The full tables for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll are now up here. On the regular leader trackers David Cameron is at minus 25 (from minus 23 last week), Ed Miliband at minus 27 (from minus 20 last week), Nick Clegg at minus 54 (from minus 52). Cameron has the best rating again, but realistically him and Miliband have much the same rating and have done for the last couple of months.

While the GDP figures this week don’t seem to have had any effect upon voting intention, their impact is visible on some of the economic questions. Economic ratings and optimism remain very low. 80% of people think the economy is currently in a bad state (including 35% who think it is in a very bad state, up from 26% last week before the GDP figures were announced). Only 25% think the government is handling the economy well. 51% of people say they personally feel worse off financially than they did a year ago and only 10% of people expect their financial position to get better over the next 12 months.

The support for a change of economic strategy continues to grow – now only 28% of people say the government should stick to their current strategy compared to 45% who would like to see growth prioritised instead. David Cameron & George Osborne’s lead over Ed Miliband and Ed Balls on who people would most trust on the economy has also fallen, now down to 3 points. 34% would trust Cameron & Osborne more, 31% Miliband and Balls more.

Asked about various changes to economic policy spending more on large infrastructure projects and cutting taxes seem to be the most popular options (and no, that isn’t necessarily contradictory! YouGov presented them both as being funded from borrowing – there was very little support for bigger cuts). People would support more spending on big infrastructure projects by 46% to 37%, the most popular option. 41% of people would support cutting taxes to encourage growth, but 43% would be opposed. There is significantly less support for reversing spending cuts, supported by 32% but opposed by 48%, or reducing spending more quickly, supported by 24% but opposed by 60%.

Support for George Osborne has continued to drop. Only 19% of people think he should remain in his role with 52% of people thinking he should be replaced. Amongst Conservative supporters only 48% think Osborne should stay, compared to 28% who think he should go and 24% who don’t know. The most popular replacement for Osborne remains Vince Cable, but this is again a largely partisan response – Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters would like Vince Cable to take over, but Conservatives would prefer Hague or Clarke.

Finally on the economy YouGov asked whether people believed the GDP figures, or the claims of some commentators that the unemployment figures suggest that the economy is actually doing better. The majority (61%) of people think the economy is as bad as the official figures suggest, only 18% of people think the employment figures are a better indicator and the economy is, in fact, doing better than the official figures suggest.

Moving onto “cash in hand”, 64% of people say they have paid a tradesman “cash in hand”, but only 26% say they have done this in the knowledge that they were intending to avoid tax. 30% of people say they have asked for a discount for paying cash-in-hand. The majority of people think that it is not wrong to pay cash-in-hand, or to ask for a discount for doing so. However, 57% of people think it is wrong to pay cash-in-hand if you know the person you are paying intends avoiding paying tax on it.

Finally on the Olympics there is growing optimism that they will be a success – 60% of people now think they will (up from 53% a week ago), with only 15% thinking they won’t be successful. People think they will improve Britain’s image abroad by 50% to 7% thinking they will damage it. The survey was, of course, done before the opening ceremony – I expect we’ll have it asked again during the Games so we can see how figures for interest and if the Games have been a success go up or down.


158 Responses to “More from YouGov/Sunday Times”

1 2 3 4
  1. Net approval of the UK Government

    Rest of South -21
    London -31
    Midlands/Wales -39
    Scotland -51
    North -52

    Great Britain -37

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ryyt1wg2mk/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-results-27-290712.pdf

  2. “64% of people say they have paid a tradesman “cash in hand”, but only 26% say they have done this in the knowledge that they were intending to avoid tax.”

    :-) :-) :-) :-)

  3. Net doing well/badly – David Cameron

    Rest of South -8
    Midlands/Wales –20
    London -23
    Scotland -42
    North -47

    Great Britain –25

    Net doing well/badly – Ed Miliband

    London -12
    North -19
    Scotland -22
    Midlands/Wales -28
    Rest of South -36

    Great Britain -27

    Net doing well/badly – Nick Clegg

    London -41
    Rest of South -51
    Midlands/Wales -51
    North -60
    Scotland -73

    Great Britain -54

  4. ‘only 28% of people say the government should stick to their current strategy compared to 45% who would like to see growth prioritised instead’

    So people back Labours plan (or at least its rhetoric) 45% to 28% – a 17% lead.

