The Sun have tweeted tonight’s YouGov voting intention figures – toplines are CON 32%, LAB 41%, LD 8%, UKIP 11%. The Labour lead is up to nine points, the biggest for three weeks or so, and suggests a positive reaction to the conference announcements.

Usual caveats for any poll showing interesting movements apply, especially for the sometimes up and down polls of conference season (some years it doesn’t have much effect on polls, some years they are up and down like a rollercoaster after each conference). Last week we had a narrowing of the Labour lead following the Lib Dem conference, this week a boost in the Labour lead following their conference. Next up we have the Conservative conference – will the Labour conference boost be sustained so they end up the net beneficiaries of conference season? Or will it fade away again once the immediate publicity passes? Or indeed will the Conservatives get their own conference boost next week?


462 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 32, LAB 41, LD 8, UKIP 11”

1 6 7 8 9 10
  1. ROSIEANDDAISIE

    “The number of people who have never worked and are members of families who have never worked is appalling.”

    No matter how low that figure is, it should be a matter of concern. However, the idea of intergenerational worklessness seems to have been somewhat exaggerated.

    http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmpo/publications/papers/2011/wp278.pdf

  2. amber

    ” the strong castigate the weak for not ‘pulling themselves up by their bootstraps’ ”

    My Dad [who died of cancer 50 years ago when I was a young teenager] was a strong character with a huge work ethic who had that attitude.

    The problem with some who are “strong” is they really do find it difficult to understand why anyone else is different and then seem to believe that in every case it’s a lifestyle choice.

    The comment “we’d all like to get away with that is we could” sums it up for me because “we” quite patently would not like it one little bit.

  3. @Amber

    You clearly know what you are talking about.

    So the response to these proposals should not be like my initial one when I first linked to the story, which just plays into the ‘not pulling themselves up by the bootstraps’ narrative that they want, it needs to be be yours. “excellent idea, tell me how it is going to work, with specific examples in case a, case b, etc.. ” .

  4. Old Nat

    Are you sure? I read it in the Daily Mail [whilst getting my hairs fluffed up at the barbers]

    Actually it’s not the level of the figures that should concern but the fact that it can happen at all.

  5. Ironically I once dealt with a CPS lawyer who had lost his sight (temporarily, but for a period of years) after an operation. He continued to be employed full-time, but his employers hired a “reader” for him. She was a lovely young law graduate in her early 20s and extremely sharp. I was looking for a charging decision on a very difficult historic sexua l abuse case where the victim had a history of mental illness and social services “trouble”.

    He decided to go ahead with the case (to my surprise) and his understanding of the case, and the quality of the legal work he did, were exemplary. We eventually won the case (on a retrial, after a hung jury first time) and the offender got 22 years.

    To this day I believe that if it hadn’t been for the extra dimension of that young woman, with her closer perspective to the case and the fact that every word (and there were many) of the reports I wrote had been read aloud and discussed at length (rather than skim read over a coffee before rushing to a meeting), we would never had got the charging decision and justice would have been left undone.

    I don’t know how much they paid her. Probably £12k pa in today’s money or similar. But even if that was the only case she influenced, it would have been worth three times the money. Decent lawyers are surprisingly rare. If it hadn’t been for the decision to employ her, we would have lost the services of a very good one.

  6. ROSIEANDDAISIE

    Well, you can never be sure with these academics – bunch of workshy scroungers themselves.

    That the offspring of the uber-rich need not do any productive work for generation unto generation is a scandal.

    Get them down the pits where they belong!

  7. So…. How much more VI mileage is there in stuff like immigration and welfare?

    In particular, compared with something like cost-of-living?

    ‘Cos at the end of the day, just how much better off are we all as a result of the bedroom tax? Similarly, the vans, which don’t appear to have made my life any better in any noticeable way.

  8. oldnat

    You can’t say fairer than that.

  9. carfrew

    money can’t buy you love.

  10. Enjoyed reading that Neil.

  11. Carfew, the mileage seems to be in finding something to blame things on

    “the greedy energy companies”
    “Europe”
    “the feckless workshy”
    “the immigrants coming in and taking all our jobs and housing”
    “the GP’s with their six figure salaries”
    “the greedy bankers”
    …the list goes on…

    Each party has their list.

