Tonight’s YouGov/Sunday Times poll has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 43%, LDEM 10%, so the eight point lead seems increasingly steady. Full report to come tomorrow when the tables are up.


80 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 35%, LAB 43%, LDEM 10%”

1 2
  1. Labour in the game.

    Ed is credible leader.

    The ‘hackgate’ affair will dog the Government

  2. According to the Guardian, News International threatened the Lib Dems over the BSkyB. Makes you think whether Cable wanted to be removed from the decision making position. And could account for Clegg looking so grumpy about recent NOTW allegation of illegal practices and Cameron cozyness with News Corp executives.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/23/news-international-liberal-democrats-bskyb

  3. The last time Labour were creeping towards a 10 point lead, I was willing to acknowledge that it was ‘soft’; it was an anti-government vote rather than a pro-Labour one.

    Ed saw somebody in politics had to take responsibilty for calling NI to account & he stepped up, even though he was risking the ire of a powerful media group. Had Brooks clung to her job & the BSkyB bid gone ahead, it would have been a humiliating defeat for him.

    Now, I think Ed’s call for responsibility throughout society has struck a chord. And it is not being dismissed as empty rhetoric because he took the risk of leading by example.
    8-)

  4. Chris Lane

    Your comment appeared a little strange – sandwiched as it was between the two thread headings

    “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 35%, LAB 43%, LDEM 10%”
    “YouGov/Sun – CON 35%, LAB 43%, LDEM 11%”

  5. @Amberstar – “Now, I think Ed’s call for responsibility throughout society has struck a chord. And it is not being dismissed as empty rhetoric because he took the risk of leading by example.”

    Well, I’m going to take the credit for being the first poster here to pick up on Ed’s speech, but elsewhere there are some very surprising voices agreeing with him.

    In today’s Telegraph, no less than Charles Moore writes “Democratic politics, which purports to enrich the many, is actually in the pocket of those bankers, media barons and other moguls who run and own everything”, under the headline ‘Could it be that the left might really be wrote?’, while Carswell himself blogs tonight “I had mistaken big business interests with the free market. Too many Conservatives still do.” and “Traditional Toryism does not seem to recognise this the way we should. Conservatism today needs to be as suspicious of Big Business and Corporatism as we have been of Big Government.”

    In my humble opinion, we are seeing a sea change in political attitudes, and so far, Ed M is leading it.

  6. @Old Nat

    I was first to respond to the Sunday Poll.

    First comment.

    And I do think Labour looks more solid now, and Glassman’s Blue Labour will have traction, while the economy stagnates

  7. It’s as I have been predicting. The Labour lead is increasing, and is now back to the levels it was in March/April. I expect the lead to continue increasing – scandal or no scandal.

  8. It’s as I have been predicting. The Labour lead is increasing, and is now back to the levels it was in March/April. I expect the lead to continue increasing – scandal or no scandal.

  9. Looks like ICM got their weighting wrong – an inability to respond to a recent change in false recall?

    Sorry I’m a few threads late with this comment!

  10. chris lane

    “I was first to respond to the Sunday Poll.”

    I realise that, but it still looked odd – lying as it did between two sets of identical numbers for Con/Lab. :-)

    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Hackergate (a much more appropriate term) is currently benefiting Milliband.

    In the longer term, the contagion firstly of MP expenses, and now corruption in wider aspects of public life, becomes very unpredictable in terms of public attitudes to any party.

    Many might envy the Latvians their opportunity to have a referendum to dissolve Parliament over a corruption issue (95% of votes counted so far are for dissolution!)

  11. Yes, it seems like ICM is, in the very least, an outlier.

    Yougov usually gives Labour its biggest leads – so the ‘real’ lead may not be as high as 8% IMO, but it is now clear that ICM really is out on its own at the moment. I think we can now quite confidently say that the Labour lead is now somewhere around 5 or 6% across all the pollsters.

  12. Chris Lane

    I have replied saying that “I realise that, but it still looked odd – lying as it did between two sets of identical numbers for Con/Lab. :-) ”

    My subsequent comments seem to have triggered the spam trap.

