There are two new bits of YouGov polling today. First up is the regular Welsh political barometer. The usual caveats apply about it being just one poll, but it shows Labour support perking up in Wales since Jeremy Corbyn’s election – Westminster voting intentions with changes from last month are CON 26%(-2), LAB 42%(+5), LDEM 5%(+1), Plaid 10%(-2), UKIP 16%(+1).

Assembly voting intentions are CON 23%, LAB 39%, LDEM 6%, Plaid 18%, UKIP 13% for the constituencies, CON 24%, LAB 34%, LDEM 5%, Plaid 18%, UKIP 14% for the regional vote. Roger Scully’s commentary is over on the Elections in Wales blog here and has an Assembly seat projection of 29 seats for Labour, 12 for the Tories, 10 Plaid, 8 UKIP and one for the Lib Dems.

The Times also has some YouGov national polling, showing the Leave campaign narrowly ahead in their EU referendum polling – REMAIN 38%, LEAVE 40%. This is the first time YouGov have asked the question using the new referendum question, so some of the shift might be due to that (I discussed here how asking the question as Remain vs Leave seems to produce figures that are better for those who wish to leave than asking it as Yes vs No), but nevertheless it’s the first time since November that YouGov have shown LEAVE ahead. Tables are here.

142 Responses to “Latest YouGov Welsh and EU figures”

1 2 3
  1. @Carfrew
    250 people joined the LP during his speech.

  2. @Carfew

    “The Labour “moderate” on Daily Politics, Lance Price, doesn’t seem impressed. Because Corbs didn’t say much about immigration, EU etc…”

    He didn’t talk about the price of cinema tickets either, which is a bloody disgrace

  3. Went on a bit didn’t he?

  4. I sensed that he was a lot more comfortable when he was wearing his ‘activist’ hat.

  5. @LIZH

    “250 people joined the LP during his speech.”


    Well in that case, he needs to start writing some much longer speeches!!

  6. @AU

    Well, cinema ticket prices are a bit of a pain, but I’ve a membership at a quaint old local cinema so it’s only a fiver a ticket…

  7. @COLIN

    “Went on a bit didn’t he?”


    Oh, so he won you over in the first five minutes then and the rest was superfluous?


    I reckon he has made that speech many many times.

    Plenty of “campaigns” for the troops in there :-)

  9. I feel compelled to point out that Mr Corbyn , Ms Abbott and Mr McDonnell were not forced out the party despite decades of consistent opposition to party policy and open revolt to leaders dating back to Kinnock . I would also humbly advise Mr Corbyn that he chooses his battles carefully there is little to suggest that there is a much enthusiasm to scrap trident or leave N.A.T.O not only amongst his m.p’s but the general electorate which recent polls have indicated that some 70% are opposed to his position , the two largest unions who appear to value there members job security over and above any pacifist idealism and lets not forget they now provide the bulk of the parties funding and in fact the labour membership which appear evenly split on this debate. I actually found Mr Corbyn’s speech on the whole quite splendid his avowed pledge on tacking inequality both heart warming and easy to agree with , he made some pertinent observations on some of the excesses and hypocrisies of globalisation and the free markets and his stance on housing and the lack of opportunities afforded to the young and disadvantaged strike me as something which can chime with those beyond the faithful , But it has to be said that the issues that were not addressed were troubling he made a point of stating a desire that labour will be seen as open and welcoming to refuges yet made no attempt to tackle the problem that labor has had in addressing the concerns of many of the working class in regards to immigration and the impact on there daily lives and whilst he rightly condemned the Saudi’s for there appalling human rights he leaves himself open to a perceived selectivity of chastisement if not acknowledging Russia and Iran in being far from pristine in this regard. Ultimately I suspect that he can only succeed if he can put across an coherent program which not only plays well to the optimistic and progressive but also reassures those who are not ideologically driven and are more concerned with the day to day priorities of family , jobs , and security both in terms of health provision and law a order. I’m willing to believe that the labour movement has a genuine chance to be a force in this country again , I’m even open to the possibility that this can be achieved under the asperses of Mr Corbyn’s leadership ,but it can In my opinion only happen if labour stays intact with all wings and members tolerated and an acceptance there are there voices within and outside the party who will be compelled to point out some hard and at times unpalatable truths that many within the party will find hard to take if we are serious about being attractive beyond the members and initiated fellow travellers.

  10. @Colin

    Well maybe you’ll be heating that speech a few more times yet Col., ‘cos appears to have acquired new members at a rate of 250-per-hour.

    So, another thousand speeches like it and they could have a quarter of a million new recruits!!

