YouGov’s daily polling for the Sun this morning has topline figures of CON 30%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 13%. While we have seen much higher from other online companies, it is the highest UKIP score that YouGov have shown so far. All the usual caveats apply: one should never get too excited about a record breaking score as it will almost always be a bit of an outlier. What counts is the underlying trend, and these figures underline the ongoing increase in UKIP support, and indeed the recent modest recovery in YouGov’s Lib Dem support.


595 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 30, LAB 40, LD 12, UKIP 13”

1 6 7 8 9 10 12
  1. toh colin rn – anyone else joining the bandwagon

    Its all just partisan noise you are creating: did the Tories abolish the minimum wage they were so adamant would destroy the economy when they took over? No. I could go on but won’t; the examplea in either direction are too numerous.

    This is the way of governments as a very general but very typical rule.

    But I expect you knew that really?

  2. Colin
    Ah! M. Hollande, he who has become THE most unpopular President of France ever & in record time. He has of course ditched most of his loony policies, (as predicted by several, including me, at the time he was elected) failed to change the austerity path of Frau Merkel, tried to become a beacon leader for the southern states of Europe to gather round (& failed). As a result he is blamed for the breakdown of the Franco/German axis in Europe. He has also had the Supreme court rule that his proposal to tax people at 75% is unconstitutional, as at that rate it is confiscation, not taxation.

    The unemployment rate is almost 12% and young French are flooding to London for jobs, whilst the rich French are leaving/have left. He is referred to in the press as ‘the repairman’ rather than the President because he keeps referring to his tool box of policies. Basically, he hasn’t a clue and the best analogy would be King Canute.

    Add to that, the fact that every major city is seeing demonstrations against his proposal to legalise gay marriage.

    He is doing well on the mistress front however. (About the only Presidential skill he possesses.) and the sun is shining.

    Not much of a beacon for Ed, I’m afraid in 2015.

  3. ROBERT

    Thanks.

    Yes-my continuing interest in Mr Hollande’s period of office is intensified with the passage of time.

  4. Actually there have been some distressing events to date.A few weeks ago a
    Man froze to death on a steet in Totnes,a very affluent little town.Also the poor
    Young woman who was living in a tent of all things when a tree blew down on it
    And killed her.Obviously I do not know the circumstances behind these cases,
    but I have noticed an increase in people begging recently and my son,a student,has twice been accosted by people. In Newport city centre demanding
    Money.Anyway,like Anthony I am off to watch Thrones.

  5. Colin – Labour will claim higher short-term debt for less over the cycle and try to identify 2010/5 as ‘borrowing for failure not to invest’ with lowe growth etc

    A slight chance of the Gilt market reacting badly, I think not but we shall see.

  6. Robert Newark
    But how can you know that the curriculum changes you endorse will deliver the improvements you would welcome? Much of Gove’s fiddling seems to be “Something must be done, this is something, so it must be done”, with no meaningful evidence to support the specifics.

    It strikes me that polling on education reforms must require careful wording to avoid leading questions along the lines of “As the product of a failed education system that produces people with no meaningful skills or knowledge, do you agree with Michael Gove’s reforms?”.

  7. JIM JAM

    Yes I think you summarise the essence of how they will present it.

    But they will need specifics-and then Cons will attach numbers to those.

    Then it gets interesting.

  8. @Robert Newark

    Re Labour not reversing anything: something we can all agree on, at last!

  9. Everything will depend on the state and direction of movement of the UK economy. The great hope of Labour must be that things will be on the upturn when they are elected, but only just upturning (otherwise the Tories might hold them off). After 5 years of austerity, they will then try their very best to make the following 5 years of moderate growth seem like a cornucopia. What the current government has lacked is the financial means to offer any of the bread and circuses that make for good headlines.

    The great dread of Labour (as Colin has pointed out) must be that they get Hollande-aised, and take office in an economic environment that is still desperate. If Labour have to put their money where their “spend our way out of recession” rhetoric is, and the result is still more economic misery, they’ll suffer horribly for it.

    Personally I think the stars are aligning pretty well for Labour. I foresee a swingback of both the Lib-Lab and Tory-UKIP pendula bringing 2015 to perhaps a 5% Labour winning margin, but that would gift them a hefty majority. I think growth will be sustained (though modest) from late 2014 onwards, giving Labour a pretty smooth sea on which to sail.

    Of course, that’s just the most likely scenario (imho) and almost any alternative still has time to work its way into the frame.

