ICM’s monthly poll for the Guardian is out today and has topline figures of CON 38%(-2), LAB 32%(+1), LDEM 8%(+1), UKIP 13%(+3), GRN 3%(-1). The full tables are on their website here.

The fieldwork for the poll was Friday to Sunday, meaning just over half of the interviews were conducted before Jeremy Corbyn was announced as Labour’s new leader. If you are waiting to see the impact of Corbyn on Labour’s voting intention figures, you’ll need to wait for another poll (and even then, if the next poll has Labour down a bit or up a bit, unless it’s a huge great shift it will be indistinguishable from normal sample error. As ever, we’d need to wait for a couple of polls showing movement in the same direction before concluding there had been any real effect).

350 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 38, LAB 32, LDEM 8, UKIP 13, GRN 3”

1 4 5 6 7

    “Maybe if he just hummed it? ”

    I have it on good authority that actually he did hum it, but would not say so in order not to undermine the principle of confidentiality which is inherent in humming.

  2. Candy

    The problem is that everything you said he did in his first term, which was a time when I was a firm Blair supporter.

    By the way, I said Blairite, not Blair so I suggest you read my posts more carefully.

    Shame Blair does not agree with FoI any more. Did you see his book?

  3. Candy

    It is also fair to say that Major deserves some credit for Northern Ireland. To continue secret talks with an organisation even when they tried to mortar bomb him took real leadership.

  4. @ crossbat11

    Wholeheardedly agree with you.

    By coincidence I went to see a performance of The Crucible by Arthur Miller on sunday night.

    In my view the parallels are becoming strikingly evident

  5. Candy
    The thing with Blair is with a majority that size he could have done SO much more. Also its no coincidence that most of that legislation took place in his first term, token policies to appease the left basically.

    I’m not alone in thinking that part of the reason the Tories are able to do some of the things they currently do is because Blair did nothing to undo what the previous 18 years of Tory government had done. For example the recent Trade Union Bill, the Tories wouldn’t even be contemplating this bill if Blair had undone not all but some of the restrictions Thatcher put in place in the 80’s or took action to actively support and foster unions (to be fair to him he repealed SOME of the legislation, hardly any but some)

    Now don’t get me wrong I’m not naïve, the Tories don’t like the unions and had Blair repealed a good chunk of Thatcher’s union regulations the Tories would seek to re-implement it, but that’s totally different to what’s happening now for two reasons. Firstly the obvious, the Tories would be seeking to shackle the unions with the first wave of legislation that Blair repealed rather than adding onto pre-existing legislation and thus killing them. Secondly had Blair took action to foster the unions this legislation would perhaps be facing opposition from 10 million Trade Union members rather than the current six million.

    This is how politics works, its a game of tug of war where each respective government tries to drag the country one way and when the opposition gains power they drag it back in the other direction, the net result is the country remains broadly centrist. Blair didn’t carry on with this though. At best you can say he stopped the rightwards drift for several years, myself and many others though would claim he continued with it just at a much slower pace. thus when the Tories inevitably got back into power rather than re-establishing the right/ dragging the country back from the left they were able to pile more right wing legislation onto a nation already saturated with right wing politics. Not only is this a disaster from the perspective of a left leaning individual it also goes a long way to explaining Labour’s present electoral woes, the Overton window has shifted so far right that Labour’s CORE principles are now somewhat obsolete. Their not dead yet but the Blair years did nothing to help Labour long term.

  6. NEIL A
    ““Did Miliband pretend to be a churchgoer?”

    No, he did though, I believe, say at some point that he is non-synagogue goer.

    I don’t see the point of the argument that it makes any difference that we are a monarchy rather than a republic. Corbyn would also not sing:
    “God bless our Head of State
    He’s our best Potentate…..”


    @” Not an expert but think that might only apply at the Olympics and stuff…”

    Well I’m no expert either -thats why I asked-but when JC was singing it in that pub after his victory-a guy next to him gave the clenched fist salute. Also when JC was on the rostrum at “Solidarity with Refugees” in Whitehall, after he spoke, Billy Brag belted the Red Flag out -complete with salute + fist-so I’m thinking maybe thats what you have to do-be it at the Olympics -or down the pub ???

  8. @Carfew

    “Not sure the name will save ya from being put in a box and labelled. You could call yourself the “non-voting hater-of-all-parties” for all the good it’d do.”

