We have our usual three Monday polls today:

The weekly Lord Ashcroft poll has topline figures of CON 27%(-6), CON 33%(nc), LDEM 9%(nc), UKIP 17%(+3), GRN 6%(nc). The drop in Conservative support looks striking, but is probably largely a reversion to the mean after the unusual neck-and-neck Ashcroft poll last week. Tabs are here.

The twice-weekly Populus poll meanwhile has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 37%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 12%. Tabs are here.

Finally the daily YouGov poll for the Sun tonight has toplines of CON 33%, LAB 35%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%.


704 Responses to “Latest YouGov, Populus and Ashcroft polls”

1 10 11 12 13 14 15
  1. “Levers”-not “Leavers” :-)

  2. STATGEEK

    The polls (although subs) have clearly shown a shift to the SNP from Labour but it’s how the can harness this surge until the 2015 GE.

    Maybe some of the voters who always voted Labour because a vote for the SNP will let the Tories in might have diluted somewhat if Cameron delivers on the Scottish parliament and also a lot of people who have never voted before might be more inclined to vote in 2015….wither that benefits the SNP or not we will just have to wait and see!!

    It’s all rather exciting though…

  3. I guess it must be easier to make a 13 minute speech on a single theme without notes rather than an 80 minute speech covering a raft of policies.

    Sure Ed fluffed it. Came over as trying too hard, pretending to be something he’s not.
    Although voters might like the “I got it wrong…. should have done it differently” approach.
    They may think politicians showing a touch of humility are to be encouraged.

  4. FLOATING VOTER
    @Allan
    Mea Culpa
    I am a wrong with that analysis, please see Roger Mexico at 10.37, for the correct seat change
    He was just too polite to point out my error
    in fact Lab gain 2 Cons stay the same, LD lose 2
    But UKIP are playing havoc with all parties vote share
    _______

    Thanks for that but the principle is still the same..Vote UKIP and let Labour in by the back door.

  5. @John Murphy

    Enjoyed reading your 10.58.post. Usually when I see yards of text I move swiftly on.
    You made some good points. I even reread it,

  6. @Allan

    “It’s all rather exciting though…”

    As a man with no party, and there being no referendum on the near horizon, one has to find excitement where one can.

    The SNP polling high in Scotland and a slug crossing my driveway have fairly made my day. :-p

  7. @Phil Haines

    I predicted something of this sort in 2011 after the election (in another place – but not ‘the other place’). At the time, it was a shot across the bows of a few who considered the SNP result in Scotland to be of no importance.

    If I was a betting man, and I’m not. I might pop a few quid on the SNP staying out of any form of arrangement, and forcing a minority government, with the SNP voting in ‘Scotland’s best interests’, and generally pissing off the people of the rUK.

    Scotland to get booted out in 2020? :))

  8. Sorry, I was referring to J Murphy’s 10.15 post.

  9. valerie

    What’s happened to the Lib/Dem Conference? Don’t they usually go first before Labour and then the Cons?
    Or was it so under-whelming that I’ve missed it?

    Normally it would have been scheduled for last week but that would have clashed with the run up to the Referendum (particularly as they’re holding in Glasgow). So it’s moved to October:

    http://www.libdems.org.uk/autumn_conference

    Don’t worry Parliament doesn’t return till 13 October, so there won’t be a clash (got to max the chillax, what?).

  10. Just a few little thoughts on the current political situation in the light of the Scottish Independence campaign. I’d be careful to read too much into the immediate aftershocks from a political event of that magnitude and while membership rushes and poll improvements offer some succour to the SNP in the aftermath of their gigantic disappointment, let’s see how it all pans out over the next 8 months or so before we announce the results of the May 2015 General Election in advance. Emotions and bruised egos are far too raw for rational debate just now although, as I said, it was interesting to hear commentators and politicians like Tom Devine and Fiona Hyslop give such thoughtful and nuanced perspectives last Friday.

    A reflection too on something that has become almost a given in this debate but, when you think about it more is actually quite extraordinary, is the assumption and acceptance of Tory toxicity and how this factor drives voting behaviour and the political dynamic in so many areas of the UK. Rather than accepting this as read and trying to devise constitutional contrivances to try and mitigate against it, if you were a member of the Tory Party, wouldn’t you be better employed applying some thought to why the Party to which you belong and support was so viscerally disliked.

    As I said, just a thought.

  11. Actually, mention of UKIP makes me think of their inept conference last year. It doesn’t seem to have hurt them going by the polls.

