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 6 7 8 9 10 12
  1. HOWARD

    I think most people assume the system is broken, & abused.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26024375

    I think they believe that our immigration “authorities” lost control of it & have no idea how to manage it-spending most of their time in whatever room hides the mountain of cardboard boxes which constitutes their filing system.

    That’s pretty much what I believe anyway.

  2. Robin

    many who post here would agree with and you may be right, but I don’t think so. If you read my little discussion with Alec above you will see some of the reasoning behind my disagreement.

  3. ROBIN

    @” I think I’ve identified something that is potentially *very* worrying for the Tories.”

    How exciting !

    We haven’t had one of those for …ooh…minutes !

  4. Colin

    Re immigration, Snap!

  5. “LAB now clear betting favourite to secure most votes in May Euros Last year UKIP were odds-on” – Mike Smithson.

    If Labour can be credited with one electoral trick recently it’s that their Wythenshawe victory threw a brick wall in front of UKIP’s momentum.

  6. Robin
    EU elections a seismic event? You may be right, but I don’t think you will be. I suppose if it led to a unofficial pact between some Cons and UKIP, that could have an effect, but I do wonder if that would actually save seats or even be detrimental to doing so. In any event, are not most of the anti EU Cons in ultra-safe seats anyway? Anybody know of an analysis written on that (I mean the seats)?

  7. “Bloke: Oi mate! Give us some change yeah?
    Me: Are those Dr Dre headphones you’re wearing?
    Bloke proceeds to walk/run away muttering swear words. ”

    Facebook- from a grandson in London. :-)

  8. Colin
    Yes I was aware about the students, but my cases cited were not about tertiary education and not about defrauding the system either, but the lack of reporter investigation on those cases about people who were here – legally. Is it not intriguing to anyone about those? How were they here legally?

    Regarding the cardboard boxes, I am sure you are right, as there do not seem to be many automated government systems to write home about, are there?

  9. @Colin

    Until recently, Tory VI has correlated extremely strongly with government approval. The break in that correlation seems pretty significant to me.

    @Howard

    I agree the Euro elections probably won’t be seismic, but it’s not impossible for Con-UKIP switching to be sufficiently large that it alters the electoral landscape. I’m pretty sure that UKIP suffer from the typical small party problem with potential voters not believing they have a chance of being elected. If the Euro elections were sufficiently dramatic to look like a UKIP breakthrough, it might badly damage the Tories.

  10. HOWARD

    I don’t really follow.

    If the system is completely bust & subject to abuse, and the authorities have no idea who is here or why,asking the question ” why is that person here ” is completely pointless.

    The answer is probably-because he/she came here & no one knew.

  11. @ Howard,

    David Nuttall and Jacob Rees-Mogg are in tight marginals. I’m sure there are many others; the 2010 Tory intake is heavily Eurosceptic and naturally contains most of the MPs in the most marginal seats.

  12. @Colin – forgive my ignorance, but what are ‘headphones’?

  13. If anyone’s interested in the ongoing NOLS saga, Oxford Labour Club has just voted 19-6 to disaffiliate from Labour Students. This leaves York, Salford, Hull, Leeds, UCL, Sheffield, Sheff. Hallam, Warwick, UWE and UWS still to vote.

    Personally I’m convinced that SLS are a lost cause. The people I’ve spoken to so far are fairly livid about their treatment and all the major opinion formers are either for disaffiliation or they’re undeclared.

    Still, I’ve used all my journalistic skill (ha!) and written a one-minute speech for the meeting on Wednesday, in which I get to stand up and be yelled at. I do rather like this line, though:

    “Few generals have ever won wars by cutting their own supply lines even if their field marshals seemed little better than the enemy.”

    Still, it’s a token gesture. As Paul would say, my side is doooomed.

  14. There’s been a few screamers here today.

    Euro elections being seismic!

    Best of the lot.

  15. “Rosieanddaisie

    Sorry to offend you, try “have” instead of “of”. ”

    Its you who needs to try that Howard – I already do, where appropriate.

    And I wasn’t offended – just sheeply docked.

  16. @ Mr. Nameless,

    Good for you. It takes a lot of courage to stand up and be yelled at.

    If you do vote to disaffiliate, has there been any talk of forming an alternative organisation? With five or six universities together you guys would have some clout, and you might be able to lure a few more groups out of NOLS (or rNOLS, as I suppose we’ll have to start calling it).

  17. @ R & D
    “sheeply docked.”

    V. Funny. It would make a good name for a poster.

    I’m glad you are back to making jokes. Yesterday you actually said something (unmemorable) about polling – v. disconcerting. Bit like reading an article in the Daily Mail praising Ed Balls.

