There are three GB voting intention polls in tomorrow’s papers – YouGov, Opinium and Survation. Topline figures for all three are below:

  • YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 32%, LAB 34%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 14%, GRN 6%
  • Opinium/Observer – CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 13%, GRN 6% (tabs)
  • Survation/Mail on Sunday – CON 33%, LAB 30%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 18%, GRN 4% (tabs)

376 Responses to “Latest YouGov, Opinium and Survation figures”

1 6 7 8

    “Daily Mail says Miliband the movie -the Labour party ppb ,tuesday night.
    Compares it to vote Kinnock -that one went well didnt it.”


    Actually it did. The personal ratings of Kinnock jumped +19 over the course of the campaign after it I was hearing today.

  2. Dave

    If SNP combining with non-Labour results in a Labour Queen’s speech being voted down, surely the SNP could join with Labour to vote down any Tory QS, and ensure a second general election?

    No it wouldn’t. I know I keep saying this, but we really need to forget about Queen’s Speeches. Under the FTPA, the only thing that matters is very specific votes of no confidence and confidence. Obviously there’s likely to one of these put forward after a failed QS vote, but there’s nothing to prevent MPs then voting for the current government and no election happening.

    A government in that position could resign, vote down any alternative and force an election after 14 days. But there’s nothing to say that the electorate will approve of such goings on and it may punish a Party that is thought to behave in such a manner.

    What is more there is no guarantee that a new election would make things any easier. Usually two elections close together tends to benefit the two biggest Parties at the expense of smaller ones (think of the Greek election in May and June 2012). But the SNP are the big Party in Scotland and would likely be unaffected by this – similarly Plaid and the NI Parties in their own heartlands. So all that might happen would be to squeeze the Lib Dems more and maybe get rid of what few UKIP MPs do get elected. It would probably leave government formation more difficult not less.

    The only ways out of that deadlock would be for one of Lab or Con to win a lot of seats off the other. And if that is the likely outcome, having both of them agree on a new election isn’t going to happen. Alternatively they would have to form a Grand Coalition – and we know how unpopular that would be.

    His “poll of polls” seems to be a somewhat flexible commodity!

    He has certainly upped the frequency of them, and this one of four polls covering a month seems reasonable.

    Sorry BTW to repeat your link. I did have a skim through the posts before I posted on his 2 latest threads but missed that one.

  4. Hmm

    I don’t think anyone can disagree that the Labour party are more left wing than the Tories and that the SNP are more left wing than both, therefore as SCotland have shifted from Tories to Labour to SNP they have become more Left and therefore socialist

  5. AR558,

    Being to the left of someone doesn’t mean that you’re a socialist.

    Also, using party voting preference is an infamously bad way of working out someone’s political views. Just awful. Fortunately, we have actual issues polling for Scotland and England due to the Social Attitudes Surveys, and so we know that both countries have nearly the same distribution of views on most major issues.

  6. AR558
    Yes if you look at it that simply but people rarely if ever vote solely based on were a party sits on the political spectrum. Attitudes regarding certain key issues or the party in general, perceptions of leaders, narratives in the media are all far more in important. Rightly or wrongly the Tories started giving of “anti Scottish vibes” in the late seventies which drove many in Scotland to Labour and now the Indy ref and the desire for Scottish independence have drove practically all yes voters of any political persuasion to the SNP regardless of their policies.

    When you look at the key requisites to differentiate a country on political terms such as attitudes to certain policies Scotland is wholly comparable to anywhere else in the UK.

  7. @ Ar558

    There is a qualitative difference between a relative position on the left-right scale and being Socialist.

    Also, people are just as varied in their beliefs and norms there as here (for the time being). So you have the same palette of colours as in England.

    Also Bill Patrick gave you some pointers to evaluate the SNP as a government party (and the absence of socialists).

    Individuals also matter. NS and AS are not embodiments of some abstract political beliefs, but individuals (and the former is a personality).

