More Brexit polling

A year on from the EU referendum there was some new YouGov polling for the Times this morning. The country remain quite evenly split over whether Brexit is right or wrong, 44% think leaving was the right decision, 45% the wrong decision. There is not much optimism about negotiations – only 26% expect the government to achieve a deal that is good for Britain, 31% expect a poor deal, 15% expect no deal at all (that said, most don’t think Labour would be doing any better – 24% think they’d get a better deal, 34% a worse deal, 20% that it would end up much the same).

Asked to choose between Britain having full control over immigration from Europe or British businesses having free access to trade with the EU people preferred trade by 58% to 42%. As I wrote in my last post, there’s a lot of variation in questions like this depending on the specific wording, but the overall picture suggests that when people are pushed to choose they do think trade is more important than control of immigration (though among Conservative voters the balance is the other way round).

On other matters, on the question of who would make the best Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn now leads Theresa May by a single point – 35% to 34%. This is the first time that Corbyn has led in the question – this is partially because of a sharp drop in Theresa May’s ratings (before the snap election she was consistently in the high 40s), but is also due to a significant increase in Jeremy Corbyn’s ratings. Again, if you look at the longer term ratings he used to be consistenty down in the teens.

Full tabs are here

I should also add an update on polling about the second referendum. In my last post I mentioned the Survation poll for the Mail on Sunday which found that the balance of opinion was in favour of having a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal. This was the first time any poll had shown this, and I said it was worth looking to see if other polls found the same. Well, so far they haven’t – Survation also had a poll for Good Morning Britain on Monday, that also had a question on a second referendum, and it found 38% of people supported it and 57% were opposed. Tabs for that are here.


451 Responses to “More Brexit polling”

1 2 3 4 10
  1. The Other Howard,
    “How rediculous leaving the EU is not running away, It’s breaking free,”

    Well we shall have to disagree on that. Part of the current insanity is that the professed desire of hard brexiteers is to leave a complex and integrated trade deal with the Eu and then join a complex and integrated trade deal with the EU.

    Lewis Caroll here we come.

  2. DANNY @ TOH
    Thats why Churchill would have been pro EU membership.

    Sadly, I don’t think that’s true. Both he and Attlee were more concerned about the Empire/Commonwealth than with Europe. I’m mildly surprised that you haven’t had a response from TOH on the issue.

    Attlee could have put the UK at the very heart of what is now the EU by becoming a founder member of the European Coal and Steel Community by being a signatory of the Treaty of Paris in April 1951. After beating Attlee in October 1951, Churchill would almost certainly would have been welcomed into the ECSC had he so wished.

    That would in turn have lead to the UK signing the Treaty of Rome in 1957 as a founder member of the EEC, which might well have grown in a somewhat different way to today’s EU.

  3. @ToH
    ” very existence of the nation and the lives and liberties of the people are imperilled.”

    The situation at the start of negotiations with the EU are hardly comparable to the country’s situation in the aftermath of Dunkirk, which is sort of what I had in mind in writing that.

    To me you are indulging in drastic hyperbole at best.

    However if you really do think that, then surely you should be pressing vociferously for a national government of unity to lead the effort, as we had during the last two crises of that severity (1915-18 and 1939-45)?

  4. For many Leavers, this argument is essentially a form of religious faith and attempting to convince ToH is akin to trying to debate evolution with evangelicals.

    His list of reasons make that stark as it is entirely based on faith.

    The clever thing the Eurosceptics did was to make wanting to leave the EU a core part of the identity of a lot of people who consider themselves traditional conservatives, like Howard. To be a ‘good’ conservative (with a small ‘c’) requires certain positions to be taken including opposition to the EU, just as the same is required of socialists, or Greens. We just have to accept that. Arguing with him about it just makes everyone unhappy.

    It is fair to point out that his position on how the electorate and media should engage is not compatible with democratic values, but unfortunately he is far from alone there and, indeed, I fear that like the most recent election making socialism in the UK very much more likely, that the backlash will be severe and very much not to the liking of Howard and his well-meaning, like-minded in-group (or most of the rest of us). I worry that the conduct of the Mail et all means curbs on freedom of speech under a populist and authoritarian left-wing Government.

  5. Back to poll info! Survation table6 backs up the YouGov article I posted earlier. Table6 can be viewed as a proxy for current Leave/Remain status, taking the two main parties (Leave/Remain/DK):

    CON 73 / 26 / 2
    LAB 23 / 74 / 3

    DKs are small for both (surprising?) but adjusting for those around 3/4 of CON are Leave and 3/4 of LAB are Remain.

