There is a second poll for the Feltham & Heston by-election, this time by Survation in the Mail on Sunday. Topline figures are CON 29%, LAB 53%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 7%. The figures for Labour and the Conservatives are very similar to the Populus(?) Feltham & Heston poll for Lord Ashcroft earlier in the week, which had the Conservatives on 30% and Labour on 52%, the difference being on the Lib Dems and UKIP.

Survation also have GB voting intention figures in the Mail on Sunday, conducted after the veto and showing CON 35%, LAB 35%, LDEM 14%. Since Survation’s last poll at the end of November the Conservatives are up 3, Labour up 1, the Lib Dems up 2, and others presumably down 6, but Survation’s previous poll was the one that included minor parties in the main prompt and showed them at 22%… I suspect the changes here may be a result of going back to more usual methodology.


151 Responses to “A second Feltham & Heston by-election poll”

1 2 3 4
  1. Yay! First!

  2. I think that these figures are very close to what will actually happen on the night. I’m always a bit sceptical about by-election polls but this one just feels right. What will be interesting here (or at least for the anoraks!) will be the battle for third place.

  3. Anthony, do you know when the fieldwork for this was conducted? Pre- or post- veto?

  4. Where is Brumhilda Maria de Navasques Latika Silva di Francesci, I thought s/he would be first

  5. Stanley:
    Anthony, do you know when the fieldwork for this was conducted? Pre- or post- veto?

    Post. Started yesterday evening. It wasn’t commissioned until late in the day.

  6. I suspect most people’s predictions and polls are accurate.
    Labour should get about 50%,
    the Tories about 30%
    and
    the LDs might manage 10
    with UKIP on 5-6%.

    It’s unlilkely to be a comprehensive victory or total disaster for anyone.

  7. RiN

    If your name was as long as “Brumhilda Maria de Navasques Latika Silva di Francesci”, you would probably post more seldom too!

  8. RiN

    Of course, I should have similarly contracted their name to BMdNLdF.

  9. Or even BMdNLSdF

  10. I suspect most people’s predictions and polls are accurate. Labour should get about 50%…….It’s unlilkely to be a comprehensive victory or total disaster for anyone.
    ——————————————
    If Labour gets 50% or more, we will be calling it a comprehensive victory, you can be assured of that. :-)

  11. Amber

    “If Labour gets 50% or more,”

    Don’t be ridiculous. When do we ever see polls suggesting that any party has 50%+ of VI? …….. :-)

  12. @ Old Nat

    Grandson’s 1st steps, more than 50% in a poll… for you, Christmas came early, yes? :-)

  13. Amber

    Indeed! We had a “European Xmas” in NC – like some parts of Europe (including the bit of Germany that my daughter in law’s father’s family came from), gifts are exchanged in early December. When I was a kid, stockings were hung up on Hogmanay, not Xmas Eve.

    There’s a lot to be said for enjoying multiple traditions instead of being locked into a monolithic Anglo-American gestalt!

  14. @Stanley
    “One third of the survey was conducted after Mr Cameron wielded the veto at the Brussels summit.”

    http://m.dailymail.co.uk/mobile/news/article.html?articleID=2072637

  15. Good Morning, woke up to see news about Nick Clegg’s attack on his own leader.

    Surely this is a very important moment in UK politics?

    Should ED have the courage to put down a censure motion?

  16. CHRISLANE1945

    “Nick Clegg’s attack on his own leader.”

    Has Cameron become leader of the LDs? – Not that it would make much difference, I suppose? :-)

  17. Good Morning SCOT NAT.

    Yes. Dave Cameron is leader of the Coalition Party, I think. Until now the Lib Dems have been very obedient members, loyal voting lobby fodder.

    As said earlier in the Advent season Ed Miliband should probably be at the Scottish Office Shadow Under Secretary spokesman, so the Govt should survive! (i dont know how to put those smiley faces on here!)

  18. @ Bill Patrick (from two threads ago)

    “It’s interesting that you say that, because the only major UK party to have ever formally split into a pro-European party and a Eurosceptic party was the Labour party in 1981.”

