This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun had topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 40%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 12%. For the time being at least we seem to have settled into a Labour lead of about 8 points in YouGov’s daily polling.

To pick up on another couple of questions from earlier in the week, on the suggestion by Len McCluskey that there should be a general strike, 57% of people said they would oppose a general strike with 27% in support. Naturally large majorities of Conservative and Lib Dem supporters were opposed, amongst Labour supporters 49% said they would support a general strike, 33% were opposed. Ed Miliband has totally dismissed the idea of a general strike and said it would a terrible idea – asked before Miliband commented, 40% of people said that Labour should oppose any such strike, 21% that they should support it, 27% that Labour should remain neutral.

On the same poll, George Osborne continued to be narrowly preferred to Ed Balls as best Chancellor, 29% to 24%. Asked the same question about whether people would prefer George Osborne or Alistair Darling as Chancellor, Darling is narrowly ahead 25% to 29%. The contrast isn’t vast, but obviously Darling does appeal to some parts that Ed Balls does not.

266 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 32, LAB 40, LD 11, UKIP 12”

1 3 4 5 6
  1. Ken

    I’ve got nowt against him to be honest. He set the foundation of the success we’ve had this season. And I can’t begrudge him going to a much bigger club…

    …who’ll just happen to be a division below us next season!

  2. @ Colin @ Alex

    The report on imported carbon emissions is something I felt was likely to be true. To be honest one of the reaons I would have been positive towards the EU was the idea that as one economic group we could set certain higher standards and because it was a level playing field it would do us no harm in competitiveness but it seems like globilisation has overtaken that ‘ideal’ (maybe a socialist one but maybe something that a lot of Tories would not have a problem with either).

    Sometimes it feels like people set things up and then lose sight of what they were trying to achieve.

  3. All this talk of whether Darling/Balls would make a better chancellor than Osborne is like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. The UK economy is a disaster zone, with the highest per capita foreign debt (public and private) of any major country, far worse than any of the other EU Piggies. The “so-called” austerity measures of the ConDem government are tritvial in the light of the massive increase in public debt that will accrue over the life of this partliament. Sooner or later, a real authoritarian regime will be needed to turn the country around. A good example is the economic recovery achieved by Chile starting under the Pinochet regime; its public and total foreign debt is now approximately 10% of that of the UK, expressed as a % of GDP. See article in Moneyweek at:

  4. I take it that the Michael Elliott here is NOT the Michael Elliott who was Labour MEP for London West from 1984 to 1999, whom I have known ever since his first election campaign for the European Parliament.

  5. @Daodao,

    I always said the last election was a bad one to win. I actually think the next one is even worse. It’s probably going to be very close to a no win situation, and in many ways could be harder for Labour given the expectation of higher spending.

    Having said that, there is an element of scare mongering to the article, and whilst I agree with parts of it, significant GDP increase would help if we could somehow get there. In the meantime please excuse me whilst I take out a huge hedge position in gold

  6. @Daodao

    If the debt is such a problem, why are people still lending to us at such fantastic rates?

    If the debt is such a problem how does it compare to the store of public and private assets in the UK?

    Given the anti-authoritarian streak in the British public what mechanism do you see for the subversion of the democratic process?

    How does all that feed into voting intention?

  7. @daodaoa – “real authoritarian regime will be needed to turn the country around.”

    I would have thought AW frowns on people advertising products unless it is though the usual channels; also this site is about opinion polls and elections, so a calling for an authoritarian regime is going against the spirit somewhat.

    Thankfully someone else has taken apart the advertising campaign so we don’t have to:


    “Failing to adjust for inflation or relate the numbers to the actual size of the economy in order to create scary graphics is a very dodgy technique indeed.”

    What’s the point of the fear-mongering?
    A list of reasons why you should buy a magazine, plus, somebody appears to be keen to find a new home for your assests:

    “Thirdly, and in many ways most importantly, we’ve found several ‘bolt holes’ outside the UK you can move a part of your wealth into right away.”

