Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 7%. This is the first time YouGov have shown the Labour lead dropping back into single figures since the local elections, and follows a ten point lead yesterday.

I’ll add my normal caveat – it could be the start of YouGov’s bigger Labour leads of up to 14 points that we’ve seen since the local elections falling back a bit… or it could just be normal random sample error.


209 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 34, LAB 42, LDEM 8, UKIP 7”

1 2 3 4 5
  1. SoCal

    According to Wikipedia:

    In the climactic scene [of Stanley Kubrick’s film Spartacus], recaptured slaves are asked to identify Spartacus in exchange for leniency; instead, each slave proclaims himself to be Spartacus, thus sharing his fate. The documentary Trumbo suggests that this scene was meant to dramatize the solidarity of those accused of being Communist sympathizers during the McCarthy Era who refused to implicate others, and thus were blacklisted.

    Many subsequent films, television shows and advertisements have referenced or parodied this iconic scene. One of the most notable is the 1979 film Monty Python’s Life of Brian, which reverses the situation by depicting an entire group undergoing crucifixion all claiming to be Brian, who it has just been announced is eligible for release (“I’m Brian”; “No, I’m Brian”; “I’m Brian and so’s my wife.”)

    I suspect its popularity in Britain is more due to Python than Kubrick. Anyway enjoy the original:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8h_v_our_Q

  2. So my suggestion of Jacob Rees-Mogg as SoS for Wales has reached the ears of the PM?

    Dave, for god’s sake, it was only a joke!

  3. @ChrisLane1945

    “It could be a tipping point in the political history of these times in the UK, although the ‘crisis’ may pass.”

    You like to hedge your bets a little, don’t you? lol

  4. CROSSBAT11

    `You like to hedge your bets a little, don’t you? `

    :) Don`t we all?

  5. Phil,

    I am pretty sure that the Scottish Government will accept the wording put forward by the electoral commission. I have a feeling that the inial “soft” wording was just that a a starting point in an inevitable tussle over the wording.

    If you want a fair question and know the other side will try to drag it their way then start with one that favours your side.

    So far the main opening positions have been on timing, voting age and question. It looks like Cameron has conceded the timing, probably because he has enough on his plate and doesn’t feel he should fight a referendum when he is low in the polls ( or let Labour lead the fight to save the Union when it is high).

    Votes for sixteen and seventeen year olds are still in the balance along with the question. I think we should win the age argument because both the LibDems and SLAB have backed it in the past, but having opposed it so far ( unwisely in my view) the No camp may have alienated part of the younger vote.

    If we come out of the negotiations with our date, our franchise and adding ” or Disagree” to the question I’ll be more than happy.

    Peter.

  6. @TINTED FRINGE

    Any mention of the ‘independent thinktank’?

  7. @PETERCAIRNS

    “I think we should win the age argument because both the LibDems and SLAB have backed it in the past, but having opposed it so far ( unwisely in my view) the No camp may have alienated part of the younger vote.”

    May I ask. What exactly is the ‘Yes’ argument for reducing the voting age? i.e. – Why is it a good thing?

  8. CROSS BAT 11 and SMUKESH and LIZH.
    Years of experience have made me realise that everyting seems to be contingent.
    So I hedge bets.
    No assurance of anything.

  9. @StatGeek –
    “Class is a centre-left thinktank established by Unite and GMB.”

    Quite clearly labelled my post with it – is the implication that the poll is biased?
    If it is biased, is it due to wording, acquiescence or an allegation against YouGov’s methods?

    I do wonder if pollsters ever try to deal with acquiescence by reversing the questions asked for half the respondents – perhaps AW can give us some insight?

  10. @CHRISLANE1945
    `No assurance of anything`

    I agree…A Tory government has the advantage of a favourable press and controls the BBC through the licence fee…And the Labour leader seems particularly keen to keep his distance from the media..We saw in the London mayoral contest,how one`s man weakness is ruthlessly exploited by the media while the other is protected and how it influences elections.At the moment,Leveson seems to ensuring some balance of coverage.

  11. STATGEEK,

    Sixteen year olds, can marry, have sex, join the army, are eligible for benefits in their own right, no longer get child benefit and be prosecuited as adults in the court.

    In pretty much every respect bar voting the law treats them as adults.

    Straight forward really, it’s about fairness and equality.

    Peter.

  12. Firstly 16 year olds can’t marry without parental permission and can’t be anywhere near the front line if they join the army. But that isn’t the point anyway. The point is that if you want to lower the voting age then get a law passed lowering the voting age. You can’t just lower it for the referendum because you’d like to, unless parliament has approved a general lowering of it then it is 18.

