This morning’s YouGov/Sun daily polling results are here. Topline figures are CON 33%, LAB 38%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 13%. Two noteworthy things in the regular trackers – one, the gap between the people blaming the government for the cuts (29%) and the people blaming Labour (33%) is the lowest YouGov have had so far. Two, people appear to be getting less worried, the 63% of people who say they worry about having enough money to live on is the lowest they’ve shown since the election, so is the 53% who worry about losing their job or having difficulty finding work. Both are presumably a sign of economic optimism continuing to creep slowly upwards.

Meanwhile the twice-weekly Populus poll yesterday had figures of CON 32%, LAB 37%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 15%. Full tabs are here.

590 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 33, LAB 38, LD 10, UKIP 13”

1 2 3 4 5 12
  1. Sorry Alistair, just saw your post.
    Yes, I noticed the East-West difference as well.

  2. Jim Jam,

    Goodness no. To quote Black Mirror, I’m not clever or stupid enough to become a politician.

  3. Mr Nameless

    Before you finally decide, you might want to have a chat to our own Barney Crockett. He seems rather keen on disaffiliation at the moment.

  4. Labour taking a big hit from that Daily Mail story, I see.

    @ Mr. Nameless,

    You never know, you might speak for the silent majority! Think how proud of yourself you’ll be if Better Off In carries the vote. ;)

  5. “It’s part of a trend. They often lazily follow the lead of the gutter press but I’m genuinely stunned at how low they have stooped this time”

    There’s a bit of Beeb-bashing going on here tonight, isn’t there? I’m not saying that all their reporting of the Mail story has been to the very highest standards of journalism, but they are obliged to report on something that was already seeping out into the mainstream media. From what I’ve seen and heard so far, it’s been covered fairly even-handedly even if it’s regrettable that the source of the story is so tainted with tendentiousness.

    Of course there is a huge irony lurking in the way that the Mail have reported this alleged NCCL/PIE/Labour imbroglio. They first trailed it in December then rested it when it didn’t catch fire. They reheated it with added venom a week or so ago and when again it appeared to be spluttering, threw a huge hissy fit that their fiercest foe, the lefty BBC, were failing to give it air time. Imagine that, Dacre pleading with the BBC to cover the story. Why, I ask, would he do that if he didn’t tacitly accept that only the BBC, with its vast viewing and listening audience and high journalistic reputation, could lend his tawdry tale a semblance of credibility and legitimacy?

    Ironic indeed.

  6. Most of the best Labour Politicians barely even dabbles with NOLS in my opinion.
    There where some good Nollies (eg Neil Stewart, Maeve Sherlock) but mostly it was the mediocre but determined that prevailed.

  7. “YouGov/Sun poll tonight – Labour lead up one to six points: CON 33%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 11%”

    Crikey, if the news that Labour are run by a bunch of paedophiles actually adds to their VI, what on earth is going on out there???

  8. “The Conservatives can be an “irresistible political force” if they reassure voters they are on “their side”, Sir John Major has said”

    Now that is utterly brilliant.

  9. CL1945
    ERM ‘debacle’ was at least 3 months *after* the 1992 election, as Chris wrote, so I don’t know what Mrs Beckett had been smoking if that was her story.

    Noting Labour on 39 and a lead of 6, we also had someone looking forward to several leads of only 4, earlier, so I don’t know what he / she was smoking either.

  10. If ole JM says to announce this from soap boxes then that could be the election in the bag.

  11. Nice use of the word ‘reassure’, which suggests that it’s a fact that needs emphasizing. ‘Convince’ suggests there’s work there to be done.

  12. statty

    I think Labour should be bold and declare that they are just in it for what they can get.

  13. RAF,
    I confess,oh the shame,that I read the Mail online,mainly because it is quite
    amusing particularly that Quentin Letts bloke who is a hoot.Having said that I
    Dip into most papers online with the exception of the Telegraph which I get free
    From Waitrose and then find very useful for lighting the fire.

