The Kent Messenger are now reporting the voting intention figures from the Survation/Unite Rochester & Strood poll. Topline figures with changes from the previous Survation Rochester poll right after Mark Reckless’s defection are CON 33%(+2), LAB 16%(-9), LDEM 1%(-1), UKIP 48%(+8), GRN 2%.

As with the ComRes poll a week ago it shows UKIP with a solid lead. While there will always be some underlying churn, the obvious implication of the changes since the start of October is that the Labour vote has been significantly squeezed, and is breaking heavily in UKIP’s favour.


376 Responses to “Survation poll in Rochester has UKIP lead growing to 15 points”

1 3 4 5 6 7 8
  1. @ Amber

    “Shares in Scottish registered companies & the value of the GBP were shaken by one opinion poll showing that Scotland might vote Yes. I believe that affected the ‘don’t know’ voters.”

    I wonder at what point “the markets” start to get a bit spooked at next year’s GE. Based on current polling you’d go with the likelihood that even two parties couldn’t produce a stable government. Say 30 SNP, 30 LD and 5-10 UKIP with no clear water between Lab and Con sounds like a nightmare for stable government!

  2. GRHINPORTS

    ‘I will accept I rather lazily accepted it was something Blair could have said. And it fitted with the point I wanted to make about the real dividing political line in British society’
    ——————————————————————————-

    Colin was correct in pointing out that it was not an actual quote from Blair. However, according to Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, Blair recognised what you call ‘the real dividing political line in British society’.

    ‘ Blair is not entirely delusional….. His key insight was to recognise that the great dividing line in this country is not between Labour and Tory, but between those who believe in the market and those who believe in the state.
    On one side stand the Tory paternalists, the Lib Dem Left and Old Labour MPs who, essentially, believe Britain should be governed by a benign elite.
    On the other side lie Tory radicals (Michael Gove, Iain Duncan Smith) and the New Labour praetorians (RIP)..’

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/9057323/If-Labour-ditched-David-and-Ed-Miliband-it-could-actually-win-an-election.html

  3. Colin

    Making a constituency level forecast 6 months out might be considered “brave”!

    However, if it worked out something like their suggestion of

    LABOUR 291 CONSERVATIVES 265 SNP 38 LIBDEMS 23 UKIP 9 DUP 8 SINNFEIN 5 SDLP 3 PLAID CYMRU 3 GREEN 3 INDY 1 ALLIANCE1

    it would be interesting to see how it was handled. Labour following the example of the SNP in 2007 and their Welsh colleagues in 2011 might be wisest to run a minority government and dare the other parties to bring them down.

    To do that, however, requires balls not Balls.

  4. cl45

    “Just imo; it was, about tory exits being Lab’s last hope.”

    Yes, I’d figured out that that was just your opinion chris and I was just pointing out that it is somewhat arbitrary and disregards loads of other historical and current issues – without even taking into account the possibility of “stuff” happening in the next 8 months [stuff often does happen you know……………]

    Ergo I think your analysis, as it so often seems to be, is based on the premise [a la footy analogy above] that nothing ever changes from how it is at any one fixed time.

    But it does and it will.

  5. I wouldn’t read too much into polls showing a surge in support for independence in Scotland. The pro-independence VI is likely to come down once the new Devo Plus Scottish bill is passed in the next parliament. Right now, Scottish Labour voters are probably frustrated because they expected Devo Plus to come faster, even though the unionist parties are actually following the timetable that was announced before the referendum.

  6. That UK Elects maps give the Greens Cambridge, Norwich South and retaining Brighton.

    I’d take that at a push ;-)

  7. OLDNAT

    All forecasts are aren’t they?

    I won’t enquire as to the basis on which this one is made-I wouldn’t understand it.

    Presumably they update their forecasts over time.

    The difference in seats which their current VI forecast produces, compared to UKPR UNS for the same VI is dramatic.

    The SNP factor seems well accepted there-and although my knowledge of constituencies is meagre, those purple ones look as though Labour suffer as badly as Cons at the hands of UKIP.

    Yes-that outcome would be a nightmare. Politics apart it wouldn’t be good for economic confidence given the current global climate.

    Just another big “known unknown” to deal with.

  8. Mbruno

    “The pro-independence VI is likely to come down once the new Devo Plus Scottish bill is passed in the next parliament.”

    If Scots voters feel that it matches their expectations/aspirations then I’m sure that would be true. If they felt it was far too little, then …….

