Sunday polls

There are four voting intention polls this Sunday. Opinium, ORB in the Sunday Telegraph, YouGov in the Sunday Times, ICM in the Sun on Sunday. Topline voting intentions are:

YouGov: CON 47%(-1), LAB 28%(-1), LDEM 11%(+1), UKIP 6%(+1) (tabs)
ORB: CON 46%(+4), LAB 31%(nc), LDEM 9%(-1), UKIP 8%(nc) (tabs)
Opinium: CON 46%(-1), LAB 30%(nc), LDEM 9%(+1), UKIP 7%(nc) (tabs)
ICM: CON 46%(-1), LAB 28%(nc), LDEM 10%(+2), UKIP 8%(nc)

Changes are from last week for ORB and Opinium, from the midweek Times & Guardian polls for YouGov and ICM. All continue to show a robust lead for the Conservative party. Note that fieldwork for all of these was before the local election results (YouGov is conducted Thursday evening and Friday morning, but the vast bulk would have been before many results were known) so don’t expect to see any local election impact yet: it’s the sort of thing that could have an impact, in terms of parties looking doomed or successful, like a wasted vote or a foregone conclusion.

The YouGov poll is the first one since Theresa May’s midweek speech about the EU supposedly attempting to influence the election result. 51% of people said that the claim that EU officials and politicians were deliberately trying to influence the general elections were “probably true”, 24% that they were probably false. There was clear divide down party lines and by attitudes to the EU – 72% of people who voted to Leave thought it was probably true, only 35% of those who voted to Remain.

On a related topic YouGov also asked about the “exit bill” for leaving the EU. In principle, 32% of people thought it was reasonable for other EU countries to ask Britain to pay for outstanding financial liabilities like pension costs and spending agreed before we leave, 50% of people think it unreasonable. Presented with some specific costs, people were evenly split over whether a settlement of £10bn was reasonable, but 53% thought £20bn was unreasonable, 64% thought £50bn was unreasonable, 72% thought that £100bn was unreasonable. In practice I suspect it isn’t the specific figure that’s at issue (I bet if we’d offered £5bn than some people would have said that was reasonable and then rejected £10bn) – these are all figures that sound unfathomably huge – it’s the idea of having to pay to leave the EU. The key thing for the government won’t be the size of the payment, but how they manage to present it. If it’s a leaving fee, people will hate it. If they can twist it into being seen as a fee for some continuing benefit it may be more saleable – 42% of people said that Britain should be prepared to pay a financial settlement it is the only way of getting a trade deal.

UPDATE: Added the ICM poll!

409 Responses to “Sunday polls”

1 5 6 7 8 9
  1. @TOH

    If you say things that are incorrect or invalid and people then correct you, it is asinine to then re-state a separate point that was not what was at issue, and to continually re-state that uncontested point while denying that you said the other things you said:

    “2+2=4; 3+3=7”
    “No, 3+3=6”
    “But I said that 2+2=4. I never said anything about 3+3”

    No one is suggesting is anything but worrying that Le Pen got 30% of those turning up to vote.

    This is the whole Brexit debate in microcosm. A complete refusal to engage with issues that threaten the blinkered Brexit mindset.

  2. Re- Scotland. I suspect Labour will be content to be only 12% behind the SNP compared with the almost 26% margin in 2015. That amounts to a swing from ANP to Lab of circa 7% and should enable Labour to claw back some of their 2015 losses.

  3. TOH: “Yet another Remainer just does not get the point I was making.”

    I think it’s you who didn’t see what Robin’s ‘LOL’ was about.

    You wrote: “This is a greater figure than UKIP have ever reached, hence my comment. I wasn’t making comparisons at all”

    Surely Robin’s point is that “This is a greater figure than UKIP have ever reached.” is a comparison between UKIP’s best performance and Le Pen’s vote share.

    So Robin’s LOL is about the irony of your making a comparison immediately followed by a statement that “I wasn’t making comparisons at all”

    A lot of people here like to make points using more-or-less subtle irony rather than in-your-face sledgehammer stuff.

  4. Carfrew,

    I think the bit of your review of political history you forget to mention is that Labour stood on a platform in 2010 of pretty much identical degrees of austerity to the coalition programme.

    You are correct to point out that the Lib Dems got all the blame for things Labour were going to do anyway (tuition fees being another example of something Labour kept very quiet about in the 2010 election campaign). So lets just agree that the Lib Dems were very stupid to break the Pledge on any possible criterion, and politically very stupid to trust either of the two larger Parties by going into coalition with them!

