Full tables for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll are now up here, covering u-turns, strikes and more on the jubilee.

On the regular leader ratings David Cameron’s net rating is at minus 26 (no change from last week), Ed Miliband’s at minus 28 (from minus 23 last week), Nick Clegg at minus 55 (no change), so Ed Miliband has dropped back behind Cameron. Other ratings though are more negative for Cameron. 59% think he doesn’t have a grip on the government, 68% think he is out of touch and people think he is weak rather than strong by 50% to 33% (compared to 45% weak and 39% strong a week ago). Less negatively, 42% of people do at least still see him as likable (interestingly enough this was something that we also saw with Tony Blair – long after his other ratings were negative, people still thought he was likeable).

Asked about the recent U-turns 50% think this is a sign of weakness or incompetence, while 33% see it as a sign the government is willing to listen. This is a significant shift from when YouGov asked a similar question a year ago and people were pretty evenly split between the two answers, suggesting that whereas people were once willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt when it came to u-turns, it is now starting to be seen as a negative sign.

There is majority opposition to both the proposed teachers strike and the industrial action by doctors. 55% are opposed to the teachers strike and 62% are opposed to the doctors action, which is only supported by 28%. 59% of people already see doctors as being very well paid and 33% think their pensions are already too high.

Unlike most of the other professions YouGov ask about, there is not even majority support for doctors having the legal right to strike. 48% think they should not be allowed to strike, compared to 44% who think they should. To put this in context, a majority of people think nurses, teachers, railway workers and fuel tanker drivers should have the right to strike, with majorities thinking that police officers and firefighters should not.

194 Responses to “More from YouGov/Sunday Times”

1 2 3 4
  1. @The Other Howard – “I have no time for non-productive jobs that serve no purpose, something we saw so much of under the last government.”

    Absolutely. There’s currently a bloke sitting on his @rse in Whitehall doing nothing at all, for an annual salary of £92,000. He’s called Sir Alex Allan, and he is the Prime Minister’s Adviser on the ministerial code. For some strange reason, our PM seems happy to pay his wages but never asks him to do anything.

    Non-productive indeed.

  2. Other Howard

    Well aren’t you so brilliant. I bow down to your greatness and work ethic. If only the rest of us were not so unworthy

    I fail to see the relevance to the accusation of me and others being miserable though

    I am amazed that you are a royalist when you seem to think the work ethic is so important. Most of the family seem wasters to me. My sil works 10 hours a day in two jobs and looks after twins. She earns very little and is exploited by her employers. Your ‘royal family’ would not understand that though. She is not always very happy either

  3. Keep an eye on the jubilee numbers watch. A few hours ago the media were reporting thousands of people lining the Thames, then at around 3pm it became hundreds of thousands, and now the Telegraph has splashed a million across it’s website.

    By late evening we will be told that 20m watched the event in the UK, and by tomorrow morning we’ll probably get back to that royal wedding tally of 2 billion world wide.

  4. @Colin

    But you and I both know that policies of the left cannot deliver full employment in the long term because of their economic philosphy. We live in a real World where we increasingly compete with low wage economies. For this reason the European model of the Welfare State is also doomed.

  5. Alec

    That last post is really sad.

    The implication is that you have been watching on tv -but in order to establish that not many people were at the riverside.

    How many would you like it to be ?


    Absolutely full employment isn’t really possible.

    There is an optimum number, I think-depending upon the nature & status of the economy in question.

    Also, the labour market isn’t a homogeneous bloc.It is made up of sectors. Some will be maturing; others ( hopefully!) will be emerging, and employment conditions will vary between them.

  7. @colin – “Alec
    That last post is really sad.”

    Well that post was really weird. I’m not quite sure how I get the Telegraph numbers from the TV, but hey ho!

    I haven’t watched any TV all day, but I think it’s a great spectacle and would be an ideal day out for families in the area.