  12. Bramley:

    To say that EM’s speech won’t make a lot of difference in how people vote could be wrong.

    Before the 1986 Tory Conference the Tories were behind Labour in the polls but immediately afterwards they went into a substantial lead. It’s generally felt that that particular conference was a game-changer for the 1987 Tory landslide.

    According to Tebbit the 1986 conference “was more successful than I had dared to hope…the opinion polls which had us 7% behind in June and still 5% down in September now put us back into first place – a position we never relinquished from then right through the election campaign. The Prime Minister’s ratings were immediately restored”.[

  13. @ Colin

    I think we do actually share the same awareness on this even if our solutions would probably be different and the point you make about an ageing population needing more care (and subsequent costs) is very valid.

    The problem for politicians I think is that the voting public hasn’t really accepted this as a problem that will cost someone’s money to fix. This is a bit chicken and egg because politicians consistently give the impression that there is some magic fix (usually involving efficiencies or some political doctrine) so the public is not receptive to anything that costs them more such as increase in national insurance contributions, private age related insurance or taking those costs out of your estate when you die.

    Having said all of that I think there is something fundamentally wrong with society. Compared to the time when we didn’t have this looming crisis (I guess partly because we didn’t have the drugs and medical expertise to keep people alive longer) we have made massive improvements in how we produce things that we need to survive. Even if you accept that people “need” more things like the latest gizmo, this should still have resulted in tons more time available in caring for the elderly. In that sense it really shouldn’t be a pure economic argument, it should be about the way we distribute resources.

    I agree that Mansion tax won’t solve all these ills but I’m not clear what your solution would be that doesn’t involve either individuals or government (taking it from some form of tax) paying more.

  14. Allan Christie

    […]but the principle is still the same..Vote UKIP and let Labour in by the back door.

    No it isn’t. In this case what appears to be happening[1] is that most of the recent gains by UKIP appear to be from Labour not to their benefit. If anything UKIP’s rise seems to mean that the Conservatives hold on to a couple more seats in Wales than they would based on UK changes.

    [1] There aren’t many polls done for Wales and the regular YouGov ones don’t show people’s 2010 Westminster vote, so you can’t tell where people’s vote is coming from.

  15. @Statgeek
    ” If I was a betting man, and I’m not. I might pop a few quid on the SNP staying out of any form of arrangement, and forcing a minority government, with the SNP voting in ‘Scotland’s best interests’, and generally pissing off the people of the rUK.”

    I’d say it’s a good bet that SNP will stay out of any arrangement, but to “force” a minority government doesn’t make sense – they would be “allowing” it, just standing back and letting it happen. Retire and lick their wounds for a while looks good tactics.

    I would be surprised if they didn’t vote in Scotland’s best interests whatever the result. That’s what they always do, so it’s unlikely to surprise or annoy anyone much, even the UK government. The danger for governments in minority is the unpredictability of their own supporters, not the predictable opposition, as we’ve seen over the last few years, and as some of us saw in the late 70s.

  16. Do we mean a minority at Westminster?
    Thats not the SNP forcing a minority; its them continuing a policy of respect and understanding towards the rest of the UK in regards to non-Scottish votes.

    A minority government negotiating bill by bill on UK issues with the SNP as a potential supporter is very much in their interests.

    I can not see how the rest of the UK can complain other than the Labourites who feel ‘entitled’ to the Scottish vote (which is exactly why they are losing them).

    After the recent independence debate I just hope Murphy doesn’t try to take over Scottish Labour, Lamont is useless but she can show respect and work with the SNP; Murphy will be going back to the days of Wendy Alexander and Scottish Labours complete failure to get in touch with reality.

  17. @Shevii

    It wasn’t so long ago – the eighties? – when the press was full of how we were going to cope with a world where we didn’t need to work so much because of the dividends of productivity. Would we all retire earlier or go to 20 hour weeks?
    I suppose with hindsight there was a degree of techno-BS in that but the way we live seems to be increasingly driven by consumer-mania.
    I just rather pointlessly updated my smart phone at a cost of £400, justifying it to myself on the basis the headphone socket was iffy and that, my ‘old’ phone being 3 or 4 generations behind the curve, the latest must be much better. In fact I struggle to find any difference.
    It’s enough to turn a chap Green.

  18. Barrell – the Westland affair in early 1986 had seriously dented Thatchers credibility and that of the whole Government.