    It just goes to show you how little I know! :) That said, it may explain why Labour (who I presume were the Euroskeptic party with the Social Democratic Party splinter becoming a pro-European party) never seems too wigged out on Europe issues. Tories always seem to get overly emotional and hyperbolic and impassioned on EU issues while Labour always seems so non-plussed. And I believe it too since Labour seems like the kind of party that loves internal dissention, knock-em-out-drag-em-out fights between factions, dramatic personal power struggles, and making sure the public is aware at all times.

    @ Billy Bob (from two threads ago)

    “I don’t know how much relevance it has but I was pondering this yesterday – you might find the anecdote to be of passing interest.

    A very charming and deeply good person, friend of the family – served in the Far-East during WWII, then a prominent position in the shipping industry.
    We were discussing Europe one day, and he turned to me and said “Very good people, tremendous expertise, but they like to have a Brit in charge … not neccessarily in charge, you know, Chairman sort of thing… to keep everything running along smoothly.”

    I’m not sure I totally understand this anecdote (though I definitely aprpeciate it). Was he talking about his shipping company preffering a British CEO to a European one? Or was he talking about Europeans preffering Brits to be in charge of governmental entities?

    “I wonder whether the post-war settlement (Marshall Plan etc) and W Europe coming within the US sphere of influence, meant that the UK enjoyed a priveleged position which compensated for the loss of Empire.

    Traditional Tories struggle to negotiate new relationships of give-and-take within the EU… I hesitate to say it, but perhaps they should have left this one to Nick Clegg.”

    Did the UK take Marshall Plan money? The Marshall Plan was one of the most ingenious diplomatic and militarily strategic concepts ever created. It’s too bad George Marshall’s name is not known to most Americans anymore but his impact was broad.

    I think the privileged position of the UK after World War II was that Britain had sustained an invasion from Germany and successfully fended Germany off when the rest of Europe fell to them.

    As for leaving Clegg to be the chief negotiator, that might have been a good idea. Nick seems like quite the charmer.

  19. CHRISLANE1945

    Wow! I’ve been away in the US too long, and I’ve become subject to the Rip Van Winkle syndrome, obviously.

    England now has a Coalition Party? That’s news. That LDs are lobby fodder for the Tories isn’t.

  20. SOCIAL LIBERAL.
    Good Morning to you!
    Mr Ernest Bevin was a major architect of the Marshall Aid Plan, as he was for NATO, the UN, the liberation of India, the OEECD, the Berlin Airlift as the Labour Secretary under Major Attlee in our 1945-1951 Government (which has the best record on output, productivity growth, export growth, Govt Budget, employment growth and welfare reform in the History of the UK)

    He left school at the age of 11, beginning his working life as a farm labourer boy. Then he gradually built the T and G Union, and then Churchill made him the Minister for Labour during WW2, after Churchill became PM, following a disastrous Coalition Govt of Tories and Liberals- who had deflated the economy in a time of Depression, and then appeased Nazi Germany.

    But Labour was always more sceptical about Europe than the Tories since 1945. Bevin said he did not want the UK to be run by ‘Black Crows’- referring to catholic priests- since the founders of ‘Europe’ were devout, daily communicants (Monnet, Schumann etc). He made a famous statement about Pandora’s box in context of Europe.
    Labour promised to get out of Europe in the 1983 Election here. They voted against joining in 1972-1973

  21. CHRISLANE1945

    “Ernest Bevin was a major architect of the Marshall Aid Plan”

    You must have read a different set of documents than I did!

    The Marshall Plan was US aid to a devastated Europe (on their own terms, naturally – all countries do that).

    Bevin had no control over the architecture of that aid. Indeed, the US didn’t want to deal with individual European countries, but with a single organisation – hence the creation of the OECD.

    “It is already evident that, before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government. It would be neither fitting nor efficacious for this Government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a program designed to place Europe on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so. The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all European nations.”

  22. SCOT NAT.
    I think you will find on closer examination that Mr Bevin responded to General Marshall’s speech and went to the USA and worked very closely with him to put the structures into place to get the Plan actually realised.

