There have been two new voting intention polls today from Panelbase and Kantar.

Kantar has topline figures of CON 47%(+3),LAB 29%(+1), LDEM 8%(-3), UKIP 6%(-2). (tabs)
Panelbase have topline figures of CON 47%(-1), LAB 33%(+2), LDEM 7%(-1), UKIP 5%(nc) (tabs)

Once again, the broad picture appears to be a hefty Tory lead, Labour creeping upwards (Kantar still have Labour in the twenties – like ICM and ComRes they have a turnout model that is based partially on demographics, in the case of Kantar they base part of their turnout model on respondent’s ages and the historical pattern of turnout by age), UKIP and the Liberal Democrats being squeezed.

The 33% that Labour have in the Panelbase poll is the highest the party have scored in the campaign so far. Along with yesterday’s polls this has provoked some comment – how can Labour be polling at about the same as 2015 given their division, Corbyn’s poor ratings and so on? Part of this seems to be that substantial numbers of voters who don’t like Jeremy Corbyn do seem to be holding their noses and voting for Labour anyway. For example, 17% of current Labour voters would like the Conservative party to win the election. Presumably they are Labour supporters who don’t want a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn, but are voting for the party – perhaps through party loyalty, support for their local candidate, to ensure an viable opposition, or to give Labour a bigger base to recover from. That combination of holding onto some unhappy Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn and gaining some new voters from the Greens and non-voters mean the Labour vote may not be collapsing in the way some expected.

Of course, it may also be that the publicity of the manifesto leak and launch is giving Labour a temporary boost, that the Conservatives and the hostile media have not yet turned their full cannons upon Jeremy Corbyn, or that the polls haven’t done enough to address over-estimates of Labour support. We shall see.


616 Responses to “Latest Kantar and Panelbase voting intention”

1 9 10 11 12 13
  1. @norbold,

    Well I would disagree with that too! No abuse is acceptable.

    Richard

  2. MarkW

    Hypothetical questions (as none of the others lead the Labour Party) lead to highly unreliable, even if statistically significant results (academic studies on entrepreneurship is a prime example).

    Considering that at lunchtime Corbyn threw out the Labour manifesto (so it died at the young age of two days), I think most of the criticism is valid as long as it is in the range about incompetence (as we are not privy to his thoughts).

  3. Re: omfg

    1. Even allowing for both the previous and current MORI polls being outliers, together they clearly show a significant uptick in Labour support. The chances of there being no increase are less than 1/10000. Assuming 3% confidence limits for the 2 polls, there’s a better than 95% chance that the true uptick is greater than 4%. I think omfg is right.

    2. That £8bn for the NHS is spread over 5 years. Again, omfg is right, but not in a good way.

    3. The Tory social “care” proposals will do nothing to help relieve NHS bed-blocking. How are you supposed to put in place some form of financial instrument to pay for your care by mortgaging your home, while you are ill and infirm in hospital? Conversely, this seems like a major incentive to put off seeking care for as long as possible, with major knock-on effects for NHS admissions from those suffering the consequences.

    There is so much scope for attacking these proposals, which potentially impact right across 2 key swing demographics – those whose main or only significant asset is their home, and those whose only chance of buying a house is to inherit from their parents. Abandoning people to the whims of fate could be a major game changer. omfg again.

  4. Reggieside

    You are talking about a changed prexisting party of the right.

    But May has simply added an agnosticism about the state to longstanding notions of ‘patriotism’ (whether on defence, Europe or immigration).

    The is Butlers approach it’s not new. Centre Right (by the standards of 2017).

    Plus where have been the wins in other countries for ‘new populist left parties’ ?? Syriza split in Monty Python fashion and Owen Jones favourite Podemos can’t buy an election win. For example.

    A ‘social democracy for 2020s’ approach seems the only one likely to beat May in 2020 “Brexit deal election”.

    Whatever Corbynite Labour get on June 8th that will be their absolute ceiling. Which is why GMB and Unison will be moving against them.

  5. Laszlo, you are criticizing polls in general and then choosing to discount the result of this poll as it counters your chosen narrative I suggest.

  6. @ Rob Sheffield

    Corbynista surely!
    Corbynite must be the mysterious substance that affects the PLP causing rebellions that reduce the popularity of an incumbent leader. :-)

  7. @MarkW

    I disagree with your assertion. I believe the election of Corbyn has directly caused the Labour Civil War and thus has hurt everyone even considered as a leader. Nobody wants to vote for a split party.