    I thought the label ‘anarchist’ would have covered it myself but…


    “Which of Blair’s legislatory achievements would you repeal?”

    The extradition treaty with the US would be one of his achievements I would repeal.

    But this, of course, gets at the paradox of the situation. Corbyn is being branded a ‘radical’ for, in large part, defending legislation that Blair put forward and put in place; whereas the Blairites are being praised as ‘serious’ for wanting to water-down or get rid of it.

  9. Carfrew……………I mean clenched fist salute in front of the National Flag -and you are into a whole different controversy.

    So I think its best if he just forgets about combining Nat. Anth. & Red Flag at official gatherings-doesn’t work at all.

    Best keep stumm-it looks more “authentic”.

  10. @Candy

    Also, in fairness, its worth remembering that many of these legislative achievements were Blair/Brown co-productions.

    Though, of course, I realize the prevailing opinion will be to dump the ‘good’ stuff in Blair’s tray and the ‘bad’ stuff in Brown’s…


    ………..I wonder whether , when does his Privy Council thing with HM-she might just ask him quietly if he wouldn’t mind singing her song?

    They are both reasonable people who don’t get excitable about things.

    I have a feeling all will be well.

  12. Some good news on the economy. Looks like productivity is rising.


    By my reckoning we should overtake the Germans on GDP per capita very soon, if we haven’t already. The IMF releases their next economic growth figures in a few weeks so that should be interesting.

  13. “Othering” isn’t exclusively about social conservatism. Never a day goes by when one of my more left-wing friends doesn’t post or share something about Tories being evil subhumans and baby murderers.

    The right may disapprove of the left, but the left generally hates the right with a rage verging on the murderous.

  14. @Kentdalian

    The Crucible is a fine play and off course Arthur Miller was hauled in front of McCarthy’s Committee on Un-American Activities in 1956.

    I think Paul Dacre would make a fine Chair of the Committee of Un-British Activities, or maybe Rupert Murdoch if he’s got time. Then again, old Rupe is not a British citizen, is he? Or has he been made an honorary one now? I lose track of these things.


  15. It is rather difficult when the head of state can’t sing the national anthem (it doesn’t depend on the form of state cf. Norway), which does suggest that it’s a national anthem. A lovely paradox.

    Anyway, just completely take the subject away from the nonsense (more lines have been written on Corbyn’s closed lips than the achievement of the great men and women in the air and the ground, which I find disrespectful, to be honest.

    National anthems are 19th century creations (largely) in which the new upcoming bourgeois class declared that it was leading the entire nation against something old for something new, positive (even in the Hungarian anthem). Clearly after the events of the Spring of the Peoples it was difficult to maintain such an assertion – except for certain periods, and WW2 is certainly one of them, so essentially it became a class question (certainly in Europe). This is purely an aesthetic claim, and does not mean if it’s right or wrong.

  16. A “not” was cut out from the first paragraph …

  17. @Neil A

    “…………about Tories being evil subhumans and baby murderers.”

    You’re right. The Left wing thought police and opinion formers are everywhere, dominating our public discourse and polluting our minds. Doesn’t everyone believe these things about the Tories?

  18. OMNI

    The UK Labour market responded to economic downturn with greater downward pressure on pay rises, than on employment.

    Now we see the other side of the coin-when the economy picks up , a point is reached where rises in pay are greater than rises in employment.

    I would certainly like to think that increased productivity is being both seen & rewarded here. But the chronic skills gaps still seem to be present is some sectors & one feels that if/when educational/vocational policy starts to compensate for this, unemployment & some element of inward migration could still have potential for reduction.
    As it is 5%ish unemployment is beginning to look like a sticking point.

  19. @colin

    Yes, on the one hand the skills gap is a big issue, the vacancies are there and if those can be filled then unemployment should fall further.

    On the other hand, the rapidly rising minimum wage (and other pressures?) could very well increase unemployment as companies may have to let go of some “low skilled” people.

    I’m sure there are other factors that I’m missing, but from what I can see there is pressure on both sides and I agree that we may just stay at “5ish”.