  8. Bill Patrick
    Exactly what I was trying to say :)

  9. In hope they do have a Milliband the movie PPB.I liked both Kinnock and Major the movie.I think it showed their values and where they came from and what made them who they are.

    I think this approach is a good way of the public to get an understanding on the indivual.

  10. DAVID K.
    I thought the movie in which Kinnock talked of a ‘platform’ from which people could launch their lives.

    Joe Biden famously copied Kinnock’s reflection on why he and his wife were enabled to have an education for as long as they needed to have one. Kinnock’s ‘Labourism’ story was my Dad and Mum’s story, and they came from the same part of the country as Kinnock.

    Maybe Ed will tell his story, as he did in his speech two years ago; about his Mother being saved by catholic nuns in Poland.

    I think ‘people’ like a story. We do it all the time in our teaching.

    Other people feel uncomfortable about such ‘narratives’ and time will tell whether it helps or hinders Labour and the Tories.

  11. @CHRISLANE1945

    I feel it might be beneficial, although a cheesy X-Factor back story type of tug on the heart strings has to be avoided at all costs.

    Fine line to walk.

  12. AdamB
    “Said it before and will say it again, I think DC will try to bung a pile of powers to Scotland alongside EVEL and therefore try to get SNP to pass this.”

    Actively propping up a Tory government would badly damage the SNP, unless Cameron were to offer something so tempting that rejecting it would alienate even more SNP voters than accepting it would – my feeling is that the minimum that the SNP could even seriously consider would be Devo Max. As Amber Star has pointed out, this would be deeply unpopular with much of the Tory party, Labour would be totally against it, and there would be no chance of the necessary legislation being passed.

    So, if Cameron does offer any deal to the SNP, then the SNP will have to turn it down, because it will be either insufficient to appease their own supporters or more than Cameron could deliver. Merely making the offer could damage Cameron’s position within the Tory party and perhaps cost him the leadership (although he may lose that anyway), especially as it would be contrasted with recent attempts to portray possible SNP support for a Labour government as highly undesirable. I will therefore be astonished if Cameron does make any offer whatsoever to the SNP.

    I have my own proposal as to how the problem of a minority government could be resolved. The Tories and Labour could form a temporary coalition government, use their huge combined majority to push through legislation ending the Union and then vote for a new election for an SNP-free Parliament. (For the avoidance of misunderstanding, I am (a) joking, and (b) a member of the SNP.)

  13. Yep Johnmo and Chrislane, I was a kid, but I still remember Major in that taxi “it’s still there it’s still there” as they drove past a nondescript house in South London –

    I’ve seen loads of PPBs since and not many stick. I do remember Gerri Halliwell posing as a care assistant, but only because it was so irritating.

    They”ve generally been awful this year, although Salmond calling the tune is pretty astonishing for all the tropes it throws in – it’s a ready made lesson plan.

  14. SLAM
    COUPER 2802
    “On polling I am beginning to think re-interviewing January respondents in YouGov is keeping the Labour vote too high. Looking at the Scottish crossbreaks Labour is exactly same as January whereas in the full Scottish polls they have fallen back. Have YouGov used this re-interviewing technique before? Do they know it works? If it doesn’t work then if we exclude YouGov Tories are ahead.”
    ‘One of the most interesting posts today but minimal response. It would be interesting to see some of those who understand such matters give their view on this in a non – partisan way.”

    Not that I do pretend to understand such matters but I have too been thinking about this since yesterday’s Survation poll. One company is using the voting identification from 2010 to weight with and the other identification from 2015, much closer to the election. (This also affects any re-allocation of ‘don’t knows’ but I think someone yesterday proved that mathematically that made little difference.)

    Maybe weighting with a panel whose decisions were expressed so much closer to the election, rather than five years ago, affects the stability of the polls as we run in.

    Anyway we won’t know I suppose until election day which polls seem to have greater accuracy. I personally am not discounting any pollster as such.


    Just on France’s reovery – while weak their recession was not as bad as ours either (because of our austerity?) – their GDP per capita 2014 vs 2008 is down 2.4%, ours is still down 5.6%.