    However:

    ‘34% would trust Cameron & Osborne more, 31% Miliband and Balls more’

    This can only be because people perceive Cameron and Osborne as more competent (a perception which is changing and likely to change more), and/or because people don’t quite realise the growth strategy is Labour’s plan yet.

    I’d say that we’ll start to see the Labour team pulling away – slowly starting to reflect an increasing view of Miliband/Balls, but more so reflecting peoples opinions on the economic strategy we should take. I would expect the Labour team to have a good lead by the time we start the GE period, before it starts swinging back to the government a bit.

    That’s all provided we continue with cuts/Eurozone keeping the UK economy in its current state of recession/stagnation, of course.

  5. @ Ambivalentsupporter
    ‘Going back to Blair…although I think he displayed great leadership skills…. his problem was that he was all style over substance. I honestly couldn’t tell you if he was a socialist or conservitive….I’m not sure anyone can.’

    William Hague has told us that Blair was a Tory – I suspect he recognizes his own kind very easily.
    As for being a socialist – that was far less true of Blair than it was of Macmillan and Ted Heath.

  6. Under the DWP’s community action programme (CAP), which has completed a pilot stage and whose rollout is expected to be announced this autumn, people on jobseeker’s allowance for longer than three years must work for six months unpaid or have their benefits stripped from them.

    [Snip]

    I expect the Con Gov will get a boost in VI (the LDs won’t benefit) when it announces CAP roll out across the UK.

  7. “64% of people say they have paid a tradesman “cash in hand”, but only 26% say they have done this in the knowledge that they were intending to avoid tax.”

    :-) :-) :-) :-)

    —————————————-

    Indeed. According to quotes last week, both Cameron and Clegg would fall into that category of people whom, it would appear, pay cash in hand without the faintest idea that the recipient might, just might, be able to avoid tax as a result.

  8. Martin Baxter’s latest UK GE prediction:

    “Pollsters have been disagreeing about the state of the parties in July. On one side,
    ComRes and Ipsos-MORI show Labour leads of 10% (unch) and 13% (+4%) respectively. But
    on the other side, Populus and ICM see much smaller leads of 6% (-2%) and 5% (-2%).
    This might just be random variation, but it increases the uncertainty about the
    current position. Overall the average Labour lead has decreased by about 1%.

    The most recent polls from the five pollsters who published polls in July are:

    Populus (Times) has Con 34, Lab 40, Lib 12
    Ipsos-MORI (Evening Standard) has Con 31, Lab 44, Lib 12
    ComRes (Ind. on Sunday; S. Mirror) has Con 32, Lab 42, Lib 10
    ICM (Guardian) has Con 34, Lab 39, Lib 14
    YouGov (Sunday Times) has Con 33, Lab 42, Lib 9

    Overall the average is Con 33 (+1), Lab 41 (-1), Lib 11 (unch).

    The new national prediction is that Labour will have a majority of 96 seats,
    winning 373 seats (-2 seats since 1 July).”

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

  9. @Mike N and Drunkenscouser – firstly, I suggest you should be careful about breaching the non partisan comments policy on UKPR, as you last posts were highly personal views of the CAP issue.

    I also don’t subscribe to the view that if your political opponents do something you don’t agree with, it must be because they wish to punish or generally do down a section of the populace that you sympathise with. I’m no Tory, and anyone on here can testify, but I simply don’t believe this government is willfully attacking benefits claimants just because they want to.

    It’s clear that they have taken a view that claiming benefits without any obligation to work, even unpaid, represents a poor set of conditions for the claimants and that unpaid work would be better for them in terms of getting them back into the paid labour force. This is a legitimate and coherent viewpoint. We can argue about it’s effectiveness, and I do have sympathy with the issue of wage suppression at the bottom end of the scale, but I don’t accept that punishing scroungers is the intended outcome of this. Sometimes cynicism takes up too far, on all sides.

