This morning’s daily YouGov poll for the Sun had topline voting intention figures of CON 33%, LAB 39%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 14%. Full tabs are here.

Meanwhile today’s twice-weekly Populus poll has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 38%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 7% – a low Labour lead compared to their recent averages. Tabs are here


71 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Populus figures”

1 2
  1. OLD NAT
    Yeah, it was the latent piss off notice to Spain that caught my attention.

  2. JOHN PILGRIM

    I ain’t biting! :-)

    However, the praise given to Baroness Ashton for her brokering of the Iran agreement (assuming that she brokered it, and there is an agreement) also suggests that the EU does engage in foreign policy – and a good thing too!

  3. Being reported that the 3 occupants of the police helicopter that crashed into the roof of the Clutha pub in Glasgow are dead.

    No specific reports of those in the pub, other than reports of “multiple injuries”.

  4. @Catmanjeff

    “Without being partisan, why on earth would any Green vote Conservative?”

    Best guess? Rural voters with rural-minded concerns, voting tactically for a party more inclined towards rural issues (e.g. as opposed to Labour being a more urban party). Also perhaps some of the (more) green policies of the current government (e.g. tree planting). Just a guess, mind.

  5. @Oldnat

    Both the Guardian and the Mirror are saying “feared dead”. Nice of them, considering the relatives might be watching.

  6. OLD NAT
    “I ain’t biting! :-)”

    And I ain’t trolling. Unless I’m wrong – and i apologise if so – you shared my view on the poor understanding shown by the West of the South Osettia conflict, which still underlies Russian Georgian hostility and the struggle in Georgia to join the EU. A reason I did not vote for DM was the poor judgement I thought he showed in intervening then. Shades of earlier Labour proto-jingoism I thought. Barroso”s statement at Vilnius is altogether more historic and potentially dangerous, and seems to me to extend the authority of the President of the EU. Yes, no wonder DC whizzed off to join the meeting.

  7. @Colin Davis – “Richard, above, I so agree. An almost dead man, weighing less than 50 kg, and we hire a jet to take him back to a place where he knows he is in danger.”

    To be clear, the main claims to be in danger, but the asylum process has been exhausted and presumably finds that to be a false claim. He was also judged fit to be transported.

    I wasn’t present throughout the legal proceeding, and I accept that mistakes can be made, but there are numerous cases where the judges stick it to the home secretary in asylum cases, so perhaps we should be a touch less judgemental where we are not in complete possession of the facts.

    @John Pilgrim – no connection whatsoever between a Russian veto on Ukraine membership of the EU and Spain vetoing a new member. Russia is not in the EU, so doesn’t have a veto, Spain is, so it does. I can’t see any message to Spain in this, unless Barruso is saying he will unilaterally re write the Lisbon treaty.

  8. Looking at the cross-breaks of the YouGov poll they all seem about where you would expect them to be, Conservatives strong only in the Rest of the South on parity with the over 60’s (Shame YouGov doesn’t have an over 65 category)

    Otherwise behind regionally and by all other criteria.

    Maybe this is a true reflection of the current state of play.

  9. Tim Yeo has been deselected as Tory candidate.

  10. @R HUCKLE

    “Agree with your post @9.18am. You could add that much of the revenues find their way out of the UK, one way or another. Under EU law companies can transfer earnings from one country to another, so they can pay tax in the cheapest jurisdiction. We have seen this with a certain coffee chain, but it is far more widespread. There UK treasury is not obtaining the correct tax revenues, based on how much companies are earning in the UK.

    There is also still alot of tax avoidance, with people and companies hiring expensive lawyers/accountants, to route their finances through the Channel Islands and Isle of Man. I noticed recently that a local housing development was done via financing through some Channel Islands trust arrangement. No doubt that this was being done in a way that ensured earnings were maximised, with tax kept to a minimum.”

    November 29th, 2013 at 9:46 am

    ————

    Yes, they have many ways of stacking the deck. This another examole of difficulties of the neolib thing… the free flow of capital across borders has its potential benefits, but it’s also quite handy for upping your capital while providing rather fewer benefits.

    This has a bearing on the response to the costalivin’ thing. In principle, business ought to be wary of taking the mick and annoying the government and forcing it to act to curb their excesses, but in practice, with the free and rapid flow of capital these days, they can more easily just keep milking the cow knowing the minute the government do act, they can redeploy the capital elsewhere.