    My point was entirely about how the media get swept up in mindless guff about high profile events. The reference to the 2 billion was (you may recall) harking back to Jeremy Hunt’s mindless prediction of the global audience for the royal wedding, which was then reported as news by all major media outlets, with none of them checking that this would in fact represent 30% of the global population and that the real figure was something like 150m from memory.

    There seems to be some insistence that anyone who isn’t watching/involved/loving it etc is somehow sad. I’m having a great day, but I find these sentiments quite baffling.

  8. @Alec

    My point was a general one not restricted to the Jubilee. I would love to see some polling on who is the happiest, the right or the left. I was also making the point that generally the lefties on this blog seem miserable, presumably because they are not in power.

  9. @ The Other Howard

    I would be happy to favour full employment provided it is productive! …. The World does not owe the British a living.
    Britain owes the British a living, if they are willing to work. It should be the policy, the duty, of the country to provide work for everybody who wants it – & at a living wage. If the private sector will not step up to the plate, then the government should either make the private sector fulfill their responsibility or take up the slack with state employment.

  10. The other Howard

    Well the right wingers seem a bit smug and arrogant. Perhaps we can have a poll on that?

    Then again perhaps like yours it is a stupid idea

  11. ALEC

    I took your reference to “media” to refer to TV news-as opposed to your reference to “The Telegraph”.

    As to “there seems to be some insistence that anyone who isn’t watching/involved/loving it etc is somehow sad.”-not from me.

    I thought it sad that you might have been viewing with a main focus on numbers attending-clearly I was wrong-at least on the first count.

    Actually , my admiration is mostly directed at whoever organised it. What a feat-incredible.

    I did think tv coverage missed a lot of the history connected with many of the participant boats.

    And why the Queen was in that huge barge thing, rather than the wonderful Gloriana , I don’t quite know.

    She looked frozen stiff-not good at her age. But she must have been touched by it all, despite the weather.

  12. @Colin – “Actually , my admiration is mostly directed at whoever organised it. What a feat-incredible.”

    Agreed. I’m a leftie, but I’m strangely enough intensely proud of the fantastic ability this country has to organise public parades and formal processions.

    I have a memory of Anwar Sadat’s funeral in Egypt (I think it was this event,and I’ve just looked it up and it was 1981). I recall seeing soldiers trying to march around a corner in the funeral procession, and it was heroically comic – embarrassing, in many ways.

    Our ability to do ceremonial occasions and functions really well is a part of our history and something I feel we should be proud of.

    [I actually haven’t yet seen the royal ‘barge’, but I’ve got visions of queenie being hauled out of a dank cargo hold in a coal bucket.]

  13. @Bazsc

    You seem so angry! I suggest you change your politics.

  14. The Other Howard,

    Still waiting for the list of unproductive jobs……


  15. @ The Other Howard

    But you and I both know that policies of the left cannot deliver full employment in the long term because of their economic philosphy. We live in a real World where we increasingly compete with low wage economies.
    I live in a different ‘real world’ from you. I live in a real world where the private sector wishes to use state infra-structure without paying for it or its upkeep & replacement. Major companies & feted (but useless) individuals roam the world in search of a free lunch.

    It would be the easiest thing for governments to agree that unfettered globalism has destabilised all the world’s economies. The evidence is everywhere; anywhere you look you can see it!

    So, to conclude: You say: The world does not owe Britain a living; I say: Britain does not owe the globalist paper-profiteers a living but that is both the goal & the outcome of our current economic policy.

  16. Actually Howard if you google “Paul Krugman Newsnight” you’ll see a wonderful 8 minutes of him demolishing Tory MP Andrea Leadsom and Tory donnor Jon Moulton. As he says there is no evidence that countries with a smaller public sector do better. In fact Sweden and Austria have much a larger public sector than we do and have done and are doing much better than us. How they thought they could win an argument with a Nobel winning economist is beyond me! Unless your arguments are backed up by economic theory and empirical evidence it isn’t worth a candle.