    Looking at the smaller parties (v.small samples so with caution!):

    LDEM 22 / 72/ 6 (almost identical to LAB, a few more DKs)
    UKIP 100 / 0 / 0 (down to the hardcore!)
    Other 38 / 59/ 3 (picks up SNP, etc)
    DNV 63 / 36 / 0 (from the YouGov info this would suggest UKIP/LAB Leaves that DNVd and possible Remain CONs?)

    Interesting in that although everyone is focusing on the demographic split between the parties the Brexit split is even larger (of course the two have a high correlation as we know).

    This could be a problem for both parties. The CON issue is obvious. If they soften Brexit too much they risk UKIP resurgence but might win back some switch voters.
    The LAB risk will stay hidden for now as Corbyn played a blinder by downplaying Brexit in the GE and in opposition no-one tests your view but if we have a 2nd GE while Brexit is still ongoing then the issue might be harder for Corbyn to dodge a second time.

  6. STV reported a new online survey of 1006 Scottish people yesterday, carried out by a subsidiary of theirs, ScotPulse, who have been polling since 2011 but do not appear to be BPC members. For the STV article, see their Brexit: Survey finds 60% of Scots ‘want new EU vote’.

    On Do you think a second EU referendum should be held when the final terms of the deal are clear?
    61% Yes
    39% No

    On Do you think that there should be another Scottish independence referendum?
    48% No – not at all
    22% Depends on what happens with Brexit
    17% Yes – after Brexit
    13% Yes – before Brexit

    Sadly, no proper demographic tables seem to be available but on the 2nd EU referendum, they found that 61% of Scots want a second EU referendum when the terms of the final Brexit deal are clear, with majority support for a fresh vote regardless of age, location or employment status.

    Given that the vote in Scotland was 62% remain 38% leave, if the poll is accurate it does seem to show a tiny movement towards leave.

  7. Seems to me that people who voted for Brexit because they wanted democratic accountability to be purely at Westminster, might well be disappointed at some point. The UK might well end up with a trade deal with the EU that still has Brussels deciding on various issues e.g product/service standards, but the UK won’t have ministers at the EU table or MEP’s.

    Also the UK in negotiating trade deals with non EU countries will most likely have to agree to things, which UK businesses and their employees won’t be happy with. The trade deals are two way streets and not everything will be in the UK’s interest. UK Government will do these deals with very little input from voters or businesses and they will not easily be undone by votes in Westminster. While you can vote out a Government at an election, you vote on a lot of different issues.

    At the moment the EU negotiates international trade deals as a 500 million consumer bloc of countries and all EU countries have input into the process. The EU representing such a large market, has much more negotiating power than a country on its own with a population of 65 million.

  8. @ Chris Riley

    I’m not a Tory but I’m a leaver too and am not going to be persuaded otherwise, the argument for me is overwhelming in terms of economics, justice and sovereignty. I want us to be able to control, as much as we can, all of these.

    I am worried about Corbyn, there seems to be a cult following here, almost religious in form. The press seem to be understandably so completely obsessed about other news at the moment they haven’t picked up on it yet.

  9. Posting this separately from the STV poll in case AW thinks it partisan.

    If nothing else, the STV suggests why Davidson’s SCon campaign, although largely aimed at unionists against indyref2 had the sense to demand a soft exit from the EU.

    It should also be noted that SLab were not helped by their leader Dugdale’s recommendation early in the campaign to vote SCon in seats where SLab would not win.

  10. on Churchill and Europe – he made this speech in 1946 –

    ‘We must build a kind of United States of Europe.. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important.. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.’

    He subsequently tried – and failed – to make the UK part of the common market. De Gaulle vetoed Britain joining – and did again when macmillan tried to join in 1963.

  11. Danny
    “Lewis Caroll here we come.”
    Exactly the sort of comment I have come to expect. It shows that you are not interested in considering others views.
    I repeat, the UK voters voted clearly to leave the EU, it was upheld by both houses of parliament, as was the White paper forming the basis of our negotiating approach. Both major parties have accepted that we are leaving the single marke, and all you can do is make rather silly comments.
    BZ
    I made no comment about WSC because it would just be idle speculation.
    Chris Riley
    “His list of reasons make that stark as it is entirely based on faith.”
    No more than your own. I don’t recall having giving all my reasons for wanting to leave the EU which is not surprising because it would probably take several hours to write and would block this website.
    Like many other Remainers who post here why don’t you reflect on the points I have made to Danny above, accept the will of the people and support our negotiators.

