A quick update on the latest voting intention polling. TNS-BMRB’s weekly poll has topline figures of CON 29%(-2), LAB 38%(-3), LD 11%(+1), UKIP 12%(+2), Others 10% (changes are from a week ago).

Meanwhile this morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun had topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 41%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 8%.

This morning’s Times had some claims about polling conducted by UKIP in Eastleigh. I would advise totally ignoring any claims about “private polling” from political parties unless they cough up the tables so you can see if they were playing a straight bat. More often than not party claims about their “polling” in elections actually means their canvas returns. I’ve dropped a line to the various polling companies just to check none of them have any tables to release under the BPC disclosure rules, but thus far no one seems to have done anything.


476 Responses to “New YouGov and TNS-BMRB polls”

1 8 9 10
  1. John B Dick
    your surgeon sounds like a great manager.

    Report comment

  2. and meeting him sounds like a really good incentive to provide a decent service. There’s a big difference between management theory and real management.

    Report comment

  3. The NHS debate was had on this site a few weeks ago as I recall and it remains a personal opinion.

    My opinion is that the NHS is what has kept me alive. As a disabled person no insurance company would cover me for private insurance and even if they did, there are no private A&E departments in which to seek urgent treatment.

    In any huge organisation there will be errors made. Mid-Staffs is an example nobody wants to see repeated but remember that when the private hospitals make a balls-up, they call an NHS ambulance to take the patient to an NHS hospital for urgent care.

    The problem with 24/7 consultant led care is three-fold: the cost of staff to perform those roles (not just the consultant but anaesthetics dept, theatre staff, pathology as well as porters to move patients as well as ICU staff), the lack of urgent care beds and the lack of available follow-on care by community teams.

    Report comment

  4. The people running our health aren’t necessarily the best systems designers.

    I read a while back that in some hospitals they had achieved considerable success improving operating procedures and outcomes by. .. hiring people from the airline industry to cone in and advise.

    You might be tempted at this point to say that this proves the virtues of the market. But it doesn’t, as we see with banking etc.

    What it proves is the virtue of good systems designers and transparency.

    Airlines have to be both highly efficient – shifting millions around on tight schedules – and VERY assiduous about safety and outcomes. Because a plane dropping out of the sky is rather conspicuously disastrous. Aircraft design also requires ferocious systems skills and intolerance of error. So it’s no surprise if they are good at this stuff.

    A lot of it though is about designing simple failsafe systems. Which we didn’t seem to have initially regarding infection control for example.

    Report comment

  5. @TOH
    “We both know we are right about the NHS”

    Quite a revealing comment, that.

    Report comment

  6. @Phil Haines

    Glad you agree.

    Report comment

  7. Phil Haines

    Careful Phil or they will accuse you of having opinions

    Report comment

  8. carfrew & @statgeek

    “I still don’t have a clue which way to vote. Neither side has convinced me that either option is financially, politically, or personally more attractive to me”

    The details you list will be sorted by international law, negotiation and commonsense. Most of them are obvious emough, and one way or another Scotland will be in the EU unless and until sometime after independence they chose to leave or the UK government takes us out.

    Many of the arguments are promoted by those who have a hidden agenda, and that is often on both sidesof the argument.

    Out of the EU/take the Euro

    Republican or not.

    Pro-free market extremism forced on a impoverished independent state or a Socialist Scotland.

    YES to Scotlands oil or a England subsidised NO.

    “Clean” Nuclear lobby versus renewables etc

    Arguments on both sides use selective data to prove anything you want to prove.

    Almost every day the Scotsman has Alex Salmond “warned” and holes are always “black”

    For my vote I look to the broad issues.

    Independence will protect free NHS and tertiary education.Analysts as far apart as Elizabeth Warren and third world charities see these things as vital in entirely different and extreme situations. Scottish traditions, history and values (that London governments are totally unaware of) point in the same direction. Rightly, in my view, SNP proposals will embed the protection of these things in a constitution.

    I dislike the focus on what are currently topical issues in what should be an enduring document, but Elizabeth Warren’s research has shown me that they are in a class of their own with employment/welfare income protection.

    Of greater potential to make an economic difference in the long run of such a scale as the things each side now claim would better or worse is the management of the rural economy.

    Generations of government by parties focused on economic tribalism, with their roots in big capital and industrial scale organised labour, have ignored the rural economy. Horseburgers is symbolic. The love-in of the NFUS and the Rural Affairs minister shows where Scotland can lead to a different, heatlhier, greener, richer (or less poorer) way.

