This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 41%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 9%. The change is very small, but YouGov’s reported level of Lib Dem support does seem to have crept up slightly over the last month or two – the average Lib Dem score in YouGov’s December polls was over 10 for the first time since 2010, and the four polls so far this year have all had them at 10 or above.


276 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 32, LAB 41, LD 11, UKIP 9”

1 2 3 6
  1. MPs voting on 1% benefit cap today will be interesting to see. The argument that Labour are pushing (that 60% of people affected are in employment is a potent point) but Conservatives/LD obviously thinks this is a weakness for Labour, who they still perceive as to be “weak” on benefits.

    The compulsory jobs scheme proposed by Labour seems a good alternative (extension of Future Jobs Fund) but would be good to find out further policy details e.g. which fields would training/jobs be offered? Manufacturing? Retail? Services sector? Why only minimum wage and not living wage etc

  2. Good speech from David Miliband in the Welfare uprating bill.

    Surely he will be making a return to the front bench this year?

  3. John Ruddy,it is definitely rumoured.Intriguing to wonder what position he will
    Have.I agree about the speech!

  4. Good Evening All.

    I agree the Lib Dem figure seems to be firming up.

    On the Dave M speech: although good, it is foolhardy, from an electoral viewpoint, for Labour to appear to be to the left of majority opinion.

    The ‘shirkers’ attack seems to be a Lynton Crosby theme.

  5. NEW THREAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    oh bugger. wrong place…… back in a bit.

  6. Chris Lane,and good evening to you from a rather wet South Wales.If the Shirkers rhetoric is an idea of Lynton Crosby’s,it is not a particularly good one,as they seem to be either pretending they never said it in the first place,or
    Backing away from it.To me it seems a typical George Osbornism.But I think
    That it may have caused the Coalition some political damage.

  7. Haven’t listened to any of the benefits debate, I rarely do watch Westminster these days, but for Labour to do well they need to counter the Tory “it’s only fair” argument with one of “kicking someone when they are down”.

    It’s all very well to say, everyone should take their share of the cuts but that overlooks individual circumstances and needs.

    Give the financial situation the Uk is in and it’s cost we could probably cut the NHS drugs bill if we decided that every women with breast cancer got 15% chemotherapy but I don’t think it would be right or fair.

    An issue Labour need to counter with Benefit cuts is allowing the Tories to portray Benefits as a benefit an extra only some get and which they either don’t deserve or don’t need.

    Labour has to get back to portraying them as a life line and if you cut a bit off that it won’t reach and you drown.

    Holyrood is having it’s own debate on the issue today… but I haven’t listened to that either……

    Peter.

  8. Colin (FPT)

    Cuts “good or bad for the economy” ?

    Net Bad-5 down from 17

    Cuts “Having an impact on your life” ?

    Net Yes-30 down from 41

    All MOE I expect ?

    Probably mostly just due to a slightly Bluer sample. There may be a seasonal element as well. The equivalent poll this time last year, ie the first one to ask these questions after the Christmas break, showed similar movement. It may just be effect of not thinking much about such things recently. When January’s bills come in, opinions may change.

    That or the cuts have meant that all the poor people have had their internet disconnected.

  9. At the 2010 election the combined Tory/UKIP share was 40% in GB. With this poll it’s actually higher at 41%.

  10. Roger

    “That or the cuts have meant that all the poor people have had their internet disconnected.”

    lol, but I’m thinking that internet connection is more important than food, it is for me!!!!

  11. Andy Js,

    “At the 2010 election the combined Tory/UKIP share was 40% in GB. With this poll it’s actually higher at 41%.”

    That may well be true but if one side gets 66% of the vote spread evenly over three parties and the other side has one party that gets the remaining 33%, even outvoted two to one it could win every seat.

    Thats’ FPTP for you.

    Peter.

  12. Chris,
    While it’s probably a politically bad move in the short-term (we’ll have to see if it actually does any damage to VI), it may pay off for Labour to oppose it, in the long time. Again, wait and see.

    Labour’s whole narrative is probably the most self-defeating aspect of it – their opposition (that it’ll hit low-paid and middle-class families, while the wealthy get tax cuts) still buys in to the whole narrative framework (strivers vs shirkers) that the coalition set up.
    Which gives the coalition (Conservatives especially) automatic control of any future debates about the welfare state.

