Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor for the Evening Standard came out earlier today. Topline voting intention figures are CON 40%(-3), LAB 29%(-2), LDEM 13%(+2), UKIP 9%(+3). The Tory lead remains pretty steady (note that the increase in the UKIP vote is probably largely a reversion to the mean following an anomolous 6% last month).

Satisfaction ratings with the party leaders are plus 17 for Theresa May (53% are satisfied, 36% are disatisfied) and minus 38 for Jeremy Corbyn (24% satisfied and 62% disatisfied). That includes 22% of Tory voters who say that are “satisfied” with Corbyn’s leadership… I suspect they don’t mean that in a complementary way.

Nothing else has been published yet (MORI normally ask a few other questions, but I expect they’ve held them back to give the Standard another story), all the details so far are over here.


538 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 40, LAB 29, LD 13, UKIP 9”

1 5 6 7 8 9 11
  1. S Thomas,
    “The problem is that whether we remained or left there were always going to be further questions”

    The problem is that if we leave we then have no control over the future course of the EU or our relation to it. Whereas if we remain, we have veto powrs to compel the others to allow us special terms, as we have already.

  2. @ Danny

    Exactly the reason I voted to leave.

    Let them Federalise and let us stop interfering.

  3. @JONESINBANGOR

    “Let them Federalise and let us stop interfering.”

    This would be like Churchill agreeing to let Hitler have his way and us not interfering. It wouldn’t have worked then and it will not work now.
    Britain needs to be in Europe to help shape it.

  4. ken,
    “As a general point, is it just me, or does the EU structure seem to be crumbling”
    Its not just you. There seems to be a concerted attempt to push the idea that the EU is crumbling and therefore there is no point campaigning to reverse the decision to leave. Its just the campaign moving on to new ground. Same rules apply as before, biggest lie wins.

    Joseph1832
    “Something is going to give”
    yes, I agree. brexit, if it even happens, isnt going to change any of the fundamentals which brought it about.

    I am seceptical about the various claims above for Thatcher, Clarke or Brown managing to buck the exchange rate markets, but think rather they were carried along by them. Maybe they had greater or lesser ability to spin their own influence over a result which had nothing to do with them.

    The Other Howard,
    “I really am bored with the endless and fruitless discussion about something that hasn’t even started to happen yet”
    I thought you were enjoying yourself immensely.

  5. @Tancred

    Absolutely not. We and the EU will have a healthier and more constructive relationship in 10 years time than ever before.

    We were utterly disconnected from Federalist Europe, we were never sincerely committed, and to pretend otherwise is fantasy land.

  6. Jonesinbangor
    “Let them Federalise and let us stop interfering.”
    Ah, trouble is, I care what happens to the UK. But I agree, one future scenario is we leave so they can federalise, and then we rejoin. Its one way to persuade the Uk to accept federalisation, which if we were able to veto it, could never have been got through parliament. The only way to get the Uk to be part of a federal EU is for us to leave. Really, the Leave result of the referendum has made this more likely not less.

  7. @Danny

    There is no way I ever see the UK doing that in my lifetime. Maybe in 40 years time.

  8. Danny

    Your suggestion does ignore the question of why the constituent parts of the UK would not want to be federal parts of the EU in their own right, rather than regions of a UK that was a federal member of the EU.

    There are valid stances on all kinds of constitutional arrangements, but recognising that what you want for what you think of as “your country” has equal validity for those who have a different perspective, helps political dialogue to be constructive.

  9. oldnat,
    I’m not worried what the Scots want to do, whatever, its fine with me. I have always thought that being an independent member of the EU would give Scotland more power to determine its own destiny, though they would lose England’s subsidy. Some things I read suggest that England is not so convinced that the price of buying Scotland’s agreement to be part of the Uk is still worthwhile. Leave certainly seem to think that upsetting Scotland and risking breaking the Uk is a price worth paying for Brexit.

    These are bad times for political dialogue. Leave have no interest in this and only want to ram through the temporary majority they have to leave. My basic view on Brexit has not changed for some considerable time. I think its a bad idea, and if it happens events will determine whether England likes it. Then England will decide if it wants to rejoin, or maybe is compelled to rejoin. And then Englad will have to face the revised terms which the Eu will insists upon. If by then they have federalised..well.