    There is almost limitless land, renewables, clean air and water, much research in our universities but sigificantly this is untapped potential of no interest to UK party leaders in their PMQ party games. You would be forgiven for thinking that there were no rural issues except hunting with dogs, and that there were no issues with rural schools with small and falling rolls.

    Finaly, with indepenencewe get aunicameral PR parliament fit for a forward thinking nation and bespoke for the1950’s instead of the undemocratic corrupt system that suits only the metropoltan elite.

    Report comment

  9. @Carfrew

    “Airlines have to be both highly efficient – shifting millions around on tight schedules – and VERY assiduous about safety and outcomes. Because a plane dropping out of the sky is rather conspicuously disastrous. Aircraft design also requires ferocious systems skills and intolerance of error. So it’s no surprise if they are good at this stuff.”

    Dare I say it, but we’ll know when we’ve got a great NHS. The airline folk will be asking for the the NHS folk to train them!

    Report comment

  10. Of course if we build loads of social housing we will have to decide whether to repeal the Right to Buy or just wait for all the new houses to go back to the private sector within ten years and leave us mostly back where we started (although there will be a few more houses around, of course).

    RTB was a mistake.

    Report comment

  11. @JBD

    “Independence will protect free NHS and tertiary education.Analysts as far apart as Elizabeth Warren and third world charities see these things as vital in entirely different and extreme situations. Scottish traditions, history and values (that London governments are totally unaware of) point in the same direction. Rightly, in my view, SNP proposals will embed the protection of these things in a constitution.”

    Frankly I would rather any government embedded a ‘no debt’ constitution. The others are affordable with such a plan. Promising all those freebies doesn’t allow for maniac finance ministers with borrowing powers.

    Report comment

  12. statgeek

    As Scotland will be in the Euro they’ll get a “no debt” constitution by defalt, won’t they?

    At least until the powers-that-be realise its utter folly as unemployment soars to dangerous levels in parts of europe.

    Report comment

  13. Rin
    “Deserters used to be shot, shouldn’t we do the same with wealthy people that run from their patriotic duty”

    I’m surprised that you are in favour of capital punishment Roger, I had you down as a liberal, maybe even a Liberal.

    NickP
    Many people who own a buy to let (my son is one), do so because they are looking to the future, when they will retire and they want to make some provision for it. They have lost faith in traditional pension schemes because of the charges and bad experiences of others.

    Whilst doing this, they perform a public good by making property available for rent to others who can’t raise a mortgage, or don’t want to, maybe because they want complete flexibility to move around job wise.

    Rents are linked to property value, by and large, nowadays the gross return from a buy to let is between 3% & 5%. That is before expenses, mortgage payments and tax, so believe me it is not a massive return but it is a return and the hope is, that after 40 years the capital value will have increased & the mortgage repaid. Result, nest egg for retirement.

    So, by all means, bring in rent controls etc etc. and return to the 1950’s, when there was virtually no quality private rented accommodation. The people with buy to let properties will sell them, (because if you can’t make a return on an investment, what is the point of it?) creating a shortage of private rented accommodation and falling house prices (which will be great for new 1st timers but create negative equity for those already on the ladder).

    As all the council houses are now privately owned, where will all these displaced tenants live? Expect a rise in cardboard city.

    So, I do urge you to look at the issue in more detail as your policy might have the opposite effect to what you desire.

    Report comment

  14. NickP,

    Unemployment has already soared to dangerous levels in parts of Europe.

    Where are the powers-that-be realising its utter folly?

    Report comment

  15. Statgeek

    “Frankly I would rather any government embedded a ‘no debt’ constitution”

    No debt= no money, someone has to be in debt inorder for there to be money. The only way you can have a debt free constitution is to have debt free money

    Report comment

  16. @NickP

    By election polling is not at all easy, OE&Sad was Survation’s first attempt… but in a later head to head with Ashcroft they came out on top:

    Feltam and Heston
    Survation: Lab 53%, Con 29%, LD 7%, UKIP 7%, Others 4%
    Ashcroft: Lab 52%, Con 30%, LD 10%, Others 8%
    Result: Lab 54.4%, Con 27.7%, LD 5.9%, UKIP 5.5%, Others 6.5%.

    Other by elections…

    Barnsley Central
    Survation: Lab 63%, Con 13%, UKIP 9%, LD 6%, BNP 4%, Others 5%
    Result: Lab 60.8%, UKIP 12.2%, Con 8.3%, BNP 6%, Ind 5.2%, LD 4.2%, Others 3.2%

    Leicester South
    Survation: Lab 60.8%, Con 19.8%, LD 15.1%, UKIP 5%, Others 0.3%
    Result: Lab 57.8%, LD 22.5%, Con 15.1%, UKIP 2.9%, Others 1.6%.

