if there were enough fish left alive in that water to be worth worrying about!

    I take your wider point about infrastructure projects tho. Perhaps if Wales were to show an inclination to vote anything other than solidly Labour then all parties might pay a bit more attention to this kind of stuff.

  7. @STEVE

    I’ve no idea where the 2000% comes from either.
    I think it might have been an incorrect data set and while reading it being interrupted by one of the cats demanding I pay more attention to them instead.

    :-) I have the opposite experience actually – COVID datasets are quite popular here because when I’m pulling at threads in the data it’s one of the few times I’ll sit still long enough for the needy boycat to climb up and have a bit of a snooze on my lap.

  8. @JIB (with fixed formatting)

    @JIB

    The problem with turbines, and these were going to be fast moving affairs, is that they mash up fish and other wildlife. There is also a lot of silt in the Severn Estuary. Good idea, wrong place springs to mind there.

    Wales has seen a lot of promised large scale infrastructure come and go…..nuclear on Anglesey, tidal barrage at Swansea, electrification of rail lines to West Wales….

    I was referring to the Swansea Bay project rather than the Severn. I know very little of the specifics of the technology (tho some interesting posts by others about it today), but as someone who has been a regular visitor to the Swansea seafront throughout my life, I’d be personally amazed if there were enough fish left alive in that water to be worth worrying about!

    I take your wider point about infrastructure projects tho. Perhaps if Wales were to show an inclination to vote anything other than solidly Labour then all parties might pay a bit more attention to this kind of stuff.

  9. As I’ve said before, I too am pessimistic about the likelihood of humans changing their behaviour sufficiently to prevent enough climate change that will significantly alter the environment for our species as well as many others.

    However, there is always the schadenfreude of those in SE England, so concerned about migration spoiling England’s green and pleasant land that they voted for Brexit, having to become migrants themselves to avoid the rising oceans that inundate them. :-)

    Time for Derbyshire to resurrect the High Peak Rifles to protect themselves!

  10. EOR

    “Perhaps if Wales were to show an inclination to vote anything other than solidly Labour then all parties might pay a bit more attention to this kind of stuff.”

    Are you referring to elections to the Senedd (where Llafur and Plaid are engaged in co-operation talks), or to the Westminster Parliament?

    Is it your contention that if Wales followed Scotland’s example, and sent mostly non-GB party MPs to Westminster, that whichever party that had sneaked into power in that rat infested building would generously fund infrastructure projects in Wales?

  11. @DANNY

    “but it’s not going to be anywhere near linear because a substantial amount of the testing is skewed towards people with symptoms or other high risk ”

    Skewed yes, but how? Suppose the French apply their testing to care workers who are high danger but low frequency, whereas we apply it to schoolchildren who are low danger but high frequency of cases?

    Fair question as to how it skews. It seems clear that symptomatic people are going to be more likely to test positive than non-symptomatic people, but beyond that… I take your point about some people obviously being more dangerous positives than others, but wouldn’t they also tend to be those most exposed to it, and the higher testing rates among medical professionals and care workers being likely to apply to groups that are more likely to have it?

    So you’d still be in a situation where the scaling isn’t very linear, because for much of the time the substantial non-random part of the testing cohort are more likely to have it than the random part are. And the balance between random and non-random testing will vary between different countries (and between different periods within the same country!), perhaps dramatically depending on policies and approaches.

  12. @OLDNAT

    “Perhaps if Wales were to show an inclination to vote anything other than solidly Labour then all parties might pay a bit more attention to this kind of stuff.”

    Are you referring to elections to the Senedd (where Llafur and Plaid are engaged in co-operation talks), or to the Westminster Parliament?

    Either. That it may suit Labour on occasion to seek a comfortable working majority in Cardiff rather than relying one or two votes from likeminded opposition parties doesn’t change that we’ve never yet had an election to the Senedd/Assembly where a Labour FM wasn’t a foregone conclusion. Likewise Labour just had their worst GE performance on a GB basis in 80-odd years, and still came away with the majority of the Welsh seats.