  10. @Tancred “This would be like Churchill agreeing to let Hitler have his way and us not interfering. It wouldn’t have worked then and it will not work now. Britain needs to be in Europe to help shape it.”

    Are you suggesting that there are malign forces within the Federalism movement that need to be checked by the British?

    Or perhaps do you think that there is a high level of incompetency in Europe that needs a ‘wise old head’ to help direct them?

    Or do you just not trust the French?

  11. TOH
    I have taken a look at the Yougov poll for 12/13th February. using the data provided in the tables. The % figures given for each region are obviously rounded – and probably explain why I have failed to arrive at Yougov’s own headline figures for GB as a whole.
    On the basis of my own calculations a total of 1415 voters gave a voting preference. Of that GB total 575 would vote Tory whilst 334 would vote Labour. In % terms that comes out as Con 40.6% Lab 23.6% – a Con lead of 17% rather than the 16% published figure. That may be explained by the rounding within each region to which I referred. A 17% Tory lead would represent a pro -Tory swing from Labour of 5.2% since May 2015.
    Having repeated the same process but excluding Scotland, I came up with figures of 533 and 312 for the Tories and Labour respectively. In % terms the figures became Con 41.8% Lab 24.5% – a Con lead of 17.3%. My best estimate is that the Tory lead in England & Wales in 2015 was 8.1% – so a lead of 17.3% today would amount to a swing of 4.6%. This would be 0.6% lower than for GB as a whole.
    I fully understand that such a margin might not appear to be particularly significant – and in the context of a national swing of 5% I would tend to agree with that. However, Yougov has since September shown a stronger shift to the Tories than other pollsters and has pretty consistently been producing the biggest Tory leads. The swings shown by some of the other pollsters have been more modest as exemplified by Opinium – despite their latest poll – and Mori.When the overall national swing is circa 2% the lower swing outside Scotland becomes more important in terms of seats likely to change hands. Also first term incumbency could well save quite a few Labour MPs when the swing is relatively low or modest. A 5% swing would sweep virtually all of them away!

  12. Alec

    “So stop posting on it.”

    I’m trying but when you and others write stuff that I think fundamentally wrong I feel it necessary to put the other view. If you both stop I would be very happy to’

    All the Brexit discussion at the moment is pure speculation since it hasn’t even started to happen yet, and yes before you say it that applies to what i say on the subject as well. It’s got very little to do with so called fact based argument.

    OLDNAt

    “Isn’t “Good night” a needlessly provocative comment?”

    No ir was ,eant as a friendly “good night” because i was going to bed.

  13. Danny

    “I thought you were enjoying yourself immensely.”

    Most of the time I really enjoy posting, people like Ked add sparkle to the day. I think you will agree the sort of discussion I had with two people yesterday was totally pointless.

  14. @Danny

    “Leave certainly seem to think that upsetting Scotland and risking breaking the Uk is a price worth paying for Brexit.”

    The irony is that had the Westminster establishment not meddled with the indyref (lies, media, corporations, celebs and so on), then there was a reasonable chance of a Yes vote.

    That would have ended the UK, and it’s membership of the EU in 2014. No EU referendum necessary. The Brexiteers could have had their dream and if it went badly, they could have blamed the Scots for 50+ years.

  15. PAUL H_J

    @”Of course those decades of peace in Europe have absolutely nothing to do with NATO.
    Why spend 2% of GDP on defence when you can spend it on bureaucracy instead for the same effect?”

    Mr Verhofstadt isn’t big on irony is he?

  16. Statgeek
    I’m intrigued as to why you believe that a Yes vote in the Scottish referendum would have led to us exiting the EU?

    On what basis?

  17. We will rejoin the EU. The only thing that will ultimately stop it is the end of the EU.
    The older voters have so thoroughly and entirely alienated the young that it is entrenching internationalist views. 6 months ago I’d have said it was accidental but the spite and arrogance towards younger people has become endemic.
    Around 2030 UK demographics start to change substantially as the young proportion of the population rises. Any political party that takes the attitude towards the young that is typified by much of the divisive discourse of the less principled end of the Right will wither and die by then and richly deserve it.

