The monthly ComRes poll for the Indy is out tonight (technically I suppose it’s their August poll, since the fieldwork started in August and they didn’t do one last month!). The fieldwork was conducted wholly after the government’s defeat over Syria and the headline voting intention figures are CON 31%(-3), LAB 37%(nc), LDEM 12%(+2), UKIP 10%(-2).

So an increase in the Labour lead here, but not necessarily a significant one – looking back at ComRes’s phone polls over recent months they have varied between three and six points, so this is actually towards the upper end of their typical polling of late. Looking at the broader picture of post-Syria vote polls so far we’ve had Survation and Populus showing no increase in the Labour lead, and YouGov and ComRes showing an increased Labour lead, still a bit of a confused picture.


275 Responses to “ComRes/Indy – CON 31, LAB 37, LD 12, UKIP 10”

1 4 5 6
  1. COLIN
    “The BBC reports :_
    “A GMB source said the idea many more union members might to choose to join the Labour Party was “fantasy land… dream on”.

    By “A GMB source” do you think they may mean the tea lady or some bloke their reporter met in the Union bar?

    The relevant quotes are rather their Sec.Gen’s regret that Labour are moving away from a collective association in poticial representation of the union’s political interests, and are no long taking the 3 pouinds per affiliate member fee which made up the Union’s contribtuion, which GMB will now retain in their poltical fund, “for wider purposes” that is to fund political purposes which are decided by the Union in the interests of their members. This is a result which EM anticipated and intended, so that there is no longer the the consensual arrangement between the unions and Labour on political issues, but rather a separate pursuit of common political purposes.
    At the same time, the GMB members opting into affiliation become active rather than passive Labour Party members” whether 50.000 or more or less it’s impossible to say.
    I am not surprised that you put your own spin on the report, but am at the difference between the BBC edit,, which is becoming increasingly tabloid, and the more accurate and unbiased comment by their Political Analyst q;v..

  2. I think the Tories are winning the PR war.

    The public perception still seems to be ‘Labour caused the 2008 meltdown, the Tories are fixing their mess’

    But you only have to compare the UK economic performance to that of the US to see:
    – 2008 was a global issue. Labour did not run the US, Europe etc…
    – Other countries had the same deficit levels we did
    – Other countries are way ahead of where we are now, their deficits nearly cleared. Ours is stuck at one of the highest levels in the western world

    http://qz.com/114170/the-us-is-cutting-its-deficit-faster-than-it-ever-has-before/

    Ed seems to be trying to explain this, but his message is not getting through as you can see by public opinion on the economy.

    If their leaders can’t communicate basic facts like this, I think it does leave you asking questions about how effective they are. Maybe they need to recognise their weakness in communication and hire some people to help them communicate more effectively.

  3. @leftylampton Thanks!

  4. Chris,

    I agree with your analysis, there will be a sustained, unrelenting negative campaign exposing Miliband right up to the next election. It’s the Tories biggest card.

    It has started and it will accelerate. The general political view is he is limited, promoted above his level and basically not rated at all, that will be hammered on to get through to as many voters as possible.

    When Miliband speaks as poorly as he did in the debate last week he doesn’t help himself. It all offers hope to the Tories that they can prevail, where to be honest if Labour had a leader and top team of more gravitas the next election would be in the bag.

  5. I love that phrase ”promoted above his level”, Ian Wright.

    EM wasn’t promoted. He won a vote, by analysing problems more effectively than anyone else. Last week he spoke with some hesitation in the face of a situation which had been whipped up to the point of hysteria, with little thought as to the consequences of what was being proposed and no thought at all as to its morality. Not easy – especially when you’ve nearly walked into the lion’s den yourself – to speak with conviction and gravitas.

    [Snip]

  6. @ Colin

    That £1m co-op political fund is not a straight donation to Labour by a long way. A search of Google doesn’t seem to provide the figures but when I looked at it before it did not seem that significant (to Labour at least). Maybe £100-£200k of the £1m?

    GMB obviously more serious- I suspect this will be cat and mouse though- they put a hold on the regular income and to an extent hold the Labour Party hostage. Your guess is as good as mine but I have a feeling when push comes to shove that £1m a year will come back to Labour as a one off donation when GMB gets worried about another Tory government.

  7. “Jolly good-as long as it’s all OK .
    It was just a thought.”
    Except that it wasn’t.

    “…re “widening the base of the party”-if GMB are correct-only 50k of it membership would opt in under EM’s plan, compared to the 420k which GMB chooses to affiliate at present. This would indicate that the “base” is already artificially wide , and will in fact narrow when people are given a choice……………or the GMB are just making it up , so they can hang on to more of the dosh.

    By Jove, I think she’s got it. That is precisely what the GMB intend, so that they can use their political fund for purposes they decide, thus not risking the membership voting the fund down when they are balloted next year. EM has, in other words, figured out that it is not a good idea for the union membership to be corralled into funding rhe Labour Party or being affliated without deciding so themselves. And further that the media and the Tory Party would have a bean feast over it. Not stupid, our Ed.

  8. From this mornings Times:
    ” Britain is predicted to have one of the strongest growth rates among the world’s top economies in the second half of the year, raising hopes that the country is finally shaking off the legacy of the financial crash.

    The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) said that Britain will expand at a more rapid pace than the United States, Japan and the big eurozone economies in the final two quarters of 2013.”

