There were two more polls in the Sunday papers. BPIX in the Mail on Sunday had voting intentions of CON 41%, LAB 37%, LDEM 13%.

There was also a new Angus Reid poll in the Sunday Express, which seems to be their first voting intention poll since the election and apparently shows the biggest Labour lead yet. Sadly the Sunday Express doesn’t actually give the full voting intention figures – saying only that it “showed Labour taking a three-point lead over the Conservatives, with Lib Dems drifting in huge numbers to Ed Miliband’s party”.

Sadly I haven’t been able to make contact with Andy Morris yet to get the full numbers. I’m expecting Angus Reid will also have made changes to their methodology following the election, so it’ll be interesting to see what they’ve come up with.

UPDATE: The full Angus Reid voting intention figures are here, and are CON 35%, LAB 38%, LDEM 16%. Looking at the tables, AngusReid no longer seem to be weighting past vote to the actual shares of the vote at the last election – they appear to have weighted to CON 35%, LAB 29%, LDEM 25%, Others 10%, so Conservative and Labour slightly lower than they actually got and Lib Dem slightly higher. More significant might be when they ask past vote – rather than ask people to recall their vote when filling in the survey, AngusReid may now be able to use past vote data on their panellists collected in May 2010, in the same way YouGov do with their party ID weighting. I’ll get some proper details when I get chance to talk to Andy Morris.

532 Responses to “New Angus Reid and BPIX polls”

1 2 3 11
  1. Angus Reid with a Labour lead…..has anyone checked if hell has frozen over.

  2. Looking at some of the breaks in recent polls I think that 39, 39,13 might be fairly close to the mark at the moment. Ed won’t be too unhappy with this.

  3. Hmmm – I don’t follow either of these. I’ll stick to YouGov.

    Latest UNS projection on homepage of this site is 39 – 39 – 13 suggesting Lab 2 seats short of an overall majority.

    Con 283 seats [ – 23 ]
    Lab 324 seats [ + 66 ]
    LibDem 18 seats [ – 39 ]

  4. The socialists on this site are far too optimistic about future Labour prospects. See my comment on the previous thread from 0930, 3/10/10.

  5. “See my comment on the previous thread from 0930, 3/10/10.”
    errr – no thanks – I hope they are snipped.

  6. @DAODAO -“…they have elected as leader someone whom English folk (over 80% of the UK electorate) will perceive (in view of his background and lifestyle) as not one of us…”
    I think you may be living in the past. One of the most remarkable things about David Cameron being elected (and his continuing popularity) is how the electorate do not seem to care about his ‘not being one of us.’
    Eton was seen to be a disadvantage for a Tory politician for a long time. Baroness Thatcher was elected in the 80s because she brought a certain working class shine to a party which was in danger of being seen to be the party of the ‘toffs’.
    Well now the ‘toffs’ are in charge and noone seems to mind.
    A recent poll showed 82% of the electorate do not care that Ed Miliband is an atheist and is not married to his party.
    This is the new Britain (hopefully). Being ‘one of us’ no longer seems to matter as much as it once did, thankfully IMHO.

  7. Not married to his party? His partner. A freudian slip?

  8. @ Julian
    I don’t think that having attended a public school is perceived to be alien to English values and thus an electoral handicap. Both Attlee and Blair went to public schools.

  9. ha, I only took a pop at Angus Reid yesterday. Looks like far from bringing the Labour average down, they would give it a little boost!

    Will wonders never cease?

    Tories in coalition with Libs
    David Miliband NOT Labour leader and now
    Angus Reid put Labour ahead???

    I’m actually getting a little concerned that we may see some compassionate Conservatism soon.

  10. So Labour are just behind or more or less level with the Tories at the moment. I expect the Tories will open a small lead again over the next week.

    But, by spring, as the cuts begin to bite, Labour will surely be 5 or 6 points in front and likely to stay there for some time.

    Once that happens, the LibDems will be free to collapse the coalition.

    i. Let Labour take a clear lead in the polls.

    ii. Break up the coalition.

    iii. Force a new election.

    iv. Form coalition government with Labour.

    v. Bye bye blue party for some time….

    Could be their intention.

    And a major major risk for the Conservatives.

