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. Graham

    Streching things to call it a mid cycle.

    Not at all, the political cycle of this government is 60mths if we attribute 20mths to each period, (start/middle/final ) then with 22mths to go we are still in mid cycle.

  2. CARFREW

    I take the Sunday Times too-but there is far too much stuff with it which I never read.

    I don’t know why they do that. Suppose it justifies the price-I believe ST makes a profit, unlike The Times.

  3. I’d say the end cycle begins 66% of the way through, but the true sprint finish will get started post-Euro elections.

  4. RiN

    @”I would read the Times if it wasn’t owned by the Murdoch’s, I absolutely refuse to give them any money”

    You should read it then-the more you read, the more it costs him.

    If it helps, I will be watching my eldest grandson play RM in a musical about Leveson , next weekend. I expect it to be an “unsympathetic” portrayal !

  5. Sun Politics [email protected]_Politics 2m
    Bad news for @Ed_Miliband in the latest @YouGov poll for @Sun_Politics…full details later…

    Very early for the Sun, must be really good for Conservative.

    Level pegging ?

  6. I think Cameron’s very noble cause on internet policing should go down well with voters. I have always wondered why previous Govts havn’t done more. Seems like a no brainer to me.

  7. “23% think they (Unions) are controlled by militants and extremists”
    _____

    I’ve always thought this. The Unions are controlled by militants and extremists. They stifle the country when things don’t go their way, hold governments to ransom and frown upon anyone who dares mention private enterprise.

    I do agree we need unions to ensure workers rights etc but this far left extremist militant disruption they cause whenever a public sector worker sees a 1.5% pay increase compared to a decrease in the private sector does my nut in.

    If the unions had their way then we would have at least 70% of the population fruit picking, coal mining and working for Glasgow City Council.

    Can we not just privatise the unions and auction them off to the lowest bidder?

  8. YORKCITY

    “Sun Politics [email protected]_Politics 2m
    Bad news for @Ed_Miliband in the latest @YouGov poll for @Sun_Politics…full details later…

    Very early for the Sun, must be really good for Conservative.

    Level pegging?”
    ________

    The poll will be dismissed as biased like the last neck and neck poll.

  9. @COLIN

    “I take the Sunday Times too-but there is far too much stuff with it which I never read.
    I don’t know why they do that. Suppose it justifies the price-I believe ST makes a profit, unlike The Times.”

    —————

    They did it for people like me, Col!! I’d read it all, book reviews, even ballet reviews and I don’t even go to ballet. Was a suitably undemanding way to spend a Sunday afternoon after a night out, a few friends meeting up for coffee and bagels, piling through the supplements together…

  10. ^ I don’t think the government can sell non-state owned organisations, Allan.

    Rich, I wouldn’t be so sure. It may play well with the base – which I think is his intention, to strangle UKIP, but among other things it’s quite the violation of civil liberties, which I don’t think will be that popular with Lab/LD voters. It may shore up the Tory vote as more drift back from UKIP, but could also solidify any party publicly opposed.

    That’s of course if it even passes the Commons. I don’t see the Lib Dems being too keen on it. Even then, if it’s going into force next year there’ll be enough time pre-election to see how effective it is. If it’s a total failure (like I suspect it will be) then egg could very much be on the Government’s face.

  11. @mrnameless,

    I wonder what the civil liberties groups will say. I will be appalled on this one if they say this sort of material should be left as available by default.
    Normally I am very Conservative on such things, but on this stuff, we need to do something as a society. Too often it’s featuring in the early stages of rather nasty people’s development towards violent crimes.

  12. Rich

    I thought the Tories were going to stop nannying us? They’re just as bad as New Labour

  13. Since there is nothing much interesting to talk about can somebody tell me how left is the SDP leader in Germany? Somebody could also confirm my suspicion that Germany is due elections in the near future?

  14. MRNAMELESS

    ” I don’t think the government can sell non-state owned organisations”
    ___

    Yeah it’s a pure bummer!! ;-)

  15. less than 5% lead on YG could be interpreted as bad news for EM.

