This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline voting intention figures of CON 31%, LAB 38%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 12% (so underlining once again how UKIP appear to have declined a bit from from their post-local election high, but are still enjoying substantially more support than earlier in the year). Full tabs are here.

This morning YouGov also had a couple of questions on Julian Assange, spying and on Ian Brady. People have a negative opinion of Assange by 40% to 29%, asked what should happen to him, 43% think he should be left in the Ecuadorian embassy compared to 18% who think he should be allowed to travel to Ecuador. 6% would grant him asylum here, 15% would ignore international laws and diplomatic convention and forcibly enter the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest him.

On spying, following the Guardian’s story at the weekend, 79% think it is probably normal for governments to spy on each other at conventions. FInally asked about Ian Brady, 51% of people think he should be allowed to starve himself to death if he wishes, 40% think he should not.

111 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 31, LAB 38, LD 10, UKIP 12”

1 2 3
  1. Ah the joys of planning.

    As I was on two planning committees I’ll give you an idea of the Scottish system.

    Councils do wide consultations which the public generally ignore. The plan is then debated and discussed and if necessary you can have a local public enquiry.

    The final draft laying out policies and zoning is then put out to consultation again and then after that it I die abated in it’s final form and sent to the Scottish Government for final approval to make sure it complies with national policy.

    At this point if agreed all applications are tested against policy and if they comply they are passed. Some that are contentious or or border line come to committee but about two thirds are delegated.

    Services tend to be poorly resourced but as they are funded by planning fees the if the public want a better service then fees would need to rise.

    Most applications are passed and most of those, about 60% with the eight weeks limit.

    Why eight weeks. It needs to be checked and even major builders let alone private individuals often give only some of the information needed. Then it has to be assessed, advertised and people given time to object.

    In addition, as I was forever telling angry constituents when they complained that an answer would take at least a week when it was a couple of hours work, the person doing it can, once they have cleared their mail and sorted out housekeeping, do two or three of these couple of hour jobs a day.. about ten a week.

    As at any time they will have a dozen on their desk they will get round to yours once the other twelve ahead of you are finished.

    Believe me people who say it’s slow and frustrating have no idea how frustrating it is for Council planners some of the most dedicated and overworked professionals in public service.

    As to letting people build where they want,?

    Well if you are happy with no infrastructure planning so that the state just plays catch up when the roads get gridlocked or too many people are using to much water so no one has any pressure or the sewage backs up that’s fine.

    As to the need to randomly build schools or hospitals on commendered land to fit with where people have just decided to build well would be problematic to say the least.

    Still we could almost certainly deal with a lot of the lack of affordable housing in the South East if you did allow little or no planning restrictions in and around London. Like some US cities we could have a ring of huge trailer parks all around the M25.


  2. My comments on what would happen if we abolished the entire planning system overnight were intended as a thought experiment to demonstrate that the cost of obtaining land with planning is the main driver of house prices, rather than as a practical policy suggestion!

    Clearly we have zoned out a lot of the SE as untouchable (not least greenbelt). With hindsight, that may have not been the best decision we ever made. We could probably solve the housing squeeze in a fairly managed way for the next 20 years or so if we announced we were going to allow building on 25% of what is currently greenbelt, in planned developments (i.e. with schools, water etc all organized).
    The problem with doing this is that any amount of building sufficient to significantly solve the problems of housing shortage will by definition also drop house prices enough to cause serious unhappiness amongst existing homeowners.

    I don’t think there is any easy answer to this one, which is why despite housing and house prices creeping up the “what the voters are worrying about” index I don’t expect any politicians to offer more than some marginal tinkering – whichever party, any attempt to move house prices in any direction (to inflate further or attempt to deflate) will alienate a chunk of their base (either the ones with mortgages, or the ones renting). Given the way voters memories work (mostly negatively), I can’t see there being nearly as many votes to be gained for anyone in this as there are votes to be lost…

  3. Loserer,

    So the governments addresses the market distortion by further distorting the market? That would explain some of the housebuilding in areas with no jobs, no good transport links, and no long-term prospects. Then, regional policy and welfare can continue the cycle of intervention…

    It’s an astonishing mess and from what I’ve seen in the Republic of Ireland, I don’t much like the alternative. Some problems have no good solutions.

  4. The first by-election of this parliamentary term is being held today, in Aberdeen Donside (corresponds largely to the Labour-held Westminster seat of Aberdeen North – Frank Doran MP, Maj. 8,361).