    YG poll – Percentage saying it should be devolved

    “How elections to the Scottish parliament are run” 86%

    “Working age benefits like housing benefit and jobseekers allowance” 71%

    “Increased powers to set and collect income tax” 67%

    “Powers to set and collect other taxes, like inheritance tax, corporation tax and capital gains tax” 67%

    “Health and safety regulations, consumer protection and competition law” 60%

    “The minimum wage” 60%

    “The state pension” 47%

    “Broadcasting regulation and the BBC” 43%

  9. “Some of the complexities [ Scottish Labour Leadership election ] are explained here by John Curtice.”

    So, just like EM’s election, there is no trade union vote – just votes of individuals who are trade’s unionists and whose union is affiliated to the Labour Party.

    Not many people know that.

  10. That UK elects maps is bananas.

    It give Newcastle-under-Lyme and Staffordshire Moorlands to UKIP, but not any seats in Kent.

  11. Catmanjeff

    England is probably the most difficult part of the UK to predict at the moment. While the other nations have a reasonable track record to go on, UKIP is a very new phenomenon.

  12. CHRISLANE1945
    There was no GE in 34; there was a big GE in 45.

    Wrong. There was a GB GE in 1734 which Walpole won despite losing 85 seats.

    But you’re right that the 1945 UK GE was bigger in the sense that more seats were contested.

  13. @Oldnat

    Here is Newcastle Under Lyme – 2010

    Party – Candidate – Votes – % – ±%
    Labour Paul Farrelly 16,393 38.0 ?7.4
    Conservative Robert Jenrick 14,841 34.4 +9.4
    Liberal Democrat Nigel Jones 8,466 19.6 +0.7
    UKIP David E. Nixon 3,491 8.1 +4.5
    Majority 1,552 3.6

    Plus this:

    The local council has traditionally been dominated by the Labour Party. However, in the 2006 local elections a coalition of Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors gained a majority.

    The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) also made gains in 2007 and 2008 but in 2011 and 2012 losing all seats they were defending, including their Group Leader, Derrick Huckfield.

    The Council was led between 2006-2011 by Conservative Councillor Simon Tagg. [2] Stephen Sweeney served as the Conservative Leader from 2011-2012. .

    This Labour Party regained its majority on the Council in 2012. The Council is now led by Labour Councillor Mike Stubbs.

    After the 2012 Local Elections there were 33 Labour Party Councillors, 11 Liberal Democrats, 16 Conservatives and 0 from UKIP.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borough_of_Newcastle-under-Lyme#Politics

    I think it’s an error.

    If UKIP can turn that over, I’d be amazed.

  14. @OldNat

    “LABOUR 291 CONSERVATIVES 265 SNP 38 LIBDEMS 23”

    In your scenario, we could expect a weak minority Labour government, with the distinct possibility that the SNP would before too long bring that government down and eventually trigger another general election. In an alternative scenario of no Labour meltdown to the SNP but everything else remaining unchanged, the arithmetic is such that you would expect that a Labour-led coalition with enough seats to expect to last for five years.

    That arithmetic illustrates well why I feel that Conservatives ought to be delighted if there’s a Labour meltdown in Scotland. It means that even in a situation where they would be considered to have lost the general election, they could hold out considerable hope that they might very quickly be offered a rematch. Effectively an SNP surge is the Conservative insurance policy.

  15. BARBAZENZERO.
    Thank you very much; as we historians are oft to say:
    Early 18th Century: not my area!

  16. @ Roger Mexico et al

    dna”A majority of Scots would back independence if another referendum were held today, according to a poll ”
    Buyer’s remorse? A poll just before the referendum showed “a majority of Scots would back independence” but they didn’t. Other comments on OK to say that now there is no chance of it happening, and on how to ‘weight’ the figures also relevant.
    I don’t believe another referendum on the same terms is a possibility. Many English voters would not be happy to see the Scots having multiple bites at the cherry with still no say for them, or even for the Scots living in England or Wales or NI.
    Someone should ask across the UK
    “Do you think we should maintain and seek to improve the UK?”

  17. Valerie

    “Could we have a return to the situation where Scottiish politics are only discussed when there is a Saltaire in the heading?
    Just a thought.”

    Surely that would be a thread for discussing Yorkshire politics? ;-)

  18. CHRISHORNET
    In Rochester and Strood, the Scottish Nationalist Socialist Worker’s Party will finish behind the likes of Islamaphobic Britain First, the utterly bonkers Official Monster Raving Loony Party.
    And yes, even the Lib Dems.
    Why? Because they’re such an utter irrelevance to Rochester and Strood, the topic of this discussion, that they couldn’t even be bothered to stand
    _______

    This is so not true. Check the 4th candidate down

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochester_and_Strood_by-election,_2014

  19. Alex Salmond should have insisted on a best of three.

  20. @OldNat

    “LABOUR 291 CONSERVATIVES 265 SNP 38 LIBDEMS 23?