    More pertinent would be the polling effects. I rather suspect that this could be quite a popular move if framed in the right way. I suspect there is a good deal of suspicion of the government in this general area, and had Labour come up with this scheme they would find it easier to gain support than the Tories will, but if they can demonstrate action to actually provide worthwhile jobs for people to get into after working on benefits, there may be some polling mileage in this for them.

    However, given their record, and the increasing instances of unacceptable behaviours by private sector companies operating under government contract, I suspect the downsides on this will outweigh the upsides in due course.

  10. I suspect that there is a “Shy Tory” element in the polls at the moment, for example, just look at the huge number of “Don’t Knows” in the most Tory areas. In contrast, only 8% of Scottish respondents (where Tories are thin on the ground) didn’t know how they would vote:

    Voting intention – Don’t know

    Rest of South 19%
    London 18%
    Midlands/Wales 14%
    North 12%
    Scotland 8%

    Great Britain 15%

    This suspicion is reinforced by the lastest betting odds for the next UK GE:

    Most Seats

    Lab 10/11
    Con EVS
    LD 100/1
    UKIP 125/1

    Now, if punters really did believe recent polling, which puts the Tories as low as 30%, then I can assure you that CON would be longer than Evens. The only reasonable explanation is that punters just don’t trust the polling at the moment, or else believe that there will be a powerful Con “Swingback” as polling day approaches.

    (Lack of liquidity is also a plausible explanation, but unlikely.)

  11. Alec,

    “More pertinent would be the polling effects. I rather suspect that this could be quite a popular move if framed in the right way.”

    Not in Scotland Alec. I really cannot see the Community Action Programme going down as anything other than a bucket of cold sick.

    This will, as usual, have precisely zero effect on Scottish Tory VI, which is seemingly utterly impervious to anything whatsoever (irrespective of whether “good” or “bad” news for the Tories).

    But wo betide the SLDs. If they thought that 2011 and 2012 were stinkers, then they ain’t seen nothin yet.

    http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/community-action-programme.shtml

  12. * woe betide *

  13. @Stuart Dickson,

    Scotland is just one small part of the UK – and represents just a small (and generally left-wing/unrepresentative part) of the UK electorate.

    The majority of the British public generally tend to support cuts in benefits, partly as they see the current system as unfair. That goes for both left and right wing voters (though right-wing voters tend to support them even more strongly).

  14. I think the CAP will help stop those LD’s who have switched their support to Labour from swinging back.

    It almost certainly will get the Conservatives some more votes, on top of their 36% last time. Just not enough to win if Labour can keep hold of enough centre-left support as at present.

  15. AmbivalentSupporter &. Stuart Dickson,

    “This will, as usual, have precisely zero effect on Scottish Tory VI, which is seemingly utterly impervious to anything whatsoever (irrespective of whether “good” or “bad” news for the Tories).”

    Stuart was clearly referring only to Scotland.

    I can but agree. For several years I have been saying that nothing but the Grim Reaper affects the Scottish Tory vote.

    The largest figure quoted was NC’s disapproval in Scotland. Amongst current and Ex-SLD MSP’s and councillors in Scotland it must be close to 100%.

    Apart from losing the anti-con vote in 2011 they lostthrough retiral at least two MSP’s who had a large personal vote, long service, spoke their own mind and were respected more than their party in the constituency.

    That will also be the case in 2015.

    “But woe betide the SLDs. If they thought that 2011 and 2012 were stinkers, then they ain’t seen nothin yet.”

    Absolutely. 5th Party in votes is a possibility and maybe only two parties have seats, notwithstanding a “No” vote.

  16. WOODSMAN

    @”According to quotes last week, both Cameron and Clegg would fall into that category of people whom, it would appear, pay cash in hand without the faintest idea that the recipient might, just might, be able to avoid tax as a result.”

    Indeed-and of course having not the faintest idea that absence of a VAT invoice might mean that they themselves are avoiding a 20% tax.

  17. @John B Dick,

    I doubt the Tories will be overly concerned with Scotland (or the Scottish electorate). I mean, they currently only hold one seat, and even a big increase in Tory vote across the UK in 2015 will still not secure them much/any more than this in Scotland. Far better for them to focus on England and Wales, where seats are much more winnable for them and could get them an overall majority.

