A round up of voting intention polls published during the week. We have had three polls with fieldwork conducted wholly after the announcement from Nigel Farage that the Brexit party would not stand in Conservative seats:

Panelbase (13th-14th) – CON 43%(+3), LAB 30%(nc), LDEM 15%(nc), BREX 5%(-3) – (tabs)
YouGov/Times/Sky (11th-12th) – CON 42%(+3), LAB 28%(+2), LDEM 15%(-2), BREX 4%(-6) – (tabs)
SavantaComRes/Telegraph (11th-12th) – CON 40%(+3), LAB 30%(+1), LDEM 16(-1), BREX 7%(-2) – (tabs)

The three companies have taken different methodological approaches to this. The YouGov survey offered respondents a list of the parties likely to stand in their constituency (so if a respondent lived in a Conservative seat, they were not able to pick the Brexit party). The Panelbase survey offered people the full list of parties, but also asked their second preference, and used the second preferences of those people who said they were going to vote for the Brexit party but lived in a seat where they are not actually going to stand. ComRes still allowed people to say Brexit party in seats where the Brexit party are not going to stand, but no longer included them in their main prompt when asking who people were going to vote for). I expect some of these approaches will be purely temporary, as going forward we will have the actual list of candidates in each seat and I expect many companies will move towards giving respondents only the relevant candidates for their own constituency.

Obviously all three show Brexit support falling sharply as fewer people are able to vote for them, and unsurprisingly this has favoured the Conservative party (though given any direct transfer to the Conservative party from the Brexit party standing down will be concentrated in seats the Conservatives already hold, so it won’t necessarily help them win any extra seats).

Since the weekend, but before the Farage announcement, we also had the following polls released.

ICM/Reuters (8th-11th) – CON 39%(+1), LAB 31%(nc), LDEM 15%(nc), BREX 8%(-1) (tabs)
Kantar (7th-11th) – CON 37%, LAB 27%, LDEM 17%, BREX 9% (tabs
ComRes/BritainElects (8th-10th) – CON 37%(+1), LAB 29%(nc), LDEM 17%(nc), BREX 9%(-2) (tabs)
Survation (6th-8th) – CON 35%(+1), LAB 29%(+3), LDEM 17%(-2), BREX 10%(-2) (tabs)

Note that Kantar made significant changes to their methodology for this poll, adding a squeeze question for don’t knows, and imputing voting intention for those who still said don’t know. This change reduced Conservative support by 4 points, and Labour support by 1 point, so the like-for-like changes from their previous poll in October would have been Conservatives up 2, Labour up 3.

A word about trying to discern trends in support. As regular readers will know, the different methodological approaches taken by pollsters mean there tend to be some consistent differences between their figures, one company may typically have higher figures for the Conservatives, one may have higher figures for Labour. These are known as “house effects”. Currently ICM, ComRes and Survation tend to show lower Conservative leads. Deltapoll, YouGov, Opinium are tending to show higher Conservative leads.

The way the publication schedule has panned out, the companies showing higher leads are tending to publish more at the weekend (because they are polling for the Observer, Sunday Times and Mail on Sunday) while the polls for the companies with smaller leads are tending to come out midweek (as they are polling for the Daily Telegraph and Reuters). What this means in practice is that you’re liable to get two or three polls in a row showing smaller leads mid-week, and two or three polls in a row showing bigger leads at the weekend. It doesn’t mean the lead is falling and rising, it’s just the different approaches taken by pollsters. The thing to look at is the trend from the same pollster – is the lead up or down compared to the last poll from the same pollster? Are other pollsters showing the same trend? If so, something is afoot. If not, it’s probably noise.

On that basis, the lead appears to be broadly steady – both Labour and the Conservatives are gaining support that the expense of the Liberal Democrats and the Brexit party.

With four weeks to go, the Conservatives maintain a solid lead. Of course it’s worth remembering that the Conservatives also had a solid lead at this point in the last election too – much of the narrowing in the Tory lead came after the manifestos were published. In theory at least, there is time for things to change – although that said 2017 was an extremely unusual campaign in terms of the amount of change in party support.

120 Responses to “Understanding the latest voting intention polls”

1 2 3
  1. First,

  2. :-) :~)

  3. Just for the first Rogue or Outlier Poll, to see the jumpers up and down appear.

  4. Looks like we might be in for a rollercoaster midweek/weekend poll nightmare for the next month….

    @Trevors – (FPT) – “@ EOTW – and finally.. please do check into CETA (Canada-EU) and just take a guess at how “reversing out” would be quicker and easier than starting from very different regulations.”

