YouGov’s weekly poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 45%, LDEM 9%. This is the biggest Labour lead YouGov have shown since the election and makes them the third company to give Labour a double point lead after Ipsos MORI and Angus Reid.

Of course, I’ll add my usual caveat about any voting intention poll showing anything interesting, it may just be a blip or sample error. In the last week or so YouGov have been showing Labour with a lead of around about 7 points, this may be an outlier and we’ll be back to usual on Monday, or it could be the start of a further lengthening of the lead.

I’ll update tomorrow with any other polls published tonight and other findings from the Sunday Times polling.


129 Responses to “YouGov have 10 point Labour lead”

1 2 3
  1. @SocalLiberal

    “I read David Cameron’s article in the Guardian. It seems like a big colelction of vague platitudes that he’s attempting to connect together.”

    There’s a saying over here, which I’m not sure is used in the US, that I think sums up Cameron’s Big Society rhetoric and that is “motherhood and apple pie”. If you advocate the virtues of motherhood and the merits of apple pie then, in essence, it’s virtually to impossible to argue with it. Hence, “people helping each other” and “neighbours being good neighbours” and “public spirited local citizens taking over the running of a local pub” or “parishioners restoring their local church” etc are agreeable, yet empty, platitudes to describe activities that have been prevalent for centuries. What I think he’s trying to do, rather than facilitate an extension of philanthropic local volunteering, is to claim that it is, in essence, Toryism by another name. It manifestly isn’t, because if it owes anything to any particular political tradition, it’s more redolent of a Fabian, co-operative view of the world, reminiscent of early 20th Century socialism as espoused by Beatrice and Sydney Webb.

    I think Cameron would like the electorate to associate Labour with the most malign aspects of statism and the Tories with benevolent do-gooding, devoid of state interference and, crucially, money. In other words, he’s embarking on something which is much more a political than socio-economic project. It’s clever and the blander the pronouncements, the more effective the mood music created. It’s part of his ongoing process of decontaminating the Tory brand after the toxicity of the Thatcherite period.

    The challenge for Labour and the Lib Dem left is to requisition the concept of a Big Society back to where it genuinely belongs, steeped as it is in social democracy and liberalism, and to show clearly that it has nothing to do with Cameron’s sentimental noblesse oblige. I think there are encouraging signs that Miliband is starting to do this.

  2. Wolf
    This ‘ll be your ‘people I see coming out of the Golf Club’ poll then.

    I chaired a society for protecting the countryside and they are nearly all Tories or Whigs. (I am an aspiring Whig).

    Actually it was a Branch but that invites ribaldry.

    One thing I do find fascinating about Tory greenery. They all hate wind power and love nuclear. Lefty greens are the opposite. How on earth do you get party politics into energy discussions?

  3. @Socal Liberal
    Yes for his own good reasons DC| is fighting an election campaign again. I think it’s just to take the heat off ministers and to stem some Con voter drift. Con has still 34-35 and my analysis is that he does not want the polls to go so low that he loses his job.

    It’s not that he minds that, he is after all only doing what he does (noblesse oblige), but if he is looking to see who would take over, he does not see an obvious successor who would do any better than he.

    When PMs announce initiatives costing a few hundreds million (£3 or £4 each?) then you know it’s what I call counter-stagnation politics. It’ll undoubtedly be coming from another budget like NC’s money for the little ones at school.

  4. ComRes and YouGov are both showing the same picture: falling support for both the economic policies of the government and their economic programme. The same picture for Cameron’s personal ratings… the crucial point is whether this is yet translating into increases for Miliband and Labour on these measures, beyond simple voting intention.

  5. Wolf & Howard

    Actually as ever YouGov has poll for that. According to today’s questions on the Big Society, 17% of those asked claim I already do volunteer work in my local community.

    However this comprises 19% of Conservative voters and a magnificent 25% of Lib Dems. Labour voters only contribute 16% of their number.

    Actually I suspect that this may be one of those cases where YouGov panellists rate higher than normal. They are already giving up some time to fill in consumer surveys after all – so have a tendency towards involvement. it would be interesting to compare a phone poll (though that won’t include the people who slam the phone down with an obscenity).

  6. My thoughts are that while countries elsewhere in the world seem to be pulling out of recession and DC is perceived to be taking us back into recession…..the Labour lead will grow.

