The monthly ComRes phone poll for the Indy is out tonight and shows almost no change from last month. Topline figures are CON 32%(nc), LAB 37%(nc), LDEM 9%(nc), UKIP 10%(-1). ComRes also asked people what was most important to them about the economy in the coming years. Top came ensuring economic growth on 41%, following by increasing wages above the rate prices rise (25%), keeping down inflation (17%) and cutting the deficit (12%).

Meanwhile the daily YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 41%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%. It looks as if yesterday’s 2 point lead was indeed a blip, though today’s may be the same: the average in YouGov polls since the Autumn statement is a Labour lead of around about 5 points, so the two point lead and today’s eight point lead look like outliers in opposite directions.

With ComRes’s poll done, we’ve had all of the regular monthly polls from ComRes, MORI and ICM and we’re headed towards the Christmas break. YouGov don’t poll over Christmas, so will come to a halt this weekend. I’m not sure whether or not Populus or Opinium will continue over the holidays.


197 Responses to “ComRes/Indy – CON 32, LAB 37, LD 9, UKIP 10”

1 2 3 4
  1. Statgeek

    It was not a single poll. TNS,MORI and Yougov all had huge double digit leads for Labour in the early Spring of 2011. The turnaround was massive and yes unprecedented for the SNP.

    Not all of these factors pertain in the UK. Salmond was (and still is) massively more popular than Cameron but Milliband is even more unpopular than Ian Gray was in Scotland.

    However, as a non Tory, the wishfull thinking even complacency of Labour supporters on this site is frightening.

    This travesty of a Westminster Government should be being hounded out of office. Instead only the Liberal appendage of it is in terminal trouble.

    The Tories are still in touching distance of being the largest party with 18 months to go until an election with a fair economic wind and an unfair press at their backs.

    Labour should be further ahead because oppositions have to win elections not assume that Governments will lose them.

  2. More of Boris on Cleggo…

    “Johnson reserved his customary caustic classical allusions for Clegg, likening him to Valerian, the only Roman emperor to be captured as a prisoner of war. He said: “I don’t want to cast aspersions on my fellow, on what is he? He is a radio disc jockey now isn’t he Clegg?

    “I’m sure he has many, many important ceremonial duties. He is a lapdog of David Cameron who has been converted by taxidermy into a kind of sort of, what’s the word, protective shield. Like the Emperor Valerian who was skinned and hung on the wall, that’s what he reminds me of.”
    .

  3. I recall someone (edit – it was Guymonde) mentioning being phoned by Populus a while back for a poll mentioning Heathrow…. herein are the fruits of their labour:

    http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Heathrow_Poll_Nov131.pdf

  4. PH

    Yes: that sounds fair enough.

    Wot a piano-playing rascal Ed B is. Obviously a rare example of someone who spends far too MUCH time at the prak.

  5. @AA

    “This travesty of a Westminster Government should be being hounded out of office. Instead only the Liberal appendage of it is in terminal trouble.”

    I dare say that will be construed as partisan, but if I can answer that from my own perspective; the Lib Dems gained more votes from people that wanted a change but didn’t want the Conservatives. They assumed Lib/Lab and also assumed that politicians are honourable (or right honourable) people.

    As a non-politician, and a fairly non-party oriented person, my own perspective of politicians is “accuse, deal, stab, accuse, deal, stab”. They seem to be increasingly made up of lawyers, and it wasn’t coincidence that Blair’s government created new laws and he’s a lawyer and married to a lawyer. The ‘accuse, deal, stab’ ethic is not alien to lawyers either.

    Thinking about this, I found this article, dated 2009:

    http://www.thelawyer.com/focus-lawyers-in-parliament-the-commons-touch/1001447.article

    The Lawyer interviewed a selection of the PPCs and asked them why they thought lawyers appear to make good parliamentarians? Charlie Elphicke, head of European tax at Hunton & Williams and the Conservative PPC for Dover, sums it up succinctly.

