The monthly ICM poll for the Guardian is out and has topline figures of CON 31%(-3), LAB 41%(+2), LDEM 14%(-1), Others 14%. In the last couple of years ICM have tended to show smaller Labour leads than many other polling companies for methological reasons, so while ten point leads for Labour have been two-a-penny these last six months, for ICM it is a very large lead, the biggest they’ve shown since 2003. The poll also has UKIP at 6% – a high figure for a telephone pollster.

There is also a new TNS BMRB poll out with topline figures of CON 28%(-3), LAB 44%(+1), LDEM 8%(-1), Others 19%(+2) (including UKIP at 7% and the Greens at 5%). While TNS do tend to show some of the largest leads anyway, the sixteen point Labour lead is the largest any company has shown this Parliament. Suffice to say, I think we can write off the sharp narrowing of the lead in the weekend ComRes poll as an outlier!

From here on in we are into conference season polling. In some past years this has produced a rollercoaster effect, with each party enjoying a boost in the polls in the immediate aftermath of their conference and their leader’s conference address. In other years it has had hardly any effect… we shall have to see which sort of conference season 2012 is.


313 Responses to “New ICM and TNS-BMRB polls”

1 2 3 4 5 7
  1. @Alan Christie – absolutely and entirely disagree. Making a comment about an individual in a situation that was thought to be entirely private and not in front of the individual concerned simply does not rank alongside repeatedly using the F word to a WPC in public who was quite correctly carrying out her job, calling her names and making implied threats to her job.

    We all have thoughts about other people and situations in life that we keep to ourselves in private, whether those thoughts are noble or otherwise. Letting it out in public is a huge difference.

    Really don’t know where some people get these notions from sometimes.

  2. Let’s not get into a “which MPs misdeeds were better/worse than other MPs misdeeds” discussion. Such things are not quantifiable, it just becomes a game of “select examples of nasty things MPs from party I don’t like has done”. Yawn.

  3. Billy Bob (11:02) – thanks for that. I knew I’d seen an accusation of a more serious threat, but couldn’t remember where. Sourcing is a bit vague though, so we’d probably better stick with the Telegraph’s version.

    Meanwhile I hope Colin and Statgeek have complained to the BBC in the strongest possible terms for having failed to conform to their prejudices in having reported on something that they feel should have been reported on.

    Actually if you read the BBC story, it explains why the Times piece isn’t much of a story as news. The court cases took place back in 2010 and there was much criticism of the police’s failure to act back then – the BBC has had to bulk out the story with some rather odd complaints from Denis McShane to make it look relevant.

    Attempts were made from various quarters then to make out that it was because of “political correctness” and that Asians were being allowed to get away with sex abuse. The sad truth was simply that the sort of people who tried to complain to the police were the sort of people most likely to be ignored by them (female, teenage, underclass, often with a criminal record or in care) and they were complaining about the sort of crime the police saw as most inconvenient to deal with.

  4. I suppose the proper response would have been to discuss which misdeed had the more significant poll effect. As I recall, Bigotgate had a limited effect, probably because Brown’s reputation and Labour’s poll ratings were already on the floor, but maybe also because it didn’t really chime with where Brown comes from to those people left supporting him.

    Gate gate might be different, as the episode taps into deep seated fears of Tory high handedness, although again, I may be reading too much into poll movements and how they coincide with marginal events.

  5. ROGER MEXICO

    @”Actually if you read the BBC story, it explains why the Times piece isn’t much of a story as news. The court cases took place back in 2010 and there was much criticism of the police’s failure to act back then ”

    Actually if you read the TIMES revelations from FoI disclosure, the story is EXACTLY the same one as emerged from the recent Hillsborough Report.
    It is about South Yorkshire Police and the “secretive, arrogant bureaucracy ” (1)which prevailed there.

    Of course , the victims in this case were not football fans, but vulnerable young girls-and they are still living with their pain .

    It is very clear from the reports that part of the problem was indeed a concern to avoid airing issues which might cause local ethnic tension ( 2)

    (1) Dennis MacShane MP
    (2) Rotherham Safeguarding Children Board – these crimes have” sensitivities of ethnicity which are locally sensitive in terms of diversity…..imperative that suggestions of a wider cultural phenomenon are avoided”. as reported in The Times.

  6. Danny Alexander , in his speech this morning criticised Labour.

    Vince Cable, in his speech yesterday criticised Conservatives.

    Tells you all you need to know about the Liberal + Social Democrat Party.

