The monthly online ComRes poll for the Sunday Indy and Sunday Mirror is out tonight and has topline figures, with changes from ComRes’s last online poll a month ago, of CON 37%(-2), LAB 40%(+2), LDEM 10%(nc), Others 13%(nc). The shift towards Labour backs up what we’ve seen in the recent YouGov daily polls, of Labour pulling into a small lead after a period of being neck and neck.

A small methodology note, ComRes have been experimenting with some tweaks to how they deal with likelihood to vote. Looking at the full tabs here, ComRes appear to have changed the way they filter by likelihood to vote for smaller parties. For people who say they will vote for Con, Lab or Lib Dem they are still including everyone who rates their chances of voting at 5/10 or more, but for smaller parties like UKIP, BNP and Greens they are only including those who say they are 10/10 certain to vote.

UPDATE: Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 38%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%. I will put up a full report tomorrow.


65 Responses to “ComRes/Indy on Sunday – CON 37, LAB 40, LD 10”

1 2
  1. After 5 years of coalition (if it lasts that long),the country will think twice about voting in a hung Parliament again…They might just swing to whichever party is leading

    The two parties haven`t done coalition governments a favour by their open arguments

  2. Z
    AW.
    Thanks anyway. Lord knows that I transgress often enough in my enthusiasm, without accidentally triggering some trapdoor by typing a taboo word!

    On second thoughts, maybe your filter can tell when someone has been woken up by his bairns at 05:30 on a Sunday morning and may be particularly abrasive and short-tempered, so chucks his postings into moderation as a precaution…

  3. It’s quite interesting to see some of the right wing press and blogs reaction to the various reports about the budget.

    There are quite a few people now going around saying that Sunday trading reform, a cut in 50p tax rate and the reduction of public sector salaries in poorer areas are transformational for the UK private sector.

    Sadly, not only are these people mistaken, but the fact that they think this demonstrates just how poorly the right seem to understand the workings of the economy.
    While there may be some benefits around the margins from the move away from national pay rates, and some minor benefit might accrue from the tax rate change in terms of avoiding off shoring of income, the Sunday trading laws however, will have minimal impact on the real economy, which is the bit where we need to actually make stuff, rather than just go shopping.

    The contrast with Germany is stark. I doubt the Germans spend too much time in their economic planning meetings worrying about how long the shops are open. What they focus on is the number of highly trained graduates, specific industrial skills training, investment reliefs for companies, R&D and providing a stable environment for business to flourish in. As others have pointed out, Osborne still seems a million miles away from understanding the economy, let alone crafting a reasoned set of policies for it.

    I don’t know if @Colin is stalking the board at present, but one interesting bit of budget speculation is the reports that Osborne is going to lock in a tax allowance on the cost of decommissioning north sea oil platforms so it becomes a permanent contract that can’t be altered by incoming governments. By providing this he hopes companies will invest more in the industry. (One of his very few attempts to understand industry).

    Although it is being touted as ‘cost free’ that’s nonsense – it costs around £1-5b pa I understand – it’s just that this won’t add to the cost.

    I know you don’t like subsidies to the wind industry, so I hope you can also criticise in equal measure this direct subsidy to the oil industry. There are enormous subsidies to oil and gas, coal and nuclear industries in various forms. It’s just that they are harder to spot than those for renewables.

  4. @LeftLampton

    Interesting analysis, but I don’t agree our situation completely fits the 70s. For one the economic debate now, in both the political world and in terms of public mood is far too complex to have the kind of parallels with the clear, straightforward idealogical shift in consensus that we saw in the 70s, and even in the early postwar years. The debate becomes even more complex when you add in socio-economic factors. Furthermore, in the 70s we had an oil not a debt crisis, or even a banking crisis.

    Jim Callaghan was pretty popular, had had ratings in positive ground, whereas Cameron is not neccessarily popular in that sense. Thatcher’s ratings were pretty modest at about minus 10 to minus 15, so she wasn’t particuarly unpopular; she was just wasn’t massively popular. By contrast Miliband (whose ratings so far seem to be in the mid to early minus forties) in definetly unpopular. While the gap shouldn’t be dismissed, the overall image matters much more than that.