  12. Personal opinion: Brexit (once complete) has both risks and rewards for the economy, in broad terms (and IMHO of course!!):

    Risks: how much damage the leaving process inflicts (e.g. how many businesses we net lose in the short-term and how expensive the exit is)
    Rewards: once we’ve left the rewards should be improved trade with non-EU on the basis of FTAs that work for UK economy and not the EU collective (our largest export gains are non-EU and they are the strongest growth oppos, also potential to switch to cheaper suppliers outside of EU protectionism) and depending on the tariff regime we should also net benefit from reshoring of some manufacturing, etc. from EU to help balance the trade deficit – weaker ccy useful here as well. IMHO trend growth could be 0.5% higher outside EU than within (and why I voted Leave)

    Unfort we have to contend with the risks before we can reap the rewards.

    IMHO the worst case scenario (looking more likely now) is the weak govt status means the risks are higher (i.e. we net lose more businesses over next 18mths and also have a far more expensive exit) at which point we switch to a LAB govt that would be unable to capitalise on the rewards.

    If we’re going to end up with a LAB govt, I think it would be better to have that sooner rather than later. If LAB negotiate a much softer Brexit and/or keep us in, then ECJ will probably still have significant jurisdiction in UK and combined with the Blairite faction within LAB (and possible need of support from other parties) the more extreme far-left parts of Corbyn’s agenda will never happen (e.g. renationalising and reunionising the economy)

    Switching from CON to LAB mid-term is what concerns me the most. We’ll be slammed on the risk side and fail to capture many of the future rewards. It’s hard to see CON lasting 5years or winning a majority in a quick 2nd GE so maybe its better (for the long-term benefit of the economy) to pass the buck to LAB now/soon (possibly requiring C+S from LDEM to keep them in check) rather than pass them a no deal Brexit (clean break from ECJ) with a large majority and then ability for Corbyn to run a full-on Socialist experiment with our economy.

    I think Corbyn probably knows the benefits of biding his time to wait until Brexit is over and he has enough lead for a significant majority and able to ignore his Blairite faction.

  13. From last weekend in the Times… About Labour’s approach…

    “It was a result they didn’t expect but had been preparing for. The turning point in the campaign came when James Schneider, Corbyn’s head of strategic communications, got a call from the Daily Mirror announcing that the newspaper had obtained a leaked copy of “the whole manifesto” five days before its launch.

    Standing at a packed Corbyn rally in York city centre, a spooked Schneider went on autopilot: “We don’t comment on leaks. We’ll be announcing our manifesto next week.”

    While moderate Labour MPs are convinced John McDonnell leaked the draft to prepare the ground for its socialist agenda, Corbyn aides insist the “malicious act” caught them off guard.

    The next day Seumas Milne, Labour’s director of communications, chose to exploit the attention by sending out the pugilistic Andrew Gwynne, Labour’s national campaign co-ordinator, to defend the party’s “transformational agenda”. This approach meant the manifesto received wall-to-wall coverage before its official launch. Labour began eating into the Conservatives’ 20-point lead before the Tories’ own manifesto — which contained the unpopular “dementia tax” — appeared.

    “Why offer a semi-skimmed left-wing platform when Ed Miliband did that and got slated anyway?” says one Corbyn policy adviser. “We felt we could offer a full-fat agenda and offer popular policies which cut through with the public.”

    The response by Corbyn’s team reflected a lesson learnt earlier in the year: accept media hostility but use the coverage to get attention for policies capable of surviving negative headlines.

    We’d write online that Jeremy was coming and he’d get a crowd
    Back in January, after a bruising summer, inaccurate reports claimed Corbyn’s office was planning a “Trump-style” relaunch. He would become more confrontational — and more candid about his personal beliefs.

    The leader’s office sensed an opportunity. Corbyn would kick off the day by “accidentally” revealing a controversial new policy on live radio; one that would dominate the day’s news but resonate with the public. They chose a maximum pay cap.

    When Corbyn “let slip” the policy on the Today programme, the relaunch was condemned as a “car crash”, but a snap YouGov poll said 56% of voters either supported a cap or hadn’t ruled out backing one. Similarly, polls were later to show that Labour’s leaked manifesto was popular: roughly half of Britons backed public ownership of the rail network (52%), utilities (49%) and Royal Mail (50%).

    Labour’s confidence in Corbyn’s ability to connect with the public rose, but the campaign was threatened by a bitter divide between Corbyn’s office, which along with Momentum was targeting seats with a heavy student population, and Labour HQ, which was mounting a defensive effort based on internal polling pointing to a Tory landslide.

    “The less said about HQ’s internal polling, the better,” a senior source reflects. “It wasn’t difficult to go round their backs. We just had to tell people on Facebook that Jeremy was coming to a rally in one of our target seats and that was that — he’d get a crowd.”