    Call me old fashioned, but I do find it difficult to take anyone seriously who uses the word “happinate”!

  5. New ICM poll for the G: Con 49 (+2), Lab 27 (-1), LD 9 (+1), UKIP 6 (-2), Green 3 (-1).

    Guess I have to redo all my analysis again…..

  6. ICM may be picking up a short term boost from local elections.

  7. @ Pete B

    Further to discussion on austerity, government spending, debt etc, i think the linked website is helpful to give a history over the last 30 years.

    If you scroll down you will see the increase in debt interest went up steeply from 2009, when it was about £30 billion out of spending. It is now over £62 billion out of spending.

    I generally find the level of debate on economics in the UK to be pretty poor. Politically if has already been decided that the Tories have an advantage on economic competence compared to other parties. There is no detailed debate on why the public trust the Tories more on economics and do not believe the other parties. Makes it very difficult at an election as one party and friendly media have already got the main issue in their bag. The majority of the public probably still blame Gordon Brown for the worldwide Banking crash that started in the US.

  8. ICM seem to be doing the most regular polls.

  9. The item on SkyNews concerning a recording of Vince Cable and Sarah Olney basically encouraging tactical voting is likely to increase the Conservative lead IMO.

  10. @Andrew

    Don’t be having me try and defend Labour now, that’s one hell of a poison chalice!!

    I don’t know that Labour had quite the same Austerity programme in mind, given they wanted to just halve the deficit in a single term whereas Coalition went for steeper cuts to clear the deficit in a single term, only it didn’t work because of the knock-on hit to investment etc., (of which the likes of Cable warned about pre-election, hence even more astonishing the about-turn. LDs knew the issues with Austerity)…

    Whatever Labour’s actual plans for Austerity, it’s clear that in the run up to the election the priority was to go for growth over cuts, that was the emphasis. But comparisons with Labour are a straw man to some extent. Some shifted to LDs because already dissatisfied with Labour. That Labour might not be considered much cop will not have been news and not necessarily absolve LDs when voters start seeing their u-turns…

  11. Rich
    “I really dislike that debate you have framed about the less educated you are, the more likely you voted leave, I think it’s a false argument developed by the left and remain.”

    It isn’t a debate, it is a fact shown by poll after poll.. The fact that you are a well-educated Leaver proves nothing at all about that likelihood..

    However, it would indeed be a huge mistake to think that people without university education in the older generations voted Leave because they were somehow more stupid or ignorant. I do think however that people who go to University tend to pick up socially liberal attitudes and an internationalist outlook that makes them instinctive Remainers. Nothing to do with intelligence, but everything to do with peer group and changing attitudes rejecting the primacy of the Nation State.

    There is no evidence at all that any generation is more or less intelligent than any other generation, so generational differences on Brexit are unlikely to be anything to do with that. There is anecdotal evidence (but I have never seen firm figures) that the correlation between level of education and views on Brexit exists in each separate generation, as manifested perhaps by the proven correlation with social class.. Social class and education level definitely correlate for obvious reasons so the determining factor can be hard to disentangle

  12. I would say that ICM poll virtually mirrors my forecast with 3 points still to come off UKIP and 1 off the Greens!

  13. louiswalshvotesgreen

    Your +/- figures are presumably related to the previous ICM Guardian poll rather than the one published yesterday (which had Tories on 46%)?

  14. I don’t think I’ve yet seen anyone here comment on the Carole Cadwalladr investigative piece in the Observer about the role of Cambridge Analytica in the referendum, and the links to Steve Bannon and Robert Mercer. Crucially, it appears an obscure Canadian data mining company called Aggregate IQ received about £4.5m for services to the Leave side, paid out by Vote Leave, BeLeave, Veterans for Britain and the DUP. Cadwalladr discovered that AggregateIQ is owned by Robert Mercer, the US billionaire who half-owns Cambridge Analytica and is essentially Steve Bannon’s paymaster.

    I can’t summarise a 3-page broadsheet article in a couple of paragraphs here, but I’d urge anyone interested in what produces shifts in voting behaviour (and shouldn’t that be everyone who contributes to UKPR) to read it. If unaccountable billionaires are able to sway elections without anyone realising what’s going on until it’s too late, then we have a fundamental problem which makes most of our pontificating here pretty meaningless.

  15. “There is no evidence at all that any generation is more or less intelligent than any other generation”


    Well there’s the Flynn effect but I think someone on here said it had been tailing off recently…

    And it doesn’t have to be about intelligence but access to information. Or it can be opportunity, if a degree confers more good opportunities working abroad so you might thus be pro-remain etc.

