This week’s YouGov Sunday Times poll results are here, and have topline Voting intentions of CON 33%, LAB 38%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 12%. As you’d expect, the poll has questions on the Liberal Democrats for their conference, as well as some about Ed Miliband and the Unions.

By 45% to 34% people think it was the wrong decision for the Lib Dems to go into coalition with the Conservatives, though this is mainly driven by Labour voters. Amongst the remaining Liberal Democrat supporters three-quarters still think it was the right thing to do, but of course that’s largely because those opposed to the coalition are no longer voting Liberal Democrat! On the principle of coalition, 22% of people think it is better to have coalition governments that force parties to compromise, 53% think that a single party government is better.

22% think that the Liberal Democrats have been a positive influence on government, 25% a negative influence and 43% don’t think they’ve had much influence either way. Asked more specifically about Clegg’s claim that the Lib Dems have prevented the Conservatives from being more right wing, 46% think this is true (30% think it’s a good thing, 16% a bad thing). Asked which best reflects their view, 36% think that by entering coalition Clegg was doing what he thought was best for the country, 44% that he was betraying his principles for power regardless of the interests of the country.

Turning to Labour and the Unions, on balance people still think that Ed Miliband is too close to the Unions (32% think he is too close, 17% too distant, 20% about right, 31% don’t know). Miliband’s proposals to change how trade unions affiliate members to Labour are widely supported and by 43% to 14% people think he is right to try and reduce Labour’s links with the Unions (although a further 20% think that he isn’t actually trying to do this). Despite this overall he is not seen as handling his party’s relationship with the Unions well – only 25% think he’s done it well, 46% badly.

Only 16% of people think Miliband is ever likely to be Prime Minister, 70% think it is unlikely. Even amongst Labour supporters only 42% think he is likely to be Prime Minister, 45% unlikely. This is a strange finding given Labour’s consistent lead in the polls and when polls ask people which party they expect to win the election, far more tend to say Labour. I suspect this is speaking more of people’s difficulty in visualising Ed Miliband as Prime Minister, rather than their considered prediction.

Also buried away in the poll was a repeat of the “bedroom tax” question from back in March. Back then YouGov found more people supported the policy than opposed it, since then opinion has switched round, and there are more people opposed (48%) than in support (40%).

As I mentioned yesterday, there was also a second Scottish poll in the Sunday papers, Panelbase in the Sunday Times. They had topline figures of YES 37%, NO 47%, practically unchanged from their last Sunday Times poll which had topline figures of YES 37%, NO 46% (it also demonstrates pretty conclusively that the answers to referendum voting intention in the Panelbase poll for the SNP were influenced by the two preceeding questions). Panelbase have done the most regular Scottish polling over the last year and a bit, and leaving aside that SNP poll have shown very consistent figures, with YES support between 34%-37%, NO support between 44%-47% and no obvious trend in either direction. I’ve updated the page on Scottish referendum polls so far here.


193 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 33, LAB 38, LD 9, UKIP 12”

1 2 3 4
  1. Mr nameless

    Well with no A levels and no O level passes I’m a real thicko

  2. @Colin

    “Spearmint & Turk are right-if you really hate a group of people that much-you shouldn’t be working with them.”

    I think this is nonsense. I doubt he hates the Tories in the true meaning of the term, but he probably disapproves of a lot of their policies and political tactics. None of that means he can’t be a fully functioning member of a coalition with them but it does mean he is likely, just as Huhne was, to be an abrasive, awkward, argumentative and independent-minded presence. He’s just being true to himself and his party whereas with people like Browne, Clegg and Alexander, I haven’t got the faintest idea what they stand for apart from the almost maniacal desire to be in office.

    We’d have a much better government if there were more Lib Dems like Cable in the coalition, in my view.

  3. @carfrew

    Cameron himself wrote fortnightly for the Guardian 2001-2004.

  4. MIKE N
    “Since when has high IQ been essential to be a politician or to be PM?”

    Since when has IQ been a respectable measure of intelligence? Since when has academic performance been a measure of either intelligence or of the abilitity to be a good politician, or a CEO for that mattter?
    Who put these clerks and earwigs in place anyway to provide spurious criteria on a politician’s ability to read the political tea leafs and make the right decisions, and to give a damn?

    CARFREW.

    “The question now is whether the funding for housing will sufficiently impact the marginals…” Well, yes.that’s a good question. On the whole i think Labour should go for intent, not the detail.

  5. When was the last European election poll done? Aren’t we due one? I’m sure it’ll be interesting and a bad poll could put pressure on 1 of the 3 main leaders, and I wonder how UKIP are holding up.

    After reading a few posts today I realise now why I don’t bother trawling back through all of the days posts.

  6. I have an MSc from the LSE too .

    Trust me it is no guarantee of intelligence!

    However, Ed seems to be a bright guy it’s time for a Geeky PM

  7. Alex Harvey.

    There’s more chance of Sheffield United winning the Champions League in 2015 than the LDs winning Sheffield Central.

    In 2010, they had in Paul Scriven a very well-known local face, ex-leader of the LD-led city council and a very good media worker. He had a huge amount of media time and the LDs worked like Trojans to try to win a seat that they had never come within hailing distance of winning before.