  20. Just a thought but it seems to me that Mr corbyn’s authenticity and the constancy of his world view whilst being attractive and inspiring to a certain type of earnest politico might well chafe and irritate the broader electorate . I don’t think it would takes a great leap of imagination to see how a perception of j.c could take hold of person who is dogmatic , humourless and overtly earnest, traits that were perceived in Gordon Brown by many and were I suspect a real hindrance in winning over the voters hell! even Maggie had a occasional twinkle in her eye and a certain dry wit. I can’t get too worked up about his non singing of the national anthem I’m inclined to agree with the earlier contributors who have rightly pointed out that his republican views are well established and he would of looked ludicrously insincere if he stood there mumbling like a redwood thou if this kind of thing became a default mode of anti-establishment posturing in all public events I suspect that it will soon become quite tiresome and be seen as self indulgent and attention seeking.

  21. I think the real problem with our national anthem is that it is not a national anthem. It is all about asking God to look after the monarch. This makes things very difficult For an atheist and/or a republican to really get into the spirit!

    Now if it was a proper national anthem like Rule Britannia or Land of Hope and Glory that would be a different thing.

  22. LASZLO

    @”National anthems are 19th century creations (largely)”

    According to WIKI, in respect of the UN member states or observer states, their National Anthems were adopted as follows :-
    18c 4
    19c 27
    20c 152
    21c 13

  23. I can’t see Mr Corbyn being very receptive to Rule Britannia or Land Of Hope And Glory but Jerusalem would probably get his juices running.

  24. I have heard that the PLP have ‘voted’ for JC singing our National Anthem when he is representing the PLP at National Events.

  25. @mark sadler

    I don’t know, Brown’s “no fun allowed” demeanour and seriousness appealed to me. Authenticity is good – it’s one of Corbyn’s major strengths. However, their stance on important issues is also important. I could vote for a Labour party led by Brown. Couldn’t vote for a Miliband or Corbyn led Labour.

  26. Mark Sadler

    Rule Britannia would be daft given the current lack of working aircraft carriers.

  27. I think jeremy could sing verse four of god save brenda -I hadnt realised its almost socialist .


  28. Colin
    “According to WIKI, in respect of the UN member states or observer states, their National Anthems were adopted as follows :-
    18c 4
    19c 27
    20c 152
    21c 13”

    To be fair that’s probably largely due to the creation of dozens of new nations following the collapse of various empires and the break up of larger nations into smaller states (USSR, Austro-Hungary, Yugoslavia) most of which took place in the 20th century. These new nations were just following the established trend set by the “pre existing” states of the 19th century who mostly created their national anthem in that period.

  29. And no self respecting scot would sing verse six !!!

  30. Survation have a poll which we don’t see very often – BME voters in Scotland.


    While many of the Qs concern experience of discrimination, some of those with a voting aspect are –

    Holyrood Constituency VI (excluding DK etc) : SNP 69%, Lab 23%, Con 5%, LD 3%, Oth 4%

    Holyrood List VI (excluding DK etc) : SNP 51%, Lab 30%, Con 7%, LD 5%, Oth 7%

    May 2015 vote : SNP 61%, Lab 28%, Con 8%, LD 2%, Oth 3%

    Indyref vote : Yes 50.3%, No 49.7%

  31. @Neil A

    “The left generally hates the right with a rage verging on the murderous”.

    Any polling on this?
    And talking of “murderous rage” , that could well describe the tone of the Daily Mail’s coverage of Corbyn since he was elected.

  32. I think Corbyn will be quite pleased that he got through prime minister’s questions without any gaffes. Quoting members of the public (albeit hardly in a very democratic way – the e-mail went to Labour supporters and he was hardly going to choose a question that he didn’t agree with the premise of) does make it difficult for Cameron to attack because he can’t be seen to attack ‘normal’ people. However, in the long run I’m not sure doing it this way would be at all advisable. In most areas it suits Cameron quite nicely to be able to calmly explain the rationale behind his policy – it is usually when the volume goes up a notch that the PM is put under real pressure. Jumping around between topics also makes life easy for the PM (Harman was guilty of this too). And, perhaps most importantly, the way Corbyn did it today generates few soundbites. Once the novelty of him being the Leader of the Opposition wears off he will struggle to get on the news – which is where most people see question time, rather than by watching it in full. All in all, though, this was a reasonably competent performance from Corbyn as I say. A 0-0 draw if you like.

    On anthems I genuinely can’t get exercised by whether people sing it or not. I would have sung, others don’t. But you can’t get away from the fact that politically it is likely to be rather damaging. There are a lot of people that do get exercised by these things, and if he’s serious about being PM he’s going to have to start singing at some point.