  13. @Old Nat

    OK: Good Night now, after a very eventful fortnight

    When Ed ‘spoke to England’

    (you will know Amery’s shout to Walter Greenwood on September 1 1939 after the head of that Coaltion Government hinted at doing the dirty on Poland after German invasion)

  14. Chris Lane (when you log in again)

    I have never had any doubt that leaders of the main parties at Westminster all “spoke for England”. :-)

  15. Sincere condoleances to our comrades of the Norwegian Arbeiderpartiet and to all Norwegians for their tremendous losses. Now more than ever it is the time for us European Socialists and for all progressive democrats to stand up for what we believe and never give up fighting for a just, open and tolerant society.

  16. @Virgilio

    “Sincere condoleances to our comrades of the Norwegian Arbeiderpartiet and to all Norwegians for their tremendous losses. Now more than ever it is the time for us European Socialists and for all progressive democrats to stand up for what we believe and never give up fighting for a just, open and tolerant society.”

    Amen to that.

  17. Chris Lane,
    I think you meant ‘Arthur Greenwood’!

  18. Virgilio

    It’s time (now and always) for all of us who believe in a just, open and tolerant society to stand up for what we believe in.

    George Campbell Hay’s 1942 poem (written in Norwegian) seems rather appropriate now.

    Scotland to the North Sea Farers
    Thus in times past the longship, when hard hands
    held Scotland’s isles firm under the plunderer’s yoke
    (still our mouths repeat the Norse language).
    Then we were enemies, now we are friends.

    No, Norway’s keels no longer carry
    the old terror through storm and waves.
    Brothers of war, you who are following the hope we follow,
    welcome to our country from the ocean’s terror.

    Sad that this terror came from the land – but not an event that needs a political dimension yet.

  19. Norway, it is like Dunblane: Too cruel & it cannot be dwelt on without tears of grief & rage. One must read the words of courage from Norway’s Prime Minister, or distract one’s self entirely, to avoid despair.

  20. Amber

    I heard the reports of Dunblane as I was driving back to school after a meeting. When I arrived, I told the news to the office staff, so that they could put the radio on and keep people up to date with what was happening.

    I still remember my secretary’s instinctive response “You mean our Dunblane” (as opposed to one in the USA, where there would be a greater expectation of such horror).

    Ever since the news broke, the term “our Utøya” has been running through my head.

    Logically, it should made no difference to our response whether this horror took place in Utøya, Ulan Bator, or Ulysses, Kansas. However, the nearer to home such events occur, they have greater resonance. I’m still struggling to come to terms with our parochialism with regard to horror.

  21. Virgilio
    If only this could be an outcome……that could lead to some major change.

    I suspect the left is and has been on the wane (despite the recent polling you have reported) because there is enough anti-immigration sentiment (stretching from objection to EU expansion migration through to reactionary islamaphobia) that Europe has moved to the right. This sentiment just needs c5% (and in many countries it is bigger than this) to move permanently from left to right for the centre-left to become the 2nd party in most countries.

    I suspect as abhorrent as the acts in Norway may be to the vast majority of people, it won’t change that sentiment, even if progressive democrats stand-up – especially as the left in Europe doesn’t seem to offer an alternative model anymore, but just a ‘softer’ version of the right’s model (I will bow down to your greater wisdom on this matter if I am wrong). Maybe we should be looking to the success of the centre left of South America for ideas for success so that a more tolerant society can be built.

    Hopefully EdM’s Labour Party can provide a more creative alternative which can reverse the trend of the growing gap between the top and bottom which is the inevitable of free market capitalism – which his predecessors fully accepted, but used it’s results to invest in public servoces (which was a good thing).

    Sorry, too much frustration coming out there!

    Amberstar
    I normally agree with a lot that you post. On this occassion however, I’m going to disagree with you. The difference between Dunblane and Norway is that Norway was political.

    The Labour party was targeted – their offices in Oslo and their coming generations of (maybe/potential) leaders at their youth camp.

    Though both massively tragic of course.

  22. @Amber

    You said “…Ed’s call for responsibility throughout society has struck a chord…”

    It may or may not have struck a chord, but it is more important than you think.