    Whaddaya reckon? Think Osborne’s speeches will outdo Corbs at pulling in the punters?…

  11. For those few interested in such esoteric matters as Alastair Carmichael’s future, Section 106 of the RPA 1983 and the deliberations of the Election Court in Edinburgh ….

    A preliminary legal debate at a special Election Court earlier this month saw Carmichael’s QC ask the judges to dismiss the case on the grounds the MP’s initial statement that he had no idea where the leak had come from did not fall within the scope of the 1983 Act.

    However, the two Court of Session judges have ruled that the Act does apply with the case now to be put out to a ‘By Order’ hearing to discuss the next part of the trial.

    Lady Paton said: “Circumstances can be envisaged where a false statement of fact is of such a nature that the effect in relation to a candidate’s personal character or conduct transcends the political context.

    “The question of the type of relationship between the statement and the personal character and conduct of the first respondent is one which requires evidence, including evidence as to the motive or reason for giving the false statement.”

    So, what seemed to many to be Carmichael’s strongest argument – that Section 106 didn’t apply, has been rejected by the Court.

    It’s hard to see how evidence can be produced as to “the motive or reason for giving the false statement.” without having Carmichael facing cross-examination under oath.

    Interesting times (for some of us).

  12. LizH

    “59% of the Sky Pulse Poll say they are more likely to vote for him after watching his address and 53% can imagine him as the next PM.

    I watched the speech and it was great. The conference hall was packed and from their reactions it was obvious they loved the speech.”

    It would be interesting know what those same people would have thought if Miliband had given the speech – as he might have chosen to do in 2011.

  13. More fuller reaction:

    It was, I think, a good speech. It had all the flaws of a Corbyn speech (going over a bit too much, no clear theme guiding it), but that can be ironed out, and will be I’m sure, in future speeches. It was clever, as well, in answering some charges and the point about Saudia Arabia was certainly a well-aimed kick in the goolies.

    It won’t have changed the minds of many commentators (who are already in their bubbles with the shutters down), but I suspect there’ll be more than a few people up and down the country who will be wondering exactly why they’re supposed to be gripping their crucifixes so tightly.

    Over to the Conservatives then. I particularly look forward to Osborne’s attempt to sell ‘PFI on steroids’ as a good thing ;)

  14. @Carfew

    “Well, cinema ticket prices are a bit of a pain, but I’ve a membership at a quaint old local cinema so it’s only a fiver a ticket…”

    But he failed to mention them in his speech and that’s what’s important (or so the commentators keep saying ;))

  15. Good evening all from Westminster North. I’ve just being doing a little research into what parliamentary seat Maida Vale comes under and it’s held by Labour’s Karen Buck….Bit of a downer.


    That’s great news for the people of O&S.
    ““The question of the type of relationship between the statement and the personal character and conduct of the first respondent is one which requires evidence, including evidence as to the motive or reason for giving the false statement.”

    I think the motive was clearly obvious………….I smell a by-election.

  16. Hi All,
    Does anyone know if any of the pollsters are conducting a poll tonight? When are we going to find out if there’s been any movement after Corbyn’s speech?

  17. @AU

    Well, I suppose cinema tickets aren’t as important as storage, but then he didn’t mention that either. Do MPs not need storage or summat? Surely they need somewhere to put all the stuff they get on expenses or gifts they might declare in the line of work? You can’t fit it all in a duckhouse.

    Then again, what with flipping multiple homes and whatnot, might have more space…

  18. Allan Christie

    Peat Worrier has blogged on the latest developments in the Carmichael case

    and it has a link to the Election Court opinion.

    I suspect the hardest part of the petitioners’ case will be to demonstrate that Carmichael’s fibbing was directly linked to his election campaign in O&S, as opposed to trying to save some Labour seats, as any red/blue blooded LD politician would do :-)


    Nah-GO is yesterday’s news now there’s a new kid on the block :-)

  20. I don’t know how important is the cinema ticket price – the last time I was in a cinema was in 1997 (I can’t remember if it was before or after the elections). I was ok with the price, but then only sweet popcorn was available, which kind of destroyed the experience.

    The speech was for the Labour Party and not really for anyone else (apart from a few clues). Which is certainly fine: defining the narrative and the vocabulary. It may fail, but it was a necessary step. However, he planted words and sound bites that will come back. So this pretty good.

    Because of the pressures he will have to bring ahead policies – it is wrong, I really don’t think it should happen before 2017, but there is Scotland, Wales and local elections and they are set as hurdles. I’m still not convinced that the philosophical stance could be translated to political action without a purge, or before 2017, but it will happen and it could be detrimental.

