There’s normally a somewhat quite period in terms of voting intention after an election. There’s just been an actual vote, newspapers have blown all their polling budget during the campaign and even pollsters have to have a holiday. Sample quotas and weights all have to be rejigged as well (that applies even when polls have got an election correct – most polls’ quotas or weights include voting at the previous election, so 2015 targets all need replacing with 2017 targets).

We’ve had two Survation polls earlier this month, both showing Labour leads. Yesterday’s Sunday Times also had a new Panelbase poll, their first since the general election, and also showed Labour ahead. Topline figures there are CON 41%(-3), LAB 46%(+5), LDEM 6%(-2), changes are from the actual election result (or at least, the Great British vote share at the general election – the vast majority of opinion polls cover Great Britain only, not Great Britain and Northern Ireland).

It’s an interesting rhetorical question to ponder how much of the shift in public opinion since the election is because of the general election result (Theresa May’s figures have dropped now she is the PM who called a snap election and lost her majority, Jeremy Corbyn’s have shot up now he is a leader who deprived the Tories of a majority when he’d been so widely written off), and how much is the continuation of trends that were already there in the general election campaign? In other words, if the election had been a week later, would the trend towards Labour have continued and would they have been the largest party (or the Tories less able to form a viable government?). We’ll never know for sure.


605 Responses to “Panelbase/Sunday Times – CON 41%, LAB 46%, LDEM 6%”

1 2 3 4 5 13
  1. PHILOTES

    Another rather odd post, are you upset about something?

    I ask you the same question I asked Chris Riley, who are you talking about? I cannot think of anybody who posts here, who fits that descrition.

  2. @TonyBTG

    How about the Unicons?

  3. BZ: “There is also little or nothing in the document to give UK expats any reason to stop worrying ….. It would potentially apply to my younger son, who lives and works in Norway and is married to a Norwegian citizen with a young daughter who currently has only Norwegian citizenship.”

    Unless Norwegian law has recently changed, it is one of the few countries that does not allow dual citizenship. So your daughter-in-law and grand-daughter could only acquire UK citizenship by renouncing their Norwegian citizenship.

    I wouldn’t presume to offer advice on the basis of zero knowledge of the personal circumstances involved. But as someone with lifelong knowledge of both countries and how well they look after their citizens, I know that if I were in your son’s place I’d be applying for Norwegian citizenship asap.

  4. PHILOTES

    I would suggest that if you want to make rather biased comments like that (I’m being deliberately polite) to people who post here I suggest you name them, otherwise it looks rather cowardly. As for politicians they get verbal abuse all the time so I don’t see the point of your comment.

    Certainly your comments do not apply to me. On Brexit one of my reasons for wanting to leave is so that we can trade without restraint with the whole World, so a very positive outward looking stance.

    As t being afraid of anything foreign, far from it as I have probably visited more countries than 95% of the people who post here.
    I guess you posted in anger because things are irritating you. We all have to suffer that.

    Anyway thanks for replying I notice the other person I challenged has not. I draw my own conclusions on that.

  5. Colin

    Poland is effectively in war with the Commission (well, there are proposals in Strasbourg of suspending both Poland and Hungary – it won’t happen), and they are dependent on the handouts (because not much more left to be corrupted away).

    They did try to go against the Commission, it’s true, on Tusk, but even their allied Hungary voted against them (since then the relationship improved as the Hungarian government lent 3000 Hungarian people to Poland to demonstrate against the liberal opposition in Warsaw (fully paid for from EU grant – travel cost and daily allowance). So, it’s OK now.

    The third illiberal democracy, Slovakia, is now fully aligned with Germany. Romania is essentially run by the German-French intelligence services, so that’s sorted. Bulgaria is a bit more tricky, but they also know what happened in Romania, so they will align.

    Croatia is too weak, so they will go with the majority. Slovenia will go with Germany.

    So we are back to Merkel (and maybe Macron).

  6. John B,

    Looking at a whole suite of polling evidence, I got the impression that Labour’s image as a whole was beginning to improve in Scotland over the election period, but was drowned out by the Tory surge there (tactical voting seemed to be mainly from Labour supporters voting Tory, whereas in 2015 it was in the other direction, which may have exaggerated the Tory surge, and meant that Labour didn’t feel much of the gains from elsewhere).

