The Guardian themselves seem to have put a pause on reporting their polls, but they are wisely continuing to commission their series of ICM/Guardian polls so as not to leave a gap in the data. Topline figures in the first post-election ICM poll are CON 37%, LAB 31%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%. Tabs are here.

In terms of methodology ICM are using the same method as before the election – except, of course, that the data is weighted using people’s recall of their 2015 vote, not their 2010 vote. ICM’s tables make is abundently clear that is just a holding position, and that they are keeping their old method for the time being while they continue to investigate what went wrong and until they are sure of the right solution.


212 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 37, LAB 31, LDEM 8, UKIP 13, GRN 5”

1 2 3 5
  1. “How would you vote if there was a GE tomorrow?” “Same as we voted last month.”

  2. Good Evening All; a hot day here.

    I wonder whether the Labour Quartet and their deputy contestants are causing Tory nerves to fray, but swing back will occur, IMHO, in 2019, and GE 2020, IMHO seems safe for the Tories, with a new leader.

    The Lib Dem number of eight seems high.

  3. Lib Dems look a bit high.

  4. Note that SNP + Greens is 56%…make of that what you will / can.

  5. @ CHRISLANE 1945

    Snap!

  6. @Statgeek

    Needs to be higher to win an Independence vote. SNP + Scot Greens would probably have to be around 60% at least at the start of the campaign, probably higher.

  7. Chrislane
    ICM poll in June 2010 had figures of Con 39 Lab 31 LD 21
    So Tory lead 2% lower than equivalent period in last Parliament!

  8. ICM do say they are in the middle of rejigging their methodology but, for what’s it worth, the far more important English figures were –

    Con 40% : Lab 32% : UKIP 14% : LD 8% : Green 5%

    and the Scottish figures (from a tiny sample) were –

    SNP 48% : Con 22% : Lab 16% : Green 8% : LD 5% : UKIP 1%.

    Hopefully (but don’t hold your breath!) one of ICM’s changes will be to stop publishing numbers which are based on concatenating two different political systems!

    RAF

    The poll was on VI for Westminster – not indy! The best available evidence on the latter would put Yes & No neck & neck.

  9. Good evening all from East Renfrewshire. Bit cooler but dry.
    ……………
    GRAHAM
    Chrislane
    ICM poll in June 2010 had figures of Con 39 Lab 31 LD 21
    So Tory lead 2% lower than equivalent period in last Parliament
    ___________

    Oh dear oh dear oh dear..Clutching at straws are we? I noticed you didn’t mention the 13% dip in the Lib/Dem VI for the same period back in 2010.

  10. AC
    Well we are now more than 2% through this Parliament!

  11. Looking at OLDNAT’S cross breeks, sorry breaks it looks like we could see cross over in that the UKIP VI in England surpasses the Labour VI in Scotland.

  12. GRAHAM
    AC
    Well we are now more than 2% through this Parliament!
    ____

    Crikey not only are you clutching at straws, you’re bloody chewing the things!! ;-)

  13. @AnthonyWells
    I hate to nag, but if you are going to the RSS meeting next Friday, I would be genuinely grateful if you (or anybody reading this) could do a writeup and retrieve any handouts.

    (I’m posting this on the assumption that you have missed the same posts on previous threads. If you have seen them but are just ignoring me or think I’m annoying, then please tell me and I’ll stop posting them)

  14. Oh, I’m on a train again. I have popcorn.

  15. Common just voted 302 to 271 to prevent Holyrood being permanent. At it stands, Westminster can abolish Holyrood on the whim of a Prime Minister with a majority and a sympathetic House of Lords.

  16. @Statgeek

    In extremis, couldn’t the Government abolish Westminster too?

  17. Or could do away with Scottish Human Right Commission.

    So basically Scottish democracy and Human Rights is subject to England’s democratically elected majority.

    And I thought it was a union. Nuff said.

  18. @Martyn

    Does Westminster vote to ensure they can maintain the right to do that? (are they demonstrating it to the people of the UK?)

  19. @Statgeek

    Dunno.

    And now I have Jaffa Cakes.

