There is a new ComRes poll out tonight for the Independent. Topline voting intention figures, with changes from their previous poll a week and a half ago, are CON 40%(+4), LAB 31%(+1), LDEM 18%(-5). As with ICM and YouGov, that represents a sharp drop in Liberal Democrat support, though ComRes are showing a rather lower level of Labour support than other companies.


487 Responses to “ComRes/Indy – 40/31/18”

1 6 7 8 9 10
  1. @ Richard in Norway

    not me of course i live in an oil rich socialist paradise
    ————————————————————-
    Perhaps we in the UK will live in a green energy socialist paradise one day. Maybe then you will ‘come home to Labour’. I do not see you as an Orange Book Liberal – but perhaps I am wrong about that…. 8-)

  2. Billy Bob – Aung San Suu Kyi, We are just waiting in the wings to take over the World

  3. What’s Jamie Oliver got to complain about? .. The grubby geezer chef, has made a fortune from the government for his healthy school meals campaign.. And what’s happened? Less kids are now eating a school meal!
    Lansley is right to shelve the campaign. Would you keep a salesmen that reduced sales?

    What about sending him into the prisons with his healthy meals? Perhaps less people would want to go there and crime might go down!
    Now there’s a thought .
    Exciting times we live in!!

  4. @Wayne,

    I’m surprised to finally find someone who is more bonkers than me. I mean that in a positive way, of course. XD.

  5. Matt,

    Wayne makes you come accross like a sombre judge…

    I vote Wayne for PM :) (well alright deputy PM)

  6. amber

    you are probably right

    i don’t think i am a orange booker

    but i’m ashamed to say i have not read it, so who knows prehaps i am

    goodnight all…….. work in 7 hours, must try to not get killed stumbling around half asleep

  7. @Wayne… your Jamie Oliver/prison meals idea actually makes sense. A lot of offenders, it has been proved, have nutrition deficiences to the extent that their mental state is impaired.
    Added to illiteracy levels and other disadvantgages, it makes it difficult to function normally in society.
    With the sociopathic tendencies, and a better diet, they could become the very model of successful entrepreneurs.

  8. @Eoin,

    “Wayne makes you come accross like a sombre judge…”

    Agreed, he really is that bonkers.

    “I vote Wayne for PM :) (well alright deputy PM)”

    Me too. You have two supporters already, Wayne.

  9. Wayne,

    I would not let my son eat school dinners if they paid him :)

    I must say i never thought I would agree with you on anything…. but there you go

  10. ‘@Eoin,

    “I would not let my son eat school dinners if they paid him :)”

    *Shudders at the memories.*

  11. @ Valerie

    “This may happen in the private sector but the majority of LA employees are women, most of whom have had career breaks”

    I understand-you are missing the point.
    Any pension is a function of the length of pensionable service.

    If pensionable service has been intermittent or truncated, you cannot expect the same pension as an employee with longer pensionable service.

    Just quoting pension value is meaningless.

  12. So pension credits for women who take a break to have children then?

  13. I would vote for a female candidate (or PM) if she is good enough. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of good female Tory candidates at the mo IMO.

  14. Or, indeed, senior female Tory MPs more generally.

  15. @Eoin Clarke

    “Wayne,

    I would not let my son eat school dinners if they paid him :) ”

    I was recently invited (well, dragged along by my son, actually) to a comprehensive school in North Yorks to give a talk on nuclear power to the Sixth Form. I was pleasantly surprised by the astonishing quality of the food, discovering that the head of the canteen is a fully trained chef. The food was healthy, tasty and cheap.

    Not like I got at my boarding school!

  16. @Tony

    Which is precisely what Jamie has been campaigning for, and helping set up.

    The cynic in me would assume the comments were a prelude to implementing some drastic cost saving measure, such as catering schools with the same method as airlines. Cheap low quality food pre-cooked in a central location, and just reheated at the schools?

  17. Tony Fisher,

    Nice to see you on- missed your pearls of wisdom

    too much red meat Tony- its not good for the wee’uns.

