The full tables for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll are now up here, covering the budget, fuel strikes and party donations.

On the regular leadership trackers there is a sharp fall for David Cameron, down to minus 27 from minus 11 a week ago. This is his lowest approval rating as Prime Minister (and I think as during his time as leader of the opposition too, though I don’t have them all collated in one place. I think his lowest then was minus 26). Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg’s ratings are also down slightly, Miliband to minus 41 (from minus 37), Clegg to minus 53 (from minus 46).

YouGov repeated the overall budget question from last week now there has been a further week for news of the budget to sink in (and for people to row over pasties… a move the poll found 69% in disagreement with). A week ago 24% thought the budget would be good for the economy, 34% bad. That’s now fallen to 13% good, 45% bad.

Turning to the fuel strike, 25% would support a strike by fuel tanker drivers, 52% would oppose it. If it did go ahead, two thirds of people (66%) would support using the army to deliver petrol supplies. On the government’s handling of the strike threat so far, an overwhelming 86% of people think they have handled it badly (59% think they have handled it “very badly”). This includes 78% of Tory voters who think they have handled the strike threat badly.

On party funding and donations, the figures suggest people are equally negative towards both the two main parties. 68% think donors have a lot or a fair amount of influence over Conservative policies, 69% think the same about Labour; only 25% of people trust David Cameron to be honest about his relationships with Conservative donors, only 24% trust Ed Miliband to be honest about his relationships with Labour donors.

68% of people think that British politics are very (21%) or fairly (47%) corrupt, 56% think it is probably true that policies have been changed in exchange for donations, 80% think it is probably true that honours have been given in exchange for donations. On the specifics of the Cruddas case, just over half (53%) think that he was telling the truth and the Tory donors really would get preferential access and influence.

Moving forward, just over half (53%) would support a cap on individual donations to parties, with 63% and 62% supporting caps on business and union donations respectively.


371 Responses to “Full report on the YouGov/Sunday Times survey”

1 2 3 4 5 8
  1. AMBER

    Selective data again, mind the SNP did win 25% on Orkney to Labour’s 5.4%/ :)

    I doubt very much when the vote comes or even before it the islanders will vote to leave Scotland. Possibly 20 years ago but now with the imploding Lib/Dems and not forgetting the SNP may have lost out big time due to two independents standing against the Lib/Dems in May 2011, then I think the good islanders will stay with the homeland which I know would be upsetting for some. ;)

  2. @Amber

    Maybe they would like the option on the ballot of union with Norway :)

    Actually, I can see why the Northern Islanders would want no part in the referendum.

  3. Amber

    But I never expect you to say anything different! Your predictability is what makes you so loveable. :-)

  4. @Green Christian

    “In London, Ken has been very easy to work with (it helps that he’s one of the last remnants of Old Labour”

    From DA in the ST today:

    “…..creates an internal community solidarity that would otherwise be eroded by the modern condition of Britain. Some of this may explain why Ken Livingstone has managed to have a run-in with some of London’s Jews. Not only has he been oddly insensitive to the Jewish community but at the same time he has courted Muslim opinion with a creepy assiduity. This culminated in his speech to the Finsbury Park mosque two weeks ago in which he promised to ‘educate the mass of Londoners’ in the teachings of Islam. Speaking about Mohammed’s last sermon, he said: ‘I want to spend the next four years making sure that every non-Muslim in London knows and understands (its) words.’ It may be that Livingstone has, unnoticed, made similar promises to Jews, Buddhists, Sikhs, Methodists, Mormons, Scientologists and others about their prophets and gurus. But we doubts it, My Precious, don’t we, because we knows there are no voteses in it.”

    I predict Boris will win.

  5. @ Allan Chistie

    I am quite happy for you to rule the Islanders in. The best information which we have is that the vast majority will vote ‘no’ to independence. I’d like those ‘no’ votes to be counted in the general vote – but, for now, I’m just enjoying the things which are, politically speaking, going ‘my’ way.

    But I am a social democrat, therefore a democratic decision by Scotland &/or the Islanders to vote for independence will secure my backing; I’ll be gutted, personally, but then it’s all hands to the wheel to secure as safe a transition as possible.
    8-)

  6. tark but blair supported egypts mubarak long after blair was no longer in government and was a private citizen.