    Labour should have just stuck to the facts – that had benefits been linked to wages, while they would have fallen in the past few years, they would now be far higher and far more expensive in total.
    And that Osborne’s own deficit reduction plan is harmed through the removal of some of the automatic stabilisers.

    See:
    http://notthetreasuryview.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/the-economic-impact-of-uprating-policy.html

    It should also be a policy, in the long term, that should worry those who’re concerned about the size of the state.
    If the Conservatives successfully make the connection that benefit increases should be tied to wages (rather than inflation), then Labour could implement such a policy the next time they’re in power (increasing benefits, including WTC, in line with average wages) – meaning that the total size of the benefit bill would soar during good economic times (but also face automatic cuts during downturns).

  13. Roger Mexico

    @”Probably mostly just due to a slightly Bluer sample. ”

    Thanks.

    I get quite confused about comments like that-I thought weighting sorted that out.

    But I’m not putting any particular significance on those trends-unless they sustain.

    Vox pops on the benefit cap today have been interesting.

  14. @”On the Dave M speech: although good, it is foolhardy, from an electoral viewpoint, for Labour to appear to be to the left of majority opinion.”

    I don’t think this is anything to do with left / right-which means nothing to the average voter anyway.

    This is GO/IDS fighting back on the “fairness” front.

    Hope the Polls track opinion changes so we can tell who won.

  15. @ Colin

    Labour won. The Tories are dialling down their strivers v skivers rhetoric.

  16. AMBER

    Think I’ll wait for an objective assessment-thanks anyway.

    Interested that the issue for you is words, rather than policy

  17. Also, since I didn’t see this in the previous thread:
    Lord Ashcroft’s take on ‘Can the Conservatives win?’
    http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2013/01/lord-ashcroft.html
    Given that he’s the only one who actually seems bothered to do the polling research on the question, it would be unwise for the Conservatives to ignore him.

    His overall message is: It’s the economy, stupid and he makes some good points about Labour’s weakness in that area (both in terms of plans and in terms of their own supporters).

  18. @ Colin

    There was no need for this Debate or vote. It was widely acknowledged as being a ‘political trap’ for Labour. This is about positioning & framing. The words, the narrative, the rhetoric is what this ‘trap’ was all about.

    It is now acknowledged by all the LibDems & by David Cameron, apparently, that the Coalition needs to change their tone. Labour has won.

  19. Gov win vote on benefit cap (nobody is surprised):
    328 votes to 262

    There was an indication that around 5 LibDem MPs would vote against and the numbers look roughly right for that – it’ll be interesting to see which ones did.

  20. While it’s true, the Lib Dem VI has shifted from a 9% average (Jan – Nov) to a 10% average (December) to 10.5% in the first 4 polls this month, I’m aware that it did the same thing at the end of 2011 and to a smaller extent in 2010. In both years, it soon reverted back to a 9% average again.

    A graph of 2012 VI for Lib Dem looks very similar to that of 2011. I’ll be more encouraged if our VI is still in double figures in a couple of weeks.

  21. It’s not really strivers v skivers, of course that’s the wrapping but the real thing is if we squeeze these people you might be able to keep your lifestyle. No one would put it like that because it would be electoral suicide but that’s what’s really going on and most people know it on a subliminal level. It would work as well if only the coalition had not reduced the top rate of tax

  22. PB has a link to Labours list of eighty target seats for 2015. Here is the Scottish list.

    Argyll & Bute 4.4% LibDem (4,018)

    Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale 4.6% Tory (4,194)

    Dundee East 2.2% SNP (1,821)

    East Dunbartonshire 2.3% LibDem (2,184)

    Edinburgh West 4.1% LibDem (3,803)

    Three Libdem , one SNP, one Tory.

    Easy to see who Labour is after and on current polling I’d say they could well get all five, although I think we could hold Dundee.

    What the SNP need to do is get more of the 10% who voted Libdem than Labour do… No easy task.

    Edinburgh West had 23% Tory at the last election so they might save the LibDems but only if they still dislike Labour more than the LibDems by 2015.

    What happens to the 20% who voted Libdem in Dumfress
    could decide the Tories only seat in Scotland?

    Peter.