  10. @Colin I have thought about it and fail to see how a) cutting benefits is going to help when already there are a lot of people who want work but can’t get it b) how cutting in work benefits makes work pay c) how it can be right to punish those with an extra bedroom when they don’t have a realistic alternative.

    I can see that there is an unfairness about A being over-housed when an equally needy B is under-housed. However the main answer to that is to build more social housing. In the meantime if we have to have this policy it could be a lot more fairly administered (e,g, only apply the penalty in circumstances when there are no realistic reasons against moving).

    So as that is how I see these policies, I can’t see what the paragon you describe is doing furthering them. That is the question I would like answered and I am grateful to you for raising it.

    [It won’t be answered here though, since this is NOT a forum for discussing whether policies are any good or not! AW]

  11. @AW

    Yes it’s a voodoo poll, of course it is, but I’m afraid that I still think it counts for something that 61,000 people (it’s now up to that) could be bothered to get around to registering their support for something in the space of just 12 hours from a standing start. It’s not the absolute number, but the speed of the reaction that impresses.

    FWIW I think that “I’d manage on £53 pw” is going to define IDS henceforth, much as (an invented?) “plebs” did to Mitchell and “let them eat cake” did to Marie Antionette.

    Having just checked, nearly 1,000 added their names in the time it took me to write this response.

  12. @ Neil A

    My nose tells me that your analysis of the post 2015 environment is about right. VI is pointing that way currently. However, if true, my dread is that EM falls into the same Hollande trap of raised expectations above what is deliverable.

  13. Peewee
    Of course I don’t know for certain but I welcome his agenda as a return to factual learning and teachers actually teaching. This of course may have it’s own problems and expose some teachers as not being fit for the job. As for Free schools, I welcome a scenario where there is a genuine partnership between parents & teachers and where teachers are actually more interested in their pupils, than their trade union.

    Colin
    re: Hollande – I forgot to include the inexorable rise in the debt to GDP ratio, something he hasn’t the power to do anything about as he is powerless to do anything about the bloated public sector & he has just introduced another employment tax on business to raise the money that the 75% rate was supposed to.

  14. @AW Fair enough

    @l Colin your paragon is a liberal democrat, Irrespective of whether his behaviour is right or wrong, how do you think it will play with his supporters? Will it get him credit for being tough? I doubt it as any credit going that way will go to the Conservatives. Will it get him credit for tempering the conservatives? I doubt it as not many people will know what he may have done. Will it get him blamed for being heartless? Quite possibly by those who see things that way. So where is the electoral upside for him in particular or the libdems in general. What do you think? So to pin this down to polls what will it do to the Libdem VI?

  15. @TONY DEAN

    I don’t think raised expectation will be a problem. Labour opposed the 1% benefit cap and that was enough for me to believe EM’s heart is in the right place. After the 3 New Labour terms I don’t think anyone on the left has terribly high expectations. So some rolling back off the worst of the Coalition policies would satisfy most people IMO.

    Regarding IDS – and I know this is not scientific but even in the Daily Mail comments section his comment is treated with derision.

  16. Tony Dean
    That might depend upon whether he keeps Balls, or ditches him in favour of Darling. From the chancellorship point of view it & public confidence it would be a very sensible thing to do but dare he risk a loose cannon like Balls, on the backbenches. (No puns intended)

  17. I could live on £53 a week. I wouldn’t like it, but I could.

  18. @ Robert

    “I welcome his agenda as a return to factual learning”

    What on earth does this mean? One of the main criticisms of Gove from the teachers is that the new curriculum is simply a list of ‘facts’ without any learning involved. For example one of the criteria is to learn the names of all the continents by the age of 7 (or something along those lines). While this is certainly facts it is meaningless without context. Much rather by the age of 7 they have learned a bit about the lifestyle in just one of those continents which has some meaning and may even interest children who have a much shorter attention span these days.

    I think what worked for classes 30 or 40 years ago simply will not work now in a world of video games, soundites etc and you have to change the way children learn rather than the ‘it worked for me OK so we’ll go back to that now’ forgetting that we had 3 channels of TV with a much more eductional bias than we have these days.

  19. Neil A

    I could live on 40 pounds a week!! But I would really hate it!(just thought I would start a Willie waving contest)

  20. @ Shevii

    I don’t think it worked 30 or 40 years ago. Only a tiny minority passed “ordinary” level exams and before that a similarly small minority actually got a School Certificate.

  21. Anyway, what I really wanted to know is: does anyone know if any analysis has been done on possible VI in respect of the coming county council polls?

  22. CHARLES

    I don’t see Webb as a paragon-i’m not entirely sure what the qualifications for that are.

    But, as I have said, I admire him .