    Is it your contention that if Wales followed Scotland’s example, and sent mostly non-GB party MPs to Westminster, that whichever party that had sneaked into power in that rat infested building would generously fund infrastructure projects in Wales?

    Not quite – I was thinking more that if the parties that tend to form the government at Westminster saw Welsh votes as something they needed to compete for, either for Westminster itself or indeed for control in Cardiff, then a likely result would be Welsh infrastructure projects being a higher priority than they have tended to be in recent decades.

  13. EOR

    An interesting idea that if more of the Welsh electorate voted Tory (for that is the only meaningful interpretation of your comment) then the (mainly English) Tory government would divert more infrastructure spending to Wales?

    Have you any actual evidence to support such a speculative concept?

  14. ON
    “However, there is always the schadenfreude of those in SE England, so concerned about migration spoiling England’s green and pleasant land that they voted for Brexit, having to become migrants themselves to avoid the rising oceans that inundate them. :-)”

    I think you’ll find that the strongest Brexit vote was in East, Midlands and North of England, though the SE was also narrowly pro-Leave. But I agree about the effect of rising sea levels are most likely felt there. Good for property prices in the Midlands! There’s always a silver lining.

  15. Forgot to say – highlight of the referendum night for me was when the BBC presenter (possibly Dimbleby?) said something like “Well, Leave seems to be in the lead at the moment, but there are some big areas still to declare such as Birmingham.”
    And then the way his face fell when a few minutes later Birmingham narrowly declared for Leave too. Ho ho.

  16. Mercian

    “Good for property prices in the Midlands! There’s always a silver lining.”

    Afraid not. Those forced to abandon London and other flooded areas (whether Brexiteers or not) won’t be able to sell their flooded homes that they paid so much for, and are now bankrupted by the banks, so you are going to have to deal with hordes of impoverished refugees.

  17. @OLDNAT

    An interesting idea that if more of the Welsh electorate voted Tory (for that is the only meaningful interpretation of your comment) then the (mainly English) Tory government would divert more infrastructure spending to Wales?

    Have you any actual evidence to support such a speculative concept?

    Speculative it certainly is, and as it is counterfactual thus far then obviously there can be no evidence so that’s a silly question.

    You are also being perhaps a bit limited in your thinking on this – my point wasn’t that Labour and the Conservatives would necessarily have to be competing with each other. Labour would be less complacent if genuinely threatened by anyone, and the Tories more inclined to regard the polity seriously if Labour being significantly weakened were a viable outcome.

  18. Two polls, brackets compares previous by same pollster.

    SavantaComRes, 17-19 Sep
    Con: 40% (+1)
    Lab: 35% (=)
    LD: 9% (=)
    SNP: 4% (=)
    Grn: 5%(-1)
    Oth: 9% (=)
    Lead: 5% (+1)

    Survation, 21-22 Sep
    Con: 40% (=)
    Lab: 35% (-1)
    LD: 8% (-1)
    SNP: 4% (=)
    Grn: 4%(-1)
    Oth: 9% (+4)
    Lead: 5% (+1)

  19. Pretty steady picture for the last week or with Con around 40 and Lab around 35 LDs 8, Green 5 (SNP national share inappropriate). Lets see where we are last week of October?

    We have potential travel restrictions easing boost for the Government while to costs of living and UC possible negatives are putative rather than actual just now.

    A real chance for Labour to display their wares next week but internal rows may dominate the agenda. Personally I support an Electoral collage but now is not the time. It smacks of Starmer resigned to having to step down after the GE and wanted an ‘electable’ successor.
    If he was really confident of doing well enough to gget anher 4 years he could

  20. My key board so sensitive the post went before completing!

    A real chance for Labour to display their wares next week but internal rows may dominate the agenda. Personally I support an Electoral collage but now is not the time. It smacks of Starmer resigned to having to step down after the GE and wanting an ‘electable’ successor.
    If he was really confident of doing well enough to get another 4 years he could push for the change after a successful GE and meet less resistance due to that success.

    We could also have a vote on Evans and end up debating PR when the platform and exposure would be best used promoting a policy agenda.

  21. Only a small fringe of brexitanian unchanged nut jobs believe the b.s. about European federalist unelected super states.