    The conference was just one piece of the VI recovery, although arguably the in the end inflationary and reckless Lawson Tax cuts were more significant.

  19. Colin

    “I think it is probably impossible for the State to magic “Higher Wages”, ,” x thousand Houses”, and Ever increasing State Funding & Provision of Healthcare etc etc. And phrases like ” A new Economy which works for us all” etc etc don’t explain the methodology.”

    but that’s exactly what the state did directly after WW2, but then they did have the threat of communism to concentrate minds. Where there’s a will there’s a way, the problem now is there is no will. Worse than that, official policy at the BoE and all major parties is still to maintain a minimum of 6% unemployment and to rely on ever increasing house prices to drive the economy.

  20. Roger Mexico: there is a BBC/ICM Wales poll out today.

  21. Guymonde

    I think technological change will greatly reduce the link between hard graft and economic growth.

    This is why some sort of citizen’s wage will in my opinion be necessary in future, although not yet.

  22. SHEVII

    Thanks.

    Those are the only solutions -“individuals or government (taking it from some form of tax) paying more.”

    And it is is the balance between these two which, for some unaccountable reason is such a political hot potato in this country.

    In UK , public sector funding of healthcare is 83% of the total-a greater share than all but 4 of the 30 members of OECD-Luxembourg/Czech Rep./Denmark & Norway.

    In addition, we have the political; divide on whether publicly funded healthcare should be PROVIDED by the Private Sector or not.

    My own view is that these political differences mitigate against a frank & honest debate about State provision of Healthcare in an ageing society.

    You won’t be surprised to be told that I think political shibboleths about Public Sector provision aren’t sensible. And I’m increasingly persuaded that the chasm in political debate over State Funding & Private Funding are not just not sensible, but positively counterproductive.

    On the Continent, there seems to be a happy marriage of State & Private funding -with a one service provision approach.

    I recently needed to see a Rheumatologist-urgently after two months of pain & failed GP ,diagnoses. NHS waiting time for the man I wished to see-8 weeks. I saw this chap privately ( self funded) in four days. This is a ridiculous system.

  23. @Fraser

    Take out all the pro-SNP spin and I agree with you.

  24. “Actually, mention of UKIP makes me think of their inept conference last year. It doesn’t seem to have hurt them going by the polls.”

    This year’s starts tomorrow at Doncaster racecourse with their manifesto to be presented on Friday.

  25. @All

    Is anyone else following the daily prediction at Electionforecast.com?

    Interesting result today – first time since they “finalised” their model that Labour have caught up with Tories on predicted vote share – giving them a massive lead of 6 seats. I’d predict vote-share crossover for tomorrow, but the prediction is as unpredictable as the election itself.

    The nice thing about this is that, unlike the polls it’s a neck and neck race, and unlike Fisher you can get a fix every day. I suppose this shows that I have an addictive personality. Anyone else hooked?

  26. @JimJam

    “Barrell – the Westland affair in early 1986 had seriously dented Thatchers credibility and that of the whole Government.
    The conference was just one piece of the VI recovery, although arguably the in the end inflationary and reckless Lawson Tax cuts were more significant.”

    You’re right about the importance of those factors and while I’m almost chastising myself as I speak for allowing myself to be lured into discussing an election of almost 30 years ago, the Tory Government of 1983-87 never endured long uninterrupted periods when they were consistently behind in the polls; certainly not in the way that this current Coalition Government has. And then there was Kinnock, Thatcher, the SDP/Alliance, a booming economy, council house sales etc etc.

    Yep, all the similarities are there just staring us in the face!

    :-)

  27. I think Labour are facing a blow back in Scotland.

    Today’s Daily Record…

    ” Henry McLeish warns Labour are in danger of dying out in Scotland unless radical action is taken now”

    “ORMER Labour first minister Henry McLeish today warns his party are in danger of dying out in Scotland unless radical action is taken now.

    Although the No side won the referendum , Labour have been left reeling by the Yes vote in heartlands such as Glasgow and Lanarkshire.

    And voters energised by the independence debate are sending membership levels soaring in the SNP and Greens.

    McLeish said: “We can’t ignore this. It’s happening in solid areas of the old Red Clydeside and in Dundee.

    “Far too often we are seen trying to catch the middle ground but it doesn’t exist. We need to get our values in order and explain what they are.

    “Labour needs a review, not of leadership, but of the wider movement.

    “What do we stand for now? How do we explain that?