  11. The angus Reid figures are 35 38 16 found them here

    h ttp://

  12. @Daodao – “The socialists on this site are far too optimistic about future Labour prospects. See my comment on the previous thread from 0930, 3/10/10.”

    My thoughts were precisely the same as Julian Gilbert’s – namely that it’s very hard to argue Cameron is ‘one of us’ and it didn’t seem to do him any harm.

    I do think though that you are right in that there seems to have been an overeaction (understandable I guess) from labour supporters on the poll leads. If the coalition get it anything like right with the economy and the change agenda in the next five years Labour will have a very tough battle ahead. The coalition also have their problems too though, but I suspect Labour might have done themselves some good by elected Ed.

    We are entering a period of massive political change, where all kinds of philosophical shifts can be implemented, both by government and opposition, under the cover of the deficit. We are yet to see the unravelling of the political and economic orthodoxy following the collapse of the previous financial system, and there are real opportunities for Labour. David M was the continuity candidate, but change is what is needed now.

  13. @DAODOA
    I hope you are someone with influence in the Tory party. As a Labour supporter, I would be very unhappy if all Labour had to attack DC was that he wasn’t one of us because he went to Eton.
    Likewise, I would be very happy if all the Tories had to attack EM was that ‘he wasn’t one of us’.
    However, I fear DC is somewhat cleverer than that.

  14. I have no idea as to when the next election will take place – whether in 18 months or over 4 years..On the other hand, I find it difficult to see Labour polling less than 35/36 % next time – whenever it happens – so the Tories will need to be above 40% to be confident of a majority.. It may well be a question of how far will Tory gains from LibDems offset their losses to Labour.

  15. Anthony,

    AR made a couple of changes a few weeks before May (ok maybe a couple of weeks) but they seemed to improve their correlation with some of the other pollsters.

    This 35/38/16 seems to be something in the ball park of what that revised methodology might throw up.

  16. Having a little think about GO’s plans, I am torn.

    I actually welcome Eoin’s suggestion that cuts won’t be as fierce as expected. Surely there can’t be a Red on here who wants to see the kind of mayhem they would mean.

    However there are two reason’s I think Eoin is, sadly, wrong.

    1) In Ireland, Portugal and Greece, they have had to cut more and more as the deficit has not reduced and inititial austerity measures have not worked.

    Everything I’ve read, seems to suggest that Blues of any nation now wish they had cut further and deeper to begin with. It is this, they argue, not the cuts themselves that has been the big mistake.

    They seem to believe the “short, sharp shock” treatment would have kick-started the economies with less pain in the long run. The last thing GO wants, is to find his cuts haven’t worked and that he is facing another spending review next October, and maybe even another the October after that.

    2) The Machiavellian genius Eoin attributes to him consists of three sweeteners that could have worked equally well twenty, thirty or even fifty years ago. They amount to tax cuts really and though well timed electorally, they weren’t exactly rocket science, especially not from a Conservative.

    I actually hope Eoin is right this time, as even 10% cuts would be extremely painful, but sadly, I think he’ll cut quick and deep, believing it’s the only thing that would leave them with a chance of re-election in 2015.

  17. Alec,

    From 1914-1922
    Deficit had climbed nearly 900% since before the war
    Internal memorandum signaled 20% cut in public service spending
    Remit of Geddes Committee: Find £175million
    Recommendations of Geddes: £87million
    Implementations of Geddes: £57 million
    Proportion of Geddes eventual recommendations: c.80% Defence c.20% Social Services (as a proportion of spending)
    Actual total cuts in social services c.11%
    In the end Alec, the cuts were a) half in terms of threatened social services spending. B) The cabinet agreed to only 1/3 of the figure of the original remit of Geddes. And now for the best bit- ? C) Expenditure increased in both defense and social services the following year. Now I ask you politely: disagree with me by all means but try to keep it polite. I might be wrong, I often am, but my thoughts are founded in good faith.

  18. We reds trying to guess how much GO will cut is probably a bit of a waste of time.
    What are the Tory supporters’ views? Is GO really going to cut as much as he says he is, or could it just be a political ploy? Colin? Roland?

