There are two new polls tonight – a new ComRes telephone poll for the Independent has topline figures of CON 37%(+3), LAB 37%(nc), LDEM 12%(-3), Others 14%(nc). Changes are from the last ComRes poll conducted by telephone a month ago, rather than their parallel online polls for the Independent on Sunday. It’s the first time this year that ComRes have produced a poll without a Labour lead.

Meanwhile YouGov’s daily poll in the Sun has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%. YouGov had also been showing a narrowing Labour lead earlier in May, but it seems to have disappeared over the last few polls.

(I do not have regular internet access this week, so updates will be few and far between, and I will not be monitoring comments)


396 Responses to “New ComRes and YouGov polls”

1 6 7 8
  1. Lord Tory – It’s a shame that you didn’t get the right off in the first instance.

  2. @ Lord Tory

    “I don’t know who “roly” is but I do know that the Young Conservatives do spend their time playing scrabble, ludo, and snap (a simple card game). When a chap and a gel get friendly, long walks in the cold English rain are advised to avoid frightfulness. Also a copy of Lord Baden – Powell’s pamphlet “Clean Thoughts” is recommended. But it is not all fun and gaiety, they discuss issues such cake baking, for the gels and serf beating for the chaps.”

    You know, I have to say that is a far more sophisticated and preferable to your typical outing for Young Republicans (usually involves a night out at the shooting range and sometimes free distribution of chastity belts). :)

  3. @red rag
    Its a shame you have nothing more to think about.

  4. @SOCALIBERAL
    I have always said King George was not as stupid as he looked and General Washington did his country of origin a huge favour.

  5. OLDNAT
    Assuming it’s after the summer holidays …

    Thanks for that. Lab have until nearly the end of this month to call the writ if they decide to have it before the summer break, but I suspect they’ll be wary of holding it too soon, and may leave it until November, as they did with Glasgow NE.

    It may depend on their confidence level of holding on to it, as if they lose it would be better to blame Gray whilst if they’re really confident they may hope it will provide a fillip for his successor’s leadership and hold it when he or she is in place.

  6. @ SoCaL

    With hate speech or really any speech, I feel that the issue has been decided. I will defend certain types of speech that come under attack but I feel that speech does not need to be justified or proven worthy in order to be protected.
    ——————————————————-
    Oddly perhaps, from a big state, anti-violence person like myself, I believe in freedom of speech however hateful it may be.

    I do draw the line at one individual selecting another as the target of that hate. That is harrassment which should be prevented by employers, police & others with authority.

    Of course, commissioning violence against a person or a group of persons is a crime. Which begs the question: Is there a line between inciting & commissioning violence (if yes, where should that line be drawn?) or are they one & the same?

    I believe these are issues that the US Supremes have considered in the past & may be still considering. If anything particularly interesting comes to your mind on this topic, I’d welcome your thoughts or web-links.
    8-)

  7. lordtory

    My dear sir, call yourself a Peer of the Realm and not know what (and indeed who) the Lord Lyon is? Please redirect your gaze from manufactured confectionery.

  8. @ Barbazenzero

    It may depend on their confidence level of holding on to it, as if they lose it would be better to blame Gray whilst if they’re really confident they may hope it will provide a fillip for his successor’s leadership and hold it when he or she is in place.
    —————————————————-
    Are you talking about perception, rather than the acualité? Because Iain Gray leads Labour MSPs, not Labour’s Westminster MPs & this is a Westminster by-election is it not?
    8-)

  9. Amber

    Given that this thread now seems to deal with hierarchies, perhaps more appropriate to suggest that that Iain Gray would be Lance Corporal Jack Jones, serving under Ed as Captain Mainwaring?

    (I’ve just been watching the story of dad’s Army on TV. :-) )

  10. @ Old Nat

    LOL :-) I think Dad’s Army was intended to be a comment on the class & political structures of the time it was made, not the time it was set in (I hope that makes sense).

    As social commentary, I think it is very much of its time (i.e. the time it was made). I rarely think of it as being pertinent to the political & social landscape now. Perhaps I am too close to now & just can’t see ‘now’ with a wide enough perspective. :-)

  11. AMBERSTAR
    Are you talking about perception, rather than the acualité? Because Iain Gray leads Labour MSPs, not Labour’s Westminster MPs & this is a Westminster by-election is it not?