    They still lost. Albeit by a whisker 41.3% to 40.9%.

    Last year, Scriven lost his seat on the council and has since dropped out of front line politics. I suspect that in 2010, the seat will revert to previous type, with Labour picking up 50-60% and the second place party being back in the low 20s.

  8. CB11

    As I say-the language used is what influences my view of him.

    I have no issue with policy disagreement-it is clearly part & parcel of coalition life.

    But ascribing the lowest of motives & attitudes to ones coaltion partners takes sensible, rational exchange of views on policy across the Cabinet table with colleagues , into the area of personal abuse .

    I don’ t understand what it is supposed to achieve -taking into account , as I said, the component which represents internal LD dog whistle, and messaging to the Labour leadership.

  9. Colin

    “Spearmint & Turk are right-if you really hate a group of people that much-you shouldn’t be working with them.”

    As I recall, people held their noses and got into bed with the enemy in 2010 because otherwise, we would have ended up like Greece.

    Wasn’t that the official line? And shouldn’t VC be hailed as one of the Saviours of His Country then?

  10. “I think this is nonsense.”

    Us too.

    [Wot?]

  11. CROSSBAT11
    If someone said to you,, we’re going to put together a mixed XI to play the villagel, will you come in a bowl a bit bit of slow leg-spin; it’s a sunny day after a long winter – and there’s the village green, and tea and shandy at the pub, and you know you’ve only got a season or two left in the old bones = you may intensely dislike the skipper, but you’re not an idiot; or you may be, but mainly you’re at hear a cricketer. So on go,, with the old school tie hopefully keeping your whites up.

  12. Why are we even talking about Lib Dems taking seats off Lab at the next election?

    If there is one thing that is surely beyond doubt in 2015 there WILL be a LD to Lab swing. Any UKIP muddying of the waters will muddy it just as much for LD as Lab.

  13. Surely what is required of Cabinet Ministers is not technical expertise per se-but the ability to deploy good judgement & political acumen.

    The Treasury , one assumes, is awash with highly qualified economists. One more isn’t going to make a difference.

    But a CoE with a clear sense of purpose & direction in policy outcomes , good judgement & political acumen is.

    The country decides , every four years, whether the difference is a good one or a bad one.

  14. Re: Sheffield Central.

    Phew. I’d forgotten just how precipitate the collapse of the LDs has been in Sheffield.

    In 2010, when Scriven just failed to win Sheffield Central, the LDs won his Broomhill council ward (which abuts the Sheff Central Westminster constituency) with the following result.

    LD: 3734
    Lab 1798
    Green: 1389
    Con: 938
    Turnout 58.5%

    In 2011, the result was

    Lab: 1741
    LD: 1371
    Green: 1315
    Con: 505
    Turnout 37.8%

    In 2012, Scriven lost his council seat in Broomhill with the result:
    Lab: 1303
    Green: 1102
    LD: 809
    Con: 197

    Turnout 26.6%

  15. John Pilgrim
    I couldn’t have expressed it any better. Thanks

  16. Colin

    “The country decides , every four years, ”

    You’ve gone a lap too early a la David Coleman on Spitting image. Might explain why the Tories are already bigging up the nascent recovery as such crucial news.

  17. LEFTY

    lol

    Slip of the digit-??Freudian.

  18. @ Colin,

    Spearmint & Turk are right-if you really hate a group of people that much-you shouldn’t be working with them

    Oh, it’s not hating that’s the problem. Hating is fine. Ernest Bevin and Herbert Morrison hated each other plenty.

    What’s completely inexcusable, in my view, is to vote for policies you cannot defend. Ministers don’t have to personally agree with every government policy, especially in a coalition, but if they think a policy is so damaging to the national interest that they feel compelled to denounce it in public, they have no business whatsoever marching through the voting lobbies to enact it.

    That’s the whole point of collective responsibility. It’s to protect ministers from compromising their own integrity by supporting a government that’s doing things they believe are fundamentally wrong.

    Cable thinks Osborne’s economic policy is misguided and dangerous and it’s creating a housing bubble- well, bully for him. That means it’s time for him to resign.

  19. Lefty

    The greens are very strong in Sheffield, that looks like a very good target seat for the greens

  20. RiN

    I very much doubt it. They are strong in some isolated pockets, but they are miles behind in the constituency as a whole (or at least, were in 2010).

    In 2010, with a historically bad performance, Lab polled 17,100 votes in Sheff Central to the Greens’ 1,500. It’d be a stellar performance for the Greens to make up that sort of ground in 15.

  21. Lefty

    Yeah, I just had a look, but the figures you put up gave me the feeling that the libdem vote was being picked up by Labour and the greens in equal measures

  22. As a matter of interest which seat/s are the greens top targets, Norfolk north I think there has been talk of, or was that Norwich

  23. A rather strange call I thought by NC in calling for another coalition. Even if an elector wanted a coalition (not that ridiculous), this is something you cannot achieve yourself.

    You have to leave it to others – as with wishing to become a grandparent.

