A quick round of of today’s polls. The weekly YouGov poll for the Sunday Times is here, and has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 39%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%. YouGov’s daily polling appears to be showing an average Labour lead of around about six points.

The rest of the poll deals mainly with the economy and the royals. Economic optimism continues to get slightly less pessimistic, the “feel good factor” (those thinking their economic situation will get better in the next twelve months minus those who expect it to get worse) is minus 27. Asked more specifically about the recent GDP figures, 38% think that it shows the economy is now on the mend and will continue to grow, 49% think it is bouncing along the bottom. Looking at the crossbreaks shows quite how much people’s opinions on the economy are shaped by their pre-existing views of the government and politics: three-quarters of Conservatives think the economy is now on the mend, three-quarters of Labour supporters think it shows things bouncing along the bottom.

George Osborne continues to have a negative rating as Chancellor – only 25% think he is doing a good job, 45% a bad job. However the widespread desire for Cameron to replace him that YouGov found back in March has declined somewhat – back then people wanted Osborne sacked by 51% to 17%, it’s now a less overwhelming 42% to 30%. He also has better ratings than Ed Balls, and people think Osborne would make a matter Chancellor than Balls by 35% to 27%. By 43% to 32% people think the economy would have been worse if Labour had won the last election.

On the monarchy 17% of people think Britain should become a republic, 75% that we should continue to have a monarchy. A new ComRes poll for the Sunday Telegraph found a similar pattern – 66% think Britain is better off as a monarchy, 17% that it would be better off as a republic. The Sunday Telegraph article has a rather overblown headline of “Confidence in British monarchy at all time high, poll shows” which is a bit silly on various grounds (the monarchy predates opinion polling by hundreds of years so we don’t have anything to judge by, and as far as I can tell the survey did not ask questions that have a long train of past tracking data to compare to).

The best long term tracker data on attitudes to the monarchy is probably MORI’s collection here. Even there things are a bit hamstrung by the fact that lots of polling on the royal family started in the early nineties when the monarchy was at a low ebb in the wake of the the failure of the marriages of Charles, Andrew and Princess Anne and the Queen’s annus horribilis – so most current polling does show the royal family being held in higher regard than in the 1990s…but those few trends that stretch back into the 1980s show much more positive ratings. I suspect the reality is “confidence in British monarchy higher than it has been for twenty years or so”… but we don’t have the data to be sure.

Finally the Sunday Times had a new Panelbase poll on the Scottish Independence referendum, which had YES on 37%(+1), NO on 46%(+2). Past polls on the independence referendum are here, and it’s worth noting the consistent differences between pollsters. Panelbase tend to show a relatively tight race, Ipsos MORI and TNS tend to show a much bigger lead for the NO campaign.


342 Responses to “Sunday polling round up”

1 5 6 7
  1. JIM JAM

    Thanks again :-

    re “equality of opportunity would imply more social mobility not a bad thing but for every person who climbs (for want of a better word) someone else must fall.”

    I think this is a very interesting observation, and I suspect at the very heart of political difference.

    I don’t see it that way at all. I believe that people are different, in many ways. I believe they have a potential in many different areas & levels.
    I believe everyone should have equal opportunity to maximise their own potential, and with that caveat I see no sense of “climbing” & “falling” in differences between human life outcomes.

    I do not believe that a working life spent in manual exertion & skill is any worse or better than one spent in intellectual exertion & skill.

    But I do see that a cardiologist will earn more than a bin man.

    I agree that non-academic skills have for too long been the cinderella of UK education. I think the current government’s expansion of apprenticeships, and the Baker UTCs begin to address this error & I very much welcome it.

  2. Re; Scottish Independence
    Of course DC will (and is) keeping out of the No campaign – as has been noted – they are trying to win after all!

    Which is of course why the majority of Yes Scotland leaflets I have seen have pictures of Cameron to make the point we are led by him.

    It also explains why AS refuses to debate with anyone EXCEPT DC – Darling has challenged him several times to a debate, but he is a big feartie.

