The weekly Monday poll from Populus is out and has topline figures of CON 32%(+1), LAB 39%(nc), LDEM 12%(nc), UKIP 9%(-1). Changes are from last Friday and obviously show no significant change – Populus are planning to release a weekly poll on Mondays, and sometimes more. Full tabs are here.

While I’m here I missed some Ipsos MORI polling on attitudes towards trade unions at the end of last week. This is something that quite often comes up in discussion – we know, for example, that a proportion of people think that Ed Miliband is too close to the Unions, but are the Unions themselves any longer seen as some great threat as they might plausibly have been seen in the 70s or 80s?

Essentially, the answer is no. And while people still don’t approve of how closely linked to the Unions Labour is, it’s not such a widespread view as it once was.

The general principle of Trade Unionism still had widespread support – 78% of people agree that Trade Unions are essential to protect workers’ interests. Fears that trade unions have too much power and are controlled by extremists have declined greatly since the 70s and 80s – back then around three-quarters of people agreed that Trade Unions had too much power and two-thirds thought they were controlled by militants and extremists. Those same two questions now find only 35% think the Unions have too much power and only 23% think they are controlled by militants and extremists.

That’s not to say people are supportive of Labour’s links with the Unions, people agree by 53% to 28% that Labour should not be so closely linked to the Unions and 55% disagree that is good for Unions to have a role in selecting Labour’s candidates.


129 Responses to “Populus – CON 32, LAB 39, LD 12, UKIP 9 (plus MORI on Trade Unions)”

1 2 3
  1. One of my comments has also gone into moderation but I’m sure when Mr Wells reads it then it will be published.

    Just shows Mr Well’s filters do work.

  2. I have never understood the argument-we cannot do everything, therefore we should do nothing.

    It has always seemed like a cop out to me.

    No doubt there will be technical difficulties here, and loopholes for the determined paedophile.

    But if numbers of innocent young children-or even vulnerable young teenagers are blocked from viewing the depraved sexual abuse of young children, then I think most parents & certainly most mothers will be thankful.

  3. @Chordata,

    To answer your questions in order.

    1) Probably by CEOP or possibly the College of Policing.

    1) Probably by CEOP, and obviously by any ISP that wishes to provide IP addresses to UK households. I doubt it would be of any real commercial value. The sort of terms that would be included wouldn’t feature in your normal lexicon anyway.

    2) It doesn’t matter how many devices use the network, as the filters and blocks would be applied on the ISP’s servers.

    3) You are assuming he hasn’t, partly because I don’t think you fully understand what he’s proposing. So I suppose the question falls back to you.

    4) Quite possibly. If a website routinely shows images that are considered pornographic then it would be included in the filter list. It might actually be a gentle signal to some of the media organisations that it is time to abandon semi-clad temptresses. In practice however I think the bar will be set a little higher than that.

    Personally I am ambivalent, and have some concerns about internet freedoms, censorship, slippery slopes etc. But I don’t think it is quite as silly or ineffective as is being proposed. Of course there will be 1000 ways around it. But imperfect doesn’t mean bad.

  4. @LASZLO

    “…Or at an outside, Francis. But that’s a bit French for a British King (yeah, yeah so is Richard – but we’ve crossed that bridge a few times before)…”

    Hmmm. After Catherine’s Dad (Michael Francis Middleton). Conversely, we could have Charles, Philip, Arthur, George, Andrew, Albert, Christian, Edward, Antony, Richard, Louis after William’s Dad or brothers.

    Or if we look at her side further, there’s Peter, James, William, Ronald after her grandads and brother

    If we assume one for the job, one for William’s Dad, one for Catherine’s dad, and another for around the house, that’ll be something like “George Charles Michael James”.

    The puckish part of me points out that “George Michael” is also viable, which’ll please users of certain substances and viewers of “Arrested Development”.

    rgdsm

  5. Labour lead down to just 3 points in latest @YouGov poll for @Sun_Politics – Lab 38, Con 35, LD 11, UKIP 10

  6. @Neil A

    Sorry: incorrectly attributed a quote by you to Lazlo: apols

    @Allan Christie

    You’re welcome

    rgdsm

  7. MARTYN

    @” We not talking about this?”

    It seems that you have an inexplicable urge to do so.

    So off to bed, dreaming of tomorrows Poll.

