YouGov Welsh poll

ITV Wales has a new YouGov poll of Welsh voting intentions out today, summarised by Roger Scully here. The various different VIs, with changes from December’s poll, are as follows:

Westminster VI: CON 22%(+1), LAB 47%(+1), LD 7%(-1), Plaid 11%(-1), UKIP 9%(-1)
Welsh Assembly (Const): CON 21%(+2), LAB 42%(-1), LD 9%(nc), Plaid 19%(-1), UKIP 5%(-2)
Welsh Assembly (Reg): CON 19%(nc), LAB 39%(-1), LD 9%(nc), Plaid 17%(+2), UKIP 10%(nc)
European: CON 17%(-3), LAB 39%(-2), LDEM 7%(-1), Plaid 12%(-1), UKIP 18%(+5)

Roger calculates that if repeated at a Welsh Assembly election Labour would retain 30 seats, so still the tinest whisper short of an overall majority, and UKIP would enter the Assembly for the first time with 5 seats. If the European election intentions were repeated in May Labour would return two MEPs, the Conservatives and UKIP one each, meaning Plaid would lose out.


440 Responses to “YouGov Welsh poll”

1 7 8 9
  1. @Chatterclass

    Some are. The official line is that the Queen would remain.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/425925/Scots-demand-vote-on-keeping-the-Queen

    I imagine it wouldn’t be long after, unless there’s some really good tourism revenue to be had.

    Report comment

  2. I hasten to point out that (despite heading out to Bowie’s pad for his party) I wasn’t suggesting that Roger Mexico was “a broad” in the American sense of the term.

    Report comment

  3. Before everyone gets too excited, it’s worth pointing out that Survation are new to polling in That Place, having only done one before and that earlier in this month. There may also be the problem with online polls of certain groups being over-represented in the panel – something we normally see regarding UKIP.

    However one little thing did strike me. the last Survation poll showed:

    Yes 32%, No 52%, Undecided 16%.

    http://survation.com/2014/02/new-polling-on-scottish-independence-what-if-conservative-fortunes-improved

    But asked Now, imagine you knew the Conservative Party was expected to win a majority at the next UK General Election in 2015 and be in power in the UK for the next 15 years. Would this affect how you would vote, or not, in the Scottish independence referendum this year?, the figures changed to:

    Yes 38%, No 47%, Undecided 16%.

    And what are the figures reported on PB for tomorrow’s poll?:

    Yes 38%, No 47%, Undecided 16%.

    Obviously the united Westminster front convinced the Scots that there would be 15 years of Conservative rule, whoever got elected.

    As I said I would treat this with a bit of caution – though I also found the movement in Statgeek’s figures interesting – but I suspect it will be fun watching the reaction among the political classes to this apparent narrowing of the responses. The No camp always has the problem of being likely to split into warring factions and, as we saw with the floods, for some people it’s never too early to start the blame game.

    Report comment

  4. @Roger

    “it will be fun watching the reaction among the political classes”

    Indeed. Nothing better than panic in government (North or South). If it shakes the people and system up a little, it’s generally good for the plebs (real people; not imagined Police people).

    Report comment

  5. Roger Mexico

    Re Survation

    After their first foray into this field, Survation were somewhat excoriated by John Curtice for their methodology. To their credit, they promptly accepted the criticisms and said they intended to introduce changes.

    As always, we need to see the tables to see what the effects of these might be.

    Report comment

  6. You have to feel sorry for Anthony. He does his damndest to ensure that threads aren’t Alba-polluted – then along come polls and those on a polling site insist on discussing them!

    Report comment

  7. If the Scots are demanding a referendum on the monarchy, as Statgeek’s link suggests, it is no more that a demonstration of Wells’ Law “People will always say they want a referendum on everything”.

    Actually, despite Peter Oborne’s mischievous piece, because the Queen is already separately Queen of Scotland, so even if Cameron forced her to abdicate that, it would just pass on the next Windsor along and so on till they found one who would take the job. What I wouldn’t recommend is going back to the Stuarts. Despite Oborne’s infatuation with the Duchess of Alba, following the actual line of Jacobite succession

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz,_Duke_of_Bavaria#Succession_rights

    would only end up with another Union of the Crowns. With Liechtenstein.