  7. Amber,

    Angus is quite right, an Independent Scotland might well remain in Nato.

    Even if the SNP form a government like the Euro, the Monarchy or even the EU and SNP government might offer a referendum on any of them.

    Right now I doubt the SNP could win a referendum on almost any of them ( I think staying in the EU would be yes).

    But then thats really a core issue; The idea that Scots be allowed to decide these things.

    I am no fan of Nato but given the choice between An Independent Scotland in Nato or remaining in Nato in the UK I’d still take independence.

    If to get a Yes vote we need to offer a referendum on Nato I’ve no problem on that.

    What I have a problem with is the notion that;

    “You shouldn’t vote for Independence because given a free choice Scots might decide to vote to leave Nato.”

    Thats not an argument against Independence thats an argument against democracy… if people are allowed to choose they might make choices I don’t like so we mustn’t give them a choice.

    Its a bit close to saying that democracy is about getting people to vote for what my party want rather than my party should try to do what the people want.

    Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP)

  8. @Peter Cairns – re the SNP wanted to keep the pound but have a different fiscal strategy. That’s what I don’t get, and (as an ex economist) I’m pretty sure Alex Salmond doesn’t really get either if was honest.

    In all practical terms, a currency is a fiscal strategy. As a Scot who lives in England but can be broadly ambivalent about Scottish independence, I wouldn’t accept an independent Scotland sharing my currency without sharing the same fiscal conditions. look to the Eurozone to see what happens.

    If Scotland wants independence, join the Euro (stifles laughter) or get your own currency.

  9. @ Old Nat

    LOL :-)

  10. AMBER

    @ Allan Chistie

    I am quite happy for you to rule the Islanders in. The best information which we have is that the vast majority will vote ‘no’ to independence. I’d like those ‘no’ votes to be counted in the general vote – but, for now, I’m just enjoying the things which are, politically speaking, going ‘my’ way
    _______

    I agree at the “moment” most of the islanders would vote no to independence but I don’t see any evidence that they would want to leave Scotland in the event of a national yes vote. What happens if Greenock votes no but the majority of the country votes yes? I can’t see the Unionists making much of a case over Greenock if you get my drift.

    I’m a social democrat too and that’s why a change of administration in Glasgow would be good for democracy come May. ;)

    Btw new oil fields may be discovered off the Hebrides. I await the independence case of the Outer Hebrides if there are indeed oil fields..Oh and Gold deposits in Leadhills may bring about an independence movement in rural Lanarkshire if they are discovered.. ;) Just kidding btw.

  11. £1million members with £1 each is not the same as £1million from one business or Individual.

    I will never understand how people don’t think meeting with the representative of Millions of people who all pay individually is as bad as 1 person giving the same amount of money as all of them together…

  12. Incidentally Prophet Mohammad’s (PBUH) last sermon has very little which anyone would object to, regardless of faith or religion. It was a universal message about harmony and unity.

    Ken ran with Nicky Gavron in 2000 and I see she is top of Labour’s Top-up list this time which suggests that she will again be a leadung Labour figure if elected and particularly if Ken wins. I’m sure if Ken was any-Jewish, Nicky wouldn’t have tolerated him. The trouble on this score is that Ken’s position on the ME alienates some Jewish people, which is understandable. Also, his failure to apologise when making tactless comments to a Jewish reporter last time also hurt his standing with that community. He needs to address this.

    But Ken remains the most sensitive political figure towards London’s minorities as a whole. He usef to attend most of the community festivals. He genuinely feels comfortable amongst all kinds of different oeoples. And he tends to support these communities wherever they are under attack or being discriminated against.

    But I struggle with DA. When he wad a journalist and subsequebtly (% think) editor of the Indy he held very different views on global politics to those whixh he holds today. He’s a neo-con, who started out as a soxualiat (like most of Blair’s front bench). DA and Ken,are never going,to,agree,on,anything,these,days. So I don’t believe criticism by DA in a Tory rag is going,to do much to sway the election.

    Boris will win for other reasons.

  13. ALEC

    You do know your green counterparts in Scotland support Scottish independence?

    http://tinyurl.com/bt7sjqz

  14. @Allan christie – “I agree at the “moment” most of the islanders would vote no to independence but I don’t see any evidence that they would want to leave Scotland in the event of a national yes vote. ”

    this is a really interesting issue for the SNP. It is exceptionally difficult for separatist groups to argue against other sub groups wishing to separate from their selected geographical unit, which is in many ways one of the key arguments against nationalism in these cases – where does it stop.