    Even if they don’t or can’t redeploy, they may as well carry on until forced to do otherwise, ‘cos they can keep creaming the bonuses and share price gains and then bail, taking a job elsewhere, or selling the shares and reinvesting elsewhere, whereupon it becomes someone else’s problem. Of course, when dealing with essentials, as we saw with banking, and the recent hint of blackouts, they can also leverage the fact that with essentials, they rather have us over a barrel.

    Unaccountably, it seems that when keen to “tell Sid” at the time, they left a load of this stuff out…

  11. Graham,

    In comparison to what Labour had through most of the 1997-2010 period, it’s pretty small, though admittedly I was actually thinking of the 1951-1955 parliament.

  12. JOHN PILGRIM

    You are right. We share a view on the lack of understanding in the West, of the complexities of much in Eastern Europe.

    It was simply the aspect that might relate to Macbethianism that I was avoiding. :-)

  13. Speermint,
    Re – 10% of 2010 Lib Dems have gone to Ukip, so people defecting to parties completely inimical to everything their previous party stood for is not unprecedented.

    Could it be that those LD voters were anyone but Lab or Con who voted for the next biggest choice (England) so the UKIP makes sense for them now as LD probably joined Lab and Con as in Government.

  14. @ Jim Jam,

    That, or disaffected Old Labour people who are broadly statist and assumed the Lib Dems were left of New Labour without reading the fine print, but who defected when they joined up with the Tories. Ukip’s “Back to the 50s!” agenda might appeal to them if they have once again failed to read the fine print.

    I’m sure there’s some internal logic to it. Just, on the face of it it does seem like a bizarre shift, especially in safe seats where no party can seriously challenge the incumbents. If your non-Tory/non-Labour vote was a protest anyway, why were you giving it to the Lib Dems if you didn’t like their policies/implied manifesto?

  15. Speermint – I agree with Your main point that this is an example like Green Tories, an apparent oxymoron but for a small number of voters it makes sense.

  16. Green Tories makes sense to me. Rich or middle class people who love the countryside buy organic food, are interested in the environment/nature …like cycling, grow their own veg and bake their own bread.

  17. “Bread Machine Conservatism.” The Tories’ next rebrand?

  18. A good example of ‘green’ Tories is the CPRE. If the C of E is the Cons party at prayer (‘was’ I think nowadays) then similarly the CPRE was the Cons party at protecting bijou villages. Again, a changing scene nowadays. I went to a branch meeting on hunting a few years back. One tweedy lady stated ‘if CPRE does not make a stand on hunting, half the membership will be lost’. A colleague sat near her said ‘yes but which half’?

  19. Alec, on the wider issue of whether or not the man in question deserved to be allowed to remain in the UK, you are of course right to point out that we don’t know the facts in detail. Most of us only know what this man claims, to be honest.

    The deck is stacked against such people, however. If a person is clearly at risk of torture, we have (under longstanding conventions, to which we are signatories) an obligation to protect her or him by granting them permission to remain in the UK. Notwithstanding, we can finesse those obligations by putting a case on review, so that – if the conditions in the country in which she or he fears torture change – we can return them later. On top of which, proving that one is ‘at risk of torture’ is very hard to do, especially to a UKBA that is politically predisposed to doubt what the claimant says in the first place. So I don’t doubt the courts could find no conclusive proof this man was at risk of torture – and I suspect their hands were tied, so that they couldn’t offer him the protection he sought from them anyway.

    I hope that I’m not rushing to judgment, therefore, when I suggest that we have, morally, to take into account the loaded nature of the system we are operating when assessing the merits of what we are doing – and the huge expense required to hire a jet plane to remove a sick individual makes me think that the system was loaded especially heavily against this particular man. I’m deeply ashamed at what happened, to put it mildly.

    .

  20. ALEC
    ” no connection whatsoever between a Russian veto on Ukraine membership of the EU and Spain vetoing a new member. Russia is not in the EU, so doesn’t have a veto, Spain is, so it does. I can’t see any message to Spain in this, unless Barruso is saying he will unilaterally re write the Lisbon treaty.”
    You are right, of course, that Russia is a not a member of the EU, and does not have a veto. I should have noticed.
    However, Barroso clearly was speaking about the inadmissability of a third country intervening,, with the threat of a “kind of possible veto” in a bilateral negotiation, making it trilateral. I doubt if anyone in that room did not think of its relevance to Spain’s intervention as a third country in the discussion of the possible accession of an independent Macbetheddonia with the threat of a veto.
    His spoken statement is worth listening to on the BBC News report, not least for his statement that the time of “limited sovereignty” in Eastern Europe,, ie Russian determination of domestic policies in countries like Geogia and Latvia with substantial Russian populations, is over.

1 2