  17. Other Howard

    Not at all angry – I am not an ‘angry’ person and my politics has very little to do with my personality

    I do find your approach bizarre however. If I had not seen you posting before then I would assume you were a troll in the way you exhibit a certain passive-aggressivity,; making comments to provoke a response but ignoring said response and repeating the original comment

    Very strange

  18. @ Amber Star

    My real world is the Real one, it’s what exists now as you appear to admit. If you get rid of the wealth creators as you want then the Nation will become bancrupt very quickly. Of course you can then have full employment, paying everyone in valueless £’s so they will end up starving but with money in their pocket. I will have left your eutopia long before.

  19. @ The Other Howard

    My real world is the Real one, it’s what exists now as you appear to admit.
    No, I think you have misinterpreted what I wrote. I said they wish it to be so & our current economic policy is deliberately directed towards facilitating that outcome.

    Governments could & should change the direction of economic & political travel. There is already more than enough evidence with which to justify a change of direction.

  20. @TOH
    Please enlighten us with your wisdom about “wealth creators”.
    How does this work then?

    Oh -and when will you post your list of the unproductive jobs which you say were created in past times ?

  21. @Amber Star

    Are you saying you will support the Wealth Creators, are you a capitalist in disguise! If you are good for you.

    @Big D

    We will see if Klugmann is right, probably not in my life time. Will Austria, Sweden and other big state economies suvive in the long term. I very much doubt it but time will tell.

  22. other howard

    I am not sure what Klugmann knows about economics – did a mean job as an ME in Quincy though

  23. @BigD

    Apologies I meant Krugman

    @BAZSC Yep! I used to love Quincy.

  24. @ the other Howard

    How much wealth is actually generated by “wealth creators” as you have it?

    Whilst some entrepeneurs create new products or drive up consumption, many others simply deploy business models reliant upon low paid poorly protetcted staff to undercut pre-existing employers and thereby deprive the country of demand and of wealth.

    Wealth creators create wealth for themselves – that is how the market works. The job of governments is to ensure that this wealth is created legally, justly and fairly. FWIW I suspect the majority of wealth creating entrepeneurs probably remove more wealth from the economy than they create.

    Generally speaking the more successful European economies are fairly tightly regulated as regards employment law and economic success comes from long established corporate players working in conjunction with government who supply stability, well trained workers and good infrastructure. The entrepeneureal free market model tends only to work in small – essentially parasite – nations who offer bribes and tax breaks to allow access to larger markets.

    This model is itself in global terms probably one which decreases rather than increases overall wealth creation. So for a Luxembourg or Leichtenstein or Switzerland to thrive it requires access to wealth generated in France or the Uk or Germany. These countries may themselves be wealthy but the net effect of their low tax low regulation economies is to weaken the economic activity of their neighbours and to increase the wealth of a small number of individuals at he expense of most of the citizens of Europe and the world.

    Wealth creation is complex – and what may superficially appear to be wealth being created is sometimes, in reality a reduction in the overall wealth of a society or nation or entire continent.

  25. @ The Iceman

    You seem to have missed my point. The new rapidly growing economies such as China, Brazil and India do not play by your “old established European Economies” rules which is why I think the European model of the Welfare State is doomed.

    I suspect we will never agree on this so i am going to leave it there for tonight as I have other things to do.

    Greatly enjoyed the Jubilee celebrations although the commentators were generally not very good.

  26. @ the Other Howard

    Are you saying you will support the Wealth Creators, are you a capitalist in disguise! If you are good for you.
    I have always supported the wealth creators – i.e. the workers who actually invent, design, develop & produce the goods or services which people need. I do not support the rentiers, skimmers & paper-profiteers.

    I am in favour of capitalism when it benefits an economy for the people; when it benefits nobody but the skimmers, I take issue with it.

  27. @ the Other Howard

    The new rapidly growing economies such as China, Brazil and India do not play by your “old established European Economies” rules which is why I think the European model of the Welfare State is doomed.
    The countires which you name aspire to our European Welfare State model which is why the cost of doing business there is expected to rise to the same as the UK within a decade.