    In this case, it’s a real issue for the SNP, as much of their case rests on oil, which might not be theirs if the islands choose a different path. Ultimately, that would be a very funny outcome for those of us south of the border.

  15. ALEC

    @Allan christie – “I agree at the “moment” most of the islanders would vote no to independence but I don’t see any evidence that they would want to leave Scotland in the event of a national yes vote. ”

    this is a really interesting issue for the SNP. It is exceptionally difficult for separatist groups to argue against other sub groups wishing to separate from their selected geographical unit, which is in many ways one of the key arguments against nationalism in these cases – where does it stop.
    ___________

    Indeed, Isle of Man, Wales, Falklands, Channel Islands, N.Ireland, Cornwall, yes where would it all end?

  16. @ Alec

    It’ll be really embarrassing for the SNP when Edinburgh votes to cecede. They’ll have to get a new parliament. ;-)

  17. @Green Christian
    ‘And on the question of whether Labour needs Green support to win Norwich South, you should bear in mind that the Lib Dem vote comes primarily from council wards where the Greens ousted Lib Dem councillors. It’s quite likely that the main change in that constituency will be a significant swing from Lib Dem to Green. Whether that propels us into second place (behind Labour) or first is impossible to say, though.’

    I live in Norwich and am quite clear that Green support at local elections does not translate here into Parliamentary elections – as evidenced by the 2010 result. Labour is very likely to gain outright control of the city council in May , and at the next election will recoup the disillusioned vote which in 2010 switched to both LibDems and Greens.I confidently predict that next time the Greens will be an even more distant fourth place than they were in 2010.

  18. Anyway back on topic…

    “On the regular leadership trackers there is a sharp fall for David Cameron, down to minus 27 from minus 11 a week ago. This is his lowest approval rating as Prime Minister (and I think as during his time as leader of the opposition too, though I don’t have them all collated in one place. I think his lowest then was minus 26). Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg’s ratings are also down slightly, Miliband to minus 41 (from minus 37), Clegg to minus 53 (from minus 46)”

    I doubt even the penguins in Antarctica have experienced figures as low as them. ;)

  19. It could be that Anthony

    1. is taking the night off (quite understandable)
    2. has changed his policy – without telling us
    3. has forgotten his own policy!

    In either case, his general principle should still apply – we are here to discuss the polling evidence.

    As far as Scotland’s constitutional position is concerned, we have nothing new to discuss. Very roughly, a third are for the status quo (no matter how that status quo alters) : a third are for some form of enhanced devolution : a third are for independence.

    Currently, there is much posturing on all sides while the mechanics are debated and both sides seek an advantage. Once the current consultation ends, the SNP will outline their detailed proposals. There may (or may not) be a detailed description from those wanting enhanced devolution, and one or more parties may (or may not) endorse those.

    In the meantime we know as much about the preferred situation of the voters of Orkney or Shetland (they aren’t the same, just because they share a Westminster constituency) as we know about which powers Amber would like to see exercised in Holyrood as opposed to Westminster – we know exactly zero about either.

    When their is some polling to discuss, I’ll join in.

  20. @ NickP
    “If it’s any compensation [forgotten for whom] I get moderated (deservedly) pretty regularly.”

    Note yr recent post on “possessive apostrophe retardation syndrome” has disappeared.
    While I resent you crashing my specialism, I thought it was the evening’s most fascinating & edifying post.

  21. Amber

    You are wrong about Nato. SNP want out

    The SGP would like to know how many are drawn to independence because of Trident.

    The privatisation of NHS will, to the extent to which it reduces government spend, reduce the Scottish parliament’s income. Carried to the limit, it would make the NHS in Scotland unsustainable.

  22. Amber,

    “We have already decided – or have had democratic representation (in many instances > than proportional influence) when these decisions were taken.”

    Well we don’t need elections then if decisions have already been made and we’ve had our say…. Is the Labour party planning to disband soon!

    Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP)

  23. Amber

    The demand for an instant referendum is specious and you know it. A few months ago the UK parties were for not having a referendum at all. Wendy Alexander was booted out because she took her own line. Labour could have forcesd the issue in the last parliament.

