Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor for the Standard has topline figures of CON 41%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%. This is MORI’s first poll since the general election, and like other companies now shows Labour with a small lead over the Conservatives. Fieldwork was Friday to Tuesday. As far as I can tell, the methodology is back to MORI’s usual methods, as they were using before the election campaign. Full details are here.

To update on other voting intention polls earlier this week, ICM for the Guardian on Tuesday had voting intentions of CON 42%(+1), LAB 43%(nc), LDEM 7%(nc), UKIP 3%(nc). Fieldwork was over the weekend, and changes were from a fortnight ago. Full tabs for that are here.

Finally YouGov for the Times, which was released on Monday but conducted last week, had topline figures of CON 40%, LAB 45%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 2%. Tabs for that are here.


1,533 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 41, LAB 42, LD 9, UKIP 3”

1 2 3 31
  1. Anthony can you help, opened the kichin door this morning and there are over 10 shrews all running around in there, I would never wish to hurt a shrew but what am I to do about this??

  2. Despite everyone going “What we need is more new polls to stop all this EU speculation”, it’s notable when the have come along they’ve be more or less ignored (look how little ICM was discussed). Now we’ve got another one from Ipsos-MORI – full VI:

    Con 41%

    Lab 42%

    Lib Dem 9%

    SNP/PC 3%

    Green 2%

    UKIP 3%

    Other 1%

    It’s the first MORI since the election, so no meaningful changes.

    As you can tell the main headline on this one is about May’s rapidly falling ratings, especially in the coverage by the Evening Standard (Ed G Osborne):

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-scores-higher-than-theresa-may-for-the-first-time-in-approval-ratings-poll-a3592111.html

    Now children why do you think that might be?

  3. I just wonder how much of Labours gain since before the election is down to hopeful remainers. Vote Labour and make Brexit more difficult.

    Whilst Labours current position is pragmatic Brexit, the majority of MP’s and Labour party members are against Brexit. I think polling suggests that two thirds of people who vote Labour are against Brexit.

    If Labour keep hold of the remain voters, then the Tories might not be willing to risk an election any time soon.

  4. Surely the only useful polling company is Survation?

    They at least called the exit poll correctly.

  5. Evening standard

    It might have run the headline that TM is still the preferred PM.

    I depends whether she sacked you or not i suppose.

    I do feel that the narrative is changing. was it only a few weeks ago that predictions were that she would not last the weekend, then it was the start of the vacation ,then the conference, then christmas…

    who will lay money on her not being PM in 2019?she has the luxury of no -one plotting against her but them all plotting against each other and of every alternative being worse than herself. She should take strength from Corbyn’s survival and be reassured that despite it all she is the nations favourite prime minister.

  6. As this is a first post after seven years of intermittent lurking I assume it’s nailed on for automodding, so I’ll try to be relatively timeless.

    If we’re looking for a cause for Labours gain in support since the election was called I’m not sure the Brexit stance works for me.

    Labour’s position has been the “less Brexity” since the referendum and hasn’t really changed. It’s possible this created the recent surge in that it only gained traction in the weeks of the campaign. But that seems too co-incidental. I’d be more inclined to go for campaign-specific causes.

    I know our traditional received wisdom is that campaigns don’t change much, but this time something obviously did, and it coincided in time with the campaign, so I think a working presumption of causation is reasonable.

    We can say May failing to live up to probably unjustifiably high expectations and Corbyn failing to live down to probably unjustifiably low ones undoubtedly.

    And much has been made about the Conservative campaign.

    For me as a 50something who first voted in 1983 though, it wasn’t just its ineffectiveness. It was the way they just reran that election. I don’t mean they dusted off the playbook from what was the last time they faced a more left wing leader and updated it for the 21st century. I mean they dusted off the playbook and ran it again verbatim.

    When the Conservatives got onto concrete areas of Corbyn policy, consider the main points of attack: the nuclear deterrent, sympathies to Irish Republicanism, economic policies that would take us back to the 1970s. This was to that extent an election fought, like 1983, essentially on the grounds of the Cold War, the Troubles, and the record of the Callaghan government. Events done and dusted in the last century. No wonder it didn’t resonate much with the under 45s. I’m surprised this hasn’t had more comment.