    Thatcher’s issues with image could also be addressed pretty easily. Also she had to do was take the hats off and adjust the pitch of her voice. Miliband’s voice can’t really be done much about, beyond sounding slightly less whiney. And image wise, (not being rude) but Miliband’s facial features (i.e. looking a bit like Wallace) are the main factor in him looking wierd, which he can’t change either. Then there’s the fact that we live in the a 24 hour news world were opinions are made up and hardened fairly quickly. This was not the case in the 70s.

    So the only points on simlarities on the 70s are on VI and APPR. You could find simlarities with our situation in the early 80s in terms of a government dishing our tough economic measures, a divided government and opposotion (and unpopular opposition leader) or even in the late 80s where Lab benefitted from the collapse in the SDP-Lib Alliance vote due to the merger. Or even the early 1990s, were the polls themselves were pretty close, but Kinnock wasn’t rated whereas Major was (and it was in a time of economic hardship too).

  5. Alec

    Thanks for your mention :-)

    Re the oil taxation speculation-I guess this sort of thing would be an attempt at redressing the uproar he caused in the industry in a previous budget.

    It isn’t subsidy per se I object to on wind turbines It is -as for all government expenditure-effectiveness.

    In the case of wind power ( certainly on-shore wind ) the subsidy is equal to the current wholesale price of electricity. ie 50% of this sector’s revenue is from the state enforced subsidy paid by the consumer.
    I can only presume that without this ludicrous level of support, this industry, whose turbines generate such pathetically small quantities of electricity, would in fact go bust.

    In today’s ST is an article about the need to store wind generated electricity if it’s unpredictable intermittence & variability is not to render it useless.

    THe proposal-from the chief scientist at DECC-is for giant hydro schemes like Dinorwig in Snowdonia . Sites like Loch Lomond, Loch Sloy, a variety of mountains & sea cliff hanging valleys are suggested.

    I don’t know if you have seen Dinorwig. I have, & the thought of more mountains being excavated & dammed , in a further desperate effort to make the massively subsidised wind turbine fiasco make some contribution to our power needs, is utterly depressing.

    …and that’s before you start considering transmission lines from remote sites.

    Also I object to the already wealthy landowners who are the recipients of this largesse , plastering our places of beauty & wilderness with these monstrosities.

    RE Germany-GO made an interesting comment on Marr this morning.

    He had been told by a German company operating in UK that in Germany, the time required to get new infrastructure through planning regs is one third of that in UK.

    Of course this must always be a balance between environmental protection & economic growth.

    But the contrast between that disparity ( it was about a new warehouse) , and the seeming ease with which useless wind farms are built is ridiculous.

  6. ALEC

    I remember you talking about Ken releasing his tax records…Given the constant querying of his tax arrangements and the impression of sleeze it is creating,I think he should release it and challenge Boris to do the same

  7. Alec

    The DECC guy proposes 12 new sites for pumped storage systems, each storing 10 times the energy stored in Dinorwig.

  8. @REDRIDING

    “A hung Parliament post 2015 with 10 Lib Dems, the power would be held by the SNP – and I don’t think the SNP could risk keeping the Tories in Power – much as they hate Labour in Scotland esp as any DevoMax deal from the Tories would result in a massive cull of Scottish Westminster seats.”

    There’s still a small matter of a referendum in 2014 first, and before that the potential for the coalition to sweeten the economic medicine being given to the people, in 2012, 13 and 14.

    In the past year alone we have seen the demise of Cameron, the resurgence of Cameron, the demise of Miliband and possibly a small resurgence of Miliband (I tend to attribute the polling more to anti-government, rather than pro-opposition at present.

    2015 is a very long way away. We’re not quite halfway through this parliament, and there will be local elections, by-elections and lots more before that to test the water.

  9. Colin

    RE infrastructure planning

    Apples and pears I’m afraid- something that GO often deploys to confuse an issue and make an invalid point.