    Just fish or chicken for my wee man…

    He is 1/2 scottish so we have to keep a wee eye on his penchant for batter….

    in addiiton they are £60 quid a month…

  18. @ Éoin

    It is amazing how the smallest expenses mount up. £3 per day for lunch sounds okay, until x20 days = £60 for a month.

    I got free lunches at school. The food was OK but the free meals had different tickets so there was some teasing went on. I’d bet those who did the mocking are Daily Mail readers now. ;-)

  19. Amber Star

    “I can only vote for policies”

    With respect – what an inane comment!

    Fortunately, the SNP/LDs/Greens combined to vote down the totally stupid, populist, unthinking policy of “jail for carrying a knife” which the two authoritarian, populist, unthinking parties wanted to create. (You voted for one of these two stupid parties – it doesn’t matter which, you share an agenda).

    When I nipped up to the shops for Mrs Nat, taking a break from tying up some plants, I still had a knife in my pocket.

    You and the Tories are so insane that you think I should have been jailed for that.

    I don’t really believe that you, as an individual, want that to be the case – but you say you vote for policies, so maybe you are really that stupid!

  20. @ OLD NAT

    “I can only vote for policies”
    ————————————
    You have the wrong end of the stick, my friend.

    Richard in Norway said he could never vote Labour because of a remark that David Blunkett made. I was responding to that.

    Carry all the knives you like. Provided they stay in your pockets, it is not a problem. I am not sure why you are having a go at me. 8-)

  21. @ OLD NAT

    You and the Tories are so insane that you think I should have been jailed for that.
    ————————————–
    I mean where do I say anything like I think you should be jailed for that?

  22. Amber Star

    I’m having a go at you, because you vote for a party that proposed a law (supported by your Tory pals) that would have jailed me whether my knife was in my pocket or not. If you don’t want to vote for stupid authoritarian policies, then not voting Lab/Con would be a good start!

    I take it that you are actually a reasonable person, and think that the SLAB policy on knife-carrying is rubbish, and that the SNP/LD/Green policy is correct?

  23. Amber Star

    “I mean where do I say anything like I think you should be jailed for that?”

    That was the policy you voted for! Wasn’t that a clever thing to do?

  24. @ OLD NAT

    Read my posts. I agree with Matt that prevention of crime is best; I then question how that can be done without infringing people’s civil liberties.

    Now, if somebody has a good explanation for why they carried a knife, I would expect the police to have more sense than to bring charges.
    Failing that, I would expect any sensible Procurator Fiscal to drop the charges.
    And failing that, I’d expect any sensible Court to find the person ‘not guilty’. 8-)

  25. @ OLD NAT

    That was the policy you voted for! Wasn’t that a clever thing to do?
    ——————————————————
    As far as I could remember, even being found guilty of carrying a knife doesn’t carry a mandatory jail term.

    I checked & it doesn’t appear to. You can correct me if I’m wrong but I voted based on my understanding that there isn’t a mandatory sentence. 8-)

  26. Amber Star

    So why would a reasonable person like you vote for a party that (with Tory support) wanted to jail anyone carrying a knife in a public place?

    Your previous post suggests that you totally disagreed with labour policy on this (which any sensible person would do). Yet you post that you vote for policies.

    Jailing knife-carriers was a key Labour policy. You think they were wrong. You don’t support Labour policy on everything – good for you!

    We’ll have you thinking as an independent person instead of a party hack soon. :-)

  27. Amber Star

    I’m worried that you don’t know what you are voting for!

    This from the SLAB website

    “The amendment – if passed – will ensure that anyone found guilty of a carry a knife would get a mandatory minimum sentence of at least six months but judges could jail knife criminals up to a four year maximum.”

    It also quotes “Anyone who disregards moves to toughen the sentencing laws on knife crime will be seen by the public as having victims’ blood on their hands.”

    Do you really not understand what the people you vote for, and encourage others to do so, want to happen?

    Every party has really crap policies! I’d expect decent Labour supporters in Scotland to be wholly condemnatory of this particular one.

  28. My response to Amber is in moderation. There may be a trigger word, so I’ll try a moderated version.

    Amber Star

    I’m worried that you don’t know what you are voting for!