    Finally, as this is a first post, thanks to Anthony for the site and to all who post here for seven years of education, information and infuriation.

  7. To be fair yougovs model was pretty accurate. MPR is the future.

  8. How common is it for the leader of the opposition to be seen as the best Prime Minister. I would have thought it was quite exceptional because actually being PM makes you look Prime ministerial.

  9. Polls very much stabilising around a 1-3 point Labour lead. Such a clear alignment like that is pretty rare actually.

    Apart from one thing: the figure for the LDs is higher (9 points) than any other poll post-election. Most have said 6-7; survation last week said 8. UKIP remain all over the place, from 2 to 6 points, even on the same pollster (looking at you, Survation).

    Considering that their polls seem to vary so wildly, and their sample sizes generally the smallest, it’s perhaps surprising that Survation keep getting it right. Arguably, their samples are no better than others (and may even be worse) but they merely had the correct assumptions at the time. Consider that the raw weighted data for all polls was fairly similar pre-election, mostly giving the Tories a 2-4 point lead.

    Now that most other pollsters are following similar assumptions regarding turnout etc., perhaps Survation is no longer any better than the others.

  10. s thomas: “She should …. be reassured that despite it all she is the nations favourite prime minister.”

    Out of a field of one, I’d say she is doing brilliantly.

  11. I would like to advance a controversial theory…….I think the polls are still underestimating the labour VI. My believe is that the labour vote at the last election was depressed because few believed that they could win. Now it has been established that labour with Corbyn can win the turnout for labour supporters will be higher. Also the youth vote I would expect to increase again, voting does matter and the media spin that “it was the bloody students wot won it” will increase their enthusiasm for voting.

  12. I still hae me doots about Corbyn becoming PM.

    It’s easy to see the current position as that of a newly elected government, which should therefore be very popular having just recently won an election.

    It actually is more akin to mid-second term, given that the GE was out of sync with the correct cycle and we have now had Tory led government for over seven years.

    Given May’s unpopularity and the enormous problems and criticism that the government faces I think parity [more or less] will be considered pretty good by them.

    Which means May could be more secure and therefore so will the government.

    The reason why, sensibly, I would not “predict” anything at ll, is that we are going through one of the oddest and most volatile periods I can recall, certainly in terms of domestic politics.

    Add in the EU situation and an unstable international outlook then there is little point in attempting to guess the future – much less predict it.

  13. monochrome october

    i am glad that got the joke.

  14. R Huckle,

    Re ” two thirds of people who vote Labour are against Brexit.”

    Can you show me the evidence for this, is it possible that votes against Brexit and being against Brexit is being conflated.

    Rachel – are not Corbyns ratings as doing a good job? i.e as LOO. best PM may be different, I would expect so and being behind an actual PM as best PM is not a problem if a modest margin.

  15. CAMBRIDGERACHEL

    How common is it for the leader of the opposition to be seen as the best Prime Minister. I would have thought it was quite exceptional because actually being PM makes you look Prime ministerial.

    One of the joys of the MORI polls is that they have such a long time series for their data (though the website is now a lot less useful as with most upgrades). The latest poll has this useful chart:

    https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/2017-07/pm-july-charts_0.pdf#page=16

    It shows Cameron just ahead of Brown in May 2010 (33-29) but that was just before he became PM and the ratings of both are quite low compared to current ratings which may distort things. Otherwise there does seem a built-in advantage.

  16. Oh the irony

    ‘Freedom of movement must end… but not for Brits’ – extraordinary, yet unsurprising, really https://t.co/n2Rh0DXuk6 https://t.co/o3pDtshIPs

    And the people most effected by the referendum couldn’t vote in it! Astonishing

  17. The DUP and Labour got chummy before the DUP/Tory deal. They continue to remain on cordial terms. it gives them both a little leverage.

    http://www.irishnews.com/opinion/columnists/2017/07/20/news/newton-emerson-there-are-signs-the-dup-and-labour-are-developing-closer-links-1087702/

    “The more trust there is between the DUP and Labour, the better placed they will be to pick at the Tory carcass. Pound is an interesting if minor figure in this regard – he has been a shadow Northern Ireland minister since 2010, and is not on the left of the party, so leaving him in place represents continuity from a Corbyn team that seems otherwise set on a purge.