  7. ” a person under age of consent who suffers grooming or sexual abuse is a victim, whatever the circumstances. The allegations uncovered by The Times and the alleged indifference of the agencies involved are horrific”

    Mathew Reed
    CEO Childrens’ Society.

    “the insidious and misguided hand of political correctness allowed sensitivities about cultural background of the perpetrators to hinder a full investigation into this cancerous abuse of vulnerable children”

    Tim Loughton.
    former Children’s Minister.

  8. Colin:

    I take it you believe that Labour and Tories only differentiate themselves from just one other party?

    Otherwise what’s your point – assuming you have one.

  9. For the sake of the sanity, and even temper, of all of us who read this normally excellent site, please can we shut down the thinly disguised party political points that some are trying to score from distressing, yet highly unusual, cases of organised child molestation.

    Such debates have no place in either a political, cultural or racial context. They are acts of human wickedness and criminality which, I fear and suspect, will continue as long as mankind walks this earth. To couch them in debates about alleged local authority negligence or police failure, or whatever other thinly veiled stick we choose to beat the powers that be, is a dreadful example of petty politicking at its absolute worst. It’s as pointless as claiming that “Britain is broken” whenever acts of unspeakable barbarity periodically surface; as they occasionally always have and, as in the South Yorkshire case, regrettably always will.

    Nobody’s fault but the atrocious human beings who perpetrate them.

  10. As the famed Rugby headmaster Arnold put it: ‘First religious and moral principle, second gentlemanly conduct, third academic ability.’

  11. @Roger

    “Meanwhile I hope Colin and Statgeek have complained to the BBC in the strongest possible terms for having failed to conform to their prejudices in having reported on something that they feel should have been reported on.”

    I fail to see how being more inclined to objective and balanced reporting is prejudiced. The BBC have maintained a story of how one man is accused of calling another man an inoffensive name, while in another story a police force are accused of withholding information.

    Since I pay for the news they choose to serve, I reserve the right to complain. If there is prejudice, it would appear to be among those are fine to see police corruption.

  12. @Colin – “Tells you all you need to know about the Liberal + Social Democrat Party.”

    Presumably that they are neither Tory nor Labour and don’t see UK politics as being solely bipolar?

  13. For the sake of the sanity, and even temper, of all of us who read this normally excellent site, please can we shut down the thinly disguised party political points that some are trying to score from distressing, yet highly unusual, cases of organised child molestation.

    ————-
    Absolutely GATE GATE is quite sufficient for the purposes of those who can’t resist a bit of point scoring.
    Serious organised abuse really should be off limits

  14. Colin

    I think you’ve missed my point. It’s whether the Times story was news (which is why I used italics the first time too). It is estimable and interesting and should be the stuff of features and analysis and editorials, but there was nothing particularly surprising about it. The police had admitted their errors at the time and appear to have taken corrective action. I seem to remember that there were individual officers who also did their best from the start.

    So it seems odd to denounce the BBC for not featuring it as news.

    Especially when they did.

  15. So…

    have the polls moved or not? What’s the verdict?

  16. @NickP

    Cautiously, I’d say yes. Probably in part due to the undue prominence given to poor Mr Mitchell in the crypto-Communist BBC, which has boosted the Socialist Party under young Tedward Miliband.

    But on a serious note, I’d put a fiver on a LAB 48 before the year’s out (only as an outlier, mind)

    What do you know? My spellcheck says outlier isn’t a word. However, it (rather ironically) says spellcheck isn’t a word either, so…

  17. I’m hoping for a Lab 50% within a twelvemonth. Oh, if only it really WERE a socialist party.

  18. Or even slightly left wing

  19. Labour is extraordinarily left-wing, isn’t it? That nice Daniel Hodges in the Telegraph says it is, and he doesn’t have an angle or anything, does he?

  20. Oldnat

    That’s almost unbelievable

  21. @THE WASH
    “Given that the story from the Lib Dem conference is to stay the course for the sake of the economy, I don’t see how they can now or even in the near future pull the plug”

    But surely the Liberals at the next piece of bad economic news can say Osborne’s policies aren’t working, They are not listening to us, we want out. Get rid of Clegg. New Leader and very grateful country with Liberals getting the credit for getting rid of the Tories. Lots of votes enough to deny Lab an OM then coalition with Labour.

    If I was a liberal that would be my plan. If things do not improve polling wise by early next year.

  22. Reports that Boris Johnson backs the police over Andrew Mitchell.Boris seems to take every opportunity to differentiate himself from Cameron.

    Seems to me that Boris will make a challenge sooner or later.Every time he challenges Cameron,the PM`s own authority is weakened.