    Only by copying the European model, can they hope to achieve the social & economic stability – together with the required infrastructure needed – to ensure their economic & political future.

  28. Last week one of the Labour posters was saying it was very interesting that Labour were ahead of the SNP in Scotland when looking at the cross breaks.

    So this poll shows the SNP on 39% and Labour on 36%. As I said then…you can’t read too much into the sub samples but just for today I think I might just do that!!! :)

  29. @Amber, Howard –
    My political economy is better than your political economy, nyeah nyeah?

    Not sure what it has to do with what the *public* think is the best course of action…

  30. @ BIGD

    Jon Moulton recently announced that he no longer supports the Tory party. I don’t think he likes any political party at the moment.

    My take on the issue of private versus public and the proportion of each, is that the true issue gets lost. It should be about the end user and public/tax payer interest, not just ideology. I don’t care if a service is provided by public or private, as long as the quality of service is good, there is zero corruption and overall it represents best value for money.

    Capitalists don’t like the public sector unless they can make money from it. How many of the private companies that have taken over provision of once public services, actually operate in the publics interest and genuinely represent best value for money in the long term.

    I am not convinced personally that the UK public have benefited from the privitisation of various utilities. In particular some of the issues people face with the water and sewerage companies is very concerning. Don’t tell me that water is now cheaper and we have better service as a result of privitisation.

  31. ALEC

    Glad we found a point of agreement :-)

    The royal barge was a dutch luxury river boat-suitably tarted up for the day.
    Actually it was massive & I thought the skipper was very skilled.

    The really impressive boat was the newly built Gloriana- modeled on one in Canaletto’s 18c painting of a Thames pageant.

    Powered by oarsmen it is a thing of beauty & craftsmanship. But it is much smaller than the Dutch barge thing & would only have held the core royal family-not the army of hangers on ,on the larger vessel.

    But I think it would have personalised the presence of the Queen greatly & been a huge advert for British craftsmanship in boat building.

  32. @ Tinged

    Not sure what it has to do with what the *public* think is the best course of action…
    The public hasn’t revolted yet so I’m guessing they think the best course of action is to watch politicians argue along the lines of:

    My political economy is better than your political economy, nyeah nyeah? :razz:

  33. Good Evening All.

    I am glad everyone is such a good mood here.

  34. How long will it be before the current government starts getting the blame for socio-economic implosion, do people think?

    Or will the last Government continue to be blamed?

    Big issue this is, I think for the GE

  35. the OH

    welfare economy doesn’t work: jobless should go where jobs are: tec etc etc

    Now this begs the question of course of WHERE in this country there are jobs and what should happen to people who, whether they try hard or not, can’t find one??

    Do we leave them homeless with an OH platitude for company?

  36. I have been a state school teacher since 1978, 102 terms completed now; 17 years in Voluntary Aided Schools and 17 of them in the secular schools.

    But I have not been an entrepreneur

  37. The Other Howard,

    Still no list of unproductive jobs, just invective… Your inability to back your claim with evidence is undermining your own case.

    Capital will flow to where it can get the best return and that tends to be where costs are lowest.

    However as has been pointed out costs rise over time and as standards of living rise costs rise with it. The race to the bottom will at some point meet the aspirations of the people coming up.

    Living standards in the Brick countries are rising faster than ours are falling.

    We do need to live within our means but as countries like Sweden and Germany have shown, a very efficient private sector can sustain a very efficient public sector which gives high standards of public provision and still sell be a world class exporters.



    left-wing people are more miserable than right-wing people…….there is an explanation for this view



  39. @ Colin (from the previous thread)

    “I’m always interested in the things in which people find a political slant -even music.

    I remember discussing preferences with a lefty friend a few years ago-enthusing about Van Morrison. He launched into a criticism of VM’s unionist politics. I thought-what the f*** has this to do with music?

