Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor has topline figures of CON 40%(-1), LAB 44%(+2), LDEM 9%(nc), UKIP 2%(-1). Fieldwork was over the weekend and changes are from July.

Leader satisfaction ratings are May minus 17, Corbyn minus 3 and Cable minus 1. While Vince Cable has the least negative net rating, this is because he has far higher don’t knows than the other two leaders (39% compared to 10%) rather than any great surge of “pro-Vince” feeling. MORI also asked some more detailed questions about perceptions of the leaders’ qualities, underlining the collapse in perceptions of May’s and the rehabilitation of Jeremy Corbyn since last year. In September 2016 Theresa May had better ratings on almost everything (the sole exception was being marginally more likely to be seen as more style than substance). Now there are obvious areas where the two leaders outshine each other – May is still more likely to be seen as a capable leader, good in a crisis (though her leads are vastly reduced – in 2016 she beat Corbyn by 44 points on being a capable leader, now it’s only 7 points), but Corbyn now has strong leads on personality and honesty, and is much less likely to be seen as out of touch.

MORI also repeated their regular question comparing the popularity of leaders and their parties – do respondents like the leader and party, the leader but not their party, the party but not its leader, or neither of them? 46% of people said they liked Jeremy Corbyn (up 9 since last year), putting him eight points behind Labour on 54% (up 8) – that means both Corbyn and Labour have become more popular, but Corbyn continues to be less popular than his party. Compare this with the Conservatives: a year ago Theresa May vastly outshone her party, by 60% to 38%. That gap has now vanished – the Conservative party is still only liked by 38%, but Theresa May is now on the same figure, down by 22 points (At the risk of pointing out the obvious, note how much stronger the Labour brand remains than the Conservative party – while they may not vote for them, most people have a broadly positive perception of the Labour party, far more than can be said for the Tories). Full tabs are here

There was also a poll by Opinium at the weekend, which had movement in the opposition direction. Their topline figures were CON 41%(+1), LAB 41%(-2), LDEM 5%(-1), UKIP 5%(+1). Looking at the broader picture, the polls still appear to be clustered around a very small lead for the Labour party. Tabs for Opinium are here.


308 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 40, LAB 44, LDEM 9”

1 2 3 4 7
  1. Have political sketch writers and cartoonists ever had it so good? If I’ve got this right, Little Nell is going to stand in an empty hall somewhere warm and nice and deliver her gracious speech, dabbing her eyes with a freshly laundered hanky, pleading with the enemy to accept twice as much money as earlier suggested in return for being a member of the club while pretending not to be, oh and by the way, we would like to be excused from one of the club’s rules please as our press don’t like it. At the end three spade on work experience rise in tumultuous applause, and in the time it takes for the moustachioed villain in the beret to twirl his facial hair the sound of Charles Penrose fills the hall. You really couldn’t make it up.

  2. Spads, not spade, bit early for proof reading

  3. As long as we can keep having the cake it might not matter that we don’t get too keep it as well, at least for 2 years.

  4. And partially posted twice, whoops.

  5. R. Huckle

    We appear to be a supplicant to the court of the EU. We wait outside the throne room waiting to be allowed in to talk about trade. It is a mistake to think that they negotiate . They do not. They rule essentially by decree and that is happening here.We should take account of this and either:

    1. Offer about 60bn and stuff their mouths with gold. About 20 bn would be contingent liabilities in any event. Make it a grand gesture and conditional upon starting trade talks. Print the money if need be.;or

    2.Pay nothing and tell the EU that the situation will not change and they must decide what they want to do.Deal or no deal.

    3. Anywhere in between will not break the deadlock .We then either increase the offer in a humiliating way or we do not and we march inevitably to a brexit without a successor deal.

    If we are in a mess it is no wonder. Can you imagine going into a huge commercial negotiation with a team comprising people who do not want it anyway,being advised by people who have a ppe from Oxbridge with no commercial experience and who also do not want it to succeed.what a team!

  6. Jim Jam

    No cake yet to have. It is till to be baked or, if it is baked, it is hidden – possibly down the back of the sofa

  7. Locals

    Bit of a humiliating night for Labour. Lost 2… to the liberals!!

