Grexit polls

On Sunday there is a referendum in Greece on whether to accept the deal that was put to the Greek government before negotiations broke down (or at least, there was as I write, who knows what the position will be by the time you read this). What can the polling tell is about the likely result? There have not been any polls since the referendum announcement yet – though I don’t think there is anything preventing any (Greece previously had a ban on polls in the last fortnight of election campaigns, but this was repealed before the election earlier this year. I don’t know about referendums or any subsequent legal changes.)

There were, however, two Greek polls conducted in the three days before the referendum announcement that have been widely reported. A Kapa Research poll conducted between Wednesday and Friday actually asked how people would vote in a then hypothetical referendum, with 47% saying they would vote yes, 33% that they would vote no. Of course the poll was conducted prior to the referendum announcement so may not reflect current Greek opinion at all – people taking it as a sign Greece is about to vote yes should probably hold on a sec. Respondents may have been imagining a referendum on a deal that had the support of the Greek government, rather than a referendum where the government are opposed and backing a No vote.

The rest of the Kapa poll found 72% of Greeks wanted the country to remain within the EU and 68% wanted them to keep the Euro. There was a pretty even split over the government’s strategy – 49% had a positive opinion, 50% a negative opinion.

A second poll by Alco found negative opinions about the proposals on the table, but continuing goodwill towards Syriza. People didn’t think the proposals met their pre-election promises, but by 53% to 34% thought this was because Syriza hadn’t realised how difficult it would be rather than an attempt to mislead the people. By 61% to 33% respondents rejected the idea that the last Greek government would have done any better. Syriza continue to hold a robust lead in voting intention. Again, this is sometimes being reported as showing Greeks will vote Yes, but I’d be wary. It found people would, in principle, prefer a deal to default… but that’s not the same as saying they will vote YES in a referendum on a specific offer that the Greek government doesn’t support.

Turning to the attitude in other countries in Europe, YouGov polled the countries it has panels in a week ago and in most countries the public expected Greece to leave the Euro, and would prefer it if they did. In Britain people would prefer Greece to leave by 35% to 26%, Denmark by 44% to 24%, Sweden 35% to 26%, Finland 47% to 26%. France was the only country polled where people would prefer Greece to stay within the Euro, though only by 36% to 33%. In Germany 53% of the public thought Greece should leave the Eurozone, only 29% would prefer Greece to remain. Note, of course, that the countries YouGov operate in are largely Northern Europe… the public in Southern and Eastern European countries may have different views.

UPDATE: We finally have a poll on the referendum conducted after it was announced. Prorata for Efsyn found 51% of Greeks intending to vote no in the referendum. The fieldwork appears to have straddled the announcement to close the banks – before the announcement NO led by 57% to 30%, after the announcement NO led by only 46% to 37%. On the face of it that looks like No leading, but in a very fluid situation, but I don’t know what the sample size was before and after the bank closure (and indeed, whether the early and late respondents to the poll were comparable) so cannot tell if that apparently shrinking lead is meaningful.

152 Responses to “Grexit polls”

1 2 3 4
  1. @OLDNAT

    I’m a bit bemused about the outrage over the EVEL proposal. If I understand it correctly all that is being proposed s that an extra stage is being added to the Commons procedure for “England only laws”. At that stage English MPs can veto it.

    That is just a first step in resolving the knotty West Lothian question and is going to be needed once taxation issues are devolved to the Scottish Assembly. Given that an English parliament isn’t on the cards this seems like the least bad alternative tabled to date.

  2. OldNat

    I didn’t say it was a recent survey! Also I don’t know why John Curtice should want to revise his opinion of the methodology, as a poll that showed Yes in the lead a year before the referendum didn’t have much predictive power. And it certainly didn’t match other polls of around the same time, including ones by Panelbase. Also to suggest that Yes lost ground in the last year of the campaign seems odd.

