ICM’s regular poll for the Guardian came out today, topline voting intention figures are CON 42%(nc), LAB 27%(+1), LDEM 10%(nc), UKIP 12%(-1), GRN 4%(-1). There is no significant change since a fortnight ago and the Conservatives retain a formidable lead.

The poll also asked about expectations of Brexit. People tend to think it will have a negative impact on the economy (by 43% to 38%) and on their own personal finances (34% to 12%), but on the overall way of life in Britain they are slightly more positive (41% expect a positive impact, 36% a negative one). All these answers are, as you would expect, strongly correlated with referendum vote – very few Remainers expect anything good to come of Brexit, very few Leavers expect any negative consequences. Full tabs are here.

For those who’ve missed it, I also have a long piece over on YouGov’s website about the Brexit problem facing Labour and how to respond to it. Labour were already a party whose electoral coalition was under strain, with sharp divides between their more liberal, metropolitian middle-class supporters and their more socially conservative traditional working class support. Brexit splits the party right down that existing fault line and their choice on whether to robustly oppose or accept Brexit will upset one side or another of the Labour family.

More of Labour’s supporters backed Remain than Leave and a substantial minority of Labour voters would be delighted were the party to oppose Brexit. However, such a policy would also drive away a substantial chunk of their support. 20% of people who voted Labour in 2015 say they would be “angry” if Labour opposed Brexit. In contrast, if Labour accept Brexit but campaign for a close relationship with the EU once we leave then while it would delight fewer voters, it would also anger far fewer voters (only 7% of Labour’s 2015 vote would be angry). If Labour’s aim is to keep their electoral coalition together, then a “soft Brexit” would be acceptable to a much wider segment of their support.

Of course it’s more complicated than that. This is only how voters would react right now. Labour may want to gamble on public opinion turning against Brexit in the future and get ahead of the curve. Alternatively, they may think Brexit is such an important issue that Labour should do what they think right and damn the electoral consequences. That’s a matter for the party itself to decide, but in terms of current public opinion I think Jeremy Corbyn’s position on Brexit may actually be the one most likely to keep Labour together. Full article is here.


637 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 42, LAB 27, LD 10, UKIP 12”

1 10 11 12 13
  1. Alec,

    I don’t know who you talk to, but few Brexit supporters I know are confident at the EU will offer any kind of a deal that we might want to accept. The most common view is that they intend to take a very hard line, un-compromising position and force the UK to walk away with the hardest of hard Brexits. I have discussed the politics behind that before.

    Juncker has said that following Brexit, Peru will have a closer relationship with the EU than the UK, and he is proud of that.

    Hard to see any ‘shocks and disappointments’ coming from that. Rather I think it is the Remain side who really do believe that when push comes shove the EU will be nice to us after all. Personally I can’t see any evidence whatsoever to support that view. The Council even went as far as to stonewall May when she looked for a humanitarian mutual statement of intent regarding the future of EU citizens in the UK and vice versa, happily throwing their own citizens under the bus to make rather cheap point. They made so many things clear there; including the real possibility that people who have migrated to the UK are to be treated as traitors. Juncker has said that the British are to be treated as traitors, so it would be consistent.

  2. Alec,

    I don’t know who you talk to, but few Brexit supporters I know are confident at the EU will offer any kind of a deal that we might want to accept. The most common view is that they intend to take a very hard line, un-compromising position and force the UK to walk away with the hardest of hard Brexits. I have discussed the politics behind that before.

    Juncker has said that following Brexit, Peru will have a closer relationship with the EU than the UK, and he is proud of that.

    Hard to see any ‘shocks and disappointments’ coming from that. Rather I think it is the Remain side who really do believe that when push comes shove the EU will be nice to us after all. Personally I can’t see any evidence whatsoever to support that view. The Council even went as far as to stonewall May when she looked for a humanitarian mutual statement of intent regarding the future of EU citizens in the UK and vice versa, happily throwing their own citizens under the bus to make rather cheap point. They made so many things clear there; including the real possibility that people who have migrated to the UK are to be treated as tra1tors. Juncker has said that the British are to be treated as tra1tors, so it would be consistent.

    My first attempt got moderated. Silly me, I forgot that if you use the language favoured by the Commission et al, you get moderated.

  3. BZ

    “Perhaps HMG’s current apparent disdain of the Single Market is the problem.”

    It’s not a problem, the UK voted to leave the EU, the single market is in the EU.

