Friday polls

We have no fewer than four voting intention polls out today. Populus’s twice weekly poll has topline voting intention figures of CON 33%, LAB 40%, LDEM 13%, UKIP 9%. Full tabs are here.

Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor for the Evening Standard has topline figures of CON 30%(-3), LAB 39%(+2), LDEM 13%(+4), UKIP 11%(+1). The increased Labour lead seems to be mostly down to likelihood to vote – last month MORI’s results for all voters had a seven point Labour lead, which became a four point lead when they took only those certain to vote. This month their results for all voters had a five point Labour lead, which became a nine point lead when they took only those certain to vote. Full details are here.

MORI also had some interesting questions on coalitions. 60% of people now think it was a bad thing that we had a hung Parliament in 2010, 32% a good thing. This compares to 40% good, 52% bad when it was asked in May 2010. Looking forward, only 26% think it would be a good thing if we had another hung Parliament at the next election, 65% see if as a bad thing (thought 51% of people think it is very or fairly likely). MORI also asked if people would support the party they support going into a coalition in the event of a hung Parliament.

  • 70% of Tory voters would support another coalition with the Lib Dems, only 40% would support a coalition with UKIP.
  • 62% of Labour supporters would support a coalition with the Lib Dems, 63% would support a coalition with the Greens
  • 65% of Lib Dems would support another coalition with the Tories, 53% would support a coalition with Labour

Moving on, YouGov’s daily voting intention poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 39%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 12% (full tabs are here.

Finally, Sky News have a Survation poll with topline figures of CON 30%(-1%), LAB 34%(-1%), LDEM 12%(+1%), UKIP 18%(+2). Full tabs for that are here


178 Responses to “Friday polls”

1 2 3 4
  1. Hope more than expectation?

  2. @Mrnameless – “That seems to me to be quite a petty piece of legislation that punishes those who are more comfortable completing a test in their first language. Driving theory is not an English exam. ”

    I’ll disagree on this one. learning a decent working knowledge of your host country is the first thing I would do were I to move abroad. I wouldn’t expect special treatment.

  3. Crossbat11

    You missunderstand me, I agree there are ways that banking could be improved and I would support anybodies plan to do that provided it did not penalise Britain’s banking sector vis a vis the rest of the World. The point I was making to those who for some reason want bankers to suffer is that under that scenario they are most unlikely to do so.

  4. Weird..

    @MSmithsonPB – New Survation EP2014 poll out with exactly same figures as @YouGov

    CON 23
    LAB 32
    UKIP 26
    LD 9
    GRN 5
    BNP 1
    NAT 4

  5. ALLAN

    @”The problem I see with EM approach to banking reforms is that it’s ill thought out ”

    The most interesting thought on this I have read today was in a Times article ( though of course I don’t discount the opinions & experience of the Governor of BoE.)

    This article has resonance because it follows a theme we have discussed on UKPR over the last few days-the continuing rise of on-line retail sales.

    ONS numbers today show non-food internet sales yoy % increase for each of the last 12 mths ( to nearest whole %) as +6/7/15/11/4/13/6/10/14/14/17/18 % pa

    Music & Books were the first industries disrupted & totally transformed by the internet. This is now happening in shoes & clothing.

    The writer of this article predicts that the internet will do the same for retail Banking-via Peer to Peer ( P2P) lending.

    Lending Club , a P2P lender in USA is currently growing it’s loan book at $100 m per month & will float soon. It is taking business from Credit Card companies currently, but the writer foresees P2P platforms targeting small businesses & students very soon.

    He has an interest in P2P , so you might reasonably say -he would say that wouldn’t he?

    But the article concludes with a quote from Andrew Haldane, of BoE :-
    ” Peer to Peer lenders could eventually replace high street banks. At present these companies are tiny , but so was Google a decade & a half ago “.

    One final-intriguing thought on this-P2P platforms introduce a willing lender & a willing borrower-so they enable lending without leverage.

    We have had left wing commentators here who have made great play of the dangers of fractional reserve banking & it’s role in the credit crash.
    THe Basel Accords &the increasing focus of Regulators & Central Banks on leverage & Capital ratios demonstrate that this is seen as a major area of risk.

    If P2P begins to role back high leverage banking , whilst introducing the additional competition everyone desires-one should not be surprised that an executive director of BoE expresses such enthusiasm for it.