    AC take note- the vince bounce incarnate.

  8. EU (2)

    sorry. Our present position is like the western front in 1916. davis faces barnier in a stand off. Neither side can or will move.TM is told that she needs to break the deadlock and stalemate.
    Thus we embark on a political Gallipolli by TM. I fear the same result.

  9. @S Thomas

    He’s our next PM after all.

  10. Good morning all from a bright and sunny morning in the PSRL.

    @Sea Change

    re antiquity, I have been fascinated by Roman period since reading Gibbon at the age of 12 (I wasn’t a ‘normal child;-)). By the tine I was 14 I had read Caesar, Suetonius and Thucydides. When I was older and studying modern history I was always struck by the level of influence antiquity has had through the renaissance, englightenment and in to the modern day. Hegemonic theories relating to US dominance daw comparisons with the Imperial period and Luttwak drew a direct comparison between Roman v Parthia and US v USSR.

  11. Apologies for some misunderstandings:

    @ CMJ – I also applaud the Catalans, I meant the reaction from Madrid – I don’t think many people would expect Westminster would go that far. IMHO – the UK devolved system needs moving forward. 3 devolved nations of adding up to around 15% have quite a bit of rope but understandably want more. The 85% non-devolved nation should also have a stronger say it “devolved” powers. Devolution was an acceptable first step, next step IMHO should be federation of nations with some sort of Stability and Growth Pact (but much easier for countries to have full ability to Leave if they so wish and continue free trade with each other) – independence might leap frog the federation stage.

    @ OLDNAT – I should have put a :) in about the day job. The last GE looked like a “hold on” message to Sturgeon and one she has listened to. We might disagree about Westminster versus Madrid – I’ll admit it is hard for me to see Scottish Independence from a Scottish perspective. I agree she has the mandate – thank you for confirming it is a technical possibility as well. I’d much prefer UK to try out a federal system for a while first as Scotland and England have many areas where a federal system is mutually beneficial. If/when Scotland does become independent though I would expect separation to be relatively straight forward and part of the wait and see can be to copy the best bits of Brexit (none yet, but maybe later today!) and learn from the worst experiences. Start with agreeing free trade, free movement up front perhaps?

  12. Reading the exchange between Carfrew and TW the comment concerning the impact of the Oil Shock made me reflect on how since 1914 war has been probably the main factor driving our history. The Oil Shock occurred as a direct consequence of the Yom Kippur War, and the move by OPEC was particularly effective as it threatened to bring the US war machine in SE Asis to a grinding halt.

    Our own domestic history has been largely shaped by the two world wars, and our economic growth after WW11 owed much to the cold war (we were the largest recipient of Marshall aid) and the re-armament sparked by the Korean war which fuelled European and Japanese recoveries.

    More recently the wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan have had a tremendous effect on events both at home and abroad.

    One can make a strong argument that they key driving forces in the c19 or from 1815-was industrialisation, technological advance such as in transportation and the growth of ideas such as nationalism. You can make an equally strong case that the driving force of the period from 1914 today has been war!

  13. @ S Thomas

    The point is that A.50 is a rubbish process that was never designed to be used as it is. Lord Kerr who wrote it, is on record as saying that they never had in their minds a situation such as Brexit when A.50 was being written.

    David Davis/UK team and the EU team have not even scratched the surface in looking at the issues. A 2 year transition from March 2019 is very unlikely to be enough. I think originally TM wanted 3 years transition and then Boris objected, so a compromise was reached.

    Theresa May and the cabinet seem to be thinking that a Brexit deal will not be decided before March 2019 and therefore a 2 year transition of being out of the EU, but still paying in and complying with everything EU, is needed. But then what happens in 2021, when there is no deal on the longer term UK/EU relationship that is acceptable to all parties ?

    I think there is every chance this Tory minority Government will collapse. The DUP won’t continue to prop them up for very long, as Northern Irish issues are more important than Westminster politics. They will have seen what happened to the Lib Dems, where if you forget the people who supported you at elections, you will end up in weaker position. Given the cross border issues, i should imagine that DUP would become very unpopular if they voted with the Tories against Nothern Irelands interest. The £1 billion extra money has not yet gone through the official budget/parliamentary process.