    But they aren’t alone in their complete detachment from reality.

    Here’s just thirty of the reasons actual brexitanians have for making their decisions.

    “To reduce the length of the political food chain and bring democracy back within clearly defined borders of control.” (James Jackson, Medium)
    2. “Because of all the EU laws that we have no say in.”
    “Name one.”
    “There’s loads. Too many to list.”
    “Name one.”
    “…” (Caller to LBC radio station)
    3. “As a protest vote.”
    4. “Because I want it to be a close result.”
    5. “It [Sunderland] already is [a giant jobcentre]. That’s why I voted Leave, to put everyone else in the sh!t like us.” (Twitter)
    6. “To stick it to the toffs.”
    7. “To give Cameron a bloody nose.” (Express website)
    8. “To give Cameron a better negotiating position.”
    9. “Because the EU closed the coalmines.”
    10. “Because I thought we had been in long enough.”
    11. “Because I had the hump.”
    12. “Because now our lads will get out of prison, ’cos there will be jobs for them.”
    13. “The main reason I voted out was because the EU parliament aren’t elected representatives. The second is, they pass laws that affect us, but we aren’t given a say. Third, we need to sort our own house out” (Joanne, Facebook, giving exactly the same — factually wrong — reason in three different ways)
    14. “Because I felt uncomfortable when a group of brown people got on the bus the other day.” (Family member)
    15. “Because the EU made them change Marathons to Snickers.” [That decision was taken by Mars, not the EU.]
    16. “Because they banned our bendy bananas.” (Express website) [The EU introduced a law stipulating that bananas should be given different classifications depending on their curvature. No fruit was ever banned, just categorised differently.]
    17. “Because fishermen now won’t have to throw fish back in the water and Muslim women will no longer be told by their husbands not to wear make-up.” (Caller to LBC) [The exact effect of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU will have on fishing waters and quotas must wait until negotiations are complete, but we will still need agreements with our neighbours, and limits to prevent overfishing, which our neighbours will probably wish to remain broadly the same.]
    18. “Because I’ve lived here all my life and when I was growing up, that street over there was filled with shops.” (TV documentary)
    19. “To stop the Muslims immigrating here.” [Migration is unrestricted within the EU. But individual nations are responsible for setting their own limits on immigration from non-EU countries, such as those where the majority of citizens are Muslims. Leaving the EU will have no direct effect on the number of Muslims coming to the UK.]
    20. “Because I want our old lightbulbs back!” [The EU has placed restrictions on the sale of old-style incandescent light bulbs in a bid to reduce energy wastage and slow global warming.]
    21. “Because vaccines should not be mandatory.” [The EU has never passed any law making vaccination mandatory, even though vaccination is widely regarded as being a pretty good idea. Some European countries have done so of their own volition.]
    22. “Because the Queen said.” (Pro-Brexit Facebook group)
    23. “Because we should not be signing up to TTIP.” [TTIP is a trade deal between EU and America, which the EU has just put on hold. After the UK leaves the EU, most commentators believe it will sign up to a similar deal with the US, probably with fewer checks and balances.]
    24. “Because we are like Germany, and Germany isn’t in the EU.” [Germany was a founding member of the EU.]
    25. “Because the country is full.”
    26. “To annoy my wife.”
    27. “It will be an adventure!”
    28. “Because the value of the euro is going to go down.” [Even if it were true, this would not have a marked effect on the UK’s economy. Since the vote, sterling is down 18% against the dollar and 15% against the euro.]
    29. “So that I can get cheap photovoltaic panels from China.”
    30. “Because otherwise, 7 million Turks will come over here.” (Caller to LBC radio station) [Turkey would never have been able to join the EU so long as Britain used its veto.]

    My favourite is 26!

    I voted remain because on balance I thought it beneficial for the residents of the U.K..

  22. @EoR

    With regards fish and the Swansea lagoon, and also knowing a little about the issue, what could possibly go wrong…..

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-41153357

    An unique ecosystem, somewhat inconveniently for the project cheerleaders and the ignorant layman.