    This from the SLAB website

    “The amendment – if passed – will ensure that anyone found guilty of a carry a knife would get a mandatory minimum sentence of at least six months but judges could jail knife criminals up to a four year maximum.”

    It also quotes “Anyone who disregards moves to toughen the sentencing laws on knife crime will be seen by the public as having victims’ blood on their hands.”

    Do you really not understand what the people you vote for, and encourage others to do so, want to happen?

    Every party has really bad policies! I’d expect decent Labour supporters in Scotland to be wholly condemnatory of this particular one.

  29. The best put down of the authoritarian Lab/Cons came from Green MSP Patrick Harvie, who said: “There are some things legislation is not good for. Distinguishing between a frightened wee boy who made a mistake and knows he has and a genuine thug who poses a threat is something legislation can’t do – the courts have to do that.”

  30. @ OLD NAT

    I’ll have to take this up with my MSP & MP. This mandatory sentencing idea is news to me. 8-)

  31. Colin + Roland – once again i read your comments especially regarding public sector cuts and say yes you put it absolutely perfect – well done guys.

    Sue Marsh – I must need a lie down, agree with you about IDS. Gove (but esp IDS) and hope they succeed with some really difficult but potentionally brilliant ideas. And yes i do not rate Lansley and never have.
    There you see once a year i can be nice.

    Prisons – really impressed with comments from all sides today, i am instinctively a lock them all up and increase sentences kind of guy, but when you see the types of crimes like non payment of fines, mental health etc you can see the logic in trying to find a way of stopping the return to jail culture. It would ofcourse need funding of voluntary groups/ private sector etc, and support from tory backbenchers – good luck Ken.

    Really enjoying the much more constructive comments on these pages over last few days. Found myself agreeing with Sue and i think a comment from Eoin – time to go and lie down in a dark room . well done all.

  32. @ SUE

    “So pension credits for women who take a break to have children then?”

    Yes…..why not?……..it’s only money-someone else’s money.
    If we try hard enough we can make the cost of having increased the population as significant as…..oh …not wanting to work at all.

  33. Amber,

    Yes it all adds up. I like to think I can give him something a bit healthier for less.

    Would GO sign me up on that motto do you think :P

  34. @Old Nat

    It should be obvoius that being inadvertantly ‘tooled up’ for a spot of horticulture is no crime.
    When young teenagers die on the streets of London, to the tune of one per weekend as a result of trivial disputes, then it is not reasonable that Police have powers of arrest were it is obvious that youths routinely carry weapons for no good reason?

  35. I’m struck this morning by how the central aim of the OBR doesn’t appear to have worked. When Brown surprised us and set up the independent interest function for the BoE, it immediately slipped into a role without anyone questioning it’s independence, even when rates fell before elections etc.

    With the OBR, among very many independent commentators there is a general agreement that the OBR estimates of private sector jobs growth are wildly unacheivable and this is leading many to question how independent the OBR is. This is not a good outcome.

    To meet Cameron’s pledge yesterday for falling unemployment we need to create 2.5m private sector jobs in five years. Between 2000 and 2008 – right through the boom years – the prvate sector only created 1.5m jobs, with much of this coming from false booms in construction and financial services. Economists have also pointed out that this tends to be the pattern for austerity driven private sector booms – they are speculative in large part and historically have unravelled at a later date post bust, leaving little long term net benefit.

    I’m afraid that while I’m very much hoping (for my own sake as much as anyone elses) that the private sector can deliver, I am very sceptical. I say this as a private sector company director and employer.

  36. Another thought on deficit reduction and how we’ve got our priorities screwed up. Last year the government spent £17.5m on campaigns relating to benefit fraud and only £633,000 on similar campaigns targetting tax evasion.

    Official estimates for benefit fraud (including payment errors) were £3.1b, and for tax evasion £70b. [That’s the same figure as we need to close the structural deficit, give or take].