    It’s an interesting one because there are numerous factors…

  16. from wiki about the Flynn effect….

    “The Flynn effect is the substantial and long-sustained increase in both fluid and crystallized intelligence test scores measured in many parts of the world from roughly 1930 to the present day. When intelligence quotient (IQ) tests are initially standardized using a sample of test-takers, by convention the average of the test results is set to 100 and their standard deviation is set to 15 or 16 IQ points. When IQ tests are revised, they are again standardized using a new sample of test-takers, usually born more recently than the first. Again, the average result is set to 100. However, when the new test subjects take the older tests, in almost every case their average scores are significantly above 100.”

  17. Carfrew,

    Sorry to tar you with the Labour brush! I guess I assumed that like most people so negative about the Lib Dems, that was your viewpoint!

    To be honest I have no recollection at all of what the Lib Dem policy on austerity was before the 2010 election other than “something must be done, and we warned you about that”. I doubt if many voters do.

    I do remember Clegg’s broadcast on “no more broken promises” however, which is why I resigned from the Lib Dems in 2010!

    Things have to be forgiven in due course though which is why after fruitlessly voting Labour in 2015 in what was supposed to be a marginal constituency, I rejoined….

  18. @Pete B

    Besides carfrew’s point and R Huckle’s, it appears that a few things need to be taken into account:

    – Inflation 2010 – 2017 is 15.5%, so £673bn in 2010 is the equivalent of £777bn in 2017, implying no material increase in real spending at all;
    – Health spending demand through demographics is increasing real demand by approx. £2-3bn per year, so about £15-20bn over the period;
    – Increasing school numbers mean increased education demand as well, although I don’t have numbers for that; shall we guess at £2-3bn?
    – increased debt of approx. £500bn will add about £15bn a year to the interest bill.

    So overall, in real terms it looks like no increase in real spending, at a time where real demand has increased by £20bn plus.

    Once you take into account the areas that at ring-fenced or privileged – pensions, NHS, education, foreign aid – then it amounts to a pretty harsh squeeze.

    [I’m quite enjoying this ‘agreeing with Carfrew’ lark….]

  19. @Andrew111 – That seems to be the case – on the ICM site, they refer to polls on 02/05, 05/05 and 08/05. It’s a little bit confusing though, as they have a nice graphical gizmo which allows you to look at voter churn, but the numbers don’t exactly match the pdf tables….

  20. “There is no evidence at all that any generation is more or less intelligent than any other generation”

    This isn’t about intelligence, it’s about education, which is a completely different thing. The capacity for logical reasoned argument, and for critical interpretation of information, is not innate. It is something that requires particular forms of education, in particular that offered at university. School education has historically been very poor at this, particularly the school education to which older generations were exposed. (Modern education may possibly be better in this regard, although whether this progress will survive recent Tory policies is open to question).

  21. Carfrew,

    re Flynn effect:

    I would say that Intelligence test scores are very subject to environment. (the idea that you cannot be coached to do well in them is clearly rubbish, for example).

    As people get wealthier and better educated, and more likely to have graduate parents, they do better in intelligence tests: that seems a reasonable hypothesis. I also note there are a lot of such tests online these days for people to practice!

    Of course if you take a Darwinian approach you would say that through much of this century in Britain people have aspired to be better educated than their parents, whereas now they aspire to be on Celebrity Big Brother! That should reverse the Flynn effect pretty soon!

    Thanks for the link though! Interesting and not something I had come across before.

  22. ICM saying this is their biggest ever lead in an opinion poll.

    Perhaps the hospital charges policy from Labour today will cut through later in the week.

  23. @Andrew

    I’m not negative about LDs. I’m not mad keen on politicians who let down their supporters, but that seems common across parties. Clegg rather tested the boundaries, but we can find silver linings…

    It’s delicate stuff discussing party betrayals but vital in terms of salient info. gained on what influences peeps because more extreme events can reveal things, so I find the Coalition thing most interesting giving lots of useful info. about what voters will accept, how far parties can go with their about turns etc.

    Following on from this you should note that Cameron did not dare to u-turn on the EU ref., and it cost him his job but Tories have recovered quick. Meanwhile Lab have not recovered in Scotland for siding with Tories…

  24. @BigfatRon

    “I’m quite enjoying this ‘agreeing with Carfrew’ lark….”


    It’s very nice to agree but don’t get too used to it. I can start to feel I’m not adding value and so go looking for new things to confound!!…

  25. @toh

    Sorry but your original post made a very direct comparison between Le Pen’s vote share and UKIP’s vote share in the UK.