    “I think the qualities required are similar,” Elphicke argues. “The ability to brief yourself very quickly and on no notice. The ability to handle a meeting. To understand legislation and to propose a positive solution on the hoof.”

    Of course, your average project manager meets these requirements too, and is arguably more capable of planning, costing and see a project through than a lawyer, who is more suited to long-winded debate, years of delays, long lunches and plenty of expenses. :))

  6. Just came in. I thought a certain subject was taboo here? Oh well, it’s Yuletide I suppose.

  7. @Statgeek

    It’s been said of Blair that he was good at quickly seeing to the heart of a problem. Whatever one may think of Blair (not so much in my case), one can see that such a forensic ability is the sort of thing that would help a lawyer prosper, quickly grasping on what matters a case rests.

    Unfortunately, lawyers are not so much required to come up with solutions. Thus, for example, even if you can see what’s “wrong” with education, doesn’t mean you’ll come up with a great plan to fix it. You need the systems peeps for that sort if thing…

  8. The ability to argue a position in which you don’t believe.

  9. Thank goodness we have sworn “non-Tories” like Statgeek, The Other Howard, Allen Christie and now Alexander Anderson to guide benighted and wretched creatures like, forever condemned to partisan myopia, to the sunny uplands of non-partisan objectivity, balance and impartiality.

    If only I could aspire to such virtue. lol

  10. @AW

    “If your local MP supported Heathrow expansion, would it make you more or less likely to vote for that candidate, or would it have no impact?”

    No impact: 60%

    Which either highlights that Heathrow does not feature high enough on most peoples’ radar (London-centric?), or that 60% of the voting electorate is represented by someone they wouldn’t vote for anyway. In fact, the support or opposition of their MP to the Heathrow expansion might bring more people to reach the opposite point of view.

    e.g. “I support Labour. My MP is Conservative and he opposes the expansion, therefore I support it”

    It is interesting that net opposition in Brentford and Isleworth is less than in Richmond Park, despite the former being closer to Heathrow (and supposedly subject to more noise pollution). I assume that Richmond Park is more affluent, with more NIMBYs.

  11. cross Batty

    “If only I could aspire to such virtue. lol”

    You can always aspire – you’d just never be quite as impartial as them.

    By the way, why ARE you so cross yet also LOLing quite a lot also?

  12. @ Alexander,

    I think you’re underestimating the strength of the ABT vote.

    Amber and Old Nat’s epic battles nonwithstanding, a lot of voters see the SNP and Scottish Labour as fairly interchangeable: they’re both centre-left parties with strong Scottish roots and similar positions on most issues apart from independence. For a leftish voter without strong tribal allegiances, switching between them doesn’t require a massive psychological wrench.

    The Tories and Labour are not so interchangeable, and as they head into the 2015 election they appear to be differentiating themselves further (which is one of the reasons it’s going to be so interesting). This is why Lib Dem voters who thought they were voting for a Lib/Lab government defected from the party en masse when it turned out to be a Lib/Tory one. It’s also why after thirteen years of opposition, the biggest recession for a century and a hugely unpopular Labour Prime Minister, the Tories managed to gain a measly 5.5% on their 1997 defeat. (Neil Kinnock did better than that!) There just aren’t that many Lab/Tory swing voters around for the Tories to win over.

    The SNP vs. Labour contest in Scotland isn’t analogous to a UK general election. Salmond was fishing in a much deeper pool.

  13. @RosieandDaisie

    ” By the way, why ARE you so cross yet also LOLing quite a lot also?”

    Not cross, really, just a bit irritated every now and again by the disingenuous attempts of some on here to seize the moral high ground.

    Of course, I wouldn’t want to LOL anybody into a false sense of security.

    Lots of Love

  14. @Carfrew

    “You need the systems peeps for that sort if thing…”

    Indeed, and personally, there’s a good argument for missing out the middleman (or woman), as they tend to increase all the negatives and reduce all the positives when dealing with providing solutions to the country.

    A project manager can tell me if a project is feasible, and within what time scales and costs, and won’t have party political spin built in. There will be a fairly objective view of the impact on people, and so on.