  18. @SMukesh

    My reply to your post about how “it hasn’t been done in the last 33 years” (that is becoming PM without a Murdoch endorsement) went into moderation. The surrendering of directorships does seem to be a milestone of sorts for UK politics, so I will try again with a different link. According to the Telegraph:

    Claire Enders at Enders Analysis said Mr Murdoch’s resignations were part of the “slow fade of Rupert and James from the UK” that began last year and will be “complete and permanent”.

    “James and Rupert have decided that they are not welcome in the UK, and they’re right. there is an enforced emotional withdrawal from these assets because they are no longer useful [in terms of influence],” she said.

  19. On July 9th Spain imposed a “proof of income” control on EU citizens living in Spain for more than three months.

    They must provide documentary proof that they will not become a financial burden on the State , either by having a job, or if they are jobless, they are covered by health insurance.

    This is apparently possible under Article 7 of the 2004 EU directive on free movement, which gives EU members power to define it “without prejudice to national border controls”.

    UKBA are reported as saying ” EU nationals who want to stay in UK for more than three months must have proof they are working /studying/self sufficient.
    Wherever we encounter someone breaking the rules, we will take steps to remove them”

    Phil Woolas is reported as saying ” ” In practice this provision is simply ignored………….British officialdom interprets the EU’s principle of free movement as an inviolable right”.

    So now we know-you can control immigration from EU.

    But you have to want to do it.

  20. Ambivalent,

    – “I doubt the Tories will be overly concerned with Scotland (or the Scottish electorate).”

    And Scots know that to be true. For how long can the Union survive when only one of the two possible ruling parties gives a toss about Scotland? Not long.

    Sir Walter Scott and his many illustrious Scottish Tory pals must be doing 1000 rpm in their resting places. If he was alive today he would be voting ‘Yes’.

    … they currently only hold one seat, and even a big increase in Tory vote across the UK in 2015 will still not secure them much/any more than this in Scotland. Far better for them to focus on England and Wales, where seats are much more winnable for them and could get them an overall majority.

    If the Tories win a seat in Scotland at the next UK GE I will be astounded. I will be betting heavily against such an event, as and when a bookie sticks their head above the parapet.

  21. I know it’s ultimately up to the client but nevertheless: Thank you, Anthony & YG!

    “Finally on the economy YouGov asked whether people believed the GDP figures, or the claims of some commentators that the unemployment figures suggest that the economy is actually doing better. The majority (61%) of people think the economy is as bad as the official figures suggest, only 18% of people think the employment figures are a better indicator and the economy is, in fact, doing better than the official figures suggest.”

    I really wanted this question to be asked. The public may be able to hold equal & opposite views at the same time – but they do not consider anecdotes to be data. Well done, people! :-)

  22. @Stuart

    I’m old enough to remember (vaguely) when the Tory party was a real political force in Scotland (the land of my birth and where I spent my first 21 years of life) and I don’t remember this at the time but I seem to remember hearing or reading that at one stage the Conservatives were the dominant party at one point in the 50’s believe.

    I can’t see the Tories gaining much vote share any Scot knows they are a toxic brand North of the border (and in a lot of surrounding England as well) and many of their former seats are now held by the SNP places in Perth and the Edinburgh Pentlands, but what effect would losing the referendum have on the SNP?

    Their stated aim, goal, founding principle was to get a referendum on Scottish Independence. If they then lose that referendum theoretically, and by a considerable margin what will happen to them? Will they continue on trying to gather enough support for a second attempt? Will they drop the independence goal and just carry on as being a party for Scotland? Or will they give up after having lost.

    Even if they do continue on, will the rejection of their founding principle not harm their poll ratings somewhat? If the SNP vote especially for a Westminster election falls, the Tories could theoretically pick up seats ( 1 or 2) while not making much of a gain, if any in share of the vote.

    Oh and before I am accused of being a right winger again, this not my desired outcome, I am just pondering the effects of a referendum loss on the SNP. I can’t think of any British example really to my knowledge of a political party who’s core principle was rejected in a referendum they had worked so hard to achieve, so the effects I think could be quite unprecedented, that doesn’t mean I would consider that outcome positive.

