The latest YouGov/Sun poll today has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 42%, LDEM 8% – still very much in line with YouGov’s recent polling.

For those looking for any polling effect from the strikes, you’re a day too early! Remember YouGov’s fieldwork period is about 5pm or so through to about 3pm the next day – most of the responses come in overnight. Not, I should add, that I’d particularly expect a sudden strike effect anyway… it’s not as if people weren’t aware it was going to happen.

Tabs are here


216 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 37, LAB 42, LDEM 8”

1 2 3 4 5
  1. @Howard – “… all who voted for LD… didn’t waste their time.”

    At least those who voted LD in 2010 have had the satisfaction of hearing Danny Alexander all over the media this week (and not a peep from George Osborne). ;)

  2. “record balance of payments deficits”
    Record deficits, really?

    Before the financial crisis (you know, that thing that happened globally?), the highest budget deficit under Labour was 2008 Q3 at 3.50% of GDP.
    After the crisis, the highest deficit was 11.13%.
    These are both ex financial interventions – shock horror, tax revenues and the economy both fall and the deficit rises.
    It’s partisan nonsense to blame the deficit on Labour – what to do about the deficit isn’t (sometimes) partisan nonsense.

    After the problems (minor compared to 2008) of 1992, the budget deficit hit 7.66%.
    You could hardly blame the Tories (sort-of) for tax income falling, leading to a budget deficit.
    It took 4 years for the Tories (with high growth) to reduce this to 3.42%.

    Labour inherited a budget deficit of 3.42%. They reduced this to a surplus in a year (Q3 1998) and this surplus continued until Q1 2002 (just about).
    The peak of the surplus was 2.04% in Q3 2000.
    So 15 Quarters of surplus.

    In Q3 1988-Q1 1990 the Tories ran a surplus. This peaked at 1.29%.
    So 7 Quarters of surplus.

    The highest deficit, excluding the 1992-1997 period, for the previous Tory government was 3.95% in Q2 1984.
    I’m excluding the period of deficit reduction 1979-Q3 1982 (4.96% to 1.71%) for obvious reasons.

    So let’s talk historical –
    The previous Labour government (1974-1979) ran budget deficits of 4.02% at it’s lowest and 7.30% at it’s highest.

    1970-1974 – 2.04% budget surplus inherited, peak deficit of 4.00% (Q2 1973).

    1964-1970 2.80% deficit inherited, 1.83% budget surplus (since I’m counting the 2.04% under the next government) peak, 3.99% highest budget deficit (Q1 1968).
    The budget surplus (started in Q2 1969) lasted for 9 Quarters.

    1955 (earliest data)-1964 – Highest budget deficit of 2.69% (Q3 1961), budget surplus of 0.29% (Q4 1955) and another surplus of Q2 1958-Q4 1958 (3 Quarters) of 0.12, 0.13 and 0.12.

    So by ‘records’, you mean ‘post the greatest economic crisis possibly since the great depression, the government ran up a historical budget deficit, however their period in government was mixed –
    prior to this they had smaller budget deficits than the previous four administrations, the longest period of surplus since ‘the post-war period’ and the highest peak budget surplus since the earliest recorded surplus (of the 1955-2011 data) of Q4 1955′.

    If you’re going to make historical comparisons, please do it properly. 8)

  3. Saw IDS this morning encouraging employers to recruit young unemployed workers from within the UK rather than recruit immigrants. Apparently he also criticised the LDs in gov on the immigration issue.

    This is a very strange/difficult message to be sending out, IMO.

    Taking the obvious, first, isn’t it counter to equality law to prefer a particular age group to another?

    Second, isn’t IDS’s comment an admission that the gov has a real problem controlling immigration?

    Third, attacking the LDs suggests that there is a big difference of opinion on immigration at the heart of gov. Is IDS seeking to lay the blame on the LDs for the Cons not being able to deliver the kind of immigration controls that a large slice of the UK population are thought to want?

    I expect to see some upward movement in Con VI share just because of this issue.