    Maybe I miss it, but would be nice to hear some positive policies instead of always finding someone/something to blame.

  12. @Neil A

    And there is the rub

    The public sector seems to be more concerned with properly implementing the provisions of the Equalities Act (reasonable adjustments etc) than the private sector. Now I work for a large private sector organisation who are very good at dealing with disabled employees and customers, but many are not.

    Unfortunately, we have a Government that wants to see more of the disabled in work but does not want to put any pressure on private businesses to properly implement the Equalities Act. Oh, and that also wants a smaller public sector.

    Which leaves only one conclusion. The government wants disabled people to work for their benefits.

  13. “Turk, with respect [as they say] it sometimes appears that by the time you get towards the end of a post you’ve forgotten what you wrote at the beginning.”

    ——-

    Can’t say I blame him. Anyway, by the time he reads your post he’ll have forgotten what you’re on about…

  14. @ Neil A

    Enjoyed reading that Neil. (Chordata)
    ————–
    I enjoyed reading it too – but let’s be careful here. Some people with special needs will require extra facilities, care & expense – they will not ‘repay’ this by being extraordinary workers. Because, for the most part, they are ‘ordinary’ people. You could even say: “Gosh they are just like me!”

    So ask yourself (not Neil, all of us!): If I had their extra challenges, would I have enough to cope with to just be like the next person, or would I be capable of doing my job to a higher standard than I do now because I’m expected to prove ‘disabled’ people are workplace superstars who justify the extra effort/ expense?

    I make this point with the intention of being positive, not negative. ‘Disabled’ people are ordinary* people with special needs not special people with special needs. And I believe that society ought to accept the responsibility of allowing them to be as ordinary as possible.

    * Yes, everybody is special in their own way & special to the people who know & care about them. But this subject is not about people’s special unique individualism, it is about expecting everybody (who isn’t rich) to be the same – i.e. to work or contribute something in exchange for an income.

  15. @Amber

    The attitude of the Right can be summed up as ‘Up by your bootstraps, but first we’ll just rob you of your boots.’

  16. @ROSIEANDDAISIE

    “money can’t buy you love.”

    ———
    True.

    (Beatles made a lot of money out of the fact though)

  17. DRUNKENSCOUSER

    In that case, there are a number of folk in every party, including yours, who are “of the Right”.

    The problem isn’t one that is helped by sloganising as if all good is on one side, and all evil on the other.

  18. @DRUNKENSCOUSER
    @Amber
    “The attitude of the Right can be summed up as ‘Up by your bootstraps, but first we’ll just rob you of your boots.’”

    ———

    But that’s just supposed to make you raise your game even more.

    The reason the rich set up these trust funds and send their kids to private schools and want to make sure they inherit as much as possible is to hold them back and level the playing field for everyone else.

  19. @Rosieanddaisie

    The attitude you described can be formed through either bourgeois class interest rationalised through some pseudo-intellectual means, or simply a lack of education and awareness about the world that can leave people struggling to empathise with those ‘different’ to themselves. That said, I know absolutely nothing about your late dad, and I’m just talking in generalities.

    UK society has gone in a funny direction in recent years. Generally speaking (and by this I mean not the Westminster Industrial Complex conversation) there’s less of a taboo against ‘weakness’, but being reliant on social security is more associated with ‘weakness’ than it was in the past.

    It’s not just social security where there are a hell of a lot of contradictory ideas flying around at the moment.

  20. @RICHARD
    “Carfew, the mileage seems to be in finding something to blame things on
    “the greedy energy companies”
    “Europe”
    “the feckless workshy”
    “the immigrants coming in and taking all our jobs and housing”
    “the GP’s with their six figure salaries”
    “the greedy bankers”
    …the list goes on…
    Each party has their list.
    Maybe I miss it, but would be nice to hear some positive policies instead of always finding someone/something to blame.”