  20. Here’s an interesting statistic.

    This weekend, for every pound spent in the cinema, 70pence went to “Jurassic World”.

    WORLDWIDE

    (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4069&p=.htm )

  21. 31-37 must be worth at least 38–30 young liz versus pritti.

  22. Allan Christie

    My remaining breeks seem quite contented. During my period of ill-health, Mrs Nat consigned most of my gardening trousers to the charity shop shredder,

    As she described her decision “They no longer had the Gaelic” (translation – “The Erse wis oot o’ them”)

  23. @OldNat

    Speaking of health, how are you holding up?

  24. Have we had crossover yet?

  25. Martyn

    Excellent thanks. Consultant has given the all clear.

  26. @Oldnat

    Oh, I am glad

  27. Am now pulling into Waterloo.Just passed MI6 building. Will be going offline in a few mins. I’m afraid you’ll have to all entertain yourselves…

  28. Martyn

    It’s OK. MI6 will keep us all in touch with your every move.

  29. CMJ

    Fieldwork February 16th – March 5th 2015

    That isn’t new – even to those of us who are old. :-)

  30. I never understood why the unionists don’t point out that an independent Scotland would be ruled by Brussels. No one in Brussels gives a damn what a Member State of 5.3m thinks – that’s the same as Slovakia so Scotland would get the same number of votes in the Council of Ministers, bugger all. When I worked in Brussels whenever an issue was discussed the first question asked was, “what do the Germans, French and Brits think”. No one would ask “what do the Scots think”!

  31. Thanks Oldnat.

    Survation are cheeky mares.

  32. STATGEEK.
    Parliamentary Sovereignty allows Parliament to do whatever she wants.
    GRAHAM.
    Thanks!
    RMJ:
    Snap indeed.
    07052015:
    Liz K is ok, IMO

  33. BigD

    UKippers and Tory EU sceptics often did make that point – frequently on this very site!

    It seemed to slip their notice that every nation in the EU is “ruled by Brussels” already. Only some nations are also “ruled” by a Parliament dominantly run by representatives of another nation as an intervening step between it and the EU.

    If you want to make anti-EU points, feel free, but they have little to do with the referendum already completed in September, or any subsequent indyref that may be called in the future – in Scotland, or in any part of any other EU member.

  34. chrislane1945

    “Parliamentary Sovereignty allows Parliament to do whatever she wants.”

    And when they do as they are told, “she” purrs. :-)

  35. Oldnat you’re missing my point. I’m pro EU! I don’t think the UK is ruled by Brussels, that’s my point, the UK, France and Germany get their way 90% of the time. Believe me I know, I worked as an UK negotiator, I think I therefore know more about it than you! My point is small member states rarely get their way, that’s why they are ruled by Brussels.

  36. Oldnat,

    The SNP look a bit low on those figures…

  37. BigD

    Apologies for misrepresenting you!

    However, when you were negotiating “for the UK” it would be interesting to know which areas you were involved in, and the extent to which you formally took on board the interests of the devolved administrations when you were negotiating.

    I’d be delighted to learn of those areas in which you prioritised the interests of Wales, Northern Ireland or Scotland in such negotiations – or the North of England for that matter. :-)

  38. We had a very close relationship with the devolved administrations. I worked on an area with very little difference between the UK Gov (Lab at the time) and the devolved administrations. And to be clear my negotiating position was approved by Ministers who of course are elected. It was there job to make sure all areas of the UK were taken into account when deciding policy.

    From my point of view the days of the last Lab Gov with the large number of Scottish politicans (remember when rightwing English commentators used to complain about the Scots ruling the English because of the large number of Scottish politicans in the UK Gov, we even had a Scottish Home Secretary!) meant Scotland had much more power and influence than they would as an independent EU member state. However if Scottish voters keep sending an overwhelming number of SNP MPs to Westminster they might as well be independent because the SNP will obviously never have enough seats to form a UK Gov and no unionist party will let them have influence given how toxic they are to English and Welsh swing voters.

  39. BigD

    Thanks for the response.