    Owen Smith, the new shadow secretary of state, is an unmistakeable emissary of a wooing already under way. Smith was Corbyn’s only challenger for the Labour leadership last year. Sending him to Belfast might seem to be a punishment but in fact it is a signal that Corbyn’s personal views on Northern Ireland will not define his conduct and policy towards us. That signal is partly aimed at Britain, where Corbyn’s friendship with Sinn Féin is on balance considered a liability, but to the extent it is aimed at Northern Ireland it can only serve to reassure unionists.

    While the sincerity of this message may be questioned, it is undeniably being sent. Smith was tasked with unionist outreach over the Twelfth and endured eye-watering abuse on social media from Labour supporters in Britain after thanking the Orange Order for its hospitality. It will be interesting to see how his mission to the mad provincials is developed and promoted. Labour monstered the DUP to its supporters after the Tory deal but could seek to undo this as it aims to deal more with the DUP itself.”

  18. just checked the Mori link in case I was being numpty but actually the below was included re best PM.

    ”Theresa May as being more capable at the job of Prime Minister. Just under half (46%) pick Mrs May, against 38% for Mr Corbyn”

    Pretty normal I would say for actual PM to be above the LOO as per Roger’s link.

  19. “EU negotiators have told their British counterparts that British people living in an EU country would lose their guaranteed welfare, residence and other rights if they moved to another EU country.
    A senior EU source said there was a willingness to be flexible on this point during the negotiations, depending on the UK’s position in the next set of talks.
    Senior British sources called the proposal “unprecedented” as it would leave British expats with worse rights than those coming from outside the EU and it would be “interesting” to see what the public reaction would be to it.”

    BBC

    !!!

  20. Long time reader; first time poster! Without meaning to sound sycophantic, can I thank everyone on here for their contributions over the last few months. I have found these threads far more stimulating and far less partisan ( largely) than the media comment sections.
    One point I did want to make: many on here have suggested that May should feel bouyed by recent polling, especially in light of the election fallout, internal Brexit squabbling, Grenfell etc… However, is it not more indicative of just how polarising Corbyn is as Labour leader? The support for Cons can’t fall noticeably below the 40% mark as there is nowhere else for them to migrate to.

  21. COLIN

    I find it hard to understand the “senior British sources”. The first EU offer was very generous to ex-pats. Now they are just trying to find reciprocity. It would be very odd if EU citizens here lost all their EU rights, while our citizens there retained them. This is the ‘bargaining chip’ approach so espoused by Mrs May; down to the meanest deal possible.

  22. Colin
    I can’t honestly see why this should come as a surprise, it seems to be entirely in keeping with what the EU and those relying on an evidence based outlook have been saying all along.

  23. @CR,

    On Labour’s vote still being under-estimated, this is potentially possible. Note that in Ipsos Mori’s report, in terms of all people giving a preference to parties, Labour lead 43-38 (the lead was i think 3 points before the election).

    The ‘party preference’ is actually the way Mori used to do their headline voting intention years ago (probably pre-2001 when turnout dived). But as turnouts fell, they did so in a way that mainly damaged Labour. If Corbyn can continue to increase turnouts, it’ll be largely in his favour: not withstanding the fact that a number of tory-inclined voters didn’t show up in 2017, overall turnout is still much lower in the (Labour-inclined) young, meaning an overall increase in turnout will likely mean proportionately more young people voting.

  24. @CR,

    On Labour’s vote still being under-estimated, this is potentially possible. Note that in Ipsos Mori’s report, in terms of all people giving a preference to parties, Labour lead 43-38 (the lead was i think 3 points before the election).