  4. Barbazenzero: “We will * give you a say over whether we should stay in or leave the EU”

    Thanks for posting this bit of the Tory manifesto. Interesting to see that they seem to have intended it as a consultative referendum. “have your say” is by no means the same as “decide”.

    TOH: Thanks, and glad to hear how fond you are of Scotland and NI. When I see how easily phrases can appear to mean something much stronger than the originator intended, I’m always glad not to be a politician whose every word can be pored over and turned into a millstone if it looks bad. I have absolutely no time for that KellyAnne Conway person, but I suspect that when she said “alternative facts” she was thinking of alternative explanations, or something similar. It’s why politicians mostly use that stilted, ultra-cautious, formulaic language that so turns people off. The alternative is to throw caution to the winds and go for it like Boris.

  5. RODGER

    No idea on the manifesto bill issue. I see Labour peers have already tabled 8 amendments.

  6. Somerjohn,

    “We will * give you a say over whether we should stay in or leave the EU” That is in the summary at the top.

    The specific commitment is
    “We will hold that in-out referendum before the end of 2017 and respect the outcome”. I don’t see much wriggle room in that, and it certainly justifies making the Brexit bill a Manifesto bill.

  7. Rodger: “The most common view is that they intend to take a very hard line, un-compromising position and force the UK to walk away with the hardest of hard Brexits. ”

    Nobody is forcing the UK to walk away, except arguably a large chunk of the British electorate. But if we choose to do so, why should we expect special favours and concessions without offering anything in return?

    If, after A50 is triggered, we enter into negotiations in good faith and make positive proposals, I’m sure it will be possible to achieve some compromises acceptable to both sides. If that isn’t possible, then Brexit will indeed have meant Brexit.

  8. RODGER

    @”BTW I have long thought that Juncker was in favour of Brexit from the start and did his best to bring it about. After all, he won’t get his European Army without it.”

    Yes-I think him & his ilk will be glad to see the back of us. We have just been a sheet anchor on the Political Integration project.

    The outcome of the Dutch Elections will be very interesting too-Juncker may not like them either.

  9. TOH

    There were literally hundreds of Amendments tabled for the Commons bill. Most never got past the Committee and were not discussed in the House. It does make it rather hard for the Lords to pass Amendments that have not already been dealt with (very firmly) by the HoC.

    I think that means is that if the HoL wants to go down the obstructist route, all doors are closed to the ‘yes. but have you thought of’ weasel approach, and they will have to do it in blunt opposition to the will of the HoC and the People. It will be interesting to see if they are up for that.

  10. Rodger

    Ah, yes, I should have read the whole manifesto. As you say, not much wriggle room. Which makes it all the more reprehensible that no preparatory steps were taken to honour that commitment. Which is why, 8 months on, we’re still seemingly in a muddle.

  11. Have just caught up watching “After Brexit: the Battle for Europe” on the iplayer. Here it is for those who missed it:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08dx4lz/this-world-after-brexit-the-battle-for-europe

    It’s an eye-opener. Brexit Britain looks like an oasis of stability and tranquility compared to what is going on in Europe.

  12. Somerjohn,

    “why should we expect special favours and concessions without offering anything in return?”
    That is pretty much exactly what I said. Why are you suggesting I disagree with it?

    “If, after A50 is triggered, we enter into negotiations in good faith and make positive proposals, I’m sure it will be possible to achieve some compromises acceptable to both sides. If that isn’t possible, then Brexit will indeed have meant Brexit.”
    I would love to see some evidence to support that; I know of none. I suggest that like most Remainers, as I said, you believe that when push comes to shove the EU will be nice to us. Perhaps they will, but …

    That is something I do find with Remain supporters, they believe that the EU is fundamentally ‘nice’. The people are, the politicians less so, and it is not seen as ‘nice’ by the rest of the world, of which we will soon be part.

  13. Rodger: “you believe that when push comes to shove the EU will be nice to us.”

    I think they will be nice to us to the same extent that we will be nice to them. In other words, I expect a hard-nosed negotiation, not a love-in.

    You seem to be saying that we will be nice and they will be nasty. A sad tale of unrequited love. Do you really mean that?

  14. @Somerjohn “Which makes it all the more reprehensible that no preparatory steps were taken to honour that commitment. ”

    Absolutely. It was disgraceful and Cameron’s actions in banning the civil service to do any preparation whatsoever was reckless in the extreme. His reputation is deservedly in tatters.