    The last Scottish Parliamentary by-election was way back in April 2006 (SNP Hold in Moray), so these are very rare events.

    To spice things up, if the SNP lose today then Salmond loses his overall majority in parliament.

    If the betting markets are anything to go by this looks like being a straighforward SNP Hold, however, the battle for 3rd place looks very interesting, with the new centre-right, pro-independence party the Scottish Democratic Alliance currently priced ahead of the Lib Dems, Tories, Greens and UKIP. (Surely some mistake??)

    Best prices – Aberdeen Donside by-election (SNP defending majority of 7,175)

    SNP 1/33 (Hills, Ladbrokes)
    Lab 19/1 (Betfair)
    SDA 100/1 (Ladbrokes)
    Greens 150/1 (Hills)
    UKIP 150/1 (Hills)
    Lib Dems 237/1 (Betfair)
    Con 237/1 (Betfair)

    I must say that I am pretty amazed that the Labour challenger is priced so long. This is after all a Labour-held area at Westminster level, and if you believe the YouGov Scottish breaks then Labour are miles ahead of the SNP at the moment. But then the thing is, anybody who knows anything about Scottish politics doesn’t believe the YouGov Scottish breaks.

  5. Good Morning.
    Now that the lead is down to 6%, does anyone think that Labour will take steps to pick a new leader who can win in 2015?

  6. Any recommendations Chris?

  7. Chris – what are the numbers please.

    And no as no leader can win an OM in 2015 imo giving the electoral mountain we have to climb.

  8. Latest YouGov / The Sun results 19th June – CON 32%, LAB 38%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%, APP -33


  9. Latest YouGov / The Sun results 19th June – CON 32%, LAB 38%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%, APP -33


  10. A single swallow doesn’t blah blah.

    3 in row rule applies for 6 to be correct but as per Colin yesterday to say lead 8 rather than 9 we need the odd 6 so this is looking more probable.

  11. The G8 Conference allows an incumbent PM to be Prime Ministerial and associate with World leaders which is normally good for a short term boost.

  12. Saw this headline: Royal baby’s gender to be ‘surprise’

    I would have thought it was a 100% certainty it would be a Boy or a Girl!

  13. DC and GO have had a lot of exposure at the G8, the PM has been chairing the meetings of the great powers. This has probably helped the Tory VI by a point or two, I’d guess. We’ll see if Labour are indeed slipping a bit, though.

    Not sure if the Aberdeen by-election will have any impact down here, it might if were a seat for Labout to lose.

  14. A pointer to the Aberdeen by-election? For the first time in ages, the YouGov Scottish sub-sample gives a lead to the SNP.

  15. Hermathrodite?

  16. Wilshaw!

    Yes Sir.

    Do you know why you are being put in detention?

    For othering “poor children” on the Today programme Sir?

    Exactly. Extra homework for you Wilshaw:


  17. Blimey-a 6 !

    Crinkley’s at 36/31
    DC best pm over EM -+15 from +7
    Maj Con Government preferred over Maj Labour.

    ……er , is something occurring?

  18. Morning Everyone – Point by point – just tiny movements but they all add up to a 6% Labour lead this morning.

    Is it a blip or are we slowly working our way to 35% each – be very interesting to see if they cross over or stay more or less neck and neck for a while.
    More interesting for us poll watchers though – 40,30,10,10 is obviously good for Labour but very boring for us!

  19. CL 1945

    @” does anyone think that Labour will take steps to pick a new leader who can win in 2015?”

    From this morning’s YG Poll :-

    EM as “best PM”:-
    Lab VI -58%
    2010 Lab-48%


    What a ludicrous response to a serious point about educational disadvantage from a committed educationalist.

  21. Wow, first 6 point lead since March 2012. (Excluding that random 4 point lead poll from December 2012.) Not a happy poll for Labour!

    Looking at the crossbreaks, what seems to be happening is that the Tories are gradually getting some of their Ukip defectors back but Labour and Lib Dem -> Labour are not. (Blah blah one rogue poll blah blah crossbreak disclaimer. But I think Sine Nomine is right that it points in the direction of the current trend.)

    I’m a bit puzzled about what could be causing it, unless it’s just that equal marriage has been off the news for a bit and social conservatives are feeling less annoyed with Cameron.