    The Conservatives are pursuing an accountancy-democracy-transparency agenda, and key phrases such as “post-bureaucratic age” and “open data” inform it. It is in this light that policies such as the Big Society must be viewed. The underlying principle is the distribution of power and information from the centre to the people and, for all its faults, it is a way of living with the smaller state required post-bailout.

    But it also copes with one of the large problems of our time: the corruption of the democratic process by the rich and powerful, and the resultant alienation of the citizen from that process.

    So intellectually, the Conservative approach identifies the problem and provides a solution: powerful stuff.

    Up til now, Labour’s approach has been that everything is OK, the bailout was small, and it was somebody else’s fault. This approach doesn’t acknowledge the problem and doesn’t provide a solution. Not good.

    But Miliband, by pursuing a responsibility agenda, has stumbled upon an alternative solution: that power, instead of being popularly redistributed, be instead exercised more responsibly by the powerful.

    I don’t know which approach will strike a chord with the electorate, and I suspect the debt, recession and Europe will occupy most people’s minds. But at least Labour is now offering an alternative solution instead of ignoring the problem.

    Regards, Martyn

  23. Ronnie

    Breivak’s lawyer has said that his client has said a lot about why he committed these “atrocious but necessary” acts, but he was not revealing details.

    You, however, seem to have absolute knowledge of his motivation. You may well be correct, but how do you have such knowledge?

  24. Oldnat

    My apologies if I came across as absolutely certain. I was expressing an opinion as opposed to having knowledge.

    There are some observable facts though – from the news footage I have seen on the BBC & Sky News. In particular:

    1.
    The car bomb was put outside the Labour Party’s Olso offices and

    2.
    The youth camp was the Labour Party’s youth camp.

    It may be circumstantial, but I think these 2 facts make it seem that he was targeting the Labour Party (of Norway).

    Do you think there is an alternative explanation for these 2 facts?

  25. Ronnie

    You choose to emphasise the Labour Party aspect. However, I trust that you aren’t comprehending that in terms of UKLAB.

    Your emphasis may well be true, but Labour has been the largest party in Norway since 1927 (if we ignore the Nazi Occupation years).

    There is a dangerous assumption that “the far right” (or any other appropriate description) in Norway responds to the Arbeiderpartiet (the party of the Establishment) in the same way that “the far right” (or any other appropriate description) in the UK would respond to Labour – still not the the party of the Establishment in England, despite NuLab’s efforts.

    Making simplistic assumptions across different political systems seldom works.

    Once we have the data, we will know what Breivak’s motivations were.

    Whether he was attacking Labour or the Establishment remains to be seen.

  26. Dear me, is it not possible to see anything outside the ScotNat vs Labour tribalism of Scotland?

    I made a point of stating the Labour Party of Norway.

    They are called “The Labour Party”, when translated to English….and what that Party call themselves when they speak in English is the Labour Party…….what would you want me to call them?

    What have I said about the tragedy in Norway makes any mention of the UK Labour Party?

  27. Sorry…that last post was to OldNat.

    BTW: They have not had power in Norway for the whole period you mention – particularly this century.

  28. Ronnie

    I think you have totally misunderstood my comment.

    Had this occurred in the UK (though culturally the exact opportunity wouldn’t have arisen) then the attack could be simply seen as being against “Labour”.

    In Norway “Labour” has been the party of Government (ie the Establishment) since 1927.

    What is that you don’t understand about the difference between

    Labour – as a political party that is sometimes in power in a country

    and

    Labour – a party that is the Establishment party in a country because it has always been in power?

    I deliberately made no reference to Scotland (where one might argue that Labour had a similar status as the Norwegian Labour Party – though for a much shorter period of time). That construct is entirely yours.

    My hope was that you weren’t trying to interpret the political aspect of the Norwegian tragedy in terms of UK politics. I still hope that you are not doing so.

  29. @Ronnie

    Good point, and it illustrates the limits of the approach: distributing power from the centre and reducing corruption presupposes that one wants to distribute it and one is not corrupt oneself, and this is not always the case in the Conservative party (or indeed in any other… :-) ).

    But pointing out that the Conservative approach is incompletely executed and/or stymied by corrupt individuals does not invalidate the approach – on the contrary, it should be applied more forcefully, not less.