    ”The Unions are controlled by militants and extremists. They stifle the country when things don’t go their way, hold governments to ransom and frown upon anyone who dares mention private enterprise”.

    Allan like I said your right wing views (which you are entitled to hold) are quite clear.

  16. REG OF THE BNP

    “Since there is nothing much interesting to talk about can somebody tell me how left is the SDP leader in Germany”
    _____

    If you look at a football pitch and anything just left of the half way line being left of centre then looking where Ed Miliband’s position would be (behind the gold posts) then I would say somewhere around the penalty spot.

  17. #goal post

  18. @YORKCITY

    “I thought the Tories were going to stop nannying us? They’re just as bad as New Labour”

    ———–

    I thought Rich’s post made things perfectly clear. He’s against nannying, except for when we need nannying..

  19. JIM JAM

    “Allan like I said your right wing views (which you are entitled to hold) are quite clear”
    ______

    Yes they are but I’m 100% pure none partisan. I’m left on welfare etc but to the right on the economy and don’t even get me started on the constitution.

  20. Rich,

    I don’t think violent or extreme pornography is pleasant, but in the case of child porn it is already illegal to make and distribute and any websites carrying it will be shut down.

    What seems nonsensical to me – from a social as well as a political point of view is how the general ‘opt-out’ would work.

    Firstly, I think it’s a net vote loser. There are a lot more people viewing pornography in the UK than any poll would show, and they probably won’t appreciate it being cut off, any more than they’d appreciate having to call up the government to request their material. It’ll be popular with the blue-rinse brigade, but there’ll be a lot of very annoyed men and women out there.

    Secondly, it probably won’t work. There are myriad ways to get around filters – Tor, foreign proxies, downloading the material then watching it. Then there are websites that will disguise their content as something else. The Great Firewall is an excellent example of this sort of legislation being very hard to enforce.

    Thirdly, it’s quite naive to assume that even if it did work, people wouldn’t still find ways of accessing child pornography and other illegal material. It existed before the internet and would still do so if it was all blocked.

    Fourthly, why block non-extreme pornography? I accept the targeting of extreme stuff, but 99%+ of the material out there isn’t and I can’t quite get why it’s so harmful to cohesive society to have professionally produced or consensual amateur content freely available for those who want it. I suspect it would be much more damaging to have hundreds of thousands of sexually frustrated people wandering around.

    Fifthly, there’s the ideologically libertarian view that why should the government be able to tell me what to watch, so long as that harms nobody. I can legally have sex, so why should David Cameron tell me I can’t watch people doing the same in the privacy of my own home?

    It just seems a very ham-fisted approach to tackling the small amount of abusive imagery that exists. It would probably be cheaper and more effective to just put extra money into task forces to tackle illegal pornography, and would avoid most of the civil liberties charges. Unfortunately, we’ve got a government (and it’s not just this country) full of people who do not understand the internet or how it operates.

  21. Also Allan, if we’re using that analogy, put Michael Foot in the Plymouth Argyle stands behind the goalposts, Neil Kinnock in defense, Ed Miliband milling around somewhere left of the centre spot and Tony Blair running around celebrating topless with the away team.

  22. MRNAMELESS

    LOL well in that case I shall go the speaker of the house..ie the referee and send the lot off.. ;)

  23. Bad news for Ed?

    I’ll guess at 4% lead.

  24. @ALLAN CHRISTIE

    “Yes they are but I’m 100% pure none partisan. I’m left on welfare etc but to the right on the economy and don’t even get me started on the constitution.”

    ———–

    That sounds very NuLab to be fair. They were to the left on welfare, to the right economically and didn’t get started on the constitution…

  25. CARFREW

    “That sounds very NuLab to be fair. They were to the left on welfare, to the right economically and didn’t get started on the constitution”
    _______

    Absolutely, minus the Iraq war and the sleaze then Blair’s NuLab was rather middle England-ish and I don’t have a problem with that.

  26. Bad news for Ed?

    Only 1% of the population want the royal baby to be named Ed?

    I’m sure the Sun normally don’t tweet stuff like that- can only imagine a circa 2% lead.