    Perception indeed. Iain Gray is indeed the Lab shop steward in Holyrood, but the electoral college gives Lab MPs equal voting rights except for those who choose to recuse themselves, and the 40 Lab MPs now outnumber the 37 Lab MSPs.

    I couldn’t spot the original article in the Grauniad but UTV states: “The new leader is elected by a three-way electoral college of party members, unions and finally Labour members of the Scottish parliament and Scottish Labour MPs.

    Whether London want public perception of the by-election as something controlled by “Scottish” Labour or by the centre is another matter of course. Odd that Iain Gray’s name appears on the home page of scottishlabour.org.uk whilst your leader’s doesn’t. The only names mentioned on header page of the “PEOPLE” section are: “Our leader in the Scottish Parliament is Iain Gray, and his deputy is Johann Lamont. Both were elected in September 2008.

    Somewhat confusing, no?

  12. @ Amber Star

    “Oddly perhaps, from a big state, anti-violence person like myself, I believe in freedom of speech however hateful it may be.

    I do draw the line at one individual selecting another as the target of that hate. That is harrassment which should be prevented by employers, police & others with authority.

    Of course, commissioning violence against a person or a group of persons is a crime. Which begs the question: Is there a line between inciting & commissioning violence (if yes, where should that line be drawn?) or are they one & the same?

    I believe these are issues that the US Supremes have considered in the past & may be still considering. If anything particularly interesting comes to your mind on this topic, I’d welcome your thoughts or web-links.”

    There is a line depending on how you define incitement. Incitement can only be criminally punished under the following circumstances:

    1. The speech must be directed to producing imminent lawless action; and.

    2. The speech is likely to produce that imminent lawless action.

    The mere abstract advocacy of the need to resort to force or violence is protected speech and cannot be restricted by the government.

    That’s been the law for 42 years now and shows no signs of changing. For example, cross-burning, in and of itself cannot be used as prima facie evidence of an an intent to intimidate another or commit a hate crime. That’s because cross-burning is a type of protected speech.

    However, the act of burning a cross on another’s law is still something that can be a punishable criminal offense.

    In terms of selecting another for hate, I think that’s too vague to define. There’s a difference between committing actual crimes of harassment or stalking or committing defamation and simply speaking in a way that selects another for hatred.

  13. @ SoCaL

    Thank you. I was sure you’d be a source of knowledge on this issue.

    I like your example of cross burning (it makes it clear that it is freedom of expression in general, rather than freedom of speech, that is protected).
    8-)

  14. @ Barbazenzero

    Somewhat confusing, no?
    ———————————-
    Indeed, & it is a topic of conversation amongst those few within the Party who are more interested in our internal workings than achieving a better Uk for its citizens.
    8-)

  15. @Socaliberal
    You know in most case’s and American of the left is not quite as left as the British equivalent. You may think you are but there is just a slight difference. I agree with you and struggle with the freedom to speak my mind without supporting hate speech. A bad driver who nearly causes an accident is a stupid bastard, not a stupid black bastard. I know we agree on that, however I reserve the right, whatever laws Labour foisted upon us, to hold a view about the suitability of certain Muslims to live in this country. I also persist as a free born Englishman to say so. They will just have to send 48 armed police, 2 squadrons of SAS and a fire engine to my home.

  16. SOCALIBERAL
    First line again “in most case’s an (not and) American of the left ect ect ect.

    I do not want Red Rag giving me detention.

  17. @Lord Tory

    “First line again “in most case’s an (not and) American of the left ect ect ect.”

    Rollers, you silly old thing, you’ve committed another coupple of howlers. It’s cases, not “case’s” and etc. (as in et cetera) and not ect (as in abbreviation for ectoplasm).

    By the way, have you spotted my deliberate mishtake? lol

  18. @amber star
    Must disagree. I am older than you I think. Although I do not go back to WW2. However, I think the diffident upper middle class public school boy, decent chap but no gumption, is a classic. The lower middle class grammar schoolboy, now a full blown bank manager on £400 pa, at once disdaining Wilson but never quite having Wilson’s built in superiority, who does that remind me of ? Jones is timeless, we get daft old men in every generation.

  19. @CROSSBAT
    Yes you got my name wrong. I think the Rolland thing has gone over the hill now. I am not this person and that is an end to it. It seems there are so few Tories on this board nowadays, that the woodcraft folk think every new poster who is not red must this wretched man.