  18. An interesting survey might be a count of the appearance of certain characters in posts: My own unscientific survey

    1. Corbyn
    2. May
    3.Hitler
    4…

    47. Farron

    The Daily Express might headline this as ” Farron less popular than Hitler in Poll survey”

    On the other hand now i come to think of it…….

  19. Chris Riley

    Good to see you getting down with the kids.No doubt you wake up every morning listening to “wrap” music.I was going to to say together with Gordon Brown but i thought that it might be mis-understood.

  20. TOH

    Sorry to be late getting back to you regarding the EU’s ‘refusal’ to enter into negotiations about citizens’ rights and status post-Brexit.

    If I understand correctly, Angela Merkel and the EU generally could not enter into discussions on the topic because they had not been asked by the UK to do so.

    According to the rules (and the UK Government would be loathe to allow anyone else to bypass ‘the rules’) the only way in which the UK could initiate these discussions was to trigger Article 50.

    It is therefore the UK’s decision to delay the triggering of Article 50 by nine months which has caused the trauma we are facing. Had Article 50 been triggered last summer then perhaps we might already have sorted out the problem through friendly negotiation! Instead, we are still waiting for the UK government to start the process.

  21. Danny

    Surely if the English wish to stop subsidising Scotland they have only to vote to do so in Parliament, where there is a stoncking English majority! Personally I’d be delighted, as I believe the Barnet Formula is having a detrimental effect on Scotland’s willingness and ability to determine its own future.

  22. @ Tancred
    “This would be like Churchill agreeing to let Hitler have his way and us not interfering. It wouldn’t have worked then and it will not work now.
    Britain needs to be in Europe to help shape it.”

    I disagree. Cameron’s antics trying to renegotiate before the referendum were embarrassing for the UK. We were already in the slow lane after opting out of the Euro. We have been heading in opposite directions since ERM debacle, bar a brief spell under Blair which fizzled out.

    This is an issue of sincerity and commitment, neither were qualities the UK was capable of bringing to the European Union.

  23. JOHN B

    Since you have come back John I will reply. You may be correct technically but May raised it as a possibility and I believe it was Merkel and others said not before Art 50 is triggered. Therefore I still believe it is the fault of the EU, listening to May in the HoC on several occasions, she certainly thinks so.

    Either way I certainly have sympathy for your families issues and May has said she will ask for it to be dealt with early in the negotiations

  24. CHRIS RILEY

    And a happy Sunday to you as well.

  25. @TOH – ” It’s got very little to do with so called fact based argument.”

    Actually, a lot of it is to do with facts, but you often choose to ignore these.In the context if the discussion regarding @John B’s partner and their terrible uncertainty, it’s a simple that Mrs May has decided not to make a decision to let EU nationals remain, and is therefore solely and totally responsible for the concerns expressed. You tried to blame the EU for this, and you were wrong in doing so.

    This is not supposition or ‘IMO’ opinion, but hard, immutable facts that you choose to ignore.

  26. Alec

    I posted on the subject to John B a few minutes ago. As I said to him the Prime Minister has agreed with my view on several occasions. You are already on record that you disagree with me and presumably the PM so I suggest we leave it at that.

    On discussion on the EU in general, opinions about how good or disastrous our leaving is pure conjecture and has little to do with fact based analysis. I would have thought that was patently obvious to all.

  27. Graham

    Thanks for your reply , we obviously calculated the YouGov numbers differently. I used the adjusted breakdown numbers for the regions excluding Scotland and thenchanged the percentage for each region into numbers for each party to calculate the figure for the rUK.

    On your latter point YouGov and ICM give the largest Tory leads and Opinium and Survation the lowest. As you say thse last two pollsters report less frequently than YouGov and ICM. The differece between the two sets of pollsters is quite large and one group will presumably be closer to the real situation than the other. The question of course is which.

