This week’s YouGov/Sunday Times poll is up here. Topline figures are CON 29%, LAB 41%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 12%.

Economy

The economic trackers are as bad as usual for the government – people think the government are managing the economy badly by 65% to 25%, 67% think George Osborne is doing a bad job as Chancellor, only 11% of people expect their economic situation to get better in the next twelve months. Asked if the government’s economic strategy is working only 7% think it is, 36% think it isn’t but will in the fullness of time, 45% think it is unlikely to ever work. Take note of these figures – they are the background to this week’s budget and we’ll see next week if it has a positive or negative effect (in recent years budgets have had negative effects far more often than positive ones).

On the budget itself YouGov asked people what they wanted to see happen to spending and taxes in the budget – and how it would be paid for (otherwise everyone tends to say they’d like more spending and less taxes). 32% of people (mostly Conservaitves) said they wanted to see spending cut more, 25% (mostly Labour) that they wanted to see spending cut less, 25% that cuts should stay at about their current level. People were similarly divided on taxes – 24% wanted to see tax cuts, 22% tax rises, 38% that taxes should stay at their current level.

These should all be seen in the context of the more regular YouGov polling on cuts that does show that people dislike the spending cuts – they consistently say they are bad for the economy, too fast and being done unfairly. However they are also consistent in saying that they think they are necessary, which proably explains why people answered this week’s poll as they did.

The survey also asked about ringfencing spending on various areas after Liam Fox’s call for NHS spending not to be protected. His stance was, unsurprisingly, not widely popular! 74% think it is right for NHS spending to be protected, 18% think it is wrong. There is also widespread (67%) support for protecting spending on education, but 76% are opposed to protecting spending on international aid.

Leveson

The poll also had a series of questions on Leveson, which generally speaking show the public pretty evenly divided. Some of the aims of the proposed regulations, such as forcing newspapers to print corrections or making newspapers who do not join the system subject to larger libel fines met with widespread support (90% and 62% respectively), but questions on the details of how the system works met with divided replies and large proportions of don’t knows. To be honest, I suspect that while people would like an effective and independent system of press regulation, few outside the industry or politics really care about the difference between underpinning by royal charter or by legislation.


432 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 29, LAB 41, LD 12, UKIP 12”

1 2 3 4 5 9
  1. Anyone else waiting for runs on banks in Italy, Spain, Portugal?

    Would *you* leave your savings somewhere where they might be arbitrarily subject to confiscation?

  2. Ordinary savers being penalised by the EU for their own government’s profligacy is just the latest sign of the dictatorial tendencies of the EU.
    I was amazed that more fuss wasn’t made about the EU forcing unelected Prime Ministers on Greece and Italy.

  3. @Colin – completely agree on your last post.

    As it stands, I would take the Cyprus deal to mean that there is a depositors guarantee in place, only for as long as the commission decides it will be.

    To me, that is no guarantee.

  4. Alec,

    “As it stands, I would take the Cyprus deal to mean that there is a depositors guarantee in place, only for as long as the commission decides it will be. To me, that is no guarantee.”

    Can you name a Government or political guarantee that you can’t say the same about?

    I’ve always take n the view that a politicians guarantee can be relied upon up until the next open their mouth.

    Much of the outrage about broken promises begs the question why on earth did you believe them in the first place.

    Peter.

  5. There’s plenty of ways to skin a cat.

    My pay has been frozen for years and interest rates are pinned at a level designed to guarantee inflation. I wonder just how much my pay has shrunk in real terms since May 2010 with years more of this policy to go and more than 1 percent in pension contributions being added every year?

    I wouldn’t mind so much if public spending was actually being reduced as a result or growth was blooming all over the economy.

    But all that is happening is everything is going up except my pay, and the country’s economic performance.

  6. The battle is on to win the “we didn’t back down” argument. The Tory argument seems to rely on “This is a Royal Charter, Jim, but not as we know it” and “This legislative underpinning refers to something else entirely, honest guv”. And, of course, Dave taking his ball home on Thursday was actually a strategic masterstroke that brought everyone back to the table. Including Dave :-)

  7. @”Much of the outrage about broken promises begs the question why on earth did you believe them in the first place.”

    I imagine former politicians everywhere muttering this as they shuffle towards the exit & out into the world of those whose trust they sought & betrayed.

  8. ROBIN

    It would be nice to know WHO ask to reopen the talks.

  9. ROBIN

    Who blinked first.

  10. ROBIN

    Would *you* leave your savings somewhere where they might be arbitrarily subject to confiscation?
    —————————————————————————–

    Wel, I share a bamk account with my wife if that’s what you mean.

  11. @ Paul C

    LOL!