    But this missed the point I was making. The point I was making was that prior to Miliband’s advocacy of responsibility, the Conservatives were winning the intellectual argument by default, but now Labour is offering a counter-argument.

    Regards, Martyn

  30. Ronnie

    “They have not had power in Norway for the whole period you mention”

    Quite right – and not a point that I ever made, so a “straw man” argument.

    Only someone thirled to FPTP would ever assume that “largest party” meant “party in power” – so maybe you are just thinking in UK terms.

    The Norwegian Labour Party was in power, however, during
    1935-65 (other than occupation)
    1971-1972
    1973–1981
    1986–1989
    1990–1997
    2000–2001
    2005 –

    If you don’t understand how “Labour” can be the “Establishment” then you may have little understanding of political systems beyond Westminster/Whitehall.

  31. @ Ronnie,

    I’m not sure how to respond but I will try.

    My comment was emotional not analytical. My son played on a hockey team with children who attended Dunblane Primary School at the time of the massacre there.

    I do not personally know anybody involved in Norway (as far as I am aware at this time) but I have said on this board that I feel an affinity with people who work for social democracy, regardless of nationality. Therefore, my reaction to these horrific events was similar.

    Perhaps, in time, I will be able to consider the differences but now I just feel the same as I did then.

  32. Amber

    I fully understand the emotional rather than analytical response – especially if your son knew some of the Dunblane victims.

    However, I want to force you back to your comment, and ask you to think if it actually expressed what you meant.

    “I feel an affinity with people who work for social democracy, regardless of nationality. Therefore, my reaction to these horrific events was similar.”

    Having read your comments over a long period, i simply can’t believe that your response wouldn’t have been exactly the same if the victims had been in the youth wing of any party.

  33. OldNat
    I hope, my last post on this subject, as I think the tragedy is much bigger then what is being discussed.

    You have brought forward UK politics into the debate, not I. I am not suffering from any confusion on this matter, and have not at any time. You seem to be showing a lot of sensitivity to the word “Labour”, even though this is what the Norwegian Labour Party calls itself. I can only assume this sensitivity stems from the rivalry between the SNP and UK Labour in Scotland.

    You should also note that the Norwegian Labour Party was NOT a party of government in Norway from 1997 to 2005.

    So since this 32 year old man has been 18, when maybe a lot of his politics was being formed (as it does with many, hence the assumption – but who knows) there has been a centre-right government for 8 years and centre-left government for 6 years.

    Just like the certainty you have questioned of me, I will finish by asking based on this how can you know he saw the Labour Party of Norway as the establishment?

  34. Amberstar
    I am very sorry.
    It must bring back memories in a way I would never understand.

  35. @OldNat & Ronnie: I think the terrorist’s manifesto that has been spreading across the internet (now confirmed as genuine by Norwegian media) makes it very clear that the attack was directed against what he described as ‘cultural marxists’ who were ‘enabling’ the ‘Islamification of Europe’.

    This has a major political angle and is likely to have at least medium-term effects in that sphere.

  36. Ronnie

    “I will finish by asking based on this how can you know he saw the Labour Party of Norway as the establishment?”

    Good God! Can’t you read? I have made no assumptions about what was in his deranged mind!

    All I did was to ask you to question your assumptions that it was an attack on “Labour” and whether you understood that the same label didn’t necessarily have the same resonance in different political systems.

    It would appear, however, that you respond to assumptions in your head as opposed to what other posters say.

    “You should also note that the Norwegian Labour Party was NOT a party of government in Norway from 1997 to 2005. ”

    Since I never claimed that they were, that is a spectacularly fatuous comment to make.

  37. P Brown

    “This has a major political angle and is likely to have at least medium-term effects in that sphere.”

    I agree. Whether these effects will be party political, and how they will have consequences in different political systems is not clear, however.

  38. OldNat
    i am starting to feel a little patronised here.

    I can understand PR voting systems vs FPTP and I dont see everthing in terms of UK Political parties.

    Please consider others may have the same knowledge you have.