    Adam Klug, Momentum’s national organiser, confirms: “We targeted seats regional Labour parties thought were unwinnable. In Battersea, for example, the local party thought the seat wasn’t worth putting resources into and was encouraging people to go to Tooting.”

    Momentum’s website — MyNearestMarginal.com — meant it could also bypass high command and funnel activists to seats like Sheffield Hallam and Kensington, both of which Labour won.”

  14. The will of the people changes. Now that we are having a more meaningful debate about the EU it has become clear that the majority now put staying in the single market ahead of immigration control. That is what the latest polling is suggesting. The will of the people was different in last years advisory Referendum.

    It is now down to this Government to consider not just the 52%! that voted leave but the 48% that voted Remain as well as those who voted leave who actually want us to remain in the single market.
    If they chose not to then the Brexit trade deal will be voted down in Parliament

  15. @ToH

    I’m afraid that you are wrong on one thing. I think a number of people have pointed out that the Labour party manifesto did exactly the opposite of committing to leave the Single Market. It does however state that Labour are committed to ‘respecting the result of the referendum.’

    The exact phrase was ‘negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.’

    The referendum has committed the UK to seeking to negotiate a departure from the EU – but it remains the case that there is no consensus, politically or across the wider population – as to what form the revised relationship should take.

    I’m not getting behind a government that either:
    – can’t articulate a meaningful and realistic end goal, or
    – seeks an end goal that I fundamentally disagree with.

    Nor can I see any reason why I should…

  16. @ToH

    “Glad you can see the point.”

    ——–

    Lol, thanks for that answer, yes that makes things much clearer now!!

  17. @ BBZ – thank you for the Scottish poll. It has similar findings to the Survation UK poll. With Article50 triggered Remain voters understand the only way to stop Brexit is to have a 2nd referendum. If EU know we are having a “re-think” they can push horrific terms expecting a Remain/Return win (which was clearly the LDEM plan all along)
    IMHO the ship has sailed and Remain is now Return – requiring EU27 unanimous support on Return terms which I’d expect to be as/more punishing as Leave terms.

    This is hardening views on both sides and can be seen in the CON/LAB 2017 vote (see YouGov link earlier) and Survation poll info. Scotland is following the same logic.

    I’m still bemused why Remain voters pick LAB. I can see a LAB govt relying on SNP and LDEM is a route to a 2nd Ref but a full LAB majority and emboldened Corbyn would still mean we leave (just probably pay more to do so).
    Keen to see what happens to LDEM with new leader. If they put LAB plans under the spotlight maybe the Remain vote becomes split? Probably wishful thinking on my part!!

  18. @Danny

    I think that’s a very good summary.

    Leaving the EU and staying in EEA through EFTA is surely fulfilling the referendum mandate?

    I think we’d be quite happy there. But if things were that bad, we could always have a EFTA referendum?

  19. REGGIESIDE

    You’re correct re the 1946 Churchill speech, which begs the question: Why didn’t he join the ECSC?

    My take is that the “we” was an appeal to Truman to join in “sponsoring” the project rather than the UK joining it, and the following para rather supports that, IMO:

    There is already a natural grouping in the Western Hemisphere. We British have our own Commonwealth of Nations. These do not weaken, on the contrary they strengthen, the world organisation. They are in fact its main support.

    For the full text of the speech, the Churchill Society has it here.

  20. BIGFATRON

    Interestingly then both Corbyn and McDonnell have both said that then.

    “Nor can I see any reason why I should…”

    That’s up to you I am taking the democratic line myself.

  21. Bigfatron

    I meant to reply to an earlier point you raised with me.

    I would be totally behind a National Government provided it followed the negotiating principles laid out in the White Paper which has been approved by parliament. Would you?

  22. Bantams

    Glad to see somebody else understands why we must leave the EU.

  23. The Brexiters are getting more and more heated beneath their collars, which I find a most hopeful sign.

  24. MIKE PEARCE

    “Then the Brexit trade deal will be voted down in Parliament”

    Possiblebut then we would then leave without a deal, so unlikely in my view.

  25. @ToH

    I am afraid I do not consider a single one of your arguments to have a shred of validity and you feel the same about mine which tells me that there is no point either of us engaging one another on Brexit. I suspect we have a lot more in common when it comes to horticulture, ornithology and that most noble of pursuits, cricket.

  26. GUYMONDE

    “The Brexiters are getting more and more heated beneath their collars, which I find a most hopeful sign.”

    Your comment gives me a good feeling, remainers “clutching at staws”.