    Report comment

  8. I think that Bully, Bluff and Bluster would be a good name for a group.

    Of course, any immediate polling reaction will be based only on emotion: in September we will see 60/40, or my name’s not Robert the Bruce.**

    [** Fancy getting yer name mixed up. That DJ should have called himself Ken the Bruce.]]

    Report comment

  9. I shan’t be addressing the West Lothian and associated areas question.

    But does anyone know how broadly European polling tends to correlate to local authority voting if they’re held together, as this year? Obviously nobody polls for local elections because they’re rather dull.

    Report comment

  10. Does anyone have a working link to toadys YouGov poll? The one on the YouGov site seems to have a problem.

    Report comment

  11. Good Morning All.

    If Cameron lost the Union would he resign as PM?
    That leaves aside the other matter, on which my ‘hero’ Tony N was featuring yesterday, to my disgust.

    What, I wonder, would be the polling effects of a Yes vote on the UK Parliament intentions for next year’s GE?

    Report comment

  12. Do feel free to discuss the two new Scottish polls – I wanted to have a post up this morning, but I’m waiting for Survation to put up some tables (or for John Curtice to post) to see if they have shifted their weightings and if we have any confirmation of the effect.

    Report comment

  13. COLIN GREEN
    @”Does anyone have a working link to toadys YouGov poll? The one on the YouGov site seems to have a problem.”

    Its very annoying-the one time there is some real change & you can’t see the data.

    Hopefully they will fix it soon ?

    Report comment

  14. I wonder if the total collapse of Blair’s credibility will shut up the Blairite wing (and help Miliband)? Or will it impact Lab’s VI? I think Ed has successfully detached himself, don’t you think?

    Wonder what other juicy revelations await at the trial?

    Report comment

  15. Interesting data on pay. Chief Economist at Henderson has smoothed bonus elements out and concludes that Private Sector pay was up 2.1%pa in December .
    This ties with Markit’s monthly survey and BoE Agents suggesting Private Sector Pay this year is expected to rise by 2.4%
    The Markit survey on households gives another indicator that households are more positive about their finances.

    I wonder if the revelation about funding limits for Labour’s flagship employment guarantee will impact VI/
    Probably not-but its another reminder that come the all important GE Campaign, Labour will need much more detail & depth to their fiscal policies.

    Report comment

  16. @ NickP

    Re Blair advice. I don’t expect he even considered that any private advice during a telephone conversation would end up being talked about in a court. It was pretty innocuous stuff anyway, as it was known that Blair was friendly with various people in the media.

    If you look at some of the press at the moment it is quite interesting. There is some not so subtle pressure being applied by some newspapers, reminding leading politicians that they will not accept state regulation of the media. At the moment regulation of the media has been put on hold, presumably because of current court cases and the election next year.

    Report comment

  17. @NickP.

    I don’t think AuntieBlairGate will make much difference to anything. Cameron is probably breathing slightly easier knowing that he’s not the only politician associated with the Brookses as a “personal friend”. And it may remind people that Rebekah Brooks was actually more of a Labour figure than a Tory one (at least when the butts that needed kissing wore red ties rather than blue ones).

    But honestly, I don’t think many people care much about the saga anymore. I think it is becoming more of a Westminster Village issue as time goes on.

    I agree that Miliband and the current Labour leadership have nothing to fear from it and it won’t affect Labour VI.

    @Colin,

    I think there is a well-concealed tension in the Labour party between the “go-for-it” left who genuinely don’t believe in austerity and want to feed the public desire for spending, and the “hang-on-a-sec” right who still have concerns about the deficit and want to try and retain the “prudent and responsible” mantle.

    I think the overreaching desire for victory should keep those divisions in check, but there does seem to be a pattern of one hand announcing a new commitment and the other hand immediately announcing caution and corollaries about it. And of course, compared to the Tories and LDs, they are spectacularly united.

    Report comment

  18. @colin – “The Markit survey on households gives another indicator that households are more positive about their finances.”

    Strictly speaking, they are less negative about their finances, which according to this, are still declining, and slightly less positive about their future finances, where they are still anticipating growth, but with a significant fall since last month.

