The full tables for YouGov’s Sunday Times poll are now up here.

On the regular weekly trackers of the leaders’ approval, David Cameron is up slightly at plus 5 (from +2 a week ago), Ed Miliband continues downwards at minus 14 (from minus 9 a week ago), Nick Clegg remains pretty much unchanged with minus 23 (from minus 24 a week ago). YouGov also repeated a question on support for the government’s policy on tuition fees, originally asked 3 weeks ago. The debate since then doesn’t seem to have changed much – in November 35% of people supported the policy, that has now risen very marginally to 38%.

There were also a series of questions on Wikileaks. Asked if Wikileaks were right or wrong to publish the diplomatic cables, 37% thought it was right, 48% thought it was wrong. However, asked if the USA would be justified in prosecuting Julian Assange (for exactly what crime is not specified in the question) the position is reversed, 38% think it would be justified to prosecute him and 43% think it would not.

Finally, there were some questions on the World Cup bid, none of which are particularly surprising – British people tend to think England most deserved to host the 2018 World Cup (or rather, English respondents did. Scottish respondents were split evenly between England and Russia). 59% think the government did enough to help England win. 74% think there was probably corruption involved in FIFA’s decision.

26 Responses to “More from the YouGov/Sunday Times poll”

  1. I am wondering when the changeover point will come regarding Clegg and Miliband. If Miliband continues his fall, he will be level with Cleggy before Christmas.

  2. Interesting stats…

    47% say the coalition partners are working well together compared to 44% who say they aren’t
    47% say this gov will be bad for them, and only 27% say it will be good for them

    And at 44% it’s a tie on whether the gov is managing the economy well or badly
    59% say their financial household situation will get worse over the next 12 months.

    63% say it was wrong for the LDs to go back on their pledge to oppose tuition fees
    45% say VC should vote against tuition fees

  3. I have waited to see if the Political Betting comparison between the 2002 GE and the last GE had come to anyone else’s attention. It has, a well known Labour poster. He sees the fact that an increased LD vote last time, kept the Tories from an overall majority. He goes on to speculate that the Tories will vengefully squeeze the LDs to death for this “crime”. As I see it, the LDs share of the anti Brown government vote last May, should of given them a place in the new government. And, I am not an LD myself, but do believe in democracy.
    The very interesting thing about this article was the similarity regarding figures between these two very different elections. Blairs magnificent victory was gained with a very similar number of votes to Camerons hung parliament. Browns defeat earned very similar vote numbers to Hague’s disastrous defeat. The big difference was the LDs increase in votes in 2010 over 2002, by a couple of million.
    Had anyone asked me if this half @rsed Tory non overall majority matched St Anthony of Sedgefield in his high summer of victory, I would said no. However the votes cast were within a couple of thousands of each other.

  4. @MIKE N
    Are you sure these stats are kosher, or could they be from an impersonator ?

  5. @Roland

    FPTP. The sooner it goes, the better.

    Regards, Martyn

  6. @Martyn

    “FPTP. The sooner it goes, the better.”

    What, and kiss goodbye to the Tories or Labour ever forming a single party government ever again?? Surely not, or has this coalition infatuation got to even the most die-hard partisans?!


    Be careful about comparing apples with pears when looking back at past elections where varying turn-out tends to distort aggregate vote talliy comparisons. The 2001 GE (I think you meant that when you said 2002) had a record post-war low turnout (59% of a smaller electoral roll compared to 65% of a bigger roll in 2010) and Blair won handsomely by securing 41% of all the votes cast compared to Hague’s 32%. Cameron secured 36% of a larger turn-out and Brown about 29%, thus explaining Brown’s 29% being on a par with Hague’s 32% in terms of popular vote tallies. Blair’s 41% vote share in 01 delivered him a parliamentary landslide but, in terms of popular vote aggregates, it was way less than the 44% of the 72% turn-out that he secured in 1997. Vote share is the key and significant comparator here.

    To prove my point about how misleading it is to compare vote aggregates across different elections, I had a bit of mischievous fun a while back by pointing out that Neil Kinnock won 700,000 more votes in losing in 1992 than Cameron did in winning in 2010! The comparisons, in reality, are more or less meaningless.

  7. Roland – if the vote shares in 2010 had been the reverse of those in 2001 (that is, CON 42%, LAB 32.7%, LDEM 18.8%), then the Conservatives would have got 331 seats (a majority of 12), Labour 260 and the Lib Dems 31.

    The big difference between these figures and the 160-odd majority Labour enjoyed in 2001 are our old friends differential turnout, tactical voting, vote distribution, Welsh and Scottish* over-representation and out-of-date boundaries.