  27. CHRIS RILEY

    Good summary of the position. We can agree on that.

    The English ladies are facing a very tough task in their game against India who scored 282 for 3 in 50 overs.

  28. Democratic does not mean “one person one vote, once”. It means we are free to keep arguing and campaigning for what we think, and indeed are free as individuals to change our minds. Democracy doesn’t require that we leave the EU, if circumstances make it clear that it would not be in our interests and a majority of our democratically elected representatives choose not to. To bind ourselves to a narrow margin (small enough that there’s reasonable odds that a number of leave voters larger than the margin of victory have since died or otherwise become ineligible) on a single vote for evermore is neither sane nor democratic. Even if you agree that the referendum result should be honoured there is absolutely nothing wrong with criticising the absolute dog’s breakfast this government is making of it, nor with making people aware of the current and likely consequences of this decision.

  29. barbazenzero,
    ” Both he and Attlee were more concerned about the Empire/Commonwealth than with Europe”
    Now this thread is going to end as a chat about our favourite historical figures!

    Yes, I understand, but equally there is no longer an empire. Ian Hislop this week had a documentary on immigration where he pointed out Chuchill was very pro freedom of movement, and in two world wars he was very pro Uk involvement in Europe. I fancy his reservations over the nascent EU were that he saw the UK and its empire continuing, not that he advocated withdrawal from world politics. There is no more empire, so the UK has to fight for european dominance just like everyone else.

    Bantams,
    “I am worried about Corbyn, there seems to be a cult following here, almost religious in form. ”

    well perhaps you should be. Much the same was true of farage. Any entrenched political party should certainly worry. But I dpn’t think this special to either Farage or Corbyn, they are simply in the right place at the right time to capture a protest vote against the status quo.

  30. @Bantams

    Disagree with you on Brexit but I can at least see the logic even though I think you are going to be sorely disappointed.

    On Corbyn, I agree. I don’t want him as PM and I don’t want any of his lieutenants anywhere near power. However I feel the same way about the rotten gang of failures we have ‘in charge’ at the moment and I feel that the Tories have richly earned a decade or two out of power. I guess all that change Brexiteers were informing us that the electorate wanted is coming, albeit not in the form they wanted or expected and there is a certain form of satisfaction in that. I confess my political instincts have now reverted to the Base form of ‘if I can’t have what I want I can at least make sure the people I blame for it suffer in the hope that they take a lesson from it’. It’s not noble, but it is honest.

  31. To go back to AW’s opening para:
    “A year on from the EU referendum there was some new YouGov polling for the Times this morning. The country remain quite evenly split over whether Brexit is right or wrong, 44% think leaving was the right decision, 45% the wrong decision. There is not much optimism about negotiations – only 26% expect the government to achieve a deal that is good for Britain,”
    Both Brexit polling and VI indicate a trend, which over the perod of a year has political but also an age demographic and educational basis. The indications, both in public perception and in the statistics, are that the trend will continue,
    By 2019, when we expect to see an outcome to the negotiations for Brexit, it is probable that there will be a signiicant majority both for Remain and for a Labour Government. By that time the Labour leadership, including Corbyn will, for reasons of responding to the membership and their support in the country, and for clearer economic reasons, decide on a very soft Brexit or on another referendum.
    A wise Government now negotiating in Brussels would recgonise the straws in the wind and would abandon any intention to push through a hard Brexit, the effect of which would be to strengthen the case for Remain.

  32. @BFR

    “To me you are indulging in drastic hyperbole at best.”

    ———

    Surely we should be taking it seriously though, and at the very least we should have rationing, blackouts, shelters…

    …conscription, the Home Guard…

    …Vera Lynn…

  33. Jo

    That’s just your opinion.

    Chris Riley

    “suffer in the hope that they take a lesson from it’”

    I can’t resist replying to that. People like me will be delighted that we have left the EU when we do so, in my case regardless of any consequences which are likely to be insignificant at my age. A change of Government. That is likely at some time and I have seen many Labour Governments which is why I could never vote Labour. To be fair to Blair though his were no worse than many Conservative governments.

    So in terms of suffer and lean the lesson, very unlikely.

  34. TREVOR WARNE @ BZ
    IMHO the ship has sailed and Remain is now Return – requiring EU27 unanimous support on Return terms which I’d expect to be as/more punishing as Leave terms.

    You may prove to be correct on that, but I certainly hope that you’re wrong.

    I’m still bemused why Remain voters pick LAB.

    BIGFATRON’s recent response to TOH is a pretty good explanation, and very close to my own view.

