This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 37%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%.

All very normal, but worth noting a slight update in methodology. As regular readers will know, YouGov’s political weighting is based on panelists recorded party identification in May 2010, meaning they don’t have to worry about changes in party ID over time – they weight people’s 2010 ID to 2010 targets. However, over the years new people join the panel, so the target weights need to adapt to this and reflect to some proportion that Lib Dem ID has fallen and UKIP ID has grown – hence once a year YouGov update the weights to reflect this. The changes this year decrease the target weight for Lib Dem ID and increase the target for Other (primarily UKIP) ID.

The end result is that the new weights tend to show UKIP 1 point higher, the Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems very slightly lower (less than a percentage point in all cases).

345 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 33, LAB 37, LD 8, UKIP 13”

1 2 3 4 5 7
  1. That latest poll has the parties roughly where I expect them to be in the GE: Labour a bit lower, the Tories a fair bit lower. 34-32 is roughly what I expect, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all by 35-34.

  2. @Mr Beeswax

    ‘Lessons will be learned’ they say. The lesson I hope many will learn is; ‘don’t vote for people who let this happen to kids’.

    Most people that are involved in this process are not elected. You can vote for a different Councillor who is involved, but I don’t think there is a magic formula to make the same paid professionals work better. That needs better systems (and probably more resources too).

    Dealing with this day to day must be hugely complex and difficult. If any politician offered me an ‘easy’ solution, I would be inclined to disbelieve them, and assume they don’t understand the problem.

    I guess this goes to the heart of why I think politicians should largely stay out of such matters. Political slogans are cheap and easy, real world solutions are not.

  3. @Bantams

    Well done Bradford.

    As expected. Unemployment will be going up in Leeds by one very shortly.

    Saturday, two sent off, tonight one.

    Geez….League one here we come…

  4. @Ewen,

    One thing I have noticed is that the girls we come across in CSE investigations are often very intelligent and have good intuition. They’re also quite often sociable and friendly. It’s a common lament that in other circumstances they would have thrived.

  5. Thanks AW (for the tweet poll news).

    I expect we get someone predicting the outcome of the next GE soon. Oh – we already have. Thank you Bill Patrick (he knows, you know).

  6. Howard,

    Only because I looked up the answers at the back of the textbook.

  7. @ Neil A

    You just have to keep doing the best you can for them.

  8. @Anarchists Unite & Amber,

    We live in a society which has chosen to make it very difficult to convict those accused of crimes. Our criminal justice system simply doesn’t allow us to set aside issues around the reliability and truthfulness of witnesses. To change that would mean a complete sea-change in English law. The best we might hope for would be some kind of expert evidence to put the actions and statements of abused children “in context” in the way that sometimes happens in domestic violence cases.

    @John Pilgrim,

    Your use of the words “difficult and inconvenient” is a little jaundiced. Police and prosecutors generally decide not to pursue matters because they have a genuine belief that the pursuit would not achieve anything and would not succeed. That’s not to say that laziness, disorganisation, incompetence and lack of time are not all sometimes factors (as they are in all kinds of cases, and indeed in all fields of public, and private, life). But it’s not a case of “they just need to try a bit harder and everything would be OK”. I speak as someone who was brought to the edge of mental illness by the stress of trying to keep CSE cases alive, and in fact had to be taken off them for fear that I might end up unfit for work.

    We have a similar issue with adult s*xual offences. There is a fantastic psychotherapist called Zoe Lodrick who gives training to police officers in understanding behaviours in assaulted women that might, at first glance, seem contradictory and inconsistent. Zoe is quite pessimistic about ever getting courts and juries to understand the subject, however.

    In relation to my £20-seeking 14 year old, it might have been different had the case been a freshly reported one, with some sort of forensic corroboration. But like 90% of cases this was reported historically, and therefore the whole case rested on the truthfulness of the witness. In those circumstances it is simply beyond realistic to expect CPS to authorise charges.

    As for running away from children’s homes, well that’s not about the homes themselves being awful places. It’s about rebellion and escaping the imposition of rules and authority. If you want to go drinking and dancing, the children’s home will try to stop you – so you’d rather stay somewhere else.

    It’s worth remembering that in criminal cases, a well paid and highly educated barrister is dedicating their time specifically to seeking negative background information about your victims/witnesses, and weaving that information in a wilfully biased and partisan way into an obstacle course for the prosecution. By way of an example, in a recent case the defence were making a very big deal over a comment recorded in a police report about a 7 year old girl, when a teacher told an officer “male members of staff don’t like to be alone with her”. The girl was now 15. There was no information in the police records to suggest she had ever made any kind of s*xual allegation against any teacher, but because both the teacher and officer had now retired, and couldn’t be traced to explain it, this comment formed a big part of an argument that the witness couldn’t be trusted.