  28. Graham

    I should have added another question, is Opinium starting to fall in line or is their latest poll and outlier?

  29. TOH
    To your last question the answer has to be ‘wait and see’! Opinium did show a 12% Tory lead in November before falling back again.
    Re -Yougov and ICM having the bigger Tory leads. Whilst that is true, ICM has not shown any drop in Labour support at all since last Summer when they were already recording big Tory leads.Yougov stand out as the only pollster consistently showing a significant drop in Labour’s share since last Autumn. I still find that puzzling.

  30. It is inconceivable that reciprocal rights to stay for EU nationals residing in the UK presently and vice versa will not be agreed.

    I think one area where the UK Government could have claimed to moral high ground was to say we will grant rights to stay whatever the EU decide.

    Details – length of time, rights to citizenship etc could have been discussed later.

    Far from weakening the negotiating position it would have garnered much goodwill in many EU Countires helping with the substantive issues.

  31. Colin: “What makes you think Germany will change its view on the fiscal responsibility of EU members?”

    Your question was in response to my suggestion that the EU will move at two speeds, with the eurozone integrating faster and the others at their own pace.

    There are two answers to your question:

    1. Faster eurozone integration will require fiscal responsibility and the institutions to enforce it. Those countries unable to comply will move to the ‘laggards’ group. (I used ‘eurozone’ as shorthand for the fast-track core group. There is no reason why some of the others shouldn’t keep using €, as Montenegro and Kosovo already do, and as Ecuador does with the US$).

    2. As the eurozone moves towards a federation, at some point it will need to raise some taxes federally – maybe external tariffs. It can then direct expenditure where it will be most effective, which will have the effect of transfer payments.

    All this depends on the development of strong central institutions, of course, under the control of democratic governance.

  32. TOH: Please don’t feel the need to comment on my answer to Colin above. It’s about the possible development of the EU27 post-Brexit and so I’m sure of no interest to you.

  33. Jim Jam about the right of EU nationals to stay.

    You’re absolutely right: morally and for practical reasons our govt should give EU nationals living here the right to stay, whatever the other EU countries decide.

    This is not likely to happen with a May govt in the grip of fearing UKIP and the ‘problem’ of immigration.

  34. SOMERJOHN

    I will of course post to anybody who chooses to post on this site, as and when I want to. That after all is what discussion on the web is about.

    As it happens your correct in this occasion, since you know my view already of what is the likely outcome for the Eu in the longer term.

    Enjoy your discussion.

  35. @SEA CHANGE

    “Are you suggesting that there are malign forces within the Federalism movement that need to be checked by the British?
    Or perhaps do you think that there is a high level of incompetency in Europe that needs a ‘wise old head’ to help direct them?
    Or do you just not trust the French?”

    I’m not necessarily suggesting any of these. What I am saying is that Europe and Britain both benefit when there is British influence in European affairs. Believe it or not, most European countries look fondly upon Britain, either as a long standing friend or long standing rival, but in either case there isn’t the bad blood that so many tabloids appear to make out. Our image is important and we should not tarnish it by abandoning our friends and neighbours after all these years.

  36. @Tancred

    Okay fair enough, in that case it was perhaps an inappropriate reference to Churchill and Hitler. I expect Britain will still influence affairs in Europe as it has done for much of the past 1000 years, but maybe less than the last 43 years of course.

  37. SOMERJOHN

    I can understand the concept of two speeds in respect of EZ ins & EZ outs.

    But for countries inside the single currency & monetary union, institutionalising what you describe as “laggards” merely entrenches the regime of never ending bailouts to fund interest payments on the previous bailouts-as for Greece.

    These will arise because the Single Currency is valued by reference to the economies of Germany AND the ” laggards”-ie it is advantageous ( undervalued) for Germany & disadvantageous ( overvalued) for the laggards.

    Germany will not countenance debt write off /and or fiscal transfers. I suppose they will continue to push the next best thing-fiscal rules to instill prudent public finances, more oversight by the centre & more fines & punishments.

    The only way to make EZ economies converge os for EZ to be one country . This will avoid the bureaucratic nonsense surrounding the existing structure.
    Monetary UNion with one Central Bank. Fiscal Union with one Finance Ministry-ergo one Parliament -ergo one country. .