  26. @Carfrew
    Likewise – I try to restrain my ‘keyboard warrior’ tendencies, although not always with 100% success!


    Thank you for the new Guardian poll. As we expected the UKIP->CON flow is continuing, with another 2% moving over (that’s 600,000 voters at a national level)!!!

    What happens to the remaining 6%?

    My guess is that drops further, bottoms at around 2% into the GE (with the gain again going to CON)

    I also assume that UKIP will not field candidates everywhere – just selective seats.

    What does a UKIP voter do if their is not UKIP box to tick on the ballot paper?

    I need to get back to other markets but if I get time later I’ll send a “flow of people” look back at 2015 election and how you can use that analysis to look at 2017

  28. “I generally find the level of debate on economics in the UK to be pretty poor.”

    Ineveitably when you talk about ‘debt’ that isn’t actually debt in any sense you understand it.

    For as long as the economic debate is about numbers it is on the wrong level. There is never an issue with numbers. The state can clear any payment it chooses and nobody can stop it as the function of government spending shows:

    The question is about the underlying resources. Where are they at the moment, where should they be in the future and what mechanism should we use to move them. That’s the actual political debate we should be having, but it is has been closed off completely by clever marketing.

    We can always deploy the nations resources very easily during a war. And we can do the same in peacetime if the political will is there.

  29. @Robin

    “The capacity for logical reasoned argument, and for critical interpretation of information, is not innate. It is something that requires particular forms of education, in particular that offered at university.”

    Robin you may very well be right, looking overall at the experience of most. I can only comment, however, from my own personal vantage point. That my own innate critical interpretation of information and that which I learned or was immersed in both in the home and at school far exceeds anything I subsequently encountered at the particular faculty of the University I attended – where critical thinking of any kind was noticeable by its absence and the route to ‘success’ was only to be found through the memorising and regurgitating of unchallenged information.

    Critical interpretation and – shock horror – original thought was rather actively frowned upon.

    I would hope of course that you are right and that my experience of University education was not shared by all.

  30. @Andrew

    Yes, one might practice such tests but in practice how many do? We didn’t and I went to a high-performing school. I’m not sure I know anyone who did/dies I’ll have to ask.

    Regarding aspiration, I think it’s long been an aspiration here to earn without doing much work, a hangover from aristocracy. It’s just that nowadays there are new avenues for this.

    Regarding offspring doing better than parents, One wonders these days how many boomers want their offspring to do better. I cited polling a little while back showing how older peeps seemed not so keen to be passing on their wealth, summat the youngsters seemed unaware of. One wonders if lavishing so much unearned support on the post-war generation hasn’t fostered a bit too much narcissism…

  31. Trevor some UKIP will become DNV of course but they former non-voters who backed UKIP and then then leave in the Euro-Ref will as you say break heavily for the Tory’s.

  32. did/does

  33. @ Bigfatron

    Thanks. That is exactly the detailed debate that should be happening on economics and i doubt we will see it much during the election campaign.

    The economic performance of the UK economy is not as good as some stats suggest and it is very vulnerable to another financial crash which might well be on the horizon. UK Banks have not really recovered since the 07/08 crash and if property prices ever significantly fell, then we would see a crash like we have never seen before.

  34. Polls starting to indicate that Tories could hit 50% at GE, as UKIP still has further to fall.

    And this before the Tories have really stated to attack Corbyn or released any strong policies. It will be interesting to see if/when the Tories really open up.

    Unless polls tighten they may not need to hit hard beyond Brexit, but there must be a massive urge to really nail Corbyn and Labour.( is it feasible to drive Labour below 26%?)

  35. @Bigfatron

    “Likewise – I try to restrain my ‘keyboard warrior’ tendencies, although not always with 100% success!”


    Ah, well, one secret is to avoid hot topics. You can be really quite controversial about stuff peeps couldn’t care less about!! I don’t say much about Brexit, but can happily hold forth on multipliers, MMT, Thorium etc.

  36. Does anyone know what betting odds are available for a 200+ seat majority for the Tories?

  37. @ JIM JAM – yes, I agree. It seems v.likely CON HQ are very happy with the way they are grabbing the UKIP vote without making any new Brexit related promises. I would guess they will keep the “reduce immigration to under 100,000” as an election “promise” in order to keep/motivate the UKIP switch vote (then just make very little effort to meet that target – just like before!!). Possibly even accept some freedom of movement fudge as well once we’re past 8June.