  18. @Colin

    “Feel free-but even if today’s OP result is exactly the same as that of the GE-you will not be cable to prove any connection between the two.”

    I agree with that but I wasn’t referring to daily opinion polls, I was alluding to two opinion polls on the same subject, one conducted two and a half years ago and the other yesterday. They were both conducted by reputable pollsters and painted broadly the same picture. My view is that they both provide important clues to what we’re currently seeing in terms of political opinion and voting behaviour.

    That said, like all opinion polls, you’re perfectly at liberty to ignore or discount their findings.

  19. Robin,

    The disconnect between approval rating improvement and Con/LD VI is a double edged sword.

    Worrying yes but also gives hope.

    We know that real earnings have not been rising as GDP has increased and polling has shown many voters either don’t think growth is real and/or that it has not reached them.

    There will be a group who acknowledge the improving Economy but who as yet will not switch allegiance (back in most cases) to one of the Governing parties from WV/DK in the main.

    The Tories will feel that as real earnings rise some of these reluctant approvers will become supporters.

    The alternate view of course (implied by you perhaps) is that these voters minds are entrenched and even if they now approve of the Government they won’t switch back.

    FWIW – my view is that many if not most 2010 Tory identifiers currently DK/WV will end up Con at the GE but that getting enough Lab-Con switchers is unlikely.

    I think it was Roger Mexico who said a few weeks back that if a 2010 LD had not yet switched and was DK/WV it was most likely they would end up back with the LDs as none of the others had attracted them – this could give them 2-3% on their VI although I have not checked the tables.

  20. @RnD :)

  21. Immigration to the UK is apparently 30% higher at 212,000 people in the latest stats.

    Don’t see a way for the government to get immigration down to tens of thousands by May 2015, as they promised. As far as I see it, governments have very little control over immigration, unless they take away the rights of many people to come to the UK, stop spouses of UK citizens coming here, reduce work/student visas etc.

  22. @Alec
    “There’ve been a few screamers here tody…”

    Actally this is my only post. Who are the others?

  23. It’s noteworthy that even after fours years’ worth of government efforts to reduce non-EU immigration, it still accounts for well over half the net total. I suspect that isn’t what most UKIP voters would assume: it would be interesting to see polling evidence on this.

  24. Rosieanddaisie

    “Sheeply Docked” – that’s priceless!

  25. @JimJam

    I suppose we’re all speculating really and it won’t be until they start tipping out those ballot boxes on a Thursday night in May 2015 that any of us will get to know if our solemn predictions have turned out to be true. That said, there is some data available to inform our opinions; recent elections, opinion polls, even face-to-face contact with voters for some of us, and those of us who try to be sensible about our speculating do try and base what we say on what we think this data tells us. I know you’re one of them and I’d like to think I am too, although I’m as aware as anyone of the dangers of lapsing into wishful thinking and predicting what we want to see happen rather than what is likely to transpire.

    It is on that basis that I’m not ruling anything out or in for May 2015, but I do think the current polls are intriguing in their inelasticity and relative imperviousness to quite significant economic and political events. I don’t fully understand the reasons, if I’m honest, but voters aren’t behaving in predictable ways and I’m always keen to understand why that might be the case. The “toxicity” levels of the main parties as measured by the IPPR/You Gov and Ipsos/Mori polls may be giving us clues and I’d be fascinated to know what it is about the Tory “brand” that repels a lot of voters. I’ve had some doorstep conversations that have offered some explanation but I’d be really interested to know what issues lie behind the answer when someone says that they would never contemplate voting Conservative.

    I know for a fact that it’s a question that is exercising the minds of many thinking Conservatives too. They’re not ignoring its significance at all and they are absolutely right not to do so. If the polls are right, and this toxicity issue doesn’t go away, then it’s feasible that the Government could preside over a booming economy and just not enough people, even in those circumstances, can bring themselves to vote for them.

  26. A teacher goes onto the sex offenders register for seducing a pupil.

    Guess how the DM reports it.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2568580/Woman-schoolteacher-love-schoolboy-led-bed-narrowly-dodges-jail-sentence.html

  27. Sorry if this has been posted, chewed and spat out:

    http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/news/file/independence_polling_-__nov_2013_to_feb_2014.pdf

    …but it can be now, if not.

  28. McStattmeister

    That is an illegal link on a non-satire thread and I therefore cannot read it.

    What’s it say?

  29. Colin
    Just came in, thanks for your reply. Yes, I see what you mean. What – you mean it has been known for that long a time that we didn’t know that people were here without permission, so that’s why the journalists did not make an issue of it to look into? I must admit I did not know that. Was there a time when we did know who was here and whether they had a right to be so, I wonder? When did it change?