  15. Somerjohn,

    I don’t think we are in too much of a muddle. It took May a while to work out her timetable, as it should. It takes months to set up substantial departments of people to do anything, and that had to be done. She comes across to me as a very focused manager, who knows how to get on with things. Yes, I have read the comments about nit picking on the details and being unable to delegate, but it is too soon to say if that is real or mendacious. As a manager, if someone puts up an important document to you and it is intellectually scruffy, of course you send it back. But perhaps she has a habit in interfering in matters beneath her. Who knows?

    She certainly hates the ECJ; I share her lack of confidence there.

    The test will come when negotiations start. To some extent, negotiators are born not made, and many senior negotiators are there on ‘Buggin’s turn’, and are fairly useless, so having a fresh team is not all bad; it’s certainly not all good either. There is a technical side to negotiation where experience is vital, there is also a human side which cannot be taught or learned. For example Joseph1832 and his earlier remark
    “In contrast, many on the Remain side are indifferent to Parliament being cut out of the picture when it comes to making European laws, but talk of nothing but Parliamentary Sovereignty when it comes to overruling public opinion.”
    Someone who produce that quality of argument off the cuff in a negotiation is very powerful.

  16. Somerjohn

    Thanks, no problem. I have issues sometimes getting down exactlywhat i mean, and i could see what you originally complained about even though it was not what i meant.

  17. Sea Change,

    The trigger for ruining Cameron’s reputation came earlier than not preparing for a “leave” vote. It was his approach to the “re-negotiation”. Having achieved nothing there, he should logically have been campaigning for a leave vote. That he did not exposed the insincerity of his position which was already committed to keeping the UK in the EU at all costs.

  18. Roger

    ” It will be interesting to see if they are up for that.”

    Indeed it will. PersonallyI am appaled that the Lords are putting forward amendments after the Commons made clear that no ammendments were acceptable.

  19. Somerjohn,

    I have customers in South East Asia and I have been exposed to their view of the EU. They do not like it. The PM of Singapore said years ago to be wary of the Europeans, they are very greedy and give nothing.

    The Americans similarly do not have a very high opinion of the EU, who they see as being not very good. Especially after they had to step in to sort out Serbia, then watched EU hubris lose the Crimea, were asked to contribute (via the IMF) to the Greek bailout, and the Donbas went on and on with France and Germany trying to make money out of it selling arms until Obama said ‘Enough’ and shut it down.

    So no, I don’t expect a ‘love in’. I think (not know) it will be quite cold and nasty until near the end. I think the basic deal will be hard Brexit with some bits and pieces negotiated for specific problems, where that suits the interests of France and Germany.

    The long term damage to the EU, which I think will turn out to be immense, has already been done.

  20. CANDY

    A great programme-thanks.

    It is clear, that for Schultz & Verhofstadt , “reform” means Political Union. The National Parliaments & their wretched voters are the problem.

  21. THE OTHER HOWARD @ BZ
    It’s not a problem, the UK voted to leave the EU, the single market is in the EU.

    Recommended that the UK leave the EU would be more accurate, and the single market is not just the EU but also the EEA plus Switzerland.

    However leaving both certainly seems to be what HMG now plans. But in that case how can HMG meet its own manifesto commitment to safeguard British interests in the Single Market?

    Of course HMG could easily “honour” both manifesto commitments by remaining in the EEA, at least for the time being, but it seems to be dead set on leaving both.

    I only raised the point to suggest a possible reason why HMG may not be too keen on stressing that the result of an advisory referendum is being honoured at the expense of perfectly deliverable manifesto commitments in order to lock the HoL out of the A50 process.

    RODGER may be right that Bercow could rule it a manifesto commitment that the HoL had no right to dispute, but after their attempts to unseat him in the last Parliament I could imagine him doing Lenthall impressions if asked by HMG.

  22. TOH

    I baulk at the name House of Lords. House of Stooges would be more appropriate. There are others.

  23. The Herald have reported on a “froth” question in their BMG poll.

    Since it deals with a topic Antnony prefers not to be discussed here (for very good reason!) I’ll pass swiftly on to the similarity between the Herald’s poll reporting and “The Adventure of Silver Blaze”.

    Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?

    “Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.

    “Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.

    “Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

    That’s the second poll in a row where the Herald has handed over cash to have VI questions asked – but not revealed the answers.