    (figures from the Trading Economics website)

    So laugh at France if you want, but in a way they have done better than us…

    That said they are stuck in the Euro with huge structural headaches – I am just pointing out that there are other ways of considering the numbers.

  16. In light of Milliband’s commitment to rule out any form of deal with the SNP and the resulting comments as to how Labour can form a government without SNP support I’ve been doing a little bit of thinking and it occurred to me (please correct me if I’m wrong) that a government doesn’t necessarily need a majority in the house. Allow me to explain and sorry if this point has already been made.

    Imagine this very plausible scenario….
    Lib Dems=25
    And the rest distributed as one might expect.
    In that scenario the right wing bloc of Tory, Libs, DUP and UKIP results in 280+25+9+3=317 seats. This is 6 seats short of the minimum 323 needed to command a majority (Sinn Fein and Speaker abstentions) Labour and the progressive bloc will obviously vote down everything they do and thus lock the Tories out of power.

    Now before recently one might have expected a Lab+Progressive bloc government to emerge in this scenario but with any “official” deal with the SNP ruled out that seems less likely. But SNP plus the rest of the Prog bloc could still de facto support a Lab government but lets assume they don’t and abstain on everything a Labour government tries to do. In that scenario Labour can offer a few goodies to the Libs (electoral reform, votes at 16, Lords reform) and get the Libs on side. Lab+Libs=295 seats which is greater than the Con+DUP+UKIP bloc which equals 292. Thus so long as the prog bloc abstains Lab/Libs can pass anything they want and reality is I don’t anticipate Cons, DUP and UKIP voting as a single bloc and Labour and the Libs would probably at least garner some support from the SDLP, Lady H, Greens and Plaid.

    Thus to conclude the SNP’s presence basically acts as a differential between what Cons and Lab need to form a government. Any Tory led group needs to exceed 323 while any Lab led group simply needs to be bigger than whatever the Tories can cobble together. This makes Labours job undeniably easier. Now all this does have the whiff of Weimar Germany (and that didn’t exactly end well) but that’s another debate for another time.

  17. @RIVERS10

    The issue with your scenario is Clegg’s comments on whether a government with the second largest party in control would be seen as legitimate.

  18. Rivers10

    An interesting article, thank you.
    One small point; the Speaker has 3 deputies who are also effectively discounted, arithmetically speaking. The ‘winning line’ therefore is 320.


    I suspect that the sentence “That should help BBC Parliament’s viewing figures.” has caused a post I just attempted to go into automod.

    In any event, I do hope you read it as it ends with a request to you.

  20. Just yougov today?

  21. @Les Cunningham

    I think the Yes voters now voting SNP are getting to the point of no longer caring about whether the SNP support Labour or Tory.

    I wonder if this is the point of the Conservative campaign: the demonising and delegitimising the democratic choice of Scots has hardened the Yes\SNP vote. The fact that Miliband is not standing up for Scottish democracy but rather is joining in with the demonisation and also the hypocrisy of EM being happy to sit with the SDLP, means that SNP voters will have no real desire to help EM to be PM.

    So, if the Conservatives make a good offer it might enable the SNP to abstain in the confidence vote. Could the SNP sell that to their voters & members?

  22. @Catoswyn

    It is purely statistical the YouGov cross breaks should be compared with the full Scottish polls. If the cross breaks do not show any fall in the Labour vote since January but the full Scottish polls do show a drop, then it is possible that this technique of re-polling people from January is missing real change and YouGov are over-estimating Labour. If we take YouGov out of the polling averages then the Tories are slightly ahead.

  23. Have just watched a new movie The Politician v The

    The tories can’t seriously be thinking of putting him in charge surely?