  14. I read the Telegraph to get a balance of views. I find it the best quality of the right-wing papers.

  15. Newsnight has again covered the PIE/NCCL issue. However tonight seems to be much more balanced (effect of the 4 or was it 5 UKPR complainers?). Hopefully as with the EM father story, this will backfire against the DM.

  16. The Times has some decent columnists too. And the Speccie is usually pretty risible but Isabel Hardman is very good.

    @ Jim Jam,

    Roy Hattersley and Tom Watson, too.

  17. Roy Hattersley took the youth section out of a Soviet affiliate, if I recall. As a latter-day Hattersleyite, I will follow his example where possible!

  18. Stay and fight Nameless !

    Laura K has been doing some trawling through the NCCL archive, but can’t have found much cos they didn’t shout ‘scoop !’ on Newsnight.

    l still think that the outcome of the next GE will depend primarily on the destination of ex-LDs , l know it was a long time ago but the last regional poll for the South West saw Labour doing well even in their least favoured area.

  19. Mr Nameless,
    I actually like the Telegraph.I always read it before I light the fire with it.

  20. Sturdygun v Ma-taunt

    No debate. Do West of Scotland folk like these displays of…female machismo? Just wondering who’s impressed.

  21. I can’t believe the stupidity of the Daily Mail story. They know the (let’s just say) ‘home team’ (let’s just say) ‘exceedingly high ranking’ folks involved in the real thing rather than ‘failing to condemn on a civil liberties platform’ stuff, and how carefully that stone is being kept from being turned by focusing on aged media celebrities instead. Do they really want to lance the boil their own people have been so carefully dressing? I doubt we can say more on this site and I’m surprised it’s being stoked up.

  22. Statgeek

    Interruptitists rule!

  23. @ Mr. Nameless
    “I read the Telegraph to get a balance of views.”

    Is that a balance between v. right-wing and not-quite-so-v.right-wing views?

  24. Crossbatt – I think the lack of movement is due to all time low interest and cynicism in politics.

    As for Harman – I’m surprised the BBC have given minimal coverage to other issues in the press that I would have thought were relevant, such as the very specific cuts to flood protection in those towns flooded recently. Not just vague x amount cut by EA but specific projects in specific towns halted in 2011.

    Then there was today’s Times front page which had a Tory MP supposedly committing 100k housing benefit fraud. That seems rather serious. Minimal coverage compared to Harman.

    I also read a BBC article today about house price increases and increasing mortgages that was hardly balanced. It was pumping it up, with many positive words and phrases to describe them such as recovering and enjoying pleasing progress. Getting a bid fed up of that really. It’s not great for the young or long term society.

  25. @Ann In Wales


    I read the Indy, the Guardian and the Telegraph – all online. I used to read the Times also before it disappeared beyond the paywall.

  26. There are plenty on the Right who feel that Harman doesn’t have as much to answer as the Mail thinks she has, if indeed anything. Andrew Pierce from the Mail did sound rather desperate when he was interviewed on the radio earlier. Probably the Conservatives know that this doesn’t have the legs on it that they might privately like, and that banging on about it wouldn’t do them much good. Better for them to put the boot into Labour’s actual policies rather than personalities, though at the moment the polls aren’t generally too bad for Labour at all.

  27. I would like yo hear bit more from Labour about the Daily Mail being Adolf Hitler’s favourite British newspaper!

  28. I’m almost able to figure out the party affiliation of one or two posters…

  29. Bill Patrick

    “I’m almost able to figure out the party affiliation of one or two posters…”

    Well done! As we were told tonight “‘We’re not genetically programmed in [that part of the UK that you live in] to make political decisions'”, so achieving that level of decision making is truly remarkable!

  30. couper2802 (fpt)

    The question for me is ‘Why is this news now?’ There is nothing new in this; NCCLs association with PIE has been known about for decades. That Labour folk were in NCCL has been known about for decades. What ‘new’ information has been discovered?

    I suspect most of the media agree with you, which is why so few of them picked up on the story at first. There was nothing new in this ‘news’ and there had been previous attempts to make a thing out of it, which had failed. Most of the rest of the media just thought that Dacre had one of his brain-farts on a slow news day and it would be forgotten in a few days.