    If a government was serious about a fair way to close the deficit they would ruthlessly and aggressively target tax evasion. Closing this down would effectively spread the tax burden across a much wider base and in due course enable a lowering of general taxation rates with a consequent freeing up of private sector resources for sustainable growth. Cuts would also be part of this, but much less severe and with much less risk to the economy than we are seeing at present.

  37. Alec,

    Your second post was much better than your first… I fully agree we have imbalance in our targetting of tax avoiance…. draining companies of capital before pulling the plug only to restart under a new name, VAT fraud to the tune of billions and of course constructive accounting are all blights on the nation’s coffers..
    __________

    OBR

    Thus far, the OBR have released as much information to annoy GO as the have to cheer him….

    Its initial report basically exoneratted Darling’s main figures and were even kinder of the Labour deificit plan than Darling was himself… The OBR wont produce everything to blue’s liking you can be sure of it…. In the end I foretell it will lead to the demise of GO..

    So what if it says 2.5mill jobs will be created…..? When that fails to materialise you can beat GO with his own stick…

    Wait and see, there will much to cheer about the OBR in future years. I for one hope it is here to stay.

  38. @Eoin – “Wait and see, there will much to cheer about the OBR in future years”.

    If what I fear happens does come to pass, I won’t be cheering.

    Personally, I don’t feel the OBR is biased. What I find worrying is that under Darling, and (I believe) under his instruction, the Treasury used the most pessimistic and cautious (possibly over cautious) estimates of spending, tax revenues and labour market projections. The OBR is using by contrast some pretty rosy assumptions. Osborne has used these as the basis of a very high risk strategy with no escape clause if the assumptions prove unfounded.

    No one in the private sector genuinely believes we can see job creation on this scale. The BoE agents report no jobs growth for at least 6 months and probably longer. The Treasury models have been consistently over estimating projected GDP growth, and all of this comes before we start discussing the fact thay Osborne is assuming 10% investment growth every single year and booming exports to a Eurozone currently on it’s knees. Meanwhile, the second phase of the banking crisis looks like it might be about to break – the one that many Tories posters here predicted when Labour were in power, but have been strangely silent on since their lot got into No 10.

  39. @ Alec

    I don’t think yesterday showed OBR’s lack of independence, they were simply forced to the pre-announcement for their own sake. I have lots of doubts about their forecasts, but mainly for two reasons.

    One is that it is largely an econometric model, thus they should have produced confidence levels for each of the output variables (in the way as the Met Office now does) and not only for GDP growth. Its model also seems to be rather similar to the Treasury’s. This model has certain problems – it is designed to estimate gross and net financial flows among the main actors (government, households, private companies, and external) with some structural breakdown through national accounts, but notoriously inaccurate for estimating non-financially expressed economic performance. If we take four quadrants (market of goods and services, investment and savings, money market and labour market), one of them cannot be simultaneously defined in these models. They tend to leave out the labour market for this reason. This then creates problems. If you look at OBR’s growth figure estimates and the growth of employment would suggest quite a serious drop in private sector productivity. I don’t think it’s likely. The drop would be smaller if there were large unused private sector capaciities (the initial increase in job creation would be from here and then rapid increase in investment (including activation of investment) at a higher productivity level)… There is no consensus about free capacity among business economists and the OBR has no estimates for this. These are the problems with econometric modeling and not with OBR.

    The second is that labour market in this forecast is clearly considered to be homogeneous thus structural imbalances are ignored and it is assumed that the labour supply can meet any kind of labour demand (by quality, skills, terms of use (e.g. working time), employee and employer preference) if the wage is right (unconstrained substitution of one job to another). Considering the inflexibility of the British labour market in these terms (as against numerical), the assumption is very problematic – the British labour market (mainly the English) tends to respond to sudden changes (and such an increase in employment is sudden) in labour demand through immigration.

  40. Actually if such a large increase in demand for labour happened (I doubt), we would likely see the return of East Europeans (mainly Polish) in large numbers.

    Thus the UK economy could have an increase in private sector jobs and unemployment at the same time and both can be large and persistant.