  9. The specific ethnic factors in these cases were first raised in my memory by Labour MP, Anne Crier and strongly supported by far left magazine, Searchlight.
    I have been the leader of a city council and always said when asked about the responsibilities, that the only thing that ever seriously worried me was the fate of children in our care.
    Tonight the local paper is carrying calls for the closure of a lovely new children’s home because of the problems in the area caused by the young girls living there. Local councils don’t have an easy job and central government are unlikely to rush in to take on this responsibility.
    I can say Neil A’s stories are true to life.

  10. Shaun Wright has resigned from the Labour Party but intends to serve out his term as an Independent (presumably standing down thereafter).

  11. Still a fairly steady Labour lead, probably too early to extrapolate to an electoral result, but educated guesswork is slowly becoming more worthwhile. The fact that it has been reasonably steady for a while, and the Conservatives quite firmly stuck low thirties for a long time helps predictions become more accurate. I think the relative level of support for the two main parties may be more predictable than is often the case. It’s the UKIP/LD’s support that’s going to make things chaotic.

    There’s a few 1% leads and ties of late, not really often enough to suggest a steady closure of the lead. We have conference season – usually causing some meaningless poll movements as party leaders make unchallenged statements in turn, then everyone forgets about it a week later.

    Once the election is on the doorstep and firmly fixed in voters minds, I expect some recognizable poll movement. If things don’t move because of that before polling day, they probably never will.

  12. Where did you find that out MrNameless ?

    Neither Sky nor the BBC have it on their breaking news ticker tape – both are just repeating Labours threat to suspend him if he hasn’t resigned by morning.

  13. Colin

    I don’t really buy the argument that the little slut had a drugs & drink problem, so they were just giving her what she wants anyway.

    Nope……..just can’t see the justice-or humanity in that approach.

    Nobody here has said anything like that Colin. But these cases usually rely on the testimony of the victims and the English criminal justice system still tends to examine witnesses very harshly and place enormous weight on ‘credibility’. And less credibility tends to be given to those who are young, inarticulate, confused, poorly educated and have a record of misbehaviour. Which often describes the victims in these sort of cases. Those cross-examining them and judging them are none of these things and those accused may choose not to testify or restrict themselves to simple and well-coached denial.

    There’s an awful lot wrong with the justice system, which has more and more come to be expected to operate for the benefit of lawyers (and particular sets of London-based ‘top’ lawyers at that). But it has always had a particular class bias (polling shows most people agree that there is different justice for rich and poor) and even if such victims are not treated unsympathetically they are often not believed or not believed enough.

    The level of ‘reasonable doubt’ required to escape conviction is rightly high, but it often seems impossibly high in certain sorts of cases – fraud trials with wealthy defendants say or police officers committing a crime in the course of their duties. Unless there is really good outside evidence such as forensics, the bar tends to be so high in these CSE cases as well that the police may not feel that it is worth bringing the case to Court and perhaps putting victims through the agonies of cross-examination only to see their molesters walk away free.

    What I think annoys me so much about much of the discussion on this topic (though not here) is that those most anxious to cry that this is due to political correctness are those who would also hold exactly the views about such girls that Colin describes, and proclaim them at length in other situations. They have no interest in wanting to see these dreadful crimes actually stopped, they just want to see them used to attack groups they disapprove of.

    There’s an interesting interview with the Deputy Children’s Commissioner in the Paper I’m Not Allowed to Link To where she says that:

    […]she had discovered that police and council officers were in some cases still either looking the other way, not asking questions or claiming abuse was confined to a certain ethnic group – such as Asian men – or a particular social class.

    On a recent field visit to a police force, Berelowitz was surprised to learn that the officers’ top search on their internal computer profiling system was “Asian male”. When she asked what would happen if the perpetrators were not Asian, the officer in charge replied that the force was “not looking for those”. “I was astonished. I said: ‘I think you better start looking’.”

    She said that in other cases a culture of blaming the victims remained prevalent

    By concentrating on those parts of the report that concern the excuses used for inaction and not looking at the continuing problem, those who are claiming it is ‘all about PC’ may be helping continue the abuse. The same incidentally applies if the apportioning of responsibility starts and ends with getting rid of a few high profile political at the behest of the media looking for a quick scalp.

