I don’t think we have any new GB polls today, but we did have a new Scottish poll from YouGov in this morning’s Times. Topline figures are SNP 42%(+1), CON 29%(+1), LAB 19%(+1), LDEM 6%(-1).

This is the first poll since the local elections and doesn’t show any obvious impact from them – the SNP remainly safely ahead, the Conservatives are clearly the second placed party and there does not appear to have been any real movement since the last poll. Tabs are here.


317 Responses to “YouGov/Times Scottish poll – SNP 42, CON 29, LAB 19, LDEM 6”

1 2 3 7
  1. I wonder if the Conservatives will breach 30% in the election. It will be starting if they do, after decades of being also-rans in Scotland.

  2. Have YouGov ever shown the Tories that high in Scotland?

  3. A Welsh poll might have been more informative.

    My first thought was that this was very bad for those hoping for a big swing this week. So far, opinion has been very stable since the swing away from UKIP in the first few days – and this follows that pattern.

    But then, Scotland is now subject to a politics divorced from the rest of the UK.

    It is the West Lothian question taken to a higher level. Voters are faced with totally different choices in Scotland than in the UK – particularly when Scottish politics is all about the independence question. It is quite plausible that none of the things that may have made the last week good for Labour are relevant to Scotland.

    Fifty years ago, the swing (or lack of it) in Scotland would have been predictive of the swing in England or Wales.

  4. Strong and stable from the SNP.

  5. A Scottish thread, just what the doc ordered.

    Based on the above figures the Scotland vote website has the following…

    SNP..47 seats – 9

    Tories 8 +7

    Labour 1 (1)

    Lib/Dem 3 +2

    According to the Scotland votes website, if the SNP poll just 2% more and the Tories 2% less than what the current poll is showing then the SNP jump up to 52 seats (-4) and the Tories 4 (+3).

    I still reckon the SNP will poll around 45% and win 50 seats.

  6. joseph1832

    Constitutional politics is nothing new in the UK. It’s been going on in NI for decades, later taken centre stage in Scotland and now with Brexit, it’s trumping everything in England and Wales.

  7. For the life of me, I can’t understand why Scots would vote Conservative. What do they expect to get out of it?????

  8. @ David in France

    The Conservatives have manage to corner the unionist vote. If above all else you want Scotland to remain in the U.K. you’ll vote Conservative.

  9. ….and whats the point voting Labour in Scotland? SNP have corner the left of centre vote….

  10. @Rudyard
    I would like to thank you for your general optimism hope and faith – combined with talking to people I had assumed would be voting Tory but are actually going for Labour, the direction the polls are going it has convinced me that the election may not be the rout I feared it would be. I have decided to return to being a member and to get involved in the campaign.

    Thinking about what will happen after the election is an irrelevance which ever part of the party you are from – if there is even the slightest chance of winning all effort must be made to make it happen.

  11. AC – ”According to the Scotland votes website, if the SNP poll just 2% more and the Tories 2% less than what the current poll is showing then the SNP jump up to 52 seats (-4) and the Tories 4 (+3). ”

    52 is my guess, not forecast.

  12. Interesting to see Labour increasing in this poll. The Labour manifesto is said to have had a positive impact on the polls.

    Does anyone know if they have a second seat chance in Scotland?

  13. “Interesting to see Labour increasing in this poll. ”

    Isn’t “increasing” putting it a bit strongly, given margin of error?

  14. Question,

    If there has been a narrowing in GB polls in the last week to say 15% lead on average but no change in Scotland (1 poll does not help much) then Labour must have closed a bit more in E&W.

    Maybe the 4% swing is a tad less in E&W, although London swinging a lot less has the opposite effect on E&W excluding London?

  15. I am told that Labour have a highly-regarded candidate in East Renfrewshire and have hopes of taking that seat, whilst East Lothian is also a seat that Labour have a real ambition of taking.

  16. @ AC

    This poll has Greens on 2% and UKIP on 1%. IIRC Greens are only putting up 3 candidates, and given Scottish Greens are firmly in the pro-indy camp, adding half the Green VI to SNP seems a safe bet. That puts Lib Dem seats at +1 and Cons at + 7.

    Then increase by SNP by only 1% and drop Cons by the same 1% and you are at only 3 Cons gains.

    Keep the 1% in the unionist camp but move it to Lab and its 3 Cons gains plus 1 LibDem.

