YouGov’s latest voting intention figures in the Times this morning are CON 42%(+2), LAB 28%(nc), LDEM 8%(nc), UKIP 12%(-1), GRN 3%(-1). The changes since last week are not significant in themselves, but push the Conservatives to a fourteen point lead, the largest from YouGov since November 2009.

It looks very much as if Theresa May is still enjoying a honeymoon as Tory leader (though the Tories may also be being aided by the disarray in the Labour party – it is impossible to disentangle one potential cause from the other).

Full tabs are here.


984 Responses to “YouGov/Times – CON 42, LAB 28, LD 8, UKIP 12”

1 2 3 20
  1. You will see the lead soar if jeremy corbyn wins the leadership battle as many more traditional Labour voters will join the will not vote column

  2. Accepting the usual caveats around looking too closely at cross tabs, the key thing that pops out to me is that, of people who voted UKIP in 2015, 22% would now vote Tory, while only 3% would now vote Labour.

    Even allowing for a large margin of error, this seems to be the current direction of travel. The Tories are regaining the votes they lost to UKIP in the first place, while Labour aren’t.

  3. The Times leader, sensibly, urges May to use this lead with care & responsibility.

    I think she will.

  4. Whoever wins the Labour leadership election, and it looks like Jeremy at the moment, has a huge job of work to do.
    The party has to unite behind the winner, and take the fight to the Tories and the SNP.
    I believe the SNP have reached their high watermark of support and Labour can claw their way back up north.
    For the sake of the Kingdom, they have to wholeheartedly embrace Brexit and Unionism from a left leaning point of view – it can be done.

  5. @Funtypuffin

    In response to yours on the previous thread.

    You are right, of course. But you could argue that Corbyn has played a blinder. By defeating Smith, he will be securing the supremacy of the membership over the PLP, and he can choose his successor, rather than negotiate a choice with Watson.

    And he can walk away with his reputation intact in the eyes of the Left, rather than selling out under pressure from the PLP.

    The PLP will be desperate for a figleaf escape and will be forced to accept McDonnell. Had Corbyn negotiated with the PLP six weeks ago, he would not have that level of control.

    And finally, Smith has been forced to adopt left-wing policies in the leadership election, thus laying down a direction for the party that has eclipsed any Blairite input.

    Corbyn has completely outmanoeuvred the PLP.

  6. @Jasper22

    Reports of the demise of the SNP are greatly exaggerated. From the YouGov crossbreak Labour 13 % SNP 54%. And a strategy of Brexit and Unionism is hardly going to play well with Scottish voters.

  7. @Unmutual

    That may be the case for now, but in case of a ‘soft Brexit’ this may well change. The Tories are having a honeymoon because they are glorying in Brexit and Labour is a broken up shambles, but it won’t be like that for too long.

  8. @Jasper22

    “For the sake of the Kingdom, they have to wholeheartedly embrace Brexit and Unionism from a left leaning point of view – it can be done.”

    Despite your banging on about ‘the kingdom’ there are many Labour supporters who would prefer a republic. My sympathy for them has been increasing steadily over the years, and I’m basically a Lib-Dem.
    Brexit remains undefined, and while a ‘soft’ Brexit (EEA membership) would make perfect sense, a ‘hard’ Brexit is a recipe for chaos and economic recession that this country cannot afford.

  9. The Tories believe that they should govern the country. Therefore the primary aim of Tory policy ‘for the good of the country’ is to keep the Tories in power.
    Hence we have a Tory government led by and consisting mostly of those who supported ‘Remain’ but now pursuing Brexit ‘to make it work’.

  10. Good morning all from a warm central London.

    I wrote on the previous thread that I thought UKIP would nibble its way into some Labour seats in the north of England but looking at the tables (pinch of salt stuff I know) then Labour are well in front of UKIP in the north and midlands.

    In London Labour are actually still ahead of the Tories which I find astonishing but it’s not so good for Labour in the rest of the south where they are only 5% above UKIP.

    Polling is consistently showing a huge gulf between the Tories and Labour and I suspect some in the Tory ranks will be kicking Cameron for his 5 year fixed term governments.

  11. @Millie – “…and he can choose his successor…”

    No. This isn’t possible at present, in any practical sense – at least, not without the aquiesence of 51 MPs or MEPs, which they don’t don’t have. Having gone to the legal barricades to defend their interpretation of the party rules on leadership nominations, Corbyn cannot resign and expect something different. for now, the PLP controls the leadership selection process.

