There is a new ICM poll out in the Guardian here. Topline figures, with changes from the last ICM poll in late August, are CON 43%(+2), LAB 26%(+1), LDEM 19%(nc).

This equals the second highest Conservative lead recorded by ICM, but like most recent polls, shows very little real change (in fact the figures are identical to an ICM poll for the Sunday Mirror in mid-August).

The other questions paint a pretty sorry picture for Labour. Only 14% of people said they thought Labour were telling the truth about the financial situation, compared to 36% for the Tories and 32% for the Lib Dems. 60% of respondents now expect a Conservative victory at the next election, 17% a Labour victory.

Asked whether they have a favourable or unfavourable impression of the main parties and the party leaders Gordon Brown trails the party he leads, and both Labour and Brown lag a long way behind Cameron and the Conservatives.

28% of people have a positive impression of Gordon Brown, while 31% have a positive impression of Labour. In contrast David Cameron is more popular than his party – 48% of people have a positive impression of the Conservative party, but 52% have a positive impression of its leader. Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems have the biggest gulf between leader and party – 53% had a positive impression of the Lib Dems, but only 39% have one of Clegg – partially due to a much higher proportion of don’t knows than the other two leaders.

ICM asked if people would prefer to see the national debt addressed by tax increases or reductions in the amount spent on public services. Interestingly this showed spending cuts only very narrowly ahead (47% to 45%), in contrast to other polls that have showed substantial majorities opting for cuts over tax hikes. The may be down to the specific wording of the questions – ICM asked about cuts “even if it affects those services you use”.

23 Responses to “17 point Tory lead in latest ICM poll”

  1. 14% think Labour are telling the truth, yet Labour poll 26%. So even in a best case, that means around half of Labour voters don’t trust the party. That’s got to be bad news in terms of getting people out to vote on election day.

  2. The complete collapse of Labour’s economic credentials is stark.

    Only 14% think they are telling the truth about the public finances…and whose fault is that?

    It was only days ago that GB was still laying into Osborne for talking about cuts, claiming that Labour would “invest”. Now he talks about cuts along with everyone else.

    It really does beggar belief that the Prime Minister can be so cynical .

    He has paid a terrible price for it-and Osborne has reaped the reward of plain speaking .

  3. Forgot to add – over 5 months since Labour last polled 30%. Brown’s going to have to have one heck of a conference to pull this one out.

  4. A new poll on the Lisbon Treaty!!!!

    59% NO ‘V’ 41% YES.

    In one of the largest polls of its kind ever carried out: Gael Poll polled 1,500 respondents in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Kilkenny, Galway, Athlone, Tralee, Dundalk and Letterkenny over the course of six days last week.

    I got this from a irish website.the poll has only just been published i believe.

    When pollsters discounted the don’t knows: an overwhelming 59% of people would vote No in the referendum as opposed to 41% who indicated that they would vote Yes. The last Gael Poll which was published in the Irish Sun (June 4th 2008) accurately predicted that the Lisbon Treaty would be defeated by a margin of 54 % for the No side versus 46% for Yes campaigners.
    On the day of the count -which took place nine days later- the actual result was 53.4% No and 46.6 % Yes.
    The uncanny poll prediction which was out by only a half a percent was the most accurate poll in the country.

  5. How do you intend to vote in the Lisbon Treaty Referendum?


  6. A whopping 130 seat majority if this came to pass.

    The Lib Dem’s “fairer taxation policy” may even send a couple more points the Tories way – which is a shame IMO because I would like to have seen them beat Labour to second place.

  7. One thing. I noticed that the total vote of the 3 major parties only comes in to the mid eighties %. where is the other 15% going?

  8. I reckon the Lib Dems have made a terrible error in not attacking Labour.

    I would love to ask Cable or Clegg when is the next 10-20 yrs do they expect labour to be more despised than they are today?

    If the LIb dems can’t take Labour now they never will!

    More to the point it seems they are not going to even try.