  4. Inverclyde?
    I hope some small part of the SNP believes Oldnat’s explanation. In truth, it is a stunning result for Labour. It certainly stuns me as I have been working on two local by elections which gave good results for the SNP. Iceman, though a Labour supporter has been quite willing to give ascerbic comment on Labour’s position in Scotland so you can take his triumph statement as Gospel.
    A significant point for those outside Scotland is the involvement of A Salmond. He keeps well away from defeats so he must have thought victory was on the cards.
    Labour will have to do a lot of thinking about what went well. I suspect that media commentary, “traditional result in traditional seat” etc may be wide of the mark.
    Inverclyde is socially intensely divided and Labour may have done well in its traditional area and also well amongst the good proportion of AB votes. The respectable vote for the Tories is a surprise perhaps linked to a sensible candidate and a strong anti-SNP message.
    SNP supporters may reflect on the poor choice of candidate for the area. Perhaps as one Labour wag said everyone electable for the SNP has been elected.
    This morning across Scotland there will be hundreds of Lib Dem councillors considering their options for coming elecctions. Rumours abound that the SNP have a loving up strategy to gain defections already having an impact on nearby Renfrewshire. So the Lochside Liberal tag may be apt.

  5. Actually playing the “race card” is a good indicator that the Government fear they had a very, very bad day yesterday, whatever their utterances in public.

    If they can immigration (and welfare scroungers) back up front instead of pensions, strikes and the sinking economy, they can score some points…they think.

  6. @Tinged Fringe

    It true, as one economist stated last week, that the deficit will be reduced by a half when the government share of bank ownership is sold?

  7. Nick Poole
    I agree that ti seems as though the Cons/gov use immigration and welfare scroungers as a tool to maintain popularity.

    But I’m just being cynical, again as we all know politicians don’t do this kind of thing.

  8. Sorry to change the subject…

    I was thinking about yesterday’s strikes. I don’t know if AW has any plans along these lines, but it seems to me that it would be interesting to find out, after the arguments have had an airing in the media people pay attention to, what the general public _think_ the dispute is about.

    I heard one person yesterday thinking that Teachers were on strike to get a pay increase! It seems to me that asking about a full range of possible causes ranging from seeking a pay increase and trying to overthrow the government through such explanations as ‘the Government wants to make pensions fairer’ and “public servants are being made to pay for bankers’ mistakes” and ‘the Government has broken its promises about pensions’ all the way to ‘the Govt wants to make it easier to privatise services’ would give some interesting information about who is winning the arguments, that could then indicate where the balance of opinion would move if there were more strikes in the autumn.

  9. @ Mike N

    “I agree that it seems as though the Cons/gov use immigration and welfare scroungers as a tool to maintain popularity.

    But I’m just being cynical, again as we all know politicians don’t do this kind of thing.”

    If the media did not care about this, I don’t think the Tories would try to go for so many soundbites in this area. Certain newspapers are mad on these topics and their readers believe everything that is printed.

    Just in todays DM.” Immigration and rising birth rate driving growth”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2009853/UK-population-growing-fastest-rate-50-years.html

    There is also a story about Roger Daltrey having a go at politicians lack of control of immigration and jobs not going to British people. A couple of quotes .

    “The star told how the last government left ‘the British working man screwed like he’d never been screwed before by cheap labour coming in from Europe.’”

    “However the current Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government were not spared his ire either, with Daltrey adding: ‘The quality of our politicians is tragic.’”

    In the same newpaper there is also a story about IDS having disagreements with cabinet colleages on immigration and jobs

    “Minister who dares to speak the truth: IDS exposes Cabinet tension, warning the majority of jobs created in Britain go to foreigners.”

    THIS IS AN ISSUE FOR ALL POLITICIANS OF ALL PARTIES. OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE THE SAME ISSUES, BRITAIN IS NOT UNIQUE.

    I would suggest therefore that they work on this with EU colleagues and stop making it a party issue. If you really want to control population in the UK, then you have to consider making some major decisions. i.e Can Britain control immigration while being in the EU ?

  10. I really don’t have a solution to it, but it is remarkable the juxtaposition of mass immigration into the UK alongside mass unemployment and ingrained worklessness.

    What is it about our compatriots that prevents them from taking up the jobs on offer? I think the government’s answer would probably be “access to benefits” which explains their focus on restricting benefits and “making work pay”.

    But for all the good intentions of IDS, it is hard to see why an employer would want to offer a job to a Briton that doesn’t want it rather than an immigrant that desperately does.

  11. Does the by-election result not give the lie to the idea that Labour has ‘lost’ Scotland to the SNP?

    Tory wishful thinking. Scots will vote Labour for Westminster and SNP for Scotland, for the next few years anyway.

  12. Neil A
    “But for all the good intentions of IDS, it is hard to see why an employer would want to offer a job to a Briton that doesn’t want it rather than an immigrant that desperately does.”

    Aye.