    It is inconceivable to me that either Foot or Corbyn would ever be elected to a majority government in the UK for that matter.

  8. LASZLO
    “With a relatively friendly press probably those points will be emphasised that suits the strategy.”

    Even with a relatively friendly press, reaction from institutions concerned with the economic factors of migration, to the manifesto’s promise of a reduction to “tens of thousands” and to the means by which this will be achieved – e.g. of the CBI,, OECD and IM,F – are likely to be based on the evidence.
    That for the factors behind the c.300,000 net immigration averaged over the past four years, and that for the 180,000 to 200,000 (EU-UK) net migration forecast in the EC Ageing Report (2015) for the period up to 2060, are based on ONS statistics, and the latter on Treasury advice.
    TheEC Ageing Report (and many others) sees the driving push and pull factors as those of inequality between nations in the unemployment and lack of economic opportunity of educated young people, and the needs of industry and the care services in the Uk – but also the recgonition by governments of the demographic need of achieving balance in an ageing population – factors which determine the German policy of encouraging up to 1m. net migration for the coming years, and which the EC anticipated would be recognised by a UK government, prior to Brexit but still holding good now. This appears to be recognised in the Labour manifesto. In the event of a Tory government’s imposition of the controls it proposes, the intended 2k per hired migrant is unlikely to stop either employers or migrant applicants.
    I hope this post won’t be regarded as partisan. Both parties will have to live up to the reality of migration in the coming years.

  9. @WB

    Ha! Well, at least Jeremy has significantly added to our lexicon.

  10. Sea Change, well I dont agree with your description of events. I was just flagging up a poll that counters yours and Laszlo’s points about JC’s unpopularity.

  11. @rob sheffiled

    The tories have dressed themselves up in UKIPs clothes – anti Europe, traditionalist, anti immigration, less market orientated, flag waving, dog whistle xenophobia – and it seems to have convinced most of the former UKIP voters. We are talking about perception rather than reality – and the preception is of a very different party to the pro-market, socially liberal(ish), metropolitan lazzie faire one headed up by cameron and osbourne.

    “Whatever Corbynite Labour get on June 8th that will be their absolute ceiling. Which is why GMB and Unison will be moving against them.”

    How do you deduce that? They are have had to deal with brexit and 18 months of chaotic infighting.
    A fresh leader with the same sort of polices leading a united party and where the brexit deal was done could reasonably expect to do better than whatever labour manage this time around.

  12. @MarkW

    He’s 46 points behind May in that Poll! Let’s have some perspective.

  13. WB, Corbynista is a childish slur in my view suggesting links to south american revoloutonary ‘istas.

    The correct term is surely Corbynite.

    The press likes to use ‘ followers ‘ and ‘ acolytes’ and other words where perhaps supporters is more accurate.

  14. Sea change, as I think you realize I am speaking of the votes each alternative leader attracted in the poll. JC was top.

  15. Alec,
    “That’s the first time (to my knowledge) that I’ve been classified as a Corbynista!”

    well someone called me a farage supporter.

    Met some canvassers today for labour. They seemed confident they could defeat the local tory. Oddly, they could be theoretically right if they could only motivate voters. Practically speaking, seems unlikely.

  16. The Tories are still miles in front despite the latest two polls showing a Labour increase.
    The Tory campaign hasn’t got started yet, but I’m sure it will over the remaining weeks! I think there is plenty to come from them, and the Tory press, on the competence of Corbyn’s team, Brexit, plus Corbyn and McDonnells past ‘friendships’!
    Labours bag of manifesto promises may get them a poll bounce, but come the 8th June I think a Tory lead of 18% + over Labour.
    If the predictions game is still going I think:
    Con – 48
    Lab – 29
    Lib – 9
    Ukip – 5
    Green 3

  17. @Sea Change

    “I disagree with your assertion. I believe the election of Corbyn has directly caused the Labour Civil War and thus has hurt everyone even considered as a leader. Nobody wants to vote for a split party.”

    ———–

    The election of Corbyn obviously causes issues with the liberals who took over the party.

    The issue is that under the Liberals the long term future of the party wasn’t necessarily ideal. Already losing votes under Blair as liberalism became mor apparent, then taking a big hit after your typical liberal banking crash under Gordo, then under Miliband lost Scotland and saw VI fall further beyond that to UKIP over liberal politics of free movement etc.