  22. I think that, without corroboration, the 6 point poll is best interpreted as part of a broader shift of Labour’s support from about 40 to 38. In particular, I’d want to see the Tories do better than 30 for a while before I infer that they’re doing any better, given the absence of an event that could explain such a revival.

  23. I’m not sure there has to be “an event”.

    It can be more subtle than that-a general feeling in respect of a number of factors-involving policy, outcomes. and personalities.

    I agree with the need for caution. This poll is still = a Lab majority of 78.

    Cons have a mountain to climb-but 6 is better than 13.

  24. My personal view is that in the end when it really comes to the crunch the electorate will weigh up the prospect of a Labour Government so soon after getting rid of them in 2010.
    I think the economy will have improved enough and the countries horrendous debt will be at least under control that they will give DC and the Tories another 5 years to continue the hard job they inherited rather than ‘possibly’ throwing away all the hard work and pain we have endured since 2010.
    Some people just don’t believe that Labour have the guts to do anything ‘unpopular’ that may be necessary in the future.
    Just one view of course and very hypothetical.


    @”the countries horrendous debt will be at least under control ”

    Don’t wish to quibble without reason-but it is important.

    The annual Deficit may be “under control”.

    The cumulative Debt will most certainly be “horrendous”-and the next Parliament will be much engaged in how to get it down-to what level, and how quickly..

  26. @Colin – spot on of course – well pointed out!


    Perhaps but the question remains that at the current numbers polled today, LAB would have majority of 78. (Electoral Calculus)

    In order for CON to have a chance of forming largest government, they would seriously need to make big inroads, in UKIP support and stripping LIB DEM voters from LAB. In today’s polling, 34% of previous Lib Dem voters are aligned with LAB, and these voters have helped to get LAN +36/37%. They seem to be quite “sticky” voters, so CON will have a momentous task of gaining votes from both UKIP and ex-Lib Dems.

  28. Bill/Colin agree with both your latest posts.
    In particular Bill I have long argued that the key number is Lab VI asCon VI will hold up better in this parliament without the LD option for malcontents who return at GEs anyhow. In this context the fall below 40 now creeping towards 38 is a concern, whether some VI that has gone to the UKIP and will vote that way in the Euro Elections is going to return for the GE is important and if so how much is crucial.

    Sine – the key is in your remark

    ‘I think the economy will have improved enough’

    Enough for an OM, unlikely enough to deliver most votes for cons imo likely.

    I can’t see Labour not taking 20-30 seats off Cons just from LD returnees as 20-25% of 2010 LDs seem pretty entrenched back with Labour and few 2010 LD are turning blue (although Chris L thinks many will at the ballet box)
    This would put the seat count very close with who takes most seats off the LDs being crucial to who has most MPs.

  29. @Q/ALI

    Yes as people keep on pointing out of course Labour would still win quite easily with these figures but a 6% lead is really not very good in the electoral cycle.
    Also most people are well aware that anything could happen to swing it either way but considering how things are at the present in the UK in general the Tory led coalition are holding up quite well and probably quite frustratingly so in some Labour minds!

  30. Also worth pointing out that the deficit will also not be sorted out in 2015 – see graph “worst deficit in the west by 2015”

    All parties have failed to come to grips with what is necessary to sort it out. I think the markets will end up having to sort it out Greece/Spain/Netherlands/Ireland style.

  31. richard

    Only growth will “sort it out”. The Greek “solution” will just make it worse, as we are seeing. Hence, stimulus.

  32. @ Spearmint

    If I’m reading the tables correctly Labour was last down to a 6% lead on 1st May and prior to that on 28 Jan. 4% was 12 Nov. Today’s figure probably is part of an overall small decline but not, in itself,quite as unusual as you say.


    Salutary graphs.

    Fraser Nelson is an expert with the bucket of cold water.

  34. Just yesterday I was thinking that we were overdue a 6% lead. This latest Yougov doesn’t necessarily point to an underlying 6/7% Labour lead, but instead indicates that the Yougov lead is probably around 8% instead of 9%. But we still need a few more Yougov polls to confirm this trend.

  35. Just yesterday I was thinking that we were overdue a 6% lead. This latest Yougov doesn’t necessarily point to an underlying 6/7% Labour lead, but instead indicates that the Yougov lead is probably around 8% instead of 9%. But we still need a few more Yougov polls to confirm this trend.