    I don’t know an awful lot about Scottish politics but I do remember seeing polls showing that, in Scotland, Corbyn’s approval shot up there much like the rest of the country, and even Kezia Dugdale’s net approval went positive (who I know little of, but the general impression I’ve been under is that she represents the reasons why so many Scottish voters deserted SLab in the first place) at a time when Sturgeon’s ratings were falling fast.

    Of course, from my perspective I can imagine it is quite easy for one to approve of Jeremy Corbyn, and not think twice about voting for the SNP, who bill themselves as an anti-austerity party. And I agree that Holyrood is a completely separate affair – Scots did, after all, elect an SNP government in Holyrood 2007 only to elect 41 Scottish Labour MPs at the 2010 election. If current trends persist, I would not be surprised if we returned to a similar situation come the next Westminster GE. That said I have a poor understanding of the politics of this on the ground – I’m purely looking at this from a polling perspective so you would know better than I. Scottish politics sounds fairly unpredictable.

  7. SOMERJOHN
    I know that if I were in your son’s place I’d be applying for Norwegian citizenship asap..

    Thanks for that. That’s his plan if the UK really is idiotic enough to turn its back on Europe. Currently his UK passport is occasionally useful but will be ditched if or when that stupidity occurs.

  8. Electoral Calculus has it’s ward-level mapped data up and party-colour coded now for anyone interested. It gives insight into local trends that aren’t necessarily obvious in the headline data. The sweep of Tory blue across Scottish rural areas, and Labour red back into the urban areas is most striking, as are changes to Lib Dem distribution in the south and south-west.

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/datamap.html

  9. Analyst. Good stuff and agreed. I sense that Dugdale is a hindrance to SLab but that this will be overcome by the popularity of Corbyn. My how he has turned things around.

    SLab have every chance of becoming the largest party at the time of the next General Election. They could pick up 20 seats or even more. It will make it that much easier to win an overall majority.

  10. PHILOTES

    That’s OK, we all get irritated at times.

    BZ

    Just to point an error in your last post. The UK is not turning it’s back on anything, it’s just trying to leave the EU. Most Brexiters want good realtions with Europe once we have left the EU. As for being idiotic, that just your opinion which of course you are entitled to.

  11. Nobody seems to have posted the official Con-DUP agreement, which goes much further than simple C&S.

    The official PDF is at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/621794/Confidence_and_Supply_Agreement_between_the_Conservative_Party_and_the_DUP.pdf

    Looks like they’re not expecting power sharing to resume.

  12. Also, not sure if this was already posted a week or two ago, but Electoral Calculus’ reviewed the boundary changes based on GE2017. The analysis suggests it would be worse for the Tories (-20) than Labour (-17).

    Personally I hope this helps consign their introduction to oblivion. I’ve never been comfortable with the idea of reducing the number of elected MPs while the number of unelected Lords continues to expand seemingly without end.

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/boundaries2018.html

  13. SSIMON

    That’s interesting. I suspect you are right given the Tories will not want to come out of any boundary review worse off.

  14. @ Mike Pearce

    I know several Tory MPs that are (and have always been) most decidedly unhappy with the proposed changes, and not just those slated to lose their seat.

    The idea that cutting 50 MPs was somehow going to improve politics or make it more affordable was facile at best, and counter-productive in many ways.

    I think it’s a policy the backbenchers will be happy to see the back of.

  15. BARBAZENZERO

    I am appaled by your last paragraph but this is not the place to argue it.

    As for HMG then I think you are clearly wrong. I have grave doubts about the attitude of the EU though but of course that is all just a matter of opinion.

    Anyway other things to do so goodnight all.

  16. SSIMON

    Yep and those backbenchers whose seats might vanish in any boundary review may vote against or abstain from any legislation following said boundary review. It appears to be a non starter.

  17. JOHN B

    just guessing-you would rather we stayed in the EU?

  18. SSIMON – it’s not really worse though – we are losing 1/13 of our seats. Under that projection of the new boundaries …

    The tories lose 6.3% of their seats
    Labour lose 6.5% of their seats

    So it really is better for the Tories.