    “We need full autonomy from UK Labour so we can have a clear identity”

    “n stark contrast to the Labour party’s fortunes, in recent days the SNP membership has grown by more than 32,000 to stand at more than 57,000 – making the SNP the third largest party in the UK

    This follows a Survation poll showing support for the SNP standing at 49 per cent – up on even the 2011 landslide levels – while support for Labour languishes at 33 per cent.

    Commenting, SNP Business Convener Derek Mackay MSP said:

    “The extraordinary influx of new members joining the SNP shows no signs of slowing down – with membership now having more than doubled, standing at over 57,000.

    “What a contrast with the No campaign parties in the last few days – we have overtaken the Lib Dems at UK level and Labour are in complete disarray in Scotland”

    And that’s the losing side?

  28. STATGEEK
    @Allan
    “It’s all rather exciting though…”
    ……

    As a man with no party, and there being no referendum on the near horizon, one has to find excitement where one can.
    The SNP polling high in Scotland and a slug crossing my driveway have fairly made my day. :-
    __________

    LOL

  29. @ Guymonde

    I don’t think the Gizmo aspect is the real cause of these problems although it will play a small part. Possibly the biggest cause is the cost of putting a roof over your head either by renting or buying. 40 years ago (with some state support in terms of social housing) one wage earner seemed to be able to do this- not now and very often it comes down to parents to help out as well as two wage earners. It fits in with successive governments relying on housing booms but to some extent also what the demand can afford- together with housing shortages. My view is that increased National Insurance (or private insurance if we really had to go down that route) would reduce the price of housing because people simply could not afford those prices and we will be in the same financial situation but with funded health and retirement in place. Very simplistic I’m sure and damaging to the economy in the process but at least a utopian goal where our day to day living costs reflect the cost of (in this case) building and maintaining a house rather than the cost the market will put on that house.

  30. @VALERIE – thanks for your comments and to others too. Brevity being the soul I wit I’ll say no more than I love this site.

    It’s a good place to drill down into polls and their meaning and I marvel so many of you know so much. Yet is it also a place where there are so many interesting things said by others on a very regular basis as well as the sharp exchanges of partisan fire – and that’s good too.

    Anthony has given us all a very interesting place to meet, to become better informed, ponder, wonder and in my case mostly to be proven wrong…..

  31. @RogerH

    Hilarious to hold it at a racecourse. Talk about playing to your stereotype! Don’t expect you to know the works of R S Surtees, but it’s all heading in that direction “Farage’s Fun and Frolics” would be the perfect title.

    Also hilarious that they’ve gone to the Bonny Banks of Don. Trying to ease their way into Scotland by the back door, do you think?

  32. UKIP have this bizarre invulnerability to them which will mean unless their conferences ends with Farage hoofing kittens off a cliff while the membership sings the Horst Wessel Lied, they’re unlikely to suffer any loss of face.

  33. CB – agree

  34. @ Colin

    I think we are virtually in agreement!

    Obviously you know I’m going to query the private involvement but as long as something is in place and it is fair such that people who really cannot afford the treatment will still get the service then I don’t object.

    I think your case proves the point. I’m convinced this is part of the shambles of an NHS policy over many years that uses waiting lists to offload some of the queue into paying for it themselves. I know people who have had to go private to get a cancer scan done earlier which is shocking. I’ve gone “private” for an osteopath to sort out football injuries although I wouldn’t really expect the state to make me a priority just so I can play football again a few weeks earlier!

    It’s interesting what you say about other countries having more private involvement. Problem for me is that everything about PFI makes me think this has been a waste of money and an excuse for governments to push the liability onto a future government. I’m also concerned about private leeching off the NHS training and resources and not sure that private is any more efficient than NHS- they certainly have a lot more comfy add ons and of course a “profit” element. It may just be a case of how “private” works in our country in a different way to other countries?

  35. @Statgeek

    “…..with the SNP voting in ‘Scotland’s best interests’, and generally pissing off the people of the rUK.”

    “Voting in Scotland’s best interests” is an essentially meaningless phrase. I would imagine that all MPs can claim that they vote to favour their constituents’ best interests, whatever they think those might be.

    The SNP gained 45% of the vote in the referendum by directly appealing to Scottish Labour supporters in the guise of being a party of the left. If there’s a hung parliament in 2015 we’ll be able to see if those words meant anything. If the SNP tried to undermine the viability of a Labour minority government, they would piss off most of the people that the SNP claims to have won over from Scottish Labour.