  3. R Huckle

    “These polls are confusing at the moment”
    ____

    In Scotland the polls appear to be more straight forward..

    “According to the Sunday Times / Panelbase poll, with the SNP 18 points ahead of Labour in constituency voting intentions, and 23 points ahead in the regional vote, the SNP would gain even more seats than they achieved in the landslide of 2011 which returned a majority SNP administration.

    The scale of the SNP’s lead is such that it now has more support than the three ‘No’ parties combined. In the constituency vote, the SNP sits on 48% against a combined Labour/Tory/Lib Dem total of 47%. The regional vote has the SNP on 48% against a combined Labour/Tory/Lib Dem total of 42%.

    Translated into seats, the poll suggests that the SNP would return in 2016 with 71 seats – two more than in the 2011 landslide win – with Labour down four on just 33 seats.

    More worryingly for the Scottish Labour leader, a detailed analysis of the poll shows that she along with former leader Iain Gray, and senior backbencher Duncan McNeil would all lose their seats to the SNP”
    ….

    Electoral analysis conducted on http://www.scotlandvotes.com shows that the SNP would gain the following constituencies on this result:

    Glasgow Pollok (SNP gain from Johann Lamont – Lab)
    East Lothian (SNP gain from Iain Gray – Lab)
    Greenock & Inverclyde (SNP gain from Duncan McNeil – Lab)
    Motherwell & Wishaw (SNP gain from John Pentland – Lab)
    Uddingston and Bellshill (SNP gain from Michael McMahon – Lab)
    Edinburgh Northern & Leith (SNP gain from Malcolm Chisholm – Lab)
    Cowdenbeath (SNP gain from Helen Eadie – Lab)
    Ayr (SNP gain from John Scott – Con)
    Galloway & West Dumfries (SNP gain from Alex Fergusson – Con)

  4. JOHN RUDDY

    “It also explains why AS refuses to debate with anyone EXCEPT DC – Darling has challenged him several times to a debate, but he is a big feartie”
    _____

    Really?

    I think the only big fertie kicking about are the Scottish electorate towards Labour.

  5. @Steve
    “…………….The latest YG Still has Tories (40) and Labour (42) within MOE in the 18-24 Cross Break.

    I just don’t believe this”

    As AW says you just have to watch the trends rather than the splits in individual polls.I could have equally have said that the percentage in the over 60’s group in the last two polls look out of line. Its better to look at the trends revealed by moving averages.

  6. @Steve

    Sorry, should have said Labour percentage.

  7. The Latest YouGov poll Regional breakdown in Scotland has Labour on 45% SNP on 23% and the Tories on 21%
    Which would give Labour 43 Seats (up 2) and SNP 6 NC

  8. @Colin

    Totally agree with your last post. I have always been an admirer of the German system which does seem to me to tackle the problem better than most.

  9. We haven’t seen a 40% for a while. Obviously within MoE, but I’ll keep an eye on it.

  10. Allan
    I went to the site link you provided the last Westminster poll appears to be from November 2010!

  11. STEVE

    I’ve not quoted any polls for the UK???

    The link I provided was for the Scottish Parliament.

    In any case I never take much notice of cross breaks for obvious reasons.

  12. TOH

    I think GO announced an increase in UTCs from 12 to 24 some time ago, with a rise to 40 or so -but not sure by when.

  13. STEVE

    Just for you..

    http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/jul/poll-shock-labour-lamont-would-lose-seat
    ____

    Remember to claim your free pen if you sign up ;-)

  14. Nae Chance with that mate. My dear old mother would never forgive me for being such a Numpty.

    Nice to See the SNP think they will win.

    Can I claim my free pen for visiting?

  15. RiN

    “Goats of all stripes should of course be govts of all stripes”

    I prefer the original

  16. colin

    “I believe that people are different, in many ways. I believe they have a potential in many different areas & levels.
    I believe everyone should have equal opportunity to maximise their own potential, and with that caveat I see no sense of “climbing” & “falling” in differences between human life outcomes.”

    Absolutely agree. As a musician I have always hated the word “gifted”.