    Perhaps if the planning was done in a more public manner, with less or no political involvement, the politicians couldn’t add in more ‘value’ to these projects.

    @CB11

    You don’t have to be a sworn “non-Tory” or be of any political allegiance to see how more laws equates to more lawyers.

    http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/representation/research-trends/annual-statistical-reports/

    (England & Wales only – if anyone can find Scottish data, many thanks)

    2001 – 104,538
    2012 – 165,971

    That’s a 59% increase in eleven years, despite the population increasing by 7.1%, and crime reducing in that period. This coincides partially with a rise of 22% in the number of laws in the ’97 to ’06 period.

    h ttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/jun/04/houseofcommons.uk

    Those are the facts, so please don’t start labelling me to a political party (directly or sarcastically). I have never been a member of one, and doubt I ever will be.

  15. Statgeek – there’s also a question of where the flightpaths go, so its places in certain directions that are affected the most.

  16. crossbat11

    Not seen anybody talking about morality on here today.

    AW

    Sorry forgot we are not supposed to mention QT.

    spearmint

    I suspect Alexander like myself expects a partial collapse of the Labour vote in 2015.

    Enjoy the rest of the day all, off to do other things.

  17. Very encouraging nemployment figures. Surely we can all agree on this.

  18. TOH

    “I suspect Alexander like myself expects a partial collapse of the Labour vote in 2015.”

    Can’t see it myself. Given that in 2010, Labour gained 30% of the vote at a time when they were very unpopular and with leader about as popular as Ed is now, that would seem to me to be an absolute minimum for Labour.

    Plus the LD’s got 24% of the vote and their vote is likely to drop about 10% with the majority of that going to Labour plus a number of voters who voted Tory but now wished they hadn’t, I really can’t see where this collapse is going to come from.

  19. @Statgeek

    Thanks for your reply, and agree with much of what you say. Actually I happened across an article the other day which highlights the ways in which political involvement can go tragicomically wrong… Colin and ToH are gonna love it. I’ll dig it out later after coffee…

    (…Or maybe mulled wine if the Teepee’s still up…)

  20. ‘Very encouraging nemployment figures. Surely we can all agree on this.’

    That’s only true as far as they go. Many thousands of those who have come off the register are now working 15 – 20 hours a week at low wages – in reality they are still circa 50% unemployed. On the basis of a million workers only working half their normal hours we should be adding 500,00 Full Time Equivalents to the published headline figures.

  21. As a contributor to the Heathrow poll I’d be very interested in AW’s views on its validity.
    I live in Brentford & Isleworth. The constituency is long and thin with affluent Tory Chiswick in the East and much poorer Hounslow in the West.
    The further west you get, the nearer you are to the airport and – clearly – the more noise and pollution you get. Chiswick seems to be stridently NIMBY anti-airport (they think it depresses house prices) whilst I suspect the rest of the borough is pro (they think it provides jobs and – oh – supports house prices)
    For myself, I rarely even notice aircraft noise since Concorde went belly-up. Certainly there’s a lot of talk about this poll being biased and I’m probably too close to it (npi) to have a view so expert opinion would be very welcome

  22. Oh and as my presence here confirms I am one of the unemployed that aren’t counted (living off redundancy pay and a bit of consultancy when I can get it)

  23. @ Spearmint

    “Amber and Old Nat’s epic battles nonwithstanding”

    I always think of them when I watch African Queen and look what happened to those two!

    @ Statgeek

    To be fair to the Lib Dems they may well have lost similar votes if they had gone with Lab and been in the same boat, although probably the weighting of their vote was more left wing.

  24. @Stageek

    “Those are the facts, so please don’t start labelling me to a political party (directly or sarcastically). I have never been a member of one, and doubt I ever will be.”

    Methinks thou do protest too much. You need to go back and read my post.

    Why on earth people think that not being a member of a political party equates to being, per se, impartial and non-partisan is quite beyond me. It guarantees no such thing.