  41. Laszlo
    The last point in your post is of critical importance. If by any chance there is a growth in private sector jobs it will be irelevant to those losing pulic sector jobs or those already unemployeed. Private employers will go for the new arrival.
    On Tuesday I had lunch with a friend who is a very right wing employer and he expressed pleasure that tory measures would drive the long term unemployed into work… but not he confirmed with him. I checked and in the hotel we were eating the serving staff came from Slovakia, Poland, Venezuela and India. For social cohesion the public sector is essential

  42. @Alec

    I draw your attention to my post of 29th June 9:53 in reply to your post. I have not ignored the banking problems under this govt or any other.
    My initial response to the ECBs refinancing package is that it shows an improvement in the general situation but suggests continued disparity within the sector. The basket looks healthier but some of the eggs are going off. To what extent they go off will determine whether the whole basket is ruined.

  43. @ Barney Crockett

    “it will be irelevant to those losing pulic sector jobs or those already unemployeed.”

    Yes, or all the jobs have to unskilled or semi skilled. But then there will be a wage level problem. I guess some of the figures will be destorted by voluntary redundancy and early retirement schemes in the public sector as a way of reducing employment there.

    I agree with you on the likely employer behaviour (but obviously there will be exceptions) and the leading back the long term unemployed to work environments is very difficult.

  44. Colin – @ SUE
    “So pension credits for women who take a break to have children then?”
    Yes…..why not?……..it’s only money-someone else’s money.
    If we try hard enough we can make the cost of having increased the population as significant as…..oh …not wanting to work at all.

    Silly me. Much better we give pension assistance to millionaires than allow for the fact that over 50% of our population will be penalised in retirement for bringing on the next generation.

    Old Nat – WAY too aggressive IMO. We all have policies we abhor. If we let one or two stand in the way of the hundreds we approve of we’d never vote at all. Name calling and insults over one policy YOU are passionate about is rather bullying IMO. Last time she posted, I wasn’t aware she was a cabinet member?

  45. Oh, and by the way OldNat, my nephew got stabbed to death outside a nightclub two years ago. He was 19, so perhaps even draconian suggestions might be worth thinking about. Happy pruning!

  46. Laszlo,

    Sorry to bug you- did the USSR ever have a year of negative economic growth? specifically 1945-91?

  47. @ Eoin

    No problem :-).

    There was no negative economic growth between 1945-1989 (I would be very cautious with figures after than as Gosplan effectively collapsed, so collecting figures was rather haphazard).

    Three caveats. The Soviet Union used material production value (thus excluding most of the “non-productive” services – banking, education and alike, while transport, most of retail and wholesale were in) to measure growth and not national accounting method. Attempts to convert these to GDP are quite dubious. Of all the former state socialist countries, the USSR was the only one, where there were no investment cycles until the early 1980s.

    Secondly, there was actually a drop in economic growth in 1945-47, but it was related to moving from war production to peace production and for various reasons it is is not reflected in the statistics.

    Thirdly, some of the figures in the late 1960s are a bit problematic – there were large increases in inventory. The same applies for 1985-87, when investment in progress pushed up the growth figures.

  48. Laszlo,

    Your very kind- Thank you :)

  49. @ Eoin

    Just remembered what you are marking :-). My sympathy is with you :-)

    The Brezhnev stagnation still produced around 1.3% annual growth. It was, paradoxically, Gorbachev’s acceleration (uskarenie) and rebuilding (perestroyka) that killed off any hope of growth by starting a huge number of investment simultaneously (first in production, then in social infrastructure), which absorbed all resources, thus taking away the remaining responsiveness of the Soviet economy.

  50. @ Sue

    Thanks :-) I was a bit discombobulated by the tone of Old Nat’s comment; I am not a fan of mandatory minimum sentences but having read & thought about Matt’s posts, it is clear something needs to be done.

    Women used to be afraid to venture out at night, that situation seems to have improved somewhat.

    Now ’tis young men like Matt who are afraid because of youths who carry knives & similar weapons.

    I think the SLP policy that Old Nat hates (& I am not massively keen about) would have Matt’s approval. My son doesn’t think it is draconian. 8-)

1 6 7 8 9 10