    If this continues through 2014, 6 points ahead in the polls at this stage, might not be enough for a Labour victory in 2015. It should be 15-20% at this time in the cycle.

    I have said many times, it’s all to play for and anyone who says the result is a foregone conclusion is naive.

  9. I have never been in in a Union & don’t know very much about their activities but the thing that struck me on the GMB thing was that it smacks of ‘I’m taking my ball home’ & all because EM has asked their members to opt in.

    What are the Union leaders so afraid of ?

    As I say, I know nothing about how a Union works so maybe it’s just me being naive but if Paul Kenny’s reaction is typical then maybe some journalist might stop & ask him what he’s got to lose.

  10. JOHN PILGRIM

    @”This is a result which EM anticipated and intended, ”

    Good-I assumed he knew what he was doing.

  11. The great irony of the GMB disaffiliation story is that if the Government’s “lobbying” bill goes through, trade unions will be barred from spending their political funds themselves unless they register with the Electoral Commission and put up with a bunch of needless bureaucracy.

    So the simplest thing to do with the money will be to donate it all back to Labour.

  12. SHEVII

    @” I suspect this will be cat and mouse though- they put a hold on the regular income and to an extent hold the Labour Party hostage”

    THe most realistic & astute reaction so far I think.

    I concur with your view.

  13. ROBERT

    THose OECD forecasts for UK Q3 & 4 of 2013 GDP growth are extraordinary.

    In the terms that ONS do their numbers they are +0.9% & 0.8% respectively-ie both at annualised growth rates of over 3%.

    ( their 2013 forecast for UK threw me-it is +1.5%-but when you look at their website it is calculated on a basis different from their quarterly forecasts-very odd)

  14. Colin,

    His speech last week was a lamentable effort, it won’t be the last time he will be put under pressure and for a prospective future PM, you would hope for better.

    You can defend him all you like but the general opinion of him even from many Labour supporters and politicians is not favourable, basically that he isn’t very good.

    The Tories and the press will go for him big and he will be under enormous strain all the way to the 2015 election.

  15. The press release for the TNS poll is here:

    http://www.tnsglobal.com/press-release/scottish-opinion-monitor-scottish-support-independence-falls-25-3-september-2013

    with link to the data tables (via John Curtice – TNS seem to have the most difficult site to find anything, Lord know’s I tried).

    However while they have been giving a headline of:

    Yes 25% No 47% DK 28%

    The figures among those certain to vote are :

    Yes 30% No 51% DK 20%

    Although they ask how people voted in the 2011 Holyrood elections (Constituency) they don’t actually use it for weighting the Referendum response. This means the make up of the sample (s/s 1017) is:

    Con 6% (7)

    Lab 23% (16)

    Lib Dem 7% (4)

    SNP 21% (23)

    Others 2% (1)

    Can’t remember 11% (n/a)

    Didn’t vote 31% (50)

    Figures in brackets are actual 2011 result.

    This suggests that the sample was biased towards Labour and Lib Dem voters, possibly due to the method of interviewing “face-to-face, in-home using CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing)” – I presume arranged by land-line phone.

  16. AMBER

    Do I assume correctly, that on balance, you prefer the stability of rule by dictators like Gaddaffi, Assad & Mubarak, than the chaos which ensues on the road to representative governance , after their overthrow. ?

  17. new thread

  18. Colin

    Do I assume correctly, that on balance, you prefer the chaos and lawlessness which ensues after a western intervention rather than the stability of strong govts which will not act in our interests

  19. @ Colin

    I prefer we don’t interfere until we have a coherent plan that will improve the situation. The present mess in Libya will likely be solved by another dictator who the coalition of the willing will like…. until they don’t.

    So, I don’t like people being killed ‘in my name’ when we have no plan for peace, stability & to peacefully prevent the rise of an alternative dictator.

    I expect that is too complex for people to understand because they (the same people) keep asserting that I am a fan of a particular dictator – or dictators in general – despite the evidence which is: That I am a fan of people; I like them; I like them to remain alive. And I don’t like people being killed in the name of peace, democracy & humanitarianism!

  20. COLIN
    FLT
    “@Amber: Do I assume correctly, that on balance, you prefer the stability of rule by dictators like Gaddaffi, Assad & Mubarak, than the chaos which ensues on the road to representative governance , after their overthrow. ?”

    De Villepin on Hardtalk was good on this, specifically on the need in Syria to learn the lesson of the deteriorating situation of populations in Iraq and Libya, which he and others attribute to the use of military force rather than an array of other, political and long-term solutions in achieving a transition from dictatorship.

  21. AMBER

    Thanks for that.

  22. Richard

    Perhaps it escaped your notice , that at various points in time, Gaddaffi, Assad & Mubarak ( not to mention SAddam) were thought to be acting in our interests !

  23. Colin

    It never escaped my notice but I also note that as soon as they were acting against interests or of no further use to us, they were replaced

  24. @ Amber. Re your 10.54am link regarding Libya.

    Hate to say I told you so but I did point out 2 years ago ( that long ago ) that the tribes and factions in Libya couldn’t get along in a western style Democracy and that we should have stayed out of it. The same applies across the Arab region.
    I am totally amazed that western governments don’t understand this and stop interfering in things they obviously know nothing about.

1 4 5 6