  23. Good Evening All.
    Regarding Mr Gove’s History Curriculum, I think he has spoiled a good case with his very prescriptive syllabus. Expecting ten year olds to cover the ‘Glorious Revolution’ for example seems inappropriate.
    Secondary chool pupils in Years 7,8 and 9 in about an hour a week timetable allocation will cover History from 1692 to 1992 in three years, with thus 120 hours to do so.

  24. ROBERT

    Thanks again.

    The French public sector makes Bob Crowe seem like a boy scout.

  25. I really hope those teaching unions ( the ones who wish to delegate the imparting of facts to Google, whilst they explain to students the art & meaning of walking ) do carry through their threat to ban OFSTED Inspectors from their classrooms.

  26. Expectation management for the 2013 local elections has commenced.

    According to one cabinet minister “terrible will be a great result for us”.Grant Shapps is “braced to lose as many as 500 seats”. Whatever the result Shapps expects it to demonstrate the failure of Ed Miliband’s One Nation appeal.

    Labour’s national executive members last month were told not to expect more than 200 gains in these predominantly Tory shire elections, it will be “more of a contest between the two coalition parties.”

    h
    ttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/01/conservatives-county-council-elections

    In 2011 Rawlings and Thrasher set a very high bar, predicting that anything less than 1000 seat gains for Labour would be a failure; the 857 gains were indeed portrayed as such.
    In 2012 they set the bar at anything less than 700 gains for Labour being a failure. In the event 823 gains on the night took most commentators by surprise.
    It will be interesting to see what they predict for May 2013.

  27. ROBERT NEWARK
    Peewee
    “Of course I don’t know for certain but I welcome his agenda as a return to factual learning and teachers actually teaching. This of course may have it’s own problems and expose some teachers as not being fit for the job.”

    —————–

    It tends to be easier to teach facts, than things like abstract concepts, creativity, problem-solving etc…

  28. @Neil A

    “I could live on £53 a week. I wouldn’t like it, but I could.”

    What would you do when your washing machine broke down. Or your shoes wore out. Or when your power was switched to (much more expensive) coin or card-operated meters. Or when the bailiffs came round because of your unpaid council tax (which you now have to pay). Or when your housing benefit was cut????

    Claims to be able to live on meagre amounts always ignore the big one-offs, or the periodic purchases (tomato ketchup, salt, vinegar, cooking oil, shampoo, bubble bath, deodorant, bog roll, all cost money), or the bills that arrive every 3 months…

  29. Bubble bath!?!!

    That made me smile.

    For the washing machine, I’d apply for a social grant or loan. For the shoes, I’d spend a couple of quid on replacements. For the power, I’d leave the power off as much as I could. For the council tax, I’d do my level best to find whatever small fraction of it my local authority expected me to pay.

    Brown sauce (ketchup? urrgh), vinegar, cooking oil, shampoo and bog roll I would buy for a total of about £6 from Lidl. Deodorant, I’d buy some rock crystal deodorant (for about another £5) and it would last me 6 months.

    Salt – don’t eat it on account of my high blood pressure. But if I did I’d maybe put a few pence of the money I’d save on my subscription charges towards it.

  30. subscription=prescription

  31. @ BillyBob

    I wonder how UKIP will do. The Conservatives will do well to minimise losses as they are defending seats won at the depths of Gordon Brown’s unpopularity; but we are talking about shire counties here so it’s not obviously fertile ground for Labour. Surely there’s an open goal for UKIP here if they can get together some sort of local base?

    And as we saw with the LDs in Eastleigh, building up a solid party base in council elections can be the key to Westminster elections when the going gets tough.

    If I was a UKIP strategist – which I’m very much not – these council elections would be a key part of my long-term strategy

  32. COLIN.
    OFSTED’s leader is a good man, and attended my sister school in London: Clapham Catholic College. He writes very well about the need for inspirational teaching and against ‘formulaic’ teaching.

    However, that is not what is looked for by the real Inspectors, who, when they call, do indeed look for lessons by formula. In fact lessons are meant to be so much like a formula that anyone, incluuding non qualified colleagues, are able to ‘deliver’.
    This does not apply, of course, to the Independent Sector schools.

  33. Billy Bob
    “It will be interesting to see what they predict for May 2013.”

    Whatever it is, one can be certain that if Baroness Warsi is anywhere near a TV studio she will be declaring it disastrous for Labour.

    I remember last year when the totalgains for Labour kept climbing, she insisted it meant nothing unless Labour won increasing numbers from 700 to over 1000 throughout the night.