  23. @ JJ – In the same way it is better for Rishi for get the ‘medicine’ out mid-term then it better for Starmer to get the internal issues sorted way ahead of a GE.

    For Starmer then “When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die” (trying)

    If he doesn’t win the party then how can he can win the country.

    On recent polling then the fieldwork for most of them would certainly have picked up the ‘Energy crisis’, food shortages, etc issues. I posted the YG article y’day showing folks were ‘frustrated’ with CON HMG handling with a TBC on the polling implications.

    Of course could still be too early to say. Perhaps a lot of cognitive dissonance is building and at some point CON VI will collapse. OR every time the press get all “Project Feary” about CON HMG incompetence but the Apocalypse Now doesn’t happen then folks might just prefer to stick with the devils they know?

  24. ALEC
    As Johnson dismisses French concerns over AUKUS, Biden acknowledges the process was flawed.

    It looks like France has persuaded Biden that he owes them, and Europe, a favour.

    Meanwhile, George Eustace displaying his ignorance, claiming on Sky that he is explaining to the Americans that the protocol is tantamount to someone in the US not being able to send potatoes from one state to another. Eustace says he doesn’t think Biden understands this, while trade twitter is telling Eustace that there are SPS borders withing the US, for various reasons.

    Slightly embarassing.

    September 22nd, 2021 at 11:02 pm

    ————–
    Or he knows but knows the average person will only hear his version of the ‘truth’

  25. For anyone wanting read Keir Starmer Magnus Opus The Road Ahead it’s here:

    https://fabians.org.uk/publication/the-road-ahead/

    I’ve had a skim read, and it looks like anything Tony Blair would write, light on detail but heavy vague themes and non-specific mood music. As as previous Labour member and voter, there is absolutely zero there to encourage me.

    I’ll read more fully later, but I might need some strong coffee!

  26. News that care homes say they need immediate assistance on staffing suggests that the method adopted by the government to sort out problems is having an effect.

    Rather than deal with structural issues and actually solve supply issues, they chuck our money at the problem. The deal with CF shows that all industry has to do is create a supply strike, and a government so fearful of losing support will open the coffers and spend our money, in a transactional, firefighting mode.

    The inherent weakness of the post Brexit economy, and a defective government, seems to be ushering in an era of industrial action, not by unions,but by industry.

    Rather than fight this and solve the problems, the government seems intent on claiming credit for spending our money for fixing problems they have, in the main, created themselves.

  27. Just listening to a Government spokesperson who was asked whether they were prepared to bail out the big energy suppliers. Reluctant to give an answer, realistically I suspect they will have to and not before very long.

    The chap from Green Energy was on before and was of a similar view and the unfairness of it, he also the comparison between the CO2 provider bail out

  28. @JIB – if that report is accurate and the lagoon folks are assuming salmon will naturally avoid the turbines, then I can foresee problems.

    It’s usually the downstream migration of smolt that is the bigger issue, because these are far smaller fish and have much less ability to avoid being sucked into turbine flows.

    There are detailed calculations about vectors and flow speeds you normally need to satisfy with fish protection to ensure that target species have sufficient escape velocity to move away from inflows, and that’s before you get to the actual screening. Basically you need to have the have the right gauge of screening (milimeters, for smolt) and then you need to ensure the speed and angle of flow is such that they don’t become trapped against the screening.

  29. It’s being wise after the event but did anyone think that 70 gas suppliers not really adding any value was too many?

  30. Energy + Food ‘Crisis’ being fixed

    Short-term (next few weeks):
    1/ ‘Rinse’ of small ‘bad businesses’ is ongoing with the existing Supplier of Last Resort (SOLR) mechanism being used to reassign customers. The current system has benefitted consumers via fierce price competition with shareholders of the businesses bearing the brunt (eg some have now gone bankrupt, others have seen reduced profits – see Centrica share price!)
    2/ Due to some plant closures and over reliance on Just In Time (JIT) then CF Industry got a 3week bung to ensure no significant ‘contagion’ of that problem to broader economy. Cost to taxpayer of the ‘fix’ £tens millions. Cost of ‘do nothing’ would have been enormous.