    Of course Curtice wasn’t the only one to criticise the question order, Anthony and everyone else did as well. The trouble with ‘priming’ questions is that there isn’t someone in the polling booth to make you go through that line of questioning before they let you fill in the ballot paper. That’s why knowing the details on these Greek referendum surveys is important. We know some other questions are being asked, particularly with regard to staying in the Euro.

    At the time I pointed out that, while useless in predicting outcome, this form of questioning does have a use in private polling for campaigners to test how certain lines play with the public. While it was never explicitly said that the poll had been commissioned as private polling for the SNP, it was kindest to assume that someone (maybe fairly junior) at SNP HQ had got overexcited and put out the results. It certainly had the opposite effect to the intended, making the SNP look shifty and (unfairly) damaging Panelbase’s reputation – did Amber ever stop going on about it? Still if you wish to maintain that the two of them colluded to publish a misleading poll, maybe it wasn’t private polling that went astray.

  3. Meanwhile it’s still the lack of polls in Greece which is so puzzling. There are now four since the announcement one of which (ProRata) started before the bank closure. Of the other three, one having been carried out by a pollster with no track record[1] I can see in recent parliamentary polling.

    Given the multiplicity of polling companies normally producing figures (13 since January) this paucity is odd and it’s even odder that to commission a new pollster given the availability of experienced companies. Coupled with two other reported polls from such companies being withdrawn or denounced, it’s strange.

    Both today’s poll show Yes and No very close within MoE – PAMAK (U of Macedonia) tied on 43%, Alco with Yes just ahead 45% to 43%. Both are being spun as showing movement towards Yes, but in truth there haven’t really been enough polls to show any pattern.

    [1] The Focus FM poll appears to have been carried out by a marketing company called tothepoint which I can find little info.

  4. The outrage over EVEL is partly because of the liberal definition of “England-only”. The bill as drafted basically says that anything that the Scottish Parliament can legislate on can be certified as being England (or England and Wales) only. This includes things like financing of health or education, which clearly has implications for Scotland because of the way money is allocated within the UK.

    It also politicises the role of the speaker, because it’s his decision to actually certify a bill. It was also revealed yesterday that this would only apply to government bills, but not on private members’ bills.

    All in all, it’s a dog’s dinner.

  5. @07052015

    Are you suggesting that Cooper/Burnham?Corbyn were lying when they indicated support for continuing with the 50% rate?

  6. Roger M
    I will remember the point about not having someone in the voting booth!
    On Greece I wonder if things are too hot to handle and companies are reluctant to give figures because of the assumption that no matter what you say you will be accused of bias. On polling figure which may interest Laszlo is that the KKE’s spoil your ballot position is not supported by many of its members but it nevertheless could result in 5-10 % taking that line. Some of the MPs on the hard right in the government have come out for yes and many mayors are also doing that. Syriza is making very angry accusations that the local authority in Athens is removing its posters.

  7. @07052015
    From this week’s New Statesman

    ‘The 50p tax rate was one of the signature policies adopted by Ed Miliband as a means of both reducing the deficit and inequality. The totemic measure has now become one of the first to be jettisoned. In an interview with me in this week’s NS (to be published later today), new shadow chancellor Chris Leslie tells me that the issue has “moved off the agenda”. He said: “For us, everything is now under review. I personally think the priority is going to be whether the 45p rate is going to fall to 40p, so in a sense the issue of the 50p rate has now moved off the agenda. I have a feeling this is going to be a question of priorities. To me, it wouldn’t be right to cut the 45p rate at a time when the deficit is still so high and the cuts for pretty vital services are going to be so particularly deep.”

    Leslie’s stance is particularly notable since it puts him at odds with Labour’s leadership candidate. Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham have both said that they still support a 50p rate. On 31 May, Cooper told Andrew Marr: “I think it is the right thing to do right now, yes, because the deficit is still coming down, it’s still too high, it’s got to come down and as part of bringing it down we should have a fair system to do so. I think that’s about Labour values, about saying the tax system should be progressive, it should be fair and, yes, I think it was unfair for those on the highest incomes to have a huge great tax cut at a time when the deficit is still too high and needs to come down.”