    Let me explain my naivety; as you know I am an ex-pat returned from the Netherlands. There, as indeed I believe in most of northern european countries, you have to be registered both with the local council and with the immigration service if you are staying more than 3 months and if you are an EU citizen. For non-EU, the arrangements are stricter. Without those documents, you are snookered. You can’t get benefits, a job, anything basically.

    Not only that, but the rules on being able to stay are as strict as apparently our government recently discovered they are allowed to be here. If you lose your job and are not apparently trying to get one, you will be asked to leave. This is not deportation, but as you lose all benefits, it may as well be. Belgium (has the same system) has just told about 500 such people to ‘get lost’.

    Everyone (that means everyone) in the country has to be registered with their local council and has to re-register if they move to another local authority area. Here in GB, it’s only for the honour of being allowed to vote and carries no other benefit to the elector or to controlling authorities. An id card has to allocated in NL from the age of 14 onwards. It is supposedly not compulsory but try getting a bank account, for instance, without one. The police can demand to see it to prove id, so you simply have to have it unless you want live a clandestine existence.

    Every time we hear Clegg boasting about having ripped up the system that would have effected this simple procedure, we in this house groan. How can a country maintain safe and secure society, in this day and age without it? I believe the system was instituted by Napoleon in the countries that were ‘assimilated’.

  30. @Howard

    Do I take it you’re presenting an argument in favour of Mr Brown’s Identity Cards?

  31. Howard – is there effective policing and sufficient resources in Nd for finding illegal immigrant workers?

  32. interesting movement on betfair…odds on a tory majority have lengthened considerably. now 4.8 compared to 4.2 just one month ago…the odds on the tories having the most seats have lengthened a little bit too, but not nearly so dramatically.

    I think a bad euro election result will lengthen the odds still further and the tories will then be in a difficult position…it’s almost as though a net is slowly closing on this administration.

    This doesn’t mean that Cameron is doomed. It just means that his retention of No. 10 post 2015 is more difficult and requires more extreme events for him to survive as PM.

  33. In order for the Conservatives to get 40% of the vote (an arbitrary figure but one of the lowest I expect the Tories to be able to get and win a majority, however slim) they need to win over 3,244,773 voters in 433 days.

    To put that into visual terms, they need to convince a city the size of Inverness to vote for them every week.

    Your mileage may vary on how possible or likely this is.

  34. CB11

    Thanks.

    Clearly I have got your message. The increasing frequency with which you state it is hard to miss!

    …the polls tell you that there is no demographic or combination of individuals in the UK which can deliver for the Conservative Party a majority / 40% of VI … ( I forget the precise detail) . The Conservative Party has become a historic relic & they can never ever win a GE ever again.

    Something along those lines anyway??

    I don’t buy it because I don’t believe in this sort of Apocalyptic Theory.

  35. The Tories have as much chance of winning the GE in 2015 as there is the chance of wild beavers being discovered in Devon!

  36. HOWARD

    @” Was there a time when we did know who was here and whether they had a right to be so, I wonder? ”

    I have no idea.

    But I do know that there was a time when net immigration to UK was regularly below 100k pa-way below.

    You can see the stats online.

  37. Good Evening All.

    COLIN:
    Surprisingly, perhaps, I agree with you! In 1959 Butler and King suggested Labour could not win again. (Nuffield Study of the GE).

    I think large over all majorities for either Party seems to be unlikely, owing to the way the UK is developing.

  38. I’m not sure either of the main parties (or any other party) will be able to poll at >40% in the future.

    Labour barely managed it in the golden circumstances of 2001, didn’t manage it in 2005, and even with the collapse of the LD vote and austerity conditions, they probably won’t achieve it in 2015. Similarly, the Conservatives only managed to do it in 1992 due to what I think was one of the best and underrated political campaigns in history.

    The two-party model has gradually eroded since its peak in the 1950s, and we seem to be looking at a multi-party model in which the overall vote of even the three major parties as a whole is in secular decline.

    The Labour party will be able to get majorities despite their declining vote share due to demographic factors, at least for a while i.e. until their current decline gets too steep or some government enacts major boundary/seating changes or changes our system to PR. In 2005, Labour did worse in % terms than in 1979 and barely better than 1992.

    And these facts are not so surprising when one considers the declining (and dying off) membership of the party organisations themselves. The very structure of our politics is fundamentally changing against the two main parties, and neither has any sort of solution at work.

    Incidentally, it’s by no means clear that recovering economies are causally linked to recovering party support anymore-

    http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Images/Polls/poll-economic-improvement-vs-labour-share-of-vote.gif

  39. CL1945

    @”I think large over all majorities for either Party seems to be unlikely, ”

    Yes.