    Labour spent over a year trying to call DC a toff who dosn’t care about the rest of us,a deceitful man who can’t be trusted,even Labour admitted to defeat on this & it was quietly shelved.

    Also vince Cable,as i have posted on here before the Straight talk interview on the BBC, long ago started to read his own hype,he is no economic genius,quite the opposite.

    And that interview was a disaster,he looked like a dithering old fool.

  9. The Liberal Democrat numbers will improve as their conference begins to affect the publics views.

    Personally Vince Cable did brilliantly today and I would expect his own personal popularity and credibility to transalte into better polling numbers for the party.

    But the Conservatives will be totally unconcerned about it, my party is actively easily dealing with them in the southeast/west.

    But the Liberal Dems will up their numbers I am sure, but it will come at Labours expense as their conference policies seem destined to woo the leftist erlectors and trades unionists.

  10. the behaviour of Labour and the LIb Dems on spending cuts is really sickening and further fuels the hatred of politicians amongst ordinary people. For years the moment the Tories even breathed the barest mention of restricting public spending, they have howled in anger and jabbed the finger at the wicked Tories. Now, the public mood has changed (thanks in part to a decade of continuous waste of public money, the pitiful bailing out of greedy bankers with public money as well as the realisation amongst ordinary people that to sort their own finances out required less spending) Labour and the Lib Dems are competing with spending cuts hyperbole as if they have always been interested in this. As for the Tories they ironically look rather weak and effiminate on the issue and certainly don’t seem to be even in the running for the title of the “Nasty Party” any more.

    The Tories have come close – ish to telling the truth about the difficulties ahead but i really do wonder whether the people we will elect into parliament in a few months will have the balls to do what is right. Irrespective of party tag, we should be rigorous in only voting for those we really believe will serve the country well in tough times ahead and will not just serve self, party and sectional interests above all else.

  11. Cable was shredded by Andrew Neil on Straight Talk (19th September).

    Neil exposed quite a long catalogue of holes and inconsistencies in his economic thinking.

    For example, Cable claims to have supported Quantitative easing all along, but had likened it to Mugabe economics at the start of the year.

    If this is noticed, and summarised for the public, then I think this could be quite significant.

  12. It is good to see this site return to a more non partisan discussion of the polls.
    With a tad over 7 months left until the almost certain date of the General Election there is a consistancy about the message from the polls that is hard to ignore but even so the nuances of our electoral system will keep us happily guessing at the result right up to the day of the poll.
    Given that their conference is currently in session I have looked at the Labour seats which the Lib Dems are targetting and it is not encouraging for them. On the basis of the polls and even allowing for some tactical voting by Tory supporters I cannot see more than 6 seats which might change hands. Maybe guys like Mark Senior can see others but for the life of me I cannot see them.

  13. This makes more sense politically but as you say statistically the picture is no change: 41:26:18. The parties are pretty well spot on their 250 day averages and the Standard Deviations are small. This is, if anything, worse news for Labour than the dismal firgues about trust.

  14. The next big test will be after ALL the party conferences are finished. That will allow an evaluation of the total impact; any polls between now and then could be distorted by a party having a conference. Then again, if Labour (or the Lib Dems) can’t make a breakthrough with their conference, even if only for a short while, it would suggest that they are out of political capital and can only hope for a Tory implosion.

  15. Back in 1987 the tories got a majority of 102 with only an 11% lead over labour. Even if Labour manage to pull back 6% (unlikely) within the next 7 or so months before the GE, the tories will still be home and dry with a thumping majority

  16. The party which should be most concerned by this poll is not Labour (for whom it is still dire) but the Lib Dems.

    While other pollsters had shown LDs close to Lab in the run up to Euros, ICM was the only one to ever show them ahead (in just one poll which could probably be dismissed as a rogue).

    Since June we have seen both Con and Lab recover from their low points before euros, but LDs appear to be stranded. They have certainly not capitalised on teh opportunity they were given this spring, and now appear to be floundering.

