YouGov/Sun – CON 33, LAB 43, LD 8, UKIP 8
21 Jun 2012
Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 43%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 8% – back to rather more typical YouGov figures after a seven point Labour lead yesterday that appears to have been something of an outlier. That said the last four YouGov polls have shown the Conservatives creeping back up into 33-34%, whereas apart from the brief post-Jubilee boost, they have typically been at 31-32% since the local elections. I’m wary of overanalysing small shifts in polls, so right now I’d say to assume this is normal random variation, but do keep an eye on it.
Filed under: Voting Intention, YouGov
Thank you Anthony.
Coalition split being shown on BBC now
Who benefits more if the Lib Dems melt down in the next election?
I think Labour is more likely to win but the Tories could totally sweep up the SW couldn’t they? Would that get them a majority?
I think it’s a given that more of the LD voters of the last election have switched to Labour than to the Tories – an LD meltdown could only realistically help Labour.
Well that depends which sort of LD voter deserts them quickest. There’s much evidence that at present it’s more likely to be people switching from LD to Labour. That clearly helps the Tories gain some seats in the South West and in other places too, but it will be of more help to Labour. There may not be that many places where Labour stands to gain seats from the LDs but plenty where Labour benefits from squeezing them and could gain from the Tories accordingly.
Not a split as LD will roll over as usual.
I think that STEPEN is correct.
The Cons would sweep the SW.
But a split in a Lib Dem marginal where labour has no chance is only going to help the Tories.
I think as long as the blues poll at 33 and under the reds can feel reasonably comfortable. This allows them the space to concentrate on developing, and testing, policy positions without the need to worry too much about the poll lead
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2162804/I-didnt-time-research-Amazing-confession-peer-controversial-Beecroft-Report-making-easier-sack-workers.html
Government should not hope to gain public approval in implementing Beecroft proposals.
@Stephen
“But a split in a Lib Dem marginal where labour has no chance is only going to help the Tories.”
But may help Labour in the long term. If they squeeze out the LDs and increase their vote share, these seats could become Con/Lab marginals in the future.
Wonderful interview on BBC tv news about Gove etc.
Toby Young vs Lefty teacher.
Lefty-O levels were terrible-sheep & goats-loosers & winners-what we need is more “teacher assessment” etc etc.
Young -I took O levels & CSE-didn’t do me any harm-Singapore still uses them-PISA ratings show them higher than………..
Lefty in uncontrollable anger & high pitched voice-We are talking about O levels-STOP talking about PISA-Singapore is a FASCIST STATE.
Embarrassed looks all round-end of discussion.
LIZH.
I basically think that a LD collapse is good news for the Cons.
No chablis then.
Many interesting comments on exam systems on the last thread, and this seems to be going to be bounced all over by joyful media types as well on an “Ooh, a coalition! Poke the weak points!” rampage. I’m doing my last two A Level papers (Statistics 2 and Mechanics 2 modules for maths) tomorrow…
This *should* help the Liberals really, as Gove’s ideas and their social issues are even named in a very conservative (small c) way with the O Level ideas. Opposing them might well help the Liberals with their goal to be seen as the socially progressive force in the coalition (albeit still fiscally rightwing).
I think there are some parts of the Gove ideas that seem logical:
- Competing exam boards push down standards. Particularly given the commercial goals conflicting with educational ones, this is rather a no-brainer; it’ll be ironic if Labour end up defending a free-market-style system against the Conservatives for the sake of opposition.
- Splitting GCSEs up to have four testing points is ludicrous given the workload; leaving testing to the end of the two years is far more sensible given the volume of work in the GCSE.
That said, I think there are things to watch out for;
- The renaming to O Levels and CSEs seems very much a sop to the Conservative faithful. Not to mention probably being more expensive than simply trying to improve the GCSE; the hope presumably is that the additional costs will be unnoticed compared to the PR gain in unveiling “The New O Level”. The Liberals should certainly be visible in opposing here, the last thing they need is to be lumped as more reactionary.