  14. Amber, Neil
    Given half a chance kids come around from even the most appalling circumstances. Freud’s daughter Anna worked with children who had survived the concentration camps, most were able to move on, astonishing as that may seem.
    Mind you, those perps who are caught bang to rights should be given exemplary justice.

  15. @Howard

    “He knows, you know”

    Fantastic quote. From now on your camp name is Hilda :)

  16. @NeilA

    “One thing I have noticed is that the girls we come across in CSE investigations are often very intelligent and have good intuition. They’re also quite often sociable and friendly. It’s a common lament that in other circumstances they would have thrived.”

    That very thought occurred to me when I listened to one of the women, now aged 24, but abused from the age of 12 in Rotherham, when she was interviewed by Humphreys on this mornings Radio 4 Today programme. She was articulate, rational, logical, reflective and, quite extraordinarily for someone who had been through a living hell for most of her early teenage life, able to offer utterly credible explanations for what had happened to her. What was particularly chilling was her account of how her involvement with the adults who later systematically raped and abused her had started innocently with casual contacts on street corners with children of her own age. These youngsters, rather like scouts sent out by their elders, then slowly introduced her to the older men who then spent over a year grooming her; fooling her with fake kindness and friendliness, desisting from any abuse for over a year until they’d won her confidence. In other words, and this is the true evil of what they did, they intricately, methodically and painstakingly planned the abuse, They spun a false world, slowly entrapping the child who was initially flattered and excited by what she thought were new and interesting friends. Later, when their prey was ready, they pounced and introduced her to a hellish and sadistic world. How she came through it to be the sane and decent woman she appeared to be I’ll never know. A heroine of sorts, I think.

    Adults who rob children of their innocence for their own deviant pleasure have stooped as low as it is possible for any human being to go. Sadly, as these terrible cases continue to unfold, and they didn’t start in 1997 nor finish in 2013, this behaviour takes place in all sections of society, amongst all races too, although I now accept that there is obviously a specific problem with young Pakistanis in some of our towns and cities. But it’s not confined to them at all and I suspect we’ll all be shocked to the core again when the Inquiry into the 1980s Westminster scandal reports its findings. Just as we were by Saville and all the cases involving care and foster homes going back to the 1950s, and probably earlier. We’re also starting to hear about some terrible abuse carried out in privately run boarding schools, going on for decades, where parents have paid exorbitant fees for what they thought was a better education for their children. Sadly, and this is the cruellest trick of all, they were paying for the luxury of adults to abuse their children with impunity.

    If we go hunting inept council officials, overworked social workers and delinquent police officers and think we’re getting anywhere near solving the problem of systematic child abuse then we’re deluding ourselves I’m afraid.

    Maybe I’ve lived a blessed and innocent life, but I remain appalled and astonished that such atrocious people, in such number, can exist amongst us. I have absolutely no idea at all what we can do about it, depressingly. A many headed monster indeed.

  17. @Ewen

    Even the concept “bang to rights” causes me difficulties. It suggests that there should be some sort of foolproof way to catch these criminals in the act. There really isn’t. Prosecutions will always rely on the evidence of live witnesses, and I struggle with any sort of “ranking” of cases that treats witness evidence as some sort of second-class option.

  18. @Crossbat.

    Sickening as it is, just the simple “eye-opening” process is in itself a huge leap forward.

    Even if we are depressed and demoralised by the idea that abuse is all around us, at least we are no longer blind and disbelieving. Progress, comrade! Be encouraged!

  19. Crossbat

    While it’s true that some have been able to rebuild their lives after this terrible abuse, they are probably in the minority. By definition the ones who are able to speak and explain coherently are those who did best. One thing the Jay Report makes clear is that many suffered terrible consequences. Of course many were already from homes with problems such as parental addiction or mental health difficulties. That sort of background made them vulnerable and easy to target in the first place. But what happened subsequently made things much worse.

    One of the things that shocked me about the Report was how little support was offered to the young victims (Sections 6.62-63):

    There appeared to be very little by way of specialist support services, in the form of mental health, counselling and psychological services for children and young people who had been sexually exploited. Many suffered post-traumatic stress and endured lasting psychological and emotional damage that diminished their capacity to lead normal lives. One survivor told us:

    “Sexual exploitation is like a circle that you can never escape from.”