    I can see a LAB govt relying on SNP and LDEM is a route to a 2nd Ref but a full LAB majority and emboldened Corbyn would still mean we leave (just probably pay more to do so)

    The former is currently more probable but either could hardly be a less collegiate approach than the Cons are currently following. In either case, involvement of the three devolved nations would be sought. The need to resolve the issue of the 500 Km Irish border in a way that would preserve the Belfast Agreement would probably be the issue which guaranteed staying within the customs union. I have no idea why you think Lab would have a higher re-entry fee than any other government. If any party should be so punished surely it should be the Cons for wasting EC time.

    In 1975 I voted against joining the EEC because I knew in my heart that we would be rotten europeans. Had I not been disenfranchised for being an expat, I would have voted to remain in the EU, although would have preferred to be in the EEA which would have had the advantage of not having UKIP embarrassing us all in the European Parliament.

  35. “I am worried about Corbyn, there seems to be a cult following here, almost religious in form”

    ————

    Lol, they cheer him at festivals, it’s not like they abandon all their worldly possessions, cut off all contact with the outside world, shave their heads, where sackcloth and go and live in a compound somewhere, living according to the sacred text: “the words of Chairman Corby”…

  36. The Other Howard,
    ” It shows that you are not interested in considering others views.
    I repeat, the UK voters voted clearly to leave the EU”

    I am always intersted in others views. Especially in evidence to demonstrate why they are correct. Its perfectly fine to have an opinion, but while I may respect you sincerity, it isnt by itself convincing.

    As to the vote, 52/48 is not ‘clearly’. The numbers have dwindled since then to around 44/45 in favour of remain, at the last poll. It isnt ‘clear’ at all.

    What I ‘accept’ is that we live in a democracy. Everyone is free to campaign for what they want. You cannot claim that because there was a referendum in 1970 odd about EU membership that this result is set in stone for all time. And indeed, I suspect you do not want to argue that at all, but rather that a later vote would supercede it. And so I am not arguing anything different to yourself.

    But what I would argue is that if it becomes plain to voters before Brexit happens that they no longer wish it, they have the right to stop it.

  37. Carfrew

    “Lol, they cheer him at festivals, it’s not like they abandon all their worldly possessions, cut off all contact with the outside world, shave their heads, where sackcloth and go and live in a compound somewhere, living according to the sacred text: “the words of Chairman Corby”…

    It would be nice if they did though.

  38. I support the Labour party and JC and I only have/do one from that list.
    I must be rubs.

  39. BFR

    @”. I think a number of people have pointed out that the Labour party manifesto did exactly the opposite of committing to leave the Single Market.”

    Actually it doesn’t mention Membership of the SM at all. In fact it only uses the words “Single Market” once in a sentence from which this is a quote:-

    “We will scrap the Conservatives’Brexit White Paper and replace it
    with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union ”

    The distinction between Membership of & Access to the SM-which is rife-was touched on by Peston in an interview with John McDonnell.

    The exchange was as follows:-

    “RP:-Could Labour itself, given your manifesto, support continued membership of the single market.
    JM: I can’t see it being on the table in the negotiation but…

    RP: But if it got back on the table…

    JM: I don’t think it’s feasible but we’ve been clear all the way along. Ours is a ‘jobs first Brexit’, everything we can do to protect our economy. That must mean tariff-free access to the single market, that’s going to be our…

    RP: So you would, just to be clear on this because I think this is very important to people, you would support the prime minister, if Theresa May remains prime minister during these talks, you would support her in her determination to get us out of the European single market.

    JM: Let’s be clear: we are respecting the decision of the referendum. We are democrats…

    RP: Yes, but the decision was about leaving the EU, it wasn’t about leaving the single market.

    JM: I think people will interpret membership of the single market as not respecting that referendum. However, what we’re saying very, very clearly; we had the contrast in this general election. Here we had the Conservative Party going for a ‘race to the bottom Brexit’ and undermining our economy. We always said it would be a ‘jobs first Brexit’…

    RP: No, I understand that but it is clear… I think that you are absolutely saying that Labour remains wedded to the idea of leaving the single market.

    JM: It’s access. Access to the single market on a tariff-free basis.”

    So JM makes it clear that since Membership of the SM is incompatible with non-membership of the EU, and therefore the UK Referendum, Labour does not support it but wishes to replicate trading access to it’s customers.

    This is , of course, the policy of the Government too.

    My own view is that this distinction, between Membership of the SM ( & thus acceptance of its Four Freedoms) ; and Access to the SM free from the barriers of the Customs Union , is not generally made -in political discussion and also in polling.

    The answers to a question about “leaving” the Single Market may lead the respondent to think that it means a destination outside the trade barriers of the EU Customs Union.