  23. @Richard in Norway

    Not correct. There are plenty of decent people, i would suggest the majority in this country who do not think like you even subliminally on this issue. Of course you are in Norway and i do not have a view on people there.

  24. “We should consider abolishing the retirement age. If you want to work and can work, you should be allowed to continue to do so. We should dismiss the notion that at a certain age we should stand aside. Saving for retirement should receive greater encouragement, perhaps through the concept of SARA (a savings and retirement account) an ISA and pension combined.”
    ———–
    More on abolishing the retirement age as proposed by the 2020 Group. This is a move towards not allowing people to have the state pension & work at the same time, IMO.

  25. AMBER

    Great!

    Well done .

    ( wonder why Byrne made such a fuss about opposing it if there was no need for it )

  26. Toh

    It’s not even subliminal with you.

  27. TOH

    RiN prefers subliminal.

    It adds that air of dark conspiracy , and wicked Tories plotting to kill babies & feed them to millionaires , whilst bankers look on & laugh.

  28. Well,we shall just have to see if here is any lasting movement in the polls.
    However as Amber and I agree,the strivers v shirkers may have done them
    Damage.If not in the short term ,then the long.I still think that the DM speech is
    Really going to be the focus of political opinion,which rather deflects Osbournes trap.Was he even there,by the way?

  29. The bankers are laughing though. All the way to the. .. erm bank.

    Millionaires are doing quite well also. That’s not really in dispute.

    It’s just the baby thing that there’s currently a vague on. But a real terms benefit cut probably ain’t gonna help. Even middle class kids are Vienna take a hit on child benefit.

  30. Vienna = gonna.

  31. @ Colin

    It adds that air of dark conspiracy , and wicked Tories plotting to kill babies & feed them to millionaires…
    ——————-
    Like during the Irish famine?

  32. But chrislane didn’t you say it would be electoral suicide to elect ed? the red ed propaganda attacks by friendly journalists didn’t last long after totally going over the publics head. If all politics is about is staying safe and doing what the polls (which are often contradictory depending on how a question is asked) say now then no wonder the public are cynical about the motives of politicians. If Labour believe in opposing the policy then they’re right to vote against it.

  33. @Peter Cairns

    The whole thing is up on Labour List:

    http://labourlist.org/2013/01/labours-106-battleground-target-seats-for-2015/

    It would be interesting to hear your perspective on the prospects of the SNP vs Labour at the next election. My impression had been that SNP stood a good chance of beating Labour to the Lib Dem carcass, particularly in the Highlands. Do you think the SNP will worry Labour in any of their seats? I’m thinking, in particular, of Falkirk and Ochill and South Perthshire.

  34. Colin

    You must be referring to the famous idea of Johnathon swift, I forget now if he avocated selling babies as high class food as a solution to the Irish problem or the working class problem

  35. If a STRIVER loses his/her job, does he/she become a SHIRKER?

    And if a SHIRKER gets a job, does that make them a STRIVER?

    Seems a simplistic lot of nonsense to me…

  36. I don’t think GO reads UKPR or he would know that Labour just need to keep their own voters, motivate their soft voters to vote and keep the Lib Dem defectors to win an OM.

    So the ‘trap’ has the wrong bait a trap for Labour is to make them vote for things lefties dislike or against things lefties like.

    For Labour to fall in the trap they would have had to vote FOR the benefit cap. Maybe that was the Tory plan but Labour out smarted them.

  37. If only Labour did the things that the Conservatives kept telling them to do, then things would work so much better!

  38. I personally think that it would have been better for Labour to vote for the 1%benefit rise.Rightly or wrongly,the country believes that welfare mushroomed under Labour and they could have neutralised one of the Tories` main attacking points by hugging them closely.

    It would be a disappointment for Lefties they penalise the poor….There was a 3/4ths majority support for the measure amongst the public and Labour have to work harder on other issues to convince them of their fiscal continence

  39. I think it’s disgraceful that the link to inflation has been removed by this government in what comes across as being for spiteful reasons only.

    When banks are bailed out to the tune of billions & pensioners are protected at all costs, the denial of an additional 71p per week to someone on JSA is abhorrent in my book.

    The impact assessment published by the DWP today states quite clearly that 10m households will be adversely affected and mostly it’s the very poorest households that are most affected.