  23. Scottish MPs?
    Tories are unlikely to set the heather wildly ablaze but Electoral Calculus have them favourites in 3 Scottish seats (existing boundaries).
    More significantly, the Lib Dems are entirely out of contention everywhere except
    1 Orkney and Shetland and
    2 Wherever C Kennedy stands (if he stands and if as a Lib Dem)

  24. Anmary,

    Point of information: ” to get a referendum on Scottish Independence” was certainly not a “founding principle” of the Scottish National Party. 80 years ago referendums had no role to play. Even as late as the Thatcher period, it was accepted (even by Mrs T herself) that a simple majority of Scottish MPs would be enough to secure Scottish independence. All this referendum enthusiasm is very new-fangled.

    The 50%+ Scottish Tory vote in a 1950s UK GE is a bit of a myth. In order to get to 50%+ you have to add the official Unionist Party (they were not called “Conservatives” then; indeed they hated the word) to the National Liberal and other semi-detached candidates’ votes. Modern results websites nearly always gloss over the different types of Tory candidates in days gone by, but history is not as simple as is often portrayed in modern sources.

    The Aims of the SNP are:

    a) Self -government for Scotland – that is, the restoration of Scottish National Sovereignty by the establishment of a democratic Scottish Parliament within the Commonwealth, freely elected by the peoples of Scotland, whose authority will be limited only by such agreements as may be freely entered into by them with other nations or states or international organisations for the purpose of furthering international co-operation, world peace and the protection of the environment.

    b) The furtherance of all Scottish interests.

  25. @ MIKEN
    ‘Under the DWP’s community action programme (CAP), which has completed a pilot stage and whose rollout is expected to be announced this autumn, people on jobseeker’s allowance for longer than three years must work for six months unpaid or have their benefits stripped from them’

    I totally agree with you. There can be no justification for making people subsidize employers in this way. If there is work for these people to do then pay them at the minimum wage rate less the Jobseekers Allowance they would have received.. The suggested new scheme has more than a whiff of having been put together by the ‘Arbeit Macht Frei’ wing of the Tory party frankly.

  26. Barney,

    “More significantly, the Lib Dems are entirely out of contention everywhere except
    1 Orkney and Shetland and
    2 Wherever C Kennedy stands (if he stands and if as a Lib Dem)”

    This is the first time I can recall ever agreeing with you.

    An interesting (and probably hypothetical) question is: if he doesn’t describe himself as a Scottish Liberal Democrat on the next ballot paper, what description will Charlie Kennedy use?

    My prices:

    Independent Liberal Democrat 13/8 (probably thereby thrashing Danny Alexander)
    Official Scottish Labour Party Candidate 2/1
    Scottish National Party (SNP) 9/4
    Scottish Socialist Party 100/1

  27. Stuart/Barney

    It’s probably the one issue that everyone can agree on – regardless of party label, Charlie Kennedy will any Highland seat that he chooses to contest.

  28. The prospect of independence was a founding principle the referendum as you say is just a means to an end.

    Also your point B “b) The furtherance of all Scottish interests.” answers my question on what will become of the SNP in the event of a loss. But still does not answer how viable that would be. Obviously there is no precedent for any of this, at least not in UK politics, but from a purely theoretical point of view, losing a referendum on your core principle has to attract some loss of credibility, and with that a loss of voting share. Maybe the effects will be mitigated in Holyrood elections, indeed many friends back home couldn’t care less about Independence but feel the SNP is the right government for Holyrood, but in Westminster, I predict a drop in their vote share if they were to lose the referendum in 2014.

  29. AmbivalentSupporter @ John B Dick,

    “I doubt the Tories will be overly concerned with Scotland (or the Scottish electorate). ”

    Which the chicken, which the egg?

    If it had been otherwise, there would be no SNP.

  30. ANMARY

    ” feel the SNP is the right government for Holyrood, but in Westminster, I predict a drop in their vote share if they were to lose the referendum in 2014.”

    That’s a distinct possibility. However, another possibility could be that Scots choose to vote SNP to increase the pressure for Devo Max. Polling continues to suggest that option is one around which two-thirds of Scots can coalesce.

    Labour could avoid that by adopting a Devo Max/Plus position, but they show no signs of doing that at the moment.