    If there is anything remotely like it then it is the passion for something which is generally a driver for the intense effort required for successin any given field.

    If you were passionate about playing the euphonium then, depending on how hard you worked at it, you’d be very good. Same with me if I loved gardening.

    People are NOT born equal and that really is why I differ from TOH on the contempt issue: some people’s backgrounds/genes/makeup mean they are, without help, incapable of addressing life’s problems as you or I might do.

    Ergo, in my view they require compassion and help, not contempt and exclusion. [I realise that is not what you were discussing of course… twas just an added thought.]

  17. John Ruddy

    “Darling has challenged him several times to a debate, but he is a big feartie.”

    If you visit:

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/getting-closer/

    you will find that Darling’s campaign manager seemed to offer that he – AD – would debate with anyone that the YES campaign would put up against him. Arrangements are being made for such a meeting with Dennis Canavan, and there has been a less-than-enthusiastic acceptance by BetterTogether.

    I look forward to the debate (but not with bated breath!)

  18. John Ruddy

    “Darling has challenged him several times to a debate, but he is a big feartie.”

    If you visit:

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/getting-closer/

    you will find that Darling’s campaign manager seemed to offer that he – AD – would debate with anyone that the YES campaign would put up against him. Arrangements are being made for such a meeting with Dennis Canavan, and there has been a less-than-enthusiastic acceptance by BetterTogether.

    I look forward to the debate (but not with bated breath!)

  19. PAUL CROFT

    @” [I realise that is not what you were discussing of course..”

    No it wasn’t.

    I will leave TOH to answer your assertions about what he did or did not say.

  20. RIN
    ” it’s a complete cop out”

    Of course governments should cop out of pretending to manage markets or economies, which even economists fail to do. What they can and should manage – are elected to manage – is the institutions and resources which provide access to markets, including the labour market, and so reduce inequalities.
    COLIN
    No it does not mean eradicating the private sector, for the reasons that Nye and Morrison didn’t get rid of Eton or the historic private funding of Balliol and KCH; these elements of private enterprise in the health and educational sectors are valued by “goats of all stripes” because they are historically the origin of ideas and wealth and they diversity opportunity. Recent Etonian monopolies of office in Tory governments are, however, putting this one-nation concept severely to the test.

    TURK, by the way, a good analogy of pre-distributional policy measures is the preparation of a new pasture, in which you do deep cultivation to ensure that the structure of the sub-soil is well drained and aerated.
    As Colin points out, pre-distribution does’nt make a good campaign slogan, but how about this, pointed out by my daughter from my copy of Pasture Management:

    “The secret of a good lay is a firm bottom.”

  21. @Colin

    Thank you for answering my question and as you point out Banks do pay taxes. I agree that there is no reason why they should pay different taxes than anyone else simply because they are banks. There may be reasons for taxing them in a different kind of way because, for example, they make massive profits, or have excellent opportunities for evading taxes or do not earn credit by doing things that governments wish to encourage. But insofar as others are in the same position the same should presumably apply to them.

    Personally what I have got out of the discussion on all this so far is the fact that London is actually an advantageous place for banks and other financial bodies to be.

    That they are there is not an unambiguous good for us – for example, it helps create the London housing boom, and thus the rates of housing benefit that some people need to live there, and also attracts some of our brightest young people into an industry that according to Bigfatron will eventually depart anyway.

    So it is only fair that they pay us a bit of a premium while they are here and this is something that we need to use wisely in case like North Sea Oil it becomes something whose proceeds we fritter away. Otherwise all we will be left with is a painful whole in our exchequer and a load of bright people variously emigrating to the East, retiring to Surrey on their previous bonuses or generally lamenting times past. (My nephew no doubt wisely anticipating all this has already retired at an immensely young age, and is devoting himself to the study of Byzantine history, a subject which uses his great intellectual capacities without being much use to the rest of us)

    Given that the banks have sound financial reasons for being here and seem to make pretty massive profits, it is hard to think that they are going to be horrified by any rise in taxation, however small.. However, the question is how much of a premium we can charge without causing a precipitate flight and how exactly we do it in such a way that it cannot be evaded. (Similar questions arise re Costa Coffee, Amazon and so on, although they would probably find it hard to leave).