  27. Last polling on opt-out filters was here. Slightly more people opposed than supportive… but check out the gender split:

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/xnzsm6ut1l/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140613.pdf

  28. CARFREW

    It’s being strongly hinted on R4 that the Nanny posturing on the internet could encompass violence and gambling as well .

    The polling on this issue could change ,if the government take internet policing to far into legal activities.

  29. So after the weirdly liberal stance on same-sex marriage, DC’s swung hard to the right on online censorship. I suspect this may be throwing a bone to his base so they don’t depose him.

  30. @AW

    The typically more technical v the typical more maternal. Never mind which is right, we’ll plough on with more (supposed) vote winning ideas. No party will oppose them either.

    A sad day for the Internet.

  31. @ Allan,

    Er, unions ARE privatised. They represent the outsourcing to the private sector of functions like health and safety inspection and contract enforcement that we might reasonably expect to be performed by the state.

    Considering that they’re the ultimate example of the Big Society and people coming together to take care of themselves and their community instead of asking for assistance from the government, I’ve never understood why conservatives are so against them. (I mean, I do, but ideologically your position is incoherent.)

    @ Mr. Nameless,

    It’s not clear he’ll have to get anything through the Commons. So far the policy seems to consist of rebranding the current filter policy as a new policy, which conveniently will not require any legislation: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/21/david-cameron-war-internet-porn

  32. Interesting AW.

    Mothers worry more………….and which gender is DC currently less popular with than he would wish ?

  33. How on earth do they expect the internet filter to work? Firstly there is the nightmare difficulty of classifying porn (or do we end up with a class based distinction? The Origin of the World is Art http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'Origine_du_monde, but a photograph of a woman in the same pose is porn?). Secondly, how do we do it automatically without capturing any newspaper that mentions porn, or presumably Hansard when it reports the debate? Thirdly, do we really believe that bored technologists whose hearts aren’t in it are going to be able to outfox the collective libidos of technically literate 13 year olds?

  34. It’s a boy!

  35. Good Evening All.
    I think the PM is greatly to be admired for the stance he seems to be taking on pornography. Freedom, imho, as they say here, should not involve being able to exploit vulnerable people, especially children and women from poor backgrounds.

  36. RICH @7.30

    Agree with your view on this completely.

    To stand idly by & say nothing can be done-or even worse , nothing should be done, is betrayal of young children.

  37. @ Allan Christie

    Didn’t you just manage conflating public sector, trade unions and geographic distribution of economic activities in one non-partisan Peter Griffin’s grinding sketch imitation?

  38. Gosh, this really is the silly season isn’t it? No views on the Populus poll? See you all soon.

  39. @TheSheep,

    I think you are conflating two quite seperate strands of the proposed new policy.

    “Porn” will be controlled by identifying sites that are pornographic and setting filters on the servers of the ISP that only serve those sites up to customers who have elected to have them. It is not about restricting search terms in Google or anything like that. L’Origin du Monde, like any other image, would have to be judged as to whether it was pornographic. If it was then that Wiki page would presumably be tagged as pornography and you would only be able to see it if you had opted-in. The flaw in this approach is that there will be plenty of illicit sites that don’t flag themselves as pornography. I imagine there would be a steady, ongoing process of identifying those sites and applying external flags to them. In any event, all of the “reputable” porn sites would comply, so the bulk of online content would be covered.

    The second proposal relates to images of children. I think what the government wants there is a restriction on search terms. Any word or combination of words that could reasonably be expected to amount to an attempt to access IPOC would be automatically blocked by the search engine. Probably with some sort of warning message reminding the user that accessing IPOC is a crime.

    It seems to be fashionable to assume that the government is applying this second approach to the first problem. I don’t think they are.

    Of course the second proposal won’t work all that effectively either, as most of the methods for accessing IPOC don’t involve anything so clumsy as typing in a few keywords on Google.

    So far, what I see is a proposal that isn’t particularly scary, won’t be more than 60% effective, but is probably worth giving a try. The fundamental objection I can see is from Internet Libertarian Ultras who believe that the online world should be completely free of interference from government and think that any breach of that is the thin end of a wedge. Sort of swivel-eyed OKIPpers (Online Kingdom Independence Party..)