  34. Neil A – “After 5 years of austerity, they will then try their very best to make the following 5 years of moderate growth seem like a cornucopia.”

    I don’t pretend to be an economist, and to be fair neither does George Osborne.

    My reading of the relentless Labour’s legacy/austerity rhetoric was that for political reasons it was neccesary to choke off Darling’s nascent recovery.

    The idea would have been to take a foot off the brake maybe last year sometime, thus enabling growth in the second half of the parliament to appear quite dramatic in comparison.

    If that was the plan then Osborne is cutting it a bit fine. If it was a fundamental misreading of how to operate the levers though, then Labour would be fully entitled to the any credit coming their way.

  35. Who needs a washing machine, do it all by hand, it’s cheap and its a good work out, saving money on the gym to boot

  36. I have a confession to make despite being “on the Left” – I think Gove’s history syllabus aims are correct! – I was trained as a history teacher 1974-77, and actually taught it 1994-2002 after other careers! During my training I was in a minority of one in my college for arguing that history should not be taught as a pseudo-investigative science subject before Undergraduate level. History has a completely different purpose for the population at large rather than for those who handle it academically at a later stage. For the population at large it should be a combination of rip-roaring tales of the past to imbue enjoyment of history as a pastime in everyday life cobined with an exercise in engendering a sense of belonging to your community/nation and its shared past – a sort of knowledge base of “How did we get here?”
    If you read Hitchens’ “The Abolition of Britain” (although much nonsense is contained therein in other respects), his analysis of what is wrong in the teaching of history in schools is spot on. I think Gove wants to undo all the preudo-academic approach which since the 1960s has been forced down to even Primary School level so that kids who can barely read ordinary English are forced to try and decypher a text written in early 19th century language about how a mill girl is “feeling” about her conditions – instead of knowing the basics like who Nelson was in our national story.

  37. The economy reviving is unlikely to help the Tories.

    The LDs defected to Labour almost immediately, before the cuts had had time to choke off growth. The economy wasn’t the reason for defecting for many and for those whom it may have been in anticipation of the effect of cuts on the economy they are hardly liable to come back.

    Meanwhile, how many Ukipers have defected over the economy and even if they mostly did, Tories only got about 36% in the election before the recent exodus.

  38. Pedant’s corner

    Bob Crow is spelt thus.

  39. @ Colin

    “the ones who wish to delegate the imparting of facts to Google, whilst they explain to students the art & meaning of walking ”

    I really don’t know where you are getting the second part of that from (Daily Mail?) and it bears no relationship to what the lad has been learning at school coming up to GCSE’s. I agree that it is silly to propose getting rid of Ofsted (but I suspect much of the opposition is to the format) but I would suggest that the idea of getting facts from Google is not so ridiculous.

    I passed 10 O-Levels and in all the science ones have retained zero information. I’ve kept a spattering of French (enough to ask directions) but the only ones I would probably have any hope of passing today are Maths and English.

    Learning is about a basic education so you know how to read, add up and your North from South. The rest is about understanding and logic and problem solving. As long as you know how to access facts (Google) and understand and action those facts then why retain a whole load of useless information you will never again use in life?

  40. Michael Gove will doubtless admire my scholarship.

    Btw I didn’t write ‘Pedants’ corner’ as I wish to be alone.

  41. CHRISLANE

    Yes he is a good man , with an incredible record of transforming children’s life chances.

    He is dedicated to it.

    It will get him hated.

  42. Well I love history but I don’t think it should be taught in schools, it’s really a hobby subject. It should be replaced with mechanics

  43. OK, £53 quid a week. About £220 a month.

    Try getting gas and electric below £80 a month especially with a prepay meter. Water’s £40 a month. Phone and internet £20 (you have to be online for government services and jibseeking is going online too.

    Council tax contribution more than a Tenner a month. You are already spending £140 and have £20 a week left for. .. food, clothes, toiletries, cleaning products etc.

    Oh, and public transport. .. two quid to go just 3 miles!! This is leaving out all those many incidentals like stamps or biros or sellotape or bulbs or freezer bags etc etc etc

    And leaving out mobile phones, insurance, tv licence, bedroom tax, appliances and repairs (social loans have to be repaid)… and God help you if you actually want to socialize…

  44. RiN
    “Well I love history but I don’t think it should be taught in schools, it’s really a hobby subject. It should be replaced with mechanics”

    I almost agree (and me an ex-history teacher!!) – mechanics should be found a place, however, history could usefully be replaced with “National Identity Lessons” – there is no reason why these could not be designed to be “inclusive”, and neutral in a Left/Right sense.