    The confusion of the media is very pleasing, but there must be a similar confusion among Labour members, and among the voters. Here the crucial task is knowing exactly when measures are implemented to stop the confusions (the purge comes to my mind for some reason again).

    Labour seems to be comfortable with itself. This is contagious. It could actually work – but for that they have to keep the activists active, and keep the pipeline of policies active.

  21. OLDNAT

    Brilliant piece of research-what a hoot :-)

  22. Colin

    What you may have failed to notice is that the phrases suggested by Heller have been offered to many previous Lab leaders – who have rejected them, presumably because they represented a strand of traditional Labour values, which they were trying to extirpate.

    The question I raised, was how would exactly the same words have been treated, if delivered by Miliband (or Brown, Blair, Smith, Kinnock)?

    Of course, it may have been Lady Paton’s research that was brilliant, and that it is a “hoot” that Carmichael may be forced to describe on live TV exactly why he claims to have fibbed, in order that an admitted fibber remains an MP.

  23. @OldNat

    That Spectator article was interesting.

    Corbyn obviously thinks that a speech written for 2011 when unemployment was 8.3% is applicable for 2015 when unemployment is 5.5%.

    It’s like he hasn’t registered the passage of time and that circumstances have changed.

  24. @LASZLO

    “I don’t know how important is the cinema ticket price – the last time I was in a cinema was in 1997 (I can’t remember if it was before or after the elections). I was ok with the price, but then only sweet popcorn was available, which kind of destroyed the experience.”


    Well, it depends how often one likes to go to the cinema. I quite like iMax, but that’s like £18 a ticket, and you can get quite a few nice cocktails for that if you know the best places for Happy Hours.

    P.s. just so you know, best not to mention popcorn. I got modded once for mentioning popcorn…

  25. @COLIN

    “Nah-GO is yesterday’s news now there’s a new kid on the block :-)”


    Is GO not gonna be leader then?

  26. OLDNAT

    Thanks for the Peat Worrier link. Well explained as usual.

    Neither the BBC Scotland nor the [otherwise good] Scottish Legal News reports mention the 3 year exclusion from elected office which Mr C may be subject to, presumably because the RotP Act 1983 is so confusingly written.

    I wonder who the LD candidate will be should the action prove successful. Tavish S, perhaps?

    If nothing else, the trial may finally get Scotland Votes to recognise that an LD-less O&S is not beyond the bounds of possibility!


    You might have mentioned that the police investigation is of her [presumably former] lawyer, who has been struck off.

    Resigning the party whip would have been a good idea for Carmichael, as it would not have further tarnished the LD brand.

    The BBC report includes:

    The BBC understands the initial police inquiries will not involve Ms Thomson, who was the party’s business spokeswoman at Westminster.


    Ms Thomson …. added: “I have always acted within the law and look forward to being cleared of any wrong doing.
    I have this afternoon decided to withdraw from the party whip whilst an investigation takes place.
    Once the investigation is concluded I look forward to returning to play a full role in party activities.”

    To put it mildly, the cases seem rather different.

  28. By election?
    I would be surprised if the first one was in Orkney and Shetland
    Michelle Thomson has resigned the SNP whip whilst police investigations continue. Interesting to read Ian Smart on this issue.

  29. Omnishambles

    “Gloating”? What a silly term to use.

    The ruling that Section 106 applies to candidates talking about themselves could have an effect in every constituency for every candidate in future.

    For example, in a future election, an MP, MSP, AM (or their agent) making a claim to behave honourably (not just legally) in their personal, business or political dealings, when there is evidence that such “self-talking” is a fib, could have their election challenged in an Election Court.

    Sounds an excellent advance in the understanding of electoral law to me – regardless of which party they represent.

    That all parties might make much more detailed investigations into their candidates history would be a significant gain for politics. Wouldn’t you agree?

  30. @Liz H

    “The Sky Pulse Poll” – i.e. an entirely unrepresentative self-selecting sample of people motivated to express an opinion on Jeremy Corbyn’s speech. I’m surprised it wasn’t closer to 90%.

    Dan Hodges got it spot on today (I don’t often say that). A speech that was good for the Labour audience – perhaps including those who didn’t support him – but utterly useless at reaching out to the people whose votes he needs.

    @Barney Crockett

    I read the Thomson stuff just now. Sounds fairly serious if true and if her involvement can be proved. Surprised this hasn’t been picked up further. Edinburgh West is interesting – Thomson won it on 39% of the vote, the LD incumbent polled 33% and Labour were 4th. Could be a way back for the LDs.

  31. Barney

    What did happen to the investigations into Ian Smart, when he was suspended from the Labour Party for his “unacceptable behaviour”?

