This week’s YouGov/Sunday Times poll is up here, with topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 38%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 12%.

The biggest chunk of the rest of the survey covered the ongoing historical child abuse story. Three-quarters of the public think that it’s probably true that some senior political figures were involved in child abuse in the 1970s and 1980s, and that there was a deliberate cover up. They are more divided over how well the current government have responded to the allegations – 34% think they’ve handled it well, 41% badly. 44% of people say they have at least some confidence in the inquiries under Baroness Butler-Sloss and Peter Wanless to fully investigate the matter, 44% do not. 56% would rather see a full public inquiry.

More generally 46% think questions about historical child abuse are being asked in a proportionate and measured way and there a genuine questions to be asked, 29% think it risks becoming a rumour-led witch hunt of retired politicians.

Interestingly, and perhaps reflecting their general suspicion towards the establishment, UKIP supporters are by far the most likely to believe there was a cover up (90%) and have by far the least confidence that the inquiries will get to the bottom of them (26% – compared to 67% of Conservatives and 65% of Lib Dems).

The other new poll is today is a Scottish ICM poll in the Scotland on Sunday. Topline figures with changes from last month are YES 34%(-2), NO 45%(+2). Excluding don’t knows it works out at YES 43%(-2), NO 57%(+2). The movement is towards NO, but it’s within normal margins of error and appears in line with ICM’s longer term trends. Looking back the YES score (excluding don’t knows) in ICM’s monthly Scottish polls this year have been 46%, 43%, 46%, 48%, 43%, 46% and now 43%. That looks to me like just random variation.

216 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times and ICM Scottish poll”

1 3 4 5
  1. Well true. Did the Juncker thing happen since then?

  2. Does anyone know when/where the ICM data tables are up?

  3. @MrNameless


  4. Hannah,

    Just back.

    The view in Middlesbrough at the time that there were one or 2 cases where Social Services and Doctors (Higgs) got it wrong but that many more children were sent back to abusive families.

    Most wrath was heaped on the late MP however.

  5. Roger Mexico – ” …my first reaction (and I suspect that of many others) was to think

    Think being the operative word… rather than follow simple word association: child abuse > inquiry > Cleveland > Butler-Sloss.

    Reminiscent of the recent appointment blocking manoeuvre: Juncker > EU > Brown/IMF > Lagarde.

  6. Well,
    For what it is worth and to provide a little balance to the Ken Clarke,jolly good
    Egg thing,my ex mother in law was great friends with Gillian Clark another good egg type.Except that they were not.

  7. Martyn,

    Well that could be it I suppose but then I would think other polls would have showed it up.

  8. @ ROGER M/PI

    “Brenda is also “Lord of Mann””

    Aren’t the Barclay Brothers trying to be the Dames of Sark?

  9. It’s the Ashcroft Effect + reallocation, I’d imagine. A phone poll of 1000 is going to have an effective sample size of 500, so you’re starting with a high risk of getting a weird sample, and then ICM reallocate so that’s going to boost the Tories at Ukip’s (and to a lesser extent everyone else’s) expense.

    I know Colin gets very excited by any gleam of light for the Tories (well, if you can call a hung Parliament with Labour 30 seats ahead a gleam of light), but I’d wait until we see a big movement with YouGov before declaring the Ukip bubble burst.

  10. Also probably worth pointing out that a typical ICM Ukip score is ~11%, so it’s more that last month was high than that this one was very low. The Tory score likewise is within the usual range

    What’s of more interest is that ICM has recorded very low Labour VIs for three polls in a row now, which I guess could be a coincidence but is starting to look like a trend.

  11. Well a couple of days ago on the On volatility in polling thread I remarked:

    I also note that [Ashcroft] was avoiding Anthony’s point (which I tend to have to make once a month when people get over-excited about ICM) about the way in which telephone polls tend to have smaller effective sample sizes (ie the number of respondents on which the VI percentages are based) than online polls (which often start out with a bigger initial sample as well). So the minimum MoE is 4 points rather than the 3 points which the political classes tend to believe is the MoE for all polls irrespective of size.

    And lo! it came to pass (again).

    ICM’s tables tend to be fairly slow up (especially if there are extra questions which the Guardian is holding over) but last month’s figures were based on a sample of just under 500, though they they supplement those with their reallocation procedure

  12. @Guymonde

    Ooh err.

  13. Guardian ICM shows a one point Conservative lead.
    34 Conservative 33 Labour.

  14. @ SHEVII

    I don’t think you or your CLP (or equivalent) did anything wrong. The Labour Party went through a lot of initiatives to encourage women, all of which failed except AWS.

    I think:
    1. Part of the issue is women worry that they’ll be selected but won’t win the election; they fear being a ‘loser’ who lets down the CLP & the Party.

    2. Partly it’s that women don’t have as much time to network & gather support.

    3. Partly it’s that (generally speaking) women don’t feel comfortable ringing round or visiting men they don’t know very well to ask for their support at a hustings or similar selection meeting. Men are usually more confident/ practised at asking both men & women for their support in selection situations.

  15. New thread.

1 3 4 5