    This would all be consistent with the Henderson’s snapshot of earnings, which are still growing either fractionally about inflation or well below inflation, depending on which measure you take.

    In general, for most owner occupiers, RPI will be the more relevant measure, as this includes mortgage and council tax costs, and social housing rents also rise in line with RPI, not CPI, so I don’t really think we can start to say that consumers are getting any better off.

    Indeed, the evidence from the retail sector suggests that consumers are struggling, with the fastest rate of retail discounting in the last couple of months ever recorded, apparently. Other surveys have suggested that businesses are registering increasing input cost inflation, yet the decline in CPI inflation suggests end prices are being squeezed, presumably indicating weak demand.

    Report comment

  19. r huckle

    you thought the suggestion to set up a “Hutton” inquiry to effectively get him/her off the hook was pretty innocuous?

    Probably won’t have any discernible VI effect though. Just thought it might take any pressure off from that side of the Party.

    Report comment

  20. I’ve noticed a minor problem with accessing the YouGov Archive recently that it sometimes comes up with the dataset you click on being not found. However if you try again (even straight away) it does work. I think it’s a timing thing.

    Report comment

  21. ChrisLane1945,

    There really isn’t a precedent for a prime minister losing as important a referendum as this – although Callaghan’s government ‘losing’ the referendum in 1979 did it irreparable harm by cutting off Nationalist support in the HoC.

    The only referenda that would have resulted in this big a change in the status of the UK were the AV Referendum and the EEC Referendum in ’75. Both were won by the prime minister’s side, so we don’t know what would have happened otherwise. I suspect Cameron would not have resigned had AV gone through, nor Wilson had Britain voted to leave Europe, but then that’s not on the scale of losing a third of the country’s land and a tenth of its population.

    For the record, I don’t think it’s a resigning matter. He agreed to a referendum and doesn’t head the Better Together campaign, so if it passes then it’s none of his business, although his reputation may get a knock.

    For the same reason, I doubt Alex Salmond will resign if it’s a no, nor should he.

    Report comment

  22. Thanks Anthony

    Your’s works fine-but from the website still no good. ??

    Report comment

  23. NEILA

    Thanks.

    They will need to decide where they are come the campaign-or it will be an open goal.

    Report comment

  24. ALEC

    I read the Markit Report &n note their chosen headline :-

    “UK households report positive financial outlook for first time in over five years ”

    Nuance that as you wish.

    Report comment

  25. Markit’s Composite Euro Zone PMIs for Jan very mixed :-

    ““A dip in the eurozone PMI provides a reminder that
    the region?s recovery continues to be uneven and
    fragile. The slight easing in growth is disappointing,
    but it?s too early to read too much into one month?s
    data, especially as the rate of growth of new orders
    picked up to its highest since mid-2011. Looking at
    the latest two months as a whole, the PMI suggests
    the region is on course to see GDP expand by up to
    0.5% in the first quarter, which would be the
    strongest growth for three years.
    “Growth continued to be led by Germany, which
    contrasts with a worrying renewed downturn in
    France, where malaise in the domestic economy is
    offsetting better export performance and suggests
    there is a risk of the French economy contracting
    again in the first quarter. Germany, on the other
    hand, is likely to see GDP increase by as much as
    0.7%. The „periphery? is meanwhile enjoying its best
    period of growth since early-2011, which should
    help drive a more broad-based and sustainable
    expansion as we move through 2014.
    “Unemployment looks set to remain a worry, as
    companies report ongoing pressure to keep
    headcounts down to reduce costs and boost
    competitiveness. Prices also continue to fall, albeit
    at the slowest rate for almost two years, as
    companies could often only generate sales via
    discounting.”

    Markit

    Report comment

  26. “I think there is a well-concealed tension in the Labour party between the “go-for-it” left who genuinely don’t believe in austerity and want to feed the public desire for spending, and the “hang-on-a-sec” right who still have concerns about the deficit and want to try and retain the “prudent and responsible” mantle.”

    I think all parties have this to a degree. The Conservatives have disagreements between the hard right and the libertarians, and UKIP have a mix of hardcore libertarians and far-right nationalists.