  20. @ Amber Star

    “Thank you. I was sure you’d be a source of knowledge on this issue.

    I like your example of cross burning (it makes it clear that it is freedom of expression in general, rather than freedom of speech, that is protected).”

    You’re welcome. I try my best on these things. Expressive conduct is not as strongly protected as actual speech itself. But it is still protected. Hugo Black was a First Amendment absolutist yet he drew a strong line between speech and conduct where he believed that no speech could be restricted but conduct could be restricted by the government.

    I think John Paul Steven’s final line of his Christian Legal Society v. Martinez concurrence (one of the last opinions he authored) really sums up how free speech and free association work: “Groups may exclude or mistreat Jews, blacks, [gays], and women – or those who do not share their contempt for Jews, blacks, [gays], and women. A free society must tolerate such groups. It need not subsidize them, give them its official imprimatur, or grant them equal access to law school facilities.”

  21. There’s no shortage of Tories on here – try the constituency section.

  22. @Lord Tory

    Alright, I give in, you’re not Rollers or the recently discontinued Zappa, but, bearing in mind your new moniker, are you now representing the union of jailed, or soon to be jailed, Tory Lords? As you must know, the good Lords Taylor and Hanningfield have been naughty boys, trousering rather large amounts of the taxpayers money. What are we to make of these bounders? Peers of the Realm, yet prepared to defraud their underlings.

    You’ll be one of the few Tory Lords still at large soon!!

  23. @ Lord Tory

    “You know in most case’s and American of the left is not quite as left as the British equivalent. You may think you are but there is just a slight difference. I agree with you and struggle with the freedom to speak my mind without supporting hate speech. A bad driver who nearly causes an accident is a stupid bastard, not a stupid black bastard. I know we agree on that, however I reserve the right, whatever laws Labour foisted upon us, to hold a view about the suitability of certain Muslims to live in this country. I also persist as a free born Englishman to say so. They will just have to send 48 armed police, 2 squadrons of SAS and a fire engine to my home.”

    See I don’t support hate speech. In fact, I abhor it. I think it’s disgusting what Fred Phelps does, going around to protest at funerals with his “god hates f**s” signs and his prayers. But I believe strongly in his right to do so and will defend his right to do so.

    See I wonder if France has similar hate speech laws prohibiting hate speech laws against Muslims (I presume that they do). See, I think their recent enactment of anti-Muslim laws demonstrates just what an absolute folly hate speech laws. As an American, it irritates me, frustrates me, embarasses me, and enrages me to see people protesting the proposed Muslim Community Center of Lower Manhattan. Yes, they have a right to shoot off their mouths and say stupid things but it still makes me angry.

    But I take comfort in knowing that our government could not enact the same anti-Muslim laws that France has enacted. The way I see it, it is far worse to have the government tell people what kind of religious garb they cannot wear, religious food they cannot eat, and religious structures they cannot build (this is more appropriate to Switzerland than France) than simply to say “well you can’t say anything bad about Muslims lest you be prosecuted.” If a bunch of morons want to go out there and say all sorts of nasty, hateful, horrible things, so be it. That’s a lot better than taking away other rights.

    And of course the same First Amendment free speech right that protects your ignoramus Republican to make anti-Muslim hatefilled rants is the same right that protects the right of the Muslim woman to wear her headscarf.

  24. Is there no YouGov poll today? They usually tweet the numbers at 10pm. There’s nothing from them today.

  25. @ Lord Tory

    “Yes you got my name wrong. I think the Rolland thing has gone over the hill now. I am not this person and that is an end to it. It seems there are so few Tories on this board nowadays, that the woodcraft folk think every new poster who is not red must this wretched man.”

    There are some stalwart Tory bloggers here, they just don’t wear blue (I think one of them may have gone to UKIP though). My Tory colors are actually appropriate when we discuss foreign policy issues here.

  26. @ Amber

    “I think Dad’s Army was intended to be a comment on the class & political structures of the time it was made, not the time it was set in (I hope that makes sense).”

    Have to disagree there Amber.

    It’s about the Home Guard during WW2.-not 1968 when it was written.

    And I don’t think its a commentary on class structures-it is about characters-characters of their time.