    Medium Term (this Winter):
    1/ It sounds like the ‘plan’ will be to continue with the current approach unless/until it reaches the point when sector risk becomes imminent[1] and then we’ll likely get a ‘state owned’ supplier as SOLR (and not a bail out of the ‘big6’)
    2/ 3weeks might not be enough but the ‘market’ will then be expected to sort itself out. Higher domestic prices of CO2 will likely mean supply chains tilt to take advantage of that but yes, those increased costs will likely be pushed down the supply chain to end users.

    Longer-Term:(Most Important Aspect – ensure we’ve learned some lessons from fixing the crisis but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water)

    1/ Hopefully the ‘crisis’ has raised awareness to stop kicking the can on ‘Generate (and store) Energy in Britain’ and we see CON HMG get some of the vast number of potential projects approved, along with ‘funding models’, etc.

    Specifically on suppliers then ‘barriers to entry’ will likely stay low so ‘new entrants’ should avoid a return to a ‘cosy oligopoly’ (cartel). So dropping to ‘less than 10’ not a concern (IMO). Ofgem need to massively up their game but no need for fundamental changes in the supply side (ie ‘keep the baby’)

    If we do get to the point of having needed a ‘State Owned’ supplier then I’d like them to stay but being CON HMG I’d expect they’ll look to pass off those consumers as soon as the surviving businesses can take them (eg next price cap review in Spring)

    2/ If 3weeks isn’t enough for the CO2 issue to be resolved by ‘the market’ then perhaps another short-term bung until it is?

    PS Very happy to agree with anyone that this was a crisis CON HMG should have foreseen but sometimes you need to actually have the crisis to get govts to see the problem and stop kicking the can. Without a time machine then we can’t change the past but huge opportunity to ‘Generate (and store) Green Energy in Britain’ creating Green British Jobs for British Workers – which due to locations of potential projects will also tick the ‘level-up’ box.

    [1] EG if businesses of the size of Bulb fail and energy prices have moved even higher:
    https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-data-and-research/data-portal/all-available-charts

  31. @ TW/Jim Jam

    It’s like a World War One where you might win the war but you’ve lost all your soldiers in the process.

    Starmer won control of the party with only one tweak to the NEC voting rules that gave him a comfortable majority on the decision making executive. Beyond this he’s just turning off left wing voters and members for no good reason.

    Blair was far more subtle until one day people realised he was in full control of the party but he never went through a similar bloodletting such as the significant suspending of delegates the week before Conference and the trawling of twitter feeds desperately looking for reasons to suspend anyone with a different political viewpoint to the leadership.

    In terms of “winning the war now” until the Corbyn situation is resolved one way or the other then he’s not getting anything out of the way. Imagine a General Election fought with an independent Corbyn standing in Islington North? it won’t just be Islington North where Labour could afford to lose one seat, but a reminder to every left wing voter in other seats as well. He may be relying on Corbyn being loyal to Labour and not doing this and simply retiring but it’s a big risk.

    But mostly it’s a flawed strategy anyway because he has turned off “easy win” left wing voters who have moved to Green. Labour only wins with a united party where it can appeal to all centrist and left wing voters with nuanced policy not choosing one “side” over the other.

    The Progressive Britain polling is out now (can’t find tables):

    https://progressivebritain.org/rebuilding-labour-and-the-nation/

    Chris Curtis is a respected pollster and there are some good summaries, although short on concrete policy that might work. However he’s asking the questions that right wing Labour want him to ask.

    As an example they ask a question about the Corbyn withdrawal of the whip. They get a huge favourable response to this with 45% delighted or happy and only 14% upset and angry. What’s not to like then? The point being that 14% who would have been in the Labour column in 2019 are upset or angry while 45% who probably didn’t even vote for Blair in 1997 are pleased. The ones in the middle that Labour needs to win over don’t care one way or the other and Corbyn no longer resisters. So 14% vote share is put at risk while unlikely to gain much from the 45%.

    Corbyn was an issue when he was a leader but what happens to him now is a non issue for swing voters now. The only movement is likely to be among those who supported Corbyn.