    R Huckle
    “I would suggest therefore that they work on this with EU colleagues and stop making it a party issue.”

    Aye.

  13. Frankly, I saw the result of the by-election in the Independent. When I looked at the numbers, my first thought was to congratulate OLD NAT & the others for a good result. When the new MP talks about stopping the SNP bandwagon, I feel he should get an M.O.T check on its braking system. To have had a majority 3x as great at the GE, as an opposition party, at this point in a parliament, with all that is going on in Britain and in its heartland, is not a famous victory for Labour.

    The whole thing puts me in mind of Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands comment after the battle of Arnham.
    “I am not sure Holland can stand another Montgomery victory”.

  14. You would expect an ex Paratrooper to be able to spell Arnhem, would you not. Old age, its a bugger.

  15. Immigration is a tricky one. Putting the onus on employers to police it seems unlikely to work.

    People have always moved around the globe looking to eat, get shelter, make their fortune. I think we need to live with that reality and be pragmatic.

    There’s no easy solutions but the demonisation of certain parts of society might well be counter-productive.

  16. @Nick Poole
    “What evidence have you that the Government had a very very bad day yesterday”.
    I posted this yesterday
    “It will be interesting to see the polls after today’s events. I have just watched BBC News and despite the fact that they interviewed people in the North where Labour is stronger, the support for the strikers from parents of school children was almost nonexistent. Danny Alexander came across very well in interviews on both BBC & Sky this afternoon. I suspect the Government is winning the argument but we shall have to wait and see. Credit to Ed M for saying the strikers are wrong. I suspect that he also believes the Government is winning this one”.
    There was very little reporting of yesterday’s events on the BBC this morning, probably a sure sign that the day had gone well for the Government. I think there will be quiet satisfaction in Government circles but of course they will not make that Public for obvious reasons. They have to stand firm on this issue for the long term good of the Country as a whole.
    Judt my opinion of course as I said before will will have to wait and see.

  17. ICEMAN

    I support your analysis. The majority was better than anything Labour could have hoped for.

    What conclusions we can draw about a UK election some years away are less clear.

    Can any estimte be made of the proportion of Lab/SNP split voters? Should that be the SNP/Lab split voters?

    The Conservative vote held up. Does that mean that there is nothing left there for the SNP to gain? Do they already have a monopoly of the Con-voting anti-Lab vote?

    Inverclyde is as likely as anywhere to have a high loyal core to the Labour vote and a smaller proportion of antii-Cons. Is that also true of the 15 FPTP SP seats?

    How much was the result local bye-election factors (candidate/campaign)? Was the personal vote for the late MP not as high as supposed, or did Labour retain most of it, and if so how?

    Labour, SNP and Conservaties all have something to learn from thoughtful analysis of the result. For the LibDems, it is as clear as it can be what went wrong. If Labour had won by 500 votes or 10,000 the answers would be clear.

    The instant verdict is that there are nearly 20% anti-Con “swingers” in this constituency, twice the level of support for the party leading the UK governmentas well as a substantial number who voted SNP.

    Can it really be as much as that?

  18. Further, to my comment about the Scottish by election.
    I make no pretence at being a polling technician like some of you, but, it looks to me on the voting figures, that if replicated across Scotland, Alex Salmond would be the next King.

  19. Interesting post on Political Betting website by Henry Manson a Labour activist attacking Ed M for his attitude to the strike. If his comments are valid then Labour is split from top to bottom.

  20. @nick poole
    Comments like “the government had a very bad day
    yesterday” are so partisan and subjective. It depends totally on which newspaper you read. The Guardian I am sure agree’s with you, the Telegraph is saying the opposite. You may get the approbation of left leaning posters on the site, but only the polls will speak the truth.

  21. @John B Dick

    “The instant verdict is that there are nearly 20% anti-Con “swingers” in this constituency, twice the level of support for the party leading the UK governmentas well as a substantial number who voted SNP.

    Can it really be as much as that?”

    The short answer is Yes. Possibly even more.

    I suspect vast tracts of the Scottish population see Labour and SNP as philosophically indistinguishable ( they are not, of course, in reality, but are widely perceived to be so) an all major isues except independence – and with the referendum safeguard that issue is effectively parked.

    The trick for both parties is to find means of resonating with the electorate more than the other. At Holyrood Salmond took virtually all of this vote – Labour were a total shambles.