    Very finely balanced and well within the MOE

  17. @Adam

    There is a strong working class unionist vote in Scotland, particularly in the west and central industrial belt. Just look at the flags at any Rangers football match for confirmation.

    These people would never vote SNP

  18. Jim Jam

    AC – ”According to the Scotland votes website, if the SNP poll just 2% more and the Tories 2% less than what the current poll is showing then the SNP jump up to 52 seats (-4) and the Tories 4 (+3). ”

    52 is my guess, not forecast.
    _______________

    It’s a good guess, I guess Ha!

  19. profhoward

    Interesting to see Labour increasing in this poll. The Labour manifesto is said to have had a positive impact on the polls.

    Does anyone know if they have a second seat chance in Scotland?
    __________

    They have a good shout for my old seat of East Ren but the Tories also think they can win it and the both of them could actually split the Unionist vote and let the SNP hold the seat.

    If East Renfrew was in England then it would be 100% a Tory seat.

  20. Prof Howard

    Blair McDougall is the SLab candidate in East Ren.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blair_McDougall

    As the chief strategist for Better Together, he is likely to be popular among Unionists. However, in that particular seat, it would make him very unpopular in Barrhead (the least affluent part of the constituency and fairly solidly SNP now, I think.

    Kirsten Oswald’s best hope (though probably not likely) of keeping the seat for the SNP, is for Blair McDougall to do sufficiently well in the commuter belt to prevent SCon winning..

  21. I don’t think I can stand 5 more years of these bland comments. Come on – time for a real change, some real politics and some real debate. This is just bumping along the bottom – yours not mine!!

  22. Evening All.
    Good to see Scottish politics becoming more dynamic.

    The Unionists had a majority of seats in 1959, and won Govan. It looks as though Ruth Davidson is rebuilding the Unionist Party.

  23. ExileInYorks

    You’re having too much fun with the Scotland votes website ;-) but yes you are correct. That’s why I think the SNP will poll around 45% in June. The Green vote will mostly drift towards the SNP and may be crucial in some of the softer held SNP seats in Edinburgh and Perthshire.

  24. Just listened to John McDonnell on the radio about school meals, is there anything that Labour have said they would NOT fund?

    I have never seen a political party promise so much spending whilst seemingly paying little regard to how that would look to the electorate, it seems they wake up every morning and say ‘Right what can we say we will pay for today’.

    Surely it hits a point where the more you offer actually makes people less likely to vote for you.

  25. Just thought I would add as I am feeling rather pleased with myself that after taking 18/1 on Lib Dems getting 10 seats or under those same odds are now at 7/4.

    If I cashed out now I would make about £2800 profit, or do I get greedy and go for the whole lot?

  26. Blue Bob

    Agree totally about Labour’s funding promises and I imagine the Tories will come back to this later in the campaign, possibly with some force.

    I think Labour, given the polls, are simply going for broke with a nothing to lose approach. It appears to have had some initial traction but hasn’t dented the Tory VI.

  27. @Blue Bob

    I understand the word “free” appears 39 times in the Labour manifesto.

    They genuinely think that people will vote for freebies without worrying about how they will be funded!

  28. Allan Christie

    The Green vote will be interesting in Glasgow North, where Pat Harvie is the candidate.

    Not that he will win, but I can see him eating into the SNP vote, and with a number of ex Slab folk in Maryhill shifting to SCon, I wouldn’t be amazed if the SGP pushes SLab into 4th place behind SNP, SCon, and SGP.

  29. @blue bob,

    I heard one economist say he thought the Labour manifesto net cost wasn’t £58bn as they quoted but over quarter of a trillion…

  30. @Carfrew

    I have been approaching our discussion from an academic pov as your comments had challenged some of the assumptions I held. As you have failed to answer any of my questions at all (instead dismissed them as strawmen) you have not given me any evidence to convince me to change my opinion from the following point of view:

    After the ‘shock’ 1992 defeat, which many explained as due to voter concerns about economic competence, the right of the party concluded that clause 4 had to be dropped and liberal economics had to be adopted if the Party was ever to stand the chance of getting elected. After Smith died, Mandelson sided with Blair rather than Brown (who previously he had been closer to) on the basis that he was more voter friendly rather than on any ideological grounds.

    The centre of the party largely went along with this shift in policy the key motivation was to get into power – if you aren’t in power you cant achieve anything being the most persuasive argument.