  13. Seen on the back of a T-shirt of a person on a bus in sunny Bromley this morning:
    “Youth and talent are no match for age and treachery.”

  14. I hope that by the time the referendum on independence takes place, we all know what the details of what said independence will mean, not the vote and then decide the details, the people should know beforehand what it will really mean… not some guess of what it will mean.

    I would like a say in the relationship between the rest of the union and an independent Scotland… (Our referendum if you like)

    The people of Scotland deserve to know the details, small things like currency or in or out of Europe, military, etc before they vote… don’t they?

  15. tingedfringe

    The Class survey is quite interesting, though it does have the problem like all such surveys of there being no priorities between the various policies. Still I suspect that the Sunday Times would be less likely to want to know about a 75% top rate of tax so all information is useful.

    The poll seems to have been part of the YouGov daily for 21-22 May. Presumably the tables will appear on the YouGov archive eventually, but they tend not to be too quick if the data has been published elsewhere.

    One slight surprise is that the group with the greatest affinity for “Right-wing” policies is the under 25s. This may be because of the usual YouGov problem of a small sample size in that group (97 upweighted to 209). Though their VI was 44-31 to Labour that’s if anything low for this group, and the 8% UKIP is atypical for the under 25s. But I wonder as well if it also reflects how this group will have grown up hearing the conventional market-worshipping wisdom and many are are regurgitating it.

  16. RAF

    I first saw that written on the back of my mate’s Scotland jersey before a rugby game against an experienced England – needless to say he was proved correct

  17. Quincel,

    You don’t need consent in Scotland,

    http://www.weddings.co.uk/info/scotland.htm

    Even if you can’t fight you can still get killed, either in training or by an attack and you are also deemed old enough to pledge to fight and die in two years time.

    As to legislation the SNP policy is for 16 year olds to vote in all elections but control of elections resides with Westminster. We have lowered the age to stand as a Councillor to 18.

    One of the reasons the SNP want the Scottish Parliment to run the referendum is because we think that it should run all Scottish elections not Westminster.

    At the moment we have a Scottish Parliament bringing forward a referendum bill that will almost certainly include votes for 16 year olds and I think it will pass.

    We can’t bring in votes for 16 year olds for Holyrood or Westminster because they are controlled by Westminster.

    Jim,

    If you wait for that you would never have a vote on anything… At any election you could claim that. We can’t vote at Westminster in 2015 until we know the exact detail of the governments spending plans for 2020 and what British and Eurozone interest rates will be.

    You agree things in principle and then do the detail. Do the detail first is the standard defence of people who oppose the principle.

    That really is where the debate sits, between;

    “The Devil is in the Detail” and “A Self Evident Truth”

    The Games Afoot.

    Peter.

  18. One slight surprise is that the group with the greatest affinity for “Right-wing” policies is the under 25s.
    ————————-
    Youth & treachery! A frightening combination?

  19. @ Peter Cairns

    The SNP are obviously in favour of lowering the age at which you can:
    1. Drive on public roads; &
    2. Drink alcohol (if you are wealthy enough).

    I haven’t actually seen those things in the SNP policy platform, so perhaps you can point me to a link or policy statement on these matters.
    8-)

  20. Amber,

    What the legal drinking and driving ages are in Scotland will be determined in Scotland post Independence by the government of the day.

    At the moment there is a debate over what the legal drinking age should be and with the Scotland Bill becoming law the drink drive limit too.

    The legal age for alcohol has more to do with the health effects of alcohol on young people rather than just age. There are good reasons why young people might be more susceptible to alcohol but it is an issue of physical as opposed to mental capability.

    You can get a driving licence at 18….. But not if you are blind.
    I am quite open to looking at the eligibility age for a driving licence if there is a demand for it, but at the moment unlike the drink drive limit that we can now control the power to change it remains at Westminster……..

    But in an Independent Scotland, well we can have our own debate and make our own choice.

    There are good health and safety reasons for limiting drink and drive ages, I can’t think of a good health related reason not to vote at sixteen, other than dangerous exposure at an early age to British politicians!

    Peter.

  21. @ Peter Cairns

    A typically SNP answer; silly me for expecting joined up policy from the SNP.

    But back to polling. The sample size for young people in the YG is low but younger people seem to be least in favour of independence (that’s also the outcome in MORI polls & moreso when 16 & 17 year olds are included, if my memory serves).

    I don’t think that the SNP will, at the end of the day, push very hard for 16 & 17 year olds to be voting in the referendum.
    8-)

  22. I’ve got no objection to lowering the voting age to 16 (in fact you could put a good argument that they have a better case for the vote than the very old, after all it’s their future).