    IMO I think 2015 election in Scotland will be determined by Labour’s UK performance. If Labour appears to be winning, or it is very tight then this vote, will stick massively with Labour. If Milliband is proving unelectable, or Labour are appearing vacillating or incompetent in the UK, then vast swathes of that vote could shift to the SNP. I don’t think anyone can ascertain that shift until the closing days of the GE campaign – and it will be decisive – one way or the other.

    Either Labour will conquer all, as before, or we could see a total meltdown as Holyrood. I personally don’t believe there will be any middle ground on it (There won’t be a significant shift to SNP with Labour holding on, mostly, it will either be broadly as now or broadly as Holyrood)

  22. Of course the biggest question is: Is there anything the SNP can do to win over the swingers? They are promiscuous.

    Should Labour Bavarianise to focus on these voters, and free the Scottish party for a more Scottish stance?

  23. Nick poole
    “People have always moved around the globe looking to eat, get shelter, make their fortune. I think we need to live with that reality and be pragmatic.”

    Indeed. As I udnerstand, the land mass called Scotland is rising whereas the south coust of the land mass called enagland is sinking. (IIRc as a result if the retreat of the ice some 30,000 years ago.)

    Coukled with rising sea levels there may well be a mass exodus from south England with a commensurate increase in immigration to Scotland.

    I’m sure the SNP will welcome us all. In fact I thk the SNP should now be undertaking a massive building programme to accommodate the refugees.
    ;-)

    “There’s no easy solutions but the demonisation of certain parts of society might well be counter-productive.”
    I agree. I cannot believe that the Cons hierarchy wants to be viewed as devisive by targeting sections and groupds in our society.

  24. Oh, good grief – far too many typos

    Nick poole
    “People have always moved around the globe looking to eat, get shelter, make their fortune. I think we need to live with that reality and be pragmatic.”

    Indeed. As I understand it, the land mass called Scotland is rising whereas the south coast of the land mass called England is sinking. (IIRC as a result of the retreat of the ice some 30,000 years ago.)

    Coupled with rising sea levels there may well be a mass exodus from south England with a commensurate increase in immigration to Scotland.

    I’m sure the SNP will welcome us all. In fact I think the SNP should now be undertaking a massive building programme to accommodate the refugees.

    “There’s no easy solutions but the demonisation of certain parts of society might well be counter-productive.”
    I agree. I cannot believe that the Cons hierarchy wants to be viewed as divisive by targeting sections and groupds in our society.

  25. Iceman

    You’re probably right about the next UK election. Maybe you are right about 45% anti-Cons too. The SNP seem to have swept up (for obvious reasons) the 15% that the LibDems had and they must have already had a fair trance themselves.

    If so, the answer to my question above is that for the next four years, the SNP has to try to persuade swingers and other anti-Cons in the central belt that they are the best buy, and Labour has to persuade those that live in the Northerh regions, that they can best meet the requirement to oppose the UK coalition or mitigate its policies as they effect Scotland.

    As you point out, there are a number of imponderables there, and some critical ones depend on developments furth of Scotland. It’s for Labour to lose, the SNP can’t be proactive except in demonstrating competence.

  26. @ THE OTHER HOWARD
    I have spent some time on the Indy comments site over the last couple of days. Hardly the David Cameron fan club as you might expect. However, the attitude towards Labour in general and Miliband in particular is appalling.
    The support for strikes and anti cuts issues is strong, but most posters have zero confidence in Labour to represent their views.

  27. Lloyds is cutting 15,000 jobs-thats 43,000 to date.

    Gordon didn’t say 29% of your staff will lose their jobs when he told them to buy HBOS.

    Anyone up for march against this inhumane & unfair attack on the jobs & pensions of ordinary bank workers?………………don’t all rush………….

  28. What I said was:

    “Actually playing the “race card” is a good indicator that the Government fear they had a very, very bad day yesterday, whatever their utterances in public.”

    I offered no opinion myself. Just suggested that the immigration issue being introduced meant the Government feared a backlash.

    Not partisan at all. Might of course be wrong, though.

  29. @mike n
    I am all for long term planning, but if Labours only hope is waiting for Dorset, Hampshire, Sussex, Kent and Surrey to be under La Manche, you have got a long wait pal.

  30. @colin
    OOH you are awful

  31. CHOUENLI

    ;-)

    Ain’t Solidarity great -as your namesake used to say :-)

  32. “…but if Labours only hope is waiting for Dorset, Hampshire, Sussex, Kent and Surrey to be under La Manche, you have got a long wait pal.”

    I imagine that there will be resolute die-hard Con-utes (Canutes?) who will stand on the beaches believing they can turn back the rising tide (of socialism).