- Streaming classes is already done in schools, even up to A Level in some cases. I’m very sure we wouldn’t benefit from having more separation and different names for the qualifications. It would divide students more, which is socially a bad thing, and would stretch comprehensive school resources by them having to teach two courses whilst entrenching grammar and private schools who can afford to be selective. This is one of the key angles Labour should take opposing such changes; the private/grammar/comprehensive divide is a major factor in class distinctions (speaking as a comprehensive pupil who got accepted into a public sixth form then decided to stay put myself). That plays well to a “we’re not all in it together” narrative.
- The idea that more volume of work is the way to stretch people. Getting people to learn a larger volume of work won’t teach them to think, and certainly won’t stretch bright pupils. What we need is people doing more extracurriculars and stretching their conceptual frameworks, rather than simply doing more homework and learning more data. This is perhaps the thing I feel I’m getting least from Gove on; if we fail to encourage ingenuity, links between subjects, and application, we risk building a very monolithic education system. If we’re going to free up more time by not putting exams in the middle of GCSEs, I’d propose that rather than giving History students a book more of knowledge to learn, we should be teaching them to start applying statistics to history, and teaching physics students how to write concisely about science, etc. We treat subjects too separately as it is.
- Fewer, longer exams being better. The problem with modularisation is how it breaks up the timetables and the years, as opposed to how it breaks up the papers, in my opinion. So move all the exams to the end, maybe, but I’m not sure what going back to three hour papers for all subjects would gain except to end up testing stamina rather than ability – not quite the goal.
Those probably aren’t very well thought out comments given it’s late and my brain is mostly full of coefficients of restitution, but hopefully they make some vague sense!
COLIN.
Good evening to you.
Mrs Thatcher abolished O Level, in 1985, and replaced it with GCSE’s
@CHRISLANE1945
“I basically think that a LD collapse is good news for the Cons.”
I take a long term view of this and rather have the left vote consolidated. Also as an ex LD supporter it gives me great pleasure to see them going down the tube.
What are you all talking about? Lib Dems have already collapsed.
Tories winning the SW from lib dem is like the Republicans winning all the cowboy States, but — just winning the cowboy States.
CHRISLANE
Good Evening.
Yes-I knew that.
LIZH.
I have always found rank and file Liberals to be very nice.
Therefore I actually feel sad that they have been let down by their leaders, and that Labour became unelectable for many
Labour must be feeling very satisfied with such a poll.
Even if Con retrieve half the UKIP vote they are still out of power in 2015.
Meanwhile i can’t see any movement back from Lab to Lib Dem. Those voters will never forgive the coalition with Con.
It’s cast in stone now.
@CHRISLANE1945
“I have always found rank and file Liberals to be very nice.”
I am sure there must be some nice Liberals around but that still doesn’t change the fact that the Party misled me to vote for them.
JAMES BAILLIE
Best of luck tomorrow. Now get to your bed and rest! :-)
Excellent post btw.
LizH
You are anecdotal evidence and are thus no evidence,
However the polls shew you are typical of such a voter.
Bad news for the Coalition, this split over Gove’s initiative, I think
Colin – re Lefties and tax :
Some years ago a pro footballer (John Arne Riise) had his payslip leaked. Those in the blogosphere to the left of us commented on the extraordinary size of his monthly gross pay, whereas those to the right of us (ahem) commented on the extraordinary size of his PAYE tax deduction.
I remember Ruud Gullit’s negotiations being characterised by leaks of unironic demands for “netto” money (ie, the company pays the tax bill as a sort of extra accounting fillip, not a reference to the discount grocer.)
There are plenty of arty lefties who “manage” their tax, and presumably many (Michael Caine was one of the most vocal) who supported the ideas that Laffer curved out a career on (I can’t think of any celebrity arty lefties who think income tax is as pragmatic an issue as Laffer did).
DC really ought to address the loopholes employed by all if he’s going to pick on one. Maybe he is, but I think the delay on transparing his front-benchers’ affairs speaks volumes.
The idea of “tax management” is a bit of a non-starter for someone who is trying to repair his appeal to the “many”. I wonder how many of his target electorate can envisage such control over their taxes that allows them to “manage”. Most pay PAYE and can’t afford to save at all, let alone “manage” the HMRC in the way that the “Few” are encouraged to do by DC.