  23. @SMUKESH

    Replacing one old Etonian toff with another is hardly going to help with the ‘arrogant posh boy’ accusation.

  24. @COUPER2802

    `Replacing one old Etonian toff with another is hardly going to help with the ‘arrogant posh boy’ accusation.`

    I thought the same till I learnt that Boris got into Eton on a scholarship and because of his charisma he could transcend this drawback easily …In my view a Tory party led by Boris would offer a formidable challenge as long as no skeletons tumble out of his private life

  25. @COUPER2802
    Perhaps Boris has managed to shake off the “arrogant” part of that tag. After all, there are plenty of posh people that the British adore, especially when they’re a “bit of a character”.

  26. statgeek

    I fail to see how being more inclined to objective and balanced reporting is prejudiced. The BBC have maintained a story of how one man is accused of calling another man an inoffensive name, while in another story a police force are accused of withholding information.

    Apologies if the paragraph you quoted was overly complicated, even by my labyrinthine standards, but I was merely trying to point out the humour of Colin and you demanding the BBC report something when they had.

    As far as continuing with the Mitchell case, I don’t see how you can blame them. The Telegraph, Mail etc have all led with it and still have it front page on their website, as is the Sun’s voodoo poll. Boris is busy stoking the fires in his usual manner.

    I suspect if the situation was reversed and a Labour minister was being treated in the same way – even by the Mirror and the Guardian, you might be complaining if the BBC kept quiet on the topic.

  27. @nickp – ” …have the polls moved or not?”

    Over the last four months on YouGov… the weekly average:

    9.0 > 9.0 > 9.0 > 9.6 > 10.0 > 10.6 > 9.4 > 9.4 > 10.0 > 10.0 > 10.2 > 10.6 > 9.4% Labour lead.

    Over the last six weeks individual YouGov polls have been resolutely in the 9-12% range (plus one13 and those three pesky 6s).

    Looking at YouGov there seems to have been a very gradual move from 9 to 10; without the hiccoughs it might have been moving towards an 11% Labour lead.

    So where does YouGov go from now? Will it reinforce ComRes in showing a small Con revival, or will it point to a further Con decline which other polling companies have hinted at over the weekend?

  28. @SMUKESH
    @PEEWEE

    I am not sure he is much of an electoral asset – yes people like posh buffoons but not running the country. After all he just beat Ken Livingston for Mayor. And he would do far less well outside the South.

    He seems to have too much history and too many hostages to fortune i.e Hillsborough.

    Is there any working class Tory that could challenge for leader?

  29. COUPER2802

    I’m not a Tory but I think your dismissal of Boris is a tad unfair. You say “he just beat Ken Livingston for Mayor. And he would do far less well outside the South.”

    But that glosses over 2 key important facts, the first is that London is something of a Labour stronghold, it’s very different from the rest of the south and hence is not usually included in “the south” when discussing politics, despite it’s geographical location, it is usually counted seperately.

    2nd, Boris’ victory no matter how narrow was still an impressing feat especially when on the same day, his party was being electorally slaughtered across the country and Labour had managed to almost gain a majority on the London Assembly which uses the exact same electorate.

    I’m confident that Ed Milliband can beat David Cameron, and will do so in 2015 barring a huge unexpected event. But Boris leaves me less certain, he is something of an enigma, a wild card, it could backfire, but also it could be the game changer the Tories need. I remember no one thought a buffoon like Boris could win in 2008, I remember no one thought Mrs Thatcher could win, and as a Labour supporter, even more recently, people were saying there was no way EdM could win, and now those people have gone silent.

  30. ROGER MEXICO

    @” think you’ve missed my point. ”

    Quite possibly.

    I think you may have missed mine too.
    Still-it is beyond opinion polls-so lets drop it eh?

  31. @OldNat

    Interesting to see even when there’s an absence of electoral considerations (‘they’ll never wear it’ etc), Labour still are positioning themselves ever further Right. Something for nothing? Joke of a party.

  32. @couper2802
    I think there are plenty of words that I would use to describe Boris, e.g. posh, bumbling.
    Equally there are plenty I wouldn’t use to describe him, e.g. arrogant, prime-ministerial.

    Working-class tory leader … I remember watching a tory leadership edition of Question Time in 2001, in which Michael Portillo and Ken Clarke cancelled each other out, Ian Duncan Smith and Michael Ancram were obviously makeweights, and I was struck by David Davis as a strong contender. I wouldn’t bet against him making (yet) another challenge to be tory leader and it could be third time lucky.

  33. CROSSBAT11 @2.43pm

    I really recommend you read Denis MacShane’s article in today’s Times.