  31. @Stuart Dickson

    This suspicion is reinforced by the lastest betting odds for the next UK GE:
    Most Seats
    Lab 10/11

    “Con EVS
    LD 100/1
    UKIP 125/1
    Now, if punters really did believe recent polling, which puts the Tories as low as 30%, then I can assure you that CON would be longer than Evens. The only reasonable explanation is that punters just don’t trust the polling at the moment, or else believe that there will be a powerful Con “Swingback” as polling day approaches.”

    This is a truly instructive comment Stuart. I approve. Follow the money! The Tories are still well and truly in the race.

  32. Anmary @ Stuart

    “…. but what effect would losing the referendum have on the SNP?”

    The membership would be disheartened, and melt away for a few years.

    AS will still be FM.in 2015. It is up to EM to lose the 2015 in Scotland with a negative campaign which is irrelevant to Scotland. He can do it if he tries!

    In 2016 oddly, it would then be possible for the anti-tory voter to vote SNP without any fear of aiding the drift to independence. If Labour continue to be regarded as Tory-lite and perform poorly in the Scottish Parliament their losses could still boost the SNP or Socialist/Green vote.

    In the long run there would be more salami sliced devolution. The Scottish Greens may become the third party in the SP and Glasgow could elect a Socialist..

  33. And yet again time to trot out “Betting Odds Have No Better Information Than Polling”. Betting odds are set primarily by how much people bet. People who bet money on political outcomes tend to do so for irrational reasons. (I know the only time I’ve ever done so was to ‘have a laugh’.) Both bookies odds and betting markets have shown that “the wisdom of the crowd” does not apply to election results, it instead simply reflects the biases of those who bet money on these outcomes.

    The odds on favourite for the last election was a clear Conservative Majority.

  34. @Alec
    On the issue of benefits i imagine that attempts to cut them may well be popular.

    Some benefits should perhaps be cut or at least taxed (as a relatively old person, I like getting free television and bus rides and a winter fuel allowance but don’t particularly see why I should get them simply because of my age ).

    In addition there are no doubt among the poor some scroungers, feckless mothers, irresponsible fathers and so on who might (although I doubt it) get more benefit from one of Ms Casey’s tough love super nannies. (Hopefully their children will not be made to starve as part of bringing the family to terms with reality). In default of any evidence that such schemes would work on a widespread basis, I see no more case for extending their use to the poor than in applying similar remedies to the minority of bankers whose inadequate potty training or socialisation or whatever has far more likelihood of causing economic harm.

    That said, the people of working age I know who are on benefit do not fit the stereotype in which I suspect that Osborne believes. If they are of working age, there is nothing they would like more than a job. Sadly, they are prevented from getting one by circumstances (divorce, children etc), ill health and the state of the jobs market. Some work experience may indeed be worthwhile, providing a structure to the day, company and a sense of worth. In a few cases this may even provide skills and/or lead to a job. But a lot of it seems to me an extensive way of washing our hands of the problem. Companies use their work experience trainees as cheap labour who stack shelves, get no worthwhile skills, and no supervision or appraisal and may be disliked by their workmates as providing a means for cutting down any possible overtime.

    So you are surely right in wanting to see any cuts in benefit to those of working age packaged with a really determined drive to get full-employment, and presumably aligned with policies on apprenticeships, retraining, investment, meaningful jobs etc. A policy which exports yet more economic risk from the rich to those without money seems to me immoral and an unfair way of putting the blame for the unemployment rate on individuals..

    My question is do you see any party which has a realistic chance of bringing in the sort of policy on jobs etc which I think you want?

  35. JAYBLANC

    “The odds on favourite for the last election was a clear Conservative Majority.” – which was also what the polls were suggesting until near the end of the 2010 campaign.

    Just as the polls were suggesting a Labour win in Scotland – until near the end of the 2011 campaign (Stuart will know whether the betting markets were more accurate in the run up to these elections).

  36. “The odds on favourite for the last election was a clear Conservative Majority.”

    Here are the betting odds on the General election morning when the polls opened in 2010, courtesy of politicalbetting:

    http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/05/06/the-opening-markets/

  37. Poll shows SNP leading across the board

    Sun, 29/07/2012 – 10:42

    Detailed analysis of the Sunday Times/Real Radio poll by Panelbase shows that the SNP is leading across all age groups, genders, socio-economic groupings and resident types in both the constituency and regional polls for the Scottish Parliament.