I’m wondering whether the Murdoch “stable” will make this tougher than they wouold have done pre-Leveson.
I’m also rather hoping that Leveson’s next job might be to examine the culture, practices and ethics of accountants, including :
a contacts and relationships between the big four and the HMRC, and the conduct of each
b contacts and the relationship between big earners and politicians
c the extent to which current policy has failed
d the extent to which lessons from previous failings have not been learned.
etc.
I suspect the benighted Lord would leap into a ditch and expire if he thought such a reward awaited him!
Bad news for the coalition? Surely, if it is then its old bad news.
Or do people mean that there’s been a “swing” away from the Tories because of their 7% deficit previously. Surely we’re wise enough to know that we’re just seeing normal MOE around a 10-12% Labour lead.
As for it being set in stone – well, people have often thought that in politics. They have often been wrong.
@Howard
I am and I know many like me. I just can’t see myself ever voting LD again even if for any reason I become disenchanted with Labour.
@ChrisLane1945
Worse than the polarising nature of the policy within the Coalition is the fact that not even Nick Clegg was made aware of the anouncement beforehand, nor was it discussed in Cabinet (per Clegg).
RAF.
I wonder whether David Cameron knew about the move?
LizH
I am not getting through. Whatever your future choices, telling us on here has no relevance to the movements in the polls. It’s anecdotal.
@chrislane1945
Michael Ashcroft did some polling in August 2011… at the time he found Con and Lab equal nationally on 37%, with LDs on 11%.
In Con/LD marginals Con were comfortably ahead, but in Con/Lab marginals (33 Lab target seats polled): Con 36%, Lab 44%, LD 7%.
In the current polling landscape there are not enough LD seats seats in the SW (or elsewhere) to make up for the number of marginals Con would be losing to Labour.
The only split I can see in the coalition is in Eric Pickles trousers!! ;)
Conservatives taking most of the LD seats in the SW won’t help them in this situation – there’s not that many to take, despite it being the LD heartland, and the increased Labour vote elsewhere will take from them many more than they will gain here. 36% isn’t quite enough to get a majority when the opposition is split, worse still when it’s virtually reunited and there’s another centre-right party nibbling away.
That 10% leads me to think the Labour lead is drifting slowly downward. No sign of those 15% leads for a bit.
This thing with the O-levels is a bit weird, not like normal government at all. Perhaps we should remember that coalition governments are very unusual things in this country. We’ve not had one for a long while, and thus parties are not well geared up for it. Who knows though, maybe we might get another one next time.
@Howard
“I am not getting through. Whatever your future choices, telling us on here has no relevance to the movements in the polls. It’s anecdotal.”
I disagree – what I state about me is fact, therefore not anecdotal but what I casually observe about others is.
I thought the last regioanal SW poll( OCT 11) showed that the 21 vulnerable LD seats would split 11 Tory 10 Lab…
LizH:
I’m with you – I voted LD last time on the understanding that they were a left-of-centre party. To quote the Who “I won’t get fooled again.” [good song]
Re Cons picking up in the SW, well, maybe, but they will probably be slaughtered elsewhere and the result will be to enhance their southern enclave bias.
“One-nation” tories? Hardly a quarter in reality.
UK Banks downgraded
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-18542691
LizH
‘I am sure there must be some nice Liberals around…’
I reckon I know one or two.
The Government finally seemed to have turned around the corner from the Omnishambles, and began anew. Wading into tax evasion has already blown up in DCs face, HoL reform is going to be tough, and GCSE reform causing mayhem (LDs and Boris Johnson both fighting against).
I seem to remember Lab polling not too badly in the South recently – I expect that the LD collapse will give Labour a stronger showing there in the next election (though the LDs may pick up a few seats here too), even strong enough to take a few, and reduce a few others to C/L marginal status.
The LDs must be hoping to continue the coalition as much as possible. Having rolled over on HE reform, NHS reform and countless other things, they seem to have decided to start distancing themselves from the Cons. A smart move, one that I think will at least stem the leak of votes. I suspect the remaining LDs are firmly anti-Lab/Con, and centre-right, I think they have (surely) hit their nadir already.