    There is no documentary evidence to suggest this shift was caused by Liberal entryism into the Labour Party – in fact many of the people who supported/advocated this change in economic policy tended towards socially conservative views, and favoured (in a very trad Labour sense) significant increases in spending in education and the NHS – which incidentally did happen under Blair and Brown).

    Also it is a complete fallacy to make the assumption that the right wing of the Labour party is Liberal – Jack Straw, Gordon Brown and Alistair Campbell are not Liberals.

    In addition you cannot take events that occurred post 2000 as evidence of the intentions views or objectives of people during the the 1980’s. Most people do change some of their views over time – especially after significant events such as losing an election you thought you would win.

    The fact that there are rumours that in 2017 that Blair may be launching the SDP mark 2 does not prove in 1983 he was a Liberal entryist into the Labour party.

    Therefore the evidence supports the conclusion that the reason why Labour adopted a ‘liberal’ economic policy was out of political expediency and not a result of liberal entryism.

    The changes to internal party procedures etc were essentially driven by as desire to prevent the party becoming un-electable, as at the time it was assumed that a traditional left wing economic policy was electoral kryptonite, rather than to facilitate a Liberal take over.

    After Labour jettisoned clause 4, some who previously would not have voted let alone join Labour started to view it as a party they could be comfortable voting for or joining – so the entryism Carfew is citing started to occur after this point. However the majority of MP’s and party members were what I would view of as part of the traditional Labour broad church – and at that time driven by the desire to win.

    You can make an argument that in many ways Blair was the natural successor to Thatcher – but neither were Liberals in the political sense of the word. As PM’s they both were essentially socially conservative/authoritarian but liberal on the economic policy spectrum.

    Carfew I am not going to bore other posters any further on this topic – feel free to respond but I guarantee you you will have the last word.

  31. @ BLUE BOB

    I would definitely cash out now. Given the current seat numbers, some small majorities in former LD seats, some big names standing, and the general uncertainty about the distribution of the LD vote it seems unlikely that price is going to get much lower before polling day.

    Put it this way, if you were coming into the market today, how much would you put down on LD < 11 seats at 7/4? Gonna guess it'd be rather less than £2800? :-)

  32. @ couper2802

    “If above all else you want Scotland to remain in the U.K. you’ll vote Conservative.”

    If ‘No’ is at 55%, why aren’t the Conservatives? Either plenty of folk know the difference between GE and Scotref, or plenty of folk aren’t prepared to vote Conservative to preserve the union.

    Up to 19% Lab and 6% Lib voters for a start. Never mind that the 2016 Scot Elections, recent local elections and this GE are not referendums…:)

  33. Blue Bob – rather than cashing out you may be able to get decent odds on LDs getting 10+ and you could hedge.

  34. Looks like Labour are now making noises that Trident might be up for discussion after all?

  35. BB – using the 7/4 quoted above you would need to bet £1600 to get the £2800.

    If your winnings are going to be £4400 or more (you did not mention the initial stake and that’s your choice) then the edge is better value than the cash out.

    Also you can bet more or less than the £1600 depending on your preferences and judgement – the £2800 is the cash out number the bookie is using not a number you need to be held to.

  36. @Allan Christie:

    I appreciate Northern Ireland has been split on constitutional issues – or rather a “do you feel you feel you belong to the neighbouring country” issue – but Scotland is much bigger and newer to this sort of dynamic. It had largely split from the rest of GB politically when it became un-Scottish to vote Tory in the 1980s – now no real link at all for time being.

    But I would differ on England and Wales being now split on constitutional lines. There is definitely far more votes being cast for constitutional reasons. There were the 12% who voted UKIP in the last election for a start. But the striking thing in this election is how few Remainers have defected from the Tories, how few Remainers have shifted their votes on constitutional grounds according to the polls, and perhaps we shall find that few Labour leavers have shifted to the Tories?

    We shall know when the exit polls get analysed after the election if I am right on the above. But that is my inclination.

    (And wish I had put an early bet on the LibDems floundering – I could never understand how their strategy was supposed to work in the South West.)

  37. Sorry ignore my previous 74/ is the new figure for under 10, what is it for over 10 and you can do the maths yourself.

  38. I think what you will see is this:

    -Labour manifesto honeymoon period starts to fade away
    -Right wing media start to focus on Corbyn’s IRA links (Telegraph have already started this tonight)

    => Tory landslide

  39. @Redrich

    I didn’t just dismiss them as straw men, I actually pointed out why.