    Given the level of expertise on this site, I have been a bit disappointed about the lack of detail there has been in the discussion (e.g. over how much exactly might be raised, how far it could be part of a general set of measures dealing with international companies, what the most efficient way of raising the money might be etc)

  22. @Colin

    Very wise of you, Paul has a problem with some of my views which were honestly expressed, perhaps too honestly for his sensibilities. After a long and (boring at least to others exchange), I think he had to accept that i could think differently from him.

  23. @Charles

    Good to see you back posting.

  24. CHARLES

    Thank you.

    I don’t share your general view of the UK banking sector -though of course recognise that elements of Banking everywhere played a significant part in recent global economic problems.

    I am in favour of correcting flaws in oversight & regulation; punishing illegal activity,encouraging useful banking activity , and clamping down on egregious tax evasion.

    But I am not in favour of state revenge via the system of taxation.

    I hope you are well.

  25. @Colin

    Fully agree about banking and what should and should not be done. Taxation should have nothing to do with revenge.

  26. Charles

    The problem with taxing the banks is exactly the same problem with taxing smoking, many people have said that Crosby was behind the decision not to go ahead with plain packaging but it is quite possible that it was the treasury because they are addicted to smoking as much as I am or possibly even more. If regulation of the financial services industry costs tax money then no matter what the consequences that regulation won’t happen, as we have already witnessed both with this govt and the last. And again we concentrate on the money that banks make using that as an index of their usefulness to society, would we do the same with the mafia? Money is not wealth but an claim on real resources, the real resources are the wealth

  27. @Colin – Thanks. I am trying to form views about the UK banking sector, so it’s gratifying to know that at least I have a sufficiently firm position for you to disagree with it!

    I agree with you that taxation should not be about revenge (pips squeeking and all that). That said, it can presumably be used to raise money for the good of all and where, as in the case of the city of London, there are significant social costs to an industry, it is surely appropriate to make sure that these are paid for. I think it might also be possible to look at it as a bargain – you locate here because it suits you because of the kind of society we have created, you are more than welcome but you will have to pay in order to help maintain that society in working order.

    @TOH many thanks for welcome – Like my late wife, I always read your post with great interest, while, as you might expect, rather rarely seeing eye to eye. Rightly or wrongly my wife saw you as a kind of village Hampden, sturdily independent, and with a heart of gold hidden under a gruff exterior. She like you was a gardener, albeit one from a different political party!

  28. @Charles

    Thanks for your kind words, and my own wife would agree that I am much nicer than I seem some times. As to Hampden whilst Charles !st would have irritated me no end, I have always seen my self as a Cavalier, they were far more romantic, and i am certainly that at heart.

  29. colin

    “I will leave TOH to answer your assertions about what he did or did not say.”

    How desperately sad that you can’t view my post, agreeing with your point, in a sensible way but instead seem to view everything I write through a prism of dislike instead of objectivity.

    Re TOH, I made no “assertions” at all so he has nothing to answer for. He set out his views quite clearly and I have simply referred to them to expand an additional point to the one I understood that you were making – ie: we are NOT all born equal. Is that really such an outrageous thing for me to have done?

    For those less blinkered than yourself the conclusion that I come to from that view is pretty uncontentious: that in dealing with other human beings we need to make allowances for people’s frailties as wel as their strengths and attempt to differentiate between those we can hep as a society and those that we have little need to do so and others who, perhaps, we simply cannot.

    Anyway, fair enough, next time I agree with something you write I won’t mention the fact.

    There really is no need for either of you to discuss this further; I think our different views are transparent enough as it is.

  30. Re Population Density. Apparently, we have been misinformed.

    According to Lord Howell “there are large uninhabited and desolate areas, certainly up in the North East where there’s plenty of room for fracking well away from anyone’s residence where it can be conducted without any kind of threat to the rural environment.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10211109/North-East-is-desolate-says-George-Osbornes-Government-adviser-father-in-law.html

  31. @TOH – A complex character then! I had imagined that you would oppose ship money and all its modern equivalents!