  12. Anyone that gets 90% of their money out of bust bank should actually be extremely grateful. Funny how people don’t see it like that.

  13. re Levenson

    Hacked-Off are happy so that, for me, is the important point.

  14. @HAL

    I agree. Asking savers to contribute towards saving their bank – where the more money you have the more you pay – seems very fair.

    I understand the problems; run on banks etc but the plan is fair.

  15. What is the “Free Speech” Network’s take on the compromise? I need to know if we’ve started down a slippery slope to Armageddon, or if we now have the strongest press regulation in the free world.

    Having said that, I’m now getting adverts for GiffGaff…

  16. I don’t care who won the leveson thing, I’m just so happy that those freedom network ads are gone. Im guessing that was the real point of the ads

  17. @Paul (3.13)

    “Wel, I share a bamk account with my wife if that’s what you mean.”

    Paul,
    It’s comments like this that we missed for a while. Pleased to see their comeback.

  18. I think the Cyprus plan might be fair were it to exclude the first €100k of deposits. That would align with people’s expectations that €100k was 100% safe.

    The argument for a levy on amounts below €100k seems to rest on the accusations of money laundering which have been bandied about; i.e. there could be many €99k deposits which actually belong to a single organization.

    But that argument has rightly been challenged by Neil A; if they want the money launderers’ ill gotten gains, use the correct laws & processes to get it.

  19. On Leveson. If all the three major parties, “Hacked Off” and the newspaper proprietors are happy, my hunch is that the proposed reforms a are a gigantic and convoluted dollop of political fudge.

    The more things change, the more things stay the same………..

  20. I assume that under the Royal Charter and the statute linked to it there is no option for a Newspaper veto omn membership of the commission. However, I have not seen any media comments on this.

    Anyone know the answer, because for me the absence of any veto is key to the success of the charter.

  21. @ Peter Bell

    This is the best summary which I’ve seen regarding the key points:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/table/2013/mar/18/press-regulation-deal-what-parties-won

  22. Peter Bell:

    I am humbled, yet smug.

    Ta very much!

  23. Amber, thanks for the info at 4.00. Seems that my concerns are unfounded.

    May I also say that although not a fan of your leader, I thought he came across excellently in the current debate (apart from his one problem with indef…….. Smiley)

  24. @ Peter Bell

    I’m no sure whether you are an LD, if you are then I can return the ‘compliment’.

    People are asking: Who won?
    Answer: Nick Clegg, IMO. He was willing to put the Coalition on the line if Cameron wouldn’t allow a free vote on this issue. It seemed to me that it was DC who blinked.

  25. @petercairns – we’re back to an issue we’ve previously talked about.

    If the UK government breaks a guarantee, I can vote them out. If the EU Commission does, I couldn’t.

    Regarding the point about getting your money from a bust bank – that’s the entire point of the EU, member states, and the entire mechanism of civilised governments – to protect innocent citizens.

    Owners (shareholders) of bust banks take the pain – that was their risk. Savers are lenders, not owners, and deserve protection as far as can be achieved.

  26. Amber,
    while no longer a LD member since the NHS fiasco, I guess my heart is still within the LDs. I have to say that the current stance of the LDs in speaking more frequently against the Tories when necessary has helped in this respect.

  27. Worth pointing out the Cyprus situation is the result of a joint IMF and EU proposal not the EU alone.

  28. Alec,

    I read that Cyprus does not have the money to pay up on the guarantee. The banks really are bust and there is no backstop. It isn’t the EU that is reneging on a guarantee, it is the Cypriot government that has promised one that it can’t fulfil.

  29. Alec,

    “If the UK government breaks a guarantee, I can vote them out. If the EU Commission does, I couldn’t.”

    But you can’t vote out UK civil servants or judges either.

    The commission are the servant of the Council of ministers not their masters. People who don’t like the EU tend to get the two the wrong way round sometimes deliberately.

    Cyprus needs other peoples money and those other people have a right to expect that Cyprus bares more of the pain than they do.

    If Cyprus rejects this deal than it might have to accept Greek style cuts instead, so savers will get to keep their 10% instead of bank shares ( than in a decade might be worth more) but if instead they cut benefits, then the poor with nothing will suffer more than the Russian oligarchs.

    You could argue that you can change the UK government but can’t change the German or French one but then Scots haven’t voted for the last half dozen Tory Governments.

    You can vote all you like for a UKIP government but you are unlikely to get one.

    Peter.

  30. @RogerRebel

    “Who blinked first.”

    I think this is all you need to know

    “The deal was agreed in the early hours in Ed Miliband’s office at the House of Commons. The Labour leader was there alongside his deputy Harriet Harman.” – The Guardian

    If in doubt as to who is in charge, look to see who is on home turf.