    As you’re reading my posts, not quite sure why you don’t stop pretending and have a chat about it directly? That would be nice.

    Your assertion here is fundamentally incorrect, and shows a lack of understanding about trade talks. ‘Reversing out’ (great description, btw) is far harder than moving towards alignment.

    The point you are missing is that when you wish to align, it is relatively easy to lay out your preferred end point at commencement of talks. We can agree, roughly speaking, how close we wish the arrangement to be, and then start to look at the details and how these fit with the overall objectives.

    With the reversing out plan, that’s actually much harder, because there is no clearly identified end point. We don’t know and haven’t defined the extent to which we wish to remain aligned, so there is nothing concrete to work towards. Once you factor in future changes on either side, you should be able to start to appreciate how awkward this could get.

    Under May’s deal, a negotiation would have been relatively straightforward, because we had already agreed dynamic alignment in many areas – in other words, the end point was established. By removing this, we have inserted a very large potential barrier in the talks. This thread is helpful – https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1194896373386219520

    Here is another perspective from a seasoned trade negotiator – https://twitter.com/AnnaJerzewska/status/1195242405043326976

    She says – “The problem is if you’re in a CU and even more so under an FTA how do you coordinate with the other side? Where do you complain when your traders are faced with NTBs. Sounds easy to fix, really isn’t in reality. Especially under an FTA…..Spent many years working with EU (UK) companies struggling to use existing FTAs due to NTBs. Can potentially also occur under the UK-EU FTA and much harder to coordinate and solve issues under an FTA. ”

    So with FTA starting from alignment, there are a vast range of issues that need to be sorted out. It really isn’t simple.

  5. Just completed latest YG poll

    As well as the usual range of political questions and constituency VI (with candidates named) there were 2 new Qs

    “How ‘Scottish’ are the parties?” and “If SNP v Con was likely to be close in this constituency and the others nowhere – who would you vote for?”

  6. Reading an interesting item on the WA that should unsettle Brexiters.

    George Peretz QC has identified an issue with Article 10 and Annex 5 of the Irish Protocol in the new agreement. This applies “the full panoply of EU State aid rules (the law; its application by the Commission and ECJ; enforceability in the UK courts) to *the United Kingdom* in perpetuity” in respect of any issue that affects trade between NI and the EU27.

    This means that any UK wide measure (eg selective assistance via tax breaks or grants for – say – the auto industry – is automatically subject to EU state aid and other regulatory approval mechanisms.

    Even if the assistance is to a GB company, it would be possible to take action in the UK courts, under EU law, against such a measure, if it violated anything under EU law.

    Not sure this is quite what people voted for?

  7. Alec
    In the current climate I bet that plenty of people who wouldn’t have approved that last issue will now approve it because a. Boris did it and b. like so many remain supporters Brexit fatigue has set in and they’ll basically accept black is white to ‘get it done’. Although we all know that it doesn’t get done for years and years.

  8. @ JSB – “I hope that he still finds a hedge to win his bets”

    Hedges are so last week. It’s all trees these days – real ones and imaginary ones ;)

    Tree of choice for Bennites of old (genuine Corbynites like McCluskey) would be the British Leylandii ;)

    I prefer the English Oak myself and I hope we plant 340+ of those in Westminster on 12Dec ;)

  9. Hopefully polling companies will find a common “solution” to the “pulled candidate” issue. IMO the YG approach is best (ie ask the postcode first and then only show the candidate list for the available option in that seat)

    If anyone wants to discuss the numeric “like-4-like” impact of Brexit pulling loads of candidates then see Electoral Calculus write-up and comments on last thread.

    Very roughly, IMO, we should expect to see BXP -4 and CON +3 (bit of rounding up elsewhere as I’m assuming some BXP move to WNV or at least much lower LTV).

    Hence, roughly, if SUM(CON+BXP) = 45 (it’s been very stable for ages)

    so if BEFORE the pulled candidates the split was:

    CON: 36
    BXP: 9
    (Sum: 45)

    then AFTER them (ceteris paribus) we’d see:

    CON: 39
    BXP: 5
    (Sum: 44)

    We’ve also seen LDEM losing some VI to the bigger two (net helping LAB narrow the gap) and obviously general MoE stuff, inter-company differences, etc.