    Note that they would only be 2 off a majority under the new boundaries.

  19. @ PHILOTES – as ToH points out most Brexiters want to INCREASE foreign trade free from the protectionist regime of the EU (where we pay to effectively be exploited). That requires a FULL Brexit without ECJ jurisdiction. Hard/Soft are silly terms. It’s either a deal (hopefully not too punishing) or we walk and renegotiate once we have left. All of our imports could be sourced elsewhere or made in the UK. Our exports could increase if future FTAs focussed on UK’s needs not the collective/protectionist needs of the chief players in the EU. Some business will suffer, the aggregate is a gain – the more notice businesses receive the better.

    As I have posted many times (including today), if we tightened up existing EU laws and allowed economics to do their work we would probably see immigration drop but market forces should determine immigration levels not ridiculous targets. Rights to UK benefits should require UK citizenship (or settled status acquired after a period of paying into the system) – the deal on offer is far more generous than Brits receive in other countries (I’ve worked around the globe). The EU expat deal should be fair and reciprocal. The EU would not want UK courts having jurisdiction in the EU.

    When in Rome abide by what the Romans do.

    For round numbers UK GDP is 2trn, a 100bn divorce bill would be 5% of GDP. I estimate the cost of walking away would be 2-3% spread over 2years before we could see trend growth 0.5% higher than within EU. The min “legal” we should pay is around 30bn so if we pay over 50bn then the deal starts to turn “bad”. If we wait until the last minute to walk then the hit to GDP would be bigger. The EU know this and will string us along. However, whatever the EU decide to do on their side we will need to pass an immigration bill before 2019 – unilaterally if required but unilaterally on fair and generous terms not diktat from Eurocrats.

  20. IMHO of course!!!

  21. BBZ

    @”That may be the case for some individuals, yourself included, but that is hardly the attitude of HMG.”

    Eh?

    I’ve just heard both TM & DD say -in HoC-that they want a “deep & special” relationship with EU.

    You have no basis on which to make that claim.

    …..unless of course the only thing which qualifies as “good relations” with EU for you is just doing what they ask-regardless of UK’s interests.

  22. @ Geoff

    I think it would leave Tories 3 short. But anyway, try telling those 20 Tory MPs that this arrangement is best for the party. Before GE2017 the Tories were in line to lose about half that number (10-15), and Labour up to 30 seats (13% of their total). The rationale for change (Labour’s unfair electoral advantage) has evaporated – at least on the basis of this review.

  23. @Trevor Warne

    In your analysis you seem to think there is a party called Scottish Conservatives to which the Scottish Conservative MPs belong. There isn’t; they are simply Conservative MPs who represent constituencies in Scotland. By way of comparison, the Scottish Green Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats are legally separate entities ( although the latter are party of a federal UK party).

  24. Nigel Dodds has just said in HoC ( with an almost straight face) that in the interests of full transparency DUP might release their correspondence with Labour Governments & the SNP.

    :-)

  25. Colin

    That certainly would not prevent Corbyn from going on the attack over this deal. He had nothing to do with any approach to the DUP in 2015 or 2015. It rather serves to highlight his authenticity even further.

  26. SSSimon
    Thanks for the link to Electoral Calculus ward-level data. Very interesting.

  27. ANTHONY WELLS
    ”Not yet. Obviously everyone (apart from MORI, who don’t use political weighting) will update their political weighting to 2017 rather than 2015. The question is what happens to turnout models that were previously turning small Tory leads into great big ones. My guess is that companies will drop them (as Roger says in his comment above, lots of polls would have been pretty accurate without them!), at least for the time being….”

    Thanks much appreciated

  28. Mike Pearce
    “It rather serves to highlight his authenticity even further.”

    Or his outsider status, depending on you POV. He seems to have been given a free pass by the media and even posters on here to disagree with any decision of previous Labour leaderships or even current party policy! I can’t think of a parallel.

  29. Pete B

    Agreed. It does give him considerable license but he must not overplay it. His apparent conversation with Eavis appeared rash. Similarly Labour supporters need not talk about landslide victories. The next election could still be five years away. They need to be patient and let events take care of themselves.