    In a philosophical sense, what are arguing for is for the party to be led not by a democratic membership, but by it’s leader, even to the extent of selecting his successor. this gets us into North Korean territory, and would be entirely against every principle Corbyn has stood for throughout his political career.

    I can’t see this happening.

  12. On who would make the best PM nationally TM 52% ol Corby 18% and the strongest showing for Corby is in Scotland 25% to TM’s 39% which is quite surprising because Scotland according to the tables is where Labour has least support….13%.

  13. @Jasper22
    ‘The party has to unite behind the winner, and take the fight to the Tories and the SNP.’
    They don’t have to and, given the open talks of splits, almost certainly won’t! As @Millie’s statement supports, the Corbyn clan see this as a battle for the Labour Party, not the government.

    ‘I believe the SNP have reached their high watermark of support and Labour can claw their way back up north.’
    I believe the SNP have reached their high watermark of support and Labour cannot claw their way back up north (or here, as I prefer to say it).

    Beliefs really aren’t that important. Polls suggest my view. You got any evidence?

  14. @Alec,

    Both you and @Millie are partially right. Corbyn needs to win this contest and stay leader of the Labour Party until after he loses the 2020 election to the Tories. By then the boundary review will have been implemented and with a large proportion of the constituencies needing to reselect their MPs, Momentum will be able to force feft-wing candidates on them using the votes of all the new Corbyn-supporting members. Even if the deselected candidates stand as independents or form a new Party, they will not be able to use the Labour name which is vital for their election.

    The one danger for Corbyn is a snap general election, because this would be fought on the existing constituency boundaries and it would not be possible to deselect all the anti-Corbyn Labour MPs in time. A snap general election, assuming that the Tories can either get around or repeal the FTPA, is the best hope for the non-Corbyn supporters as the Labour Parliamentary party after even a heavy defeat would still be strongly anti-Corbyn.

  15. “A snap general election, assuming that the Tories can either get around or repeal the FTPA, is the best hope for the non-Corbyn supporters …”

    I don’t think that’s remotely likely.

    The FTPA was one of the best bits of legislation brought in by the Coalition government, as it gives any incoming government the certainty of a five year period to implement its manifesto commitments, and provides certainty for the electorate as to when the next GE will take place.

    It also prevents the Government from taking political advantage of any perceived weaknesses in the opposition, and disrupting the financial stability that fixed terms offer.

    Other than a vote of no confidence (vanishingly unlikely) I can’t see any reason for TM to call a snap election, especially as the proposed 2018 boundary changes, and reduction in seats from 650 to 600, are likely to favour the Tories more than Labour.

  16. ALLAN CHRISTIE
    I suspect some in the Tory ranks will be kicking Cameron for his 5 year fixed term governments.

    It was part of the price of the LDs going into coalition in 2010 and quite difficult to wriggle out of unless a government is prepared to vote itself out of office. Cameron may have been unwise in many ways but his party can’t realistically blame him for that.

    ALEC
    This isn’t possible at present, in any practical sense – at least, not without the aquiesence of 51 MPs or MEPs

    But aren’t only 15% needed to nominate if there is a vacancy?
    If so, 15% of 232 MPs + 20 MEPs = appx 38 needed to nominate.

  17. As a lib dem I really hope Labour do “wholeheartedly embrace Brexit” since that will leave them scrapping with Ukip and the Tories for 52% of the votes and I would expect significant benefit for the Lib Dems from amongst the majority of Labour voters who voted Remain!

  18. @DC While I don’t think FTPA is the best thing since sliced bread, it certainly does have the effects you say. One important feature of the old system was that it kept HM Opposition on their toes as they might have to form a government at short notice.
    On the last thread, some people questioned the relevance of the NI parties. Tory majority is 12 + NI votes – a very relevant and useful cushion, I would think, enough to put aside any Tory thoughts of needing an election to increase their majority.

  19. The fixed five year parliament idea was introduced to prevent parties in power from manipulating the electoral system to their advantage. It makes sense when you think about it.