  36. I see the US is also planning on bringing quantitative easing to a close next year.

    I don’t think the UK can continue with QE once the US brings it to a halt, and the next steps are obviously a correction in interest rates.

    The US is expected to have got its deficit well under control by 2015, so I expect interest rates will be allowed to start correcting in 2014/5. UK can’t offer lower interest rates than the US and still finance its debts.

    So if anything 2015 promises to be a year of increased pain economically, and more cuts to finance the interest bill on that massive debt accumulated over the last 8 years as rates rise. And as the deficit rises, rates will have to increase further to reflect the increased risk.

    I really can’t see the UK avoiding an IMF intervention sometime in the next few years to provide political cover for the real correction necessary. The question is which party do we want to implement those IMF policies?

  37. Do we all agree though that although Global circumstances and the ‘greedy banks’ caused most of it BUT the Labour government didn’t help the UK economy one bit with their usual spend & borrow policy?
    And in the main still don’t admit to it or even a slight apology for aiding & abetting the state we now find ourselves in!

  38. @ Sine Nomine

    What is this ‘electoral cycle’ of which you speak? Voters respond to events,not phases of the moon.
    Consider this lot:

    Profumo Affair (Macmillan)
    Devaluation (Wilson)
    Inflation,3day week, miners’ strikes (Heath)
    Winter of discontent (Callaghan}
    Inflationary budget .Riots (Thatcher)
    Boom and Bust (Thatcher)
    Poll Tax (Thatcher)
    Black Wednesday (Major)
    Bank Collapses (Brown)

    All of these generated enormous government unpopularity,all were badly mishandled by govt. and PM at the time.Sometimes the offenders recovered, sometimes they didn’t.

    Whatever else we can say of DC, so far there’s been nothing to match the above disasters.No real ‘events’ at all – and no ‘cycle’ guaranteeing there’ll be one.


    @”I don’t think the UK can continue with QE once the US brings it to a halt,”


    @” UK can’t offer lower interest rates than the US and still finance its debts.”

    Gilt yields this morning-10 year Bonds:-
    USA 2.37%
    UK 2.19%

  40. Sine
    Do we all agree though that although Global circumstances and the ‘greedy banks’ caused most of it BUT the Labour government didn’t help the UK economy one bit with their usual spend & borrow policy?

    You may be right but it is remarkable that GO/DC have been able to airbrush their commitment to match Labours’ spending plans right up to Lehmanns collapse.

    But Labour were in office so rightly they carry the can.

  41. I have a thing about weighting. Today, Labour weighted down more than normal. So, let’s not all get too excited/ despondent. All within margin of error.

    There are so many new variables to 2015:
    Collapse of Lib Dems: first time since 1981. How will that effect Tory/Labour marginals where difference in 2010, when Labour very unpopular, is less than LD share? And LD/ Labour marginals? (or even, as where I live, not such a marginal but lots saying won’t vote LD again).

    Also, govt is a coalition. So neither ruling party won. Tories didn’t even manage a 1983? (where they won on 42% of the vote). Ruling party has never increased share of the vote, and Tories have dropped substantially. Can they increase from here to more than their 2010 share when Labour was so unpopular?

    And then the rise of the 4th party, UKIP. Taking voters from all 3, attracting the over 60’s who turn out to vote. How will that effect the marginals. Will they do to the Tories what the Liberals did to Labour.

    So many variables…

  42. @Sen5c

    I note that you list three for Lady Thatcher and none at all for Blair – why none for Blair, was he a favourite of yours?

    But there is almost always a political cycle of some sorts.It might come in slightly differing forms but a cycle non the less.
    An example being most governments do recover slightly when a GE looms.
    Mid Term Blues happen to most if not all governments.

    Its a cycle that is sometimes quite obvious and at other times not so obvious – so why do you question my term ‘Political Cycle’ apart from being pedantic or awkward?

  43. Phil Haines

    “…a response of “taxation” hardly captures that concern and might be interpreted as meaning that I want even less of it.”


    As the referendum is closer, many will rate “Independence” as the key issue, including some in r-UK. Will the pro- and anti- be added together?

    Do those who select “Europe” include those who want the Euro?

  44. Although some of the LD vote going to and sticking with LAB is an obviously good thing for Labour, will there not be some places where this might help the Tories? For example a CON/LD marginal.LD votes go to Labour, result Tories win. Will the Conservatives actually gain some seats out of this LD shift to Labour?