    How curious.

  24. @Rodger – “I suggest that if the Parliament votes down the deal, the Council and Commission will just proceed with it anyway and ignore the vote. ”

    Really not sure where this stuff comes from. I can see why so many people bought the leave campaign stuff.

    Do you not remember just a few months ago when the Wallonian regional assembly scuppered the CETA deal, forcing specific concessions? It brought everything to a juddering halt, and it was not legally possible to ignore the vote.

    Again, this is an example of leavers expecting things to be so because that’s what they want. It sits counter to your net post, when you accuse many remainers of thinking the EU will be nice to us and leavers expecting a hard time. That’s your anecdotal evidence, and it really doesn’t stand any close inspection.

    What I do find interesting is your post on views of the EU from Singapore and the US. Do you think that the EU might not be a little unpopular in such places as they drive a hard bargain and take on people like the US on even terms?

    There are many elements of EU foreign and trade policies I certainly don’t like, but upsetting the US isn’t one of them. To me, that shows that the EU is doing it’s job for it’s citizens.

  25. @PAUL H-J “The trigger for ruining Cameron’s reputation came earlier than not preparing for a “leave” vote. It was his approach to the “re-negotiation”. Having achieved nothing there, he should logically have been campaigning for a leave vote. That he did not exposed the insincerity of his position which was already committed to keeping the UK in the EU at all costs”

    Yes I agree with you on that. His arrogance in thinking he could win the referendum whatever he negotiated was his undoing.

  26. Rodger: “many on the Remain side are indifferent to Parliament being cut out of the picture when it comes to making European laws, but talk of nothing but Parliamentary Sovereignty when it comes to overruling public opinion.”

    Always interesting to see what others perceive as a killer argument.

    Of course, I view this point from a different perspective. What has always puzzled me is the seeming indifference of parliament, the media and the establishment in general to the process of creating European laws. Anybody living in Britain could be forgiven for not knowing that we are a major player in the EU; that we have a big role in creating those regulations; that we have an effective veto in the council; and that as a result of our ability to get our way, we have nodded through 97% of regulations without a vote in Council.

    I can’t remember a single example of a minister coming back from Brussels and standing up in the Commons to say: this is what’s being proposed, this is what we think, this is what were trying to achieve, and this is how we’re going about it. Instead, there seems absolutely no interest until the regulation is approved and then sometimes the media will go ballistic at what ‘they’ are doing to us (as, for example, on the regs on vacuum cleaner efficiency). Pathetic, really. But then, interestingly, my ‘pathetic’ is someone else’s killer argument.

  27. @Sea Change “His arrogance in thinking he could win the referendum whatever he negotiated was his undoing.”
    Add to that the method he chose to win. ‘Do as we say or you are doomed, and we shall make sure of it’
    As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

  28. RODGER @ Somerjohn,
    The specific commitment is
    “We will hold that in-out referendum before the end of 2017 and respect the outcome”

    The word “implement” would have been appropriate, and a valid manifesto commitment, had CMD’s HMG written consequences into the European Union Referendum Act 2015.

    The verb “respect” which the manifesto uses is defined by Google [1] as:
    have due regard for (someone’s feelings, wishes, or rights).
    “I respected his views”
    synonyms: show consideration for, show regard for, take into consideration, take into account, make allowances for, take cognizance of, observe, pay heed/attention to, bear in mind, be mindful of, be heedful of, remember; archaicregard
    “at least they respect your privacy”

    [1] That’s pretty much in line with the Shorter OED I have with me in Spain [the full OED is in my flat in Switzerland].

  29. Sea Change & Dave

    Yes indeed. I used to think Cameron was only the second-worst PM of the last 100 years. Not any more: Chamberlain could at least claim that the agreement he brought back from Europe was popular and in accordance with the will of the people. And the people turned out to be fine judges on that occasion, too, didn’t they?

  30. @Somerjohn ” we are a major player in the EU; that we have a big role in creating those regulations; that we have an effective veto in the council; ”

    A veto is a means of stopping something you do not want. It is not a means of creating something you do want. The Commission initiates EU laws.
    Compare the UK system, where, rare though its success may be, a backbencher can do it.

  31. Sommerjohn,

    I agree with your points about the lack of interest in Parliament regarding EU legislation. I have never been able to explain it. I suspect a Parliamentarian could point to some structural reason, but I don’t know what it is.