    Brian Brivati’s one volume abridged version of Bullock’s magisterial book shows this in detail.

    Without Bevin it would not have happened.

    Bevin described the Plan was one of the legs he was buidlng for British Foreign Policy, along with the UN, NATO, OEECD, Greece policy, Berlin, and, at home, economic reconstruction, with the collaboration of the Unions.

    He hated Richard (double) Crossman, Herbert Morrison- his own worst enemy- not when I am alive he aint!

    My Mum’s Dad’s hero he was- the founder, as you know, of the Carter’s Union- dock labourers. He was the ‘KC’ for the working man. And he got on well with Winston, despite, because? of their contrasting backgrounds.

    Nearly became Chancellor, but ‘Clem’ switched him with Dalton at the last moment.

    Now Labour’s Foreign Affairs man is someone from Scotland, I think, called Andrew Alexander- he would not be allowed in the building in Mr Bevin’s day. LOL as kids say apparently!

  23. @Dave B,

    Thanks. Surprising, then, that UKIP poll equal to the LDs, considering you would expect some UKIP voters to revert to being Tory after the veto.

  24. Now Labour’s Foreign Affairs man is someone from Scotland, I think, called Andrew Alexander- he would not be allowed in the building in Mr Bevin’s day. LOL as kids say apparently!
    ——————————-
    His name is Douglas Alexander. And I assume that it is Ernest Bevin, of whom you speak.

    As Douglas Alexander is not a contemporary of Bevin’s your point is lost on me.

    FYI, Dougie Alexander was so close to Tony Blair’s Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, that he ran David’s leadership campaign. So, DA was certainly welcome ‘in the building’ whilst Blair was PM.
    8-)

  25. @ John B Dick (from two threads ago)

    “I think you have something there.

    The Conservative C” support which voted for Thatcher (strong leader) but not Major (wimp) is a different tribe.

    You can see them in Spanish bars where they order (in Englsh) their beer (served in pints) and pay for it in pounds while watching English football and playing pub quizzes about soaps and celebs.

    They are recognisable by their beer bellies, builder’s cleavage, tattoos and branded sportswear and the men are dressed that way too. Their natural home is the BNP, but they regard the BNP as losers and say that no party exactly represents their views.”

    These people sound an awful lot like Teabaggers. Frankly, I didn’t know that people like this even existed in England. Are these the people who murdered a Russian in a London park (because they confused him for a German) in 1996 in response to England’s football loss to Germany?

    What I don’t get is the act of ordering in English in Spanish bars. Don’t people think that it’s a little rude to start speaking in English in a country where English is not the spoken language (outside of dealing with hotel staff). Then again, when I was in Barcelona, there were a number of people who randomly spoke French and Russian to me. So it’s not just the English (or even my fellow Americans) who are obnoxious in Spain.

  26. @ Old Nat

    “You must have read a different set of documents than I did!

    The Marshall Plan was US aid to a devastated Europe (on their own terms, naturally – all countries do that).

    Bevin had no control over the architecture of that aid. Indeed, the US didn’t want to deal with individual European countries, but with a single organisation – hence the creation of the OECD.”

    Yeah, I think what I read in my history classes is a lot closer to what you read.

  27. Given the lead that Labour has in this byelection according to the two polls, I think that even with a bounce for the Tories on Cameron’s veto, this won’t swing the seat to the Tories.

  28. AMBER STAR.
    Thanks for your post. yes, Douglas Alexander. The point I was trying to make is that he is not of the calibre of Ernest Bevin, at a very criitcal time for Europe, the UK and ‘The Party’

    SOCIAL LIBERAL and SCOT NAT.
    If you read the literature on Marshall Aid and the OECD you will find the rescue package detail owes so much to Mr Ernest Bevin. Bullock and Brivati write very well on this.

    But Bevin is very under written about, and hardly known by young people in the UK. (He was one of Churchill’s key men after 1940, along side Morrison and Attlee).

    Despite the Gestapo jibe by Winston Churchill, Mr Bevin got on very well with him, and by his actions showed that the Tory Election campaign slogan was a lie.