    Cameron’s way of ramming the whole bottle of his deficit medicine down the population’s throat all at once really is beginning to be perceived as the poison that Labour said it would be, while other countries teaspoon approach seems to be working

    There are some very interesting times ahead. The local elections results in May and the discomfort felt in middle England may well cause the Libdems to lose their nerve. If they don’t, political annihilation and Labour leads of over 50% beckons.

    The polls are now reflecting that some people are very quickly wising up to the fact that they voted for the wrong guy….. The problem for the Conservatives could then be that the ‘once bitten, twice shy’ floating voters develop a stubborn resistance to be serenaded back into their way of thinking by the time of a General Election.

  7. Robert C “Polls fluctuate. Get over it”

    Calm down Robert. Let’s try to keep things civilised.

    I hadn’t sought to make a contentious point. We have little experience of coalition in this country so I was just speculating on the long term meaning of the Lib Dem polling collapse (AW allows it within reason). Apologies if I irritated you with a prediction of doom for your side or if you saw it as typical Labour arrogance.

    To try to answer my own question I would guess the LDs are going to have to flag up the distinctive areas of policy – the areas where they claim to have made a difference in the coalition by getting their own way.

    I there any polling related to this? They could ask “Do you think the Lib Dems are a positive influence in government?” or something like that.

  8. How the LDs react in the coming months is indeed going to be very interesting. The stabilisation in their vote corresponded to Labour refocussing their guns on the Tories. But as government popularity goes through the floor, there will be more and more attention once again on the LDs, asking why they are propping up a disastrous government. At some point, someone is going to have to make the calculation as to whether they want to choose possible electoral disaster over probable annihilation.

    It may be that this is what Clegg’s reported future strategy of targeting left-wing Tory voters is supposed to achieve – the analysis may be that the support that has been lost to Labour will not be coming back, and that positioning the LDs as “sane” Tories is the best chance of political survival.

    I’m not sure how that’s going to work though. Maybe it’s going to need regular doses of sacrificial dissent, ratcheting up the image of a party dissatisfied with what the coalition is doing and leading to a clear break on the grounds that the Con-led government is being run without paying heed to their LD partners.

    If they are going to follow such a strategy, it needs to happen soon. No-one is going to buy it if they stick it out for 4 years and then break apart just in time for the next election.

  9. @ NickP

    I am an accountant with a couple of authors as clients.

    Most literary advances are returnable if the author fails to adhere to various terms in the contract for the book. For instance, if the author fails to deliver the manuscript on time or if the book fails reach the standard outlined in the contract.

    As a consequence, HMRC only tax literary advances in the year that “the intellectual property right, (i.e. the final manuscript), is accepted by the publisher”.

    The contract spells out the royalties that each version of the book, (paperback, hardcover etc), will earn. Usually, say 10% to 15% of the retail price. If/when the amount of royalties earned by the book exceed the value of the advance, the author starts receiving additional income in respect of that book.

    Most authors write a book every two or three years, so assuming (a) they are successful and their books earn more than the just the advance, and (b) advances are spread over more than one year, they will receive in any one year, payments covering the advance for a new book and royalties from their back catalogue.

    In the year when a manuscript is accepted by the publisher, the author will pay tax on ALL of the advance payable for that book plus any back catalogue royalties.

    In years when no manuscript is handed over, the author will only pay tax on royalties from the back catalogue, even if they have received advances.

    Consequently, the amount of tax an author pays varies wildly from year to year.

    By the way, the comments and advice given to you by other respondents is in the most part very accurate.

  10. iananthonyjames – I’d have to dig around to find them, but go back to last year and there were quite often questions asking about how much influence the Lib Dems were having in government, how much difference they were making and so on. The answers were, to say the least, not positive.

    Roger – it’s one of those “are you a heartless bastard questions”. People will exaggerate their own volunteering activity. In that sense, you may find that YouGov find a lower proportion of people claiming to volunteer than a phone poll would as people may be more likely to admit to a computer screen that they are a heartless bastard than to a human interviewer.

    PamF – if there aren’t lots more polls asking it before the election I’ll eat my hat (except that I left my hat in a radio studio just before Xmas and don’t have one, so I’ll eat someone elses hat).

