Just to catch up, YouGov put out new voting intention figures yesterday (though the fieldwork was from last week). topline figures were CON 39%(nc), LAB 28%(+2), LDEM 11%(+1), UKIP 13%(-1). While the changes since the week before are not significant in themselves, eleven points is actually the lowest Conservative lead YouGov have shown for several months. It’s also worth a glance at the “most important issues” question in the tables: the NHS has risen ten points since YouGov last asked the question back in November, making it the second most important concern after Brexit. It’s possible to interpret that as health rising up the agenda and helping Labour’s support… but it’s equally possible that the changes in voting intention are just normal, random sample variation. Still, worth keeping an eye on it. Full tabs here.

There was also a Survation poll for the Mail on Sunday at the weekend. Their topline figures were CON 38%, LAB 29%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 13%, GRN 2%. Tabs are here


315 Responses to “YouGov/Times – CON 39, LAB 28, LDEM 11, UKIP 13”

1 5 6 7
  1. Guymonde

    I should have added that the answers to questions on the single market and customs union reflect that view see the poll detail on the YouGov site.

  2. Alec

    “The old adage about battle plans and contact with the enemy does spring to mind though.”

    Of course but the momentum is with may and the Government at least for now, and of course in the hard negotion coming it has to be. It seems to me that she has appealed particularly to voters patriotism.

  3. @ The Other Howard

    “It seems to me that she has appealed particularly to voters patriotism.”

    I am always reminded of Dr Johnson’s words in such circumstances.

  4. @Neil A

    Regarding how (it might mask…)

    If the labour market is cooling, that would ordinarily mean poorer job outcomes for natives.

    But fewer migrant workers can enhance job prospects for natives.

    If migrants leave at the same time as the labour market cools, the migrants leaving can counteract the impact of job market cooling to some extent.

    Like, to put it simply, if they cut 10,000 jobs in a sector, that would be bad news for natives, unless 10,000 migrants leave the sector at the same time…

    That’s ‘how’ it might mask, then you look at the data to see if it’s happening…

  5. My goodness that YouGov poll???

    Talk about leading questions…

    If May gets a deal including..

    WishList1
    WishList2
    WishList3
    WishList4
    WishList5

    Everything she wants.do you think it would be good for Britain.

    That is ridiculous and allows the press to run with
    “Huge Support for May’s Brexit Plan”

    I really wonder about YouGov whether they really are an independent polling organisation.

  6. Yes, for balance they could ask how good it would be for Britain if May doesn’t get what she wants. But yes, without that its easier to generate positive headlines….

  7. ToH: “UK needs EU more: 19%
    EU needs UK more: 34%”

    I think this YouGov finding is very revealing. Presumably you will think it well founded, while I predictably think it totally delusional. I suppose it reflects the success of the “they want to sell us BMWs and Prosecco” meme. But whatever the rationale, it goes some way to explaining the insouciance with which we Brits are tripping after the Pied Piper.

  8. With our learned friends delivering their judgement next week, does anyone think that they may well rule in favour of the government now, there having been a vote in Parliament already with a large majority in favour of serving article 50 and with the government also promising a vote on the final deal in 2 years. In addition there will be other debates and voting around the great repeal bill.

    In other words, as Parliament has expressed its opinion already and overwhelmingly so and will have the opportunity to do so again more than once, will it really be deemed necessary for their Lordships to risk being seen to be interfering in matters political, when it is now unnecessary. The pressure of the legal action has brought the government to heel, they have listened, given Parliament a debate and a vote, with the promise of more in the future.

    Job done, mission accomplished.

  9. @RN

    I don’t think that’s how it works. The judges have to apply the law regardless of political machinations. It sets precedents.

  10. @SomerJohn

    Watching this from Scotland I am amazed at what seems to me to be delusion. The Scottish xbreak is a bit more sensible

    UK needs EU more: 29%
    EU needs UK more: 23%

    But still…..

  11. @ Robert Newark:

    I think you are attributing political motivations to the SC members, which would mean them acting against the judicial oath they have taken. Their job is to interpret the law based on the arguments put before them. There are decisions to be made about:
    1. Whether triggering Article 50 requires an Act of Parliament or some other step in Parliament (both of which will require the involvement of the Lords as Parliament means the Lords and Commons assembled)
    2. whether the Sewell convention contained within the Scotland Act 2016 requires legislative consent form the Scottish Parliament.
    The effect of the Good Friday Agreement on the Northern Ireland Constitution and the need for the involvement of the N.I. Assembly (with particular political connotations of its own.
    3. Whether the various Government of Wales Acts require the involvement of the Welsh assembly.

    I think you are
    1. Equating the House of Commons with Parliament: that is legally incorrect.
    2. Underplaying the complexity of the decisions to be made.
    3. Defaming the integrity of the Judges of the SC.

    There were respectable legal arguments presented by all sides in the case: it would be an injustice to the people of this country, whether for or against Brexit, for the SC not to rule on those arguments. I hold them in higher esteem and believe they will do their duty and address those arguments in full.

  12. There is also a Scottish YouGov poll carried out for the SNP

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/dhb1x9kj4r/SNP_Final_Results_170113_Independence_EU_Website.pdf

    High level of understanding that Scotland will be worse off:

    And around 2/3 support for the SNP positions: Scottish parliament having to be consulted & that Scottish governments plan should be included in Brexit negotiations.

    What is interesting to me is the higher social grades are more supportive to the SNP positions and most negative about the economic consequences.
    Better off: 9%
    Worse off: 54%

    And that 2014 No voters split evenly between support & oppose on the SNP positions & are pessimistic on economic consequences
    Better off: 10%
    Worse off: 37%

    Hammering home economic consequences should turn those affluent No voters to Yes. The trick is doing that & keeping enough of the poorer, Yes\Leavers onside.

  13. @Atair 8.22

    “You need to wake up, Labour have done more damage to the NHS in the last 20 years than anyone else, ”

    Funny, I have no recollection under Lab of waiting times in A&E being more than 4 hrs for 25% of arrivals, of people waiting hours on trolleys be for dying , of cancer ops being cancelled several times due to lack of beds etc. Etc.

    Face the truth, please

  14. I guess the reference of Labour’s responsibility for the NHS is PFI, which is correct, although extremely complicated.

    It has to be added that any money released by the Blair government to the NHS was tied to performance criteria. One could argue that these weren’t the right thing, or that it created confusion in management (it did, but from a public point of view, it worked). The coalition government abandoned them knowing well, that the resources were not there to meet them.

    One could argue that the large expansion of the health service infrastructure effectively turned all cost fixed, which, after reaching a certain limit (efficiency savings), only cutting capacity can be done, and hence deteriorating indicators.

    If you combine this with demographic changes, the prescription charges, forced self-employment, and recurring visitors to A&E, it is clear that the current system is not sustainable in the medium term (of course, throwing money at the NHS would alleviate some problems in the short term).

    Because it represents a conflict between the government and the public, the only way out I can see (if the free at the point of service is to be maintained) if essentially funding decisions (not clinical obviously) are given over to the public.

  15. EU contributions.

    inelegantly worded:
    source bloomberg/EC net contributions and revenues for EU budget 2015.

    ” Excluding Germany the British contribution is more than the total net contributions of the 25 other EU countries”

1 5 6 7