  29. @ Old Nat

    “Indeed! We had a “European Xmas” in NC – like some parts of Europe (including the bit of Germany that my daughter in law’s father’s family came from), gifts are exchanged in early December. When I was a kid, stockings were hung up on Hogmanay, not Xmas Eve.

    There’s a lot to be said for enjoying multiple traditions instead of being locked into a monolithic Anglo-American gestalt!”

    Uh-oh, are you joining the War on Christmas?

    I’ve never heard of Hogmanay before. But it sounds interesting.

    For some people, Christmas is celebrated as “Movie and Chinese Food Day.” :)

    Btw, it’s refreshing to see you write about DC and NC and not be refering to David Cameron or Nick Clegg.

  30. @ Amber Star

    “FYI, Dougie Alexander was so close to Tony Blair’s Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, that he ran David’s leadership campaign. So, DA was certainly welcome ‘in the building’ whilst Blair was PM.”

    Yeah, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Douglas Alexander. Jim Murphy is better looking. But I don’t think that dilutes any of Alexander’s political skill or ministerial competence. He could be a great Foreign Secretary (though I’m not sure Hillary would have a crush on him like she did with David Milliband).

  31. Crikey !!

    I go to bed early after a week several time zones away and I wake up (early for me given it is a Sunday) and the SH*T has hit the fan within the government.

    “The stinging rebukes reflect Clegg’s recognition that he can no longer take the hits for the coalition and defend policies with which he disagrees. Instead, he has criticised Cameron in a way that will raise questions about the government’s ability to last its five-year term” (Observer)”

    “Nick Clegg is furious that David Cameron has relegated Britain to being the “lonely man of Europe”, as the Prime Minister’s dramatic decision to walk away from a eurozone deal threatens the future of the coalition/ Vince Cable, the Liberal Democratic Business Secretary, raised “serious concerns” that Mr Cameron’s attempt to protect the City of London outweighed the interests of the wider British economy” (IoS)

    Shame that the LD posters here (RiN exception) don’t seem able to finally open their eyes, undraw the curtains and fold up the black-out material and actually *honestly* look at what is going on in this ‘coalition’ and to their party!!

    The Mail-On-Sunday is of course running an instant poll where the great disinterested of the UK (having not looked at the actual detail or facts of the so called ‘veto’) have jumped at the vicarious opportunity to give the thumbs up to a bit of Tory horse-eater bashing (by 62%- 38% = actually not very high: a referendum champaign would whittle that away in short shrift)

    Lets look at what that slightly more engaged constituency- that of business- is thinking though:

    “Yet it was hard to find many business voices supporting the decision this weekend. Sir Martin Sorrell, boss of the multinational advertising group WPP, summed up the concerns of many business leaders when he told the Observer: “Intuitively, it can’t be helpful. I’d rather be inside the tent.” He added that the spat between Britain and the eurozone countries was reminiscent of the kind of internal politics he has had to deal with: “It reminds me of the battles that go on inside companies in our industry between country managers and regional headquarters – it’s really a political battle over power and control.” (Observer)

    Understandable given:

    “Mr Clegg believes the PM’s isolation from the EU’s other 26 member-states now threatens Britain’s relations with the US, weakens protections for the City and puts in jeopardy future foreign investment in the UK.” (IoS

    Hhhhhmmmm……….

  32. @ Chris Lane

    “If you read the literature on Marshall Aid and the OECD you will find the rescue package detail owes so much to Mr Ernest Bevin. Bullock and Brivati write very well on this.”

    Actually, I think that a lot of the rescue package detail is owed to Averell Harriman, who actually managed the distribution of Marshall Plan funds directly in Paris. He would later serve as Governor of New York. He was the father of Pamela Harriman who later served as U.S. Ambassador to France under Bill Clinton (she helped bankroll his campaign).

  33. @ Rob Sheffield

    I think Clegg is overreacting.

    And if this threatens to end the Coalition, Clegg should watch out. Because voters are probably going to be a lot unhappier with diminished government services they cherish, cuts to programs they like, and job losses than they are with Prime Minister standing up for the UK’s independence.