  38. Coin – I took Somerjohn’s Laggards to be non-EZ members, Denmark, Sweden etc not weak Economies within the EZ Zone

  39. SOMERJOHN

    You might be interested in the Conclusion of this study-it was written 4 years ago !

    http://www.lse.ac.uk/europeanInstitute/LEQS%20Discussion%20Paper%20Series/LEQSPaper57.pdf

  40. JIM JAM

    The EU’s problems lie with the Currency Union. Those outside it have mechanisms available to adjust to changing economic circumstances.

  41. Chris Riley – “Around 2030 UK demographics start to change substantially as the young proportion of the population rises.”

    It will – and not in the direction you think.

    See the following:

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/div-classtitlethatchers-children-blairs-babies-political-socialization-and-trickle-down-value-change-an-age-period-and-cohort-analysisdiv/38664695516495C5A6C08BC656EEAB20/core-reader

    It’s quite a long report, but worth reading in full.

    They define Thatcher’s children as the group born between 1959 and 1976 (i.e. they were in school when she was in power). And Blair’s Babes as children born beween 1977 and 1990.

    quote

    Overall then, Blair’s Babies stand out as the most economically right-wing generation; they are also more authoritarian than Thatcher’s Children. Our models thus show that the generation coming of age in the aftermath of the Cold War, once Thatcher had left office, stands out as the most economically conservative, net of both period and age effects. Overall, the results provide some support for the idea of a political generation of ‘Thatcher’s Children’, since with this cohort we see a reversal of the trend towards greater social liberalism and support for redistribution. These results also suggest that rendering Thatcherite values uncontentious (under Blair) was more significant for ensuring their long-term endurance.

    quote

  42. JIMJAM
    TONY EBERT

    While I agree with both of you about EU citizens, I think there may be a little more behind this. May’s problem is not to do with reciprocity with rEU, but rather the fact that Britain has a particular setoff circumstances that make ‘taking back control’ over EU immigration rather difficult in practice. Most, if not all, rEU countries have systems of registration for their own citizens and outsiders, and it is impossible to live in say France or Holland for any length of time without being registered. The UK has no such system – perhaps a good thing – and its immigration laws for foreigners are a bad fit with EU law on freedom of movement. So, not only do we have 3+million unregistered EU citizens that suddenly need to be registered, but also under present Home Office policy, about a million of them are , in the Home Office’s eyes, here ‘unlawfully’. These include many of the longest term and most integrated residents. And they have friends and families who vote and are often very well connected. So May has a problem, not of what to do, but how to achieve it – and it’s a problem none of the other European countries have. Unfortunately for her she has underestimated the power of this lobby (MPs are besieged – let’s remember we are talking about six times as many people as farmers, plus all their British relatives) and lost the moral high ground, while the EU have been showing an increasing grasp of the problems they may have resettling their citizens and families in the event of a hard Brexit.
    I’m fairly confident that May wants neither the humanitarian crisis (e.g. split families; cancer patients denied treatment), nor the disruption of denying those already here a right to stay, but it’s not easy. Does she provide the Home Office with the funds to set up a unit to register people quickly, and give them a sort of second class citizenship, with limited rights? Wouldn’t that mean having to register the rest of the population? Does she open a fast track route to naturalisation? Or does she just pass a law saying ‘you’re all welcome’ and then do nothing? How does she check who was here before 23rd June and who came since? These are not easy questions, and nobody thought about them before the referendum. Worse luck for those of us unfortunate enough to be caught up in the chaos!

  43. @JONESINBANGOR

    “I disagree. Cameron’s antics trying to renegotiate before the referendum were embarrassing for the UK. We were already in the slow lane after opting out of the Euro. We have been heading in opposite directions since ERM debacle, bar a brief spell under Blair which fizzled out.
    This is an issue of sincerity and commitment, neither were qualities the UK was capable of bringing to the European Union.”