    ———–

    Well yes, but some policies while blaming, also offer the prospect of some tangible benefit to many of us, whereas I can’t see how the vans will. I won’t even get a coffee out of it…

  21. OLD NAT
    “On one shoot, the Duke of Edinburgh was there. Strangely, his dog was sent out to collect birds that he could only have hit if his gun could shoot at angles. ”

    Great story. Funny but also sinister.
    My experience of the setting up of these arrangements concerned the Chairman of JBS, who with the Chairman of the Anglo-Soviet Working Group on Agriculture, had laid on the former’s 1989 to take the visiting Soviet delegation up for the grouse shoot. Kaboshed by Gorbachev’s reform to reintroduce small farmer and diversified market systems, they were aplplexic at the replacement of these oligarchs with nonentities who wouldn’t know a decent single malt from a vodka, let alone know how to hold a gun or where to buy their tweeds.
    It was the sympathetic relationship of their big organisations and their bigshots with ours which was striking – and the ideology. Selwyn Gummer, who I met in Riga, boasted of having helped to destroy the agricultural producer cooperatives in the UK. They weren’t kidding about ‘the end of socialism’, but behind the rhetoric, ideas of scale in economic organisation which entailed changes to meat marketing, for example and the support for massive petro-chemical agricultural corporations, had some appaling similarities.

  22. “had laid on” the former’s helicopters.

  23. Just thought I’d drop in:

    1) Hooray! My prediction was very close and Ed should be pleased with that kind of polling.

    2) On the topic of blackouts, I made an amusing quip to my Tory member flat mate while we were next door for drinks. He was talking about his timetable having no lectures on Monday or Friday, so I said “Well Tories would know about three-day weeks!”

    A-thank you.

  24. Up too early but get the YG first for once

    33/40/9/11 app -27

  25. Because you guys have conferences every single year, I’m kinda surprised that there’s as much of a poll bounce as there usually is. You’d think that people wouldn’t be tuning in unless they know for sure it’s going to be an election year.

  26. Thanks Jim Jam

    re: 33/40/9/11

    This of course is well within MOE from yesterday’s result. However, I wonder if it does detect a whisker of a response to the dreadful press Miliband has got for 48 hours – almost universally unremittingly hostile – it reminds me of the press response to Cleggmania.

    A German friend of mine thinks it is unbelievable how our democracy can function fairly with such a one-sided and opinionated press sector. Interestingly, he regards it as anti-democratic – I point out to him that we tend to regard a “free press” as symptomatic of a healthy democracy.

    What seems likely to me is that the press still influence the political mood, if not quite the agenda as they once did?

  27. @Tony Dean

    The press certainly do their best to influence political mood and agenda.

    Personally, I think we have one of the worst, and possibly the absolute worst, popular press in the democratic world, and count our awful, institutionally-dishonest newspapers as one of the worst things about this country.

  28. @SoCal – not that many people tune in, but they generate news headlines.

  29. Tony

    Billy Bragg wrote a song about that

  30. I wonder if there is any way of assessing the influence of the press on VI – or if it has been attempted. I guess it is substantial but have nothing to base that on and could be totally wrong.

  31. Lab share in last 4 YouGovs: 40 39 41 40.

    Before that it was 37 35 36 37 37.

    @Tony Dean

    Most of newspapers are lousy but Labour has won elections in spite of them. Murdoch is clearly firmly behind Cameron now, but Labour would have won in 1997 without Murdoch’s backing.

    What concerns me is that the BBC seems increasingly led by the press in terms of the choice and tone of its news coverage.

    That said, in this case, the more the press wants to keep high energy prices in the headlines, the better for Labour.

  32. I’m not quite sure why everyone is making a big issue out of forcing people into work when the work isn’t there anyway. I can’t imagine that Poundland would ever be undersubscribed for job applications (certainly outside of London) and aside from skilled jobs I think this applies to almost everything.

    Obviously helping the community would be useful to get people onto the work ethic and maybe learn some skills, although I suspect all governments have failed to invest in this type of programme to the level where it really is helping the community.

  33. Sorry, that should have been (in order latest last)

    Lab share in last 4 YouGovs: 40 39 41 40.
    Before that it was 37 37 36 35 37.

  34. The public should be given more credit, they can see through the utter hypocrisy shown at the moment by these right wing rags – I mean one month running stories on fat cats and record profits on these energy companies, the next these utterly pathetic scare stories. Yesterday’s YouGov shows the public don’t buy it and shows how this blind agenda often puts them at odds from the public.

    I’ve been particularly shocked at the agenda BBC have been allowed to adopt very very worrying.