    Everybody knows that the SNP want a long campaign to build support, and the Unionists wannt to avoid that.

    Weren’t you arguing the party line before they changed it too?

  24. JOHN B DICK

    While it remains official SNP policy that their policy would be that (should they win an election to govern an independent Scotland) we would leave NATO, I’m one of many in the party who argues that it makes sense to remain in NATO, like Norway.

    If, in future, one or more parties who campaign to become the Scottish Government wanted to include leaving NATO as part of its manifesto, that’s a different matter altogether.

    The idea that (if Scotland votes for independence) every SNP policy would be implemented because (a) the SNP would automatically form the Government and (b) SNP policy would never change is palpable nonsense.

  25. @ Amber Star
    Thanks for the info. Didn’t realise the hornets nest I was stirring up. Was a bit stunned at reading all the comments having just got in.
    Anyway thanks again.

  26. Even though they’ve chosen not to headline them, the columns on the far right of Page 3 of the ComRes poll contain weighted voting intentions of Con 267, Lab 349, LD 79. (Unweighted FWIW is Con 261, Lab 338, LD 84).

    This must be in the absence of a turnout adjustment as there’s nothing on that. Apart from that, are these weighted in the same way as a normal ComRes VI poll?

    (Been away for the weekend, so apologies if this has already been spotted)

  27. @ John B Dick

    I always argue the Party line, if it’s a policy which we’ve arrived at democratically.

    If something is still open for debate then I argue for what I believe in.

    And sometimes, when it’s Old Nat, I just argue for the sake of arguing. :-)

  28. oldnat @ JOHN B DICK

    “The idea that (if Scotland votes for independence) every SNP policy would be implemented because (a) the SNP would automatically form the Government and (b) SNP policy would never change is palpable nonsense.

    Some SNP policies are such that people will vote for independence on account of them because they cannot be delivered with devolution: Trident, NHS, CFP.

    The FM and DFM are quite unequivocal about the NHS. “Never” is a word they actually use, and I do not believe that – in an independent Scotland – SLAB would take a different line on the first two, or get elected if there was a choice.

  29. Amber Star @ John B Dick

    “I always argue the Party line, if it’s a policy which we’ve arrived at democratically.

    If something is still open for debate then I argue for what I believe in.”

    So if you lose the argument within the party, you either argue for something you don’t believe in, or you believe in the infallibility of the party and that you must be in error if you have held an opinion outvoted by a majority of one?

    Now that I know that you either sometimes argue for party policy you believe to be wrong, or change your opinions because you want to conform to the majority view, I know that your opinions are of no value, for they are not your own, and that you are not only an Authoritarian Follower, but knowing that you are, see nothing wrong in that.

  30. @ John B Dick

    I know that your opinions are of no value, for they are not your own, and that you are not only an Authoritarian Follower, but knowing that you are, see nothing wrong in that.
    ——————————-
    Cool, I won’t expect any more @ Ambers from you then.

    Feel free to skip over my posts & not read them, if you consider my opinions to be of no value. :razz:

  31. Amber

    I’m sure that your opinions would be of value. However, if they are determined simply by the votes of others, they probably aren’t.

  32. “Moving forward, just over half (53%) would support a cap on individual donations to parties, with 63% and 62% supporting caps on business and union donations respectively.”

    Not a bad idea. I’m surprised you don’t have this already.

  33. SoCalLiberal

    Unless both sides agree to changes that keep the playing field roughly level nothing will change.

    Labour want to cap personal and business donations while leaving union donations uncapped. Obviously the Tories wouldn’t agree to that until some agreement comes together that leaves the playing field level it won’t change.

    I’m surprised to see that the same number of people think that union donations should be capped as business donations but it does put paid to the theory that somehow union donations are somehow more “fair” or “just” or “valid” in the public eye.

  34. @Alan

    It’s probably because many people do not understand that those that pay the political levy, pay a very small sum and that it is their own individual choice, rather than their TU deciding for them.

  35. @Alan

    Er… Surely you make an inherent mistake in assuming that “the playing field is level” to start with? As has been demonstrated, it is currently very easy for unscrupulous persons to circumvent laws intended to prevent overseas donations. Those who are willing to break the spirit of the laws have a pretty significant advantage over those who do not.