  8. Oh for God’s sake, is that MoneyWeek article STILL doing the rounds?

    Private Fraser in pin-stripes. The fact that people still get taken in by that shameless advertising punt, thinking it to be erudite comment, makes me question my long-held belief that the UK education system is just fine and dandy.

  9. @ DAODAO

    A good example is the economic recovery achieved by Chile starting under the Pinochet regime; its public and total foreign debt is now approximately 10% of that of the UK, expressed as a % of GDP.
    Points for troll-ing, DAO.

    Chile is definitely the model to follow if the UK wants to go bankrupt & start over again with sterling pegged to the USD; then go bankrupt again & start over for a second time.

  10. @Daodao – I’m afraid your post, and the ‘data’ on which it is drawn, is utterly laughable.

    Try having a look at this graphic

    It’s from the same source as some of the data quoted by the Money Week item, but as this shows debt scaled to GDP, it paints a vastly different picture. One where government debt by 2015 will be well below half what it was in 1950.

    I’m afraid you’ve been completely duped by a tired advertising gimmick.

  11. @Billy Bob

    That post demolishes the neoliberal arguments put forth by the above link and the government more effectively than Labour have done in two years.


    It seems UKIP’s policy review is going as well as can be expected.

  13. @Amberstar – there has been a good deal of comment in the last couple of days about the significant campaign time given by CCHQ to attacking UKIP. Since mid April, lots of activity and some serious resource seems to have gone into this, which some are suggesting suggests deep concern.

  14. @craig,

    Some interesting points in the response link, but reading phrases like the ‘great neoliberal lie’ makes me think the response might not be particularly impartial too….in fact, leafing through a few articles on that site, there are a lot of anti neo-liberal, anti centre right articles…

    I think I’ll stick to the Economist for what I consider impartial economic comment!

  15. I have not read the thread,so sorry if this has already been mentioned.
    Apparently there will be a labour reshuffle of the front bench after the May
    Elections.Please,please get rid of Liam Byrne and also that witch like woman
    Who as on question time on Thursday.

  16. My basic premise is that the UK economy as a whole is in far too much debt (public, personal and financial sector), that things are almost certain to get significantly worse before they get better, and that unfortunately the unpalatable measures that need to be taken are unlikely to be able to be delivered by a democratic government. I agree that the evidence iin the Moneyweek article is distorted by not taking inflation into account, and should have been expressed as %GDP, and that the article is a sales pitch (which I was not trying to promote). However, recent figures show that the external debt of the UK is 390% of GDP, compared to 106% for the USA, 142% for Germany and only 8.7% for China.

  17. @Rich

    Well I wouldn’t call Economist anywhere near impartial, but then I wasn’t trying to claim the blog was impartial – it is clearly not – it’s brilliant at debunking right-wing myths though.

  18. @ Amber

    What is more interesting than the Guardian article is some of the articles recently in the Telegraph, Daily Mail etc pointing out extremist candidates within UKIP. So far they are simply articles without too much of an anti UKIP bias but you do wonder whether the right wing press will turn on UKIP.

    Up to recently I felt they were quite sympathetic to UKIP, perhaps to put pressure on Cameron to lurch rightwards, but maybe they are realising the potential damage to the Tory vote even if they agree with much of UKIP policy. If they change tack that has the potential to do quite a bit of damage to UKIP- maybe it depends on their readers’ reactions to articles as to which way they sway?

  19. Consensus seems to be that UKIP will finish second in South Shields.

  20. @AiW

    Luciana Berger, was it not? Briefly put it on to see who was on it, so didn’t get to see it – take it she was useless?

  21. @daodao

    “Sooner or later, a real authoritarian regime will be needed to turn the country around.”

    Will you step up to be one of the tortured and/or murdered? Authoritarian regimes have a knack of biting the least suspecting on the backside.

    See ‘Old Bolsheviks’ and ‘Night of the Long Knives’.

  22. @DaoDao

    If we’re to have our own dictator debt-removers, I’d like some Marxists, who will expropriate some of this country’s massive wealth to do just that (rather than nationalising all their debts and then slashing all working class gains via government).