Jimmy Carr tweets
‘Although I’ve been advised the K2 Tax scheme is entirely legal, and has been fully disclosed to HMRC (Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs), I’m no longer involved in it and will in future conduct my financial affairs much more responsibly. Apologies to everyone. Jimmy Carr.”
If the scheme was disclosed then why did the HMRC not reject it? Perhaps the legislation does not need to be toughened, but rather the tax people do their job.
@Henry
“I reckon I know one or two.”
Nice to see you here again and a nice Liberal too.
Anthony
Any comment on the polling carried out by YG for prospect re likeliness to vote for a particular party.
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/uqumztj0xb/YG-Archives-Pol-Prospect-UKIP-200612.pdf
On exams,
As Kenny Dalglish replied when asked how his side at the time would do against one of the great Liverpool sides of the past;
” It doesn’t matter as we aren’t going to play them”.
It is all but impossible to make any reliable comparison between current students and exams and previous ones.
I recently watched my daughter study for her religious studies higher and she was discussing things I did in second year as part of my degree.
Having been married to an Educational Psychologist for twenty five years I ‘ve had an inside look at how educational has evolved over that time, improving in understanding and practice.
The principle reason students get better grades is that they are better, yet people won’t accept that.
I think it is because as we’ve all been to school we think we understand education. We all have a view and an oppinion and it is hard to shake us from it. Even within Education you get people bemoaning that it wasn’t like that in their day.
No one has any problem accepting that a Ford Fiesta produced today is far better than the one I bought new 25 years ago. Everyone accepts that cancer treatment today is hugely improved since the seventies.
An American F-22 Raptor is in every respect superior to an old F-4 Phantom.
Last week the US re-took the lead with the worlds fastest computer title. Compared to the first computer to get the title in 1993 it was almost 250,000 times faster.
In almost every area of modern life we overwhelmingly accept that vast progress we have made in almost every area of modern life, but not schools, not education, not exams.
There is no way we can sit a group of today’s students down beside those of the seventies and have a quiz but I think today’s youngsters would wipe the floor with them.
I talk to my son and daughter and have little doubt that what they are learning and how they are being taught is ahead of what I got at their age.
I can remember having conversations with my late parents and when rtalking about school it was clear that my education in primary and secondary was way better than what they got yet they bemoaned falling standards too.
The general feeling about education and young people is pretty much summed up as this;
“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”
Peter.
My advice to the Tories is to take heed of the wise counsel being given by the likes of Lord Ashcroft, Sean Worth and Tim Montgomerie. The “Cameron’s a natural born vote- winner, Miliband’s a dud, it’ll all be alright on the night” type of complacency is dangerously delusional. As the three wise men have said, there are deep seated dangers lurking for their party, not least the resurrection of the sort of issues that have so debilitated the Conservatives electorally for more than 20 years.
All the polling over the last three months suggests a perception of callousness, aloofness and incompetence is taking root amongst a sizeable section of the electorate and, if that toxic mix starts to stick then it could conjure up the three-card trick that obliterated the Tories in 1997; ignored in Scotland, loathed in the North of England and marginalised in Wales. With those three cards played, if the Midlands marginals and London turn, then they’re toast.
Quote of the week: Andrew Neil saying “It’s good to have a real comedian on, unlike us” to Jim Davidson.
Peter
Sad that Socrates’ views still dominate so much discussion about young people!
On one thing I agree with Gove (in Scotland at least) – that today’s teachers are the best that we have ever had.
The argument about GCSEs/O-levels rather misses the point. The question is, what are exams at 16 supposed to be for (begging the question of whether 16 is the correct age)? Are they are marker of achievement for those who take them? Or are they intended to discriminate between students?
By and large, these are two entirely separate possible functions for exams, and they are pretty much incompatible. In the past, O- and A-levels were run by universities (either singly or in combination), and were the mechanism by which they distinguished between those seeking university entry. It’s certainly true that GCSEs in particular no longer fulfill that function. But then, the nature of GCSEs is fundamentally different from O-levels. There is much more emphasis on skills (e.g. the ability to distinguish and critique primary and secondary historical sources) and less on 1066, 1603 etc.