  20. Boink Boink

    I suspect that Jeremy Corbyn winning the leadership election is already discounted in the figures. If he loses, then Labour might get a mini bounce although with the likelihood of continuing conflict within, the Tory lead will probably remain static until resolved

  21. @andrew111
    Brexit or Remain will not be a General Election issue in 2020. By then we shall have to abide by what is negotiated, for good or ill.
    If LibDems want people to vote for them, they will need to come up with some popular policies of their own, and not rely on people voting for them just because they don’t like the other parties. What that leads to is lower turnout, not more votes for a ‘not them’ party. UKIP and the Greens got lots of votes by putting forward new if very different policies. FPTP makes it hard for new parties to win seats, but they do influence policy if they get a lot of votes.

  22. So, BoE cut the interest rates (no news yet on QE).

    The shift in the discussion on the economy in the last few weeks is interesting – whether there is a need for fiscal stimulus (i.e. whether the monetary measures have run their course). If it goes in this way, there will be a broad consensus among the parties, so details may matter more in the polls than just “economic competence”.

  23. They added 60 billion to QE, so roughly a sixth of the existing one – this one is quite reserved.

    The slashing of the growth forecast for next year is unpleasant, so it may well be a call to the Treasury rather than anything else.

  24. @Tancred
    “The fixed five year parliament idea was introduced to prevent parties in power from manipulating the electoral system to their advantage”
    It was put in place by the parties in power to ensure they had a 5 year term.

  25. Millie and others

    Yes the important principle of the supremacy of the membership has been upheld. Yes corbyn doesnt really want to be leader but he sees he has a job to do. No John McDonnell will not be acceptable to the PLP, i think for them John is even worse than corbyn. An attempt will be made to change the nomination rules so that either fewer nominating MPs/MEPs are needed or that nominations from CLPs are equally valid. At the moment judging by Owen Jones writing and other things I’ve seen Clive Lewis is the likely left candidate in the event of corbyn stepping down

  26. @DAVE

    Not really – as it was always up to the ruling party to decide when to have an election until this rule was implemented. This rule introduces stability.

  27. With the interest rate cut, the pound should fall some more which is great news for exporters and our tourism industry.
    Out with a chum last night who runs
    a company that exports to the sub-continent and Orient. He says only a positive effect to the EU vote from his customers.
    Britain is forging ahead !
    Let’s stay positive.

  28. BARBAZENZERO
    ALLAN CHRISTIE
    I suspect some in the Tory ranks will be kicking Cameron for his 5 year fixed term governments.
    ………

    “It was part of the price of the LDs going into coalition in 2010 and quite difficult to wriggle out of unless a government is prepared to vote itself out of office. Cameron may have been unwise in many ways but his party can’t realistically blame him for that”
    _____

    I thought it was Cameron’s own proposals for fixed term parliaments? Did it not come about because when Gordon Brown was PM and the polls had Labor in front he hinted at going to the country then the polls took a dip for Labour he bottled it……..Cameron came along and booted that sort of political shenanigans into the long grass with the fixed term parliaments.

    I personally agree with fixed term parliaments and think its unfair a government can choose to go to the country just because the polling shows they are ahead. Opportunism at its worse.

  29. @ANDREW111

    I doubt that Brexit will be a big issue in the next general election. For some people it will be – but the majority (including many who voted for Brexit) will have other issues to think about. The Lib-Dems need to be more than the only pro-EU party. It needs to be a reformist party, a progressive party that wants to questions the ‘sacred cows’ of the British establishment.

  30. @Dave

    I don’t think the general population of the UK will accept the idea that they “have to abide” by what ever the results of Brexit are. This is the risk of referenda, the public never blame themselves for self-harm.

    The leave camp promised a negotiation result that can almost certainly never happen. They have left the sword of Damocles hanging over No.10, ready to drop on who ever is sitting there when Brexit fails to live up to those promises.

  31. ANDREW111
    “As a lib dem I really hope Labour do “wholeheartedly embrace Brexit” since that will leave them scrapping with Ukip and the Tories for 52% of the votes and I would expect significant benefit for the Lib Dems from amongst the majority of Labour voters who voted Remain!”
    ________

    Where do you get the 52% figure from? Are you suggesting the Lib/Dems will pick up most of the remaining 48%?

    What’s the Lib/Dem message going to be for the 2020 GE…”Vote for us to remain in the EU?” …I’m sorry to say but the mad students in camper vans, Hooray Henry’s with tambourines and the rainbow dreadlocks brigade had their strop when they brought London to a standstill over Brexit,….we heard them and most importantly we ignored them………………..we are leaving the EU!