    The important point to make though is that where as CON might have won an overall majority with say a 6% lead over LAB BEFORE then that will need to be a 9% lead NOW

    NB massive assumptions on a whole range of stuff – note I state ceteris paribus. IMO tactical voting, TV, (or not) will be the deciding factor.

    If CON lead is 7-11% ish then it’s going to be messy and very dependant on which side did the better job of uniting it’s sides vote and dividing the other side (and note Remain have a “starting” advantage due to SNP benefitting from split union vote in Scotland)

    Below 7% we’re probably into hung parliament anyway and I reckon another GE in Feb-Mar’20. Above 12% then CON should just about be safe even if we get a significant TV from Remain side.

    all to play for ;)


    Twitter feed of Britain Elects reporting a lot of tactical voting is last week’s local elections.

    The Survation poll results would produce a hung parliament.

  11. @ ALEC – The reason I skip your posts 99% of the time is coz you come out with stuff like

    “‘Reversing out’ (great description, btw) is far harder than moving towards alignment.”


    I’m not even going to attempt to ask why you think that but I do note you have zero evidence to back it up. Maybe we should ask how St.Barts did it?

    Look, I’m not predicting the future, I’ll let Varadkar do that, but we have time (6+6mths) to set the END point and the path to it. Hopefully we leaned how NOT to do it from May+Robbins and thankfully so far Boris+Frost seem to be much, much better.

    END point and path example: reversing out from full alignment, hopefully to “mutual recognition” (as per most trade deals rWorld and EU which is a LOT easier if you start with 100% mutual recognition anyway – WOW, luckily we do!) and hence keeping v.low NTBs = v.low additional friction (as some friction, paperwork, checks, etc already exists)

    I’ll waste 2mins of my time answering Anna’s daft questions as they show the kind of rubbish you seem to accept without even bovvering to consider now absurd it is.

    1/ “The problem is if you’re in a CU and even more so under an FTA how do you coordinate with the other side?”

    OK firstly WOW!! Err.. if UK is in CU with EU then we can’t coordinate with anyone – that is EC’s job and we do what Brussels dik-taks to us.

    We do still have some limited competency on some bits, eg customs (eg Le Touquet agreement) but if EU agree a bad deal with anyone (eg Japan or Mercosur that is “cars for XX” with XX never being UK’s priorities) then we have to take it – like it or not. We also have to adopt whatever red tape EU pen pushers force on us (that includes the SM bit for folks that are in SM but not CU)

    Now businesses can obviously “coordinate” across international supply chains and plenty of UK business some how manage to export to places in and outside of EU. Yeah, really!!

    I know lots of them that somehow manage to do that. Amazing I know, but businesses seem to be able to adapt to change and manage to seek out business opportunities. I wouldn’t trust McDonnell to be as good as it as the private sector though ;)

    The second bit seems to display total ignorance of the Real World.

    NAFTA recently got a ‘revamp’ and is now called USMCA. CP-TPP11 scaled back it’s original expectations in order to get 80%ish of it implemented but is working on next stage (and more participants).

    So how do you coordinate – you negotiate – something we can not do if we are in CU (which obviously includes full EU). Basic stuff.

    For loads of stuff then the ‘standards’ are global. Yet again, I’ll suggest folks check the tyres on their car. You’ll see something like:

    225/55 R17

    You’ll see that everywhere in the World (maybe not N.Korea – haven’t been there). Same for aircrafts components, etc. No need to “coordinate” or add any additional meaningful friction (beyond electronic collection of tariffs perhaps).

    Oh and for stuff like banking regulations then Basel is a place not a herb or a brussel’s sprout!

    2/ “Where do you complain when your traders are faced with NTBs”

    Seriously like WTF. Which planet does this person live on. So if we’re in EU then it’s ECJ. If the only arrangement is WTO then its… err WTO. If its bilateral then its… err bilateral. If it’s multilateral (eg EFTA, CP-TPP11) then its… errr the multilateral court (or commission).

    I’m not going to even attempt to get into the different “remedy” procedures or yet again restate that EU have been non-compliant with WTO for ages.

    What else does this “expert say”

    “Sounds easy to fix, really isn’t in reality”
    Again see Varadkar – difficult, not impossible. I’ve never said it was “easy” and I’m quite happy with the default. Businesses will adapt and what we urgently need is clarity and certainty about the END point (and most of detail on the path to reverse out to it). If it’s WTO from 1Jan’21 and we know that middle of next year great (that’s the 6+6mths bit). If we have an FTA then OK, not my 1st pref but better than CU.