  33. Neil A
    “The left generally hates the right with a rage verging on the murderous”

    Point of order nobody should get offended by what I’m about to say, I’m only quoting somebody else.
    Anywho the reason for this might be that (to quote a comedian)
    “the worst the right can say about the left is that they are naïve, whether or not this is the case the left can claim a lot worse of the right which routinely present themselves as a coalition of the greedy, bigoted and extremely stupid)

    I’m not saying any of that is true so don’t have a go at me (or moderate me) I’m simply providing an insight into the mind-set of some.

  34. FWIW that should be a close quotation mark at the end of that quote not a bracket. I doubt anybody noticed but I have and its infuriating.

  35. @ Jack Sheldon

    Talking about P M Qs is usually not allowed on UKPR, unless there’s been specific polling of the general public about it.

  36. AW is against people going on about PMQs cos it just leads to partisan comments. I must say I agree with him. I could write my fourpenneth about how marvellous Jeremy was, but who cares?


    So nice to see you posting again.

  38. Hi Amber
    Just did a post making the same point and it was modded. :(

  39. @Valerie

    You have to leave a space between the letters to avoid the moderator.

    [I really wouldn’t do that. If I specifically put a word on the moderation list, and you know it’s on the moderation list, and you deliberately try to get round it… well, people have been banned for less when I’m in a bad mood – AW]

  40. And great to see you posting again Amber :-)

  41. Ah thanks Liz :-)

  42. @Valerie, I think you also have to leave off the apostrophe.

  43. @Hawthorn

    So you wouldn’t actually repeal any of Tone’s stuff.

    It sounds to me that your real problem is that the Conservatives now accept part of Blair’s agenda. And instead of saying “Yay, we’ve won the argument on xyz”, you’re like, “Huh, if the Conservatives agree with him, it’s possible that he was a crypto-Tory all along”.

    In other words you’re so into tribalism and othering that you’ve ended up othering your own prime minister for no reason other than he was good at winning arguments!

    All good prime ministers win some long term arguments. The next Labour Prime Minister will be one who accepts some part of Cameron’s settlement…. :-)

  44. @Amber Star

    At this stage of the parliament in particular the decisions and approach taken by Corbyn will obviously impact on polling and public opinion more generally. Where this takes place in a non-partisan spirit I think it is valid to discuss things like JC’s first appearance at prime minister’s questions. We don’t yet have any substantive polling to discuss – not in the UK as a whole at any rate – and so inevitably we are more likely to drift slightly off piste.

    The comments policy says that this is a place “to discuss polls and politics like adults with a shared interest, despite supporting different parties.” I do not believe that my post falls outside of that. If Anthony has made a separate ruling on prime minister’s questions that I was unaware of I obviously respect that and won’t post about them in future.

  45. Candy

    I am afraid your reading comprehension has let you down again.

  46. Good early evening everyone, on a wet Wednesday.

    IMO it will be fascinating to watch Tom Watson.

    In terms of polling to come, I think that JC (the Corbyn One) will not bring about a big change in the figures as the new Labour approach seems to be partisan rather than ‘reaching across the aisle’ to borrow from USA language.

    On the Red Flag song controversy, you may be interested to know that the Irish writer, James Connell, was cross that his words were attached to that Christmas Tree song. Secondly, Ramsay Macdonald promised King George V that he would get ‘the movement’ to stop singing it.

  47. @Hawthorn

    No yours did. The Blairites know that the voters will only let them back into govt if they accept some of Cameron’s settlement, just as Cameron accepted some of their settlement.

    But you are so into othering you can’t conceive of accepting any of it. Which means Lab will languish in opposition for years till they cave to the voters wishes…

  48. @JP

    “Mises? Veblen did,though,and Mary Douglas, Durkheim, Mauss etc, – it’s known as conspicuous consumption. Think of it as being more or less the same as totem poles among the Tlingit and Hadza.”


    I don’t know that we were supposed to know about the deckhouse tho’. It wasn’t supposed to be conspicuous. I doubt I would have noticed if any of them were living in a cupboard under the stairs either. If it hadn’t been for the pesky DT…

  49. Deckhouse = duck house. (Though I haven’t checked, so maybe a deckhouse was involved as well…)

1 4 5 6 7