  32. ALLAN CHRISTIE
    I thought it was Cameron’s own proposals for fixed term parliaments?

    I can’t say definitively, but I don’t believe he made such proposals before the 2010 GE, though he may well have justified the idea on the grounds you suggest as soon as the coalition was agreed, if only to make the best fist he could of what he more or less had to agree to.

    The UK Parliament has a good briefing paper on the FTPA, which includes [in Background on p4]:

    Proposals to reduce the likelihood of an early dissolution of Parliament were a key element of the 2010 Coalition Agreement between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Initially the Coalition’s Programme for Government proposed a procedure for early dissolution on a vote of 55 per cent of the membership of the House of Commons by resolution of the House alone, but in the event the Government decided to move straight to legislation.

  33. JAYBLANC
    This is the risk of referenda, the public never blame themselves for self-harm.

    Beautifully put.

  34. I’m fairly sure the FTPA was a condition of the LibDems joining the Tories in the coalition, to prevent Cameron being able to call an early election and stich up the LibDems (that worked out well, didn’t it?). Clegg wanted a full 5 years in his ministerial limo.

  35. couper2802

    ”Reports of the demise of the SNP are greatly exaggerated. From the YouGov crossbreak Labour 13 % SNP 54%.”

    Coup – that should be Labour 13%, Tory 25%, SNP 50%. Don’t forget that not all ‘other” votes in Scotland are for the Nats. That said, I agree with you that there is no sign of SNP support slipping and it would seem premature to comment on whether a high watermark has been reached or not.

    ”And a strategy of Brexit and Unionism is hardly going to play well with Scottish voters.”

    I’m not sure it has ever been tried – outside of UKIP in Scotland…. but even so, perhaps you missed the most recent Yougov poll, which gave the following options and gives some flavour of the possible state of play:

    Prefer Scotland stay in UK, post-Brexit – 46%
    Prefer an independent Scotland in the EU, post-Brexit – 37%

    Stripping out ‘Don’t know’ gives 55% for the UK option and 45% for the Indy + EU option.

    It seems that 43% of ‘Remain’ voters in Scotland chose the staying-in-UK option.

    The same poll listed support overall for independence on a straight question as Yes 47%, No 53%.

    There may be more Scottish voters who dislike Brexit than like it, but as it stands there also seems to be more Scottish voters who dislike independence that like it. Perhaps it depends on what we mean by ”mixing brexit and unionism”. If you perceived that as a simultaneously anti-European and pro-union outlook (eg UKIP) yes that may struggle. If it is a ‘lets make brexit work as best we can and also keep the union together’, which I think is what the previous poster was getting at, well that may bear more fruit. We shall see. Either way, although clearly most voters in Scotland would have preferred the UK to stay in the UK, it is far from clear at this stage that the overall UK decision has led a significant number of previously unionist voters to reconsider their position on independence. Not to say that they may not do that subsequently, of course, but it doesn’t seem to have materialised at this time.

  36. *Sorry, should have read ”UK stay in the EU”

  37. @CR

    I agree that Corbyn is unlikely to stand down until the nomination rules have been changed. But it’s unclear whether that will happen this year – with all CLPs suspended there is no way for them to submit proposed rule changes to conference. Maybe one of the unions can be persuded. But I doubt a rule change will be brought forward until there is confidence it will be accepted. I think next year is more likely, once Momemtum has packed enough meetings to get control of the majority of CLPs.

    Of course, if there were a genuine wish to bring another candidate forward (e.g. Clive Lewis), sufficient nominations could have been negotiated as part of deal for Corbyn to stand down. The fact that it didn’t happen says something – and IMHO it is because McDonnell at least really is happy for the party to split. Witness his non-denial denial on R4 this morning of the infamous “if that what it takes” comment (“I don’t remember” – aka “I’m not going to deny it because I can’t”).

    BTW I wonder whether the current rules could be manipulated to get sufficient nominations for a left candidate, by withdrawing the whip from a substantial number of MPs. The rules are silent on whether such MPs would still be part of the PLP.