    On the same day, Burnham told Pienaar’s Politics: “Yvette puts it very well. And, of course, in difficult times when we do still have to get the deficit down, you have to ask people with the most to make the biggest contribution. It is absolutely right. She put it very well indeed.” Liz Kendall has said that a 50p rate should not be introduced permanently but has not rejected the policy outright. Jeremy Corbyn, meanwhile, is likely to regard as 50p rate as, if anything, too modest (I am waiting for a comment from him).

    Though Burnham has identified Rachel Reeves as his shadow chancellor-in-waiting, Leslie is the frontrunner for the post should Cooper (who he nominated) win and a candidate for the job under Kendall. His amiability and reassuring manner are regarded as assets as Labour seeks to rebuild its fiscal credibility.

    But the division between Leslie and Cooper over the 50p rate raises the prospect of recreating the divide between Miliband and Alan Johnson over the issue. After becoming shadow chancellor in October 2010, Johnson continued to argue that the measure should only be temporary, in contrast to the Labour leader, who said the rate should be permanent because it was “about fairness in our society” rather than merely “reducing the deficit”. Should she win, Cooper will hope that Leslie would show greater discipline. ‘

  8. Given that Thatcher was happy to have the top rate at 60% until 1988 – 9 years into her Premiership – why should Labour be at all defensive about 50%?

  9. Apparently this Grexit referendum might violate their constitution, so all these polls might be a waste of time.

    Aside from that, we’re going there in September, now I’m starting to worry.

  10. The starting point fr discussion of EVEL has to be that with the devolution of tax raising powers to the Scottish Parliament it simply wouldn’t be acceptable to set tax rates in England without the support of the majority of English MPs.

    The solutions could be:

    1. Scotish independence. Rejected by a majority of Scottish voters (for a generation).

    2. An English parliament. Adds another tier of government and doesn’t get around some of the cross-funding issues.

    3. Regional government for England. Absolutely no support for this beyond the Lib-Dem party.

    4. A constitutional convention. Fine if Scoitland doesn’t mind waiting for 5-10 years for further devolution.

    5. The proposal on the table.

    It’s not pretty but option 5 is the least bad.

  11. @The Monk

    Even if the whole of income tax is devolved to Scotland, it will still depend on taxes determined at Westminster for over half of its revenues (NIC, VAT, Corp Tax, CGT, IHT, excise duties).

  12. Barney

    People are actually very reluctant to spoil their ballot papers in any election. Even in the despised elections for the Police and Crime Commissioners it was only around 3% of a very low poll. KKE are only polling around 6% to start with (their level of support is pretty constant), and I suspect most of the comrades will pick a side, so it may only end up as 1% or so – though others may simply be confused by the question.

    Of course in a sense the whole referendum is a sideshow – a tactic to buy the Greek government time for further negotiation and for positions within the Troika to shift. The IMF report that effectively says the current plan wouldn’t help Greece may have some effect for example. But part of the problem may be that the Troika is unable to agree among themselves and may keep falling back to the original hard line – not because they want it or it will work, but because it was the thing that was agreed.

    It’s also worth pointing out that the vote isn’t about what the headline says it is – the exit of Greece from the Euro. Certainly the Yes side are claiming that it is, but a No vote doesn’t mean it could happen. Certainly Greece could be forced out, but that itself might cause all sorts of problems within the EU and possibly lead to the crisis spreading to other countries. So it’s a high risk strategy.

    The other thing that everyone seems to be assuming is that a Yes vote will lead to the fall of SYRIZA and the government. Certainly that’s what the opposition and the EU leadership seem to be hoping for.

    But that seems very unlikely. It’s true Varoufakis has said he would resign, but that emphasises that Tsipras hasn’t said that. SYRIZA has an effective majority of the Parliament – its alliance with ANEL is about reassuring the traditional Right rather than numbers. Even if there was a new election current polling:

    gives them an overall majority. And unlike other Greek Parties, SYRIZA has shown solid party discipline without the split and walk-outs that have plagued ND and PASOK. There may be be no one else who can form a government – backdoor deals as in Italy are not an option.