    This also explains Harman’s reluctance to respond because that would have helped prolong the story and give the excuse for other outlets to report it. She still could have been a bit nimbler though, when it became clear that what the DM was going to do what it does when it’s in a hole – keep digging (as we saw with Miliband Snr).

    The BBC is so keen not to be accused of being ‘left-wing’ at the moment that it has stupidly encouraged the non-story. Chasing after the news agenda set by the London press just reveals the lack of self-confidence in their own news values there appears to be there at the moment. And of course pandering to the Mail won’t mean there will be any friendlier treatment of the BBC from them – it just gives the rather sad impression of a bullied child sucking up to his oppressors.

    It wouldn’t surprise me to see some polling on this in the next day or so. The Sun is always a bit torn commissioning this sort of thing, between putting the boot into Labour and into the Mail group. But in the end internecine warfare always wins. Though of course the people who really hate the Daily Mail are the Mail on Sunday.

    Incidentally if you want to see the true power of the press, Private Eye forced the resignation of the Chief Minister of Guernsey today.

  31. Six points as usual. Boring stuff. By the way, this post comes to you from inside a nightclub, which goes to show how bleeding boring it is!

  32. @Syzygy

    The “sale” of health information isn’t as black and white as you represent. I have no knowledge of the specific arrangements you refer to, but modern epidemiological research relies on access to this sort of information. And some US insurance giants fund large quantities of such research.

  33. @Roger Mex

    A story doesn’t need to have any truth to it to be important, of course. It just needs to be a good story. The problem with the Mail’s “revelations” is that it is “backstory” – so it has an essential lack of action, and you can’t easily turn backstory into living, breathing, drama. Dacre, however, is doing his best by framing everything Harman et al say to suggest they were previously hiding the facts, and so on.

    I think it’s too early to say how damaging this is. Any Labour candidate in 2015, if they have ever had dealings with NCCL or Liberty, however innocuous, however recent, will need to have cast iron rebuttals ready for any dirt thrown at them by their opponents.

    I saw the technique used by the Tory Party in Nottingham South back in the 80’s – entirely spurious paedophile accusations were leafleted at the last minute against the Labour candidate, the Tory candidate – one Martin Brandon-Bravo – took the seat by a couple of hundred votes. The Mail is preparing the ground for a slurry-spreader of an election campaign. They think this election is too important to lose.

  34. Unite are pushing for a ”no coalitions” commitment from Labour too. At this rate everyone will be at it. Could get awkward if nobody secures an OM next time.

  35. @SYZYGY

    The relationship was concluded 5 years after Harman got involved (she joined in 78, the pesos got booted out in 83), rather than 4 years before. There were only about 12 full time staff, of which as I understand HH was one, so that there are questions for her to answers does seem reasonable.

    What does puzzle me is why everyone is going in hard and heavy on HH rather than Patricia Hewitt, when there seems to be something of a paper trail to Hewitt.

    Back to polling – barring some sensational new development, I can’t see this having much effect on VI – I think HH simply isn’t high profile enough for the bloke on the street to know who she is.

  36. I am not surprised by the Daily Mail – the attempts to blacken Harriet Harman’s reputation by dragging up stuff from thirty years ago is pretty par for the course.

    The Daily Mail was quite supportive of Lord Rennard recently and did not call for him to apologise, preferring to put the blame on the leadership of the Lib Dems. Presumably they felt that the accusers must be considered unreliable witnesses because they were all women intent on having careers rather then doing their proper job as housewives and mothers!

    I am, however both surprised and disappointed by the BBC. For many years I have looked to the BBC to offer me high quality journalism.

    The BBC is oftened accused of bias – my own feeling is that they tend to appear to be anti-government regardless of which party is in power. This is probably natural as they are criticising actions and decisions rather than opinions – and it is the govement of the day that acts and makes the decisions.

    My disappointment with the BBC is over two appallingly bad pieces of journalism. The unchecked and incorrect allegations against Lord McAlpine and giving substance to a highly political piece of non-news trying to associate Harriet Harman with paedophilia.