  38. Anthony

    I’m actually a little puzzled about the way the final figures are worked out on this poll. If you look at the basic figures for VI before any LTV processing and whatever they are:

    Con 26% (-1)

    Lab 21% (+1)

    Lib Dem 7% (+2)

    UKIP 11% (+2)

    SNP/PC 4% (nc)

    Other[1] 4% (nc)

    Would not vote 11% (nc)

    Don’t know 16% (-3)

    I know you can’t estimate final percentages exactly from this, but I would expect the direction of movement to be the same in the headline figures. So for the Con-Lab lead to increase and the UKIP percentage to go down in those seems strange. Especially as the LTV figures for Lab and UKIP voters seem higher than the Con ones in this poll.

    Incidentally the tables from yesterday’s poll on 57 varieties of Labour hasn’t appeared on the Archive yet (I know they’re linked in the article, it’s seems they missed with delayed release pieces).

    [1] Includes 78% Green (+2) which suggests the drop in their VI is a rounding thing.

  39. Interesting to see that the majority still support the decision to leave the EU despite thinking that there will be an adverse effect on jobs and the economy. After leaving the EU immigration is still seen as the most important issue facing the UK and since the majority expect immigration to fall substantially after Brexit it appears that the Government is expected to take control of our borders. It would appear that the public expect “hard Brexit”

  40. Robin

    Im pretty sure that the PLP were not prepared to negotiate on that point, it was resign now or else! The goal of the PLP seemed to be to exclude left candidates, but i must admit that corbyn and his circle would have good reasons to not want that particular compromise, none of the younger left candidates have a high profile although in the case of clive Lewis that’s changing fast. Im sure that if the PLP had made a public offer that corbyn and his group would have been forced to accept, to refuse would have fatally damaged their position.

    Although I’m probably a bit biased in my analysis because I’m a hardcore supporter of PR, that all political voices should be heard on the national stage, and knowing that Clive Lewis shares that view makes me likely to interprete thing in his favor. Having said that, I would like to see more of Angela Raynor and Cat Smith, a woman leader would be a very good thing.

    Manipulating current rules is a horrible idea, we have seen enough of that already. The ends justifies the means philosophy which people reach for so readily is deeply disturbing to me.

  41. LASZLO

    @” it may well be a call to the Treasury rather than anything else.”

    Not exactly-Carney explained that Monetary policy change can be imediate, whereas Fiscal Policy change is slower. And he was ast pains to explain the sticks & carrots devised to ensure pass-through to the real economy of the interest rate cut.

    BUT-he emphasised too, that when interest rates are near the lower bound ( & he is not a fan of negative rates) -there is a limit to Monetary Polict effects-What he described as “structural issues” are for Government.

    A former member of the MPC was on Bloomberg this morning-saying more QE will not be effective.

    FTSE up 1.5% this morning !

  42. @The Other Howard

    Who cares? It’s not ‘the people’ who have to negotiate with Merkel and others, it’s the UK government and it’s the government that will decide what is in the best interest of the nation.

  43. ROLL A HARD SIX @ couper2802

    As AW put it in the thread on that poll:
    There were several polls before the European referendum suggesting that a Brexit vote would push a majority of Scots towards supporting independence, but people are not necessarily good judges of how they would respond to hypothetical situations.

    Until we know for sure that Brexit is going to happen [via an A50 notification] and any “remain in both EU & UK” options for Scotland [+ possibly NI] have been exhausted, hypothetical situations are all we have.

  44. ROLL A HARD SIX

    Either way, although clearly most voters in Scotland would have preferred the UK to stay in the [EU], it is far from clear at this stage that the overall UK decision has led a significant number of previously unionist voters to reconsider their position on independence

    I’m not sure that’s quite true. I think the high number of Don’t Knows to those questions you quote suggests a lot of people are reconsidering – what they have not done is decided, even temporarily. There are now two lots of uncertainty involved involving the terms for Independence and Brexit and they are also interrelated, so it’s a perfectly reasonable response.

    There’s also an indication that the headline of little change conceals a lot of churn. But the interesting thing is that, unlike most churn, it isn’t random but quite strongly age-related. Since the EU Referendum those under 50 have swung towards independence, those over away. Because of this the percentage of those who had not changed their preference since IndyRef dropped from around 85% in May to 75% now – almost as many changing their mind since the whole 20 months before.

    Though the nett effect is minimal (as I keep on pointing out the headline numbers on Independence haven’t really changed since late 2014) the big age differential means that there is movement that does need explaining. Pro-EU under-50s looking for a way to stay in seems obvious, but explaining the opposite movement in the over-50s seems harder.