    Tories have already backtracked on Liberalism after ditching Cameron and are reaping consequent VI rewards. Labour didn’t necessarily have much choice…

  18. MarkW

    I was only criticising hypothetical questions – you can’t expect a reliable answer to the question of what would be the effect of TB’s leadership.

    These sort of questions remove the downside risk of making the choice.

    I would say that Labour has had an uptick, I would also say that there is shoring up of the core vote, which helps Corbyn’s standing.

    But that’s it for the time being. I don’t think that there is everything to play for, even if I try to help. My concern is really post-election.

  19. @MarkW “Sea change, as I think you realize I am speaking of the votes each alternative leader attracted in the poll. JC was top.”

    He was second, Cooper was top on -21.

    My point being everyone are now damaged goods.

  20. @ Mark W

    sorry I was trying to inject some humour.
    It seems to me that you are right that Corbynista is probably a derivative of Sandinista, and given that derivation might be seen as a badge of honour by some on the left whilst would clearly be a term of derision for those on the right.
    The use of “ite” as a suffix (which corresponds to the French –ite and Latin –ita {deriving from the Greek}) is to form nouns and adjectives with the sense of connected with or belonging to.
    The point for both is that when used they express more than a personal description. However I do wonder how many people without an interest in politics would draw the negative connection that you suggest and would even remember the Sandinista movement (which interestingly has morphed into a Social Democratic Party), whilst those in the know would probably already have their views of Mr/Senor/Comrade/Brother Corbyn and his political views.

  21. @Carfrew

    You raise a much wider question. One thing I do know the answer is not Corbyn, Mcdonnell and Abbott!

  22. Laszlo, it may be hypothetical as are many polling questions and I accept this qualifies the result, but it doesn’t nullify it.

  23. John Pilgrim

    Yes, I agree, but it won’t be presented like this (and it is not presented like this).

    Immigration is higher on the agenda than caring for the ageing population, and as a driver for higher wages. Both are probably flawed.

    I actually think that Labour should have played the whole campaign (as they have supposedly be on campaign-path since October) on a professional basis (for example, along the lines that you outlined), employing people who can translate it to the language of the majority of the voters, and hence positing it as a question of choice of mutually exclusive alternatives, rather than we are 10% better on this than the opposition).

    I admit, it is risky, but rather effective (this is the question, chose), especially if it is combined with nested decision-making (again translated to the common language to prevent compromise-choices).

    But by getting rid of so many advisors, it couldn’t be done.

  24. The winners from the new care policies are those families who take their responsibilities seriously and care for their own elderly.

    They won’t be taxed to care for the parents of other people who can’t be bothered with their oldies. And because they’re doing the hard yards themselves, their inheritance will be intact.

    This is old school Toryism. I wonder if it will lead to a change in behaviour and incentivise families to care for the old themselves, to protect the family fortune?

  25. WB, sorry i come across grumpier than I really am, I didnt mean to pick on you. I agree with you, I am a bit sensitive at times too i think.

  26. LASZLO
    Agreed. They may yet.

  27. going on fleeting impressions – – I cant see that the tory manifesto will give them a boost. No eye catching rabbits and most of the coverage seem to be about the social care plan (which doesn’t look like a vote winner) and the immigration target – which they’ve repeatedly missed.

    The impression of the labour manifesto message is tax the wealthy to fund the NHS/public services. Yes its being attacked as EVIL TAX AND SPEND! but it will be – and it would seem has been – received well by a lot of people.

    Of course the tories dont have to make any big splashes given their poll lead – but i dont see their manifesto shifting VI.

    But again – they do seem to be VERY complacent.

  28. I have one in mod, trying again.

    I think corbynista may have started feeling like a slur but it may be being claimed in a positive way by supporters, so i should probably relax.

  29. Having to pay for your care with any assets over 100k does not seem to me a policy for the people living in their own house.Looks like the victory for the conservatives will be so big she does not care.I am sure many will get around it but many will not especially the vulnerable.

  30. @Alec

    I think you are right to make the comments you have on the Tory social care policy.

    It will, however, probably find favour with those house owners whose properties are valued at under £100,000. I suspect there will be a sudden increase in the numbers of houses valued at £99,000.

    When I started caring for my father after he had a heart attack at the age of 80, I did not consider how long I might be caring for him. It was nearly 17 years. I thought initially because his recovery seemed good that I could work part-time. He had Alzheimer’s soon after his heart attack and could not be left alone. My siblings had work commitments and some had families. They all lived quite far away. They did not want much part in his care. “Put him in a home” was their advice to me. There was never mention of meeting the care bills. It is unusual for a man to care for his parent/s. Most caring is done by a single individual, usually a woman. Men do care for spouses. For the last 4 years of caring I had support from my brother -not as much as I needed, but it kept me afloat.