    Take this to its extremes and you get weird chimera parties like Respect, who are split between the ultra-left and Islamists.

    What underpins it in all parties seems to be a fundamental difference in intentions between those who wants to modify aspects of society and those who want to completely restructure it.

    In Labour’s case it’s a struggle between those who think the Labour Party is a gradualist force for making Britain into a socialist nation, and those who want to rebalance the mixed economy to be as equal as possible, and think the former group are unrealistic.

    I’d count myself more a member of the “hang-on-a-sec” group, but I don’t consider myself on the right of the party as it means today (although right-wing in the sense of Denis Healey and Roy Hattersley would be about right).

    The debate seems more between pragmatists and idealists (extendable to all parties) than left and right. And like all the woolly people who put “centre-” before their political position, I think the right place to stand is somewhere in between.

    Report comment

  27. MRNAMELESS

    @” pragmatists and idealists”

    A different view might suggest Realists & Fantasists.

    More kindly-those who recognise that endless debt is not sustainable, but who nevertheless have different spending priorities to the Government-and those who reject the constraints of debt, or concerns about it.

    In terms of Welfare spending , the difference between the two is that the former recognises the need to answer the question-which shall the State give money to ?”, and the latter don’t .

    Report comment

  28. Colin

    You DO enjoy setting up these false dichotomies don’t you.

    Point me towards ANYONE in mainstream politics who “rejects the constraints of debt or concerns about it.”

    Despite Osborne’s political genius in coining the “Deficit Denier” tag, the argument was NEVER about whether debt matters or not. It was about the best way to manage the reining in of our debt. If grown up people on here cannot accept that premise, what hope is there for a sensible debate in the wider population?

    Report comment

  29. LEFTY

    I don’t know the Labour Parliamentary ranks well enough to answer. And whilst I grant you I cannot point to individuals now-now is not when the tension will show I feel.

    In Government, I think EM will face people on his own benches , and trades union pressure to put their pet spending priorities ahead of deficit reduction.

    Report comment

  30. “A different view might suggest Realists & Fantasists.”

    Not exactly an objective point of view, though. And since the UK government has been continuously in debt since the Napoleonic Wars your assertion that ‘endless debt is not sustainable’ itself seems unsustainable.

    Report comment

  31. @ nickp

    “r huckle

    you thought the suggestion to set up a “Hutton” inquiry to effectively get him/her off the hook was pretty innocuous? ”

    Yes it was, because News International had already set up their own independent inquiry to look at the issues they were facing. So I think Blair was only telling them what they were already doing. Although I am going by memory of what was reported in the media a few years back.

    Report comment

  32. @ Leftylambton

    You issued an effective challenge asking for information and you received an information-free response!

    Report comment

  33. New thread

    Report comment

  34. ” And like all the woolly people who put “centre-” before their political position, I think the right place to stand is somewhere in between.”

    Yes: me and the girls are sort of centre-centre.

    Re Blair: wotta bleedin’ cheek to suggest an enquiry that would cost yet more millions, just to get rich tossers off the hook.

    Report comment

  35. Lefty

    Just a thought-didn’t Ed Balls refuse to accept that there was a structural deficit prior to 2010?

    A slightly technical version of my point-but perhaps no less significant for that.

    Report comment

  36. @ Colin,

    To be fair, George Osborne refused to accept there was a structural deficit prior to 2008.

    Which suggests that either a) there wasn’t one or b) like transparency, structural deficits are something people only care about when it becomes politically convenient.

    Report comment

  37. Scottish poll …

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/20/scottish-independence-currency-union-warning-backfires

    includes change of methodology but interesting if it repeats!

    Report comment

  38. @COLIN

    “Lefty

    Just a thought-didn’t Ed Balls refuse to accept that there was a structural deficit prior to 2010?

    A slightly technical version of my point-but perhaps no less significant for that.”

    ———-

    Well, it’s not that significant in terms of what you were talking about, which was deficit denial.

    Balls wasn’t denying there’s a deficit. He was just saying he didn’t think it had to be a longer-term deficit. Austerity of course, has seen an extending of the period of deficit…

    But I’d be surprised if you didn’t know that…

    Report comment

1 7 8 9