  23. Evening Everyone – are there any polls due tonight/tomorrow?
    Just wondered so it gives us something proper to talk about.

  24. @Daodao – last post much more sensible. UK does has large total debts, but these are well below half what they were at the end of WW2, and throughout around 2/3rds of the time since the national debt was invented in the C17th, government debt has been higher than it is now.

    Some difficult measures are warranted to ensure we start to get debt moving downwards, but the theory that austerity automatically leads to private sector growth has been done to death now, so we need another, more reasoned approach. Not Moneyweek.

  25. @Mark Johnson,

    The Sunday Times’ won’t be published until tomorrow.

  26. Why don’t we do some polling on support for an authoritarian regime? I’d be interested to see the result.

  27. @Alec

    “but these are well below half what they were at the end of WW2”

    So 20-25 years to pay it off, rather than 60 years? :)

  28. @MrNameless

    Well 20-25 years wouldn’t be at all bad if we got the sort of wages and welfare the post-war consensus allowed.

  29. @Statgeek, rather.

  30. @ Shevii

    Yes, the right-wing press have given the impression of enjoying UKIP, whilst not actually supporting them.

    I’d imagine that the right-wing media’s reasoning was threefold:
    1. They had something new to write about;
    2. The Murdochs & Barclay Bros were genuinely anti-EU;
    3. They also think UKIP will pull voters to the right & then they’ll ‘snap back’ just far enough to vote Tory in 2015.

    But the UKIP ‘grassroots’ appear to want out of the EU for very different reasons to those which apply to right-wingers; they want:
    1. The NHS to remain as it is (free & not privatised);
    2. They favour nationalising rail, water, utilities etc.;
    3. They want the return of state grammar schools & some even want fee paying schools closed or turned into grammars; &
    4. They want high state pensions, low unemployment & whopping numbers of police & armed forces.

    So UKIP seems to have gone from being a right-wing, libertarian party to being a big state, national socialist style party with a sprinkling of US tea-bagger style nut-jobs & a soupcon of BNP racists & Jew haters for good measure.

    If Farage & his ‘top table’ can’t sort it out, then they will collapse in a mess (like a company which has over-traded) & the ‘snap back’ may catapult a chunk of their supporters past the Tories & into the realms of disaffected non-voters or even towards Labour & the Libdems (if they’ve voted for those Parties in the past).

  31. @Amber

    They’ve tended to pick up the working class vote that BNP gained from, but how many of their policies reflect that? As far as I was aware they’re still Thatcherite on policy level, and those leaked emails reflect that.

    Have their activists been polled, or you going off their voters? I think there’s not a chance in hell they’ll ditch their Thatcherite policies, so I think they’re just hoping those voters remain in the dark about their neoliberalism, or their concerns over immigration and the EU override it.

  32. @ Craig,

    Ms. Berger sat there like a lump and let Natalie Bennett do all the work, and when she did talk she sounded like an apparatchik. Pretty feeble showing from someone who presumably had the New Labour media training.

    Unfortunately for Ann she’s one of the people being floated for promotion. Although maybe not anymore…

  33. @ Craig

    Have their activists been polled, or you going off their voters?
    Lord Ashcroft did some polling from which I drew some of my conclusions. For others, I am going from YG polls, websites, blogs etc. And (gods help me) a little bit from comments on e.g. the Telegraph & Con-Home which had received huge numbers of recommends. I have found some of it really surprising, especially the predilection for nationalisation & the huge support for the NHS (but, as I mentioned in a previous comment, they’d like it not to be staffed or used by immigrants).

  34. @ Craig

    I think there’s not a chance in hell they’ll ditch their Thatcherite policies, so I think they’re just hoping those voters remain in the dark about their neoliberalism…
    You may well be correct about the voters remaining in the dark for the local & EU elections but I think that UKIP could well be ‘found out’ by much of their supporter by 2015.

  35. Latest YouGov / The Sunday Times results 26th April – CON 31%, LAB 40%, LD 11%, UKIP 11%; APP -32 .

    Thatcher effect beginning to unwind?