    In your scenario, we could expect a weak minority Labour government, with the distinct possibility that the SNP would before too long bring that government down and eventually trigger another general election. In an alternative scenario of no Labour meltdown to the SNP but everything else remaining unchanged, the arithmetic is such that you would expect Labour to have enough seats and allies to be able to govern for five years.

    That arithmetic illustrates well why I feel that Conservatives ought to be delighted if there’s a Labour meltdown in Scotland. It means that even in a situation where they would be considered to have lost the general election, they could hold out considerable hope that they might very quickly be offered a rematch. Effectively an SNP surge is the Conservative insurance policy.

  21. Amber (if you are around)

    LiS website listing current nominations for Leader & Deputy Leader

    http://www.scottishlabour.org.uk/pages/scottish-labour-leadership-election-nominations

    Is this normal? To an outsider it looks like undue influence being exerted.

    Add to that BBC Scotland News version of “Jim Murphy is standing for etc. He is being challenged by Boyack & Findlay” Jeez!

  22. @ AC

    “This is so not true. Check the 4th candidate down”

    I saw what you just did!

  23. @ Shevii

    I wonder at what point “the markets” start to get a bit spooked at next year’s GE.
    ————
    That’s always at the back of my mind because currencies can move quite sharply & assist, or alternatively mess up, a UK investment project that is being translated into USD.

  24. @ Old Nat

    Listing supporting nominations on the website is entirely normal. It was done during the UK leadership contest too. It is to ensure transparency i.e. to show publicly that all the candidates have met the nomination threshold by the closing date.

  25. One way out would be, if , next years GE produces an unconclusive result with no obviouse coaltion with minor parties, a grand coalition for a year followed by a another GE.

  26. @ Old Nat

    The MSM are simply treating Jim Murphy as they treated David Miliband in the UK leadership contest. How well did that work out for them?

  27. Amber

    1. Thanks

    and

    2. LOL

  28. @Amber and OldNat

    An interesting way to look at the nominations is to imagine they’re anonymous in terms of who each set of MPs and MSPs is nominating and pick which candidate you’d choose based entirely on their supporters.

    By this rule, if I had a vote, I’d definitely pick the group nominating Sarah Boyack.

    I suspect I’d also vote for her anyway but my gut feel is much stronger for her group of nominators.

  29. Northumbrianscot

    That’s a pretty good way of looking at it.

    Whichever party is the largest in 2016, and provides the First Minister and her (choice of word is deliberate and non-partisan) team, we need a damn sight better level of opposition at Holyrood than we’ve had for many a long day.

  30. @OldNat

    Is it AV?

  31. Amber Star – “Regarding the poll showing a small increase for Scottish independence – it is easy to choose the ‘radical’ option when you know it won’t happen.”

    Yes. Someone on reddit observed that the “we would have voted yes” thing after the event is a bit like the following gif:

    http://thumbpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/funny-gif-dogs-fighting-Internet-reality1.gif

  32. Hannah

    LiS Leader election?

    As I understand it, it’s more like STV within each college. Voters rank the candidates preferentially. Then the 1st votes of everybody are totalled within each college and weighted so that the total in each college is the same.

    The weighted votes of each college are totalled to produce the 1st round votes for each candidate.

    If no candidate gets 50% of the totalled weighted votes, then the bottom candidate drops out, and their 2nd preferences are allocated to the remaining candidates.

    Votes within each college are then totalled and weighted as previously, and the same for producing the 2nd round totals for the whole party.

    If no candidate gets 50% of the totalled weighted votes .. etc etc until someone gets 50%+.

    If I have any of that wrong, Amber will correct me.

  33. An issue with choosing political party leader or deputy leader is that, pretty obviously, those who choose are those who are already convinced – i.e. generally they have not/are not in danger of defecting to another party or voting for someone else. It might be an idea if members of political parties chose the candidate who would least appeal to them but just might appeal to those they want to recruit!

    Not sure I know how this would work but I’ve often thought, looking at my own voting record, that it might have been better if I’d voted for someone who had very little appeal for me – on the basis that maybe I’m not who the party needed to recruit.

  34. Maura
    Much in the same vein as I contributed earlier today, I quite agree with you. Nowadays it’s handier to have a PR friendly person.

  35. HOWARD

    Yes, I agree. Also you want someone who is going to challenge your assumptions – take you out of your comfort zone if you like. I think that’s a clear difference between Blair and Cameron – whatever you think of him Blair challenged his party and, in the process, made it able to be elected (I know some people would argue that in the process he lost the party itself) whereas Cameron seems to be constantly trying to appease the wing of his party which made it unelectable for such a long time. Before he was elected a lot of people did think he would challenge them but, since his election, he only seems able to appease them.