    The overall poll puts SNP support at 47% in the constituency vote for the Scottish Parliament – a 2% increase since the historic election result of 2011 with the three other parties falling back or remaining static. Labour were at 32%, the Tories 12% and the LibDems trailing badly at 6%.

    The regional vote also puts the SNP up 2% since 2011 on 46% with Labour 18 points behind on 28%, the Tories on 11%, the Greens 2% ahead of the LibDems on 6% and others on 4%.

    Commenting on the poll breakdowns the SNP’s Campaigns Director Angus Robertson MP said…

    “fan dabby dozy” ;)

  38. ALLAN CHRISTIE

    Details of the data are here

    http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/news/file/july_panelbase_sunday_times_poll_breakdowns.pdf

    While the figures have been taken by the SNP from the Panelbase data, anyone disputing them would also have to publish any contradictory figures.

  39. GRAHAM.

    Good Evening. On Blair again.

    He was and is a catholic christian socialist.

    He won three GE’s in a row, easily.

    He enabled tories to vote Labour.

    (By the way, has any polling been done to discern whether many people know that TB actually won the Games for Britain?

  40. @BILLY BOB
    `The surrendering of directorships does seem to be a milestone of sorts for UK politics, so I will try again with a different link`

    Sure…But it takes self-confidence to ignore the numerous carcasses of politicians strewn on the wayside and go against what`s been the norm for 33 years.

  41. @ Old Nat

    “Just as the polls were suggesting a Labour win in Scotland – until near the end of the 2011 campaign (Stuart will know whether the betting markets were more accurate in the run up to these elections).”

    If you did some political betting, you could probably secure your retirement. Or you could claim to be a psychic.

    @ All

    Ot, I’m watching the Olympics and I’m very happy with Team USA’s victory over Montenegro in men’s waterpolo. It was 8-7 so exciting to the end. It’s one of the only sports in the Olympics I really care about even remotely. It surprises me how tall the waterpolo players are (at least the American players). It’s almost like looking at a volleyball team or a basketball team (where height matters). I played waterpolo in high school and we had good players of all heights, it never seemed to make that much of a difference. Height only made a difference when it came to goalies (we always had tall goalies). I’m sure those people who study the science of Olympic physicality could explain why that is (those people who can explain why divers and gymnasts are short and why rowers and volleyball players are tall).

    NBC has some beautiful shots of London in its coverage. Reminds me of why I love the city so much.

  42. SOCALLIBERAL

    For me to succeed in betting on anything, I would need a time machine! :-)

  43. @ Roger Mexico (from the previous thread)

    “Not disagreeing with you but there’s an interesting clash here about ethics. The anger from Cavendish (and I suspect the rest of the cycling team) is because they felt the others (especially the Germans) breached professional cycling ethics where it is expected for members of the leading teams to take the turns at leading the peleton. By forcing the British riders to do 99% of that job, the others (I though the Germans in particular) broke the informal ‘rules’, hence the anger. It also slowed the peleton down.”

    I haven’t been following this but this dicussion makes me wonder about something I hadn’t ever thought of before….Manx Olympians (for that matter, Guernsey and Jersey Olympians too). Do Manx who make it to the Olympics play for the Brits or do you field your own independent Olympic team?

  44. OLDNAT

    Thanks for the link, one for the top drawer…..just in case.. ;)

  45. SOCALLIBERAL

    “Team GB” is a historical accident.

    The BOA has the Olympic charter for Scotland, England and Wales. It also includes territories with no Olympic association outwith the UK state such as Jersey, Isle of Man, Falklands etc.

    Team GB is not the UK state team.

    There is no state team in any sport which competes as United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    Hence why the IOC membership held by the BOA is called “Great Britain” as it a non-political geographical identifier.

    It includes members from outwith the UK and does not have the charter for all the countries within the UK.

    The OCI (Olympic Council of Ireland)hold the Olympic charter for all 32 counties of Ireland including all Northern Ireland.