    MIP in Germany is retained at the Federal level- in order some believe to avoid or marginalise those pesky nimbys= the country has a much more active Green base than we do.

    If an applicant is getting held up in the UK- especially over something controversial locally (like having a massive warehouse and attendant early morning / late night deliveries built at the bottom of your garden) then that’s because the LPA have received a bucket load of objections. That is Localism in essence.

    Interestingly the Brown government tried to copy the German approach…..to howls of protest from yes you have guessed it- the Tories- who have since abolish the IPC- designed to supersede local objections and bring about faster IP decisions!

    Democracy is what slows up the planning process: NOT the system itself.

    You can make the system faster by making it less democratic or by utilising faux economic instruments that rely on householder entrrpreneurial ability/ willingness to pay (such as that proposed by the Adam smith institute or by Tim Leunig prounounced Looney) and which exclude those who can’t/ won’t.

    But yes planning is an easy lazy target for people like Osborne.

  10. @STATGEEK

    It is a long way to go as you say.

    With a PM leading the leader of the opposition by 20+ points in the best PM polls but the opposition just ahead in the polls there is no way the opposition can think they will win.

    However the picture I have just painted is the one from the summer of 2007 with Brown up to 24 points ahead in the best PM polls. It does make me just a little sceptical about all ofthis talk that Labour are unelectable under EM.

  11. ROB

    Thanks

    What a minefield the planning laws are .

  12. @Colin – I’ve not seen the DECC report so i can’t really comment. Interestingly, there is underway already a major scheme to develop a pan European network of huge capacity grid interconnectors that will be capable of transporting power along the western seaboard, into the Baltic and across the Med to and from North Africa. This will enable the large scale uptake of wind power (particularly off shore) on a continental scale, while providing the necessary balancing of the gross output.

    On the planning issues, I’ve always found it a little unfair that we are compared to other nations as an example of slow planning. We (England, and particularly the south) is one of the most densely populated countries on earth, with conversely one of the most diverse natural habitat patterns. Development planning here is consequently far more difficult.

    I would agree with you though regarding the income paid to wealthy landowners. I oppose many wind farms where I can’t see any real community benefit, but much of my current work is helping very poor communities develop their own wind turbines, usually single or twin medium size types. The ownership and income stays with the communities and can be an absolute bonanza for hard pressed community groups.

    The biggest mistake the UK has made with wind power is to ensure it has been developed almost exclusively by the commercial sector. We are miles behind even places like the US in the field of community owned power generation.

  13. @DaveM

    True, but then there’s also earlier data from 2007 showing underlying attitudes towards Brown overall, which were by largely negative. Brown’s bounce also lasted for about 5 months, whereas Cameron’s ratings have been steady or so for nearly two years now.

  14. AW
    A question about ‘tweaking’ of methodology…

    It seems that there has been a fair bit of tweaking going on by pollsters. But I have the impression that they are done to achieve closer alignment with the polling results obtained by the other pollsters.

    How does a pollster ‘know’ that their tweaking is ‘ok’? And if the tweaking does not radically alter things, how do they measure that it is accurate?

  15. RedRiding @ JIM JAM

    “A hung Parliament post 2015 with 10 Lib Dems, the power would be held by the SNP – and I don’t think the SNP could risk keeping the Tories in Power – much as they hate Labour in Scotland esp as any DevoMax deal from the Tories would result in a massive cull of Scottish Westminster seats.”

    It depends on the price the Tories/Lab are prepared to pay.

    Bernard Shaw asked an actress whether she would have sex with someone for money. She said not.

    “What , not even for a million pounds?” [x 20 today?]

    “Oh well that’s different, she said”

    “Here’s five pounds.”

    “Don’t be disgusting. What sort of woman do you think I am?”

    “We’ve already established that, what we’re doing is negotiating the price.”

    The price of SNP support for Labour to govern England with a minority of English seats would be high as would the price of a devomax deal.

    Difficult choices either way perhaps.

1 2