The monthly ICM poll for the Guardian is out tonight with topline figures of CON 35%(+1), LAB 38%(nc), LDEM 12%(+2), UKIP 9%(-2). There is little change in Conservative and Labour support (though perhaps worth noting that the Tory score is the highest ICM have shown since last July) and the Lib Dems get back to a more typical ICM score after their unusual 10 point figure a month ago.

ICM also asked who people blamed for “Britain’s recent economic difficulties and the ongoing cutbacks in government spending”. 32% blamed debts racked up by the last Labour government, 16% blamed the coalition’s economic management, 20% the banks, 14% the troubles in the Eurozone.

Meanwhile yesterday’s twice weekly Populus poll had topline figures of CON 34%, LAB 38%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 12% (tabs here) and this morning’s YouGov/Sun poll had figures of CON 32%, LAB 39%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13% (tabs here.


210 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 35, LAB 38, LDEM 12, UKIP 9”

1 3 4 5
  1. And If the Scots vote yes, I can see Lab legislating for some form of PR. Conservatives are extinct in many Northern cities. Voters won’t tolerate a return to being ruled by Tories in London as in the Thatcher years.

    Report comment

  2. My own, unresearched, view of how many of each of the sets of party voters will behave at the next General Election is this:
    The Party(ies) in office traditionally have the greatest difficulty with voter apathy. This is largely due to the old Morecombe & Wise effect of “What do you think of it so far?”… Followed by “Rubbish!”
    People tend to vote AGAINST things rather than FOR. I won’t say that we are a nation of moaners but a protest has a momentum of its own whereas a stated political party position becomes merely a target for everyone.
    This is purely my own opinion but I would be happy for any researched comment to ‘put me straight.’
    I believe that all four parties have scored their fair share of “own goals” but the difference for the party(ies) in Government is that the electorate are less willing to forgive them because they expect the “Government” to be in control.

    Report comment

  3. Peter,

    Odds are often slow, if at all, to change as the likelihood of any given outcome changes, whether in sport or politics.

    Bookmakers want to win whatever the result and will keep odds short longer than the current position might suggest to encourage bets on previously unfancied outcomes in order to balance their exposure.

    We saw this before 2015 when lots of money was taken on a Tory win in 2008/9 but as a hung parliament became a stronger possibility the odds did not alter much as the bookies did not want to take much more on a Tory Win.

    Should the polls tighten I would not expect the odds to reflect this until such time as the bookies exposure is more balanced and would caution any fellow Labour supporters using bookies odds to argue polls misleading etc..

    Report comment

  4. @Phil Haines

    Re your post on pension tax relief for higher income tax payers – why not go further and abolish all higher rate tax-avoidance schemes such as charity tax relief, no capital gains tax on houses, incomes being paid as dividend thus avoiding NI etc.

    Report comment

  5. @WOLF

    Plus – abolish the distinction in allowable expenses between employees and the self-employed.

    From HMRC guidance: “If the taxpayer [not being an employee] can show that their only purpose for incurring a particular expense was for their trade, profession or vocation then it does not matter that the same result could have been achieved by different means or that the expenditure in the event fails to achieve the established purpose”

    So in effect the taxpayer subsidises expenses incurred by the self-employed no matter how idiotic, but this concession is not extended to the employed.

    Report comment

  6. @Valerie And If the Scots vote yes, I can see Lab legislating for some form of PR. Conservatives are extinct in many Northern cities. Voters won’t tolerate a return to being ruled by Tories in London as in the Thatcher years.

    But in the same way aren’t Labour almost extinct in many Southern areas too?
    So whats the difference?

    Report comment

  7. @Mrnameless

    “Labour have a consistent poll lead,
    BUT the Tories have been closing it slightly,
    BUT there are still VI-shifting events to come,
    BUT not many of them will necessarily favour Labour,
    BUT they’ve got the LD defectors,
    BUT they may switch back to tactical voting,
    BUT that will help keep the Tories out,
    BUT may facilitate another coalition,
    BUT We’ve seen that coalitions just do what the bigger party wants,
    BUT Clegg probably wouldn’t lead the LDs in another coalition,
    BUT there are few strong contenders to replace him, ditto Miliband and Cameron,
    BUT that doesn’t stop them both being unpopular,
    BUT Cameron is the most popular leader,
    BUT the most popular leader doesn’t always win,
    BUT he’s also most trusted on the economy,
    BUT economies don’t always win elections, see 1997,
    BUT Labour have been out of power for four years, not 18…”

    A very simplified level of analysis, in my opinion. You forgot the postal votes. :-))

    Report comment

  8. “If we went for PR I think we will be doomed to have Coalition government almost forever”

    By 2016, Scotland will have had 17 years of PR, and 9 years of non-coalition government.

    Report comment

  9. @Sine

    “So whats the difference?”

    London gets what it wants. The North does not.

    Report comment

  10. @Sine Nomine

    My city, Manchester has a population of 510,000. It has no Conservative MPs and no Conservative councillors. I doubt there is a similar desert for Labour in the south.

    Report comment

1 3 4 5