    Martyn
    Fair point. I think tthe Tories reaction to the Parliamentary expenses saga yielded the good transperency measures they introduced (i.e. the expenditure publication, etc…….).

    Not sure how it’s linked to the Big Society thoiugh. Can you explain?

    My concern is that the Big Society, where public ‘work’ is done by ‘private’ organisations risks exposure to corruption (disappearing funds, etc….) .

  39. Martyn

    ‘But Miliband, by pursuing a responsibility agenda, has stumbled upon an alternative solution: that power, instead of being popularly redistributed, be instead exercised more responsibly by the powerful.’

    I found your analysis very interesting; do you really think EM will go into the GE 2015 on responsible use of centralised power/ rather than increased de-centralisation?

    I think the recent NI Hacking issues has played very well for labour. The trouble with the financial crises is that the Coalition were fairly effective in their message that the austerity measures may be unpopular but the problem was caused by Labour.

    By concentrating on unsavourary hacking/andy coulson/right wing NI and linking it to DC they have wrong footed the Tory Party.

    The question I would ask the Labour Party is ‘how much credit should go to EM and how much to Labour Party strategists behind the scenes?’.

    The same question could be asked of the Tories. Is this all DCs fault or are the Tory strategists being outwitted by Labour?

    I would not ask the LDs the same question as I know the answer. They have had no involvement with Murdoch, and VC’s leaked war message, before the fat hit the fan, placed them in a very strong position; but on this matter somehow they snatched defeat from certain victory.

  40. “Saddam Tribe” has just finished on Yesterday, so I’m off to bed.

  41. Ronnie

    “I dont see everything in terms of UK Political parties.”

    That’s all I wanted to be assured of. That wasn’t clear from your original post, and I had to press long and hard for you to declare the obvious position that most instinctively adopt.

    (Now, that’s patronising! :-) )

  42. @ Ronnie

    Your apology is appreciated but it was not necessary. This is a political site & not really the place for personal, emotional reactions.

    By way of explanation, some of us have become interweb friends & the temptation to share thoughts with the community here is too strong to be easily over-come.

  43. @Ronnie

    You said “…Not sure how it’s linked to the Big Society though. Can you explain?…My concern is that the Big Society, where public ‘work’ is done by ‘private’ organisations risks exposure to corruption (disappearing funds, etc….)…”

    The honest answer is “I don’t know”…bear in mind I’m at observer level here – I get to hear the speeches and the far-off thunder but can only deduce the atomic bomb. What I guess it is goes something like this…

    How do you cope with a smaller state? Not in the ethical or emotional sense, but simple logistics – how do you do it? How to deliver services with less people and money than before? One method (privatisation) is well known: the agency moves from provider of service to manager of providers. But what if that’s not enough? How do you take the process further?

    One approach is to stop providing the services as a finished product to the client, but provide the raw materials to the client and let they process them as they see fit. This is easier for the state in terms of money, information flow and enforcement, and is enpowering for the individuals, who decide what to do virtually ad-hoc.

    I need to point out that I’m not advocating this approach – as you point out, it can go badly wrong. But it is of a piece with current Conservative thinking (at least at the Government level – I’m not sure the party is onside with this).

    @Henry

    You said “…I found your analysis very interesting; do you really think EM will go into the GE 2015 on responsible use of centralised power/ rather than increased de-centralisation?…”

    I don’t know – he doesn’t confide with me… :-) But for the first time since the election, the intellectual argument is joined. Prior to this Labour was talking about itself to itself – the whole Green Labour/Blue Labour/Purple Labour thing, which I don’t pretend to understand. But now we have two parties addressing the problem and that can only be good… :-)

    Regards, Martyn

  44. @ Old Nat

    Having read your comments over a long period, i simply can’t believe that your response wouldn’t have been exactly the same if the victims had been in the youth wing of any party.
    ———————————————-
    Thank you, you are probably right but one does not know until it happens & I fervently hope that I will never find out.

  45. @OLD Nat and Graham.

    woke very early/late:

    mea culpa..mea maxima culpa.

    Yes; Arthur Greenwood!!

    And the quote was: Speak to England.