    The ‘party preference’ is actually the way Mori used to do their headline voting intention years ago (probably pre-2001 when turnout dived). But as turnouts fell, they did so in a way that mainly damaged Labour. If Corbyn can continue to increase turnouts, it’ll be largely in his favour: not withstanding the fact that a number of tory-inclined voters didn’t show up in 2017, overall turnout is still much lower in the (Labour-inclined) young, meaning an overall increase in turnout will likely mean proportionately more young people voting.

  25. Colin

    It seems that the government were right to not take the Labour position to agree to full rights to EU citizens already resident in the UK with no negotiation regarding the rights of UK residents living in the EU if the EU really want to change Expats rights if they move from one EU country to another.
    I’m not sure what Labours brexit negotiating position would have been had they been the government but on this one rights of EU workers it definitely needs to be negotiated rather than just nodded through as proposed by the Labour leadership.

  26. Turk

    The EU are just reciprocating the deal we offered them on EU citizens. If we want more for our citizens in Europe then we need to offer more for EU citizens living here. Of course if British citizens want to retain FoM etc then there is an option available to them, apply for citizenship of their host countries. Of course that would mean giving up freedom of movement to live in the UK!

  27. TURK

    The same thought occurred to me when I read that.

  28. @TheExterminatingDalek

    Welcome to the next 18 months, which will mostly consist of Leavers being surprised by things they were repeatedly warned about but never paid any attention to,

  29. 2 wrongs don’t make a right

  30. THEEXTERMINATINGDALEK

    @”I can’t honestly see why this should come as a surprise,”

    I tend to agree. As Turk says, it just shows the naivety of that proposal to make a unilateral offer on EU Citizens , to a group of people who intend to bargain very hard indeed.

    I was interested in the Q&A which Barnier & Davies held. A BBC European journalist asked Barnier -since DD had conceded on some procedural matters, what was EU going to make concessions on & when.

    His answer-after the usual Barnier ramble-was that it “isn’t time yet” for concessions.

  31. Good Evening All, from a windy and colder Bournemouth East.
    It looks as though things are getting better for the Cons, with BREXIT talks going well, rising prospects for the economy and the Recess calming everyone down.

    I see the old problem persisting about LD figures being too high.

    Vince Cable sounds IMO, like the moderate Old Labour man he was before Tony Benn’s surge.

  32. The UK also “threatening” shouldn’t surprise anyone either.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/19/uk-threatens-to-return-radioactive-waste-to-eu-without-nuclear-deal?CMP=share_btn_tw

    Brexit department warns EU counterparts it will ‘return waste to its country of origin’ if an agreement on nuclear cooperation cannot be reached

    In 2010, the BBC reported that as well as sending high level waste back to Japan “Over the next decade, high-level waste will also be returned to European countries.”

    So, unless the EU cedes to UK demands, the UK will do precisely what it is doing anyway!

  33. Hmmm……

    The “threats” on nuclear waste seem to have been issued already :-

    “Britain will be on the hook for large volumes of dangerous radioactive waste — some of it imported from the rest of Europe — under proposals by Brussels to transfer ownership of a range of nuclear materials to the UK after it leaves the EU.

    Almost 130 tonnes of plutonium stored at Sellafield in Cumbria is among the nuclear material that would formally shift to UK control, according to draft documents issued by Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator.

    All “special fissile material” — forms of uranium and plutonium used in nuclear fuels and some of the resulting waste — within the EU are technically owned by Euratom, the pan-European regulator of civilian nuclear activity.

    Mr Barnier’s provisional negotiating position calls for a Brexit agreement to “ensure, where appropriate, the transfer to the United Kingdom” ownership of “special fissile material” currently controlled by Euratom within the UK.

    Such an agreement would make the UK legally responsible not only for its own nuclear material but also reprocessed spent fuel imported over several decades from Germany, Sweden and elsewhere for recycling at Sellafield.

    “What was a joint European legacy now becomes a UK home brew, with potentially dire economic consequences for the UK given the sheer expense and weight of this radiological inventory,” said Paul Dorfman, honorary senior researcher at the Energy Institute at University College London.”

    FT
    4 May 2017.

    It is amusing to see the “usual suspects” leap at any chance to brand the UK side in these negotiations as totally unreasonable -and paint the EU side as a bunch of Fairy Godmothers.