    [Mote and beam, sir, mote and beam – AW]

  25. Graham just above is on the ball. Lower unemployment is no longer a bonus when the employment being taken up is on such poor terms. Forcing a bad bargain down people’s throats would be hated in the City and it’s hated in the country.

    As for complacency among the Labour fraternity, hi again, AA, but you’re not supposed to be able to identify the Labour fraternity here! That’s why we all sound so complacent, you seem we’re keeping our heads down.

    Seriously though, apart from the fact that swings away from Labour are mathematically possible, what in fact do you think would have a realistic chance of denting that Labour 38, consistent throughout the parliament? Which prompts the underlying question, why indeed do you think that consistent 38 has kept on registering throughout this parliament?

    Certainly you are right in thinking that nothing Labour have done (or has happened to Labour) seems to affect it. But oppositions have only limited room to lead a debate, although Ed M is feeding the meter quite effectively at present.

    Divers Tory manoeuvres have made no difference to it either. The Tory party seem to be addressing only the faithful, i.e. attempting to shore up a cliff crumbling away under a lot of pounding from the UKIP tide.

    TOH and those of like opinion rely (their posts, not my interpretation) on the effectiveness of the 2010 ‘Labour mess’ campaign and the evidence of economic revival now. The Labour 38 haven’t swallowed the Labour mess idea to date (however many other people TOH thinks might buy it) so the only thing that’s going to shift them would be startlingly exciting economic news, and massaged statistics don’t constitute that.

    This is an unusual situation. The Tories are relying on loads of UKIP supporters ‘seeing sense’, basically – and what’s going to make them do that?

    Complacent, moi?

  26. @RICH

    “Very encouraging nemployment figures. Surely we can all agree on this.”

    I certainly would if I knew what Nemployment meant.

    Is it a bit of UNemployment mixed in with some EMployment?

    I can definitely see that.

  27. A.A
    I think you are right in your main assertion that the polls suggest Labour can’t be confident of an OM at the next GE.

    My view, however, as a party member, was and is that given how bad 2010 was an OM would be an unbelievable achievement.

    A more realistic (but unspoken of course by the leadership) goal is for the most seats at the GE and narrowing the Tory lead to 3% or less in the popular vote.

    I accept I am in a minority but feel the UKIP will poll only 6% or so with the cons gaining 3-4% net over Lab.

    Some dk/wv from 2010 Tories (less from LDs) returning from the GE will lower Labs %age with the same total votes due to turnout.

    These factors would put Lab and Cons pretty close imo with the LDs a touch higher. For ToHs small Con OM to be achieved a 3% swing Lab-Con from current YG polls or 1 in 12 currently giving a Lab VI would be needed. (A little less if some Lab-LD drift)

    The biggest impediment as I see it to a cons OM is gaining seats from Lab when even with a few going back Lab will gain 20% or more net LDs votes in each seat over the Tories. Plus the one-off impact of ‘Ashcrofts’ millions in Lab marginals not gained in 2010 will fade and there is no compensatory incumbency bonus.

  28. Colin Davis

    As I have said to the point of boring others on here I expect a drop in Labour support of probably 8 points by the time of the election as voters realise the choice they face. You may not like that answer but that’s what i think and expect. We will see who is right in 2015

  29. crossbat11

    I totally agree that not being a member of a political party does not make anybody unbiased. We are all biased when it comes to voting even if we write none of the above on the ballot slip.

  30. @CB11

    Methinks you will focus on the person, rather than the facts in the debate, and with that I leave you to your opinion, wrong as it is.

  31. Guymonde – I haven’t really seen any discussion around it, or looked at it properly. I saw nothing wrong with a very brief look at those three questions, but your original comment implied these were only part of a longer poll

  32. I think a lot depends on the recovery.
    If it’s real and sustained, and feeds through at some point into pockets then the Tory TINA argument will gain weight. Note recent polls saying support for cuts has hardened.
    Plus the immigration rhetoric – whilst it may do UKIP more good than Con – is unlikely to do anything positive for Lab.