    The Government, of course , is seeking to leave Membership of the SM ( in order to “leave the EU”) and to retain as much of the barrier free entry to the customers within the SM as it is possible to get.

    I think this is Labour’s position too.

  40. Danny

    You live in an unreal world. The decision has been taken, it was won by a referendum by 51.9% to 48.1% a clear margin of 3.8%. We have moved on since then. Both Houses of parliament have voted to accept the Referendum, Art 50 has been triggered and we are negotiating based on a White paper which has also passed through parliament.
    I too live in the same Democracy which is why now that the decision has been taken and we are negotiating, IMO the patriotic thing to do is get behind the negotiators. As I have said many times, that once we have left it is perfectly reasonable for people if they don’t like the results of our leaving to lobby for a new referendum to rejoin, just as people like me have lobbied to leave for 40 odd years.

    Colin
    Exactly, Labour position is exactly the same as the Governments in reality although of course they would never admit to that.

  41. One of the big dividing points in voting behaviour/political support at the moment seems to be the way in which less educated / more educated people vote, and yet this is getting relatively less coverage than the young / old divide.

    One of the biggest determiners of remain voting / labour voting seems be be a higher level of educational attainment whilst the reverse is true for leave / Cons.

    As young people are generally more highly educated these days, due to more of them studying to degree level than was the case 50-70 years ago for the declining baby boomer generation, could this also help explain why there is such a disparity between the political leanings of each generation.

    It seems unlikely that the increasing number of people going to university is going to reverse so that would suggest that this societal shift will continue to provide benefit to Labour and ultimately shift opinion more towards remainers / pro europeans as time moves on.

    So another referendum in 20 years on rejoining the EU might have a very different result, if that trend continues of older less educated leave voters dying off and more educated pro european voters taking their place.

    Personally I’d love to see some in depth research as to why more educated people across various generations are tending towards Labour than the Conservatives.

  42. One of the big dividing points in voting behaviour/political support at the moment seems to be the way in which less educated / more educated people vote, and yet this is getting relatively less coverage than the young / old divide.

    One of the biggest determiners of remain voting / labour voting seems be be a higher level of educational attainment whilst the reverse is true for leave / Cons.

    As young people are generally more highly educated these days, due to more of them studying to degree level than was the case 50-70 years ago for the declining baby boomer generation, could this also help explain why there is such a disparity between the political leanings of each generation.

    It seems unlikely that the increasing number of people going to university is going to reverse so that would suggest that this societal shift will continue to provide benefit to Labour and ultimately shift opinion more towards remainers / pro europeans as time moves on.

    So another referendum in 20 years on rejoining the EU might have a very different result, if that trend continues of older less educated leave voters dying off and more educated pro european voters taking their place.

    Personally I’d love to see some in depth research as to why more educated people across various generations are tending towards Labour than the Conservatives.

  43. People did vote to leave, by a small margin true, but it was a vote to leave.

    The next question is the form of that departure, there is no mandate, clear or otherwsise for that and it is part of the democratic process for people to have an input on it.

    Polls clearly show a softer, Norway style deal is getting a lot of support, it is reasonable for our politicians, on all sides to campaign for such a deal or against it, or anyother deal they prefer and for the press to report it.

    Some seem to think the Government should be given a blank cheque to decide what to do, as a democrat I could not support such a view. Robust political discussion and debate is imprtant and things as important as this should not just go through on the nod of the PM and a handful of Ministers.

  44. JO
    Democratic does not mean “one person one vote, once”.

    Quite so, and a good post generally.

    I wonder how many of those who agree with “one person one vote, once” agree that the result of the 1975 referendum should not be challenged.

    FWIW, like its 2015 successor, the Referendum Act 1975 was advisory.

  45. TOH

    Actually there is a nuanced difference . Keir Starmer opened it up . It revolves around the Customs Union.

    TM’s objective is a novel FTA to replace membership of the CU-thus allowing us to have FTAs with countries outside the CU.

    KS has said he would prefer to “negotiate” continued membership of the CU. I was surprised at this approach as it appears to forgo the right to independent FTAs with others.

    It is all covered in this BBC report-which indicates that a FTA might leave our exporters facing “rules of origin” compliance.

    Where the balance of advantage lies between TM’s approach & KS’s depends on what either of them actually managed to get from Barnier.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39706224

  46. @TOH

    Re: EU “it’s an organisation which is bound to fail and as it breaks up the likelyhood of war in Europe is high.”

    My, that really is a bleak view. I hadn’t realised you were quite that pessimistic about the EU. Your position makes more sense to me now – if I came at the issue from that viewpoint, I’d certainly also be a keen Brexiteer.