    There needs to be a major rethink on Government strategy on Brexit and we will see later whether Theresa May helps the process or makes it more difficult.

  14. Swiss (EFTA) v Norway (EEA) for transition – small but important detail.

    So finally we might get some progress. One important difference between EFTA and EEA is “voluntary acceptance”.

    IMHO this has always been the important reason why we should pick Swiss (based) model and not Norway for transition.

    This was exhausted to death back in Spring-Summer 2016 but at the time the idea of a Swiss+ deal seemed to be popular.

    The + symbol representing our slightly higher “power” status (sorry Swiss, not being rude) and basically meant a few minor tweaks (able to agree free trade deals out of CET that would be enacted after transition, etc). Some lengthy ECJ issues as well but “voluntary” again a possible solution (also EFTA have own court so good half-way house given the urgency)

    EU want “off the shelf” (100% photocopy), we’re asking for bespoke but that would be 90%ish “off the shelf” (Swiss++) but should compromise on Swiss/Swiss+ (I hope 95%-99% Swiss model)

    Who knows after transition. If EFTA is strengthened and can loosen the ties to EU a little further maybe not the worst place to end up. IMHO the important thing is not to settle on that final state now otherwise EFTA will not have the will to strengthen its own mandate and loosen ties. I think we should have a crack at the World solo but EFTA has no political-imperial ambition (we helped form it!!) so if it makes sense to team up a little in a few areas then why not. Pretty sure the Germans/Dutch/Swedes/etc will be happy if EFTA light the way and they can then photocopy our future FTAs – with tweaks of course :)

    Ireland?? My money is on them moving to EFTA in due course 2025ish, but that is another story…

  15. CHRIS RILEY
    “ I can’t bear him for reasons that are too dull to go into here (but which pre-date his emergence as a national figure) , and I have never been shy about it.”
    That’s something we can agree about, which makes a pleasant change.

  16. Trevor Warne,

    “Ireland?? My money is on them moving to EFTA in due course 2025ish, but that is another story…”

    Yes… a “fairy” one.

    Pro Brexit posters are forever posting their fantasies about Ireland returning to the fold in some way.

    In the decades before joining the EU the UK accounted for about 3/4 of Irish imports and exports and if was happy to be Independent, now it’s only 1/4!

    Another case of how we would like the world to be rather than how it is.

    Probably why so many Leave supporters like to talk in general terms about the great future the think awaits us rather than the details of problems we currently face.

    Or how well we will do is there for all to see but discussion of it going badly is just “Speculation!”

    Peter.

  17. @ REDRICH – that is quite a stretch. Certainly some economies have done “well” out of war – typically by staying out of them directly but supplying one/both sides (e.g. Switzerland in Europe, Japan in Korea War (pt1), various Asia in Vietnam, US in M.East/N.Africa under Obama)

    I really hope that is not the way forward. Cold War MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) kept the peace in Europe but saw proxy wars between low-tech communists and high-tech capitalists in China, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan (Russia then US), Middle East, etc (which the capitalists either drew or lost on the battlefield but either drew or lost in the aftermath). [switch from communist to fundamentalist from 1990]

    Since the fall of communism (1990ish) the driving forces have been free trade, globalisation, technology (internet, etc) – not wars (IMHO) and in general terms the whole World has benefitted from the end of large scale wars.

    However, the arms race in Greater Asia (not just Korea, but China, India, M.East) is concerning that we get dragged back to an era that I had hoped was consigned to history books.

  18. @ PETER – As I said Ireland was another story, one for 2025ish – 8ish years away before chapter1, although maybe sooner if they start by finishing off chapter 11 (started in 2008 but IMF stepped in).

    – EU are pushing for common tax rules which crushes Ireland’s economic model
    – EU (alone or pushed by NATO) will want defence commitments/budgets raised (something Ireland will only want to go so far with)
    – In the next budget rounds Ireland will almost certainly become a net payer

    The only unknown is the success (or not) of Brexit. We’re doing a fine job dissuading others at the moment but we are in the darkest hour of the process.

    Ireland is a democracy so it’s up to them. They have benefitted enormously from being inside EU (but able to play the Singapore tax haven role) and hence why EU approval is so high in their country – currently!