  24. Norwich South and Cambridge are the only ones they’re targeting to win I believe, and to hold Brighton Pavilion of course.

  25. AW – Damn it….I missed troll feeding hour. Out of interest, would the said troll be a multi-username troll of the right wing persuasion?

  26. “@ Red Rag

    AW – Damn it….I missed troll feeding hour. Out of interest, would the said troll be a multi-username troll of the right wing persuasion?”

    Sense of humour required I think. Some Tories are very unhappy with what Vince Cable has said today.

    I thought that there was a saying that people are more indignant when faced with the truth. Sometimes it is better to say nothing, as to complain just creates more publicity.

  27. @ Red Rag

    Your assumption regarding identity (& multiples thereof) is correct.

  28. @MRN

    “Norwich South and Cambridge are the only ones they’re [the Greens] targeting to win I believe….” That would make Cambridge very interesting as I believe it’s normally a fairly close three way split between Con, Lab & LD. Adding a fourth party to the mix would make it very interesting. Perhaps UKIP can go for it as well…..

  29. @ Amber – He posts on quite a few different wesites and FB pages. He is regularly banned but comes back with different names. I see it that often, and his comments are structured in exactly the same way that I can tell it is him from the first post. He was actually banned from the Conservative FB page for being…well, a bit of a loon.

  30. @ R Huckle,

    Some Tories are very unhappy with what Vince Cable has said today.

    Shouldn’t they be? He’s a Cabinet minister, for pity’s sake. This is not good coalition behaviour.

  31. Interesting to see that some posters object to Cable acting in a way that they find perfectly acceptable when its done by their team and with the other team as targets.

    Such is tribal loyalty.

    It strikes me that Cable is merely acting rationally. If the polls are to be believed, there will not be a Lib dem – Tory coalition in 2016, and the Lib Dems will need some new rhetoric for both main parties. He seems to have grasped that rather earlier than some of his colleagues. It is difficult to see how Jeremy Browne, for example, might comfortably serve in a Labour-led coalition, especially if he were expected to make the kind of comments about the party in Opposition that he makes about the Opposition now. I’m not sure the Lib Dems have really got to grips with the implications of a possible future Government that requires them to work with Labour and against the Tories.

  32. Norbold,

    I shouldn’t think the Greens have any hope of actually winning Cambridge, but it might turn into a three-and-a-half-way marginal. If Labour take enough from the Lib Dems and UKIP from the Tories, the Greens might be able to slip in and come second.

    Realistically, the Greens won’t win either Norwich or Cambridge. It just doesn’t look very good to say “We’re not going to win any extra seats and might lose the only one we’ve already got” in your press releases.

  33. I hope those decrying Cable’s speech remember that David Cameron’s favourite joke is now his Deputy…

  34. There seem to be Plenty of Tory Backwoodsmen MP’s who hate the Coalition without even looking at what Ld’s think of it.

  35. ICM/Guardian out finally!

    Lab 36 (+1) Con 32 (NC) LD 14 (NC) UKIP 9 (-1)

  36. A slight wiff of hypocrisy from some posters today, I’m sure if VC had been a minister in a Lib/Lab coalition and had broken ranks with an anti partner speech, those very people who think it’s nonsense he should resign, would be clamouring for just that.

  37. I know one seat where LD’s could take from Labour in 2015. Ashfield.

    If you look at the 10 wards in Ashfield, 7(Hucknall in Sherwood) are in the Ashfield constituency, in 2013 LD’s won 3 LAB 3 and IND 1, LD’s also won Eastwood, which makes up Ashfield constituency. A vast improvement on 2011 voting.

    The LD candidate is well known and the sitting MP Gloria de Piero is not from the area or popular. You may get tactical voting to get her out.

  38. Interesting point, Chris Riley.

    A party that knows its only hope for government for the foreseeable future is to shuttle between being junior partner in Coalition to one wing and being junior partner to the other, must surely position itself much better than it is currently doing.

    The problem for the LD’s is that the left and right wings within their own party have been pulling against each other for some time. Their right wing seized power in the party awhile back and sought LD-Tory coalition enthusiastically. What a contrast, they seemed to me to be thinking, between us and the old milk and water, not one or the other, LD-ism.

    They haven’t watched their backs, or stood up to the Tories with either foresight or sensitivity to their own members’ natural inclinations. Allowing the plunder of the NHS was their biggest mistake, I feel. The cost could be high.

  39. First

  40. @Spearmint

    Thanks for the comments yesterday.

    I’ve been looking at some other details and analyses, and there is lots of info to take in.

    (if nothing else it’s a stimulating intellectual exercise..)

  41. I would add a comment to RiN’s one on the new thread – but his is so Biblical!

  42. Lol

  43. @COLIN

    “But ascribing the lowest of motives & attitudes to ones coaltion partners takes sensible, rational exchange of views on policy across the Cabinet table with colleagues , into the area of personal abuse.”

    ——-

    Oh, they do that to each other all the time!! E.g. claims that Miliband wasn’t being principled over Syria but instead was playing for party advantage.

    Sometimes… They don’t just do it to each other but to the public too!! E.g. describing them as “skivers” etc….

1 2 3 4