    Ashcroft can sometimes have a bit of a blindspot when it comes to UKIP…

    Corby
    Ashcroft: Lab 52%, Con 37%, LD 7%, Others 4%
    Result: Lab 48.5%, Con 26.6%, UKIP 14.3%, LD 5%, Others 5.8%

    Report comment

  17. Robert

    I’m very illiberal when it comes to tax avoidance and evasion.

    Report comment

  18. robert newark

    “they perform a public good by making property available for rent to others who can’t raise a mortgage, or don’t want to, maybe because they want complete flexibility to move around job wise. ”

    What they do is they buy property that would normally have been bought by first time buyers, because they can borrow money easier without the need for a big deposit.

    I don’t blame your son (or anybody) for doing it, but the tax regime needs to change to change behaviour.

    Report comment

  19. RiN
    So am on tax evasion (although I still wouldn’t shoot them) but not on anything which is legal, such as tax avoidance.

    It is every persons duty to pay the minimum tax possible. Only an idiot pays tax he doesn’t have to. If you want to do more give it to charity, they will spend it more wisely.

    It is governments responsibility to close the loopholes, or not create them in the first place by having a ridiculously complicated tax code..

    Report comment

  20. Nick P
    “What they do is they buy property that would normally have been bought by first time buyers, because they can borrow money easier without the need for a big deposit.”

    Sorry you are wrong there. Normal deposit for a buy to let mortgage is 30%-40% and even then your rental income must be at least 130% min of you mortgage payments. So you might have to put 50% down.
    A normal 1st time buyer can get a 90% mortgage and may get a 5% kickback from the developer.

    Report comment

  21. Isn’t the UK already exceptionally prone to owner-occupation? My understanding is that private rented accommodation is the norm on the continent (“Buy to Let” in other words).

    Is it causing them huge problems?

    Report comment

  22. Robert

    Well I don’t normally believe in the deterance idea that proponents of capital punishment say exists but with tax evasion I can see that folk would be detered

    Report comment

  23. Neil A
    Indeed. Rents at the end of the day are subject to supply & demand. The problem is with some landlords who specialise in DSS tenants where the rent is paid direct by the local council. They inflate the demanded rent & the council usually just take the demand at face value, perhaps on the basis that it is cheaper than the alternative which is B&B and they haven’t the time or resources to investigate further.
    In my view that is why a cap on housing benefit will be positive, hurting only these landlords in the long run, as they know that they won’t re-let to a non DSS at an inflated price, so they might as well accept the situation.

    Report comment

  24. New, luvly, luvly thread me boyos.

    Report comment

  25. The NHS debate is tedious, so TOH can afford private health care over many years. Lucky him.

    I have incurable cancer, I can’t, I wouldn’t be able to get insurance, not now, not ever. I’m kept alive by the NHS and it’s doing a bloody good job.

    The NHS is a massive employer, of course there will be problems of care. There are also problems of care in private health care practices. My initial diagnoses for cancer was carried out at a famous private hospital in North West london. The ‘famous consultant’ completely missed a massive tumour in my shoulder. I should have sued, I didn’t I’m not like that.

    This debate makes me extremely angry, I can’t in all honesty believe some of the posters aren’t out to score political points.

    Report comment

  26. STATGEEK
    “Dare I say it, but we’ll know when we’ve got a great NHS. The airline folk will be asking for the the NHS folk to train them!”
    They won’t, because they do not have to deal with the constant adaptation of technology to differing environmental conditions and human characteristics that the NHS has to deal with. While the aricraft industry may have technical, organisational and communication skills that can be transferred to other spheres, including medical, just as NASA has had, the NHS has no such privileged high skill access to a “steady state” set of organisational and technical demands which has allowed for the specific high skill management and technology development of the aircraft and space industries..
    Speaking as one of the several contributors who have owed their lives to the NHS (triple bypass at Bath and Bristol) what struck me was the differing skills and organisation between keeping people alive in a restorative environment and the rapidity and high skill and high stamina team work of surgery. They needed vastly differing nursing and care, and thus ward, management.
    I agree with ACADEMIC’s concern that, not only on this thread, a debate on the quality of the NHS and on any alternatives is conducted both with political motive and with commercial interest, driven partly by trans-Atlantic interests which are alien to the standing of the NHS as a national institution. Discussions of management stresses and failures need to be seen separately from the institution and its long term quality and contribution to national wellbeing, and dealt with in their own often local and ephemeral terms, not used to attack the institution itslf and its proven effectiveness and sustainability.

    Report comment

1 8 9 10