    We came across a number of cases where children and young people needed and wanted specialist counselling and support. They were unable to access services because of long waiting lists and gaps in services. We learned that at the time of the Inquiry, the Children and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) deleted children’s names from the waiting list if they missed the first appointment. This approach is entirely unsuited to the needs of CSE victims and it should be changed. We were told by the parent of a survivor who needed help when she was over 16 that he had to pay privately for this service, as there was at least a six month waiting list for an appointment. This was too long in the life of a young woman who had experienced such trauma


    ‘Most people that are involved in this process are not elected.’

    Police commissioner who headed children’s safeguarding unit was – one of yours I believe.

  21. Drunk hour a bit quiet tonight?

  22. @Mr Beeswax

    If I was being tribal about it (which I am not), my tribe doesn’t have any PCCs.

    I’m not a Labour man at all.

    For what it is worth, I think PCCs are an appalling idea, so if it was up to me I would get rid of the lot them.

  23. NEIL A
    “Even the concept “bang to rights” causes me difficulties. It suggests that there should be some sort of foolproof way to catch these criminals in the act. There really isn’t. Prosecutions will always rely on the evidence of live witnesses,”

    Children and young adults who are caught shop-lifting sweeties and gear are daily taken to the Police Station or seen in their homes and told in front of their parents, you’re not being charged this time, but it’s on the record and it it happens again you’ll be in serious trouble.
    No courts, no expensive barristers, just coppers doing their job.
    On a larger scale, Apartheid and segregation in the States were ended not by the policing and justice systems of those countries, which were not fit for the purpose, but by the direct action of people within those systems who allied their support and expertise to a the civil actions needed to remove or reform the systems rather than band-aid the problem.
    Forgive me for pointing out that your response to my earlier post did not address the specific points I made, that the prevailing policing and justice system is not fit for the purpose of tacking systemic abuse of children; secondly that the polce specifically are not charging perpetrators, and that this is for reasons which are embedded in the system. In the face of those horrendous facts, I am afraid I found CB11’s post and your reply self-indulgent pap.

  24. Latest YouGov / The Sun results 27th August –

    Lab 35%
    Con 34%
    UKIP 14%
    LD 7%
    Greens 6%
    SNP / PCY 4%
    Others 1%

    APP -24

    Very high total percentage for smaller parties today

    Greens on 6% – snapping at the heels of the LD’s

    This poll would have been conducted too early to be effected by the dreadful revelations, so I think it is random variation of the 4% current Lab lead.

    I always calculate it takes 3 days for events like these to appear in voting intentions ( assuming there is any effect), so the 2 Sunday polls will be the ones.

  25. Good Morning All.
    FLOATING VOTER: Those figures would produce results not unlike October 1964, when I was just nine and becoming interested in Politics.

  26. Morning Chris.

    Liberal result in 1964 was 11%. Bit high do you think?

  27. chrislane1945

    Good morning to you

    I can tell you are a teacher.!

    You keep reminding me to do my homework on that election

    Lab 44.1%
    Cons 43.4%
    Lib 5.9%

    Less than 1% in it, so similar to some of the predictions here, but the Libs would have only 4 seats on those percentages- a little high, what do you think?

  28. Edit

    oh no not 5.9%*

    but 11.2% and 9 seats

    i was looking at the seat percentage

    I think that they might be pleased to get to that figure in ‘the merry month of May, when the GE is held.

    Looking at that Election, I was amazed to discover that Labour’s percentage vote hardly rose from the 1959 debacle.

  30. “The report quotes one senior manager telling the inquiry that child sex exploitation wasn’t a major problem because “it only actually accounts for 2.3% of the Council’s safeguarding work in Rotherham”.

    If you don’t think that’s an abhorrent view, ask yourself how you’d react if a police officer said that murder wasn’t really a problem because only 2% of crimes were murders.”


    The view was expressed by Rotherham’s Social Services Director.

    Denis McShane is able to put in a nutshell-now.

  31. “The report quotes one senior manager telling the inquiry that child sex exploitation wasn’t a major problem because “it only actually accounts for 2.3% of the Council’s safeguarding work in Rotherham”.

    There are no words.


    Just a thought on today’s one point gap in Yougov. The more danger of a Cameron Government then the more likely Scots are to vote for YES. Is there polling which demonstrates this?

    It’s only a 200 Scottish sub sample but could the 35-29 lead of SNP over Labour in Yougov be the first indication of a Salmond post debate bounce?

    A straw poll in the wind perhaps.

  33. Floating Voter
    “This poll would have been conducted too early to be effected by the dreadful revelations”

    Anthony keeps reminding us that singular events have no bearing on polling.