  6. @COLIN

    There is one called RateSetter here. I did put some money in it and the money gets matched and earns interest. You can lend to businesses as well but I haven’t plucked up the courage to do that.

  7. @Colin

    “If P2P begins to role back high leverage banking , whilst introducing the additional competition everyone desires-one should not be surprised that an executive director of BoE expresses such enthusiasm for it.”

    What bank wants to store more money, when it can loan it, and what bank wants more competition?

    In that sense, none of them, and they will fight it. That basically means we will see a victor around 2025.

  8. COUPER2802

    Thanks-I haven’t delved into this sector, though was aware of it’s existence.

    I guess bad debt experience/exposure is a key factor for lenders.

  9. “Allan Christie,

    “I see your point, but of the signs you mention only one has writing on it and road signs (I believe) are internationally standardized. I mean non-English speaking tourists are allowed to drive here!”
    __________

    That’s correct but not all road signs we see by the roads are found in the highway code such as those n minor and private roads.

    Yes and non English tourists do drive in the UK but I’m not at all comfortable with it just as I’m not that confident when driving abroad.

    If someone is driving on our roads with little or no grasp on English then they can become easily overwhelmed by all the signs.

  10. Crossbat11

    I’m not surprised, at all, that most LD identifiers are now rightward inclining, l was just using the coalition preference percentages to tease Statgeek !

  11. @couper2802

    On Min Wage; I don’t think so tbh; it gives them good ground on immigration (“We have raised Minimum Wage and are taking action against Employees who do no pay it”, e.g. ‘they accept lower pay’ is less fierce a debate point). It gives them a good place with the UKIP working class vote by offering real term benefits.

    They move to UKIP’s left quite frankly.

    Remember Labour had to move right to win in 97; they get reminded of what they used to say but in the end it signals a change and a bend towards democratic will. People care more for current policy, only if they distrust them will they really react negatively (e.g. Labour & Europe).

  12. COLIN

    I think when the governor of the BoE voices concern over Labour’s proposals on banking reforms then people should take note.

    I have no doubt in the future P2P lending will take off and for small borrowers it should be great news and for those who are lending.

    I think this is the way to go and puts the small person in the driving seat and assets ie commissions, profits are more evenly distributed amongst the population rather than just a few at the top benefiting.

    Mind you to Labour’s credit they have taken some advice on their approach to banking reforms from some unexpected quarters.

    http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130408140826/monopoly/images/a/a7/Monopoly_electronic_banking_edition.jpg

  13. Sorry my post at 16:22 was for MR NAMELESS

    Forgot to put your name on it..no pun intended…

  14. @Fraser
    ‘Remember Labour had to move right to win in 97’

    It’s certainly the case that Labour did move right in 97 but I would strongly disagree with your suggestion that Labour ‘had’ to do this in order to win. The sheer scale of the 1997 victory makes that a very unlikely assumption. Had he lived , John Smith would pretty certainly have won a good majority – albeit well short of Blair’s 179. Indeed had Labour fought that election under Kinnock and a repeat of the 1992 manifesto, it would still have managed a working majority. People simply wanted the Tories out in 97 – it was simply a question of the scale of their defeat. Labour had been so traumatised by the shock of defeat in 1992 that it swung much further to the right than was necessary. It was all so very regrettable because by such action it ceased to be a bona fide Labour Government – just watered down Thatcherism at a time when the electorate was crying out for something really different.

  15. Re P2P lending
    I have a small and experimental amount of funds in a P2P outfit called Funding Circle. This is exclusively lending to business and currently excludes lending for commercial property, though they plan to change that shortly.

    They assess credit risk into bands and you get to bid funds into companies that you fancy – or they will spread your lending across a portfolio according to your preferred level of risk.

    I’ve chosen to support loans to a couple of manufacturers who are assessed ‘B’ for credit worthiness. This pays 8.5% (set by auction) and I pay a fee of 1% as and when payments come in.

    This seems a very good deal for me and – I imagine – for borrowers too and if all goes well any spare funds I have will go there rather than banks.

  16. @Allan

    Yes, when the Governor of the Bank of England forgets his job is to be measured and politically neutral and makes statements about political proposals he hasn’t seen, people should take note, and I have no doubt his advisors will remind him to keep his trap shut in future.