  24. Geert Hofstede used IBM managers to gather data about attitudes across 50 or so countries. Hofstede describes the culture of a country as its personality. Culture is not monolithic of course. There are sub-cultures and not every one in any country accepts the culture of the country. The culture of a country arises out of its history. Cultures are long lasting and endure. It takes something catastrophic such as war or a great natural disaster to change the culture of a country

    Hofstede identified four (later five) dimensions that existed across all countries examined. One dimension he named Power Distance and is the extent to which the less powerful members of society are willing to accept unequal distribution of power within that society. A relatively low PD score means that the societal norm of that country is, for example,that all should be interdependent and that inequality in society should be minimised. Those in a high PD country will believe that power holders are entitled to privileges, power is a basic fact that antedates good or evil; its legitimacy is irrelevant. The underdog is to blame.

    Great Britain scores 35 as a measure of PD. High PD scores are found in Asia, Africa and Latin countries. Anglo and Germanic countries score low PD. Ireland scores 28 on PD. It is possible Scotland might score differently than England.

    The second dimension is Uncertainty Avoidance – the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations. Societies with a low UA score will hold as a norm that the uncertainty inherent in life is relatively easily accepted and each day is taken as it comes. There is an openness to change and innovation and a willingness to take unknown risks. Those in high UA countries as a norm only take known risks;regard what is different as dangerous and feel that the uncertainty inherent in life is felt as a continuous threat that must be fought.

    High UA scores are found in Japan (earthquakes?), Latin countries and German speaking countries. Low UA scores are in Anglo, Nordic and Chinese culture countries.

    Great Britain and Ireland scored 35 for UA. After controlling for age the scores were GB 43 and IRE 54.

    The third dimension is Individualism on one side versus Collectivism. On the individualist side ties between individuals are loose. Every one is expected to look after him/herself and family.

    Collectivist refers to the family. Collectivist societies often have extended families.From birth people are integrated into in-groups which continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. Individualism prevails in Western and developed worlds. Japan is in the middle. GB scored 89, ranking third in Individualism scores, 2 points behind America. Ireland scored 70 in 12 th position.

    The fourth dimension is Masculinity versus its opposite Femininity and refers to the distribution of emotional roles between the genders. It was found that:(a) women’s values differ less among societies than men’s values: (b) men’s values across countries differ from assertive and competitive and maximally different from women’s values on the one hand to modest, caring and similar to women’s values on the other. The assertive pole is called Masculine and the modest, caring pole is Feminine. Women in Feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as men. In Masculine countries they are more assertive and competitive but not as much as men.

    GB has a Masculinity score of 66 equal to Germany with which it shares 9th and 10th place. Japan is tops and Ireland is a little more masculine than GB.

    Perhaps these dimensions might be of more interest than discussions of “left and “right”. Apologies if that hope is ill-founded.

  25. As Roger Mexico says, the FTPA narrowly redefines a confidence vote from QS and budgets and anything the govt. decrees to be a confidence vote to actual no-confidence motions. Of course, one of those would promptly follow a vote against a traditional measure of confidence.

    Now, back to the weekend’s polls: either Survation (and, to a lesser degree, Ashcroft national polling) is identifying something that other polls are missing, or it’s skewing both L and C low with its high UKIP figure.

    I’m now also wondering whether someone’s collating data on expected turnout, and the VI of 2010 non-voters considered likely to vote this time round.

  26. @CANDY
    “It will affect everything. Why would a smart person emigrate to Scotland? Why would a smart person stay in Scotland? Why would a business decide to relocate to Scotland? Why would a Scottish business decide to stay?”

    Yes you are completely right. It will affect everything. And I personally know of many ex-pat scots and non scots seriously looking about coming back to scotland. I have a senior job in business transformation in Australia, my wife is a very experienced senior consultant in the health sector. We have a young family, we are doing well and love where we are, but we are making choices about where and in what culture we want to bring our children up.

    We probably would have come back on a yes last year, and who knows now with whats going to happen next week. The world is far bigger than the south east of england, and Scotland is becoming very attractive for people across the world who see an opportunity to balance being the best you can be in your profession while recognising that society is more than what exists within your front door. We live in interesting times…

1 6 7 8