    (*since eliminated)

  8. @Anthony

    So, I was unfair to Blair. He got 42% of the vote in 2001, not the 41% I’d originally attributed to him. Never good to be unfair to Blair!

    By the way, I agree with your analysis of why the 2001 result delivered a disproportionately high Labour majority.

  9. Ed Miliband’s image difficulties must surely be having a bit of a drag on Labour’s poll ratings: one would have expected Labour to have moved into a more consistent lead by now, instead of constantly trading the lead with the Tories from one poll to the next.

    Personally, as a Labour supporter, EM has performed better than I expected, but clearly the media’s attempts to paint him as a non-follicly challenged Iain Duncan-Smith are having some success.

    Most opposition leaders – including those who have gone on to be prime minister (e.g. Heath and Thatcher) – suffered from poor personal ratings before winning power. The question is how deep the doubts over EM run: are they a fatal obstacle to his electability (as eventually proved to be the case with Neil Kinnock) or can they be “contained” to the extent that dissatisfaction with the incumbent government will be sufficient to propel him into Downing Street (as occurred to opposition leaders in both 1970 and 1979)?

    Next year may well be very familiar territory for those of us who have followed these things over a number of decades: an unpopular service-cutting Tory government assailed not just by demonstrations (riots?) on the streets but also by a Labour opposition continually dogged by doubts over the credibility of its leader.

    By 2012, we will probably know for sure whether EM will win in 2015: if the mid-term polls give Labour leads in excess of 20 points – over a sustained period of time – Cameron may well be out at the next general election. But history suggests that only modest mid-term Labour poll leads will not deliver Miliband the keys to Downing Street in 2015.

    It’s too early to say, but my money’s provisionally on the former.

  10. Interesting that DC’s rating has gone up by 3 points.

    Perhaps his efforts on behalf of the World cup bid are the cause.

    After all the English in particular have an affinity for a gallant looser rather than an arrogant winner.

  11. @Robin Hood

    “Next year may well be very familiar territory for those of us who have followed these things over a number of decades: an unpopular service-cutting Tory government assailed not just by demonstrations (riots?) on the streets but also by a Labour opposition continually dogged by doubts over the credibility of its leader.”

    I agree with a lot of what you say, although it’s probably way too soon to be tempted into any Thatcher and Kinnock comparisons just yet. Way too early to say that Cameron will attain Thatcher’s status and premature to read too much into Miliband’s very early opinion poll ratings. The only other point of slight disagreement, and I had some friendly spats with Eoin and Amber on this one, is that I remain unconvinced about the inviolable law of opposition mid term poll leads. Miliband would be delighted to be 20 points or more ahead by 2013, but public opinion is so volatile and fluid in this new political age that I’m not sure this is a benchmark he needs to fret too much about. Brown was decently ahead in 07/08 and look what happened to him!!

  12. It would seem that despite a great many assumptions to the contrary, the King over the Water, Paddy Ashdown seems to wish the coalition to hold firm. He also seems to want his party to be a solid part of it.

    There has been another complete volte face, this time from the Tories. Carrying a knife will not be a prison sentence offence, (unless you stick it in someone.)
    As big a turnabout as the LDs and University fees.

  13. @ Roland Haines

    What’s David Davies up to these days? He hasn’t been in the news for a while. ;-)

  14. @Roland

    There’s another thread started showing an Ipsos/MORI
    poll with an 8% Tory lead. Seems like your hunches are coming to fruition.

  15. @Roland

    “There’s another thread started showing an Ipsos/MORI
    poll with an 8% Tory lead. Seems like your hunches are coming to fruition”.

    Sorry, only joking! Bet you got all excited though, didn’t you!!

  16. John Hemming is now saying he is likely to vote *for* tuition fees, in reaction to the students who have occupied his constituency office.

    He is saying the bad behavior on the part of this small number students cannot be seen to be rewarded. The logic of this position is that students as a whole must be ‘punished’ with a rise in tuition fees.

    The likely four-way split (for, against, abstain, delay) among LDs is being reported as leadership failure on the part of Nick Clegg.

  17. Amber
    What’s David Davies up to these days? He hasn’t been in the news for a while.
    Funny you should say that. On Sky News, it says that the NUS says that David Davis says that he his going to vote against the tuition fee rise. I always thought he was a bit of a wet.

  18. @ Kyle

    Nice to see you commenting again. :-)

    I think David Davies cares about social mobility & doesn’t just pay lip-service. I may be wrong but I believe that DD does not come from a wealthy background & probably understands how the future student intake – & their parent(s) – feel about the fees trebling.