    They have managed to attract some coverage around their conference – with Nick Clegg getting plenty of attention in the press – but, despite this, the idea that LDs are even going to come close to Labour in the popular vote in England, still less overtake them, is receding into fantasy.

    As for the latest policy pronouncements – the 0.5% tax on £1m homes is totally unworkable as proposed. It is not clear whether this was intended to demonstrate left-wing credentials or raise money , but it has high-lighted how amateurish the party is.

    If the former, it is a pretty crass appeal to former Labour voters, which will undoubtedly alienate not just the rich, but anyone living in – or aspiring to – a reasonable family home in the south-east. Did anyone check how many such properties there are in SW London ?

    If intended for the exchequer, then it is probable that the same objective would have been achieved more efficiently and effectively by creating a new “I” band for council tax. The suggested structure would be a nightmare to adminster and would possibly cost more to collect than the revenue raised.

    This looks and sounds like a good old-fashioned left-wing wealth tax. Surely Mr Cable knows that every previous attempt at such a tax has met with disastrous consequences wherever and whenever it has been tried ?

    LD supporters who were hoping that the economic gospel according to St Vincent would be their salvation may now be facing a crisis of faith. The parish of Twickenham might even be at risk after this policy goof.

  17. The problem with a 14% trust figure is that there is no way back from it. It is no good Labour making manifesto promises because 86% of the electorate will not believe them. To get back, Labour would have to actually do things, that the electorate can see, before the elections, and it is almost certainly too late for that.

    The shocking “trust” result for Labour hides figures in the 30%s for the Tories and LibDems, which are not exactly great either. If Cameron and Osborne have this sort of confidence rating whilst in opposition, goodness knows what sort of, lack of, confidence voters will have in them when they have had to make the sort of compromises which are inevitable once in office.

    I predict an “Other” vote much higher than 15% at the General Election after next.

  18. The good news continues.
    As said by Neil though, voting intention still within Error Bounds. Approval ratings terrible for Labour, good for Cameron, though I don’t think as bad as some approval ratings we’ve seen for Brown.
    That figure for only 47% of Labour voters planning to vote again is just terrible. Though as Alec said, if taken at face value it seems to indicate a dramatic switch to labour from elsewhere, which seems unlikely at this point in time.
    One possible explanation is just that since they would only have asked the 26% of people planning to vote labour, this brings the sample down to some 260 people, thus dramatically increasing the error margin.
    Who knows though, precisely.

  19. @ Dave Campbell

    Unfortunately due to changes in constituency boundaries the sorts of leads required in 1987 to get a 100 seat majority would only get the Tories a majority of 20. A switch of exactly the same lead to Labour would give them a majority of 126!

    Go figure!!

  20. Anthony,

    just looked at the tables on this and you didn’t comment on the section about which other party might you switch too. Any comments….

    I was struck by the over 40% of Labour voters who would switch that would vote for the LibDems.

    As that looks by far the largest source of new votes it may well be that the libDems have decided they have a lot of those in the bag anyway and that targetting the tories is the best way to hold seats they already have.

    Of course an alternative more cynical view is that although targeting Labour would get them more votes and probably the most seats in the next parliment they might be often different seats so this strategy has been drawn up by and for the sitting MP’s rather than the party.

    That might explain why the line talen by Clegg and backed by those looking over their shoulder at tory cahllengers is out of step with the rank and file.


  21. I don’t wan’t to be blunt about this but, if only 14% believe Labour, and 26% vote for them, then there should be at least 12% who vote for a party they do not believe in. Why would anyone do that? Anyway, apparently many people think that the election is in the bag, but I reckon Labours’ fate will improve substantially.

  22. “60% of respondents now expect a Conservative victory at the next election, 17% a Labour victory.”

    17%?! My god, that really is fervant belief in the resurrection!

    What about the expectation of Lib Dems fortunes? That would be really telling of which way tactical voting could warp things.