  13. @Monk

    “I’m a bit bemused about the outrage over the EVEL proposal.”

    Imagine if the EU voted to prevent Westminster taking back powers, and there wasn’t a (legal) thing to prevent Westminster from doing anything about it.

    Imagine also if Germany, France and the rest of the EU countries then voted to reduce EU powers in their own countries, while blocking the UK from getting powers.

    Imagine if the EU gave the UK tax raising powers, while taking money from the UK via other taxes, such as VAT or duty on its products.

    The funny thing is, if Russia did that to a smaller country, half the NATO countries would be screaming about the injustice.

  14. THE MONK

    Nice post but I would go further, EVEL is the only rational answer. I have to say i have been amazed and apalled at the SNP’s stance of the subject as displayed in parliament recently. What hypocrisy!

  15. Graham

    “why should Labour be at all defensive about 50%?”

    Perhaps because they want to get elected to office again at some time in the future.

  16. New ComRes / Daily Mail poll:

    Con – 39% (-2)
    Lab – 27% (-2)
    UKIP – 11% (+1)
    Lib Dem – 9% (+1)
    Green – 6% (+1)
    SNP – 5% (NC)


    But it’s not remotely comparable. Scotland had the option of independence and declined. As a result it remains an integral part of the UK with the powers of the Scottish Parliament decided at Westmister. Also, I think that France might be a little miffed at the UK voting on its education sysem with no reciprocity.

    Supporters of devolution really can’t have it both ways – added powers for the Scottish Parliamnet with no quid pro quo at Westminster isn’t a viable option. It’s not an issue now with a government which has a majority in England but if there was a Labour government with substantial Scottish representation (stop laughing at the back) then fiscal devolution wouldn’t work.

  18. TOH

    A rate of 60% did not prevent two Thatcher landslides.

  19. GRAHAM

    Yes but that was after the sheer misery of the 70’s. However Lawson then got income tax down to more sensible levels where they have remained more or less ever since.

    As he last election showed there is no appetite for higher income tax rates. In fact in general people want less income tax.


    Many thanks, nice to see a new poll we can discuss. I would think the Tories will be quite happy with that poll.

  21. The Monk (et al)

    As always, this is a polling site. It matters not whether any of us consider the EVEL proposals to be inspired by God or Satan.

    All that matters is the perception among voters – and increasingly very different perceptions among English and Scots voters, I’d suggest.

    It’s not the response of nationalists to EVEL and the Scotland Bill that should concern those in England, who wish the UK Union to be maintained, but the responses of those voters in Scotland whom the Unionist parties hope might vote for them..

  22. OLDNAT

    “but the responses of those voters in Scotland whom the Unionist parties hope might vote for them..”

    I am sure I will be as interested as you to see how Scottish voters vote after a number of years of SNP government when they will have the opportunity to use those new powers devolved to them. Will we actually see the SNP raising income tax rates in Scotland to pay for increased benefits for example? I will look forward with interest to what the SNP actually do.

  23. TOH

    Indeed, those who have looked in some detail at the Vow, the Smith Commission Report, the Draft Clauses, and the Scotland Bill will all be interested to see how the unresolved issues raised in amendment but ignored by the Government work out in practice.

    However, as the “Scotland Act 2015” alters the groundwork laid by the last attempt to provide a lasting settlement – Scotland Act 2012 – before it even comes into operation – it may be some time before it is clear what the new powers are in practice.

    In the meantime, there’s an election in May! If the “UK-ites” are looking for some glimmers that some Scots will return to the warm embrace of Lab/Con, then that should be a place to start looking.

    A molecular microscope might be a good investment for such. :-)

    In the meantime, for those of us interested in polling, there’s the Com Res one.