    I agree with you, however I think you may have misunderstood me.
    I was never in favour of Cameron’s pitiful approach to the EU – I was always in favour of forging ahead with Euro once the right time to join had been reached. I think Brown’s cautious approach was the right one, but I never agreed with the utterly enthusiastic tone given by Cameron. In fact, I was never convinced that Cameron was a true and committed Europhile. He was a Europhile of convenience, meaning that he was willing to bend in the wind of political opinion, like all the Tories (Ken Clarke excepted).

  44. “… utterly enthusiastic tone ”

    ERRATA! I meant utterly UNENTHUSIASTIC tone!

    Please bring in an edit function!!!!!!!!!

  45. @Chris Riley

    I think your statement fails to take into account that people’s views do change with experience.

    How can it be that so many young people who voted Remain in 1975 did the exact opposite 43 years later?

    “He who is not a socialist at 19, has no heart. He who is still a socialist at 30, has no brain” Otto Von Bismark

    While I don’t necessarily agree with old Bismark, his point is people’s politics change, and often quite radically.

  46. It might well make absolutely good sense to unilaterally Guarentee the Rights of EU citizens in the UK and it’s certainly the right thing to do, but there is probably still a fair number of those saying they will vote Tory who don’t want it.

    I do remember one poll that had about 16% saying that Brexit would only be fulfilled when all EU nationals went home and I doubt many of them were Remain voters.

    I could well see UKIP campaigning on EU nationals and indeed all foreign nationals having different entitlements to UK citizens, such as having to take out private medical lnsurance.

    They have backed away from a US style alternative to the NHS, but if it was only for Foreigners.

    Given that Ipso Mori are showing Immigration still the top concern of most voters and overwhelmingly number one for UKIP supporters and the “Crisis” in the NHS is up there it could be a vote winner for UKIP.

    Nauseating, but a vote winner!

    Peter.

  47. Colin,

    “The only way to make EZ economies converge os for EZ to be one country .”

    Not really, Polands economy was smaller than the Ukraines when the Berlin Wall came down and with open access to the EU and then membership it is now three times the size.

    The single market has seen most of Eastern Europe make great strides in closing the gap.

    Equally the gap between cities like Chicago and Detroit and the likes of Dallas and Huston is immense despite them being in the same country for a lot longer than the existence of the EU.

    Then of course there is obvious issue of the wealth gaps not just between Countries but within. I am pretty sure there are still a fair number of Greek bankers and business in Athens men who live better than someone unemployed in Birmingham.

    Peter.

  48. @CANDY

    This is all hypothesis. It’s true that there has been a backlash against social liberalism recently, but I am not convinced that this is some kind of long term trend.
    Right wing growth, in my opinion, has happened largely because of greater economic prosperity and wealth. The amount of inherited wealth has grown staggeringly in recent years and has largely been responsible for the massive growth in house prices since the mid 1990s. This has trickled down to young middle class people who have been helped on the housing ladder by their parents or grandparents inheriting from their parents etc and having the spare cash.
    This trend will start to peter out as it becomes the norm and social attitudes will start to stabilise once again. I see no reason why future generations should be more and more right wing.
    Right wing extremism is fed by the misinformation that is commonplace in the tabloid press and, increasingly, the internet. Indeed, Holocaust denial is now almost mandatory among the alt-right element on the internet and this is part of a very disturbing, nihilistic trend in right wing thought. Governments need to fight this by appropriate legislation and Germany’s ‘false news’ laws are definitely a step in the right direction.

  49. @Dont-tell-me:

    “I’m intrigued as to why you believe that a Yes vote in the Scottish referendum would have led to us exiting the EU?
    On what basis?”

    The official EU line is that the Member State is the one that joined the EU, so if a territory secedes from a Member State it is no longer a member. (There are lots of objections to this, but it pleases the Spanish.)

    One objection is that, if Scotland leaves the UK, then the rest still the UK? Why does England get to stay in? You need only to imagine Italy dividing in two, or Belgium dividing up fairly evenly to see that this is a real issue.

    In fact it is all politics. Spain are very insistent. The UK government was not on punishment mode when talking about Scottish independence, but it had the EU to do the threatening.

1 5 6 7 8 9 11