    I am sorry you don’t see the force of Joseph1832’s argument. In a negotiation, producing a sentence that neatly encapsulates an inconsistency in your opponents position is wonderfully effective. Making the opposition feel un-certain and unable to argue their position strongly is what it is all about, with the right timing. That is especially true where both sides know that they have to reach an agreement, somehow.

  32. Dave: “Compare the UK system, where, rare though its success may be, a backbencher can do it.”

    Only if the government doesn’t object. Can you cite an example of a private member’s bill that has succeeded in the face of a 3-line government whip?

    You are talking about the theory of parliamentary legislation rather than the practice. As you are doing in regard to the EU. In practice, if a big member country wants to push a particular point of view, and can get enough of the others onside, then the Commission can be leant on to propose the appropriate regulation.

    Of course, I would like to see the EP able to initiate legislation. But that’s one of those developments the UK (and other) government has been able to fend off in the interests of national sovereignty. So it’s a bit ironic if eurosceptics use that handicapping of the EP by national governments as a stick to beat the ‘undemocratic’ EU with.

  33. If there were a scottish referendum and ,say there was a vote for independence by say 54 to 46 how do you respect the wishes of the 46?

    do you only become half independent?

    do you then have a another referendum about joining the EU or EFTA or does McCanute not intend to ask the scottish people whether they want to or not?

    Funny sort of democracy if have a referendum to leave a union but not to join another one

  34. Barbazenzero,

    I think you are confusing a Manifesto with a submission to the High Court. Legalistic points carry very little weight in politics, and your interpretation might help refute a document in Court, but in a political context it is just dishonest. Legalistic arguments only count when politics comes up against the law.

    If you don’t agree, suppose you said to your wife “It’s up to you and I will respect your decision”, do you think you could afterwards say “But I didn’t say I would ‘implement’ your decision”? Well, not without a long spell in the dog house.

    Ironically, when Miller and Pimlico Plumbers brought Brexit up against the law, the SC escaped itself by doing rather more for the Brexit side with their judgement than they did for Remain. Clever buggers. But then that is what Judges do to you in rather less important matters when they think you shouldn’t have brought the case in the first place.

  35. Alec

    QED about Germany i think.

    I doubt if these unfunded liabilities feature in any national accounts. i this is our liability i would look to Germany having to declare a 100 bn liability in its accounts. I doubt you will find it there.

    i am glad you accept that this is not the cost of leaving the EU but is the crystallisation of Existing costs which have been and are continuing to be incurred in the fiscally incontinent EU.

  36. On Cameron, a key factor is that he undermined his own negotiating position by being willing to campaign for remaining in the EU regardless.

    My view at the time was that the rest of the EU took a firmer line in the negotiations than they might otherwise have done because:
    a – they believed that Cameron wanted to remain
    b – they never believed that the UK might vote to leave.

    On a they were right. On b they trusted Cameron – who was wrong.

  37. Compare and contrast with the negotiating approach being taken by May.

    Some in the EU (Juncker, Verhofstadt, Schulz) think they can play the same game again to their benefit.

    Others, notably Tusc and Merkel, are being both more humble and more pragmatic. Most chancelleries in Europe are busy assessing what their countries really need from the UK post Brexit. This work is being done quietly and without fanfare – much as it is being done in Whitehall. Then the real negotiations will start in the Council – and in parallel behind the scenes in bilateral discussions among key parties, including the UK.

    It is only those without real power (e.g. GV) who are indulging in bullying statements to inflate their own importance.

  38. Roger

    “The specific commitment is
    “We will hold that in-out referendum before the end of 2017 and respect the outcome”

    Exactly so, quite clear despite nit picking from some Remainers.

  39. @BZ

    Re the timing of a possible Indie2, I think Sturgeon will keep the plates spinning as long as she can while keeping pressure on the UK Government on the SG compromise proposal and the devolution of more powers to the devolved Governments (on the former no response after nearly 3 months, on the latter no proposals or even guiding principles 9 months after the EU referendum but signs that there will be a Westminster power grab). I think this is especially true as all the signs are that there will be a transition period post March 2109 which gives more breathing space.

    I wonder if the SG’s next move will be to seek a commitment from the UK Government to a section 30 arrangement to give the Scottish Parliament undoubted power to call a referendum at a time of its choosing.