  19. @ Redrich “When I was older and studying modern history I was always struck by the level of influence antiquity has had through the renaissance, englightenment and in to the modern day. ”

    Enlightenment is good. I like the poet Horace.
    (From Oxford Dictionary of quotations:

    “Mountains will go into labour and a silly little mouse will be born.”

    “Someone who loves the golden mean.”

    Finally this – never quite sure what it means though. “Not everyone is lucky enough to get to Corinth.”

  20. Peter Cairns SNP

    “Probably why so many Leave supporters like to talk in general terms about the great future the think awaits us rather than the details of problems we currently face.”

    Being optimistic we do just that.

    “Or how well we will do is there for all to see but discussion of it going badly is just “Speculation!”

    It is indeed just speculation as I don’t “see”. what you apparently see.

    We appear to be in agreement about Leavers approach. Happy to discuss whether or not I am right or wrong in my optimism in 2030 when we have some facts on the UK’s performance post Brexit. Looking forward to the discussion.

  21. That polling data is indicating that the Labour party’s popularity is greater than that of Corbyn does to a certain extent underline the fragility of the current level of Labour’s support.

    Broadly speaking there are two possible explanations for Lab’s relative success as the last election – the perfect storm or fundamental shift in the electorate’s views that favours the left. The later view is in part based on the assumption that Corbyn personifies this change.

    The ‘perfect storm’ assessment is based more on the v that a mixture of factors – remain protest vote, youth discontent, Corbyn appeal to a certain sector of the electorate, incompetent Tory campaign etc incrementally built up Lab’s support and these factors are continuing to operate.

    Despite people such as wishing that we are seeing a fundamental shift, I think the perfect storm view has more evidence to support it. This poses serious challenges for Labour as if any of the factors disappear (Corbyn, Remain protest) a slim Lab lead can turn into a Tory lead of 3-4%.

  22. On 30 March 2019 Brexit will apply. If there is to be a transition period surely there will have to be a new treaty with all 27 agreeing.? Does that mean a referendum in Ireland?

    The UK has not yet asked for a transition period and it is always possible that it will not do so

    http://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/oxford-and-brexit/brexit-analysis/transitional-brexit

  23. R HUCKLE

    @”As i see it, the EU will want the UK to pay for single market/customs area access”

    If there are any payments for “access” to the SM they will be called Tarriffs -and be paid by UK exporters & their customers-not by the UK Government.

    The Government of the USA doesn’t pay for “access” to the EU market.

  24. @TW ‘that is quite a stretch’. Maybe so, but the initial impetus to both the European and Japanese recoveries and economic expansion in the 40’s and 50’s was the Korean war and re-armament.

    ‘Since the fall of communism (1990ish) the driving forces have been free trade, globalisation, technology (internet, etc)’ – one can make a case that the emergence of this model from 1945 was as a consequence of US victory in WW11 and the Cold War, and that its possible demise due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (Imperial overstretch).

    Even in the case of arguably the most significant change since 1914, female emancipation (in the developed world at least), it is hard to discount the role of WWI, WWII and Vietnam War as acting as a significant catalyst to this change.

    Personally I think like Roman citizens under the Pax Romana, citizens in countries such as the UK have been largely insulated from the direct experience of war since 1945, but it has had a major impact on the history of the age. Interestingly the period is relatively unusual for Britain in terms of the size and regularity of deployment of the standing army.

    Like you I hope the future is not dominated by war (I have two young sons).

  25. @alister1948

    “Not everyone is lucky enough to get to Corinth.”

    Yes especially in light of the fact that the Romans destroyed it in 146BC.

  26. JOSEPH1832 @ ST HOMAS

    one poll in the Independent is shouting about a statistically insignificant shift to 52-48 for Remain

    Whilst the actual 48-52 result of the referendum was a resounding vote for the hardest possible brexit?

    Yet Scottish devolution was thwarted for nearly 2 decades despite winning the 1979 referendum by 52-48 [serendipitous?] thanks to the 40% of the electorate [AKA votes for the dead] rule imposed by Callaghan’s “bastards” and espoused by the Cons.