    According to Wiki:-

    “Originally intended to be called The Fighting Tigers, Dad’s Army was based partly on co-writer and creator Jimmy Perry’s real-life experiences in the Local Defence Volunteers (later known as the Home Guard). Perry had been 17 years old when he joined the 10th Hertfordshire Battalion and with a mother who did not like him being out at night and fearing he might catch cold, he bore more than a passing resemblance to the character of Frank Pike. An elderly lance corporal in the outfit often referred to fighting under Kitchener against the “Fuzzy Wuzzies” and proved to be a perfect model for Jones.”

    Other influences are said to be Whisky Galore!,- Will Hay whose film Oh, Mr Porter! featured a pompous ass, an old man and a young man which gave him Mainwaring, Godfrey and Pike.- the Lancastrian comedian Robb Wilton, who portrayed a work-shy husband who joined the Home Guard in numerous comic sketches during WW2.

    Set on the south coast It always seems to me to be quintessentially English-like Foyle’s War.

  27. Lord T

    “what I am doing on a site like this, if minor changes don’t matter in my book. The banter, and I guess the possibility that something that does change the world might happen.”

    I feel the samr .

    The banter is superior to anything available elsewhere.

    I do think pb provides some terrific specialist insight -but its a bit cliquey for my taste.

    You get a higher class of abuse here too :-)

  28. Following on from Bill Patrick’s post, David Blanchflower would add to the chronology:

    “I hold Cameron, Clegg and Osborne responsible for the collapse of the British economy: they talked down the economy when it was never bankrupt. Consumer confidence collapsed, and the date of the collapse was April 2010.”

    h
    ttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/04/george-osborne-losing-grip-recovery

    In a separate article over 300 Oxbridge academics are calling for Willetts to resign

  29. @SocalLiberal

    I think you’ll find that many in the UK who moan about restrictions on free speech, and the things they’re supposedly not allowed to say are in faxt talkinf nonsense. Pick up an English red-top, scan the discussion forums of newpaper sites, listen to certain radio stations and you will find that these people are generally free to say precisely what they want to say. And they exercise this right with gay abandon.

    I wish LordTory would expand on the type of UK Muslim he would kickout, as should he become PM, I’d like to know where I stand.

  30. RAF

    “should he become PM, I’d like to know where I stand.”

    Probably standing in a queue at Heathrow, going to whichever foreign country you are deemed to “belong” to.

    No doubt, my relatives in England will be transported north of the border at the same time.

  31. Come on Lord Tory. You seemed to think it was OK for you to point out other peoples spelling mistakes on this thread earlier. Pot….Kettle…Black….springs to mind.

    PS. I am glad I am not your bank manager….£400 pa.

  32. Lord Tory,

    “I don’t know whether to be jealous of your “British Internationalism” and unaligned politics or not. I suppose, your instinct towards classical liberalism would have been served best years ago by Super Mac and Heath. But you are probably not that old.”

    No, I’m not that old. And MacMillan + Heath were exactly the kind of Tory I dislike: social conservatives, with no economic liberalism to redeem them.

    Ken Clarke is one major example of a Tory I like, even if he’s somewhat more pro-European than I am. Ian MacLeod was also fantastic and his death was a terrible moment for the UK, because it paved the way for the Barber Boom which is still having (very indirect) consequences today.

    So Cal Liberal,

    “With hate speech or really any speech, I feel that the issue has been decided. I will defend certain types of speech that come under attack but I feel that speech does not need to be justified or proven worthy in order to be protected.”

    I agree. To paraphrase Hayek: liberty ends when the government begins to forbid objectives, rather than forbid actions.

    It is acceptable for a government to forbid assassination, but a government that forbids (say) the public advocacy of holocaust denial is doing so on the basis of an objective (holocaust denial) rather than a means (publicly advocating a position).

  33. Red Rag

    £400:00:00 was a good pay for a rural branch manager in 1942. 300 guineas would have been enough.

    My first annual salary was £80 pa but it wasn’t a living wage.

    Some people worked for very little financial reward. I knew a man who, as a recently qualified young accountant in his first job was in 1948 what would now be the chief executive of Glasgow’s most prestigious hospital, then a charity hospital. On being paid the going rate, his tax deduction was greater than his salary the month before.