  40. Jim Jam
    I only know that to get a ‘sofi’ number (translated is NI number) in the NL, setting aside the possibility of total illegality (false passport etc), then you will not get one without jumping through the hoops I described. As Colin has pointed out we are discussing legal immigration here, not illegal. The families mentioned earlier were non-EU and seemed to come and go (or not go) just as they pleased and leave their children with relations and so on. Such children could not get into a school in NL, as they seemed to be able to do here. I just don’t understand why we do not have the necessary controls. Trying to control people at the border is pathetic, It’s the system of running society here that is so loose and no wonder if we don’t know who people are, but hand out NI numbers to them like confetti.

    At the moment there are about a dozen fugitive wanted British criminals, of which some are supposedly hiding in Amsterdam. So yes they are (until caught, as one was the other day) there illegally. But as it was pointed out by the Dutch police, they could only do so under false id and have to live on cash, as there is no other way for them to exist without being spotted.

    As Colin points out, we have a figure for immigration, but we don’t know if that is the right one, because we have no system for recording what it is. We don’t check people on the way out, as I am sure you are aware, so the only way we could know the right figure is if we had a system that controlled who is who here and where they are. As EL has just pointed out, there was such a system that was actually in pilot stage but all that has been thrown away under the Coalition Agreement. I thought that was a Labour Government policy, not a Gordon Brown one though?

  41. Couple of Macbethian posts placed in their proper place in the previous thread (aka Servants’ Hall).

  42. “As EL has just pointed out”
    Thanks H , but it wern’t me.

  43. Thanks for the detailed answer Howard.

  44. @ Bill Patrick,

    I’m not sure either of the main parties (or any other party) will be able to poll at >40% in the future.

    I’m not convinced. The overall decline in party membership seems to be pretty universal across Europe, but Angela Merkel’s CDU just polled over 40%, in a system that is far more friendly to small parties than Britain’s. Or just look at the regional assemblies in the UK. I won’t count Wales because Wales has always been a bit of a one-party state, but Scottish elections are certainly contested and the SNP just polled more than 40%, again in a system far more favourable to small parties than Westminster’s.

    The requirements for polling over 40% in the modern age seem to be:

    1) You have to be nationally competitive.
    2) People have to actively want you to win, instead of voting for you just to chuck someone else out.

    Labour meets the first requirement. I doubt they’ll meet the second in 2015- it’s too soon after a major defeat and Ed Miliband is not a very marketable leader- but there’s no reason they couldn’t fulfill it in some future election.

    (Nor is there any reason the Tories or indeed the Liberal Democrats or Ukip couldn’t eventually meet both requirements, although I agree they have much more work to do before they get there.)

    As for the changing natural of political participation and declining party membership, Labour does have Miliband’s cunning Arnie Graf + two-tiered membership plan. Whether or not it will do them any good is of course an open question. The SNP and Ukip are gaining members even with more traditional membership structures, which suggests the key to reversing the decline may lie not with gimmicks but with being a political party people actually want to join.

  45. The Tories are the most successful and resilient party in UK political history. However, they haven’t won an overall majority since 1992 – 20 years ago. Even at the nadir of Labour fortunes on 2010, after 13 years in power, the Tories couldn’t quite sneak it.

    Does this mean the Tories can never win again? Of course not. At their lowest ebb in 1997 they still polled around 31% of the vote. It shouldn’t therefore take huge swings for them to win elections. But to do so they need to win over people that have in the recent past shunned them. The easiest way to do this would be to craft a message more appealing to metropolitan voters. If they could increase their inner city performance by just a few percentage points it could make all the difference.

  46. EL apologies – it was PI. (how’s that for cliquey).

  47. @Howard

    Magnum posts on UKPR?

  48. The direction I was taking with the need for id systems, was that it was Labour policy and being enacted, so will it be returned to the Labour manifesto? I mean, if it was so important then, why is it less important now. Come to think of it, what is the Conservative policy I wonder? After all immigration is a top concern in the polls, and whilst Con may have had to put up with the LD insisted policy for the sake of the Agreement, one might suppose that both Labour and the Conservatives would be all for it? Anyone know the answer to that?

  49. ComRes comments on the regionalisation of English politics.

    http://cpw.mail.aol.com/36992-111/talktalk-5/en-gb/suite.aspx

  50. @ Ann in Wales

    At last! A family of the little critters have been discovered on the River Otter. No-one seems to know how they arrived but they’re gnawing away merrily, the local farmer is happy enough as he thinks they’ll solve some of his flooding problems.

    Apparently their favorite singer is Justin Beaver!

    Boom Boom!

1 6 7 8 9 10 12