    Percentages are meaningless. 1% of average salary = £265 per annum whereas 1% of JSA rates = £36.92 per annum – a huge difference and the reason why the govt prefer to talk in %ages rather than monetized terms.

  40. Not IMHO a particularly good day for the Coalition or Labour. Bit weird of the Tories to announce some luxury spending on a transport system nobody outside London uses much ( I do as I don’t drive) then cut money for the poor while Labour, for some reason best known to themselves, said the Army needed more manpower for Afghanistan. days like this remind me of Cromwell and the Rump.

  41. AMBER

    Really?-is that what happened?

    RiN

    Yes -that’s him. Much revered to this day by bloodsucking Conservative MPs everywhere

  42. Wolf,who is Cromwell?

  43. Ann

    Oliver cromwell

  44. Colin Green

    Interesting post and good to see the non-partisan approach, good on you mate.

    I doubt whether anyone in Great George Street is opening champagne, as indeed you suggest they should not!

    Still, it’s not down in the singles as AW points out.

  45. RinN, ahem,as a history teacher I know who Cromwell was!I just wondered
    Who he was in Wolfs analogy.LOL.

  46. Smukesh

    Which polls are you looking at? I haven’t seen a poll showing anything like three quarters support, apart from the push poll* conducted by Populus for the S*n. Properly-conducted polls tend to show either the public fairly evenly split but leaning ever so slightly towards the Tory position when given a straight choice, or overwhelmingly on Labour’s side of the argument when a range of choice are presented.

    Also, it’s a big mistake to just look at the raw numbers. What also matters greatly is whether a party is seen as well-intentioned. YouGov’s poll at the weekend showed Labour ahead 30-22 on the issue of welfare reform, so I can only presume there is a widespread perception of the Tories not being well-intentioned. Secondly, those directly affected by policies will feel much more strongly than the average person. Thirdly, even a policy that is on the face of it popular can still reinforce negative perceptions about a party. These reasons combined mean that a policy can both poll well and still have a negative impact on a party’s support.

    Of course the above points would only be valid if the Tories’ policy of a 1% uprate were wildly popular, which it ain’t.

    Finally, much of the reason why politicians are held in such low repute and why so many people are so demoralised by the whole process is they all seem to poll-watch, and obsess over ‘neutralising weaknesses.’ A bit of standing on principle wouldn’t go amiss.

    * I know Anthony might take issue with me calling the Populus poll a push poll, but as far as I’m concerned any poll designed to not measure public opinion, but instread to cause a stir, make a policy look more popular than it actually is and thus influence opinion via the herd effect, is pretty much a push poll

  47. Some more points:

    Politicians who want to win elections always have to walk a fine line between being in tune with the public and being trailblazers for radical news ways. I find much of the analysis regarding what position Labour should take on welfare reform depressingly narrow and focused far too much on raw poll numbers, thus overlooking that fact that Labour are still more trusted on the issue, as the YouGov poll at the weekend showed.

    Politicians need to calculate which issues they can be a little out of line with the public and how far out of line they can afford to be, because it’s no good winning an election if you’ve ruthlessly eliminated everything that was distinctive about you and thus have no mandate to do anything meaningful.

    Lastly, many people are making the mistake of looking at what the polls are saying now, rather than imagining what they’ll be saying in May 2015. It’s easy to forget both that something like 80% of the planned spending cuts are still to come, and that public opinion can be very volatile even in good times. Lest we forget that when plans for ID cards were first announced, they had 80%+ support…

  48. Good Evening All. Wet in New Forest it was.

    I think that Labour has fallen into the trap of being shown as the party of ‘the poor’

    Gerald Kauffman used to point out that the vast majority of people are not poor.

    IDS, I think, spoke well today, and Cameron is to be credited for letting him get on with the job.

    David M was impressive also. Maybe next party leader?

  49. @Peter Cairns

    Are you not being a touch pessimistic?Is it not a case of whether the SNP pick up seats off Labour, not the other way around? I’d have thought that Labour would be reasonably content if they pick up enough seats off the others to offset any such losses, particularly if they can get Dumfriesshire.

  50. CL:

    “Wet in New Forest it was”

    Is that a literal translation from German or wot?

1 2 3 6