  24. ComRes/Mail poll is the first to use their new methodology.

    the new ComRes Voter Turnout Model. The model simulates the likelihood of each respondent to vote based on their age and social grade. This has been calculated using actual General Election turnout data on a constituency level and matches it with the known age and social grade profiles of the constituencies taken from the Census. This will provide a more accurate reflection of the actual voting public.

    Ignoring the silly concatenated GB numbers, the English VI recorded was –

    Con 44% : Lab 30% : UKIP 11% : LD 8% : Green 5%

    For the wee Scots sample, the Westminster VI numbers were –

    SNP 47% : Con 22% : Lab 16% : LD 9% : Green 3% (while I wouldn’t get excited about Lab being behind Con in a wee sample, it could be something to keep an eye on).

  25. A mate of mine has just been emailed by his Union asking whether he wishes to vote in the Labour leader election.

    To do so he needs to agree to the following statement.

    “I support the aims and values of the Labour Party,and am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it “

  26. Actual ComRes link is here:

    (confusingly both have June in title)

    Phone poll f/w 26-28 Jun

  27. @TOH
    ‘As he last election showed there is no appetite for higher income tax rates’

    I doubt that very much indeed – raising the Top rate to 50% was recoded as being popular by pollsters by a margin well beyond the margin of error.

  28. Roger

    Thanks for the correction!

    Corrected numbers (4 June in brackets)

    Ignoring the silly concatenated GB numbers, the English VI recorded was –

    Con 41% (44%) : Lab 28% (30%) : UKIP 12% (11%) : LD 9% (8%) : Green 6% (5%)

    For the wee Scots sample, the Westminster VI numbers were –

    SNP 50% (47%) : Con 28% (22%) : Lab 13% (16%) : LD 4% (9%) : Green 2% (3%)

    (ComRes are finding it hard to trace Lab voters in Scotland, it seems).

  29. OLDNAT

    I’m not interested in the 2016 Scottish election as will not be reflection of what I want to see, which as I say above is what the Scots will do with the new powers post implementation of Smith. If you want my view of the 2016 election then I think the SNP will do very well, as they can still blame the English for all their perceived woes.

    I much more interested in how they get on when they have had several years of government with the new powers. If you want another forecast then I think 2016 will be the SNP high point. After that i expect gradual decline.

    “I doubt that very much indeed – raising the Top rate to 50% was recoded as being popular by pollsters by a margin well beyond the margin of error.”

    Why did the Conservatives win the election then? Personally I would be delighted if the Labour party continued with it’s failed policies of 50% higher rate, mansion taxes etc.

  30. David

    As I said above, we totally disagree with each other and there seems little point in continuing this conversation. We have very different views of fairness. Am I correct in assuming your Scottish?

  31. TOH
    ‘Why did the Conservatives win the election then?’

    I have not seen any seen any serious commentary suggesting it had anything to do with the 50% rate – which was seen as a positive for Labour. Scaremongering re-SNP and Milliband’s leadership were far more likely salient factors together with the Greens splitting the left of centre vote. The latter almost certainly cost Labour seven seats – thus being responsible for Cameron’s overall majority.

  32. oldnat

    For the wee Scots sample, the Westminster VI numbers were –

    SNP 50% (47%) : Con 28% (22%) : Lab 13% (16%) : LD 4% (9%) : Green 2% (3%)

    (ComRes are finding it hard to trace Lab voters in Scotland, it seems).

    Oldnat, am I right in saying that we have now had a few Scots subsamples from different polsters showing the Tories ahead of Labour? Would be nice to have a proper Scottish poll to see if this looks right.

  33. @Graham

    Labour lost far more votes to UKIP, many Labour voters stayed at home and totally crashed in Scotland.

    I guess that’s the fault of Greens too? ;-)

    I thought that the Conservatives won because they got more vote and won more seats than Labour.

    Silly me.

  34. @AW @Graham

    Only teasing :-)

  35. David

    The rock on which it breaks is the fact that there is no such thing as an “English government” — therefore there are no such things as “English laws.”