  40. @sthomas

    “If there were a scottish referendum and ,say there was a vote for independence by say 54 to 46 how do you respect the wishes of the 46?
    do you only become half independent?”

    Perhaps you adopt the mature approach suggested in the last referendum of taking sovereignty back to the Scottish people and Parliament but entering into sensible and mutually beneficial arrangements across the British Isles. After all Scotland would be leaving the UK not the British Isles. So much more sensible than “Brexit means Brexit”.

  41. ComRes GB poll due at 6 pm (after Wales has won)

  42. Paul H-J

    I agree with both your posts. Going further it is noticeable that the Commission are un-swervingly hardline, the Council not so much, Finance ministers are largely conciliatory and trying to work out how to limit the economic damage, and Foreign ministers are just embarrassed.

    I see that Juncker has said today that he will not stand for another term. That is a huge change. He also said “The other EU 27 don’t know it yet, but the Brits know very well how they can tackle this”. Which sounds good until you read on and its the old Perfidious Albion theme.

  43. RODGER @ BZ
    Legalistic points carry very little weight in politics, and your interpretation might help refute a document in Court, but in a political context it is just dishonest.

    Up to a point, Lord Copper.

    To date HMG haven’t set much of an example re honesty and transparency, but if they believed that “respect” carries the same “political” weight as “implement” then they would have asked Bercow for certification of the “manifesto commitment” status already.

    OTOH, CMD’s HMG tried to unseat him and perhaps they simply don’t want to make relations with him even worse in case they need his help to thwart the wishes of the HoC later in this parliament.

    The BBC’s Mark D’Arcy wrote an interesting article re Bercow yesterday: see his John Bercow: Why the Marmite Speaker is staying put.

  44. hireton

    but that is just words. what practical steps? scotland stays in the Uk market without tariffs but also part of the single market: unlimited immigration to scotland and no border controls; armed forces no longe r part of GB:closure of faslane etc

    I tis up to you to specify exactly what arrangements you propose

  45. BZ

    They won’t be able to un-seat Bercow. He his a mouthy little gob*hite, with a book on how to get girls too drunk to say no to his ‘credit’, but as a Speaker he has stood up for the rights of ordinary MPs against the party machines. I don’t like a lot of what he does, but he is a very good Speaker of the HoC.

    Is it Bercow that must declare a Manifesto bill? I don’t know. I thought it was the Govt, perhaps because the Speaker is often of the Party in Opposition and therefore could not be relied upon to call a Manifesto bill when they should. Mind you, Bercow is a member of the Opposition. Opposition to everyone that is.

  46. HIRETON @BZ
    Re the timing of a possible Indie2, I think Sturgeon will keep the plates spinning as long as she can…

    Yes. I suspect you’re right re her plans, although she will need to have the plan in place by this autumn. If, as I suspect is likely, there is no “official” reporting back to parliament this side of the summer recess, shortly before the end of term would be a good time to seek the s30 arrangement.

  47. BZ again

    Looking at https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200506/jtselect/jtconv/265/26506.htm
    Sections 101 onwards deal with the definition of a Manifesto Bill. They talk about “the will of the HoC”, the Speaker isn’t mentioned, nor do they want further more precise definition of a Manifesto BIll. It looks from that as if a simple vote in the HoC would settle it.

    They also say at the end that the name Salisbury-Addison convention should be replaced by Government Bill convention, which is shame because Salisbury’s historic contribution should not be taken from him and you would never pick out “Government Bill convention” from all the dross in an internet search.

    You complain about the Govt not being transparent and honest. I agree, quite unlike the govt of … sorry I’m stuck there.

  48. Com Res poll:
    Con 41%
    Lab 26%
    UKIP 11%
    LDem 11%
    SNP 5%
    Green 4%

    8th – 10th feb

  49. ComRes poll – changes since JUNE:

    CON +7
    LAB -3
    LD 11 +3
    UKIP 11 -8
    GRN 4 =
    SNP 5 =

    The Con improvement will be familiar from numerous other polls and regular comment. What I find particularly striking is the collapse of the UKIP VI.

    Also notable is M Smithson’s tweet – but I can’t find tables to confirm this:

    “ComRes Indy S Mirror poll finds that one in eight (12%) 2015 Labour voters now say that they will vote for the Lib Dems”

  50. Correction – the VI CHANGES are

    CON +7
    LAB -3
    LD +3
    UKIP -8
    GRN 4 =
    SNP 5 =

1 10 11 12 13