A rational way forward would be for students to be given both a grade (to denote achievement against some set of pre-determined benchmarks), and a ranking (e.g. the percentile corresponding to their final mark). So students would end by getting results such as A96, A82,or B73.
I’m not sure whether I like this idea or not, but I can’t see any other way to square the circle.
Peter
Got to be the best post I have seen on here for some time.
I agree that it is baffling that people are unwilling to accept where there has been massive improvement in education. There is a lot more understanding nowadays about how to teach children effectively and many teachers do an excellent job.
Unfortunately the personal bias of the public conscience is what dominates this debate. The idea that because ‘I was caned and it never did me any harm’ or ‘I was taught the kings and queens of England by rote’, ‘we recited times tables 10 times a day’ etc
Everyone remembers their childhood and their own education through a time-distorted mirror, warped by incorrect assumptions and political bias.
So it means that no matter what the current generation of children do they will never be able to satisfy the demands of the public who will be convinced that the exams are too easy, don’t have enough depth.
The most interesting thing about the governments thinking is its symbolism. Gove talked today about moving forward with modern qualifications but the fact that he is calling them O Levels is in itself a deliberate harking back to the previous system.
Like ‘the Bobbie on the beat’ that only ever existed in Dixon of Dock Green I think the Education Secretary may be trying to return to a halcyon era that never existed.
The people I feel sorry for though are the teachers and the kids. More reform, more change and little proof that it is what is needed or that it will help.
The kids of now and the next few years will take GCSE exams knowing that the government have already ruled that they are second class. They will know that the people coming up behind them are going to automatically have ‘better’ qualifications than them just because the government says they are harder.
The kids taking exams in a few years will have to contend with a changing system – maybe doing some GCSE’s and some O-levels according to the timetable laid out. And like any first year taking the exams they will struggle because the teachers won’t yet have figured out how to teach the subjects, their won’t be any past papers and there will be little in the way of supporting study books developed for those courses.
The kids who are made to take CSE’s might as well not bother – universities and employers certainly won’t take them seriously.
The teachers will be snowed under with understanding and learning the new qualifications and with the demolition of targets, the national curriculum and the exam system they will have no objective measures of their performance or the performance of their pupils from year to year.
In one way it is clever of Gove to ‘wipe the slate clean’ like this. It does mean that we will never know what the effects of any of his policies have been in terms of results. And if the reduction in school budgets, teachers and teaching assistants over the next few years does lead to a drop in standards then we will be none the wiser.
Gary O
‘Like ‘the Bobbie on the beat’ that only ever existed in Dixon of Dock Green I think the Education Secretary may be trying to return to a halcyon era that never existed.’
I hope you are well under sixty. Otherwise you would remember the presence of the local cop on the beat. They might not be always seen as the gentleman cop Dixon, and were often seen as nosy and interfering , particularly by those who were up to no good.
Dixon was still broadcasting, I believe, well after the method of policing changed. this was pure nostalgia by the end. It represented the time pre-war and also the forties, fifties and early sixties. This changed and cars replaced foot, and TV reflected this with tougher and harsher TV. Also increased paper work meant more time at the station.
Gary O
I am with you on your education comments.
The idea that children were ‘better educated’ back in my day, the 80s, is ludicrous and there have been major advancements.
There is a psychological game at play where we want to ‘big up’ our own achievements at the expense of others. By saying GCSE have become ‘easier’ we are saying that our O Levels make us academically superior – do we really think that we were better educated 30 years ago? I tend not to think so
Saying that there are some improvements to make to GCSE but going back to a rigid- and that is what the old CSE/O Level was – is counterproductive.
For those of us who were there, we had CSE classes (the majority) and GCE classes (the minority). For those on the cusp there was a focus on getting them a CSE 1 which was apparently the same as GCE C. It was never considered so by anyone (including the kids).
The Gove ‘idea’ seems to have a split 75/25 but I do not see what this changes as the bottom X% don’t do the exams anyway
The Tories realized the problems with the GCE/CSE (as they did with Grammar Schools) and supported an alternative. I think that the return to the older system is based just on nostalgia.
Perhaps the next idea is the do the 16+ (anyone remember them in the late 80s?)
Henry, nice to see you posting again