  45. @Tancred “it was always up to the ruling party to decide when to have an election until this rule was implemented.”
    Not if faced with a vote of no confidence. Without the FTPA the LibDems could have brought down the government at almost any time, so that calling an election was less in the hands of the Prime Minister. The FTPA was a device of the coalition for the coalition – ie for the parties (not party) in power. Can you seriously imagine it would have been passed by any party with an overall majority, acting in the interests of ‘stability’?

    @Jayblanc: I think you are confusing the results of the 2016 referendum with the results of future negotiations. By 2020 Article 50 will have been invoked (or there will be a lot of people upset). Negotiations will have been held. Whether it is up to Parliament. or the result of the general election, or another referendum, we shall be voting on a situation set by what happens over the next four years. If the public don’t like the deal, they can vote against it. What they will not be able to do is to vote FOR the situation on 22 June 2016. They won’t even be voting on whether to accept the deal on the basis that if the public don’t like it, we shall stay in the EU. Even if that were possible without re-applying, we should not be staying in the EU on any terms known at present, nor indeed in 2020, the negotiations having been conducted on the basis of UK leaving.
    Once Article 50 is invoked, we are headed for the status of a third country, with some sort of agreement with the EU which is at present quite unknown.
    That is what I meant by “By then we shall have to abide by what is negotiated, for good or ill.”

  46. @CR

    It depends who was negotiating with whom. Those sympathetic to the Corbynite policy agenda but exasperated by his lack of leadership capability might will have been persuaded. It would only have needed a small number to agree to nominate whoever the alternative candidate might have been. But it seems quite clear that Corbyn’s inner circle weren’t willing to talk to anyone.

    I’m also a supporter of electoral reform, but to get there you first have to get elected in the current system.

    I wasn’t suggesting that manipulation was a good idea or that it might be done. I agree it wouldn’t look or feel good. I was just wondering aloud whether it was possible.

  47. Robin

    Btw

    “Once Momemtum has packed enough meetings to get control of the majority of CLPs”

    This kind of baseless accusation is trolling, the implication that momentum is trying to subvert internal party democracy is insulting, i would not be a member of momentum if that was the case and if i ever see evidence of undemocratic tactics i will leave immediately. Also other posters comparing corbyn to kim Jong i’ll or any other totalitarian leader is not only insulting but unnecessarily provocative. Referring to corbyn supporters as trots, loony left, naive, silly etc etc is not conducive to civilized debate

  48. THE OTHER HOWARD

    Interesting to see that the majority still support the decision to leave the EU despite thinking that there will be an adverse effect on jobs and the economy.

    Well the only age group who think it will be good for those things are the over-65s. And they don’t think it will affect pensions, so they’re sitting pretty. Obviously when they start getting press-ganged to harvest fruit and veg, replacing all those immigrants they wanted to get rid of[1], they may change their mind.

    It’s worth pointing out that the question was actually In highsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?, so it’s possible that some agreeing may see it as a negotiating stance to get a better deal from the EU. The actual Referendum question came out even closer in the most recent poll.

    There’s also uncertainty about the ‘hard to reach’ Leave voters matching the YouGov ones, who in this poll were also up-weighted quite a bit to match the result (the raw sample was 54% Remain). But such voters are the big mystery in all polling at the moment. How Leave voters will react when they discover the EU won’t give them everything they want (as we saw in recent Eurotrack polling) is another question.

    [1] It’s been alleged a Tory Minister actually suggested this:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-environment-secretary-owen-paterson-wanted-pensioners-to-pick-fruit-to-cut-immigration-lib-dem-a6929716.html

    though of course you won’t complain as you’ve had plenty of practice.

  49. @CR

    “Packed” depends on your point of view. If a branch or CLP suddenly has an influx of new members that is one thing and welcome. If those new members (perhaps in concert with some existing members) then, seemingly in a coordinated manner, stand against and unseat the current party officers en bloc, that is quite another thing, and my description holds. Particularly if the new members have been absent from meetings until the AGM occurs, they then come and vote, and then disappear again.

    Not all Momentum members will be a part of this, and many may not even be aware it is going on. New members will obviously have no reference point to tell them what is usual.

    The whole point of a caucus of this sort is that it will be secret, because such organising explicitly contravenes party rules.

  50. On reflection, maybe I should have said ‘live with’ rather than ‘abide by’
    It sounds a bit different.

1 2 3 20