  32. @RiN So given that the City of London seems such a desirable place for bankers to be, does the Treasury think that we have taxed them to the point where they will leave at the drop of a hat? And if so, are they right?

  33. PAUL

    @”Re TOH, I made no “assertions” at all ”

    You wrote :-
    “Ergo, in my view they require compassion and help, not contempt and exclusion. ”

    Given that this was preceded by “why I differ from TOH on the contempt issue: “, I made the assumption that your remarks sought to characterise TOH’s views in a particular way-& as I said-it is not for me to say what he said or meant.

    If I misinterpreted your comments please accept my apologies.

    re “in dealing with other human beings we need to make allowances for people’s frailties as wel as their strengths and attempt to differentiate between those we can hep as a society and those that we have little need to do so and others who, perhaps, we simply cannot.”

    I can agree with the spirit of that view. Perhaps we might find differences of interpretation when it came to specifics-but that is detail.

  34. Brand New Fred

  35. Further on taxing the banks. They have admitted making profits from rigging,

    the interest rate market(Libor)
    The foreign exchange market
    The bond market
    The electricity market in California
    The bond market
    The oil market
    The aluminium market
    The the gas market
    The precious metals market

    And so and so on, and remember this is just what they have been caught doing, it’s quite possible that it’s not the full extent. In addition we have laundering money for gun and drug traffickers and probably human traffickers as well, plus a host of other dodgy practices all of these take money from the real economy by either raising consumer prices or by lowering company profits. But not to worry because they have paid tax on there I’ll gotten gains, are you kidding me!! They tax the real economy and govt taxes them on that. Tell me I’m wrong

  36. Colin

    Thankyou.

    I should add, for clarity, that I NEVER attempted to change Howard’s view; that woud be ludicrous and I ma not sure why he thinks that was the case. It never occurred to me that he was trying to change my own.

    What I did try to do was unerstand it but, since he never went beyond saying what it was I failed in that rather miserably! But I was – to borrow your praise to him – exceedingy patient in my attempts as I always fe logic should prevail.

    Re this from you: “. I believe that people are different, in many ways. I believe they have a potential in many different areas & levels.”

    I absolutely agree but then to me the corollary of that is that some people are weaker, less well educated and were less well loved as children.

    So, until I know why they are as they are I cannot conceive of contempt as being a suitable response, emotionally or pragmatically. For me debate is largely about clarifying the “why” of my OWN point of view and has nothing to with altering the view of someone else.

    pAul

  37. @RiN,

    There is an electrician in Torbay that I happen to know is also a major league drug dealer.

    I propose that all UK electricians pay an additional £10,000 tax to the exchequer, by way of recompense. Much simpler than gathering evidence of wrongdoing and acting on it.

  38. Charles

    You see I’m approaching this from a completely different direction. I don’t want to tax the banks I want to reduce the financial services industry to less that 10%of the developed world’s economy rather than the 30% it is now. I want all those traders in London to do a proper productive job, one that creates real wealth. If I have a leech and I suck some of the blood out of it I’m only a little better off, removing the leech is a better idea. It seems to me that most folk are suffering from Stockholm syndrome as regards the financial service industry

  39. Neil A

    But then you would encourage all electricians to become drug dealers because the fine is smaller than the potential profits from drug dealing and most wouldn’t bother fixing wiring that pays peanuts. That’s the point I’m making

  40. The new thread’s rubbish.

  41. @Charles

    As I said I would have found Charles 1st really irritating and yes I would be opposed to them but in the context of that time I would have joined the King when he raised his standard. As I say very much a romantic at heart.

  42. Here’s more of what I’m talking about

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=223161

    But this article doesn’t mention that the same banks that are making money from currency volatility are also selling currency hedges, which to my mind is like the mafia protection racquets. First they create the instability/petrol bombing then they sell you hedges/protection

1 5 6 7