    He had no business making the statement he made and he made an error, which is why the Press is all feverishly speculating about whether he can remain Governor in the event of a Labour victory, something I am sure he will not welcome, but which is entirely his fault.

  17. CHRIS RILEY

    I also presume you would want him to keep his trap shut in the Scottish independence debate if he were to speak out on concerns over Scotland retaining the pound?

    Careful how you answer this?

  18. He shouldn’t be seen to favour any party or its policies, within reason, Allan.

    Why should I be careful about Scottish issues, apart from the obvious that mentioning them at all on UKPR leads to tedium?

  19. CHRIS RILEY

    I used independence as an example nothing else.

    What I meant when I said be careful how you answer was because Labour are more than happy to quote what the BoE says if it favours their side of the argument.

    They have form,

  20. That Ipsos MORI poll looks wacky as hell- Labour shouldn’t be going up on the back of the turnout adjustment, and certainly not by 4%. So I wouldn’t read too much into it as far as improving Lib Dem (or Labour, for that matter) fortunes are concerned.

    I still think a Tory minimum wage increase could win them some voters back, although a) Osborne would actually have to see it through first, b) the point about every news story beginning the coverage with “The Tories opposed the introduction of the minimum wage in 1997” is well taken and c) if it fails to improve their VI they’ll be left with Crosby saying “I told you so!” and the media asking why they’re becalmed, neither of which will do anything positive for their election prospects. Plus they’re playing on Labour’s turf now.

    It’s a high risk strategy but given how badly they’re trailing they don’t have a lot to lose, so I think Osborne will probably go for it.

  21. Oh, and that Trafford council by-election is an interesting test case for Wythenshawe and Sale. It looks like Ukip really isn’t making much headway with wealthier Tories up North, so the Ukip exodus is a cost-of-Cameron rather than a cost-of-Thatcher issue and Wythenshawe and Sale is probably secure for Labour unless there’s a ton of Tory->Ukip tactical voting. The tide of purple sweeping across the North may be more patchy than we thought.

    Do we think the Tories should be worried they can’t even hold their safe Manchester wards, or is this just the typical local election punishment a party faces for going into government?

  22. Good Evening all from a flooding south.

    The polls may indeed be suggesting that the Labour Party is more formidable politically than pessimists thought twelve months ago.

  23. GUYMOND
    @”I have a small and experimental amount of funds in a P2P outfit called Funding Circle.

    You seem to be in good company-this is from their website :-

    “In December, the Government announced that it was their intention to lend £20 million to British small businesses through Funding Circle, as part of the Government’s Business Finance Partnership scheme (BFP).”

  24. @ Chris Lane,

    With all due respect to the Labour Party and the titans who bestride its front bench, I think the resilience of Labour’s lead has a lot more to do with the Lib Dems being, from 1981 – 2010, too high.

  25. “I think the resilience of Labour’s lead has a lot more to do with the Lib Dems being, from 1981 – 2010, too high.”

    I have often thought it odd how, from 1987-2001, the Alliance/SLD/Lib Dems were often so high in the polls despite having almost identical policies to Labour.

    Still, I do have to wonder how they can survive long-term in an environment where through coalitions they’re forced to choose their loyalties.

    Were I Clegg, I would reject any coalition at the next election. To coalesce with Cameron again is to become a mini-Conservatives, and to coalesce with Labour will anger the right-wing of the party the way the left already have been, turning the Lib Dems into a party without beliefs or purpose.

  26. Interesting polling about coalition choices – but only that. As, once the UK election is finished, the electorate will have very little influence over what happens thereafter, it does seem somewhat academic. If the polling stays as it is, it’s academic anyway, because Labour will have a comfortable majority.

    Strange speech from Mr Miliband today. I understood from the press it was going to be all about the ‘middle class’ and there was some amusing debate on here about who these were.

    Instead, if the brief sound bites I caught are representative, it was just about something that one would normally expect the Monopolies Commission to deal with – or is that a quango that went on the bonfire?

    I cannot understand why divesting branches has anything to do with what V Cable described as ‘casino banking’. I thought the crash was due to head office types of international banks gambling with ‘products’ such as ‘derivatives’ of which they had not a clue as to their real value, but simply with which they were playing pass the parcel. What do I know though?