  45. @Colin

    Well I suppose they could offer lower interest rates than the US and increase QE to buy the bonds that investors refuse to buy because they can get a better return for the same risk across the Atlantic, but I think the impact should then be a sharp devaluation of Sterling and increase in the inflation rate.

    That may be less painful than the alternative….

  46. @ Sine Nomine

    I loathed Blair from start to finish.Unfortunately for me I was in a minority and that’s really my point.Blair’s government was never unpopular (Polls, by-elections etc.) He did indeed create his own ‘event’ in Iraq but that always had the support of the main opposition.

    Governments stayed popular between 1945 and 1962 and 1997 and 2007 and won every election within those dates (Labour lost in 1951 only on seats, not vote share.) The fate of unpopular governments is entirely unpredicatable.

    The phenomenon you’re identifying is entirely a result of events.When one occurs people respond to it in polls and at by-elections.By the time a general election comes round they may have re-assessed or forgotten or are forced to consider alternatives more carefully and then their vote changes.

    (I always feel like mentioning here that 2 million or more who had an opportunity to vote will actually be dead, their cycling days over for good.)

  47. @ChrisLane1945

    “Good Morning.
    Now that the lead is down to 6%, does anyone think that Labour will take steps to pick a new leader who can win in 2015?”

    “Permission to panic, sir,” as Clive Dunn’s character would have said in Dad’s Army! Panic is rarely a good basis for making decisions that are likely to have long term implications. Accordingly, “keep calm and carry on” is a far better advice!

    Let me restate where I am with the Miliband leadership question. He wasn’t my first choice and, without opening old arguments, I think either David Milband or Andy Burnham might have proved more electorally attractive alternatives, but we are where we are. In many respects, Miliband has exceeded my expectations of him and has been, in a lot of areas, more effective than I thought he would be. His 2012 Conference speech and PMQ performances suggest a politician who is a capable public speaker and debater; much better than I’d feared he was, to be honest. He’s no doubt a highly intelligent man and, when encountered one to one, apparently very personable. He’s a serious politician with important things to say about our country and, given the chance, someone with much to contribute. However, particularly in TV and Radio interviews, he’s not a smooth or polished performer at all and this continues to frustrate his admirers. For reasons that I’m not entirely sure about, and for a man of his undoubted intellect and mastery of detail, he quite often comes over as remarkably inarticulate and clunking, with none of the nimbleness in thought and language you’d expect from him. I think this may well be where a lot of this impression of weakness and indecision comes from and, while I don’t think we’re in disaster territory here, he’ll need to address this failing if he’s to prosper in the white heat of an election campaign. Considering where he stands vis-a-vis the other party leaders in terms of approval ratings, his position is eminently recoverable and I’ve seen nothing to suggest that he can’t beat a Cameron led Conservative Party in May 2015. As many of us have said before, he’s not in the company or shadow of greatness with either Cameron or Clegg. His problems in cutting through to the public would be far deeper if was running against truly popular and highly regarded opponents. The polls clearly show that isn’t the case and, in that respect, he’s a lucky man. You don’t have to very pretty to win an Ugly Contest!

    As for the politics of it all, there’s no doubt that, amidst the polling wreckage of the last 15 months, that the one crumb of comfort for the Tories has been Miliband’s relatively poor poll ratings. It’s a sore that they’ve constantly scratched with many believing that Miliband is Cameron’s ticket back into Downing Street. They’ll obviously want to spread the seed of doubt amongst Labour that they’ve got an electoral dud on their hands as a leader, thereby undermining Miliband himself and hoping that this will provoke party infighting. All they need for that to happen is for panic to spread.

    There’s many a twist and turn to be had between now and May 2015 and while Labour’s lead has wobbled a bit of late, I think the next election is still perfectly winnable; a proposition I wouldn’t have countenanced in the immediate aftermath of May 2010.

    Hence my advice; keep calm and carry on.

  48. Roger Mexico

    “There is a very real problem over ambiguity.”

    Which “country” am I in?

    If Scotland, I am very satisfied and hopeful about the Scottish Parliament and government and its potential to improve the economy and preserve the free NHS and tertiary education

    If UK, the answers are very different..


    I’m not at all sure that the Global Bond market operates like that.

    Clearly there are many countries offering their debt for sale , and they attract buyers at a range of prices/yields.

1 2 3