  30. @Trevor Warne [re EU expat deal] “IMHO the deal is as generous as we can be. It is absurd that after a generous grace period following Brexit that EU law can over ride UK law”

    Let’s get something straight here. As and when there is a negotiated settlement, the law itself will be defined. With any international contract agreement there is almost always a clause stipulating ‘Law’ and ‘Venue’. So on the question of an EU expat deal, there is no question of which ‘Law’ nor any question of an absurdity of EU law overriding UK law. The one and only applicable law will be set out by the Brexit deal. It is only the suggestion that on the question of expats there will be EU and British Law which is absurd. So the only question is as to ‘Venue’ for any resulting court cases.

    Of course, the UK Act which implements the Brexit deal may not reflect the deal itself faithfully – I respectfully suggest that the ECJ would be the appropriate venue to settle such a question.

    Now, at my house, Mrs Monochrome is an EU citizen. She arrived here under the jurisdiction of the ECJ and, given the snivelling and spiteful attitude of British politicians in using both her and our relationship together as Bargaining Chips, I for one, as one of the British Citizens most affected, would absolutely prefer to see the ECJ have jurisdiction over our situation.

    Besides which, the British Press have declared our own Judiciary to be ‘Enemies of the People’ and the Government did nothing to counter that very strong meme. So if the British Press and the British Government do not trust the British Judiciary, why should I, or Mrs Monochrome or indeed the EU trust them????

    Bombast aside, I think that the sane resolution to this might be for an aggrieved party to bring their case in the ECJ or the British courts according to their own preference.

  31. Could Mrs Monochrome apply to become a British subject?

  32. There is a comprehensive review of various topics connected with Brexit – one year on – here: http://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/sites/default/files/news/One-year-on.pdf

    I have not had time to think much about it. Some bits caught my eye. This conclusion stems from a MORI poll done before the new intake of Conservative MPs. It may be relevant.

    “The same survey found that a full quarter of Conservative MPs believed that it would not be honouring the referendum result if the UK ended up staying in the single market after the Brexit
    negotiations; just over a third said it would be impossible to say it was honouring the vote if the UK still paid into the EU budget. Almost 60% said that they would not see it as honouring the terms
    of the referendum if immigration from within the EU could not be controlled.”

    “While in Britain Brexit maps onto a set of issues relating to sovereignty, immigration and globalisation, Northern Ireland is grappling with an arguably bigger basket of thornier questions
    relating to the place and nature of the border, the related significant threat of civil disquiet, and the prospect of a referendum on a united Ireland. All of which would add further complexity to the UK constitutional mix.”

    “Taken together, the populations of the recently constituted city-region combined authorities are much larger than the total populations of the three devolved administrations, although
    these areas barely figure in current discussions….it may be that the UK’s cities and regions become more involved in the process.”

    “Best guess? Around €30 billion”

  33. The deal is a minimum 2 year one. Corbynistas’s will be seething but it’s politics. Anybody who goes on about moral high ground when it comes to coalition deals are hypocrites. They would love a lab SNP deal if it kept out the Tories. It’s politics, get over it. A happy richo.

  34. Rich

    I am sure you will therefore agree that Mrs May is therefore the biggest hypocrite of the lot given that it was she and indeed the right wing press who were constantly. warning of a Labour coalition of chaos.

    As for the two year bit. Well let’s wait and see. Events dear boy. Events.

  35. Pete B

    Unlike British people by birth naturalised foreigners have pledge the allegiance to the Monarch or any other person she appoints.

    That was enough for me not to seek British citizenship.

    It would be an interesting exercise if British people were forced to do this exercise (as a foreigner you can’t just do it by signing a piece of paper as it use to be). Quite a few people would be deprived of citizenship and declared stateless.

    In addition, you have to pass a citizenship test which is full of factual error – but you have to follow the handbook and not the fact. Interestingly, this (ignoring the facts is declared a British value on the first page of the test).

  36. Is this some sort of polling record – a winning party – or almost winning party – losing its lead only 3 weeks into the Parliament? I’m as curious as the times are out of joint!

  37. @ Rich

    “The deal is a minimum 2 year one. Corbynistas’s will be seething but it’s politics.”