    But I seem to recall that one of the big arguments against allowing expat Scots to vote was around the electoral register. Does the Scottish ER already contain all 16 year olds (it would actually need to include all 15 year olds) or will there be a need to create a new one? What would be the position of under 18s on the ER with regard to the DPA 1998? If you’re going to extend the vote to 16 year olds then why not to expats? I still like the Rugby rule idea: if you’re eligible to play Rugby for Scotland you should be eligible to have your say on independence (pro or anti). As an aside this would cover my dad, but not me.

  23. @TINTED FRINGE

    Thanks. I glanced quickly through it. Not being aware of a thinktank called ‘Class’, I missed it. I wasn’t suggesting any sort of bias. It’s generally well known that all thinktanks have some form of bias, regardless of political affiliations.

  24. Statgeek
    Ah – Sorry.
    Usually when these sorts of polls are done (whether in favour or against something), usually someone shouts ‘Bias!’, depending on whether they like the result or not, both left and right.
    So apologies again.

  25. @ PETERCAIRNS

    I put it to you that all of the above age limits on 16 year olds be raised to 18 years of age. The ability bump uglies, get hitched, point a rifle or break the law is no basis for having the right to do so.

    I’m generally for the idea of no representation without taxation though. I think it’s fair that that the people who pay into the pot get the right to say how the pot is emptied.

  26. Amber,

    What’s not joined up about eligibility at 16 unless their is a valid reason against it. Alcohol is harmful to young people seems a pretty valid reason.

    If anything isn’t joined up it is you can get married and have a cild at 17 but can’t vote. I tend to think that it takes more responsibility to raise a child than put an x in a box.

    As to typical SNP answer, well it was open and honest , without being patronising or aggressive, so I am happy with that.

    As to pushing for it, I think the positive, apart from the principle being sound, is that, for those 16 & 17 year olds who do vote, I suspect they will be more inclined to vote for the people who thought they should be allowed too than those who thought they weren’t!

    We are after all the positive party.

    Peter.

  27. “I’m generally for the idea of no representation without taxation though”
    Does that mean that purchases made by children should be exempt from sales tax?
    How about those below the income tax threshold?
    Should you get more voting power with the more you pay?
    How about corporations?
    How about those on contribution-based unemployment or those on benefits due to inability to work?
    How about single employee households?

    How about legislative issues? That’s something distinct from ‘how the pot is emptied’ (aka budgetary issues) – would that then require a second house of representatives? [1]

    Etc

    [1] I am actually in favour of separating the legislative body from a house of representatives for fiscal issues – it would allow the splitting of social from economic policy and allow more accurate representation (someone could vote Tory on social issues but Labour for fiscal – in the case of Red-Tories/Blue Labourites).

  28. “No representation without taxation” stands up to very little examination in a progressive society. It was the thinking behind the poll tax.

    Equally it often appears that billionaires, often domiciled overseas, practically own our Government and they pay no tax whatever (and still have the damn cheek to demand the welfare bill should be cut and workers’ rights torn up).

  29. @TINTEND FRINGE

    In order…

    No; The moeny has already been taxed before reaching the child

    They will pay tax via VAT and/or NI (basically a tax) or even council tax.

    No. One vote each.

    If anything corporations have too much lobbyong power as it is. Do you suggest they have voting rights too?

    Suggst if not payed PAYE in the last five years, no vote. That’s reasonable. Unable to work; not part of the argument. They may well pay tax in other ways, but we’re talking of a tiny percentage of the population.

    What about single employee households? What’s special about them?

  30. Statgeek,

    If post Independence them government of the day has a mandate to bring in everything at 18, then that’s fine by me, it’s called democracy.

    As to ” No Representation without Taxation”

    Does that mean if I don’t register to vote I don’t need to pay tax? I would expect registration to drop off quite quickly if it did!

    As to those who don’t pay tax,so no votes for Kids, Pensioners, the unemployed, poor people or housewifes(husbands).

    Democracy on a limited franchise isn’t exactly progressive is it.

    Peter.

  31. @ Peter Cairns

    If anything isn’t joined up it is you can get married and have a cild at 17 but can’t vote. I tend to think that it takes more responsibility to raise a child than put an x in a box.
    ——————————–
    It takes more responsibility to vote than it does to drink alcohol (one would hope) but you still want that to only be available to older & wealthier people.
    8-)

  32. Everybody who buys a VAT rated item in the UK & doesn’t claim it back could be said to be a UK tax-payer. How silly do we want this to discussion to be? :roll:

  33. @ Peter Cairns

    Sixteen year olds, can marry, have sex, join the army, are eligible for benefits in their own right, no longer get child benefit and be prosecuited as adults in the court.