    That’s the point surely? Voters have not a clue what breaking up retail arms of banks really could mean – but I suppose it sounds good. I doubt whether the Miliband speech will move VI significantly, if at all, but there is the publicity value, which, for instance, demonstrably helped UKIP when a by-election took place.

    No such thing as bad publicity.

  27. @spearmint

    Even if every Tory and BNP voter in W&SE switched to UKIP it wouldn’t take them near Labour. It would need half the 2010 Lib Dems as well to take UKIP close.

    We did see the Con vote collapse to UKIP in safe Labour (Manchester) wards in 2013, so given that last night’s ward was a marginal and the parliamentary seat is safe Labour, it’s still possible that UKIP might overtake the Conservatives.

    Some talk this week that Cameron may decide to turn a blind eye to local Con/UKIP pacts.

    Unlikely to happen just now, but W&SE would fit the bill for those who want to see UKIP given a free run in safe Labour seats, in return for leaving Con safe/marginal seats alone… just as OE&S fitted the bill as a test-bed for advocates of a Con/LD electoral pact back in the early days of the coalition. The OE&S experiment was a failure, but it did mask the LD meltdown for a while.

  28. Mr Nameless,

    I’d point to five major factors behind the popularity of the Lib Dems in that period-

    (1) The fear of many centre/centre-left voters that Labour hadn’t really changed.

    (2) Paddy Ashdown.

    (3) The Lib Dems differences with Labor on some key passionate issues of the day (electoral reform and the Euro in particular).

    (4) The weakness of the Tories from 1992 onwards meaning that there was almost no competition on the anti-Labour stakes in England and much of Scotland & Wales. If you didn’t like Tony Blair or Labour in general, but also disliked the direction the Tories had taken (and the indiscretions of the Tories in that period) the Lib Dems were the natural party of choice.

  29. Anyone know if ‘c*[email protected] or qu*ngo upsets WordPress? You can guess from this that my TGIF contribution plummeted into its holding cell.

  30. * Labour.

    And (5) the Lib Dems had consolidated a lot of regional support from as early as 1955 onwards in places like the West Country, the western Highlands, central Wales etc., which were hard areas for Labour to break into even under Blair.

  31. @ Mr. Nameless,

    to coalesce with Labour will anger the right-wing of the party the way the left already have been, turning the Lib Dems into a party without beliefs or purpose

    Must… resist…

  32. @MrNameless

    Were I Clegg, I would admit that the Lib Dems are only ever going to be a party of Coalition, admit that they made some mistakes in 2010 as part of the process of adjusting to Government after a long time away, and state that the days of the Lib Dems slavishly supporting other party’s policies when they know they’re wrong are over. He should reposition the Lib Dems by saying his job in Government is to promote good policy, to ensure bad policy doesn’t trouble the public, and to remind the Government that the Opposition sometimes have ideas that have merit and deserve to be considered – and that sometimes they don’t.

    I think that’s what the public wanted from the Lib Dems. Someone to be basically be the grown-ups when the Red and Blue Teams are squabbling like kids. But what Clegg actually did was squabble right along with them. His idea of ‘a new kind of politics’ turned out to be the ‘old kind of politics’ but with more Lib Dems. Nobody wanted that.

  33. @ Howard

    C*sino and any possible gambling ads will go into mod.

  34. So one poll has UKIP on double what another one shows.

    CON 30%(-1%), LAB 34%(-1%), LDEM 12%(+1%), UKIP 18%(+2).

    CON 33%, LAB 40%, LDEM 13%, UKIP 9%.

    Something aint right. Especially when the UKIP support between survation and yougov is exactly the same….

    UKIP are not ‘some other party’ on the ballot paper. Small variations are one thing, but DOUBLE the support…..

  35. Spearmint and the flooding south,
    I think you slap Chris Lane unnecessarily here.We are damn well flooding south.Endless freezing rain.Where agriculture will be after all this is anyone’s guess.But not in some sunny uplands of growing economic resilience that’s for
    Sure.

  36. @ COLIN

    I was aware there was some govt money in Funding Circle but I didn’t know the circumstances – thank you for pointing it out.