    A.50 provision created a legal basis to just not negotiate

    Surely we can assume that the leave campaign read A50 before they set out their stall in the EU referendum campaign. It’s less than half a page of A4 in total, with the bit you seem to take umbrage at being just 2 sentences long:

    A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.

  27. @COLIN
    “R HUCKLE
    @”As i see it, the EU will want the UK to pay for single market/customs area access”
    If there are any payments for “access” to the SM they will be called Tarriffs -and be paid by UK exporters & their customers-not by the UK Government.
    The Government of the USA doesn’t pay for “access” to the EU market.
    September 22nd, 2017 at 9:33 am”

    USA and UK are very different. Given large number of goods/people transits between UK and EU 365 days of the year, you don’t want a border requiring adminstrative processes taking place. You need a border like it operates now, where people and companies are not hindered in doing business across EU/UK.

    It is much more efficient for Government and business for UK Government to pay the EU £10 billion a year for tariff free access. It would be silly to go down the route of WTO tariffs and proper customs borders. The potential loss of revenues and increased costs for Goverment as well as business, would probably cost much more than £10 billion a year.

    Try to forget the EU politics that has damaged the Tories for far too long. Just think of what is practical.

  28. @Redrich

    “Not everyone is lucky enough to get to Corinth.”

    Yes especially in light of the fact that the Romans destroyed it in 146BC.

    Ha-ha, yes that would make it difficult. Re-built 44 BC
    I gather. Waiting for listed building consent maybe?

  29. @ R HUCKLE – the journey from ‘practical’ to ‘fair’ will be the purpose of the transition deal, it has logistical issues as well as financial.

    The dispute within CON is about how quickly this transition should be and the price tag for it. 2-3yrs and Xbn per year. The logistical issues are often ignored but IMHO will be a roadmap with milestones allowing some flexibility in the implementation of the phased transition.

    No time for a diatribe on the protectionism and exploitation of the current UK-EU deal. It has been unfair to pay for so many years already than a few more are not a biggy (although they might be for the right press and likes of BoJo, Farage). As long as we stop paying at some point I think the majority of Brexiters will be satisfied (not all happy, but generally unwilling to reboot UKIP and push for something faster and cleaner)

  30. @alister1948

    If I remember correctly the re-built Corinth was the provincial capital – so they must have had sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health. ;-)

  31. @Redrich

    But apart from that, what did the Romans ever do for them?

  32. @Robin

    Peace!

  33. A few spare minutes so quick scenario analysis on

    “How LAB can win next GE – part2 (post Mar’19”

    LAB side
    – new leader? RACHEL thinks it would help as Corbyn has baggage. Hard to tell from poll data. CON VI probably does have a very anti-Corbyn element (IRA, Queen, Nukes, etc). No idea how you’d even start trying to fathom the +/- VI move on that. The lead to this thread does suggest a new leader might help. (maybe +2 on VI?)
    – do something with Scotland (still no idea what – hoping some LAB can tell me), up to 18 “left” seats that they could take from SNP but no idea how.
    – don’t be seen to be going too far to the left, keep McDonnell away from strikes (or better yet replace McDonnell as IMHO he has more baggage than Corbyn) (avoid losing any VI from moderates)
    – offer to make whatever transition deal we have a possible permanent future with as much ambiguity as possible (ie keep most Hard Core Remain)
    – keep pushing hard on anti-austerity and be careful about breaking too many promised on Uni fees, welfare, etc (nice work quietly dropping a lot of that over the Summer) (again more about keeping VI but maybe a +2)

    Much will depend on other factors though:
    – CON sticking with austerity (-2 or more for CON)
    – Brexit success (or not) (+/-5)
    – whether Brexit negotiations leave some room for ambiguity on Remain/Leave (no LAB -ve churn)
    – whether LD can offer anything whatsover for Remain or whether tactical ABC vote is strong/stronger (as above)
    – SNP doing something daft? (still no idea how LAB can keep anything other than Edinburgh South no matter when next GE is)

    not to mention the far bigger risks our economy faces from either a global shock or a domestic crisis which will obviously punish CON VI (-5 for CON)

    Clearly at say 45-50 seats SNP (guessing they take 3 from CON) would lower the threshold to kick CON out but LAB with SNP C+S needs a much longer discussion – one for another day.