    This bit gives it away her very limited experience context:

    ” (She has) Spent many years working with EU (UK) companies struggling to use existing FTAs due to NTBs.”

    So do you want to go check growth in UK exports to countries outside the EU?

    Amazingly some companies seem to have figured out how to do it. Not saying it’s easy but clearly it does happen – or do you think companies that say they export to S.Korea, Canada or the far larger economies where EU doesn’t have an FTA (eg US, China, etc) are “fake news”?

    Seriously, try descending to Earth from Planet Remain and see how the Real World works

    Ok that was more than 2mins. Final word to you. Back to scrolling past from me.

  12. Reposted from the last thread as I realised after I posted it, that it was a dead thread, and who ever goes back to old threads?

    I suppose it depends on your definition of full fast broadband. I agree that it should be available to all who want it but 10mbps I would suggest is enough for most. It isn’t necessary for everyone to have 60, 100 or even faster.
    When we lived in France we had satellite internet at 20mbps, it cost a little bit more but not prohibitive, that same system is available in the uk as an option for remote locations where it is not cost effective to lay cable, which as @Colin referred to, will be old hat in 5 years.
    Someone also mentioned 4G LTE in Norway, well that’s the way the French are now going and what I switched to about 2 years ago as for 20 euros pm I could have a SIM card with 100gb of data pm for the router, for 20 euros pm. I put an aerial on my roof in France and picked up a 16mbps speed from a town 4kms away as the crow flies. My neighbour half a mile away, who was better placed at the top of the hill got a stronger signal and 60mbps speed.
    So wireless is the way it will go and a sensible offer from a government would be an equipment and extra monthly cost subsidy, for those who cannot get a reasonable speed, say 8mbps, conventionally, rather than waste billions nationalising commercial businesses.

  13. @Trevor – “I’m not even going to attempt to ask why you think that but I do note you have zero evidence to back it up. ”

    Thanks for the response. I think basically you’ve just repeated what you have always said. In terms of eividence, I linked to two genuine trade deal experts, who both take a completely counter viewpoint to you. From you previous posts, and your previous lack of understanding of issues like GATT 24, I’m content that you have no experience in trade deals, but you still manage to denigrate those who genuinely do.

    I tend towards listening to experts, and you haven’t in any way even attempted to engage with their points, let alone explain why they are wrong.

    Thanks for the polite response though. Much better.

  14. Actually, including Kantar’s old methodology numbers the seven poll average did move slightly over the week:
    I’d imagine this may have unwound in the last 48 Hours or so, but I‘m not so sure this really is the most volatile electorate anymore and wouldn’t be too surprised if things just potter along to polling day as they are. The public have seen and heard A LOT from the politicians over the years. They can’t have that much more to tell us – and labour can’t get the LibDem to back down so things look pretty frozen to me.

  15. @Steamdrivenandy – I think you are right – no one really cares about this stuff, in terms of the average voter, but the louder proponents of Brexit are in for a huge shock.

    For example, the @Trevors keep telling us that post Brexit we can use more liberal WTO rules to chuck ‘bungs’ at UK industry, and this is a cornerstone of the new ‘global Britain’ ideal.

    But that can’t happen. Johnson has signed all of that away. In effect, the WA ties the whole of the UK into all of the EU states aid rules, and ensures that the British courts would have to take full account of ECJ case law in any judgements in this area.

    There is a way out of this, but it is unpalatable. Basically, if Westminster passed different laws for GB and NI, that would work. Depending on the provisions of the final trade deal, we could launch industrial assistance measures that only covered GB and not NI, and this would not be actionable under EU states aid rules. However, this means two totally separate sets of rules within the UK, and would also mean NI was at a disadvantage within the UK market.

    I don’t think Brexiters really understand what they have agreed to.


    These are very good points, except for the wireless.

    Basically it is about the wavelength and frequency. To achieve the response rate that businesses want (to me this is what matters as individuals for their leisure can have the speed now, but if they are freelance, most don’t because the connections are not fast enough for queries to databases – Cisco had a paper on it a couple of years ago, but I can’t find it, sorry.

    Basically to have the response time with wireless would require the government to build transmission poles (connected by fibre optic) instead of trees (and would require roughly the same number.

    So, if we have fibre optic to every household, the homework and freelance work will expand exponentially. The lack of it is a constraint currently. If we don’t want it, don’t build it.

    As I wrote in the previous topic – I don’t know if Labour is aware of the implications to the labour market.