    ——————————————————–

    So are you also campaigning for them to be able to buy a drink in a pub?

  34. There are good health and safety reasons for limiting drink and drive ages, I can’t think of a good health related reason not to vote at sixteen, other than dangerous exposure at an early age to British politicians!

    ————————————–

    hmm. I think you’ve lost the argument Peter. 8-)

  35. @Peter Cairns

    I think it’s pretty clear you want 16yr olds to vote cos they are more likely to vote SNP.

  36. @PETER CAIRNS

    No, heh!

    Some believe ‘no taxation without representation’, which is right and proper. The opposite is not unreasonable. Pensioners will have paid tax or are paying it in other forms. For the unemplyed, see another post above on five years.

    “Democracy on a limited franchise isn’t exactly progressive is it.”

    One should have a responsibility to society, but not through state-sponsorship.

  37. Interesting piece in the Speccie where Nigel Farage says UKIP are considering joining with some conservative associations at the next election and running joint Tory-UKIP candidates. Given the continuing strength of ATTAUK this could potentially be quite damaging to Labour in some places. One to watch closely.

    @roger Mexico

    I deal with the 18-25 year old cohort on a daily basis and I can tell you they are strongly individualistic (albeit in a peculiarly uniform way!) and this combines with an acute self centred sense of entitlement.

    Google ‘generation y’ ‘generation next’ ‘generation why’ etc etc

    @’class’ poll

    IMHO a rather obvious (and rather shameless) attempt by the Unions concerned to influence the labour policy review and claim (despite the large majority for ‘reducing the deficit’) there is widespread public support for McDonnell and his ‘radical alternative to austerity’ manifesto with ideas like a top rate of 75%. Not going anywhere IMO- ‘blue labour’ and ‘black labour’ ideas will dominate the next manifesto whereas Mcdonnells ‘red labour’ (and ‘purple labour’ hyper-blairism for that matter) will largely be swept aside.

    I’ll stick to the YG ‘most important policy topic’ tracker along with the ITN comres cuts index!

  38. Amber,

    I am not sure it takes that much responsibility to vote, but even if it does the reason for restricting the access to alcohol to the young is related to public health not public representation.

    We limit sales of alcohol to over eighteens, we limit sales of heroin to everyone! Over 18’s may be responsible adults but society has decided that class A drugs shouldn’t be legal.

    My argument, which I thought was clear, was that a higher age for buying drink than voting is due to the detrimental effects of alcohol on young people.

    Now libertarians who oppose things like the smoking ban might argue it is a matter of choice and that it should be the right of every sixteen year old to damage their health if they want.

    As to only the wealthy, we have debated minimum pricing now for six years in Parliament and it was passed this week with the support of both Labour and the LibDems.

    50p a unit will push a bottle of wine up to about a fiver and will have most impact on the cheapest drinks which all the medical evidence shows do the most damage.

    You may not agree with that but three quarters of those elected a year or so back to Holyrood in a proportional system do.

    Like I said; that’s democracy.

    Valerie,

    As I said earlier, alcohol is a health issue and 16 for adult responsibility is fine unless you can come up with a valid reason against.

    I think health can be a valid reason.

    Equally with Driving you can argue that it involves the safety of others so their concerns need to be addressed.

    There is nothing wrong with different ages depending on circumstances and we happen to think that at 16 you can cope with voting.

    Like votes for prisoners do you make it based on the crime or just a blanket ban. 16 for everything might be clear cut, but it might not be the best solution.

    Equally all the stats say that 16 year olds aren’t that likely to vote SNP.

    Statgeek,

    “One should have a responsibility to society, but not through state-sponsorship.”

    How can you show that responsibility at the ballot box if you are barred from voting because you have a low income.

    I know; why not take your argument to its natural conclusion and charge people to vote, say £10 each.

    We could use the money to pay MP’s, that way we could see what the public thought they were worth.

    Even better if you do think it should be based on what people contribute, pay for £20 and you could have 2 votes, for £2million, 2 million……

    Peter.

  39. @Rob Sheffield – “joint Tory-UKIP candidates… this could potentially be quite damaging to Labour in some places.”

    Isn’t this a ploy to split off some Con associations, in the same way they are recuiting within the Con youth wing? (Connor Burns: “… some of the best and brightest people I have known in the youth wings of the Conservative movement have left us for UKIP.”)

    Given the strongly anti-Cameron remarks (“he’s a committed warmist… committed to the EU… completely turned his back on grammar schools”) contained in Farage’s appeal, the archpriests of Conservativism see this as “mischief-making”.