    True. There were only ever two likely outcomes after the GE. The UniCom deal (like that name), or everything falls apart and there’s another GE. I think the deal, in some form or other, was always more likely. But whether the current situation last two years is still not so clear I think. It’s not just a matter of keeping this deal together, but also the rest of the Tory party. I imagine things are likely to get tricky at the end of 2018/start of 2019, as Brexit deadlines approach and some peoples lines are inevitably crossed.

    That’s not to say May (or some other leader) won’t be able to keep all the balls in the air, but it’s going to be a tough job.

  38. @Pete B

    LOL

    Why would we want to lock ourselves into the UK? Without wishing to flame an argument here [no, you trolled me into it …. LOL], we note a train of thought in the UK which lead to Brexit, which we consider delusional and we find the memes replicated here by some who are probably known as the usual suspects. We consider our prospects to be substantially better with Mrs Monochrome maintaining her EU citizenship.

  39. @Mike Pearce

    Yes. It’s extraordinary how quickly all of TM’s simplistic slogans have come back to bite her:

    Strong & Stable? Soon turned to Weak & Wobbly.

    The magic money tree? It financed the DUP deal.

    Coalition of chaos? It morphed into the coaltion of corruption.

    And brexit means brexit? That one’s still to be resolved. My money’s on Brexit means bedlam.

  40. It will be interesting how the DUP agreement plays out in the polls.

    The Tories have recently benefited from English nationalism in their VI. This is one factor in the brexit vote.

    In 2010 under Scottish PM Gordon Brown Labour performed poorly in England compared to the rest of the UK.
    In 2015 the Tories made gains with one of the main reasons being Nicola Sturgeon pulling Millibands strings.

    Now with the DUP pulling the strings and money being sent to NI this could have negative impact on core Tory vote areas.

  41. Somerjohn

    Indeed.

  42. @Laszlo

    Unlike British people by birth naturalised foreigners have pledge the allegiance to the Monarch or any other person she appoints.

    That was enough for me not to seek British citizenship.

    I smiled at this.

    I think if I answered all the questions as I really think I’d be locked in the tower for being a traitor.

  43. @AW

    Gone into moderation for no explicable reason….

  44. @TRIGGUY

    “I imagine things are likely to get tricky at the end of 2018/start of 2019…”
    ——————————–

    I doubt they’ll even make it to the beginning of 2018.

  45. Is the SNP credible when it claims that it’s unfair for NI to get extra money? Would it turn down a similar deal?

  46. @ PETE B – of course Mrs.Monochrome would acquire settled status (as clearly described in the UK offer) but why would any EU citizen apply for settled status (or British citizenship) if they can have their cake and eat it by being under the jurisdiction of two venues.

    Sadly some people actually believe the UK press run the country and/or freedom of the press should be banned!?!?

  47. Just catching up with today’s events good to see the deal with the DUP concluded caught a bit of the debate in HoC seemed a bit odd to hear the opposition going on about grubby deals when they would certainly have jumped into bed with the SNP just imagine that price tag and at least we can say the DUP want the union to survive.

    Just as an aside can anyone tell me why the Labour back benches look so glum I would think after the unexpected surge they just had and the apparently strong personal showing of there leader they would be as pleased as punch with Corbyn and McDonald in the driving seat what could possibly go wrong.

  48. @ John Murphy

    I’m more of the opinion that there’s been an underlying trend to Labour going on since early-May, and these last few polls are merely reflecting that. The relative stability of Tory VI throughout doesn’t really follow the typical pattern we’d expect of the (perceived) ‘loser’ falling away at the expense of the ‘winner’.

  49. @Trevor Warne “of course Mrs.Monochrome would acquire settled status (as clearly described in the UK offer) but why would any EU citizen apply for settled status (or British citizenship) if they can have their cake and eat it by being under the jurisdiction of two venues.”

    There is no cake and eat it for EU citizens on this issue. Assuming that the settled status proposal is accepted in negotiation, the Law will be the same regardless of Venue. If the EU citizen does not go for settled status, the EU citizen does not get the benefits of settled status regardless of Venue for resolving disputes over settled status.

    Why are Brits not only obsessed about trying to have cake and eat it but also about others doing the same when clearly the possibility does not arise.

1 2 3 4 5 13