  35. @Chris

    But it doesn’t show there is no effect – there could still be a very large effect.

  36. TURK

    It did occur to me that that npower 2017 Fix was already on their books.

    Either way-it occurs to me that it avoids Miliband’s cap.
    OK-they have to build in sufficient price increase to cover risk that far out-but that’s what they do in any Fixed Tarrif.

    But a Tarrif which is fixed now, to 2017 avoids the EM price freeze I think.

  37. Shevii – There is not a problem with asking the jobless to do volunteer work. The problem arises when companies start to take these people on and not people full time, or even worse start to lay people off and replce them with the much cheaper jobless……and this has been happening.

  38. And if anyone thinks I am scarmongering, sixty people have just been made redundant at a warehouse near me in Lancashire, on the same day 65 government subsidised jobseekers were taken on to do exactly the same work.

  39. Good news on adoptions-a reform working it seems.

  40. Colin

    I would not be suprised to see the rest of the power companies follow suit, after all you can hardly bring in a price freeze if all the companies are operating one all ready.

  41. Stephanie Flanders leaves the Beeb to join………..JP Morgan.

    Who would have thought it ?!

  42. @Tony Dean: it is anti democratic, and will be more so once the gagging bill goes through. Most western democracies would not allow such a concentration of media interests to be held by one Murdoch. In a democracy, the free decimation of ideas and opinion (and facts) is essential: otherwise how do people know what they think.
    And of course, this does feed through into polling…
    (if any of you haven’t heard about the gagging bill, passing rapidly through, look it up!!)

  43. TURK

    EXactly.
    Don’t know if you read the Times-but Philip Collins is excellent this morning-Miliband, Burnham et al in their “35% comfort zone” etc.

    Polls this morning don’t appear to indicate escape velocity for ED?

    Hoping for something special from DC at your conference.

  44. Chris

    “Right wing rags” and “I’ve been particularly shocked at the agenda BBC have been allowed to adopt very very worrying.

    Isn’t life interesting, when i have complained about the BBC’s left wing bias in the past I have had nothing but criticism. I would suggest that perhaps the BBC is trying harder to be more balanced, something to be applauded.

    As a reader of a right wing rag I said at once that it’s response to Miliband’s speech was over the top but i also often read a right of centre broadsheet and that reporting was IMO much more balanced saying that the proposal would be popular but pointing out the problems it will cause.

    The adverse reaction from the Energy industry is to be expected but that does not mean that there is no truth in what they say. I think there wwill be an immediate slow down in investment by Energy companies in the UK and that should worry us all. The lights will not go out immediately but they will go out eventually if we do not get the investment urgently needed.

  45. Colin

    “Stephanie Flanders leaves the Beeb to join………..JP Morgan.

    Who would have thought it ?!

    She must have been converted to the capitalist agenda!

  46. Rosieand daisie

    With great respect to you, what I ment and I think most people understood was some parties get lifts in polling figures at conferences I expected Labours to be higher, but they usually soon disappear, sorry you couldn’t figure that out I’ll try and put it in simpler terms next time.

  47. Overall a good week for Miliband, he correctly identified rip-off energy prices and whatever transpires from here it shouldn’t be so easy for energy companies to rip us all off.

    The Tory response you got some idea of from the excellent Michael Gove on QT last night but the green taxes will be difficult to deal with in Coalition, so Labour on the right side of this one.

    As for all this on polling I can see Labour keeping the extended lead on the back of this for a while. To keep it though for longer term Miliband needs to back it up with some key cabinet changes in my view.

    I don’t expect too much different to come from the Tory conference, they will carry on the same course. One issue of concern for Labour, Teachers strikes next week, not popular with parents looking for childcare, Miliband needs act with care on this.

  48. TOH

    @”She must have been converted to the capitalist agenda!”

    Yes-wonder if she sought advice from former “friends”-the two Eds ?

    Actually I like her & rated her analysis .

  49. Amber Star

    “will create loads of those ‘government non-jobs’ which command a good salary & annoy the beejeebers out of many Tories & Kippers.”

    I agree with that and for that reason alone I feel other ways must be found to ensure that people do not take advantage of the benefits system

  50. Colin

    “Actually I like her & rated her analysis .”

    Yes me too although often disagreeing with some it.

1 6 7 8 9 10