Public opinion is starting to move against our involvment in Libya. Since bombing began, YouGov have been asking daily whether people think it is right or not for Britain and its allies to take military action, and whether people think the intervention is going well or badly.

Opinion has shifting significantly over the last week on whether it’s going well or not – a week ago 57% thought it was going well, 19% thought it was going badly. Today it is 42% going well, 34% going badly. This is now starting to reflect in the people who think it is right or wrong for us to take military action against Libya – something which has previously been pretty steady. For the first time so far YouGov’s tracker today showed more people (43%) thinking the military action was wrong than those in favour of it (38%).

The poll also asked about the fate of Moussa Koussa – Libya’s former foriegn secretary and intelligence chief. Only 22% of people think he should be allowed to stay in Britain in order to help weaken the Gaddafi regime and only 7% think he should be offered immunity from prosecution in return for his help.


158 Responses to “YouGov show public turning against Libya bombing”

1 2 3 4
  1. @Bt Says – interesting earlier post about the conomic commentary. As you say, broadly fair and quite balanced.

    Clearly external events are going to be critical to UK’s prospects as much as any decisions taken on these shores, but I increasingly feel vindicated in my initial thoughts that the mechanisms used to bail out the financial industry were flawed and we are about to suffer the consequences.

    I should qualify that though – at the time, I supported the general idea behind the bailouts and QE. I’m no expert on global finance and they seemed reasonable steps to take in the crisis. While the bank bailouts have functioned generally quite well, the mechansim chosen for QE has landed us with a heap of problems.

    Injecting much needed liquidity into the financial system has meant big profits for traders but pushed up commodity prices and inflationary pressures at the points of the global marketplace where the money ended up. Financial institutions have done very well out of it, but it hasn’t dealt with the debt overhang and consumers are left to cope with eroding living standards as inflation kicks in, just when we need to respond to government cuts and the continuing need to reduce overal debt levels.

    In hindsight (alhough I was saying this not too long after QE started) I can see that governments were blinded by the financial industry who told them how to run QE. In my book, it would have been better to get money into the financial system via consumers – buying off people’s mortgages and loans, especially those of high risk. This would have eliminated banks riskier lending and eased the burden on individuals in readiness for the general belt tightening, strengthening both banks and the real economy with a less direct impact on inflation.

    Banks could still have shipped the capital into the commodities market, but it would have been much harder, espcially if governments had been bolder at requiring higher capital ratios to the be held, and at least there would have been a long term kick given to consumer spending which we are sorely lacking now.

    Report comment

  2. Eoin

    My country Ireland has never been at war apart from the occasional viking sortie or home grown punch up..

    So you see for us as a cultural entity war is never an option.

    Now I’m sure that’s what Brother Manic O’Psycho taught you – and if you didn’t believe it, he’d thrash the living daylights out of you. However Irish history is pretty well documented (even for the ‘Dark Ages’) and consists of:

    Up to 795: Fighting each other.
    795 to 1171: Fighting each other and/with the Vikings
    1171-1801: Fighting each other and/with the English
    1801-1916: Fighting for the English
    1916-1921: Fighting the English
    1921-1924: Fighting each other

    This of course is not counting various other shenanigans in the 19th/20th centuries, including post 1920’s in the island’s NE corner.

    And that is why Ireland and the Irish are known the world over for their pacific nature. The Switzerland of the North Atlantic. :P

    Report comment

  3. Roger,

    You’ll have to re-read what I wrote.

    Defending oneself from invasion is not the same thing.

    Report comment

  4. @oldnat

    Wales doesn’t have a massive national press, and most Welsh people get their news from UK wide newspapers, that don’t cover Welsh issues very well. So, it might be fair to say that it is UK issues influlencing the current polls.

    Of course, if, as the campaign goes on, we start seeing Welsh issues become more dominant or not, is another issue.

    Report comment

  5. @John B Dick
    Re your comment from the last Thread

    No great secret, just down the Med from Libya is Cyprus.

    Report comment

  6. @ Eoin

    “Mick [apol for calling you Mark - I am dyslexic ]”

    You’re in good company though. Gavin Newsom (the Liutenant Governor of California) is dyslexic as is Richard Engel (the chief Middle East correspondent on MSNBC) and many other talented and accomplished individuals.

    Report comment

  7. @ Eoin

    “OldNat once argued that there is no left in America. If your views are typical of the so called Liberals out there, then I am inclined to agree with him.

    America is one of 24 countries in the world still executing its own citizens. You should see your fellow companions on that 24 list. It is the who’s who of vagabondry.”

    I thought you had argued there was no left in the U.S. not Old Nat. Well I think both of you are wrong. Just because someone doesn’t agree with you on all issues doesn’t mean that they’re not leftwing. That kind of exclusive and rigid thinking that you seem to adhere to is ultimately harmful to your political goals.

    As for other countries that still have the death penalty, I really think that’s a silly statistic. Not all death sentences are the same. And I think that some of the moral equivalencies that you’ve come up with simply don’t apply. Executing someone on a whim for their political views is quite different from executing someone who murders 7 people in cold blood, is an adult and not mentally retarded at the time of the murder, killed for the hell of it, and was given a fair trial where they were properly represented, had their constitutional rights vindicated, and was convicted by a unanimous jury by their peers.

    @ Colin

    “But legally-under laws democratically promulgated by it’s legislators.

    Not arbitrarily , at the whim of a dictator.

    “Countries who do not include

    1. Zimbabwe
    2. Russia
    3. Cuba
    4. Venezuela ”

    Well then-what a safe & decent place to live in Zimbabwe must be. Perhaps the Colonel will finish up there.”

    Lol. Don’t forget about the glorious nation of Russia or for that matter the Ukraine where the government may not execute you for a conviction but if you say anything bad about the government, you might wind up dead in the middle of the night. Because that’s much more preferable.

    I’ll just add too that the overwhelming majority of Americans support the death penalty (in California, the current death penalty law was enacted by over 2/3rds of the voters). And what the voters want is important. That’s not to say that voters may enact laws that are unconstitutional or that laws should remain in place that citizens overwhelmingly want that are unconstitutional. But if a practice is not unconstitutional, then what the voters want should hold sway.

    @ BT

    “So what? America have a legendary democracy (even more so compared to your list of 24) and a proper rule of law through the courts.”

    Thanks.

    Report comment

  8. Eoin

    “My country Ireland has never been at war ”

    Right !

    :-) :-) :-) :-)

    Report comment

1 2 3 4