    I wonder if it is some ill-judged attempt to address the previous suggestions of bias – in the same way some think a football referee may give a soft penalty to one side when they have made a mistake that advantaged the opposition. To quote my now departed mother, two wrongs do not make a right!

    I really do hope the BBC can sort itself out. I do not need more sensationalism or opinion – more than anything I want to be given the information I need to make my own mind up!

  37. KeithP

    I’m surprised by the number of people posting about the “No Coalition” on here.

    Surely such posts about Better Together should be restricted to a Saltire thread?

  38. ALISTER1948
    Thanks for the mention in dispatches, though you later corrected it to credit Bill Patrick.
    My previous posts have tended to this prediction, but mainly to point out – on the basis of involvement in campaigning in the West Country – the reasons why the stability in Labour’s 38% and the lack of churn apparent in it, appear likely to persist. The LDs who defected did so as social democrats and more generally as wanting the status quo ante, in terms of the NHS and eductional systems, and in support for reform or the EU from within.

  39. BBC journalists devote themselves to dredging the archives. They come up with nothing noteworthy, but manage to repeat the PIE/NCCL/Harriet Harman linkage every few minutes throughout their three-hour Today programme.

  40. Ian from Lichfield

    That’s your opinion and that of some others on here. For the sake of balance (difficult on a site where there are far more left leaning posters than right) I support the Daily Mail for raising the issue and belatedly the BBC for its coverage which I thought eminently fair once it recognised there was an issue. I see Tom Watson is asking for an inquiry into possible Government funding of PIE during the 70’s

    On polling it remains rather boring with the Labour lead at the 5-6 level.

  41. Ann in Wales

    Glad to see you buy the Telegraph, excellent newspaper.

  42. TOH

    R4 this morning interviewed one of the PIE “officials” ( I think he had served a sentence in the past).

    He said that none of the three politicians DM named supported PIE in any way-but they made no attempt to “rock the boat” at NCCL for fear of their jobs.

    “The boat” he was talking about was the aggressive libertarian campaigns at the time for sexual freedoms. He named the Gay Rights movement as something which no one in NCCL would have wanted to speak against.

    Yesterday on DP, a feminist campaigner ( and supporter of HH) criticised HH & the others for being part of a conspiracy of silence which swept all those 70s “sexual freedom” campaigns into one unchallengeable grouping. She said that this allowed “child rapists” to argue for an age of consent of 10 years , on the spurious ground that this liberated children’s sexual rights.

    The 70s is certainly coming back to haunt a few individuals. Of course those who suffered in the name of those “freedoms” have been haunted for decades.

  43. Colin

    As you usually do, you have expressed my own feelings on the matter.

    The Telegraph have an interesting angle on the story this morning.

  44. TOH


    the DT online is telling me I have exceeded my monthly “allowance”-looks like a paywall of sorts.

  45. TOH,
    I actually get the Telegraph free from Waitrose,but I always find it informative
    With some excellent articles on all subjects.Interesting article in support of
    HH in the Times today.

  46. Re Harman – What has this got to do with polling or indeed politics even?

  47. On that, can we try and steer away from the two-minute hate against the Daily Mail (however loathsome they are, this isn’t the place to vent your dislike of them), whether the allegations are fair or not etc, and stick to any impact people think it may have on public opinion or polling.

  48. Well there is a view that this might shift opinions on Harman and Labour – We know it boosted Ed’s polling when he went all Spartacus over his dad.

    Plus there’s Owen Jones’ petition for the Daily Mail to stop publishing rather creepy articles about 12 year olds in bikinis, which has gathered a fair amount of momentum.

    Still, the polls we’ve had since the story broke haven’t shown any shift in opinions as far as we can see. If it doesn’t do anything in a couple of days it might be worth dropping the matter on here.

  49. @ Colin,

    I’m not sure why anyone would or should be upset Harman failed to oppose the gay rights movement? It’s the people who did speak against it who have something to apologise for.

1 2 3 4 5 12