  34. @ChrisLane1945
    SOCIAL LIBERAL and SCOT NAT
    SoCalLiberal and OldNat. :lol:

  35. Socal

    The last thing Cameron wants is for the coalition to collapse and for their to be an election!

    Far from Clegg needing to “be careful” he actually needs to be doing far more of this two-fingers-to-Cameron stuff: for not only party survival reasons but also for the country. The LAST thing this country needs (no matter what an ill informed majority might want) is to f*ck with our central role in Europe.

    Originally Cameron knew this and that was his aim…..but then his sceptic and phobic right flank got the better of him- there are even rumours he was told he would get a leadership challenge if he did not find a way to walk out.

    Well that kind of Russian roulette is now-it appears at long last- being played by the LDs: “any more of this up we will not put”. So as Cameron is about to be embraced tomorrow by his 250 or so anti Europe MPs- and faces a formal motion calling for an in/out referendum possibly as early as Tuesday- the LDs are saying clearly that if he gives into the right wing (inside and outside the Tory party) then they may collapse the formal coalition and moved to C&S on general budgetary policy only.

    Dave and George have given the Lib Dems a principled golden opportunity to get out of this unhappy marriage without being seen as wreckers!

    The last person on earth I would want to be over these next frenetic 14 days is David Cameron.

  36. @Rob Sheffield,

    “The Mail-On-Sunday is of course running an instant poll where the great disinterested of the UK (having not looked at the actual detail or facts of the so called ‘veto’) have jumped at the vicarious opportunity to give the thumbs up to a bit of Tory horse-eater bashing (by 62%- 38% = actually not very high: a referendum champaign would whittle that away in short shrift)”

    Why do you assume that the electorate haven’t looked at the details of the veto? They understand that Cameron has stood up for British interests- you can say that they don’t look at the details of anything politically (I’m sure that every candidate in the country is convinced that if the voters really looked at them personally they would vote for them- not true).

    And for each of your Indy/Observer Cameron-bashing quotations, I’m sure I could find a quotation from the Times/Telegraph/Mail that would say the opposite (my apologies for not dramatically producing these quotations here. I am about to go out, but would gladly hand over the reins to anyone who would like to find them for me. Or not.)

    SoCalLiberal is right that NC shouldn’t split the coalition- particularly as I simply do not believe that he did not agree on the UK’s stated objectives at the meeting (i.e. push for safeguards of CoL, if not then don’t sign treaty). DC isn’t stupid- he would make sure that his deputy agreed with him.

    What might have happened is that Nick agreed with David but later changed his mind- but by then David had announced it and didn’t agree to change it. It would fit the D/PMs’ characters.

  37. Rob Sheffield
    ‘Shame that the LD posters here (RiN exception) don’t seem able to finally open their eyes, undraw the curtains and fold up the black-out material and actually *honestly* look at what is going on in this ‘coalition’ and to their party!!’

    Firstly the word ‘honestly’ indicating that we are in some way dishonest. I could except misguided as a reasonable opinion from a political opponent but I do not think you have any evidence of dishonesty. I am surprised as until recently you and the vast majority of posters have been reasonably balanced in your partisanship.

    True you suggested, quite wrongly as it turned out that the figures I gave for November by-elections was wrong and that the LIb Dem notice board could not be trusted. Yes, I could have been clearer that I was talking about a recent event; however I thought that was obvious. Besides you have asked time period rather than jump to the wrong conclusion. But silence on that just more attack on the integrity of LD posters other than RinN.

    I for one am questioning the Lib Dems leader’s position and the Coalition. I am very concerned that if the EU and EZ do not reform themselves, especially in terms of corruption, poor governance based upon ignoring the advice of external and internal audit, it will ultimately fall apart anyway. These professionals are equally isolated as the UK. I cannot understand how any Party or evenn how any poster can ignore this.

    Yes the LDs are strongly pro EU but that does not excuse us ignoring serious mal practice.

