ICM have released their first poll since the local elections and it shows not just an increased Tory lead, but as with YouGov the largest Tory lead from the company for many years. The topline voting intention figures, with changes from ICM’s last poll, are CON 41%(+2), LAB 27%(-2), LDEM 22%(+2). The poll was conducted between the 16th and 18th of May.

It is obviously the lowest score Labour have received from ICM in recent years, but it’s also an advance for the Liberal Democrats. ICM normally find a higher level of Lib Dem support than other pollsters anyway, but even by their standards it’s the highest level of Lib Dem support for over a year (compare this with YouGov’s poll yesterday – as usual they showed a much lower level of Lib Dem support than ICM do, but just like ICM it was the highest level of Lib Dem support for over a year).

The ICM poll adopts the methodological changes we saw in their Crewe and Nantwich poll, explained here. The effect this month was to increase the Tory lead by 1 point compared to what it would have been on the old methodology.

Given the collapse of Labour’s support and the big difference ICM’s reallocation of former Labour voters saying “don’t know” has made in their Crewe and Nantwich polls it will be interesting to see how much of the difference between YouGov’s 20 point lead and ICM’s 14 point lead is due to that reallocation.

UPDATE: Not very much of it actually! The re-allocation of don’t knows only decreased the Tory lead by one point.


11 Responses to “ICM show 14 point Tory lead”

  1. Weighted Moving Average 43:27:19. Recently Retrospectives have shown ICM about 2 more points adrift than the WMA and I suspect the real story is more 44:26:19. The appalling Labour campaign at Crewe is revolting almost everyone (see eg here) and I still think we’ll see 45:25:18 soon

  2. all speed ahead to C&N by-election if all goes to plan we will have a tory win i’m neautral myself but even i can see that the tory b-election cog’s are back in action after just over 25 years out of action

  3. I referred in an earlier comment that the Lib Dems polling was somewhat low. This seems to correct that and is much more in line with what I would have expected to see in a Labour meltdown. In such circumstances I suggest it may be a little early to be wholly convinced about the next General Election result. A bounce back by Labour perhaps under a new leader and retained Lib Dem support could easily bring back the propect of a hung parliament. In short the Tories should not forget the real dangers of a resurgent Lib Dem campaign.

  4. What do you mean neutral, Stuart? You’re having a laugh.

  5. There is NOT and will NOT be a Liberal “comeback” – certainly not a sustained one – this is and will remain a 2 horse race right up to the general election – there , that’s my latest prediction.

  6. Mike,

    I admire your conviction and foresight. All I’m saying is that if the Lib Dems make any progress, and they tend to do so in the run up to a GE, and say hold some seats in the South and gain from Labour in the North – not an impossibility given the latest Local Government results – and Labour recovers even to a low of say 30% then the balance becomes rather more of a question than perhaps you (or indeed I) would like.

  7. This is a technical comparison of the LibDem figures in the ComRes and ICM polls and an attempt to try and give the reasons for the 3% gap between Comres at 19% and ICM at 22% despite very similar raw data figures 128 LibDems in Comres sample and 133 in the ICM sample .
    The first point to note is the gap is actually 2 1/2% as the final Comres figure was a fraction under 19.5% and therefore rounded down to 19% – indeed just 1 more LibDem voter and the figure would have been rounded up to 20% .
    Comres found that in their sample 128 voters said they had voted LibDem in 2005 and adjusted the 128 now saying they would vote LibDem up slightly to 134 . This appears to be a little more generous weighting than they have used in previous months . The ICM sample by contrast had only 93 people saying they voted LibDem in 2005 much lower than expected circa 130 and those saying they would vote LibDem now 133 . They adjusted their weighted figure up to 155 giving a weighted figure with a LibDem figure 21 higher than Comres which is equivalent to around 3% of vote share .
    The final published figures in both cases are also affected by adjustments for likelihood to vote and treatment of don’t knows but the effect here is overall 1% or less so not significant .
    A good check between the 2 pollsters can be made by looking at the voting intention changes of those who voted in 2005 .
    Comres
    Lab to LibDem 20 LibDem to Lab 6 net 14 to LibDem
    LibDem to Con 17 Con to LibDem 4 net 13 to Con
    ICM
    Lab to LibDem 24 LibDem to Lab 6 net 18 to LibDem
    LibDem to Con 21 Con to LibDem 3 net 18 to Con
    These figures are pretty consistent and on their own would indicate movement since the 2005 GE from LibDem to Conservative matched by an almost equal movement from Labour to LibDem leaving LibDems at around the same level of support as in 2005 . It would be nice to include the movement between LibDem and Others but annoyingly ICM do not give the movements from the minor parties .

  8. David D is wrong – the Lib Dems were squeezed at the end of the 1992 campaign.

    They spent the campaign posing as the pious high principled do gooders who were going to come to the rescue demanding this and that in a hung Parliament, and the voters rightly punished them.

    Nearly all the evidence – in totality – shows something similar is happening in the run up to next time.

  9. Sorry Joe , the evidence of the polls at the 1992 GE is against you and LibDem support increased through the campaign as it usually does . I am sure that in retrospect many people regret there was no hung parliament and that the LibDems were not able to resue the country from the incompetent Major years .

  10. 1992 – You reached 20 and I think 21.
    The result was 18.

    Also, you had a derisory 10 in the Mayoral election,
    whereas polls predicted it reaching the teens (+ the inevitable Lib Dem tidbits from the “count” saying 15 on 2 May).

  11. Joe , the average LibDem figure in March 1992 was 16% with a couple of outliers at 12 and 14 . The final result was 18.3% . True some polls had 20% but the polls that GE were none to accurate as we know . The mayoral contest is a completely different ball game and will have as much relevance to the next GE as the last one did to the 2005 GE .