  32. I listened to the snippets of the speech driving home.

    What I find most interesting is the style of politics that ran through it. It’s quite clear that Mr Corbyn believes an a more open style of politics. If people are tired of professional politicians running uber-slick campaigns, then I would imagine Mr Corbyn would be a breath of fresh air.

    He seems genuinely keen on a large, bottom up party, where people have a real say. He seems to want this openness to reach to the PLP. Don’t people complain about zombie MPs, being whipped into group think all the time?

    Of course, in modern politics the political press live in the same Westminster bubble as MPs. They have a symbiotic relationship, living off each other’s petty rivalies, BS and nonsense.

    This is what Mr Corbyn faces. He is trying to change the rules of the game. Given the forces against him, he has a hard fight. For the sake of a decent, human and civilised political system I hope he succeeds in breaking the mould.

  33. OLDNAT

    Thanks for the link to Peat Worrier’s blog. If constituents had the power to boot out fibbing MP’s then it might had saved a packet on court fees.

    I hope the French embassy sue him.

  34. @Allan Christie

    Of course you’s have to offset the price of running an by-election….(I have no idea what that would be…)

    By election?
    I would be surprised if the first one was in Orkney and Shetland

    You’re right…”Polling Day: 1st October 2015 – Midstocket / Rosemount and George Street / Harbour”…Aberdeen.

    How do you see that yin going?


    That’s true but if AC (crikey he has the same initials as me) is found guilty and steps down then we have the cost of the by-election and court fees where if the constituents has the power to boot out fibbers then surely the cost would just be that of the by-election?

  37. Allan Christie

    “I hope the French embassy sue him.”

    Hardly likely, when it was the French Consul-General who briefed his pal in the Scotland Office! :-)

    I always reckoned that the term “linguistic confusion” that Roddin included in his report was actually cover for Coffinier’s verbatim of the following (speculative!) exchange –

    Ambassador : “The rosbifs are saying that you would prefer to see that sucking pig Cameron continue in Downing St?”

    FM : “Aye, right !”

    (General laughter)

    As to the Election Court, this has been, from the beginning, and intriguing process in which the material facts have not been under question [1] – it has been (and will continue to be) about the interpretation of those facts.

    [1] As opposed to the political questions surrounding it, that the UK Government refuse to answer – Who saw Roddin’s memo? Was the then Junior Minister (now SoS for Scotland) one of them?

  38. In the absence of polls, this is possibly more important than anything Corbyn said in his speech

    In summary the national executive committee of Labour now has a pro-Corbyn majority

  39. I appear to have sparked something about cinema ticket prices… maybe Corbyn should have mentioned it in his speech.

    Meanwhile, Carney has just given his hopes of having his chairmanship renewed a good kicking

  40. Given that Labour have dominated media coverage for the last three months or so, I’m not sure that conference exposure would be likely to make that much difference.

  41. @ Old Nat

    Re: Carmichael.

    It’ll be an ‘interesting’ court which rules that being accused of liking David Cameron is a terrible slur on a politician’s character.

  42. Amber

    You haven’t been following the case, have you? :-)

  43. Mike Smithson tweet

    New ComRes Phone poll for the Mail
    Con 39% (-3)
    Lab 30% (+2)
    LD 9% (+1)
    UKIP 12% (+3)
    Green 4% (-2)

  44. @ Old Nat

    I have. But the public perception will be that it’s about the leak itself, regardless of what the legal position actually is.

  45. That Comres seems to have an implausibly large Lib Dem conference bounce.

  46. @ Old Nat

    LiS doesn’t have any ‘skin in this game’; it’s purely my personal take on it.

  47. ComRes on EUref (excluding DK)

    England (N=801) Remain 59% : Leave 41%
    Scotland (N=79) Remain 67% : Leave 33%
    Wales (N=37) Remain 81% : Leave 19%

    I think I’ll wait for some more reliable figures from those outwith England! :-)

  48. Amber

    Every party has “skin in this game” – unless they aren’t going to put up candidates with any expectation of winning a seat.

    OK. You win. LiS doesn’t have any ‘skin in this game’ :-)

  49. A superficial reading of the Comres VI would say that Labour have gained 2% from the Greens, which seems reasonable as the Greens are now a left-wing party and some of their voters will be atracted to Corbyn. The other superficial reading is that UKIP have gained 3% from Conservatives at a time when they are getting very little publicity despite the recent conference.

    Is this just MOE, or can anyone explain why this might be? My only guess is that it could possibly be something to do with Osborne getting the Chinese to build our nuclear reactor.

1 2 3