  8. @chordata,

    It’s very simple. Every household is asked whether they want pornography available on their search engine as a default, or whether they want the default as no material at all, with the default the latter. As a parent I think it’s a great idea, as is stronger regulation on the worst material.

  9. The story is Cons 38% which if replicated in polls later this week is good for them.
    Lab on 38% is no big deal

  10. So it’s a boy then.. Oh dear another summer of flag waving and faded bunting.

    When does the football season start?

  11. …..35 eh?

    Wasn’t that a number which the laws of physics would not permit?

    There are so many rules to remember on UKPR.

  12. YouGov, wow, interesting! I do feel a genuine increase in optimism with life in general. Is this all the great sporting results?, amazing weather, signs of economic recovery. I think it’s all helping the Conservatives. Plus they have cut out the bickering on Europe and got a decent position.

  13. @Colin,

    Don’t forget the rule that any good poll for the Tories is a clear rogue that the righties on this forum bang on and on about.

  14. @Rich

    But they won’t get that. They will get a filter that removes some pornography, but leaves more unfiltered. How does that actually help?

  15. 35% is probably an outlier, but it does confirm that something is happening to Tory VI. Labour may take comfort, however, from the fact that their vote is remaining pretty solid.

    As always we need to wait a little longer – perhaps it will be clear by May 2015?

  16. So I expect the Guardian’s front page will be ‘LABOUR UP THREE POINTS’?

  17. @Colin,

    Conservatives on a charge…

  18. NEIL A

    Yes-that rule is the first one you learn here. It’s like a flagship rule for the site.

    ( just a joke AW !)

  19. @Neil A

    Nope, a term list is effectively useless as the internet is expanding faster than it can be catalogued. That is why Google developed what became HDFS and Map/Reduce, but even that wasn’t fast enough…

    As for search terms, again the technology has strange side effects. If you write a scholarly article about X, Y, Z it ends up being indexed alongside X, Y, Z. This could lead to a fun game of “get the politician’s website banned” as searches themselves become indexed…

  20. RICH -Steady the Buffs.

    …..but IF Cons are REALLY improving this sort of Poll had to appear.

    And it has .

  21. In AW’s calculator this gives a LAB majority of 32. Looking at poll averages for the last three years, we do see small bumps for the government during the summer months. Maybe because parliament’s out and nothing major happens.

  22. COLIN

    “…It seems that you have an inexplicable urge to do so…”

    Urge, yes. Inexplicable, no.

    rgdsm

  23. Well after all the criticism of ICM last week, Yougov are now falling in line.

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/07/16/are-labour-and-tories-really-level-pegging/

    Outlier, or has the spurt of Tory unity since the local election results really turned around their fortunes?

    (but as per previous twitter post, looks like policy announcements today have hit a raw nerve, it has been going on all day, so would not be surprised to see them collapse back down again.)

  24. @Colin,

    Agreed. Been coming for a while.

  25. New thread

  26. MARTYN

    I feel sure medical help is available for the condition.

    Good luck & goodnight.

  27. It seems to me that Neil A has it spot on in relation to internet porn. The ban won’t be that effective, it’s not that much of a threat to civil liberties, and it’s probably worth a try. As far as I can see, very minor difficulties (e.g. the need to go to more than one chemist to get enough pills to commit suicide) can ‘deter’ a lot of behaviour. So even with the limitations inherent in any ban, fewer people will access porn (or indeed respectable sites on sexual health) and nothing will happen to those who sign up to access it. Anyway there is one small mercy. David Cameron did refrain from blaming Gordon Brown for failing to control pornography or even accusing him for putting it up in the first place.

  28. I doubt Cameron’s policy on filtering pornography will have much effect (on polling and otherwise): the various positives and negatives will cancel each other out.

    As for the filter, it sounds like a good idea but a) his main target (child abuse) he wants to legislate against is already illegal and there are probably more effective means of dealing with this than with an internet filter and b) the specifics of it aren’t clear, but it doesn’t sound like it will do that much (so more posturing than achieving again – more or less the defining slogan of the government)

    @Martyn

    “We’re not talking about this?”

    It’s a boy – his name should be Batman. That is all.

  29. I’ll take a guess that the underlying lead is 6% with a +/-3% MoE (we’ve seen 9% and 3% lately).

    We were seeing 6%-7% on average, so it’s definitely a ‘watch this space’.

1 2 3