    Throughout the 14 or so years when I needed respite, Crossroads, a charity, provided 14 hours a week, free of charge. I would guess they would be paid a little over the minimum wage. There was a very good care provider near that I drew on from time to time, covering holidays of others and when I was unwell. They charged rather more than the minimum hourly rate. As my father declined I had to pay for more help. Social services could not provide it. There was considerably more help needed near to my father’s death at home.

    Most people do not prosper in care homes. There is an initial, sharp decline in well-being when one first goes into a care home from which some people do not recover. My father did not want to go into a home. He would have died much earlier than he did. He hated being in hospital. My doctor told me that, by nursing my father at home rather than admitting him to hospital, I had saved the NHS close to £100,000.

    My father sold his home and came to stay with me. Our assets, singly and jointly, would have been more than £100,000. I do not know how much I have spent on additional costs but the Crossroads care, had I to pay for it, would have cost about £70,000 over the period of care. I inherited all my father’s possessions and money.

    I can see this manifesto commitment causing considerable concern to most families about the care of their parents. it is likely to cause greater inequalities as you suggest. you might want to read this piece by Michael Marmot.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/11/health-inequality-affects-us-all-michael-marmot

  31. @ STEVEN WHEELER – low turnout rationale

    Combination of reasons:
    1/ Certainty of outcome (see drop from 1997 to 2001 GEs)
    2/ Cognitive dissonance factors (e.g would vote LAB but not keen on Corbyn as leader, would vote CON but not keen on Hard Brexit)
    3/ Brexit is “settled” (ie not expecting a large protest vote – evidence low LD polling)
    4/ 1/3 of UKIP candidates pulled, a few Greens as well (1% drop there)
    5/ Voter fatigue

    I work the maths bottom-up looking at each seat and considering the motivation for voters to firstly switch parties (e.g. take 2/3 of UKIP 2015 vote and allocate that 80% CON, 10% LAB, 10% abstain) – use poll info to check the “flow” of voters.
    Secondly I look at the motivation to vote – fairly subjective I have to admit.

    Lastly I have a quick look at the betting markets to see if I’m way off (or if their is a betting opportunity!!). Betfair buckets the turnout numbers but you can work back the probabilities and see the betting market is going for something in the low60%s.
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.131104264

    I haven’t put any money on the 55-60% outcome as odds aren’t great and if we see something that low it will probably mean by % by party bets have paid out.

  32. @Rich @REGGIESIDE

    Looking at the manifesto it would have made no sense if it had gone pie-in-the-sky fantasy economics that other manifestos may well be accused of.

    That would have directly compromised the message of “Strong and Stable.”

    The sub-communication I believe is “Vote for the Adults” especially as we are heading into the greatest period of uncertainty probably since the end of the Empire in the late 40s.

    Whether this moves the Tory VI we will need to wait until the weekend or early next week.

  33. Reggie I agree no costings in their manifesto , deficit pushed back another 10 years , likely tax rises,cuts for pensioners.They are saying I guess you have nowhere else to go.This years budget will get all the hard things out of the way giving you another 4 years to forget.If Labour had put no costs to the manifesto the outcry from the media would have been massive.I can see why now no opposition and taking support for granted can make you complacent.

  34. @Sea Change

    A lot of Labour voters might agree with you. But they may see them as useful stepping stones…

  35. interesting that one poll has cons 49 ukip 2 the other cons 45 ukip 6 which rather suggest a floor of 45 for the tories , I think they would take that , I would suggest that ultimately brexit and the various desire and hopes for a certain direction amongst swathes of committed leavers in leave strongholds such as the north-east , north west , and the midlands are going to disproportionally depress the labour vote as ” I never vote tory but I want us out”

  36. “3. The Tory social “care” proposals will do nothing to help relieve NHS bed-blocking. How are you supposed to put in place some form of financial instrument to pay for your care by mortgaging your home, while you are ill and infirm in hospital? Conversely, this seems like a major incentive to put off seeking care for as long as possible, with major knock-on effects for NHS admissions from those suffering the consequences.”

    Robin – this is very wrong. No-one will have to mortgage their home! You need to read the document . . . it is quite clear that if payment requires the home to be fulfilled, then this will be deferred until the person and / or spouse (if still alive) is no longer alive and needing the house to live in.