    There you go RMJ, did it for you (again)

  34. @ Trevor Warne

    Whether the UK stops paying the EU for tariff free access to the EU market might depend on trade deals in general. At the moment i don’t think the EU allows free access to the EU single market/customs area, from countries outside the EU.

    If the EU refuses tariff free access as part of a trade deal, then UK will be subject to WTO terms. Very bad news for some sectors of the UK economy, so unlikely a UK Government would have support for this.

    Logically, if the UK wants hassle free, tariff free access to the EU, then it will have to pay in an annual fee. The UK will also have to comply with EU rules.

    At some point most leave supporters will accept that they have to compromise over a long period, until the EU changes its stance on free trade deals.

    The UK in trying to obtain trade deals around the world, are going to have to accept terms that they might ideally not want. In a two way process, the UK market will also be opened up further to competition.

  35. BRITAIN ELECTS

    Labour lose two council seats to LibDems. In Chesterfield CON voters defected en-mass to the LibDem, and in Oadby the Labour %age vote actually went up, but lost a seat in a multi-member ward.

    No need for Labour to panic quite yet.

  36. @ R HUCKLE – there would be a strong economic argument for the EU paying the UK to access our market (for goods). Services, despite the “pro free trade” EU, still have lots of visible (let alone invisible) barriers. It is probably fair for Norway to pay in (or Scotland for that matter) – but not UK. Goods and services are very different. We opened up goods (and it costs us manufacturing jobs in the 1980s, etc which we deservedly lost) and still locked in to >50% goods imports from EU (due to EU protectionism, Euro, etc)

    From Turkey to Canada to load of other nations, there are enormous range of options to access EU market.

    Even within the EU there are very different terms (e.g. Schengen, tax rate opt outs etc)

    I’m not sure if you are joking or really haven’t looked in Brexit options at all.

  37. can we open a book on which poster will be the first to refer to that bloke” Guy someoneorother” and his scathing remarks about the TM speech

    Incidentally i love the irish position in this: The future commercial relationship between the ROI and the UK is nothing to do with ireland but is entirely the responsibility of the UK and the EU.Says it all about sovereignty really.

  38. TOH,

    “Happy to discuss whether or not I am right or wrong in my optimism in 2030”

    So I am I…

    Don’t Post Again for 13year!!!!

    Peter.

  39. “Incidentally i love the irish position in this: The future commercial relationship between the ROI and the UK is nothing to do with ireland but is entirely the responsibility of the UK and the EU.”

    This, of course, not being the Irish position.

  40. RMJ?
    Trolling now are we Trev?

    One more time, your default is that even mildly good polling news for the reds gets demolished by you and becomes another reason why the blues are gonna win.

  41. @ Trevor Warne

    Not joking at all. All the issues raised are very complex. Agree that if the EU applies a fee for tariff free access, then this will have to take into account EU access to UK market.

    I just think that the UK will always have to pay an access fee to the EU, until the EU changes it way of operating. It is a protectionist market place and any country wanting trade has to negotiate a very complicated deal, covering all the different requirements. If you don’t pay an access fee, then there will be tariffs and restrictions.

  42. @ R HUCKLE – OK, I think we agree. Yes, due to the relative “power” of the UK v EU (and given that we initiated the divorce) we will probably have to pay in order to get a deal. This is where CON have been since Lancaster House speech.

    Lots of negotiating room between 0 and current amount and a fair bit of wiggle on for how long and in return for what bespoke tweaks to an off-the shelf model.

    It is the overall package that will matter, which is why it is so difficult to get meaningful polling info and you end up with a simple response question for parliament in due course – take the deal or don’t take the deal (which I think we’ve established would almost certainly result in no deal and a cliff-edge or a very risky attempt to stay in). I expect very passionate debate will continue but as we start to get some clarity then the “deal” option starts to become the known outcome and (I hope) sees the backlog of investment free up (I think we have anywhere from 1-2% of GDP stored up ready to be released once some clarity on transition is made clear).