    I am not going to rush off to join the Tories or Labour; why should I. But I am a little worried that a showdown and LDs siding against the Tories and bringing the Government down, will result in a huge Tory majority in the GE and for the first time I fear for the seats of even our most dedicated MPs.

    I have always admitted we got it wrong on tuition fees; damaging support from the left side of the Party, I hope we are not going to alienate our other remaining supporters.

  38. Stanley
    ‘Why do you assume that the electorate haven’t looked at the details of the veto? They understand that Cameron has stood up for British interests-‘

    I have not read many of your posts but they are refreshing, and I hope there are many more.

    Thinking about it I should not be too irritated by RS’s attack on our integrity in view of the fact he is a bit sniffy about much of the British electorate.

  39. @ Stanley

    “……..considering you would expect some UKIP voters to revert to being Tory after the veto.”

    On the contrary, I suspect it will just encourage them as they can now scent a victory for their cause.

  40. SOCALLIBERAL
    ‘And if this threatens to end the Coalition, Clegg should watch out. Because voters are probably going to be a lot unhappier with diminished government services they cherish, cuts to programs they like, and job losses than they are with Prime Minister standing up for the UK’s independence.’

    No one could ever accuse you of not being true to your principles and saying it as it is; but then you are a SOCALLIBERAL and not a LD. But well done on your post.

  41. Tony Dean

    ‘On the contrary, I suspect it will just encourage them as they can now scent a victory for their cause.’

    I think it could go either way; I am not sure that the majority of UKIP voters, as opposed to politicians want more than to challenge some ideals they feel were forced on them. If one of the major Parties takes a firm stand, and hopefully two then they may be won round. I am not sure either way.

  42. Henry

    I’d seriously consider joining the Tories: indeed your posts (their tone and content) have long suggested this. It is the opposite of RiN who has suggested he might well consider the greens.

    The LDs are finally sticking up for their principles (note “their” rather than “your”) and this becomes the first time you question them!

    Telling Henry very telling.

    PS the LD are running at a net LOSS of council seats in 2011- that is the metric that counts = is the only honest benchmark.

    Not choosing a particular start date in order to spuriously justify an incorrect assertion.

  43. OldNat
    ‘England now has a Coalition Party? That’s news. That LDs are lobby fodder for the Tories isn’t.’

    I am disappointed and a little surprised.

  44. @ Rob Sheffield

    “…….then they may collapse the formal coalition and moved to C&S on general budgetary policy only.”

    Yeah! And get to keep the old 650 boundaries to fight the election on! I suspect a number of strategists are telling Clegg to “go for it”?

  45. Stanley

    I like you to try and find quotes in the ST MOS that purport to be from the DPM and other senior LDs and which contradict the reports in the IoS and the Ob.

    Because you won’t. Just watching the Murdochian SN discuss what this split means for the government and what “Cleggs vitriol” means for relations between the PM and the DPM.

  46. 62/38 – that’s not enough on a knee-jerk. 80/20 is what i would have suspected. Perhaps the British voters are privately a little nervous about it. Given a 4 week GE this “advantage” could whittle away to the “Four weeks to save the Pound” levels of support. Con strategists must be nervous that it is as tight as 62/38?

  47. @ Rob Sheffield

    “(no matter what an ill informed majority might want)”

    Oh dear! Bang goes the ‘will of the majority’ thing again!

  48. Rob Sheffield

    You have no more integrity than any other poster and the way you breach a key principle of the site by slagging off other posters, in particular the few LDs, shows something rather nasty. General Labour posters are in a huge majority on this site but show due courtesy to other posters with whom they disagree and then there are bullies.

  49. FrankG
    ‘Oh dear! Bang goes the ‘will of the majority’ thing again!’

    Point well made in terms of democracy. At least it shows he has not just directed his vitriol at me and a couple of other posters.

  50. Tony Dean

    ‘Yeah! And get to keep the old 650 boundaries to fight the election on! I suspect a number of strategists are telling Clegg to “go for it”?’

    You always make such sound points. A bit of lateral thinking. You really have me worried, Tony.

1 2 3 4