  31. @Alec, Pete B

    So, obviously what you want is the EU to step in, and demand that the Cyprus government do what the EU tells them to do. Or do you want the EU to stop telling countries what to do?

    I’m confused. This seems a have your cake and eat it argument. The EU get blamed for not forcing a government to do something, then in the same breath accused of forcing a government to do something.

    Let’s be clear, Cyprus have done this in *direct opposition* to the EU consensus. The EU doesn’t want this, but they can’t stop it because taxation is still a sovereign power, and if a government decides it wants to tax bank accounts for a year, they can do so.

    Frankly, blaming the EU is opportunistic drum beating, and in direct opposition to what’s actually happening.

  32. I know exactly who won over this proposal – exactly the same person that I support politically. Err..

    What’ll be important here is how the public will respond.
    And I suspect apart from those, like us, who pay close attention to politics and partisans, there’ll be a collective shrug of ‘I don’t care about press regulation. What’s in the budget?’

  33. “won over this proposal” should probably read “won, over this proposal” indicating that I was talking about who had a political-win rather than who led to the proposal’s acceptance.

  34. Robin

    “Who blinked first”
    First of all who in the real world cares, every side claims some sort of victory nobody got what they really wanted.
    In the end it was a compromise because nobody wanted to upset the press that much.
    And as yet the press still have to agree to it, personally I hope the don’t and tell all those shifty politicians to go forth and multiply but as their being blackmailed by huge legal cost if they don’t, maybe they won’t have a choice.
    Incidently you could say it was Milibands office because Cameron wasn’t present and they were getting their orders from the Hacked Off group who were, only the celebrities mind not the real victums of course.
    The only good thing about this at least hopefully we’ve seen the last of whingeing minor film star bloke.

  35. The debate has got a bit boring-mainly because of the repeat self congratulation pouring down from the Green Benches.

    All the same-with the exception of the two or three usual suspects trying to make political capital ( & broadly failing) it was good to see cross party work of this sort succeed.

    The main protagonists were all congratulated by one & all-but also interesting to hear EM single out the contribution of Oliver Letwin.

    Good to see DC has got an agreement to unblock all those important Bills which had “Leveson” bits added by the opposition. That is what prompted him to come to the Commons with it .

    Edward Garnier has just made an interesting contribution urging the House not to believe that the new regulator will be inundated with cases-anything complex will finish up infront of a judge-which is where it should be.

    Pretty good effort all round in HoC-but Press reaction so far seems muted.

    Can’t wait to read the Times leader tomorrow.

    Is FRaser Nelson still refusing to sign up?

    More water under this bridge to come yet.

  36. TURK

    @”The only good thing about this at least hopefully we’ve seen the last of whingeing minor film star bloke.”

    I agree-what a sour faced so & so he is.

    Still-interesting to see him blowing his own trumpet-he used to get someone else to blow it for him.

  37. Carfrew

    Not the first problem of that kind.

    It was a long time ago and it may have been a different hospital but there was a case of a pregnant woman who had paid for a hysterectomy

  38. @Peter Bell (4.50pm)

    [snipped comments to Amber Star]
    “May I also say that although not a fan of your leader, I thought he came across excellently in the current debate (apart from his one problem with indef…….. Smiley)”

    Limitless. The word is limitless :) And there, was me thinking it meant “tireless”.

    Maybe the Leader of the Opposition should have had a word on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, with the Member for Bradford West. He never seemed to have a problem with indefatigability.

  39. The politics of the Cyprus bail-in is terrible. The other eurozone countries are not required to help Cyprus but as they have, they are getting the blame for the mess. “The Germans are stealing our money”, etc.

    What I take from this is what a terrible idea a currency union is.

    I really, really hope that if Scotland decides on independence it adopts its own currency. Just imagine the scenario if an independent Scottish government runs out of rUKish pounds propping up an an insolvent bank. The Bank of England generously lends enough to pay 90% of depositors and suddenly on the streets it is “The English have stolen 10% of our money…”

  40. “However, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble insisted he and the International Monetary Fund had been in favour of “respecting a deposit guarantee for accounts up to 100,000” euros.

    He said it was the Cypriot government, the European Commission and the European Central Bank that had decided on the levy terms and that “they now must explain this to the Cypriot people”.

    BBC

  41. @Petercairns – “Cyprus needs other peoples money and those other people have a right to expect that Cyprus bares more of the pain than they do.”

    We’ve been down this road regarding EU and democracy before, and I don’t really want to go their again. We’ll just agree to differ on that.

    On the bail out, Andrew Lillico made a couple of very damaging points about this on R4 tonight (and was arguing that savers are in fact, lenders, and so should be liable to lose money if banks go under).