    Ireland again is a team which is not just the Rep of Ireland state but includes territory outwith their state.

    There are many non-sovereign teams which compete in the Olympics such as Puerto Rico, Cook Islands, Hong Kong etc.

    In fact Hong Kong always had their own Olympic team when they were under British sovereignty.

    Last night you also saw Bermuda, Cayman Islands and British Virgin islands enter the stadium with their team even though they are not independent and still under British sovereignty.

    The other British sovereign territories like Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Falklands, Pitcairn Island, Anguila, British Indian Ocean territory, British Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, Monsterrat, Pitcairn Islands, Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha, Turks and Caicos Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and Akrotiri and Dhekelia all are part of “Team GB”.

    (Hat tip Thistle_2014 )

  46. @ Old Nat

    “For me to succeed in betting on anything, I would need a time machine! :)”

    I’d like a tiome machine myself. Yeah, I’m not a betting man either (though sometimes I’ll offer it when people try to insist some finaccurate act on me and I know better….but then I get greedy and offer to bet a ridiculous amount and then I don’t get taken up on my offer). I have used the slots machine in Vegas….I don’t really like it.

    You understood the dynamics of the Scottish race better than anyone in the news media did. You also predicted the race accurately. So that’s an acheivement.

    Now here’s my record. In 05′, right before the mayoral election, I not only predicted the winner but predicted the exact margin (59%-41%) of the final outcome.

  47. “London 2012 are planning a massive nationwide Torch Relay around the United Kingdom and will ask the IOC that they are allowed to include Ireland as the OCI represents the whole of the island, not just the Republic.”

    http://www.olympicsport.ie/summer-games/london2012/3609-president-mcaleese-and-pat-hickey-visit-2012-olympic-park.html

    Hmmm… interestinger and interestinger…

    See also:

    “Although Hong Kong is not an independent sovereign state, the territory is guaranteed by its constitution, the Basic Law, the right to join international organisations that are not restricted to sovereign states… “

    ht tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_Federation_and_Olympic_Committee_of_Hong_Kong,_China

  48. @ Old Nat

    Thank you for that explanation. Very complicated but makes sense. I’m glad that the Manx athletes have a team to play for.

    I wonder what it’s like for Northern Irish athletes to compete under the flag of Ireland.

    I’m surprised Puerto Rico has its own team, I didn’t actually know that. Maybe that’s why there are so many confused right wing ignoramuses who make zenophobic comments in the comments section of news articles dealing with Puerto Ricans. A story about a Puerto Rican criminal will result in comments saying things like “WE NEED TO KICK OUT THEM ILLEGALS!” Articles about Puerto Ricans of any prominence will result in similar stupid comments: “SONIA SOTOMAYOR IS AN AYVIL LIBRUL IMMIGRANT FROM PUERTO RICO WHO IS A JUDICIAL ACTIVIST WHO DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE CHRISTIAN AND FREE MARKET VALUES OF MERICA!” Maybe the Olympics are to blame.

  49. re betting – who is placing money on the Lib Dems to get an OM at 100-1? Surely quicker to just burn your money?

  50. I think I may have underestimated Boris Johnson. For those courteous, and patient, enough to read my many posts this might be seem a puzzling development, but let me explain. I’d tended to regard him, up to now, as an amiable buffoon, capable of moments of extreme crassness but, occasionally, crowd-pleasing brilliance too. Politically, I’d never taken him seriously, tending to think he was essentially a walking triumph of style over substance. Somebody from such a rarefied and privileged background that he could afford to belittle politics and politicians as if he was the only one clever enough to get the joke. I still harbour some of these doubts about him now, but his positive and genuinely emotional reaction to the Olympics opening ceremony, and his disdainful dismissal of right wing nutcases like Hitchens and Burley, who have condemned Boyle’s masterpiece as leftist propaganda, suggests a far more nuanced and intelligent politician than I’d given credit for.

    I wonder if he’s becoming like Ted Heath and is starting to despise his own party more than those of his opponents. If so, maybe Cameron, certainly, and possibly Miliband too, ought to start to get worried. A leader in today’s IoS is interesting on this: –

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-camerons-dilemma-is-johnsons-opportunity-7986004.html

1 2 3 4