    It will be interesting to see if this just a rumour or he will really vote against.

    It would be a very strange situation, were Dems who promised to vote against to ‘take the whip’ & vote for (or abstain) whilst a high profile Tory back-bencher has the courage/ temerity to rebel.

  19. It takes a lot of guts to rebel. Sometimes we are blinded by our political allegances. I heard that one Lib Dem MP said he was going to vote for the policy because some students organised a sit in his constituency office.

  20. Sounds like Mr. Hemming has been desperately looking for an excuse to break his pledge and thinks he’s found one. Does not say a lot for his character. Still the likelihood this bill will pass, even if one or two tories don’t support it.

    David Davies will go up in my estimation, I might not agree with them but politicians with moral principles they stick to earn my respect.

  21. I suspect many people in the current government think social mobility is largely something to do with meeting the right people at the right cocktail party….

    I think that Uncle Ken plunging the knife into knife-crime isn’t quite the same scale of policy u-turn as the LibDem volte-face on student loans.

    In all of the shouting over this am I correct in believing that the 21K threshold of which so much is being made of as a totem of the schemes superiority over the last government’s is in fact a 21k in 2016 prices and that, allowing for inflation, is actually about the same as the 15k point set when these fees were first introduced….

    It isn’t eactly a point to Labour over…hardly a herculean feat to shout about…but when you’ve only a loin cloth perthaps you can’t afford to cut your cloth….Still at least the hyperbole is mythic in its scale even if the policy is all sand and sandals. The realities of power…all dressed up and nowhere to go…..

    I know we are in the season of Wise Men and leading stars but it’s hard to take seriously someone who spends 65 years telling you they’ve costed everything and thought things through only to find out that they’ve costed nothing and thought nothing through.

    But as it’s the season of good will perhaps its best ot leave them feast alone on their own wise words.There’s enough turkey there to feed a whole party.

    It hasn’t taken our sainted friends in gold long to tarnish their political reputations with base metal and after all being economical with the truth…is an economy any First Secretary to the Treasury would make. It must make the Treasury mandarins smile like Cheshire cats…and that perhaps is the unkindest cut of all…

    And our great leaders have discovered in Switzerland that presentation isn’t everything. Of course they may not be wise enough to see that there’s a lesson to be learned from the fiasco….beyond that of not beleiving everthing you hear in the cocktail bar of a Swiss hotel in the early hours of the morning…

    …all those meals in the Bullingdon Club were obviously wasted in more ways than one…..

  22. John Murphy
    I disagree with you (for once) on the volte-face on knife crime. I think it will rightly shock tories but they didn’t pin themselves to the wall on it because no one would have thought it necessary to ask.
    The Russian tv covered the football announcement cooly, saying England appeared very confident so they may now need to show a bit of that stiff upper lip.
    John Redwood was intereting saying it showed modern UK doesn’t understand what you have to do to sell in the modern world.
    Kyle D
    Interesting point about DC likely to be missed by Scots

  23. Amber Star
    He was brought by rather splendid hard-line Communist grandparents. He was shocked to discover that his grand-dad had not as he believed gone on the Jarrow March but on the much more militant Hunger March.
    I did wonder if you had your tongue in your cheek as the speculation of his close friendship with a former sdp activist has been re-emerging.
    The Daily Mail says he is voting against the fees, it seems in sympathy for what might be called the squeezed middle (that is if it is not an impster)

  24. Kyle D / John F
    Sorry My warm words earlier should have been to John F.. but I appreciated your comment too, Kyle

  25. A few points with regard to the Sunday Times poll details. The 5 point drop in Ed Miliband’s poll rating in entirely due to Conservatives having a worse view of him. Their rating of him went from -35 to -45. In contrast Labour voters went from +39 to +43 and Lib Dems from -25 to -16. Most of the movement was from undecideds.

    It looks like the attacks from the Press are mainly having an effect on those probably minded to not think much of him anyway. That’s not to say that masterly inactivity is the best plan.

    Most of the indicators are pretty static, but it was noticeable there was a small but significant upturn on how people felt about the economy and their own personal circumstances. It could be random or some effect of Christmas approaching or just because the world economy seems slightly less likely to collapse this week.

    As Anthony states the percentages on the student fees questions have barely changed over the last three weeks. 63% still think the Lib Dems are wrong to go back on their pledges (versus 26%) and that includes an equal split among current Lib Dem voters (44% v 44%) and 68% v 21% of those who voted for them in May.

  26. A case of the choir agreeing with the preacher, perhaps?