    Moving on.

  33. @mike n
    Or on the first plane to Canada.

  34. @TingedFringe et al

    Two points

    1: You’re forgetting to include the cost of the bailout
    =======================================================
    When discussing the debt and deficit, it is invidious to omit the costs of the bailout (a.k.a “effects of financial interventions”). In January, the ONS (correctly) changed the way it calculated the debt and deficit to include the costs of the bailout (see h ttp://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/nojournal/rbs-lbg-article.pdf ). The result was an titanically large increase. The numbers for May ( h ttp://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/psf0611.pdf ) are given below.

    Excluding bailout costs
    * Public sector deficit: £15.3 billion
    * Public sector net debt: £920.9 billion (60.6 per cent of GDP).

    Including bailout costs
    * Public sector deficit: £13.1 billion
    * Public sector net debt: £2299.8 billion (151.4 per cent of GDP).

    The last number is the colossally frightening one. Comparisons to Greece and Argentina are not unjustified.

    2: The “global” banking crisis didn’t happen globally
    =====================================================
    What Amber refers to as “well-regarded commentators” are united in the belief that the global crisis happened, um, globally.

    But here’s the thing: it didn’t.

    South America wasn’t affected. Africa wasn’t. South East Asia wasn’t. India wasn’t. The Middle East wasn’t. Russia wasn’t. USA was, but Canada, Australia and New Zealand weren’t. UK, Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Spain, Iceland, Italy, Hungary and the Baltics were, but Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Luxembourg, the countries of the former Yugoslavia weren’t. China, France and Germany were only involved because of their exposure to USA and the PIIGS – arguably, China was helped by the crisis. Bear in mind there are a *lot* of nations and people. A definite majority of the nations of the planet and (depending on whether you count China as a casualty or a beneficiary) a definite majority of the humans of the planet were not involved.

    The Chinese call it the “North Atlantic” crisis. They’re right.

    Regards, Martyn

    h ttp://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22North+Atlantic+crisis%22

  35. Great result for Labour in the by-election last night and, like Rob S, I see this as further evidence of the completely different voting patterns that have now emerged between Holyrood and Westminster elections. This will soothe Labour nerves in Scotland and give the party some welcome breathing space. The SNP and Tory jackals and vultures were gathering and they’ll no doubt, despite the disingenuous protestations to the contrary already seen from some on these pages, be very disappointed at what happened in Inverclyde yesterday.

    Another interesting little news item developing. I see the NY Times are reporting that the prosecution case against Strauss Kahn is beginning to collapse. I wonder if they’ll be dragging him back on to that plane soon for a return flight to Paris? Another case of a public kangaroo court being convened a little prematurely, perhaps? lol

  36. @ NEILA

    ” it is hard to see why an employer would want to offer a job to a Briton that doesn’t want it rather than an immigrant that desperately does.”

    Yes.

    In an interview on BBC tv news a Recruitment Industry person said that there are three “problem” areas in recruiting British unemployed – young men in the main :-

    They specify 20 hrs pw maximum-this is related the receipt of welfare benefit.
    They won’t work for the Minimum Wage.
    They won’t do “boring” work.

    Hopefully IDS’ new regime will impose sanctions which impact some of these attitudes.

    Anecdotally I have been told that one of the problem groups faced by JobCentre is early middle aged men with functional illiteracy. I was shocked to hear this.

    Again-hopefully the Work Programme contractors who are now handling the longer term unemployed will address some of these specific deficits.

    THere is a massive job ahead to change the benefit reliant culture & systemic inadequacy for work which has built up in UK.

    IDS is quite right to warn that we could repeat Labour’s experience of new jobs going to immigrants.

    BUt his plea to employers will fall on deaf ears. It is his job to sort the welfare to work plan out -and Theresa May’s job to contain net inward migration.

    I firmly believe that Michael Goves area of responsibility is where this chronic British problem will be solved-but we are talking the next generation there.

  37. @Martyn

    Where did you get the idea that Belgium and the Netherlands were ‘unaffected’ by the burst financial bubble?

  38. @ TheFringe

    “record balance of payments deficits”

    I couldn’t find what it was responding to, but in any case, you were later writing about public finances. balance of payments is of course the transactions between the UK and the rest of the world. Just a bit of pedantry.

    I’m really unsure if one can make such long term comparisons (although it’s done all the time). As Kuznets rightly pointed it out: to do so, you have to introduce various adjusting co-efficients and then those are often arbitrary. But indeed, excluding the bailouts, the debt and the deficit was not particularly extraordinary.