    …still-since you mention him-I’m glad Billy Bragg isn’t on the menu this weekend -but he doesn’t count as a musician much anyway does he ?:-)”

    1. Van Morrison is incredible. Absolutely love his music. The only negative on him that I’ve heard is that he apparently just stands still when he performs live (I’ve never been to one of his concerts) and brings little energy to the stage. Contrast that to Mick Jagger who’s performance on SNL a few weeks ago was outstanding (just watched last night).

    2. Music can be political. There are a number of songs that were written just with political movements in mind. This is especially true of the civil rights movement.

    3. Billy Bragg’s “All you faschists” is a great song.

  40. @ Reginald Maulding

    left-wing people are more miserable than right-wing people…….there is an explanation for this view

    “Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people.”
    The Other Howard could be projecting his own misery onto people who are left-wing but it’s a bit unfair of you to say so, given he insists that he is incredibly happy & thoroughly enjoying the Jubilee.

    Are you suggesting he was becoming angry at BazSc disagreeing with him & projecting that onto BazSc – because he appeared to accuse BazSc of being angry based on no evidence whatsoever?

    The above is intended to illustrate one of the problems with Psychological projection theory – it can be mis-used by psychologists, both professional & ‘armchair’, to assert pretty much anything which takes their fancy.

  41. SOCAL

    You may have seen this YT vid.


    Would be great if there was a comeback for political campaign songs.

  42. Those excited by Coulson being charged with perjury in Scotland may need to note that perjury is a bit different in Scotland, than is the situation in other parts of these islands.


    While conventionally understood simply as lying under oath, our criminal law applies additional strictures to what is and is not perjury. A sworn, fibbing witness in a Scottish court only commits the offence of perjury where their falsehoods are evidence that is both “competent and relevant”. Per Lord Emslie in Lord Advocate’s Reference No 1 of 1985…

    “… a charge of perjury will not lie unless the evidence alleged to be false was both competent and relevant at the earlier trial, either in proof of the libel or in relation to the credibility of the witness.”

  43. Hi Amber

    Still not at all angry although a bit tired!

  44. @ R Huckle

    I agree with everything you said there. I’m not hung up on private vs public so long as it is best value for money. Many private sector companies provde a very poor service.

    What you’ve described is the German model of economic development called Ordoliberalism. Essentially it says what you’ve said. It starts by saying that the private sector is usually the best form of economic activity but seeks to use to the Government where and whenever the private sector fails for whatever reason.

  45. Amber

    that might be more projective identification…


  46. It’s probably a symptom of the holiday weekend, or perhaps we’ve become accustomed to bad news from the continent, but the last three days economic news has been absolutely terrifying.

    Whereas up until Friday you wouldn’t hear anyone in Spain, Italy, Portugal and even Greece, openly talk about leaving the Euro, now there has erupted a wave of discussion about ‘blackmailing’ Berlin and breaking the Euro. Even Berlusconi (controller of the biggest block of seats in Italy’s parliament) has openly suggested Italy effectively goes it’s own way and the head of the ECB has admitted the Euro cannot survive in it’s current form.

    I would feel a little smug, as I’ve been saying this for the last two years, but the timing of this dawning realisation couldn’t be any worse. The US is stalling, and China, India and Brazil are slowing markedly. Everything is in reverse, and there is no appetite, money, or credibility for concerted collaborative action to save national economies.

    Switzerland and Denmark have already announced plans for capital controls to prevent Euro flooding into their countries, while German two year bonds are now technically showing negative interest. It’s hard to get across how bad the situation is, so we’d best keep waving flags for a couple more days and hope it’s all over by Wednesday.

  47. alec: “hope its all over”

    d’you mean the world?


  48. @ Reginald Maulding

    Could be :-)

  49. @ Old Nat

    It will be fun to watch Andy Coulson’s advocate tell a Scottish judge that his client’s evidence in the Tommy Sherridan trial was incompetent & irrelevant. ;-)

  50. 100th.

1 2 3 4