    English Common Law is not based on statutes (that would be statute law) but on precedent, as determined by judges. While the UK Parliament can amend aspects of English Common Law (it’s Parliament, not Government which legislates), there is no need for there to be an English Parliament for there to be English law.

    Apart from that, your statement is fine. :-) (if wholly irrelevant to the question of how the perception of EVEL, it’s details and the manner of its implementation will be seen by those folk who respond to opinion polls.)

  36. Roll a Hard Six

    “Oldnat, am I right in saying that we have now had a few Scots subsamples from different polsters showing the Tories ahead of Labour? Would be nice to have a proper Scottish poll to see if this looks right.”

    I’m not sure.

    The samples are so small that a few points difference between the two main also-rans is probably meaningless.

    As you say, only a Full Scottish which asks the Westminster question, as well as the more important Holyrood VI ones would provide clarity.

    However, it is perhaps unlikely that anyone will waste good cash on asking about Westminster in 2020, until a certain level of stability has developed after the May 2016 result.

    I only post the Scottish sample results to allow me to repeat my long standing point about the folly of concatenating them into pretendy “British” VI numbers.

    The English figures, are the interesting ones.

  37. Reports- Unite and GMB to endorse Corbyn .

  38. @Graham

    Regarding tax – the past was a different country, they did things differently there.

    It’s fun to look back (*), but you can’t replicate past conditions. I’m struck how small c conservative Labour has become. Every suggestion is a hark-back to the past – to 1997 (old Labour), 1983 (archaic Labour), 1945 (Labour antiquity).

    It’s now 18 years since Blair was first elected and no new ideas have been forthcoming. The Labour person who comes up with something for this century will become Prime Minister – but am not sure we’ve seen him or her yet.

    (*) The following article gives a pretty good idea of how taxes have moved over time in the UK.

    Brits are keen to pay tax during times of crisis (it’s almost a patriotic duty) but as soon as normal service resumes they want a cut.

    So for example top rate of tax went from 5% in 1907 to 50% in 1919 to pay for the costs of war and nobody demurred. Taxes rose in the late 1930’s to pay for rearmament (standard rate rose to 27.5% in 1938 – interesting that the standard rate is lower now, thanks to Brown’s cut and Osborne’s tax-free personal allowance increases) and both standard and higher rate rose continuously during WW2, ending up with a top rate of 97.5% in 1945.

    But as soon as the war situation stops, people want cuts. They’ve done their duty and now they want some sweets.

    We’re not in a war situation now, and the Great Financial Crash was 7 years ago and people feel the crisis has passed. Plus there arn’t enough truly rich people who pay income tax (as opposed to arranging their affairs in a corporation) and who are immobile, who can be taxed at 50%. So it doesn’t bring in much, it’s just a sop to people who want to punish “them”.

    I would think abolishing non-dom status should be a greater priority for Lab than raising the top rate on domiciled people – abolishing non-dom would bring in more and bring our arrangements in line with the United States. There are very few countries the ex-non-dom lot could get citizenship to evade the rule. The Americans are draconian when it comes to collecting every last bit of tax, the Europeans tax more than us, Monaco isn’t handing out citizenship. That leaves Russia – but who would willingly become a Russian citizen?

    You could even accompany the abolition of non-dom with a token cut to show how much you appreciate domiciled citizens – the former would pay for the latter. If I was Osborne looking to cut the rate from 45%, that’s how I’d finance it.

  39. @David – “How could a UK MP from a Scottish constituency function as Chancellor or PM if he or she were unable to fully participate in the legislative process?”

    I think everyone is assuming that Scots will vote SNP forever, and hence your scenario would never arise and they would never be in a governing party and no Scot would therefore become Prime Minister or Chancellor (by the choice of the Scots in voting en masse for a regional party). The Northern Ireland lot similarly self-exclude by voting for regional parties there instead of participating in national politics.

    Conservatives and Labour are now to all intents and purposes English and Welsh parties, they both have just one token Scottish MP. Hence future Prime Ministers and Chancellors will be either English or Welsh.