  19. Aha! So no-one disagrees with anyone else then?

    Cozmo, Alec and Eoin all believe that implemented cuts won’t actually add up to 25%, as they’ve been arguing all along. (As have Laszlo and myself and probably others I’ve forgotten)

    The announcements will be 25% or more though, or Osborne will lose the only thing he has so far gained:

    Credibility with the bond markets.

  20. Still going to have to weight severely against both BPIX and Angus Reid because of their appalling past performance.

    AR’s tables and methodology statement are up on their site now. From the tables, it still looks like the headline voter intent is a second question with something leading into it. Quite possibly they are still using that “Mindset shaping” policy question, which gives an anti-incumbent bias. Hence why they have shifted from giving Labour a drubbing, to giving the Conservatives one.

  21. @Sue Marsh – what I am particularly interested in is what impact a reduced level of cuts will have on government credibility.

    They have politically backed themselves into a corner by targeting the elimination of the deficit largely through spending cuts at a time when the economy is likely to show only sluggish growth – whatever happens to the private sector, historically recoveries following credit shocks are weak compared with those following other slow downs.

    But if the cuts don’t fully materialise and the deficit remains, will that affect government credibility? My guess is probably not – at least not like Black Wednesday, a single moment in time when the whole edifice of government policy crashed in a few hours, destroying an 13 year record of economic invincibility.

    The deficit issue will be incremental, month by month, (unless there is a bond market shock). If the deficit isn’t eliminated what do Labour say? Arguing that ‘we were right all along’ isn’t a great way to win votes, as effectively you are saying your opponents got it right in the end.

    The worst case for Osborne would be the Irish experience – savage cuts that shrink the economy with no overall benefit to the deficit. If he does go with 25% cuts, this really is possible. A midstream adjustment in the face of new circumstances is every government’s get out clause, and would cause Labour some problems.

    The best counter for Labour in my view is to articulate a clear philosophy encompassing what went wrong and how they want to rebuild society and the economy in a new way. If they can pick out some big ticket items to credibly reduce spending that mirror this wider message they could make progress – I’ve floated some of my ideas on this many times before.

    Either way, what some people forget is that 2% cuts will feel very painful, let alone 20%. It’s not going to be a happy time.

  22. I seem to remember even an expirienced operator like Gordon Brown could occassionally announce a minor adjustment to tax policy and have it spectacularly blow up in his face.

    The coalition have talked a frenzy of reform these past months: “Hugely ambitious plans” as David Cameron himself calls them. Simon also says today “no one will lose out.” (!) ;)

  23. Dept. of Health policy announcements (BBC 11.28am this morning). Small sums but it shows the direction spending is going it.

    1. £60m over the next four years to introduce the latest cancer screening technology
    2. The Department of Health has already announced £50m for additional cancer drugs this year.
    3. £10.75m for a “signs and symptoms” campaign, which will focus on breast, lung and bowel cancers
    4. It is also investing £43m more on proton beam therapy.

  24. DWP cuts? Try this BBC report (11.21pm last night)

    Chancellor George Osborne and Mr Duncan Smith said they had now agreed on an “affordable investment package” to reform the welfare system. Some savings are already being made through restrictions in payments such as housing benefit, but the overall cost to the government is initially expected to rise after the changes are brought in as people return to work and retain some financial assistance.

    This dept. is massive. To implement 40% cuts in it, this would probably be unlikely to aid in that regard. (Nevertheless a cracking policy idea).

  25. Sue et al
    I’m afraid I am a dissident on the bond markets. They never believed for a minute that the Tories would do what they said. Britain is very unlikely to come under pressure from the bond markets. The biggest motivation for right of centre governments with promising economies to cut deeper is old-fashioned labour discipline. To put a bit of fear back. I have been surprised how strong the desire is for this amongst some LibDems. The surprise feature may be that the modern Tory MP has promised unqualified devotion to their constituency and may not have the disciplined instincts of a previous generation

  26. Eoin – lol. NHS spending will increase in real terms, BUT they have been asked to make 25 Billions of “efficiency savings”.

    Even my tiny economic brain tells me they will be able to make some fairly hefty feel-good announcements on Health (if nothing else) between now and 2015.