  34. CHRISLANE

    Good evening to you.

    re “the Recess calming everyone down.”-I think TM will be hoping so !

  35. Might be better to stay in euratom?

  36. Might be better to stay in euratom?

  37. Colin: “It is amusing to see the “usual suspects” leap at any chance to brand the UK side in these negotiations as totally unreasonable”

    More a case of “Brexit produces loads of adverse consequences.” Who’d a thunk it, eh?

  38. Reading about who tries to overdo whom in the Brexit negotiations, and the glorious or doomed path after then, a bearded author’s discussion about the secret British diplomacy.

    http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon6/works/1857/russia/index.html

  39. Citizen rights

    We should not even be talking to then about the rights of EU citizens in the uk. it should be for the UK national government to decide. We have made our offer and our terms and should indicate to them that this is our final position and indicate we are content with reciprocity.
    On Eire how can anything be decided on trade before a trade agreement. It is illogical. There is no point in talking about a hard border if there is tariff free trading. People movement is another matter but that too will depend on what UK immigration proposals are to be.
    On the divorce bill it is up to the EU to explain what they owe to us :-)
    we should be charitable.

  40. Colin

    “It is amusing to see the “usual suspects” leap at any chance to brand the UK side in these negotiations as totally unreasonable -and paint the EU side as a bunch of Fairy Godmothers.”

    Indeed, but surely you are not surprised. Amusing is the word, although pathetic comes to mind as well for some.

    Did you see this report from the QA session re the EU demand that the ECJ should oversee the rights of EU citizens who remain in the UK:-

    “When asked by The Telegraph to name a single example of where a country submits to a foreign court, Mr Barnier flannelled wildly – but then pointed to arrangement of Norway which accepts EU law indirectly via the EFTA court.”

    It confirmed the totally unjustifiable nature of the EU stance. Fortunately it’s a UK red line that the ECJ will have no say in the UK after we leave. If the EU don’t move on this, we should spend the remaining time continuing to work on systems to cope with leaving without a deal as there won’t be one.

    As it happens though, reading between the lines I think the negotiations are going quite well. I think the EU now realise we are not going to roll over to ridiculous demands. I thought Barnier looked the more uncomfortable of the two at the News Conference. The pressure on the EU negotiators from inside the EU will ratchet up now, it started this week, there is more to come. It may or may not be effective, who knows.

    Have a good evening, other things to do this evening.

  41. @sthomas

    Regarding Ireland, you seem to have missed the fact that the UK Government wants to leave the Customs Union as well as the Single Market or possibly not understood the implications of that.

  42. Colin

    “the “usual suspects” leap at any chance to brand the UK side in these negotiations as totally unreasonable -and paint the EU side as a bunch of Fairy Godmothers”

    Not just an unnecessary bit of hyperbole from you – but also inaccurate.

    My point was that, despite the Grauniad’s portrayal of it as a threat, it doesn’t seem to be much of one – nor indeed does the EU’s provisional position (assuming the FT report is accurate [1] ).

    I think that I may have been the first person on this site to raise the question of leaving Euratom ( and got an angry reponse from a Brexiteer, saying that the EU couldn’t force us out of it!)

    I hadn’t known that, technically, the fissile material in the current EU is owned by Euratom – nor, I suspect, did the UK Government when it carelessly added “including Euratom” to the withdrawal letter.

    Rules may have changed since Sellafield became a publicly, rather than privately, owned facility but in BNFL days “all customers with BNFL have a clause in their contract to accept back their own waste, but no return date is specified. ” (BBC)

    I don’t suggest that the UK is being “unreasonable”, but that it’s Government is ill-prepared, ignorant of the technical details that it needs, and isn’t even clear on what it wants any deal with the EU to be – except in broad soundbite terms.