  39. It seems likely that these “workshy” young men will be competing for jobs with not only with unemployed graduates seeking work experience and laid off public sector workers but also unpaid volunteers eager to participate in the Big Society.*

    *that last one might have been facetious

  40. @Billy Bob

    You asked “…Is it true, as one economist stated last week, that the deficit will be reduced by a half when the government share of bank ownership is sold?..”

    No. The bank sale proceeds shouldn’t be counted against the deficit, because it’s a one-off payment. It should be counted against the debt.

    If the bank sale proceeds manage to halve the debt, I’ll be very surprised – the debt currently stands at £2.3 trillion. If you sold everything in the UK – every bank, company, child, adult, house, river, brick, everything – you’d only raise about 2/3rds of that. The bank sales won’t even come close.

    Regards, Martyn

  41. @ Colin

    Yes, it is a horrific scale of headcount reduction. A lot of them will likely be back office people.

    I’m not sure if it is purely HBOS effect (although a lot of it is) – the TSB wing of the bank had problems with productivity (relatively high headcount). Retail banking is going through a reorganisation period – I think we will see more of these sort of announcements.

  42. @Martyn

    yes, I agree this is largely a “western” crisis – while we waste our time and resources falling down a hole and clambering up again, China & India just keep on going.

    As for goings on in Scotland, Labour have an big advantage over SNP in Westminister relative to Holyrood: the anti-tory Scots might not like having a westminister parliament having overall control, but they should find it more sensible to vote for a party that has some chance of actually being in power down here some of the time – I can’t see either main party down here rushing to the SNP looking to form a coalition given what will be demanded, only if the LD’s really collapse and the Ulster unionists/nationalists say no. Not that we get too many hung parliaments at westminister.

  43. @Howard

    I knew, compiling the list of affected/unaffected from memory, that I’d get several wrong – I had Hungary (!)down as “unaffected” before menory gave me a right kicking… :-) If you are telling me that the Benelux bunch are affected, I’m happy to accept your assurance.

    Regards, Martyn

  44. I’m confused.

    Are the bank reductions counted as public sector job losses (a good thing, in some eyes) or as the private sector expanding into the space left as the bloated public sector shrinks and taking up the slack by matching the jobs lost?*

    *facetious again, I’m afraid

  45. @CROSSBAT.
    Your majority was slashed by 66%. I am not trying to “talk down” a Labour win in its own back garden. But, 66% reduction in majority Does Not constitute a victory, but only hanging on. I repeat, I would be very interested to see these figures projected across Scotland.

  46. @Colin – Unite has commented on the situation at Lloyds, and regarding the redundances at HSBC:

    “Unite has been informed that these cuts will generate savings of around 9 million pounds for HSBC. Is it a coincidence that this figure is the equivalent to the bonus for Stuart Gulliver, HSBC Chief Executive, due to be paid later this month?” said David Fleming, Unite national officer.

    Banco Popolare, Intesa Sanpaolo, UniCredit, Banca Montei dei Paschi di Siena, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs have all cut their workforce, while Standard Chartered has lost 1,500 through not filling vacancies.

    Among the reasons given: “limp economic growth” and Q2 fears, something Gordon Brown warned would happen if the wrong decisions were taken.

  47. The Inverclyde result seems to mirror what we saw in the Holyrood elections, ie the SNP is hoovering up Tory and Liberal votes in a direct challenge to Labour.

    On a slightly less momentous note, the Tories held Thamesfield (Putney) in a Wandsworth council by-election last night – does anyone know what the swing was?

  48. From “this is London”:

    Labour was quick to trumpet a 16 per cent swing in its direction and a 20 percentage point fall for the Conservatives. The Labour candidate, Christian Klapp, increased the party’s share of the vote from 19 per cent to more than 31 per cent – receiving 1,022 votes.

    Coun Ryder received 1,497 votes – 45.7 per cent – while Lisa Smart, representing the Liberal Democrats, picked up 545 votes and Green Party hopeful, Marian Hoffman, received 202. Turnout at the polls was just over 28 per cent.

    In May last year the lowest placed Conservative to be elected, Councillor Jim Madden, recorded 4,654 votes and the best-performing Labour candidate, Janet Grimshaw, picked up 1,559 votes.

  49. Chouenlai

    Try it here

    h ttp://www.scotlandvotes.com/westminster

1 2 3 4 5