  27. Barney – I agree, but they preferred the rhetoric to labour’s

    Eoin – Once and for all, no-one is claiming there will be cuts across the board of 40%

  28. NHS cuts? Hopefully to removes homoeopathy from NHS until scientific research can be shown to support.

    ‘Not my view’; ‘There are currently no good quality studies which show homeopathy really works over and above the placebo effect. There are many small studies which show it works, although they tend to be poorly designed and conducted by homeopaths themselves. Larger studies that are well designed and conducted scientifically do not show that homeopathy works at all. The evidence for homeopathy seems to be inversely proportional to the quality of the studies done: the better the study the less chance of a positive finding.’

  29. Eoin – the pre-election changes Angus Reid made were “microweighting” and using a mock ballot paper with candidates names. The microweighting initially seemed to bring them closer to other pollsters, but it seems to have been co-incidence because the different re-emerged. Either way, there’s no microweighting on this poll and, for obvious reasons, I assume there are no candidates names!

  30. Sue, GO’s ‘credibility with the bond markets’ does not hinge on 25% cuts.
    It will hinge on his management of the deficit. Although cuts to that extent *may* be required to meet the deficit targets, it is not the only way to achieve it. I very much doubt we will see 25% across most departments, and it is important to remember that he has set four years to clear ‘the bulk’ of the deficit, so year on year cuts will be nothing like that, and he will have time to tweak his plans as circumstances arise. Labour never stuck to spending review pledges whilst in govt…
    I expect to see the removal of universality of benefits contributing more than people thought originally. There is very little political capital to be lost by means testing CB for example, and I am still always surprised that Labour defend it. “make those rich [email protected] pay more to get us out of this mess, oh, but let’s carry on giving them CB”. Now I know the “squeezed middle class” aren’t rich but I’m afraid if there are benefits to be taken away, or taxes to be levied instead, the only area that makes any big financial impact is through the middle class. Tax the “rich” and bankers 90% and even if they stayed and paid it it would make a very small impact on the deficit. So the middle class will bear the brunt whatever is done, but it stand up to closer scrutiny on the fairness test than heavy cuts will do on the working class. 

    It will be interesting to see how Labour respond to this – if they want to avoid impacting lower earners, ‘hard working families’, and the better off middle then it will be hard to frame a credible deficit plan, unless they opt for denial. Remember Lab plan was less cuts but tied to overly optimistic growth forecasts which were never achievable (in any circumstances!) so robust measures are required somewhere…     

  31. Anthony,

    ta for that.

    “past vote data on their panellists collected in May 2010” – This is a very impressive innovation. Did YG do this on their 2005 data as well? I was not aware of it.

    Coceivably, ComR’s new panel wont have that luxury…

  32. @JACK
    Ann Milton’s mother was a homoeopathic ‘doctor’.
    David Treddinick believes homoeopathy should be on the NHS. Nadine Dorries also believes it should stay on the NHS.
    So does Diane Abbott, Vince Cable, Kate Hoey, Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg.
    It seems sceptics like you and I are in a severe minority. ;)

  33. @Jack

    This is not the place, but while holding no brief for homeopathy, one should remember the first duty is to do no harm.
    5-20% of iatrogenetic conditions are reported (if that)?
    There are plenty of potentially very dangerous (ie not hamless/placebo) and *expensive* drugs being prescribed by the NHS.

  34. Now that we have


    It seems a good time to do a comparison. These opportunities don’t come along often, outside election season.

    It seems there is most agreement when it comes to measuring reds

    The range only spans 4% i.e. 37%-41% and even at the YG’s 41% is the upper end of what they have been polling for reds.

    The is quite a bit of disagreement over finding the balance between blue and yellow. Companies who tend to record high scores for blue, correspondingly seem to record lower scores for yellow- and vice versa…

    So the range for blue is 6% i.e. 35%-41%
    The range for yellow is 7% i.e. 11%-18%

    Rather worryingly for the polling companies- this does not show any signs of being resolved before the enxt election. The problem has persisted for months now…

    The best piece of advice in gauging blue or yellows performance is to compare the figures like for like… ie with a previous poll by the same company. This way we can at least measure the direction the results are headed. I understand in the past some posters have got very upset at me when I advise this but there is some positive signs when you apply it in this instance….