  17. Just read a thoughtful piece by David Herdson on PB re Johnson defying political gravity.
    The latest ‘satisfied with government’ rating he quotes is minus 55.
    Does anyone know what the lowest satisfaction rating for a winning government or opposition is at any previous GE?

  18. BMG poll for The Independent, 1506 polled between 12th & 15th Nov:

    Con 37
    Lab 29
    LD 16
    BP 9

    Article link below:


    My big concern is they say it’s a drop in the Tory lead from previously but the polling result is exactly the same as one they tweeted on Nov 11th with 1504 polled and carried out between the 5th and 8th Nov.

  19. I was just chatting abut the free broadband idea, and during the conversation it occurred to me that a much simpler and more momentous measure would be to provide free bus travel to all citizens.

    The system already exists with pensioners’ bus passes. Initially, they could be made available also to young people: up to 18, maybe? Then rolled out to 18-65 year olds with a fairly nominal fee attached: maybe £100pa? Then, when demand and supply had been balanced, made free to everyone.

    As well as leading to a surge in bus travel, and the viability of many more services, it would surely cut car use, pollution and carbon emissions significantly. It wouldn’t even require any nationalisation, at least initially.

    It’s not even as if it would be ridiculously expensive. The latest figures I could find are old (2011/12) when there were 12 million bus pass holders making 1.264bn journeys at a cost of £1.270bn. Rolling that out to another 48m people might cost around £5bn, which doesn’t sound a huge amount compared with some of the other sums being bandied about.

    Could this be one of Labour’s radical manifesto proposals? I reckon it would catch the public imagination in a big way, but perhaps broadband means more to young people than buses.

  20. Looks like a Brexiteer has posted more “fake news” on EC’s own website.


    To be clear. MRA’s do not exist – they are unicorns that take 10yrs+ to agree and are obviously much, much, much harder if you start from 100% alignment to begin with (aka 100% Mutual Recognition that was the Agreement we had as part of EU). I know that coz some Remainer told me on his tw!t feed.

    Also DO NOT read anything from WTO or WCO concerning trade facilitation – they don’t even exist – Brexiteers made them both up (and yes Basel is a herb – Brexiteers can’t even spell it correctly)

    It is only possible to trade with EU if you are part of the EU.

    The Earth is flat (it starts Romania and ends in Remania). If you hear anyone state countries exist outside of the EU and can trade with the EU then firstly tell then they are WRONG and then please report them to the Brussel’s Ministry of Truth for immediate “education”.

    :-) :-)

    anyway, good to see to some of the weekends polling sneaking out and make sure to adjust for the BXP pulled candidate issue and make sure to consider methodology changes (see 12:39pm and AW’s lead to this thread)

  21. @ BANTAMS – The Indy numbers seem to come from BMG’s last poll (5-8Nov)


    Either that or its a huge coincidence and they’ve forgotten they’ve already done one poll this month? ;)

    NB Any polling that shows BXP still on 7%+ is unlikely to be taking the “pulled candidates” into account. That doesn’t make it rubbish but it is important to consider apples v apples and as/when each company changes approach then ensure to make the “adjustment” (which IMO is roughly giving CON a 3% “boost” that will not generate any additional seats – it will offer a bit of protection in CON-LDEM marginals but that almost exactly nets with the upside of “Unite to Remain” pact that helps them in CON-LDEM marginals).

    NB2 The “Unite to Remain” pact won’t make much difference to polling %s. It will mean a very tiny drop in Green, PC and LDEM VI but we’re talking 0.2% kind of thing so it will disappear in the general polling noise and MoE

  22. Why is Johnson campaigning in Mansfield with Con so far ahead in the polls?



  23. @Trevors – now do stop being silly.

    Of course these types of agreements exist. The point is that we need to negotiate what’s in them. We know that we won’t get a Canada+ deal. More access for the UK means more alignment, and tougher requirements will be placed on the UK than were on Canada or Japan.

    These are the issues, and this is why the negotiations will be a great deal more complicated than you think.

    It’s the content, not the envelope.

  24. Good Evening all from a now dark Bournemouth East, following a run across three seats here with the Patrick Lane Dog.
    Twitter says that a Delta Constituency poll is coming out.
    Matt Singh has tweeted that this point tn 2017 GE had the Tories at their peak. Current lead is 10 points.