    Burns also flags up a recent written ministerial statement about electoral administration which is seen as paving the way for joint candidates – coalition candidates, not Con/UKIP candidates:

    h
    ttp://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2012/05/conor-burns-mp-my-passionate-belief-in-the-conservative-party-and-my-concerns-about-todays-electoral.html

  40. @ Peter

    You say that 16 year olds are too young to take responsibility for their own health.

    The nation’s health policy: Yes
    Their own health: No
    8-)

  41. So, the topic is *always* Scottish independence…again?

  42. The Tory Party to have an electoral pact with UKIP? I wish… because it would pretty much guarantee the LibDems seriously considering a pact with Labour.

    On 2010 vote:
    UKIP + Tory = ~38%
    Labour + LD = ~53%
    8-)

  43. Steve,

    Apologies.

    It started with the different strategies the two two camps are adopting and how it will develop over the next two years somehow got sidetracked on to the merits of votes for 16 year olds.

    I think it departed at the point where we discussed how both sides have set out favourable positions for themselves knowing they would need to compromise and who we thought had won the first round over the date. Votes for 16year olds was sort of the next hand in the game.

    I did intend it to be about tactics as opposed to defending the SNP, but I tend to try and give full and honest answers To questions asked about my party so it can drag on a bit.

    Like. I say sorry about that.

    Amber,

    “You say that 16 year olds are too young to take responsibility for their own health.”

    No, I didn’t say that at all. I said Libertarians might take the view that it is up to them what they do on drink or any other issue.

    The fact is the Parliments in Westminster and Holyrood have made judgements on what drugs should and should not be legally available, to who, at what age and at what strength.

    At the moment it is 18 to buy alcohol north and south of the border.

    So far no one has put forward a good, let alone coherent argument, that if we bring the age for voting into line with the age of adult responsibility, we should lower the drinking age.

    I think lowering the voting age is fine. I am not necessicarily against debating or lowering the legal drinking age, but that’s primarily a health issue.

    I am not sure the opposite applies unless your arguing you need a stiff drink in order to pluck up the courage to vote….but then you are a Labour supporter.

    Peter.

  44. @ Peter

    If Labour supporters need an alcoholic drink, SNP supporters must be willing to swallow anything. ;-)

  45. More discussion along the lines of “the coalition has split the right”. Which line to take at the next election (softly softly with LDs – or not)? Doubts about the boundary changes going through… and as if no one had guessed: “Conservative HQ will attempt to solidify the Tory vote with 1992-inspired attacks on Ed Miliband and on Balls-o-nomics.”

    Intiguingly in the comments section:

    Q: Are we putting resources into Lib Dem [Con marginal] seats?
    A: No.

    Therefore the strategy has already been decided… we are 35 months before the next GE and have not even selected the candidates or appointed the agents.

    h
    ttp://conservativehome.blogs.com/majority_conservatism/2012/05/if-a-tory-majority-is-unlikely-should-cameron-double-down-on-his-alliance-with-the-liberal-democrats.html

  46. Tonights YG prediction

    Labour 43%

    Tory 30%

    LD 11%

    UKIP 9%

    There was a TNS BMRB Poll today with these results

    Labour 42% (-1)

    Tory 30% (NC)

    Lib Dem 12% (+2)

    Think it is possible that the LD vote has lifted a little.

  47. Alcohol has a detrimental effect on 18+s too. The only difference is clearly you dont trust 16s to drink alcohol. The chronic binge drinking and alcholism in Scotland isnt limited to younger people. Either it should be done on a age of majority basis that determines when you are an adult in general terms or on health reasons which would effect everyone. Saying it should be 18+ but voting 16+ is having your cake and eating it, which is very SNP ive noticed (speaking as a tory with little alterior motive with regards to scotland these days)

  48. Billy Bob – the comments section on ConHome is full of raving crackpots. The Conservatives haven’t done *any* candidate selection yet, so they haven’t appointed candidates in Labour marginals either.

  49. I wouldn’t get too excited about the Con/UKIP pact. It’s been largely denied..

    http://bloggers4ukip.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/farage-no-deal-offered-to-anyone.html

    Plus it doesn’t sound like UKIP’s members would be up for it even if the leadership were (thankfully).

    PS: I always type the CAPTCHA code in the website section, damnit!

  50. @Anthony Wells

    Thanks, that is interesting. While I’m not expecting you to comment, that sort of reinforces my impression that campaigning in marginals might be a bit Ashcroft dependent again. I know of one new Lab candidate who was selected for a fallen marginal more than six months ago.

1 2 3 4 5