    Most companies have been in broad agreement about a decline in the yellow share. If you examine April-Oct the trend is the same for all companies. Thus, whilst it is not to some peoples liking, it can be taking as a broad indicator of the direction of yellow fortunes.

    It is a pity that this batch of polling, whilst rare, comes in the middle of a conference season. Thus, it makes establishing any firm trend on blue support difficult because of the nature of the conference season. Perhaps these companies might do a raft of polling come the aftermath of the CSR.

  35. @ Éoin, All

    Does anybody have the +/- from BPIX last poll?

  36. Amber,

    I may be wrong but I tink their last poll was pre-election.

  37. Amber,

    Sorry I was wrong

    Changes since BPIX 11th June

    Blue +2%
    Red + 5%
    Yellow – 6%

  38. @ Éoin,

    Thank you. BTW – I do not think your comments about Geddes were dim.

    And I think that there was a bit of hair-splitting going on. GO can announce all the cuts he wants & put them in his budget; if his ministers agree but run over budget, it is the same as there not being average cuts of 20%.

    From a historical point of view, you are correct – that such cuts have never actually materialised. ‘Tis not only Geddes, the Thatcher administration didn’t succeed in meeting her cuts target either. 8-)

  39. The most amusing thing about the current polling trend (in my opinion) is that Labour are only just below their 2001 levels of support.

  40. @Amber – “Thank you. BTW – I do not think your comments about Geddes were dim.”

    Just for clarification, no one else did either. The accusation arose in reponse to a statement that we wouldn’t see many cuts.

  41. Eoin – yep, YouGov did that in 2005 too, and updated in 2010 (it was part of the switch from past vote weighting to party ID weighting – party ID weighting is impossible (or at least, damn silly) without a panel and without a firm baseline where you can get party ID at a point when how it related to actual votes is known – i.e. a general election.

    It’s something I’ve always struggled to get people to appreciate the importance of when it comes to differences between pollsters. There’s not a lot to choose between past vote and party ID in terms of how well they do the job (though the actual figures you weight to are very different), the more important difference between YouGov’s weighting and other companies was that YouGov was weighting using stored panel data, while phone companies were using data collected anew in each survey. If the answers to questions change – as they can do with recalled vote or party ID, that’s an important difference.

    If they have their own panel and aren’t paying to use that of ICM or a panel provider like Research Now then I’d expect ComRes would have done the same – a panel doesn’t just spring up overnight, if ComRes have their own they’ll have been recruiting for a while so could have asked in May.

    That said, if ComRes had developed their own panel I’d expect them to be trumpeting it on their website, so more likely they are buying panel in (or using some other form of online sampling).

  42. @ Alec


  43. Julian

    “Is GO really going to cut as much as he says he is, or could it just be a political ploy? Colin? Roland?”

    No idea.

    I only know the numbers he has published.

    GO ( June Budget) published Red Book numbers as follows :-

    Format :-FYE/ £bn Spending cuts/£bn Tax increases
    ( numbers are cumulative effect at each FYE)

    2010/11 5 / 4
    2011/12 23 / 18
    2012/13 42 / 24
    2013/14 63 / 27
    2014/15 83 / 29.

    The total fiscal tightening of £112 bn pa by end parliament compares -I believe -with AD’s March budget proposal of around £75 by end parliament ( though I don’t have AD’s phasing plan)

    So the additional tightening proposed by GO is of the order £40bn pa by end parliament.

    Whether these cuts represent x% overall is pretty irrelevant.
    Some departments will be able to absorb high level cuts-particularly where funcionality & staffing levels are not neccessary/appropriate/useful -or indeed just plain excessive.
    Other departments will no doubt struggle to cope with cuts of any significant magnitude.
    In any event, the ring fenced component clearly effects the outcome for the rest-and I am not absolutely convinced yet that anything will be truly ring-fenced.

    I hope as much of this is based on a review of functions & headcount as it is on the need to implement a credible plan to reduce the growth in total government debt, and with it the mounting debt interest bill.