    I think the jury’s out on the recovery. The underlying situation is pretty dreadful – balance of payments going from bad to worse with private investment – surely the key to productivity and ‘decent’ jobs sliding with it.

    It’s clear that the current recovery is debt-fuelled and I remain of the view that the enormous efforts to fuel house price rises are all about making homeowners get more comfortable increasing debt. Yesterday they were bleating on the BBC that everything is better now because inflation came down but actually this merely means that things are getting worse at a slower rate.

    Consumer confidence is still in the doldrums, and people’s expectations low. If that changes there could be a sharp increase in Tory support.

  33. All of this talk about the parties needing to convince each others’ “supporters” to switch slightly misses the point I think

    Tory supporters will not vote Labour. Labour will not vote Tory. Some supporters may tactically vote as anti-Tory or anti-Labour but in general the election will be won or lost amongst people who don’t consider themselves to be “supporters” of any particular party.

    Just because someone generally says “Labour” when asked how they will vote doesn’t mean they are a Labour Supporter.

    I think there is a very large reservoir of support up for grabs in the next, and every, General Election. Not necessarily people who “switch”. Just people who don’t follow politics very much and will make their mind up in the weeks or days before the vote.

  34. Jim Jam

    A thoughtful piece, some of which I agree with. [] Your penultimate paragraph makes the point clearly, it really won’t need that much for the Tories to get in.

  35. ToH – I think that is where we diverge in that given Labs 38% is by and large 2010 Lab voters, a chunk of 2010 LDs and perhaps some 2010 abstainers and first time voters I think the Tories getting 1 in every 12 of them even with an improving economy and real average earning growth will prove beyond them.

    But as you say we will see.

  36. I don’t mind or dislike your answer, TOH. It’s your opinion after all. I just asked what’s going to dent the Labour 38 per cent. However, your theory demands that virtually all of the 9 per cent who now vote Labour but didn’t in 2010 will see the reality of the choice they are making and ditch the opinions they have held for the lifetime of a parliament in a trice.

    That 9 per cent have been mostly LD’s, who thought they were members of a left-leaning party, but found they weren’t. The promise of PR might just sway them back, en masse, on a one-off basis, but a sudden belief in something (the Labour mess theory) that most of them didn’t even know was on the table until their leaders agreed a strategy with GO is unlikely – isn’t it?

    We differ, of course, over your contention that Labour made a mess in the first place, and that GO’s policy has helped rather than worsened the economic situation. Facts, I am sure, will out, but we can agree to agree that, predictions-wise, all this is probability thinking, no more, no less.

  37. Cross Batty

    What’s wrong with yer mote and beam?

  38. AW

    “Why on earth people think that not being a member of a political party equates to being, per se, impartial and non-partisan is quite beyond me. It guarantees no such thing.

    [Mote and beam, sir, mote and beam – AW]”

    I don’t understand your comment, AW. CB has a red background which shows his partiality. The point he was making, as I understand it, is that some posters say they are impartial and have a grey background but, as he says, just because you don’t show an obvious affiliation to a political party doesn’t mean you are not partisan. Where does the more and beam comment come from?

  39. mote not more!

  40. NORBOLD

    @”Where does the more and beam comment come from?”

    In my experience AW doesn’t usually descend from Mount Olympus to explain his rulings-this is a Dictatorship-not a Democracy.

    So perhaps I can offer you a thought-The Mote & Beam reference follows a Biblical section which might be summarised as “Judge not, that ye be not judged.”.

    So we must look for something which AW thinks CB accuses others of , which CB himself is “guilty” of.

    This may simply be a reference to accusations of partisanity in others , when the accuser is himself overtly partisan. Whether or not the accuser or accused wears a party colour here is irrelevant, since partisanity is not permitted on UKPR -whatever colour you choose to write in.