    [1] Actually, I don’t think it is accurate. The EU position paper sates “Ownership of all special fissile material1, which is currently with the Community by virtue of Article 86 of the Treaty, that is – present on United Kingdom territory on the date of withdrawal, and – the right of use and consumption of which pursuant to Article 87 of the Treaty is with the United Kingdom or with persons or undertakings established in the United Kingdom should be transferred to the United Kingdom or to any entity designated by common accord by the parties on the date of withdrawal. ”
    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/essential-principles-nuclear-materials-safeguard-equipment_en_0.pdf

    It’s a difficult technical question, and one that requires the UK to act within the rules of the IAEA – unless the Brexiteers want to withdraw from that as well?

  43. SThomas

    What is being discussed now with regard to the island of Ireland is the CTA and maintaining the degree of cross border co-operation set out in the GFA. The discussion of the effects of Brexit on trading comes when the trade deal talks start.

  44. @TOH

    I’m delighted to see your dyslexia appears to have disappeared. Your last, quite lengthy and linguistically complex post contained none of your usual unconventional grammar, punctuation and spelling. Have you discovered a new method for yourself, or some form of editing process, software- or human-based?

    I ask in all good faith as I know what a difficult and usually intractable condition dyslexia is.

  45. Eire

    And what exactly has the GFA got to do with the EU? Why is that not that a matter between the UK and Eire?
    i am surprised that Eire is not demanding a role in these negotiations. They are totally subservient to the EU. I cannot imagine France or Germany or poland for that matter allowing Barnier to negotiate fundamental matters for them.
    Still i bet Barnier rings Merkel every night. i dont think Dublin is on his speed dial list. Too humiliating for words.

  46. SThomas
    Colin

    You are simply wrong about EU citizens. It’s really fairly simple.

    The EU made a clear statement that they wished to continue to guarantee all the rights of EU citizens here and UK nationals abroad, as they existed before Brexit. This was unambiguous.

    The UK’s proposal, while not addressing the EU’s statement directly, by implication rejected this route, proposing instead a new ‘settled status’ for EU citizens here. This was not a unilateral offer but dependant on a Deal.

    Both sides I think would agree that reciprocity is essential. Poland, for example, would not agree to a deal in which UK citizens there retained all their EU rights, while Polish people here lost their rights, to be replaced by what many see as a ‘second class citizenship’. I really don’t see how Barnier could sell that one.

    What the EU now propose is what , in their view , is a fair reciprocation for UK citizens of what the UK wishes to do for EU citizens here: allowing them to continue living in their country of choice but with reduced rights.

    There are many deep problems around the future of ex-patriate EU citizens both here and there (as you probably know by now my wife is one of them) but the way you present this is twisting the facts to suit your viewpoint.

    For myself, I think that on this issue, both sides genuinely wish to find a solution, but it won’t be easy. The kind of jingoistic remarks you make and buy into won’t help

  47. eire 2

    The irish position is quite clear like the schelswig-Holstein issue.

    a. Upon Brexit unless an agreement to the contrary is made their will be tariff and customs borders between the UK (incl NI) and Eire for as long as it remains in the EU;
    b. It is for the UK and Eire to jointly approach the EU and invite the EU to modify that in the light of the special circumstances;
    c. it is bizarre for the EU to set the resolution of the irish issue as a condition precedent to the negotiation of a trade deal which may itself obviate the need for such a resolution.
    d. the trade deal needs logically to be done first. If on the present logic there is no satisfactory solution to the Irish Issue then there can be no trade deal whereas if there is a trade deal there might be no Irish issue,

  48. Patrickbrian

    But the EU approach fails to recognise that Brexit has happened. When we were in the EU the ECJ had jurisdiction , When we leave it does not. That change is called Brexit.it is us leaving the club. No nation can accept the principle that a select group of it citizens has different rights whether inferior or superior than others.

    If i go to live in spain i expect to live according to Spanish laws not still to be governed by English law
    I cannot see why EU citizens would be entitled to live by different laws to the rest of the population. Equality under the law seems a simple concept except,of course, if you are an EU negotiator.

    it is bizarre to be accused of nationalism for wanting all people to be treated equally in ones own country.

  49. @sthomas

    The EU position on Ireland was included at the Republic of Ireland’s request.

  50. The Brexit negotiations are bound to go well.

    We’ve got the master negotiator, the Brexit Bulldog.

    (Thank you Deadringers).

1 2 3 31