    He raised the rather crushing points that all Cyprus bank customers have been hit by this – regardless as to whether they put their money into sound or bad banks. Secondly, he said that bond holders are not being asked to take a haircut.

    Neither of these facts are moral or defensible, in my view, even before we get onto the issues of whether it was sensible of the IMF and EU to enforce the first deal of this financial crisis anywhere that hits savers.

    Globally, all regulators have sought to protect retail savers, as they need to defend the thin line of confidence. I still believe the Cyprus option is madness.

  42. Index on Censorship being attacked on the Labour benches., which feels very worrying.

    The Index web site suggesting online bloggers will be caught :-

    ““Bloggers could find themselves subject to exemplary damages in court, due to the fact that they were not part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first place. This mess of legislation has been thrown together with alarming haste: there’s little doubt we’ll repent for a while to come.”

    Index on Censorship.

  43. @colin – why would bloggers face damages/ Would it be that they have published falsehoods?

  44. JayBlanc
    “Let’s be clear, Cyprus have done this in *direct opposition* to the EU consensus. The EU doesn’t want this, but they can’t stop it because taxation is still a sovereign power, and if a government decides it wants to tax bank accounts for a year, they can do so.

    Frankly, blaming the EU is opportunistic drum beating, and in direct opposition to what’s actually happening.”

    If that’s true, then I take back what I said about the EU penalising innocent savers, but the way it was reported by the BBC was that the Germans wouldn’t finance the bailout without those conditions. As the Germans are the main paymasters of the EU it seemed that it was the EU which laid down the conditions.

  45. Pete B,

    Yes the eurozone is insisting that the Cypriots raise 5.8 billion from the tax as a condition of the bail-out. I think the details are up to the Cypriots, though, but the current plan has been agreed by the eurozone.

    Of course the Cypriots don’t have to ask for a bail-out. But then they are completely bust.

  46. @ Colin

    Bloggers could find themselves subject to exemplary damages in court, due to the fact that they were not part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first place.
    ———————–
    Good news for folks who are wronged like Lord McAlpine was but don’t have his resources when seeking redress.

    Unless my recall is faulty, you were very much on Lord McA’s side against e.g. Mrs Bercow.

    I’d have thought you’d be pleased by something which protects both the innocent & the ‘legitimate’ press from bloggers who can write whatever libels they choose without being called to account for it.

  47. @ Colin

    Bloggers could find themselves subject to exemplary damages in court, due to the fact that they were not part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first place.
    ———————–
    Good news for folks who are wronged like Lord McA was but don’t have his resources when seeking redress.

    Unless my recall is faulty, you were very much on Lord McA’s side against e.g. Mrs Bercow.

    I’d have thought you’d be pleased by something which protects both the innocent & the ‘legitimate’ press from bloggers who can write whatever libels they choose without being called to account for it.

  48. AMBER
    Thanks for the reference to the Guardian summary of the outcome of the Leveson agreement. My cull of the summary wording as it would affect any repetition of unscrupulous attacks on public figures, as in the News International’s wrongful and repeated misstatement’s on Gordon Brown’s alleged private gain from non-partliamentary earnings, is as follows:

    “On corrections, the regulatory body will have power, if there is no agreement, to direct apologies and to set out their nature, extent and placement. …..a newspaper will not have immunity (from exemplary damages) if it behaves egregiously between a regulator’s findings against the paper and a subsequent court case.”

    I very good aspect of this outcome, which may set a permanent seal of this misuse of the power of the press, is that it has been an all-party agreement. Any other basis for regulation would have left a lasting legacy of misalignment in the parties’ relationship with the press which would have blemished political reporting and communication between the press and politicians for a long time.

    I am taking time off from comments on UKPR for a couple of months or so, to get on with the day job. Thanks for the pleasure of your company, and as Muhammad Ali said: ” I will be back”.

  49. Hal
    Thanks for that. Here’s a quote for the BBC website

    “The 10bn-euro ($13bn; £8.6bn) bailout agreed with the EU and IMF demands that all bank customers pay a one-off levy.”

    This is what I think is intolerable. Though the Cypriots may decide on the details of where the various rates kick in, the principle that the EU can tell a sovereign government exactly what type of tax to implement is wrong, and the thin end of the wedge.

  50. AMBER

    I would be pleased at such an outcome.

    But at this early stage-with so much detail yet to come, I am more inclined than Labour backbenchers seem to be to at least read the concerns of organisations like Index on Censorship.

    I must say two Labour backbench contributions in HoC registered with me :-

    Gerald Kauffman, & Tom Watson.

    One was disturbing & the other uplifting.

1 2 3 4 5 9