  32. DM headline today is “Winter of Woe”.

    If that narrative takes hold, no amount of bluster about levelling up, building back better and British jobs for British workers will stem the tide of disaffection.

    But it remains to be seen whether chucking taxpayers’ money at each problem as it pops up, whack-a-mole style, will be enough to keep Tory VI up, given the absence of effective opposition.

    An interesting winter ahead, I think.

  33. @ SHEVII – WW1 was perhaps won by Blair? Miliband ‘appeasement’ and allowing LAB to be taken over by people you probably view very differently to me, culminating in Corbyn and now the need for WW2?

    I expect you see it very differently and perhaps Starmer could and should focus on uniting the party (I’ve offered plenty of suggestions on ‘low hanging fruit’ for policies)

    However, if he’s going to have a civil war then better to have it now. Perhaps then he does end the ‘vague’ and start doing policy??

    PS If it looks like Starmer will die trying then does he ‘appease’? ‘King of North’ can then come to rescue after GE’24. However, the ‘Red wedding’ can can’t be kicked forever. So if Starmer doesn’t achieve what must be done then bon chance to Burnham after GE’24.

  34. ‘Democracy won in the end!’

    Don’t forget Hitler got into power through democratic means… Democracy is not always right.

  35. Not sure of the priorities of Starmer in terms of talking about internal party politics, but worth remembering Blair was fortunate that Kinnock had already purged the party of militant and it’s supporters.
    Having said that I do not think Starmer needed to fight this battle

  36. Personally I support an electoral college and support Starmer’s initiative.

  37. A pattern is emerging. The government of Boris Johnson, when it was desperate to ‘get brexit done’ at all costs, signed agreements that he no longer likes. So he threatens to break his commitments if the agreements are not renegotiated.

    That’s the intro (my translation) to a story in El País that’s not actually about N Ireland, but about Gibraltar, where it seems we’re pulling the same stunt.

    Funnily enough, I can’t see any mention of the story in the UK press.

    I’ll leave the relevant bit in the original, as non-Spanish-speakers should be able to get the gist:

    La secretaria de Estado de Exteriores para Europa y las Américas, Wendy Morton, ha asegurado a los diputados de la Comisión de Escrutinio Europeo que el Reino Unido está preparado para abordar, junto a Gibraltar, un Resultado No Negociado (Non Negotiated Outcome) de su situación, en el caso de que la UE no rebaje las pretensiones impuestas en su mandato negociador del pasado 20 de julio.

    I didn’t actually know that there was someone called Wendy Morton who is Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Europe and the Americas). You learn a lot about the UK in the foreign press!

  38. SHEVI
    Thanks-understood.

    MERCIAN

    See KAY9’s response.

    KAY9

    Thanks.

  39. PETE

    @” Biden acknowledges the process was flawed.”

    I wonder if he and BJ reminded Macron of these remarks ? :-

    “-
    ……………..I firmly believe that Europeans must first and foremost define together what their security interests are and sovereignly decide what is good for Europe……………. I expect Russia to be a constructive player in our common security. But we cannot be satisfied with the current situation, in which the divide between us is growing and dialogue is weakening precisely at a time when the number of security issues that need to be addressed with Moscow are increasing.
    The main objective – I have mentioned it numerous times – of my engagement with Russia is an improvement in collective security and stability conditions in Europe………………”

    SPEECH OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC ON THE DEFENSE AND DETERRENCE STRATEGY
    Feb 2020

    ““A situation to join all together against China, this is a scenario of the highest possible conflictuality. This one, for me, is counterproductive,””

    Emmanuel Macron
    discussion broadcast by Washington-based think tank the Atlantic Council
    Feb 2021

  40. Approval Ratings
    Biden 46%
    Trump 48%
    Harvard/Harris
    Sept. 2021

  41. “1.5 million households face rise in energy bills-Prices unlikely to come down for two years”

    Times headline
    today.

    ” “There is a short term problem caused by the hydrocarbon price spike,”
    Boris Johnson
    Sky News interview.