    Then the issue is 4.3% unemployment! Should be good for wages but (I hope) also gives CON the get-out-of-jail free card on the crazy 10,000s immigration target.

    The risk for CON is seeing UKIP back from the dead (free bone for the RJW !)

  43. And if anyone thinks the transfers from Rich to Poor are bad in the EU, compare it with the US.

    http://voxeu.org/sites/default/files/image/FromMay2014/dapicefig4.png

    Peter.

  44. An interesting comment from the new Tory MP for Angus regarding voting in the EU Referendum:

    “It was very difficult because you get two arguments very strong on both sides.

    I just ultimately couldn’t make that decision and I thought I would therefore go with the will of the UK which if I’m honest I thought we would remain.

    But I left that to everyone else.”

  45. R Huckle: All the issues raised are very complex. Agree that if the EU applies a fee for tariff free access, then this will have to take into account EU access to UK market.

    I think there is a bit of conflation of terminology here.

    AIUI, tariff free access would not incur payment into the EU, it would be achieved by a trade deal, but would require a hard border with customs inspections in order to ensure compliance of goods crossing that border. [With consequent lorry parks on the motorway approaching Dover and indirectly payment to the EU for customs clearance fees].

    What would incur payment into the EU would be participation in the SM, where goods within the UK would be deemed compliant for export to the EU

  46. @ R HUCKLE (PS)

    Polls in a week or so (once the highly expected slamming from the right press and EU bods has happened) will be interesting.

    Pollsters should be able to ask slightly more meaningful questions (e.g. UK has agreed 20bn for a 2year transition – do you think that is acceptable – Yes/No and hopefully drill down on the No side)

    I clearly have a partisan bias for CON so I’m most worried about the deal being seen as a total cave in from the most Brexit % of population (and CON MPs). This could viciously reopen CON civil war which going into conference could spill into leadership contest, etc.

    Some might enjoy CON ripping themselves apart but the Brexit clock is ticking and we don’t have time to mess around (IMHO save new leader for Autumn 2019!)

  47. “BRITAIN ELECTS

    Labour lose two council seats to LibDems. In Chesterfield CON voters defected en-mass to the LibDem, and in Oadby the Labour %age vote actually went up, but lost a seat in a multi-member ward.

    No need for Labour to panic quite yet.”

    I agree Labour do not need to “panic”, but they don’t look quite as invincible in local by-elections as they have since the GE up to now.
    And as a point of fact, more LAB than CON voters defected to LD in Chesterfield…

    Holmebrook (Chesterfield) result:

    LDEM: 50.0% (+21.5)
    LAB: 42.6% (-8.5)
    CON: 6.1% (-7.2)
    IND: 1.4% (+1.4)

    Read more: http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/10601/local-elections-september-21st-2017#ixzz4tPLuGxd3

  48. Sorry to go off topic but I thought this article was interesting and maybe gives a clue as to why Kezia Dugdale resigned.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/22/the-inside-story-of-labours-election-shock-jeremy-corbyn

  49. Meanwhile I will repeat my prediction (repeated more than once on here)

    Britain will end up in a transitional deal of full Single market membership (EEA/Norway, but plus the Customs Union). This will be renewed by both sides at least once before Britain exits that waiting room in the direction of EU membership.

    This is what will happen because it is almost certainly what the EU 27 would prefer, and also what the majority of MPs in the House of Commons, and the majority of Tory Party donors want. There may or may not be a referendum somewhere in the process…

    This transitional deal will come about at the 11th hour as negotiations fail to deliver anything else other than the cliff edge. I believe this is the reason for the slow pace of negotiations so far (on both sides). The real action will take place at the 11th hour as usual

  50. @ ANDREW111 – LE turnouts as as low as Unite’s leadership contest but thank you for sharing the details.

    Are we starting to see the start of ABL?

    Ideologically LDEM are far closer to CON than Momentum (sorry I mean LAB).

    Councils (and therefore LEs) have nothing to do with Brexit and in Chesterfield LDEMs had the best shot at defeating LAB.

    Without setting the trolls off again, this (IMHO) is something we’ll see in the next GE (assuming it is after Mar’19). If you have a GE model with a flexible tactical voting filter then this is very good news ;)

1 2 3 4 7