    The Labour Party in Scotland needs someone who will attract those who are now saying they won’t vote Labour. I don’t know enough about the candidates to say who that should be!

  36. Maura

    Unfortunately they also need members, money, coherent branding, and end to in-fighting ……

  37. @Anyone who knows

    Am I right in thinking that if JM is elected as SLAB leader, he stays in the Commons as an MP, and basically devolves (meh!) the powers to the deputy SLAB leader?

  38. @ ON
    However, if it worked out something like their suggestion of
    LABOUR 291 CONSERVATIVES 265 SNP 38 LIBDEMS 23 UKIP 9 DUP 8 SINNFEIN 5 SDLP 3 PLAID CYMRU 3 GREEN 3 INDY 1 ALLIANCE1

    I am glad someone has put up this scenario because its broadly what all the polls this week have been pointing to.

    What I am really interested in is would (with these numbers) Lab try to form a coalition with the LDs. That would give a number of 314 (318 if one adds SDLP & ALLIANCE) and would be quite hard to defeat (given the absence of SF, and possible confidence support from Greens and PC). If one adds up Con + UKIP + SNP the most likely combo to support a no confidence in such a coalition it adds to only 312.

    The question is would Lab form a coalition with the LDs?

    I’m really interest in what Lab supporters feel about this now as a couple of years ago whenever this topic came up there was a categoric “NO, Never ever will we work with those treacherous perfidious Lib Dems” – but that was when a Lab majority looked relatively assured.

    The thing is if Lab try and rule in minority there are so many problems I would foresee for them:

    1. It would be tricky for them to do very much in govt.

    2. Whenever a new GE presented itself they would find themselves being attacked plausibly in at least 4 if not 5 (counting Green) or even 6 (counting PC in Wales) directions. I would have thought that would be an almost impossible election campaign to manage.

    3. The Red Dems that have joined Lab VI mostly out of anger at Nick Clegg making a coalition with the “wrong” party might well be aggrieved if their newly formed Lab vote didn’t deliver the “right” coalition when the numbers now worked in favour of that scenario.

    Surely there it would be better for Lab them to swallow their annoyance at the LDs and make a coalition in this scenario.

    Thoughts?

  39. @Amber Star
    “The MSM are simply treating Jim Murphy as they treated David Miliband in the UK leadership contest. How well did that work out for them?”

    As well as we both hope it works out here!

    JM seems to be presenting himself as the leader in waiting. Now factoids can work but he may have jumped the gun.

  40. Interesting tweet from someone called Johanna Baxter (Lab NEC?)

    “Join @scottishlabour for £5 before 1st Dec to vote in leadership & deputy leadership elections”

    Any Tories out there want to buy a LiS election? :-)

  41. @Oldnat

    Give £5 to a party so that Miliband can tell the elected leader what to do/say in Holyrood? Nah!

    I won’t even give Sturgeon my cash, never mind Miliband.

  42. LAB – 32% (=)
    CON – 31% (-2)
    UKIP – 18% (+3)
    LDEM – 7% (=)
    GRN – 6% (-1

  43. GRHinPorts

    Older posters will remember the UK Parliament in the last days of the Callaghan Government when as Joe Ashton recalled

    “I remember the famous case of Leslie Spriggs, the then-Member for St. Helens. We had a tied vote and he was brought to the House in an ambulance having suffered a severe heart attack. The two Whips went out to look in the ambulance and there was Leslie Spriggs laid there as though he was dead. I believe that John Stradling Thomas said to Joe Harper, ‘How do we know that he is alive?’ So he leaned forward, turned the knob on the heart machine, the green light went around, and he said, ‘There, you’ve lost—it’s 311.’ That is an absolutely true story. It is the sort of nonsense that used to happen. No one believes it, but it is true.”

    With Labour as the largest party, but with no chance of creating a viable governing coalition, even worse would happen. Labour MPs like Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling would have to attend the House of commons EVERY DAY!

    That’s why I suggested a minority Government. As the SNP discovered in 2007 and Welsh Labour in 2011, governments have enormous power without any need to have a majority in the Chamber.

    In the UK Parliament (were the numbers something like the ones I posted) Labour would be able to legislate as it liked on England only matters, and for UK matters, non-contentious legislation could easily be agreed across the parties.

    Why would the Tories try to precipitate another election in the short term? They would need to build an alliance with people who would find a barge pole too short, in any case.