  42. Shevii,

    One quibble, and I know Guymonde has said similar things, the overwhelmingly majority of new members that joined around the time Corbyn became leader did very little campaigning so the loss of foot soldiers is not as severe as the raw numbers might suggest. At the same time many moderate members found it hard to campaign as much as the had in the past.

  43. An interesting article in The Conversation on falling voter turnout:

    https://theconversation.com/global-voter-turnout-has-been-in-decline-since-the-1960s-we-wanted-to-find-out-why-167775

    The fall in voter turnout in democracies has been world-wide, so not a characteristic of any single country.

    They identify two reasons: First, with reduced deference to authority voting is not seen as a civic duty (and this is especially true for younger voters)

    The second reason is being called on to vote too often. The proliferation of elected institutions (34% up since the 1960s) means that in countries like France people are voting twice a year on average. Even in the English counties with District Council elections by thirds as well as County Council elections, electors are voting every year in local elections alone with the national elections on top of this. They do suggest having more elections on the same day would help. Certainly having local elections in London on the same day as the General Election had a massive effect on turnout in the former.

  44. @ Jim Jam

    Yes that is true and I remember quizzing Guymonde on this to see what sort of response they were getting (pluses and minuses) from new members and it clearly wasn’t significant in his area and many others I suspect. Although there were a few places like Canterbury that did seem to get people out of the woodwork.

    Difficult for me to judge the negatives (indeed Guymonde seemed fairly relaxed about them) unless I’m actually there to see, for example, both sides of stories like Lucianna Berger.

    However new members brought in income (which tentatively might explain some portion of the 90 redundancies) and the social media campaign shouldn’t be ignored either. When 2017 election was announced my stepson did not have a good opinion on Corbyn (“Granddad”) based on X-Factor attributes rather than his political awareness which was virtually zero- the best argument I could come up with that he’s going to get a pay increase based on minimum wage increases but it was really social media that seemed to swing him into a positive. Social media is going to be awful for Labour next time around I suspect.

    I approved of Militant being expelled in the 1980’s mainly because they had power in certain areas (LIverpool) and were breaking the law to the detriment of their constituents. I don’t think the same situation is true today that requires a Kinnock 2 moment and I don’t believe that the swing voters are going to be influenced by a manufactured Kinnock 2 moment, whereas the easy hanging fruit will turn negative.

  45. We’re Doomed!

    Gosh we were pessimistic about the world’s future last night.

    What exactly is the point of this hand-wringing? The problematic effects of biofuels on biodiversity have been debated for years. The loss of habitat has been recognised for decades as the main cause of the depletion & extinction of species, underpinned by the shift from artificially preserving species (except as a holding measure) to preserving their habitats The poor bl–dy Orangutan & the Sumatran Tiger haven’t got a chance!

    This pious sonority has a slightly hollow ring to it? The posters have only got 15-20 years left and the cataclysm they predict is not really their problem.

    And this is Extinction-anxiety without the Rebellion or the Activism. Still if expressing fashionable pessimism & fatalism on a blog makes you feel better . . .

  46. In today’s it makes no bloody sense news the latest change in the Byzantine complexity of UK travel restrictions is even more baffling than most.

    Under the new rules, travellers fully vaccinated with Oxford/AstraZeneca, Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna or Janssen shots in the US, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea or an EU country will be considered “fully vaccinated” and exempt from quarantine when they arrive in England from an amber list country.

    But people who have been fully vaccinated with the same vaccines in Africa or Latin America, as well as other countries including India, will be considered “not fully vaccinated” and forced to quarantine for 10 days on arrival from an amber list country.

    W tf!

  47. The Government can’t say they weren’t warned
    https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1440975258438209543
    “I have a letter here that Ofgem wrote to him when he was energy minister 18 months ago… warning about systemic risk to the energy supply sector”

    Shadow energy secretary Ed Miliband accuses the government of leaving the country “dangerously exposed”

  48. Is seem to recall a quote about Labours battle with Militant which was along the lines of;

    Kinnock fought the Battle, Smith won the War and Blair shot the wounded!

    I think that’s about right most of the internal arguments had been settled before Blair took over!

    Peter.

1 274 275 276 277 278 351

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)