    (Two very appalling peacetime coalition govts: 1919-1922 and 1931-1939)

  46. @ Old Nat

    “I heard the reports of Dunblane as I was driving back to school after a meeting. When I arrived, I told the news to the office staff, so that they could put the radio on and keep people up to date with what was happening.

    I still remember my secretary’s instinctive response “You mean our Dunblane” (as opposed to one in the USA, where there would be a greater expectation of such horror).

    Ever since the news broke, the term “our Utøya” has been running through my head.

    Logically, it should made no difference to our response whether this horror took place in Utøya, Ulan Bator, or Ulysses, Kansas. However, the nearer to home such events occur, they have greater resonance. I’m still struggling to come to terms with our parochialism with regard to horror.”

    Is there a Dunblane in the United States?

    I think that logic is trumped by emotion on these occasions but that’s okay. We’re human beings and we’re going to respond to different tragedies in different ways. And in some cases, we’ll respond differently to different victims even within the same tragedy. That’s because there are those victims who we relate to in some way and we feel a bond towards or their tragedy just seems so improbable and so awful, we react differently.

    I’m like that myself. There were certain victims who were murdered in the attempted assasination of Gabby Giffords who tugged at my heart strings just a little more. I’ve come to accept it.

  47. @ Amber Star

    “Thank you, you are probably right but one does not know until it happens & I fervently hope that I will never find out.”

    Me neither.

    I’ve actually never heard of a political party having summer camps for youth before. But if that’s a common practice in Europe, I can certainly imagine how something like this would deeply affect parents who send their own kids to such camps.

  48. I think this is perhaps a reflection of EdM starting to find his footing within larger politics – up until now his opposition tactics have hardly been dazzling, and DC has had a lot of popular support in the media (particularly from the NI side). If you had to ask the British public to associate the main negative aspects of each party, I reckon the LibDems would still be hit over the tuition fees debacle, the Labour party would be tarred with poor handling of the economy or the Iraq war, and the Conservative party are still associated heavily with sleaze.

    The honeymoon period for the Conservatives seems to be over – there’s only so many times you can say “Labour did it” to absolutely every allegation before it gets tired, the LibDem scapegoat are (wisely) keeping their head down (though the VC bullying will pull them in), and I think that many people outside the south of England seemed to have been waiting for a sleazy scandal to surface and prove their suspicions.

    I personally don’t think Cameron will take too long a ratings dip from this so long as his involvement doesn’t go much deeper, but I think EdM is finding his voice, and starting to build a credible opposition, hence the longer-term poll increase.

  49. @ Amber Star

    “My comment was emotional not analytical. My son played on a hockey team with children who attended Dunblane Primary School at the time of the massacre there.”

    I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being emotional or having an emotional response. It’s a normal human reaction. And I think that when the tragedy that occurs seems to lack any logic or rationality, it is mindboggling. And we all react differently to death (that’s why I hate it whenever criminal prosecutions seem based on nothing more than the emotional reactions of the defendant…but that’s another topic for another rant). I’m as shocked and as horrified as you are and it saddens me to think how much life was wasted because of the depraved motives of one selfish individual.

  50. @ Amber Star

    “This is a political site & not really the place for personal, emotional reactions.

    By way of explanation, some of us have become interweb friends & the temptation to share thoughts with the community here is too strong to be easily over-come.”

    I think a lot of blogs are that way. That’s why I gave Old Nat a link to a nutritionist’s blog the other day for advice on diet and what those with a propensity for obesity should do.

    I don’t think anyone here has attempted to politicize what happenned. What I see often occur (and I can’t stand it) is when these types of tragedies occur, all the various talking heads on tv come out and start using the tragedy as a political opportunity to advance their agenda. Like when the Virginia Tech massacre happenned in 2007, I was extremely upset but I was momentarily snapped out of my despondency and into anger watching these various gun nuts and gun control crusaders start arguing with each other about the merits of guns laws (or not thaving them).

    “Yes, we still don’t have a body count but we’re already speculating on which presidential campaign this will help or hurt.” Because for some people, there’s nothing better than a massive tragedy with which to to start using as a political tool. I wanted to reach into the tv set, slap these people, and yell at them ‘THIS IS NOT THE TIME OR THE PLACE!”

1 2