    So, for example, you were correct that Liberal policies in Labour pre-date Blair, and indeed Jenkins had some.

    I pointed out this was a straw man that did not undermine my point, because I wasn’t arguing it began with Blair in the first place. I always said it started with the likes of Jenkins. You introduced some needless FUD about it starting with Blair.

    Actually, to be honest, that’s an example of where I didn’t dismiss as a straw an, but showed how you were actually reinforcing my point.

    I have to say also, that while I endeavour to deal with all your points, you hardly reference mine at all!! apert from the stuff you misrepresent.

    To take your latest attempts…

    – you keep insisting on evidence of a kind that is obviously unlikely. Like earlier, looking for evidence of liberalism in the Eighties. Obviously they’re unlikely to do much till in power. Same was true of Jenkins, Heath etc…

    – now you want “documentary evidence” well they’re not going to document it are they. You don’t need it documenting, you can just look at the policies. More FUD…

    – your contention that it’s a fallacy that the “right wing of the party is liberal”… Well I didn’t say anything about the right of the party and I don’t necessarily consider Liberals right wing. FUD abounds…

    Note, I didn’t just groundlessly dismiss your point there, I just pointed out how it’s yet more error.

    “In addition you cannot take events that occurred post 2000 as evidence of the intentions views or objectives of people during the the 1980’s.”

    Nope, I think actions can indicate intentions. So does a court of Law.

    “The fact that there are rumours that in 2017 that Blair may be launching the SDP mark 2 does not prove in 1983 he was a Liberal entryist into the Labour Party.”

    No, it doesn’t prove that, it shows he’s still into it today.

    “Therefore the evidence supports the conclusion that the reason why Labour adopted a ‘liberal’ economic policy was out of political expediency and not a result of liberal entryism”.

    Well it may have been both. Once again you don’t entertain other possibilities.

    “The changes to internal party procedures etc were essentially driven by as desire to prevent the party becoming un-electable, as at the time it was assumed that a traditional left wing economic policy was electoral kryptonite, rather than to facilitate a Liberal take over.”

    Oh they may also have believed only liberalism was electable, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t trying to ensure liberalism prevailed. Again and again you don’t seem able to see other valid alternatives.

    “After Labour jettisoned clause 4, some who previously would not have voted let alone join Labour started to view it as a party they could be comfortable voting for or joining – so the entryism Carfew is citing started to occur after this point. However the majority of MP’s and party members were what I would view of as part of the traditional Labour broad church – and at that time driven by the desire to win.”

    Again you’re reaching too far. The entryism may only have become EVIDENT at that point but could occur earlier. I agree it may have garner some votes as well as losing some. I agree in those earlier days more of the party were of the broader church, because much parachuting yet to come. In another comical attempt to avoid evidence, you keep wanting to stress the early days, because much of the evidence comes later.

    “You can make an argument that in many ways Blair was the natural successor to Thatcher – but neither were Liberals in the political sense of the word. As PM’s they both were essentially socially conservative/authoritarian but liberal on the economic policy spectrum.”

    Thatcher was economically Liberal, Blair added a lot more social liberalism. You only seem to accept one one as liberal unless they adhere to e dry possible tenet, which is a hell of a high bar.

  40. I guess there are two diametrically opposite views on what’s happening to the party system (in England; not just so much elsewhere) at this election.

    My view is that we are seeing a reassertion of the traditional two-party dominance, with the combined two-party vote being its strongest in many years, and the Lib Dems and UKIP simultaneously weak.

    An alternative view is that we are seeing the “traditional party system uprooted”. This is based on the fact that people apparently feel more common with people who voted the same way in the referendum than their fellow party supporters ( https://euobserver.com/opinion/137975 ).

    To some extent they can hold true simultaneously, but to call the traditional system “uprooted” sounds very odd if I am right that it is reasserting itself. Still, the argument for “uprooted” would probably be that there’s a lot of churn going on, and class is less important as an indicator than in the past,.