    Jonb – No, it isn’t. There was one big AV voting intention poll for the Yes campaign that ICM did last November that tried to do a proper job on likelihood to vote (e.g. asking people in Scotland if they’d vote in the Scottish parliament election and AV referendum, people in Wales if they’d vote in the Welsh Assembly election and referendum, people in most of England if they’d vote in local elections and the referendum and people in London and the rest of England if they’d vote in the referendum), but the normal trackers are much more basic. I think ComRes are just using likelihood to vote in the general election as a proxy for referendum likelihood – certainly their tables don’t show a seperate question on referendum likelihood to vote.

  11. As a Dutch Labour voter I think, that it is very wise of the coalition to get the budget deficit down very soon and not to wait until a next recession in five or ten years, which Miliband and Balls prefer. The U.S. budget will probably give extra problems after 2012, so there is no end to the financial problems the coming years. I expect the Libdems to do well in 2015 because they take their responsibility.

    The British budget will be a problem for a long time, because investments are crowded out by budget deficits, trade deficits and taxes.

    Labour has no policy, but they can not surprise me anymore.

  12. Hi, have been a long time visitor to UK Polling but finally registered. The atmosphere among commenters seems very respectful and informative, sadly missing on a lot of other sites that deal with political issues.

    I notice Amber & a couple of other posters used the term ATTAD on this thread.

    Am being thick but can someone tell me what it means please ?

  13. I would say the trouble with Cameron’s Big Society program is [snip]

    [This is not the place for debating whether governments’ or parties’ policies are any good or not, or will actually work or not. They are a guaranteed route to tiresome party-partisan arguments with supporters of government parties wheeling out the arguments in favour, and opponents wheeling out the arguments against. All we care about is what the public reaction to them is (and yes, that’s a fine line because people don’t tend to like policies that crash and burn, but that’s life).

    This is forum about politics, not a venue for politics – AW]

  14. jolubecoha

    Thanks. I think it will be a while before it is a problem (and in any case most authors earn peanuts) but I very much appreciate the advice.

    And the others who responded too.

  15. Sorry guys, but what does “ATTAD” stand for? Thank you very much in advance and take care.

  16. ElectionWatcher

    Sorry guys, but what does “ATTAD” stand for?

    Add Together Tories and Dems. Its Labour slang that I’ve only just found out myself.

  17. How about the future?

    It has been the habit/norm for PM’s to have a reshuffle about once a year, or something like that.
    So if David Cameron follows that pattern, who will go and who will stay??
    Gove? Clarke? Pickles? Lansley? Osborne?, are any of them for the off???? Or none of them?

    Most importantly who is in the queue for promotion.

    NO prizes.

  18. Obviously Osborne should be sacked, but never will (remind you of someone?).

    Gove and Pickles, surely. Later on, Maude. He can’t sack Lansley unless he admits the NHS overhaul is a mistake.

    God knows who he would get in. Sarah Wollaston for Lansley? Clarke for Osborne. Anybody for Gove.

  19. The Lollipop men and women are under threat. This could bring them down!

  20. nickp

    “The Lollipop men and women are under threat. This could bring them down!”

    Or at least give them a big licking. (I’ll get me coat)

  21. @ Robin

    Given their private polling results, plus the steadying-off at 10% in the public opinion polls, I think you are right about the LDs revised “sane Tories” narrative from now on. They will not, of course, use that term!!!!
    What is worse is that if they attempt this it may work to some small degree, but it won’t bring back the circa10% they have lost direct to Labour. It also doesn’t make sense on a constituency by constituency basis, in terms of actually winning seats. Of course, Miliband may save their bacon a bit, in terms of seats held, if he wins the AV referendum for them (Tee! Hee!)

  22. @Nickp

    ‘The Lollipop men and women are under threat. This could bring them down!’

    A ‘big society’ way to ease the flow of traffic!…..Perhaps Jeremy Clarkson is a new advisor!

    Gives a new meaning to the term ‘school run’.

  23. No-one for getting rid of Cameron ??
    Do you want to keep him.
    Is he indispensible.

    Maybe we’ll have to wait and see if there are electoral mishaps ?

  24. Cameron doesn’t seem to be a fan of reshuffles for the sake of it, so I doubt we’ll necessarily see the traditional annual reshuffle. They’ll more likely be limited to enforced ones from resignations, and perhaps one half-way-through if the opportunity for a clear out hasn’t come through a resignation.