  40. SPEARMINT

    I don’t doubt anything you have written but ” ideologically your position is incoherent”..

    Not really when you think about it. I want less Union interference in politics and in the wider spectrum of the economy. Sure they have their place like the churches but shouldn’t be able to impose their will on everyday people by calling for mass strikes which do more harm than good.

  41. LASZLO

    “@ Allan Christie

    Didn’t you just manage conflating public sector, trade unions and geographic distribution of economic activities in one non-partisan Peter Griffin’s grinding sketch imitation?”
    ______

    Possibly ;-)

  42. @Howard,

    The problem with the Populous poll is that the VI figures are pretty much par for the course, and the union questions show that the public pretty much take a sensible, balanced view (which pretty much where I stand too). Unions are useful. They shouldn’t exceed their remit. They used to be too powerful. They aren’t any more. It would probably be better if Labour kept a slightly greater distance but it’s No Biggy.

    This, for me, is one of those “Yeah, what they said” polls.

    I am interested to see what the Sun are on about with the YG though, so I am hovering about anyway (plus I think I can probably contribute to any debate about Cameron’s online proposals, as it is an area of expertise for me – professionally of course!)

  43. @LASZLO

    “…@ Allan Christie. Didn’t you just manage conflating public sector, trade unions and geographic distribution of economic activities in one non-partisan Peter Griffin’s grinding sketch imitation?…”

    Okay, Lois. But we’re taking the couch. Chris, grab the end. Now, left. No, my left, not your left. Up. Up further. Now twist…no, not that much! OW! OK, wait a minute…

    @All

    Er, OK. Birth of future head of state. Possessed of ten wittle fingers, ten wittle toes, and a winkie. We not talking about this?

    rgdsm

  44. I think they’ll call him Richard. Just a hunch.

    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).

  45. @ Allan Christie

    “The poll will be dismissed as biased like the last neck and neck poll.”

    All 8 polls since the rogue ICM one have shown Labour leads of 5-11%, as did the 20-30 polls preceding it.

    If – for the sake of argument – the underlying picture is a Labour lead of about 7%, it must be expected that individual polls will show a full range above and below that figure.

  46. Trying to regulate the internet because of some groups accessing illegal imagery is never going to work because the very groups that do this won’t be typing vague phrases into Google, Yahoo etc. They will be using browsers such as Tor purely because their activity is illegal & they don’t want to be discovered.

    Who is going to compile the list of search terms that will be banned ?

    Where is that list to be kept & will it be sold to private enterprises for advertising purposes ?

    How will it work if a home has a single internet connection but multiple internet access devices ?

    Why can’t Cameron ever think these things through before making these announcements ?

    Does it mean the end to the Mail Online given their propensity for showing semi-dressed women ? (Hoorah, let’s all support it !!)

    I’m a woman & a parent and I’ve heard some old tosh in my time but this latest announcement ranks pretty high up.

  47. I agree with Cameron in principle regarding child internet porn and lets face it, it really is sickening and the thought of people enjoying seeing kids being sexually abused on line disgusts me.

    However how much internet freedom are we prepared to give up? Sure if it’s for kids safety etc then yeah go for it but is it just more control from government over our freedom?

    Sometimes what starts out as good intentions has it’s darker side. That said I do believe Cameron is sincere on this issue.

    Adult Porn in general is fine by me but I get a bigger turn on from a YouGov neck and neck poll. ;-)

  48. I reckon a 2% lead for Labour in the YG for The Sun 36-34, with Lib Dems on 12% and UKIP on 14%.

    Someone tweeted that Ed M was already aware of the poll and mentioned the figures this evening in a speech, so if true, I expect The Sun had contacted him for comment.

  49. A W

    Can you leave my last comment in moderation i realise why it was put there unfortunately there’s no recall button.

  50. MARTYN

    “Okay, Lois. But we’re taking the couch. Chris, grab the end. Now, left. No, my left, not your left. Up. Up further. Now twist…no, not that much! OW! OK, wait a minute”
    _______

    Chuckle!!

1 2 3