  41. YG Scottish poll – changes in VI by party since 2015

    NC : Con : Lab : L_D : SNP : Oth : 2015 vote
    97% : —- : 0% : 2% : 1% : 0% : Con
    60% : 26% : ___ : 4% : 10% 9% : Lab
    48% : 41% : 3% : —- : 7% : 1% : L-D
    76% : 10% : 8% : 2% : —- : 4% : SNP

    And for the small number of DKs by party, “most probable” vote “still DK” followed by their former one –

    NC : Con : Lab : L_D : SNP : Oth : DK : 2015 vote
    32% : —- : 0% : 7% : 0% : 0% : 60% : Con
    36% : 21% : —-: 2% : 0% : 2% : 39% : Lab
    56% : 18% : 5% : —- : 0% : 10% : 12% : L_D
    25% : 13% : 7% : 0% :—- : 4% : 51% : SNP

    So some indication of the areas of fluidity in VI in Scotland, but it would take more data than is available in the tables to suggest reasons for it.

  42. @Redrich

    To summarise, you endeavour to skirt around the key points, all the liberalism enacted in power, concerted attempts to ride roughshod and get more of a like mind into the party, the attempts even now to sabotage Corbyn, the history going back to Jenkins and Heath of Liberals taking over, being forced out, trying again…. You introduce legions of quibbles, another being saying Thatcher wasn’t a liberal when I never said she was, I said she was an ECONOMIC liberal.

    It’s pretty clear, especially from Syzygy’s link Blair hit the ground running with his plans. It was very concerted, you have to be pretty determined not to see that.

    You also ignore that a lot of if cannot be considered “expediency”. Like I said, there wasn’t the pressure for all those privatisations, or ATOS, or Academies and much else besides. It wasn’t expediency, but forcing an ideology. No amount of obfuscation will disguise that.

  43. Nia Griffith directly contradicting Emily Thornberry on Newsnight tonight re Trident: “With all due respect, Emily is not the shadow defence minister, I am”.

    God, I just placed a large bet on less than a hundred majority and it all starts to fall apart! I should have known Labour couldn’t hold it together for more than a few days.

  44. The common wisdom is that the 2015 UKIP vote will go to the Tories.

    We can see the big collapse in UKIP support when the GE was called, and the corresponding Tory increase.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Opinion_polling_UK_2020_election_short_axis.png

    But what about those UKIP voters that did not switch yet? There is still a good 5-7% of them, we know UKIP are not on the ballot in a number of places, if they didn’t switch yet why not?

    So do they stay at home, or do they end up getting squeezed and go for either Tory or Labour on the day?

    I say that, because UKIP are continuing to drift down, and Labour are the only party increasing…which seems to suggest they are now trickling to labour – so will a significant number defy the pundits and vote Labour on the day? (Being mainly DE social class, I would guess they are probably more inclined to Labour economic policies than Tory economic policies)?

  45. I think the papers next week could be heavy on IRA Corbyn links and weak trident position for Labour!,

  46. @redrich

    Sorry, to correct the auto correct, last line should read…

    “You only seem to accept someone as liberal unless they adhere to every possible tenet without exception, which is a hell of a high bar. Even LDs don’t tend to do that.”

    Anyways it’s been useful to hone the argument. Obviously after weathering all the quibbling, some bits were useful. Showing that a good deal of it wasn’t just expediency is important, as was Syzygy’s intervention showing the extent of the takeover. So thanks for helping with that!!

  47. @Rich

    I agree but I doubt it will make that much of a difference. Corbyn is an open book. There aren’t exactly any skeletons in his closet.

  48. Corbyn tends to use “party democracy” to cover himself on Trident. He might be against it but goes by the party will?

  49. Just after the referendum we were reading a lot in the press about how left and right were dead and the new, more salient divisions was between “open”, cosmopolitan people and “closed” people who were sceptical of immigration and globalisation. Now, no doubt that division does exist but I think that’s turned out to be hugely overstated. Looking at this week’s manifestos, left/right is still the big dividing line and I believe it’s that dividing line, more than Brexit, which will determine how the majority of people vote.

    On Labour – I don’t know why they didn’t adopt the policy of a referendum on Trident. True, there are some who might think irresponsible a referendum on something that its supporters regard as vital to the national interest. But the Conservatives, having organised the Brexit referendum and being unable to renounce it, would find it very, very difficult to attack the notion of giving the people a direct say in a single-issue vote.

  50. @Mike

    It’s remarkable the salience given to Trident in the national security debate, given that nuclear weapons haven’t been used for over 70 years, and, with any luck, never will be used in the future.

    As far as differences between ministers/shadow ministers – that happens frequently. Look at the recent spat between Philip Hammond and Theresa May’s office, for example.

1 2 3 7