    From the junior ministerial ranks Justine Greening and Nick Herbert look like the most likely cabinet promotions to me, along with David Laws if he is cleared in the investigation into his expenses.

    The likely departures are probably not going to be through becoming hate figures for Labour supporters! (Or, for ConservativeHomies, Ken Clarke). The rumours seem to be swirling about Patrick McLoughlin though.

  25. @Anthony Wells

    While I do appolygise for breaking some “house rules” and I will stress that the point i was trying to make was not political but I am sorry if my statment was taken out of context and I will revoke any such political points.

    I do appolygise to make the suggestion that I made a political comment but I would ensure you I have not because I actually said that in principal me, myself and other people would agree with the Big Society that it’s a good idea but the reason he does not seem to be working is that he has trouble selling an idea that is stating the obvious.

    Also I have noticed on here that there are many examples of people on here that get away with making political comments which under you “apparent watchful eye” is allowed to go unnoticed and in some cases even encouraged.

    So while I will agree with you’re house rules unless I can see this putting in full pratice i.e. everyone is told to behave accordingly to your rules then which will mean revoking other political statments that have been made here (even though I stress it was not). I don’t know how anyone can saying anything without being political or an opinion.

    So I am sorry about my comment but I stress that unless you actually put your own rules into pratice (which means everyone not just the inner circle) then I will have to continue what I think are “fair” statments.

    This is not an attack on the rules but unless there is some clarity and your rules are put into pratice then I am afraid some people will be scared to breath on here. You risk people making any meaningful debate rather despressingly escapaiding into tedious conversations.

    Andy

  26. Further to Roger Mexico’s post to Alec

    Everyone should have a read of this http://www.drsarah.org.uk/in-parliament/parliamentary-reform/311
    Shocking! Appalling treatment of someone trying to do their job! Perhaps Bernard Jenkin is right and all this ‘New Politics’ is an utter sham. I hope not, because that is not the aura Cameron and Clegg give off?
    What is going on?
    Perhaps AW hint that rumours are spreading around Patrick McLaughlin is because of his unsubtle techniques – I would like to think so!

  27. @ Robin “At some point, someone is going to have to make the calculation as to whether they want to choose possible electoral disaster over probable annihilation.”

    But there are alternatives to the electoral disaster/probable annihilation scenarios: namely the Coalition being regarded as broadly successful by 2015 and the Lib Dems getting some of the credit for that success. The fact that both the Government and the Lib Dems are unpopular today, does not mean that they will still be unpopular in 2015.

    I think that short-term unpopularity (or perhaps not so short-term, maybe 3-4 years!) was factored into the decision to go into Coalition last May. As far as I know not one of the 57 Lib Dem MPs is currently arguing for the “ditch the Coalition/have another election” strategy that Robin seems to be proposing.

  28. Right lads and lasses, I’m new round here, so please don’t jump down my throat if this has been discussed ad nauseam in the past.

    But there is a striking trend in the polls. Since the depths of the Expenses Scandal, and ignoring the momentary (if momentous) shock of the Leaders’ Debate, Labour’s support has risen pretty much linearly for 18 months at roughly 1 point per month.

    Which raises three obvious questions:

    1) Has anything similar every happened in recent history? I’m aware of sudden surges, based on particular events (Thatcher/Blair’s leaving, Black Weds etc) but such a long duration and steady rise seems unprecendented to me.
    2) Does this mean that Labour was already well on the way to re-attracting alienated supporters even before the Lib-Dem hari-kari?
    3) At what point will this top out?

  29. These threads really do appear to have become a love-in for people on the left or in the Labour Party. It’s like being washed up on the shores of North Korea.

    As a Conservative supporter, I am shocked to see that it has taken the Labour Party less than a year to match the poll ratings that we were achieving in summer 2008. Are people really going to help the party that created the deficit in the first place, that have deemed the cuts necessary?

    I have a feeling that at some point in the next few years, the polls will reverse. Tony Blair was right in his memoirs, the Labour Party will only benefit short term from their “Tory cutters, LibDem collaborators” mantra and unless they change their stance, they will lose even bigger at the next general election.

1 2 3