  40. Reports -Osborne to raise inheritance tax threshold to £1 million,just as well as you cant take it with you.

  41. @Catmanjeff
    ‘Labour lost far more votes to UKIP, many Labour voters stayed at home and totally crashed in Scotland.

    I guess that’s the fault of Greens too? ;-)

    I thought that the Conservatives won because they got more vote and won more seats than Labour.’

    I don’t think what you have said there contradicts my point at all. Not for a moment do I blame the Greens for Labour’s defeat – and you are quite correct to point to other factors as being even more important. Nevertheless having looked at individual constituency results in detail it is easy – in my opinion – to identify 7 seven seats where the outcome would have been different had a Green candidate not been on the ballot paper. The same might indeed be said of UKIP – though such voters are much more difficult to assess in terms of they would otherwise have broken between the Tories and Labour. Had there been no Green I think Labour would have won – Gower – Derby North – Croydon Central – Morley & Outwood – Plymouth Devonport & Sutton – Bury North – and Brighton Kemptown. If I am correct in my assumption the Tories would only have managed 323 – not 330 – with Labour at 239 rather than 232. Cameron would still be PM but we would be much closer to seeing him in trouble following by-election reverses. As it is it will surely take at least 3 years – if it happens at all.

  42. Shame you will still have to sell the house to pay for mum ands careplan .

  43. @”Unite and GMB to endorse Corbyn .”

    :-) :-) :-) :-)

  44. Colin

    Very interesting, would be fascinating if he got elected.
    Would we see a Tory government with a majority of over 100 after the 2020 election fought on 600 seats?

  45. TOH

    As someone remarked recently-Welcome to Jurrasic Park. !

    I see that EM was on his feet again in HoC. He got plaudits for bravery from GO the first time he appeared, but I read reports this morning that Lab. MPs are not too pleased that the bloke who went off on holiday after losing the GE now wants to breeze back into “campaigning on issues” without helping to understand why he cocked it up.

    Someone remarked that he seems to want to do a William Hague, but Hague observed a longer period of silence.

    I think Labour are in trouble TOH-that ComRes Poll would have been laughed at here not long ago as pure fantasy because UK was moving Left & the Tories were dying.

    ………mind you we have no evidence yet that it isn’t in fact fantasy !

    I read your comments on SNP MPs-my impression whenever I watch HoC debates is that they simply intend to be as disruptive as possible using ” in the interests of Scotland” to disagree with anything the Government proposes.

    But they are amusing & good value for the TV licence :-)

  46. As tories it is understandable that colin and toh are missing the point of corbyn endorsements .It means very little in terms of votes(as the unions have only managed to sign up a tiny number of affiliated supporters) and it means Burnham can avoid the charge that he is the trade union candidate.He dodges that bullet .

    I am not surprised at Unite as its ruling faction are pseudo ultra left and dominated by former tgwu activists(the old aeu ,msf,eetpu and gpmu are completely marginalised) .

    Gmb used to be more centrist but are about to elect a replacement for sir Paul which may explain their keftist tendencies at the moment.

    Unites rules conference meets here in brighton on monday and will debate disaffiliation.It wont go thru as the leadership will oppose but I suspect its only a matter of time -just needs the next labour leader to cut the trade union seats on the nec and to move towards public funding -inevitable now the tories are going for contracting in and terminating check off in the civil service.You would expect Labour to respond in kind on company and individual donations if it gets the chance.

    I would hope the new leader would launch a peoples constitutional convention and invite participation from other parties and that this would look at party funding as well as a federal uk.Cooper wont do that I am sure as she is a conservative on these issues so its either burnham or kendall for me.

  47. Corbyn is a sideshow, and will be knocked out in the first round. Liz Kendall, for all the sound and fury, will come third. The next leader will be either Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham (though I’m not quite as certain on Burnham as I was).

  48. Colin

    “But they are amusing & good value for the TV licence :-)”

    Yes I agree, the commons is a more interesting and amusing place with a strong SNP presence.

1 2 3 4