    Credit to the government for this (npi). Funding Circle have lent a total of £200M so the govt bit is significant. From the awful Gov.uk website I see that there are 6 other small business funding outfits which have also been favoured.

  37. A party without beliefs or purpose.That sounds like an epithet on a political
    Tombstone .Whose I wonder?

  38. Re government funding of P2P lenders. It’s very bad for investors, because it forces lending rates down. Yet another socialist screwing up of the market (and yes I know it’s a Tory policy – sometimes they have socialist policies).

    Re the polls – remember that a significant amount of UKIP support comes fro ex-Labour and ex-Libs. The biggest number might be Tory, but Labour supporters fed up with their immigration policy, or Libdems looking for a new protest party are also significant.

  39. R Huckle

    Thanks very much. I’ll just try again with excuses to AW.

    Interesting polling about coalition choices – but only that. As, once the UK election is finished, the electorate will have very little influence over what happens thereafter, it does seem somewhat academic. If the polling stays as it is, it’s academic anyway, because Labour will have a comfortable majority.

    Strange speech from Mr Miliband today. I understood from the press it was going to be all about the ‘middle class’ and there was some amusing debate on here about who these were.
    Instead, if the brief sound bites I caught are representative, it was just about something that one would normally expect the Monopolies Commission to deal with – or is that a qu*ngo that went on the bonfire?

    I cannot understand why divesting branches has anything to do with what V Cable described as ‘c*s*ino banking’. I thought the crash was due to head office types of international banks gambling with ‘products’ such as ‘derivatives’ of which they had not a clue as to their real value, but simply with which they were playing pass the parcel. What do I know though?
    That’s the point surely? Voters have not a clue what breaking up retail arms of banks really could mean – but I suppose it sounds good. I doubt whether the Miliband speech will move VI significantly, if at all, but there is the publicity value, which, for instance, demonstrably helped UKIP when a by-election took place.
    No such thing as bad publicity.

  40. Howard ,
    If politics ultimately and regrettably comes down to sound bites ,then the banks
    Will have a day of reckoning ,is not too bad.

  41. If nothing else it keeps the Tories playing to a Labour agenda, adding to the perception of a weak government.

  42. @howard

    I don’t know either, but Vince stands accused of selling off Royal Mail too cheap. Heard a comment that Miliband is injecting uncertainty into the situation, making it more difficult to sell our stake in part-nationalised banks before the election. Not so much about VI more about budgetary wiggle-room?

  43. HOWARD

    @”I cannot understand why divesting branches has anything to do with what V Cable described as ‘c*s*ino banking’.”

    It doesn’t-and Milibands speech didn’t address that issue ( the solution to which is said to be separation of wholesale & retail banking)

    EM was addressing lack of competition in retail lending by saying there aren’t enough high street banks &he would cap market share & somehow or other conjure up two new banks.

    VC’s response was -we have already done the latter.

    Carney observed than capping retail market share in USA was not the panacea EM imagines ( though I am not sure what adverse outcome there he was referring to )

  44. This was what Carney had to say :-

    “……..He said: “Just breaking up an institution does not necessarily create a viable or more intensive competitive structure. It’s not just about one aspect of the market as you need to look at the entire business models and risk profiles.”

    In the United States banks are not allowed to hold more than 10 per cent market share on retail deposits but Carney said the cap actually creates more risk.

    He said: “The rule in and of itself did not prevent the creation of large, systemic financial institutions. One could argue that by limiting retail funding it encouraged more wholesale funding which expanded balance sheets and created risks.”

    moneymarketing.co.uk

  45. @Colin

    I think the dispute is that the BoE Chairman shouldn’t be making speculation about what “one could argue” about the possible impacts of policy announcements outside of his remit. There are plenty of counter arguments to Carney’s position, and it’s a matter for debate, not one for Carney to use the BoE as a bully pulpit over.

  46. I also think he misunderstands how UK politics compares to US politics, and said things that were meant to be more moderate in American English that mean a much firmer position in British English

  47. Substitute US with Canadian in my previous post.

  48. JAYBLANC

    He was appearing before the Treasury Select Committee.

    They asked him the questions and he gave his answer.

    Is it possible for persons summoned before a SC to refuse to answer the questions of Committee members ?

  49. ………….and anyway that was on Wednesday-two days before Miliband’s speech.

1 2 3 4