    The tabs on the YouGov poll show the “flow” from UKIP has so far been roughly:
    50% to CON
    5% to LAB
    30% holding out for UKIP
    15% DK
    I’m guessing future losses in the 30% holding out for UKIP are split 10/1 CON/LAB

    Do you differentiate between DK and abstain (Don’t Care, DC)? Obviously raw poll data inflate the likely turnout anyway and then the better polling co.s make adjustments based on historical info to make educated tweaks to the headline numbers we see.

    Do you have any thought on turnout (either general high/low or party/region specific)?

    Show me yours and I’ll show you mine!!


    Betfair have foolishly split the majority into buckets of 25 so you can’t get 200+ as a straight bet, but the size of majority buckets can be found here:

    If you make some assumptions about the other seats (eg NAT 48, NI 18, LIB 15, other 2 = 83) then size of majority can be worked out as CON seats as well. For CON seats they went for buckets 50seats wide (effectively 4x the majority buckets!?!?). That info is here:

  39. Robin

    “This is the whole Brexit debate in microcosm. A complete refusal to engage with issues that threaten the blinkered Brexit mindset.”

    WE can agree on that , many on both sides are totally blinkered.


    If you will bother to read my posts I dropped the comparison element of the point I was trying to make as early as 1.03 to Hireton and 1.36 to Robin because as it happens I agreed that the comparison I made was not the best and it was not the point I was trying to make.

    “A lot of people here like to make points using more-or-less subtle irony rather than in-your-face sledgehammer stuff.”

    Yes, i agree, I occasionally do it myself but in this case the irony fails because I dropped the comparison a long time ago.

  40. The Conservatives increased their number of first preference votes at the Scottish local authority elections by 12 per cent, official figures have revealed. Ruth Davidson’s party won 25.3 per cent of first preferences at the ballot on May 4, an increase of 271,474 votes from the last council elections in 2012. Labour saw their share drop 11 points to 20.2 per cent. The SNP claimed 32.3 per cent of first preferences, with an overall increase of 80,221 votes.

  41. GRAHAM

    “ICM may be picking up a short term boost from local elections.”

    Looks likely although we need a few more polls before we can say that.

  42. @ Trevor Warne – thanks for the info. Just got to work out what those tables mean :)

  43. ANDREW111

    I agree with most of your post to Rich on the education issue and Brexit. I thought your comments very balanced, good to see.

    David Colby

    Thanks for the information from Scotland, interesting.

  44. Shortest odds are for 150 to 175 majourity

  45. Roger Scully reports that Labour fighting back in the Principality. Support up 5 points from last poll with the Tories up 1%.

    Tories still the largest but all to play for, according to Prof Scully.

    Soiurce: ITV Election Data.

  46. Huge crowds in Leamington Spa for Jeremy’s stump speech.

    At least he’s starting to get a hearing.

    Today, Labour have the Tories on the defensive, I think.

  47. New polling from Wales from Prof Scully:-

    Conservatives: 41% (+1)
    Labour: 35% (+5)
    Plaid Cymru: 11% (-2)
    Liberal Democrats: 7% (-1)
    UKIP: 4% (-2)
    Others: 2% (-1)

    Prof Scully says:-
    If we follow standard practice and project these results onto Wales using uniform national swings since the 2015 general election, then our latest poll implies the following overall result. (Projected changes from the 2015 result are in brackets):

    Conservatives: 20 seats (+9)
    Labour: 16 seats (-9)
    Plaid Cymru: 3 seats (no change)
    Liberal Democrats: 1 seat (no change)

    As with our previous poll, Plaid and the Liberal Democrats are projected to hold the seats they currently have but make no gains.

  48. OED
    “Austerity: Difficult economic conditions created by government measures to reduce public expenditure.”

    “Austerity isn’t defined by public expenditure.”

    “So overall, in real terms it looks like no increase in real spending, at a time where real demand has increased by £20bn plus.”

    Humpty Dumpty
    ‘When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’
    R Huckle
    On the same subject, thanks for your more thoughtful post. I agree that the Tories’ management of the economy hasn’t been exactly inspiring, though probably for different reasons than you.

    Moving on….The latest ICM poll seems to maintain the pattern of all the others. The big story in E&W is UKIP voters moving to Tory and in Scotland some Tory recovery compared to 2015. Trevor’s analysis looks very sensible. I still find it remarkable that Labour’s VI is holding up so well.

  49. TOH
    I don’t know how those numbers might extrapolate into the GE. Rather poorly I’d imagine, but they’re quite remarkable.

1 5 6 7 8 9