    The second point is that bed-blocking may be increased by some people protecting their family’s inheritance to a degree now assets are included in the formula – but for many who don’t own their home anyway (due to having already sold it; or being in rented; or in shared / sheltered accomodation; or living with relatives prior to going into care so no home of their own still – this all covers a LOT of people), their threshold below which they can keep as an inheritance has just been more than quadrupled from £23K to £100K.

    So – the devil will be in the detail, but as a first stab at fixing the problem this isn’t too bad but will no doubt evolve and improve. But critically, whilst there may be winners and losers (as with most new points of departure on policy), this really is an attempt at a FAIRER (as well as more sustainable) system – though I appreciate that opposition parties are hardly going to endorse that view for obvious reasons.

  37. BT SAYS, only the sick pay, I think that is why many are unhappy with the proposals.

  38. In this strangest of election campaigns the narrowing of the polling margin may help the tories. The pitch from the likes of Ben Bradshaw (vote for me – we’re not going to win) becomes a lot more problematic if the lead narrows to, say, 10%. In the same way that the 2015 polling miss helped the tory message I can see the same factors helping them this time around.

  39. My prediction is:

    Con 382 (47)
    Lab 193 (31)
    LD 9 (10)
    UKIP 5 (0)
    SNP 44
    PC 3
    Green 1
    Others 18

  40. @ Marco Flynn

    “I never vote tory but I want us out”

    Can someone explain to me why there appears to be a view that there is a concern amongst leavers that somehow we will not leave. Personally I am a remainer, but I cannot for the life of me see how anyone could think that this process will not go ahead.
    Apart from there being no likelihood of such an approach from the bulk of British MP’s I cannot foresee any circumstance where the 27 would allow the UK back in to disrupt their plans. Article 50 might or might not be revocable, but it is certainly not revocable by us without agreement from the 27. I could only see such agreement if we were to accept the Euro and greater expansion of centralised executive control (see Macron and fiscal harmonisation ideas), this would never be acceptable.

  41. Oops! Got UKIP the wrong way round. Revised version:

    My prediction is:

    Con 382 (47)
    Lab 193 (31)
    LD 9 (10)
    UKIP 0 (5)
    SNP 44
    PC 3
    Green 1
    Others 18

  42. It might also be noted that the Tory care proposals include something for people like SAM. If you think about it, under a system of tax applied equally to all estates it would mean that people who make the difficult choice to care for an elderly relative themselves would be taxed in exactly the same way as people who simply put them in a home, secure in the knowledge that the state will pick up the tab.

    I’m also no fan of a cap on contributions, as advocated by Dilnot, as it wipes out people with modest savings while leaving larger estates untroubled. Deeply regressive.

  43. MarkW

    Well, that’s most of us in this context. Not many people of otherwise good health have eg a heart attack and drop down dead instantly.

  44. completely off piste but this page made me laugh out loud

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-39949092

  45. @John Pilgrim

    The only thing a country certainly gets out of immigration is increased consumption.

    Whether increased production per capita results is not inevitable – and I mean increased production in value not all the unproductive (if often pleasant) stuff that does into GDP.

    Similarly, there is no rule as to whether long term cultural effects are pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. The reality is that views on the subject have more to do with views in this area, and there is a proxy war over economics.

    So, yes, the debate is sterile. But not because there is an iron law that rich countries secure their wealth by ever larger amounts of migration.

  46. Referring to your 3.33 post not 3.42 one!

  47. @Sam

    Sorry for getting specific rather than possible general manifesto impacts on polling and in this case impact of any change to social care.

    Just trying to understand an aspect of your comment regards your fathers social care.

    As I understand it under both Labour and Tory governments there is a saving amount over which home care costs are not funded, currently £23.250, between 14.250 and 23,250 council contributes, below 14,250 all costs covered.

    The manifesto is increasing the threshold to 100,000, so I am assuming in your case where home has been sold the saving threshold increase would have benefited.

    In the Labour plans is the 23500 threshold remaining all-be-it where an individual move into a care home.

  48. BT says, even if that is true then why should the funding model put the onus for payment on the dieing person. We support our health mutually with the NHS so why on earth not end of life care?

    Some peoples deaths are expensive others are not.

  49. If the Tories are to survive they need the Asian vote. Hence social care proposals.

  50. Guardian says the Conservative manifesto has slipped in that the honours system will be reformed, but without further detail: stocking the House of Lords anyone? Lord Sea Change perhaps.

1 9 10 11 12 13