    It would help you understand why the mealy mouthed equivocation , of which your post is such a classic example ; has been responsible for the continued , uninterrupted abuse of young girls in his constituency.

  34. @ANMARY

    You could be right but I feel the Tories would have to be desperate to take a chance on Boris because it could backfire very badly.

    And then there is policy if they are replacing Cameron then I assume that it is because he is not Tory enough. Would Boris be seen as quite so cuddly implementing right wing policies.

    The two recent prime miniters that got Tory majorities were very definitely not posh and not from very priviledge backgrounds..

  35. @PEEWEE

    I looked David Davis upon wikipedia – assuming it is all true he has got such a good story, he could capture the public imagination. So yes if I was a Tory MP I would be thinking about David Davis as opposed to Boris.

    Maybe Boris will be a ‘stalking horse’

  36. Davis is a good candidate for Tory leader, he does have the respect of the party and although I don’t like his ideas I do quite like the man, which is only subjective but there are not so many Tories I like, ken is the only other one I can think of

  37. Where is the poll that Ed Davey referenced in this clip – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19715322 – that puts the Lib Dems on 18%?

  38. Couper2802 – there is no need for a “stalking horse” anymore the talk of a couple of MPs trying to persuade Bob Stewart to be one a couple of weeks ago was bizarre in the sense that the Tory leadership rules have changed, and a challenger is no longer required – a confidence vote is triggered by 15% of Tory MPs writing *anonymously* to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee. The leader then wins the vote and stays or loses and goes… only if they are defeated do alternative leaders throw their hats in the ring.

    The old stalking horse thing was under the old rules when any leadership election needed a challenger – it was effectively a way of having a no-confidence vote in the leader without a proper challenger, the stalking horse fulfilling the technically necessary role of putative challenger and presumably dropping out should the vote lead to the fall of the leader. Boris would certainly not be that!

  39. Conrad – it wasn’t a voting intention poll, it was the ICM “wisdom index” at the weekend that asked people to predict what the shares of the vote would be at the next election.

  40. Couper2802/Peewee

    David Davis probably is all you say he is, however, he threw away his chance in 2005 by making possibly the worst pitch ever for party leadership/potential PM. At the tory conference before the vote, he spoke for 45 minutes and the nett sum of his speech was more people in jail and fewer immigrants – hardly a pulsating vision for 21st century Britain. Cameron on the other hand (famously) spoke without notes for 45 minutes…………….. and said absolutley nothing…..

  41. @Anthony Wells

    Thanks – I didn’t know the process had changed.

  42. @Conrad

    Clegg tried the same trick on Andrew Marr on Sunday saying, “some polls have us at 18% which is not too bad”……..shameless these people.
    Surprised and disappointed neither Marr or Neil picked them up on this.

  43. @CORKSCREW
    `Cameron on the other hand (famously) spoke without notes for 45 minutes…………….. and said absolutley nothing…..`

    Not much different since…Why change a winning formula I suppose?

    I am still unsure why they rejected David Davis…Because of one bad speech?

  44. On Boris as Leader,

    I can see why Tories who are worried about their seats might want a change at the top but it strikes me that they already have the most popular leader and there problems come mostly from their current course on the economy which most Tory MP’s support.

    Cameron is more popular than Miliband.
    There economic policy is unpopular.
    They feel they need to be tougher on europe and Immigration but are already tougher than anyone else.

    Boris may well be popular but he is also erratic. Once elected what would his cabinet be like and could he control it.

    Can you run a government properly with a Reagan or Yeltsin who can just open his mouth at any minute and say something that no one expects.

    Be careful what you wish for.

    Peter.

  45. Can anybody tell me why the word pleb’s is any more offensive than the word Toff’s or posh boy , all three are used as insults by certain sections of the population, ironically people who are offended by the use of pleb’s do not hesitate to use the word Toff’s in the same context and visa versa, I can’t think that a seasoned officer would be offended by being called a pleb any more than if they were referred to as a Toff’ however that is usually not relevant as there is any number of people willing to be offended on there behalf. Apologise’s have been given and excepted, perhaps its time to move on to more important things.

  46. @TURK

    Because ‘Pleb’ infers that the person referred to has less status\importance\class than non-Plebs.

    No one infers that posh people are of less status than plebs.

  47. Personally I don`t understand what the fuss is all about…A man losing his temper?Why is that such a big deal?

  48. Because if most people lost their temper and swore at the police they would be arrested.

    I would have thought that was fairly simple to work out.

1 2 3 4 5 7