  34. Latest yougov –
    Just as I predicted (lucky guess, hahaha)
    Con – 37%
    Lab – 42%
    Lib – 9%
    Approval -23%

  35. I’m also surprised (perhaps it got lost in the argument over whether LordTory is a Tory Lord, a previous poster or a genuine Tory partisan) nobody’s posted about the construction figures (unless I missed it).

    Construction orders have fallen 23% in the first quarter. 18% lower than first quarter last year. Largest drop in construction since 1987.
    I’d imagine it has a lot to do with the fall in public sector spending (new school projects, PFI projects scrapped, etc).

    So the big question is this – Is it time for a Plan B?
    That doesn’t necessarily mean less cuts – taxing property wealth and investing that in construction to help the industry ride out the storm may be one idea.
    Dual effect of helping the industry and more affordable homes (which we’re in desperate need of).

  36. Tingedfringe

    There appears to be some question over the reliability of the ONS statistics.

    http://www.straightstatistics.org/blog/2011/05/09/are-ons-construction-data-reliable

    “The building industry dates the problems to a change in the collection of ONS data that began in 2010. Before then, the industry was asked to provide the value of new orders won during the previous month; the new form asks for the volume of output in the period. The ONS review will doubtless explore whether this explanation is valid.

    If the ONS data on construction is wrong, it would mean that growth of the whole economy was stronger in Q1 2111, perhaps 0.8 per cent rather than 0.5 per cent. But the corollary would be that the 0.5 per cent decline in GDP in Q4 2010 would have been correspondingly greater. ”

    [I presume that they mean Q1 2011, and are not projecting forward by a century. Nice to find “straight statistics” getting a number wrong, though. :-) )

  37. Billy Bob
    The article in the Guardian and the letter today’s Observer indicate growing unrest about GO’s economic dream.

    Hopefully no other ‘events’ will occur to divert the media attention onto anything else for a while.

  38. OldNat,
    Thanks.

    I still think taxing property wealth and pumping it in to new property would be a good idea.

    I guess this is why I should stay out of the economic discussions. ;)

  39. Tingedfringe

    I’m in favour of taxing property wealth as well.

    At the moment, investing it in construction projects seems very sensible.

  40. I missed this one the other day too –
    “In the 18 major recessions since records began in 1830, Bank of England data show that consumer spending on average recovered to 12 per cent above its previous peak within seven years.”
    “But according to forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility , spending in 2015 will be just 5.4 per cent above the 2008 peak, making it the slowest recovery of any comparable post-recession period. At the equivalent stage after recessions in the early 1980s and 1990s, spending was 20 per cent and 15 per cent higher respectively.”

    I’m sure someone can jump in and correct me for being wrong again, but haven’t the OBR generally been over-optimistic about growth figures?

  41. Tingedfringe

    I wasn’t saying that the ONS construction figures WERE wrong – just that they need to be treated with caution (like many ONS data, unfortunately).

  42. OldNat,
    I realise this.
    I wasn’t particularly making reference to your correction on the possible reliability of the ONS construction figures – just that I’ve been wrong on the economy plenty of times and are usually corrected quite soon. ;)

  43. Tingedfringe

    “I’ve been wrong on the economy plenty of times”

    Thus joining a long list of distinguished academics and politicians!

  44. @ Bill Patrick

    ” Ian MacLeod was also fantastic and his death was a terrible moment for the UK,”

    Yes.

  45. Tingedfringe
    The OBR IMO are a waste of space and our money.

    It seems to me to be no more than a rubberstamp for GO’s economic dreams.

  46. AMBERSTAR
    Indeed, & it is a topic of conversation amongst those few within the Party who are more interested in our internal workings than achieving a better Uk for its citizens.

    Sorry not to get back to you last night, but thanks for that. That’s the first logical answer I have received re why the Labour party has little interest in national autonomy yet feels the need to pretend it has come election times. Presumably one of “those few” was able to persuade some past Labour leader that “Scottishness” or “Welshness” would look better on ballot papers outwith England but never got any further than that.

    Do you not feel that non-autonomy may be a bit of a handicap in the forthcoming referendum campaign?

    On the Electoral Commission’s website, they show your Labour Party as Registered Political Party #PP 53, with Registered Descriptions of Scottish Labour Party and Welsh Labour/Llafur Cymru amongst others but those entities seem to have no meaninful existence outside ballot papers.

1 6 7 8