  36. Incidentally, there is a pretty clear solution to me…

    Require that any group; corporation, union or knitting club; to create a separate and distinctly accounted “political fund” if they wish to make donations to a political party. Allow for members to voluntarily donate to this fund, up to a set individual amount per year. Only allow collective political donations to be made from registered “political funds” that may be audited.

    Create the criminal offence of allowing a foreign national to donate to a political party. Adopt existing financial financial laws to cover the handling of “political funds”.

  37. @Raf – “He’s a neo-con…”

    He’s definitely on a journey. For an interminable length of time Guardian readers were treated to DA wrestling parading/wrestling with his conscience over Iraq- but he always came to the same conclusion.

    Rod Liddle, in the midst of a long running spat, rather disgracefully called him a “New Labour catamite” (had to go look that one up).

  38. @ Old Nat

    Polls & consultations have shown that the majority would like the independence referendum to be held as soon as possible.

    That isn’t just a Party line, it’s the people’s line.

    And this is a polling site. Our discussions are driven by how people vote on issues. George Osborne is not ‘doing a bad job’ until the majority in a poll say he is ‘doing a bad job’.

    Does that make us all “Authoritarian Followers” of the ‘tyrannical’ majority? :twisted:

  39. [pops in to see if the off-topic arguments have died down yet]

    [pops out again]

  40. I wonder if the new proposal to resurrect cyberspace monitoring will affect voting intention?

    Will Ed come out against it (just as DC did in opposition?). How can the Lib Dems support such illiberality?

  41. @Phil

    That would suggest a ComRes VI something like
    Con 24%, Lab 31%, LD 7%?

    A back-of-the-fag-packet upgrade might make that
    Con 33%, Lab 43%, LD 10%. (Maths is not my strong point.)

  42. @Nick P

    “wonder if the new proposal to resurrect cyberspace monitoring will affect voting intention?”

    Careful, Theresa May might be monitoring our every word!

  43. BILLY BOB

    “A back-of-the-fag-packet upgrade”

    These days, that is a very expensive way of doing calculations! :-)

  44. Amusing comment on the Guardian CiF

    “Perhaps the Government wants to get to their emails before certain organisations deletes them “

  45. I don’t know if someone has been feeding Nadine Dorres lines or whether she came up with it herself – but it is the most astonishing attack – among a torrent of criticism directed at Cameron and Osborne by the 1922 Committee:

    “At the root of much of the catastrophe we have become is George Osborne. He drives the liberal elite agenda.”

    This has echoes (intentional or not) of 2000, when Hague lurched to the right. The “liberal elite” tag was ostensibly directed against Mandelson, Jay and Blair, but it intensified the Hague-Portillo/Maude infighting.

    Osborne was in fact Hague’s speechwriter at the time and was sent to clear it with Portillo, who demanded that the phrase be cut.

    “I am liberal. And I am a member of the elite.” Portillo told Osborne. But Hague told Osborne “I’m not liberal, nor am I a member of any elite… it stays in… it’s the bit I like best.”

  46. @Old Nat

    Well, at least I’m recycling. ;)

  47. @ Rob Shef, RAF, Billy Bob

    Rob: “For an interminable length of time Guardian readers were treated to DA wrestling parading/wrestling with his conscience over Iraq- but he always came to the same conclusion.”

    I remember Arrogant Aaronovitch in the days before the Feb. 2003 anti-war march, telling everyone that the million “naive” marchers were misguided, that he & his fellow opinion-makers were in a better position to judge the right course of action blah, blah.
    In other words, if you don’t have a privileged access to the media you have no right to express an opinion.

    Odd how such “sophisticated” people end up believing such claptrap.

  48. robbiealive

    I’m afraid he (Aaronovitch) suffered from Blair-love, which meant he had to start twisting his convoluted thinking around enough to justify carpet bombing Baghdad.

    That was quite some real politick.

    I would rather our Government avoided killing people as far as possible. But any colour of Government would have followed Bush into Iraq then…I hope because of Iraq, we might not do so in the future.

  49. @NickP (4.22)

    “But any colour of Government would have followed Bush into Iraq then”

    Nick,
    I would have hoped that the yellows would not have followed Bush but of course they had left of centre leadership then.

1 2 3 4 5 8