    I see Ireland has been mentioned in our context. Ireland certainly had a deficit problem of some magnitude-but what has put them in basket case mode is their ( perceived) need to bail out both depositers AND bondholders in Anglo Irish Bank & the other failed Irish Banks.
    The numbers involved are eye watering-perhaps £45 BN to rescue their banks-for an economy one tenth the size of ours.
    80% of their government debt is held by foreign entities.
    They have problems we don’t have………..

    ……… least I hope so-I’m never quite sure where we are on support for RBS et al . How much have we put in?-are UK’s Banks now adequately capitalised ??

  44. One thing that is very striking is the insistance by many posters, mostly blues, that we won’t see anything like the 25% cuts already promised.

    I find this interesting, and a very distinct shift in attitudes that displays the difficulties the coalition will have and how their summer campaign has failed.

    Back in the post election period, most blues were denying cuts of this scale would have a huge impact on necessary services and would be achievable without causing much trouble to the macro economy.

    As the date for the more detailed cuts proposals approaches, the tone of the blues is changing to one of denying Osborne will actually make these cuts with claims that the real cuts will be more like 10% and can be achieved through relatively painless measures.

    This interests me, in that it might indicate blue supporters are nervous of the path upon which they have been set. I think it also shows that the coalition have failed in their campaign to ensure there is broad public acceptance of the pain to come. If there own supporters do not believe in their own stated policy, it’s hard to think that anyone else will.

    I think the two big questions will be what the blues will think if Osborne really does try to deliver 25% cuts and how does he get out of his policy straightjacket if he doesn’t.

  45. @ Colin

    They have problems we don’t have………..

    ……… least I hope so-I’m never quite sure where we are on support for RBS et al . How much have we put in?-are UK’s Banks now adequately capitalised ??
    Good to see you asking that question.

    According to Merv & Go, they are – but GO will likely do more QE anyway… Why? 8-)

  46. Anthony

    According to ComRes methodology:

    Respondents are selected using two methods. Firstly, respondents are selected from an online panel or more than 250,000 GB adults. Secondly, about 70% of the sample is selected through Random Online Sampling. This methodology randomly selects people through website invitations or pop-ups and profiles them using a series of demographic data questions.

    ComRes clearly don’t have their own voter panel, and, if I understand this correctly, get 30% from someone else’s and the rest from whatever the internet equivalent is of picking on people in the street. The latter group must be skewed by which websites they target people on. And of course those replying can lie about themselves even more than people in the street. Also response rate must be much lower and because it’s a completely new sample each time, you can’t build up background information the way you can with a panel.

    On the subject of ComRes, their online questioning looks as if it follows the same paths as their telephone polls. They only ask voting intention after previous vote and likelihood to vote – and after further squeeze questions for DKs or less likely to vote. I’ve commented before that this may lead to higher numbers for Lib Dems and Others, which ComRes tends to show; whether this is a good thing or not is another topic. I don’t know what your thoughts on this are.

  47. @Julian & Jack – re homeopathy, I’m in total agreement. Unlike, say, acupuncture, homeopathy is pure quackery. I’m astonished it appears on any NHS budget.

  48. @COLIN -“I am not absolutely convinced yet that anything will be truly ring-fenced.”

    The coalition agreement stated – “We will guarantee that health spending increases in real terms in each year of the parliament, while recognising the impact this decision will have on other departments.”
    I suppose this means they will be able to un-ringfence health spending (for example) if it’s deemed necessary. My question is, do you think that would be acceptable politically for the Tories? (I think I’m right in saying NC stated before the election the LDs wouldn’t ring-fence anything so they shouldn’t be a problem)

  49. Anthony,

    Ta for that… Well it certainly frees YG from the difficulty ICM are now having with ultra shy ‘onetime’ Libs- its thrown their weighting askew…

    ComR said they recruited 15,000k for those unweighted PM debate polls in April. Maybe they followed on from that. They were also linked to Research in a series of polls for a disability chairty whose name escapes me. But yes.

  50. @Colin – “How much have we put in?-are UK’s Banks now adequately capitalised ??”

    I have no idea, but if Ireland does default UK banks would be savaged.

    I have a very uneasy feeling that just like the early 1930’s the global economic orthodoxy has got it wrong. Globally coordinated fiscal tightenting when we haven’t fully unravelled the original financial crisis is a mistake we’ve made before.

1 2 3 11