  45. Smiles at all those that could live on £53 great saying it, but doing it is a totally different matter and quoting prices…well to be honest is really childish…

    Those people living on subsistence know the reality, those who think they know but have never been on the edge, really have no idea. (now please grow up a little)

    Because if you really had been on the edge, you would not make silly comments

  46. @NEIL A

    “…I could live on £53 a week. I wouldn’t like it, but I could…”

    No, you really couldn’t. The rule of thumb I worked to is you can live off £70 per week for about 6 months, £100 per week for about a year. That doesn’t include rent nor council tax.

    You get rid of the car straight away: there’s no way you can afford either to run nor insure it. In theory you can get a bike, although I found in practice buses are better: you can’t carry shopping on a bike.

    Some things you think you can get rid of, you can’t: television is a must, even if it’s a 1990’s black-and-white from British Heart Foundation Furnishing & Electrical for about £30, since the quiet of the night can drive you nuts. However, you can get rid of the phone and mobile phone.

    Food is limited to cheap tins, tho’ going to Lidl is unnecessary: the Tesco value brands are very competitive and you can easily buy enough food for a week (a cheap tin of beans is about 27p). Aldi and Lidl tins are no cheaper and – true fact – are nonstandard sizes, so it’s a false economy (too big for one, too small for two). Buy nothing you can’t cook on a ring or hydrate with a kettle. Best to avoid microwave anything.

    Haircuts and shaving are reduced straight away: ponytail and shaving on alternate days will suffice. I can make 5 Gillette Contour blades last a year if needs.

    A fridge is a must: unrefrigerated milk goes off in 12 hours, 24 if kept in a bowl of water in the dark. Milk on the turn can be used for milk jellies, which are very cheap, very low fat, and great fun.

    You cannot realistically cut down on household cleaning products (purple Cillit Bang is the best), limescale remover, toilet roll, kitchen towels, toothpaste. A dirty environment is depressing.

    Washing machine usage is a problem: without the dryer wet clothes inside generate damp (I’ve seen a windowsill turn black in 6 months). Store up dirty clothes then wash all at once, say once-a-month.

    Switch off the heating in unused rooms and move the bed into the living room.

    Second jobs are available (I’ve worked in callcentres) *but* in practice you can’t work 7-days-a-week for longer than 6 months and my practical limit is three months: there will be other things you need to attend to.

    Libraries and local swimming pools are lifesavers: swimming is good exercise and affords you quiet time to think. It also saves you having to run a bath. I can go thru a library book a week.

    After about six months, you start running into problems: toothcare and clothing becomes a factor. NHS dentists are rubbish: fillings fall out and tooth removal becomes the first option, not the last. Charity shops are *very* good for suits but not for everyday clothing (it’s mostly girl stuff).

    Shoes last about two-three years. If holes develop in the soles in summer you can still stretch thru winter, but if in winter must be immediately replaced. Do not skimp on shoes, it’s a false economy.

    After about two years, you have serious problems: teeth are broken, boilers unfixed, repairs mount up, shoes need replacing. By now you need to have gotten more money or you have to move to a cheaper area. I had managed to get a better job so all this became an anecdote, but it did leave me with a skewed sense of humour and a more exact comprehension of what you need to live. £53 a week is not enough.

    rgdsm

  47. @Adam

    Last week I looked through council byelections in 2103 so far.

    UKIP polled on average 17-18% in the 23 seats they contested (higher post-Eastleigh than before). This resulted in two gains from Con, and was crucial in two of the Con seats lost to LD. They stood a candidate in under two thirds of all contests I think.

    Con held 6; lost 5 to LD, 4 to Lab, 2 to UKIP and 1 to Ind. Gained 1 from Ind.

    Lab held 15; lost 2 to LD. Gained 4 from Con, 1 from LD and 1 from SNP.

    LD held 6; lost 1 to Lab. Gained 5 from Con, 2 from Lab and 1 from Ind.

    Ind held 2; lost 2 to LD and 1 to Con. Gained 1 from Con, 1 from SNP.

  48. @Anthony Wells

    I double-posted. Can you remove one of them please?

    rgdsm

  49. @MARTYN

    I am very impressed and I am glad you managed to get a better job. I will admit there is no way I could live on 70 pounds a week. I would get into terrible debt.

  50. Neil A

    Two years ago you told me it couldn’t happen, but today the first steps are being contemplated

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9965039/Minimum-wage-could-be-frozen-or-cut-if-it-starts-to-cost-jobs-or-damage-economy-Government-suggests.html

1 6 7 8 9 10 12