    I’m not trying to get at you, and none of us knows what the future holds, but for our own sake, and for the sake of all the other European nations, I really, really, really hope you are wrong about this.

  47. @ BBZ – the problem is we don’t really know what Corbyn wants from Brexit. Ignoring the rhetoric he wants the same as CON – respects the result and wants the best deal for UK. That’s the benefit of being in opposition – nobody really knows what you would do because you are not the ones that have to do it (LDEM played that game for years, as did SNP). As I’ve stated several times for Corbyn to enact his state interventionalist plans he will need to be well clear of ECJ jurisdiction (not possible in EEA which is why, with LAB govt likely, I’d be very happy to settle on EEA as a temporary step until we a more Centre party in power)

    Brexit is a poisoned chalice. Whoever negotiates will have to solve the NI chicken+egg issue, agree the divorce bill and solve the expat issue – all before negotiating a new trade deal. All we know for sure is that Corbyn will unilaterally forgo the expat issue (a clear win for EU). On that form you have to assume he’d be far more compliant on the divorce bill as well (that’s potentially 10years worth of free uni fees worth of money!!). NI is a nightmare whoever attempts to solve it, especially if the NI parties are being relied upon to support a UK govt (either CON or LAB unless we have a 2nd GE)

    EU have form on crucifying countries that fail to implement referendum results – see how that worked out for Greece. ECB demands are harsher than IMF because IMF know the ECB’s terms are too draconian and will destroy Greek’s economy in the long-run (but German creditors will be repaid). IMF have caved in for now and kicked the can down the road.
    Leaving the Euro is different to leaving the EU but the main players involved from the EU side are basically the same and I base my expectations on actions rather than words.

    We’ll see what happens. The next hurdle is next week’s QS votes. After that we’ll get the Repeal Bill. After that we’ll have to start unilaterally passing immigration bill, etc as the clock will be ticking down. At that point CON (assuming they have survived that far) might start to recover as voters see the impossible demands of EU.
    Deal or no deal, we will need to pass all the Brexit legislation in the QS by Mar’19 whoever is PM or have had a 2nd GE and 2nd Ref to determine we are going to attempt to back out and then start to negotiate to Return.

    I hope I’m wrong about both Corbyn and the EU and I hope you are right on both those counts. I half joke about free uni fees for my kids (2020-2027 would be perfect) and graduating into a recession being good for competition amongst graduates. I understand I am more fortunate than most in being geographically mobile (and my kids would be as well). I’m happy to pay appropriate level of taxes for public services. I would not stick around to pay higher taxes for a Socialist project I don’t believe in. Whether or not other businesses and higher rate tax payers feel differently we’ll have to wait and see. The last Socialist era (and medicine required to fix the mess) saw a significant brain/business drain from UK – we’ll wait and see if it’s different this time!

  48. VOR

    That’s a rather tired old point of view mainly put about by the left that they are somehow more intelligent than those on the right it just feeds into that sense of superiority some on the left feel towards those who disagree with them.
    Before we get to carried away by students falling at the feet of Corbyn style politics of the old left perhaps a better question would be how well would have Labour faired if they hadn’t offered the student vote a huge bribe in the form of scrapping tuition fees.

  49. COLIN

    Yes, thanks for reminding me what Starmer has said. I don’t know about you but I find it hard to know what labour actually stands for at times.

    Thanks for the reference.

    TRIGGUY

    I don’t wish there to be a war in Europe but as the EU breaks up acrimoniously which i expect, I think the risk is high. Personally I don’t actually care very much what happens in Europe as long as we are not in the EU. It’s difficult to put a time scale on it but I expevt the split in the next 30-50 years, perhaps much sooner. If the EU forces us into leaving without a deal then it could come sooner because the economic effects of that will be bad for us but also bad for the EU. It’s why Tusk said the other day that we could stay if we want to. Theyare desperate for us to stay. Just IMO of course.

  50. VOICE OF REASON
    You raise the same issues as those which I consider as underlying a trend, in which a growing demographic of more hgihly educated voters are strongly in favour of remaining in the EU and have a majority in support of Labour.
    This also mirrors the characteristics of the Labour Party in Parliament, and a view which would support not just remaining but doing so in order to reform the EU, while also supporting the elements of the EU – the Single Market, human rights, working rightys and freedom of movement, which have been central to the issue – but not, as you say, clearly brought out in discussion – or rather, discussed in colleges and in the TUs and buysiness, but not in public debate, and, if anything, obscured in the referendume debate.

1 2 3 4 10