    [I sure don’t. But it’s a quote from Beyond the Fringe referencing the Sermon on the Mount – AW]

  41. Has anyone on here ever spoilt a ballot paper when voting in an election ?

    I have on one occasion. It was for a local council election, for which I had previously voted independent, because I generally like independent candidates in local elections. Anyway at this particular election the independents had decided to join one of the main parties and I was faced with just two party choices, Lib Dem or Tory. I think they both had two candidates. Faced with this choice, I just wrote ‘none of these’ and put a line through the whole ballot paper.

  42. SH in the government as justice minister… Probably some more LD votes lost and a few gained/retained. His own credibility for delivering his not very interesting but sometimes thoughtful speeches will surely suffer though.

  43. crossbat11

    Thank goodness we have sworn “non-Tories” like Statgeek, The Other Howard, Allen Christie and now Alexander Anderson to guide benighted and wretched creatures like, forever condemned to partisan myopia, to the sunny uplands of non-partisan objectivity, balance and impartiality.

    If only I could aspire to such virtue. lol
    ___________

    LOL just to keep you at ease I’m what you would call a Tartan Tory. A bit nationalist with a blue streak.

  44. R HUCKLE
    Has anyone on here ever spoilt a ballot paper when voting in an election ?

    Only when I once voted labour. (I’m here all week)

  45. R. HUCKLE

    What’s the point of spoiling a ballot paper? Why not just stay at home? This is a genuine question not a criticism.

  46. The Other Howard

    Colin Davis

    As I have said to the point of boring others on here I expect a drop in Labour support of probably 8 points by the time of the election as voters realise the choice they face. You may not like that answer but that’s what i think and expect. We will see who is right in 2015
    _______

    You’re not boring me and you’re absolutely correct.

    More more more Just kidding.

  47. As happens rather too often for comfort @Neil has to my mind hit the nail on the proverbial. At the moment the Conservatives and Labour are fishing in different pools. If it were not so, there would be a negative correlation between their votes over time as a gain for one would be a loss for the other. And the last time I looked this was not the case. (Apologies if it now is)

    So the difference between the two will fluctuate because of random variation (assume labour are around 38 and conservatives around 33 then Con 36 Lab 35 or con 30 lab 41 are both quite feasible) but also because they manage to catch more or fewer fish in their own pools (e,g more UkIPPers defect or come back).

    @Neil’s further point (I think) was that come the general election election people start thinking about things in a more serious way or even start thinking about them at all. This is likely to affect what happens within the pools (e,g, a lot more UKIP go back to conservative) but also may call into play people who have previously been don’t knows or ditherers between one pool and another but not between Cons and Labour. @Neil thinks there are a lot of these potential swing voters. Personally I haven’t a clue, but it would be interesting to know if there is a way of getting a handle on their numbers and which way they might go.

    Thus thinking about the arguments on this site there are ‘within pool’ arguments. The election will depend on whether UKIP goes Tory or sticks to its guns or whether liberals go back home after flirting with labour, And there are across pool arguments – elections are won from the centre ground.

    In theory these arguments suggest a dilemma for the conservatives – go right or stick to the Cameroonian guns. They are less of a dilemma for labour if one assumes that keeping the libdems is a matter of keeping fairly close to the centre.

    Personally I would like labour to be rather clearer about what it wants and for this reason probably rather more left wing but that is neither here nor there. I am not going to vote for anyone else this time.

  48. @Charles

    track the correlation between the parties, based on 2013 Yougov data.

    Here they are:

    Samples Correlation SE 3 * SE 5% CI 1% CI
    245 Con to Lab -0.229 0.06 0.182 0.128 0.160
    Con to LD -0.358 0.06 0.167 0.128 0.160
    Con to UKIP -0.434 0.05 0.156 0.128 0.160
    Lab to LD 0.190 0.06 0.185 0.128 0.160
    Lab to UKIP -0.584 0.04 0.126 0.128 0.160
    LD to UKIP -0.223 0.06 0.182 0.128 0.160

  49. @ norbold

    “What’s the point of spoiling a ballot paper? Why not just stay at home? This is a genuine question not a criticism.”

    My error, as I did not know the choice of candidates before going into the polling station. Had I known, I would not have bothered !

1 2 3 4