  44. YG being tweeted as LABOUR 32% CONSERVATIVES 31% UKIP 18% LIBDEMS 7% GREENS 6%

  45. @ Old Nat

    Any Tories out there want to buy a LiS election? :-)
    —————-
    It’s not possible because all LiS members must be on the electoral role in Scotland. I know other Parties don’t have that requirement but Labour does.

  46. @ Old Nat

    And I know your comment was tongue in cheek but sometimes people don’t ‘get’ it.

  47. Amber

    I wasn’t exactly being serious! but there’s a whole month to get the application in to get on the electoral roll for that nice wee holiday home, or the but n’ ben up the glen, or your ex-pat vote from Southern California. :-)

  48. Apologies if what I’m about to say has been already said many times over, but I’ve been otherwise engaged for a few days, entertaining some visiting relatives and, as ever, indulging my various sporting obsessions. Accordingly, apart from a very cursory glance at the recent threads, I really haven’t read much of the discussion thus far. Sadly, my UKPR habit is becoming ever more cursory and intermittent these days.

    So, based on the subject of the threads, the Scottish voting intention polls and the Rochester by-election, here goes. It would appear that the cross-breaks for Scotland were rather more accurate than first thought! I happen to think that it is very unlikely that the Scots will vote this way next May, but there’s doubt, for now and in the immediate aftermath of the Referendum, the SNP appear to be in the ascendancy and Labour in full retreat. This is a local difficulty that the new leader will need to address after he or she is elected next months because, while it is unlikely that Labour will need all 41 of their Scottish MPs, they will need to retain a good few if they are to have a hope of forming a majority government in Westminster. Lamont, who looked part of the problem and not the solution, has gone and there is an unexpected and welcome opportunity now for Scottish Labour to revive under new leadership. In that sense, Lamont, after the initially damaging recriminations following her resignation, may have done Labour a huge favour. I still think the SNP, ultimately, will have some difficulty selling an SNP Westminster vote next May, although an increased number of MPs for them now looks an inevitability.

    Trying to segue way from Scotland to Rochester (difficult!!), I don’t think the SNP threat to Labour can be compared to the UKIP threat to the Tories. The SNP have the greater capability of winning seats, but they can’t destabilise Labour across the UK in the way UKIP can the Tories. The Tory vote appears to be collapsing in Scotland along the same line as Labour’s and I see no capacity for an SNP surge to allow the Tories in to sneak Labour held seats north of the border. Labour could firewall the Scottish damage, and maybe negate it over the next 6 months, but the Tories could be hurt in hundreds of seats all over England by a UKIP surge. The recent by-elections suggest Labour can keep the UKIP beast at bay more easily in their fiefdoms than the Tories can in theirs. I see no possibility of a UKIP vote helping the Tories anywhere, but I can see it helping the Lib Dems retain seats and Labour to win some. UKIP are a nationwide spoiler, a dagger mainly aimed at the heart of the Tories, whereas the SNP are basically engaged in a straight punch up with Labour in less than 10% of Westminster seats. Labour have got problems in Scotland, but I don’t think they’re of the type, and on the scale, that the Tories have with UKIP. If Reckless takes Rochester, which looks highly likely now, then Tory electoral nerves may start to border on panic. No similar ground-shaking by-elections likely in Scotland, I don’t think.

    And then of course, beyond the seat-winning parliamentary arithmetic of it all, there’s the politics involved. The SNP advance could force Labour down roads that are electorally advantageous, returning them to what they always should be in Scotland; an unmistakably left of centre political party, closer to their natural core voters. UKIP, however, tug the Tories in ever more strident rightward directions, taking them into political territory that chimes with voters latent reservations about them. UKIP could well be leading them over an electoral cliff.

    In this thrilling relegation battle between Labour and the Tories, it seems to me that Miliband has to do two things. Shore up Scotland in such a way that he can hang on to at least half of his 41 MPs and, wherever he can, fan the UKIP flames. Carswell and Reckless have presented him with a gigantic gift in this respect.

    None of this is either particularly appetising or uplifting, but dismal political dogfights rarely are. May 2015 promises to be the last hurrah for the two old Leviathans of British politics and the prize is likely to go to the party that can sneak the majority of the 60-65% of the voters who will be supporting them. Miliband has an advantage there and, rather like the two drowning men fighting each other for the last lifebelt, all he really needs to do is to make sure he swims a little less slowly than Cameron.

    No great passionate visions or electoral victories in the offing, I don’t think. It’s sandbags and tin hats time for Labour now as the finishing line appears into view.

  49. Sunday Times/YouGov poll: LAB 32%, CON 31%, UKIP 18%, LDEM 7%, GRNS 6%

1 3 4 5 6 7 8