  36. Good Morning All. Beautiful day here in sunny Bournemouth where the AFC B squad will be doing a parade later, to celebrate going up to ‘Division Two’.

    Interesting poll result. POSTAGEINCLUDED may be right, I had been expecting continued tory gains. Am I right in thinking that in two years time the GE will have been called now?

  37. Huzzah, a poll!

    Pure Approval:
    Cameron 36 (-3)
    Miliband 29 (nc)
    Clegg 21 (nc)
    Farage 44 (new entry)

    Net Approval:
    Cameron -22 (-6)
    Miliband -27 (+2)
    Clegg -48 (nc)
    Farage +24

    Farage has ratings that the others could only dream of. Hopefully this becomes a regular bit of polling.

    Weighted averages (changes on a week) –
    7-Day weighted:
    Con 31.8 (+0.1), Lab 39.7 (-0.5), Lib 10.7 (nc), UKIP 11.5 (+0.4)
    The Welfare/Thatcher bounce (delete as applicable) has not yet faded, with Lab’s position slipping slightly on last week. No indication if this is still a trend downward for Lab or if it’s just settling around 40.
    We haven’t seen the Lab average below 40 (which it has been this whole week) since pre-omnishambles.

    Changes on pre-omnishambles:
    Con -7.2, Lab +0.3, Lib +1.8, UKIP +6.4
    That’s pretty dire for Lab, as far as changes go, but given that they were at almost 40 then anyway it may not be too much of a worry.

    The most important thing will be the locals – I suspect UKIP will do better than predictions and Lab worse which will fuel narratives on ‘the growth of UKIP’ and ‘the decline of Labour’ which may cause further VI movement (much like the Lab>UKIP movement we saw post-Eastleigh).

    30-Day weighted average:
    Con 31.2 (+0.3), Lab 40.4 (-0.4), Lib 10.8 (-0.2), UKIP 11.5 (+0.1)

  38. Interesting hypothetical question –
    If Lab, Con, Lib and UKIP had a chance in your area, who would you vote?
    Con 26 (-5), Lab 37 (-3), Lib 12 (+1), UKIP 18 (+7)

    So perhaps people are just waiting for UKIP to break the glass ceiling, like the SDP did, and the Cons (with some net loss to Lab) face large decline.
    This would probably scare the Cons in to electoral reform, as a Con+UKIP coalition (with these sorts of numbers) would command more votes than Lab.

    Warning: Subsamples
    UKIP only 3% behind Cons in the Midlands in this hypothetical poll.

  39. Craig,Spearmint,sorry for late response.Yes,she was hopeless.In fact in a way
    They all were.

  40. Tf,

    Yes it is looking like the Midlands is the most likely place for a UKIP upset. Not that UKIP are stronger there but Cons are weaker.

    There’s no substantial evidence in this poll that UKIP will do well in Labour areas. Some leakage from Labour but below the level of leakage from either Lib or Con.

  41. What’s also interesting (and which has gone completely unreported) is that the Greens have gone up to 3% of VI (versus 1.9% in 2010). This could account for some shrinking of the Lib Dem vote – could they possibly win a couple more seats (maybe Cambridge or Norwich South) next time?

    Anyway, plugging that poll into the swingometer (which doesn’t yet have a UKIP option, boo) we get a Labour majority of 106.

  42. Nameless
    Greens have mostly had 2s (rather than 3s) but their weighted average is currently 2.4%.
    And they have, in the past, had averages of 3+, so perhaps nothing to get too excited about.

    However, the advantage that the Greens have, which UKIP don’t yet (which is an advantage that the LibDems also have), is that they’ve spent a lot of time building up local support in concentrated areas.
    This means it’s much more likely that it’ll translate in to MPs (like it did in Brighton).

  43. True. My uncle in Norwich South said a lot of people there are quite familiar with the Greens whereas they don’t really know their Labour or Tory constituency parties. I can see them getting 3 seats in 2015 and replacing the Lib Dems as third in another couple of dozen.