    Today’s 1 point Lab lead is MOE and/or unusual sample.

  34. …and/or an actual poll movement.

  35. @Wes

    If a geunine poll movement, the movement is not towards the Tories but “others”. The Tories are again below 35%, as they have been for almost the entirety of this parliament.

  36. That’s a clever way of phrasing it… They’ve also been below 60% for the whole of this parliament! But yes this is a good poll for ‘others’ including UKIP and we know the new weighting has corrected slightly in their favour.

  37. “Net migration to Britain totalled 243,000 in year to March, up from 175,000 in the previous year.”

    I think UKIP could gain towards the election (as in, the month following up); immigration is going to be an issue – Labour will probably try and play it down and not go too hard on it – but the Tories can’t risk UKIP gaining in Tory heartlands and so immigration will be a platform they’ll fight nationally on.

    I think both Lab and Tory numbers could be quite the bit lower come the election.

  38. @Chrislane
    ‘Looking at that Election, I was amazed to discover that Labour’s percentage vote hardly rose from the 1959 debacle.’

    Largely due to 150 more Liberal candidates in 1964 compared with 1959 leading to a doubling of the Liberal % vote share.

  39. Depending on your viewpoint, there are some really bad migration figures out today for the government – an increase in net migration to 243,000 in the year to March.

    This was a central promise, by Cameron himself, and they are at risk of not only missing their target, but now being perceived as allowing the measure to actually head in the wrong direction. The target itself was vague – ‘tens of thousands’ – as I don’t think the government ever dreamed they would still be two and a half times higher than the maximum allowed even under such an ill defined target.

    While all governments break promises and miss targets, usually they get away with them, in polling terms. No one (or very few, at least) will actually change their vote because this isn’t the greenest government ever, or that there has been top down reform of the NHS after all. Votes will change if by breaking the promises things are seen to have got appreciably worse – so if the NHS is thought to be going downhill, that would matter, not the fact that there were top down reforms.

    With immigration, it may well be slightly different. The UKIP threat may be fairly one dimensional, but it is ever present, and if that one dimension is the one where you have been seen clearly to break your promise, on a very personal level, then I think it might well come back to haunt you.

  40. GRAHAM.
    Thank you; I was expecting your academic’s beady eye on this!
    The 1951 ‘disaster’ was partly due to the Liberal collapse that year, I think.

    Labour must be hoping Ed Miliband is a better election fighter than Harold Wilson.

  41. “an increase in net migration to 243,000 in the year to March”

    In the words of R Haines, “an open door policy”

  42. Harold Wilson a bad election fighter? He won 4 elections (or else, won 3 and arguably drew one), that’s better than Thatcher or Blair.

  43. Chrislane,
    ‘The 1951 ‘disaster’ was partly due to the Liberal collapse that year, I think.

    Labour must be hoping Ed Miliband is a better election fighter than Harold Wilson.’

    The 1951 Liberal collapse was really simply a reflection of fighting a mere 109 seats that year – compared with 450 in 1950. The vote per candidate changed very little.
    In a way things should be easier for Miliband than Harold Wilson to the extent that he faces a LibDem vote so much weaker than 2010 – and a much more fragmented national % vote share.

  44. KEITH P.
    Harold was brilliant at Election fighting; a hero to people I know.
    I think that Liberal voters switched to the ‘Conservative and Unionist Party’ more heavily than they did to Labour who did not need to call the GE then, but due to George V1’s urging ‘Clem’ did, just as the long ‘boom’ was about to start, finishing in 1973, I think.

  45. Chrislane
    I rather agree. Strange that Attlee should have deferred to George VI in that way really – cannot imagine the Queen trying to interfere like that today. Ironically , I believe the King was concerned about the Commonwealth tour he was scheduled to do in early 1952 – which ill health eventually prevented him undertaking!

  46. @AW – apologies, understood.


    Not by excuse but by way of explanation this Rotherham thing is close to home and has indirectly affected people I know. I was lashing out at what I took to be tribal apologism from a Labour party imo implicated with a ‘move along now nothing to see here’ attitude.

    Please accept my apologies and for responding to my unjustified attack with such moderation.

  48. Breaking news.
    UKIP have recruited Douglas Carswell MP from the Tories.

    According to BBC news.

  49. Will he be doing the honourable thing and resigning to fight a by-election under his new colours?

    Still, BAD news for Cameron. This could be the crack in the dam. Keep an eye on Bridgen, Hannan, Rees-Mogg etc.

1 2 3 4 5 7