  36. @philhaines

    That might of course depend on what policies British Labour are elected on, how far the people which the SNP may have won over from Scottish Labour support them and the extent to which they have moved over to SNP on the basis of a left/right assessment. It could equally well have been that Labour’s relentless negativism in the campaign, Lamont’s ‘something for nothing” stance on welfare, and its continued support for Trident may have swayed them.

  37. It’s hard not to contrast Ed Miliband’s speech with Gordon Brown’s one a week ago just before the referendum – and Miliband seems Meh by comparison.

    You could tell Gordon Brown meant every word – the bit about “our friends in the south”, “we did it together” and so on. He really believed what he was saying and that’s where the power of the speech came from – sincerity.

    I can’t get a handle on Miliband. What fires his gut? What does he believe in? I was impressed when he stood up to Murdoch and put a stop to the takeover of BSkyB – but then he ruined it all by posing with a copy of the Sun. And I thought, was it all a stunt? Which one was the real him?

  38. SHEVII
    Thanks !

    I think there is a very easy way to resolve these pointless political differences-concentrate on outcome for patients & leave provision to the test of best outcomes.

    Regarding PFI that comes under Funding really. It was a stupid arrangement-and not just in the NHS-schools too. It grew because politicians wanted to disguise State Debt by keeping what is effectively borrowing “off balance sheet”. When Enron did this sort of thing there was an outcry !

    Re your last para-I look no further than your apparent aversion to “profit” for a Private Sector Provider. If that is truly an article of faith then all NHS supplies would have to be provided by a State organisation.

    As I said- I have enough problems with the Consultants’ NHS Contracts-the thought of relying on a State Manufacturer for all the incredible equipment it uses doesn’t bear thinking about.

  39. a Christie

    “like most other people who voted YES I accept the result”

    LOL……………….This is great news for the country.

  40. Richard in Norway

    Thanks

    Have had two attempts at replying to you.

    Both zapped so will have to forgo the pleasure :-)

  41. @Hireton

    I’m sure that if the SNP do compound the expectations that they’ve built up, they’ll be able to come up with an explanation as convincing as that offered by the Lib Dems post May 2010.

  42. confound not compound!

  43. From yougov:

    “In a survey for the Times Red Box, YouGov tested public opinion on four of the policies and finds them all to be popular, even among those who currently plan to avoid Labour at the polls next year.”

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/24/labour-tax-benefit-policies-hit-with-voters/

  44. @philhaines

    I agree if any party confounds expectations it will pay an electoral price. But it seems to me you are judging what those expectations are in the minds of people in Scotland and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the SNP in Westminster could position itself to the left of a UK Labour Government on some issues. And of course it is expected that smaller parties will extract a price for support from larger parties.

  45. @Allan / Lurker / Roger

    A rather messy chart, showing UKIP’s regional 10-poll moving average since late 2011.

    http://www.statgeek.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ukip-10-average.png

    Other than London, they seem to be doing quite well in England. Note the black line is the UK average. The rUK average would be higher by a notch. Obviously as the UKIP share gets lower in Scotland (2% at most recent poll), the rUK level gets closer to the UK one.

  46. @Phil Haines

    “I’m sure that if the SNP do compound the expectations that they’ve built up, they’ll be able to come up with an explanation as convincing as that offered by the Lib Dems post May 2010.”

    You mean like the explanations that the SNP came up with after the Cowdenbeath Scottish Parliament by-election in January this year which Labour held comfortably with a 9% increased vote share while the SNP vote share reduced by 13%? Or the Dunfermiline by-election held a few months prior to Cowdenbeath (Oct 2013) where Labour gained the seat from the SNP? Or, for that matter, after less than 40% of the Scottish electorate voted for independence only a few days ago?

    They’re on a roll, aren’t they?

    :-)

  47. @Statgeek

    UKIP got 10% in the Beckton by-election recently – must be a fair percentage of the white English community of that ward.

  48. Labour has been replaced by 2 Conservatives. A typo perhaps or Freudian slip?

  49. Colin

    just as well really, we can get quite boring when we start discussing

  50. @Hireton

    “….and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the SNP in Westminster could position itself to the left of a UK Labour Government on some issues.”

    I agree, it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility.

    I also think that it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that the SNP in Westminster could once again be ill-advised enough to bring down a Labour minority government (either through its votes or lack of them) in which case it would suffer the consequences.

1 10 11 12 13 14 15