  44. Statgeek thanks for the numbers.

    BTW re ‘So 20-25 years to pay it off, rather than 60 years? :)’

    Does the smiley mean you know are joking? As you know National Debt does not get paid off it just rolls over which is why the credit card comparison is invalid.

    Of course the cost of servicing the debt has to be manageable and the ability to keep replacing maturing debt and taking new debt maintained and that is the crux of then debate (or at least should be)

  45. @KEN
    “I expect more narrowing of the polls as the result of good economic news, yet to trickle through to this poll though, probably Sunday will be more enlightening. My forecast…
    C…35 L….38 LD.11 UK..9”

    Latest YouGov / The Sunday Times results CON 31%, LAB 40%, LD 11%, UKIP 11%

    Remind me not to let you pick my lottery numbers, Ken!

  46. @ Tinged

    “This would probably scare the Cons in to electoral reform, as a Con+UKIP coalition (with these sorts of numbers) would command more votes than Lab.”

    Its a nice idea…BUT its hard to imagine an electoral vote reform that would assist Con+UKIP but not Lab+LD.

    And on the numbers you quoted its the latter combo that would command more votes.

    Admittedly I may still be indulging in the lazy thinking that all LDs are automatically predisposed to Lab over Con but then the same assumption should not be made about UKIP favouring Con. They both are reasonable assumptions to consider though.

  47. @Statgeek – “So 20-25 years to pay it off, rather than 60 years? :)”

    Yes – that would seem fine.

    It’s roughly the same time frame I’ve set myself to pay off my mortgage, and while I need to make sure I don’t take on too much debt alongside this and take reasonable steps to ensure my income earning abilities stay sound, I’m pretty comfortable with that.

    Of course, as the years go by, my mortgage will decline in relative value through inflation, even at modest CPI rates, so I’ll increasingly find the payments less and less troublesome.

    Meanwhile, that self same inflation should mean the asset that I’m slowly purchasing increases in value, and although my chief reason for purchasing a house is to have somewhere to live, it is nice to know that I’m probably also going to get richer by doing so.

    This is what I find find rather amusing about right leaning posters and their comments over the dreaded national debt. It’s like it’s some evil, terrible thing that no sensible person would ever dream of adopting, whereas most of us adopt precisely the same strategy – long dated loans, with interest, where asset appreciation over time creates wealth, and the relative costs decline year on year.

    I would agree that there are issues of amounts, rates, and the use to which the borrowing is put and how effectively spending is managed, but if used wisely, the national debt remains a fantastic facility that will massively enriched future generations and ensure that they don’t have to live in penury.

    Just like buying a house.

  48. A great “what’s it all about Nigel” letter in MoS from Ashcroft to Farage.

  49. A final thought on the Moneyweek nonsense from last night.

    I was quite tickled by the attempt in the article to pin the start of all our problems on the commencement of state pensions in 1909.

    Companies selling financial products or financial services have always hated state benefits, particularly pensions, as these offer far better value than their own profit based products.

    It was one of the sadder facts of the Thatcher years, that she allowed us to become convinced that state pensions were unaffordable and that the private pensions industry was best placed to fill the gap. Pension values are the biggest financial scandal of the lot, and we’ve been entirely taken in my the remorseless briefing that the state cannot provide.

  50. The unlikely fantasy scenario for some perhaps, would be that UKIP retains its 2010 showing (3.1%) but halts its eating into of Con 2010s (7.6%).

    UKIP’s rise continues though, making new inroads into Lab, Lib Dem and non-voters. If they could take 5% (instead of a current 1.2%) from Lab, and another 5% from LD (instead of 1.6%)… going into the GE we might see something like Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 20%.

    At which point UKIP negotiates a formal pact with the Tory party under a new leader, Farage is given a safe seat and written-in-blood guarantees about EU renegotiation/withdrawl. UKIP councillors, MEPs, Wheeler et al come into the fold. A rump of UKIP carry-ons have to field candidates under a new banner and garner less than 4% overall. There is some drift back to other parties, but thanks to the Farage brand Con takes the lion’s share. GE result: Con 44%, Lab 36%, LD 12%.

1 3 4 5 6