    Was your term as a negotiator pre 2007? I presume that it didn’t extend beyond 2010 from what you say.

    Your confidence in the ability of Ministers to balance the competing interests of different parts of the UK and represent them equally, instead of taking the (arguably) more democratic stance of representing the interests of the dominant sector (where that existed) within the UK, or their party interest, is a notable one.

    However, your faith in Government Ministers is not shared universally.

    Also of interest is your raising of the issue of the constituencies represented by those Ministers in having salience in their decision making.

    If that were true of Ministers representing Scottish constituencies, presumably it was equally true of Ministers from other parts of the UK? Otherwise why raise it?

    From your account, one must have severe doubts about their willingness to enhance the prospects for Northern Ireland, since they had no Ministers.

    On the same basis Wales, and especially Scotland, must be doomed to suffer under the partial interests of Ministers from England now.

    I would never have made such a suggestion, but your insider knowledge that Ministers were partial towards their own region of the UK must cause serious concern.

  40. Statgeek – “So basically Scottish democracy and Human Rights is subject to England’s democratically elected majority.”

    Nope – in the United Kingdom, Parliament is sovereign and no Parliament binds it’s successors.

    In practice this means that if in future Scotland concludes that the whole devolution proved to be a complete and utter waste of time and delivered worse outcomes than elsewhere, they could simply have a referendum to undo it all and Bob’s your uncle.

    Not unlike Hartlepool deciding by referendum to have a mayor, electing H’Angus the Monkey, and then deciding a decade later by another referendum to abolish the position because they wanted to save some money. No-one forced any of the decisions on the good folk of Hartlepool, they decided the entire sequence of events themselves and our flexible constitution allowed them to.

    If the SNP don’t like it, they can always put another referendum in their 2016 manifesto and if they get a majority for it, another referendum will be held.

    It’s not like anyone in England is forcing the SNP to dodge putting another referendum in their manifesto. Go for it if you want.

  41. Candy

    You do realise the essential fallacy of your argument, I suppose?

    On second thoughts, I doubt that you do. :-)

  42. As this poll is very close to the actual result and those before the election were wrong, and the only difference is which election the recalled vote is for – could the whole problem be that many people (especially those likely to consider various options) cannot recall their vote from 5 years ago accurately? I know I can’t.

    I can remember who I definitely wouldn’t have voted for in 2010, but other than that it would have depended on which minor parties were standing (if any) and what my mood was on the day.

  43. Oldnat

    It wasn’t pre 2007 it was 2007-2010 so under an SNP administration in Edinburgh.

  44. Pete B

    While I’m sure that you are right about the fallibility of recalled vote (even more true in the devolved nations with an additional GE!), we still need to explain the YG problem.

    They record people’s vote soon after the election, so should have the most accurate database.

    Yet they choose to weight on “party affiliation” rather than actual vote?

    That may have made sense at one point, as they developed their panel, but they should now be sophisticated enough to divide English voters for all parties into “long term loyalists”, “two party switchers” and “voting tarts”. Foe those in Scotland & Wales, a different set of sub-groups recognising those who switch votes between national and UK elections would be needed.

  45. Big D

    Ta

  46. We may have missed a record here.

    The last thread (‘Have ethnic minority voters swung to the Tories?’) is currently sitting there with 4 posts.

    During my ‘On this day on UKPR in 2010’ series, I flagged up a Welsh poll thread with just 7 posts, claiming this as the shortest thread ever in UKPR history.

    What does this say about our attitudes towards ethnic minorities, which seems to include the Welsh now?

  47. Alec

    Are you suggesting that “the Welsh” are “ethnically” (whatever the hell that bit of genetic nonsense is supposed to mean) different from those in other bits of the British Isles, Europe or the rest of the World?

    Presumably there is a genetic mutation as people pass back and forward across Offa’s Dyke? And what of those who are polled in Wales or England but are on the wrong side of the Dyke?

    :-)

  48. Alec

    Agree with you re the last thread, however.

    Perhaps it might have been better if Anthony had added the ICM poll as an Update to that thread, rather than consigning it to oblivion.

1 2 3 5