YouGov’s daily poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 36%, LAB 40%, LDEM 11% – it’s a lower lead for Labour than we’ve seen in YouGov’s recent polls, but I’ll just leave that with my normal caveats about not reading too much into a single poll. It may be Labour’s increased hackgate lead receeding… or it may just be margin of error, and we’ll find Labour’s lead back to around 8 points tomorrow.

There is not much change from last week in how the political leaders are perceived as having responded to the riots – 45% think Cameron has responded well, 49% badly (from 45% to 49% last week), 42% think Miliband has responded well, 41% badly (from 40% to 40% last week). The standard leadership ratings for Cameron and Miliband remain largely unchanged too.

Most of the questions are still riot related – Almost half (48%) of people think the sentences for rioters are about right, with the remainder more likely to think they are too soft (31%) than too harsh (14%). On the specific case of the two men given 4 years a piece for failing to incite riots through Facebook, 32% think the sentences were too harsh, but 50% think they were right and 13% too soft.

Looking at further measures that have been suggested, 95% would support making those involved help repair the damaged caused, 81% would support naming and shaming those under 18s convicted, 81% would support making those convicted apologise to their victims. 68% would support stopping the welfare benefits of those convicted. On the question of evicting people who are convicted of rioting from council accommodation, 62% of people would support evicting tenants themselves if they involved in the riots, but this drops to only 34% when asked about evicting families whose children were involved in the riots.

Looking at longer term responses to the riots, 56% of people would support the re-introduction of national service, with 32% opposed (there is a strong correlation with age here, two-third of over 60s would support it, under 25s are marginally opposed to it). A national citizen service, requiring compulsory community work for all young people, is more popular – 77% would support it with only 14% opposed. There is less support for the government promoting marriage in the tax and benefit system – 39% think it should, 48% think it should not be the government’s place to promote marriage.

Moving to the topic of tuition fees, only 29% of people think that a university education is worth £9000 a year. However, they are evenly split on whether this means people will be better or worse off financially from going to university. 40% think graduates will still be better off as increased salaries will outweigh the costs of going to university, 42% think graduates will end up worse off.

Finally, on trains 79% of people think current fares represent bad value for money. 47% think the government should maintain rail subsidies, even if this means larger cuts elsewhere. 24% think that the government is right to cut subsidies.

Full tabs are here.


157 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 36, LAB 40, LDEM 11”

1 2 3 4
  1. Damn, just as soon as i posted I noticed AW has opened a thread for the issue.

  2. John B Dick;

    True – I’m not saying that across the board it’s only from Edinburgh and posh parts of Glasgow that students go to Uni. However, there is a massive divide in Scotland, and while some of the best and brightest come from rural Scotland, there are far fewer than come from the schools in Edinburgh, or comparative rural communities in England.

    For example, I come from a rural town, and I was the first one to attend University from my family, who did not fully grasp the concept of what University entails. I was one of three people in my year that went to University, out of almost 100 pupils, not because they weren’t intelligent, but because there was less of a push from parents, teachers and peers to go. Schools in Edinburgh however, push pupils to University, and very few end up choosing other paths. My other half, from rural Yorkshire, along with the vast majority of his class, went to University, and he thought it odd that there were nine people in his class who didn’t go on to Uni.

    Part of it is a cultural thing, and now that the question of tuition fees has been removed, we’re seeing more and more rural students going on to HE, but there is still a divide in University access. There are companies that send students to schools in surrounding areas to promote HE, but outside the cities and large towns, it’s too far to travel, so school pupils don’t benefit if they’re in a rural area.

    I agree that anyone can do it, regardless of where they’re from, but it’s more of a struggle for some than it is for others.

  3. @Colin; @John B Dick

    Thank you: I agree with your points.

    Regards, Martyn

  4. @ John B Dick

    “The premier institute in these islands, requires graduate entry, though it didn’t when I trained. ”

    ICAEW didn’t when I trained and entered-nor does it now I think.

    It’s website describes a route to ACA/FCA ::-

    ” Professional exams +Technical work experience +Structured training in ethics + Initial professional developement =ACA”

    That was the route I took -many years ago :-)

  5. Scotswaehae

    My daughter’s contemporaries in Lewis saw univerisity as an opportunity to leave home and meet larger numbers of potential partners and yes, it would ALSO be an advantage to get a degree at the same time.

    I don’t think I was untypical of my generation in Glasgow in seeing no advantage in residence away from home that could compensate for loss of mother’s home cooking for the price of a bus fare and a half hour commute four times a day.

    I certainly was fortunate at the dining table, but that wasn’t so unusual in these days with stay at home mums and no packaged prepared meals.

  6. @ John B Dick

    “Most just see it as an agreed date in which we can all have our bonfires. In Scotland, of course, we put Margaret Thatcher masks on the guy.”

    Lol. Maybe I should do that with pics of Reagan. I actually am familiar with the history of Scottish bonfires because of Sandra Day O’Connor’s lengthy history of cross burning in Virginia v. Black.

    @ Robert Newark

    “No difference really, except the serfs didn’t have a voice then & AW’s ancestors hadn’t thought about a polling site.

    Having said that, I cheered on the news of OBL’s death. It’s one of the few things Obama has achieved.”

    Lol, true.

    I cheered his death as well though I did not go out in public to look like an idiot on tv.

    It’s a major acheivement though it’s not the only acheivement of Obama. Frankly, he’s done and accomplished and acheived quite a lot in office. But he faces extremely high expectations, which I might add are completely unwarranted given the dearth of past accomplishments.

    @ Steve

    “Time.”

    Lol.

  7. @ Roger Mexico

    “When the Euro first came into existence quite a few businesses offered to take them, usually at a very favourable rate to the themselves. That faded away pretty fast – the customers objected to the rates and the businesses found the monetary gain didn’t outweigh the cost and extra time.

    The only exception is Northern Ireland because Ireland uses the Euro and many shoppers from ‘the South’ go north because prices are cheaper there due to lower VAT and duties among other things. A lot of businesses near the border run completely on dual currencies and I expect that the Euro is widely accepted elsewhere.

    None of this however excuses tipping anyone in the UK in Euros. Not everyone can take holidays (or even go back home) regularly, even if they do they might be going to part of Europe outside the Eurozone. Also many places in the UK ‘pool’ tips, so that causes extra problems. Tipping in Euros in the UK will be greeted with as much enthusiasm as if you did it in the US.

    By the way we’re always told here that using a credit card to pay in a non-local currency when abroad (eg paying in pounds in the Eurozone) works out more expensive.”

    Thank you for this.

    The tipping thing is really offensive when you think about it. You’re giving someone currency that doesn’t work in their own economy, asking them to lower the amount of their tip (because of commissions at currency exchanges), and then you’re assuming they have the ability to travel to Europe. When I worked as a poolboy, I would not have been particularly happy had I received a tip in Pesos or in Canadian Dollars (for the next time you go away!).

    Since stores accepting Euros would decide the exchange rate, they would obviously charge more for an item and would make money off of it. Thus, you would be screwing yourself not to pay in Pounds.

    When you pay in your own currency on a credit card, that’s different because it doesn’t affect the person accepting the card, it just winds up being a fee for the credit card company.

    In any case, I knew I was right. But thank you for clarification.

1 2 3 4