    In five months and one week time we will be finishing the London Marathon 2020 (40th anniversary) and stumbling past Westminster Palace,

  25. Some new opinion polling on it voting age:

    19% support votes at 16
    60% prefer status quo
    16% want to increase it back to 21


  26. and an old poll to show airlines might be next on McDonnell’s list:

    #11 internet providers
    #12 banks
    #13 airlines


    We won’t have to worry about banks as Corbyn is “going after them” so most of them will move abroad[1] and those that only want to serve UK customers can be mopped up with LAB’s National Investment Bank.

    [1] Hence the urgency for McDonnell to nationalise and collapse the airlines. If the banks can’t fly away then they’ll have to stay ;)

  27. @OldNat I also did that poll and the version of the question that you got as “If SNP v Con…”, I got as “If Lab v Con…” I felt a little disappointed by the question because I didn’t have to think about my answer. If I had been asked about, “If
    Lab v Lib Dem… …how would you vote?” I would have really had to give it thought and YouGov would have learnt a lot more about me. I really don’t know how I would vote in that situation. I am a Conservative on most policy issues, though I very much liked Rory Stewart’s approach to Brexit in the leadership election. If I thought that only the Lib Dems could defeat Labour in this seat, would I vote for them? I don’t know; if I was really convinced, I might. I don’t dislike the Liberal Democrats and I would really rather like another Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition because I felt that the 2010-15 government governed really well.

    What did you think of your question? Do you think that replacing one of the parties with another would have revealed more about your political views to YouGov than the actual question did?

  28. @Bantams

    Had to chuckle at one comment in that article (bereft of SNP, and 50 odd potential seats of data):

    “If Labour didn’t field candidates it would mean 54% will vote for LibDem/Green/Plaid/SNP.. easily beating Tories..” (typos corrected)

    Indeed. So beware any party claiming that their VI was ambushed by another, letting in their opponents.

  29. @Alec

    “It’s the content, not the envelope.”

    As with dogs and small children, some ignore the present within and play with the shiny packaging.

  30. Just trying this out. Never done it before, so it may fail…

    For those interested, the full prediction spreadsheet (saved as a PDF) is here (if it works):


  31. @Trev

    That age of suffrage poll is just another in a long line of ‘most folk with rights think its cool to keep them from folk without’.

    Given that 16-17 year olds can’t be blamed for any issues we might have with anything in UK politics over the past 10 or 30 or 50 years, we can’t argue that they would be any worse at choosing governments.

    I imagine if there were a test to allow one to vote, the 16-17 year olds would be best placed to swot up on it than any other age group. They seek information readily. They are young and able to retain info if they bother to. They socialise daily.

    Most important of all, they have little political pre-conceptions and would be more willing to debate topics without putting up walls to others’ arguments. Something that UK political parties don’t care for too much.

  32. Charles Stuart

    My initial reaction was that the question should only have been put to those intending to vote for one of the other 3 parties here. Then, it occurred to me that some folk might vote for one of the “top two” on the assumption that they couldn’t win” and might change their mind with the prospect of their actually winning.

    So a reasonable question.

    As to the choice of which are the likely top two, SNP v Con is the obvious one here, but how YG chose to frame it in one of our “3 way split” constituencies would be interesting to know.

  33. MOG

    Didn’t work, I’m afraid.

  34. Laszlo
    Thanks. I’m not an expert on the technicals but from my personal experience I never noticed any appreciable difference in general internet use. I’m aware that the latency issue slows down response times, cable v satellite but whilst that may affect serial gamers, I’m not sure why it would limit a business user particularly.

    The upfront cost of equipment of alternative systems is a barrier but the answer is to cover the cost, as the French do, or certainly did when I was there. They certainly see LTE as the future, in such a rural country, where laying cables is never going to be economic, hence the upgrading of the phone masts. Unfortunately the one we could see from our house was never going to be upgraded from 3G we were told.

    Happily now settled in rural Shropshire we enjoy super fast, courtesy of BT whom I have found very efficient to date. I can only speak as I find and clearly others have different experiences and see the answer to be nationalisation and government/union control. It could just be political dogma of course and a yearning for ‘the olden days’- that wonderful period in history, when life was perfect and everything worked efficiently and without a problem!

  35. @OldNat

    Can’t say I’m surprised. Thanks for letting me know.

    If anyone knows how to publish and upload a document to here – without spending money opening a cloud storage account – please let me know.

  36. MOG
    I’m afraid it hasnt work. It takes me to One drive but then says the content has moved or been deleted.

  37. @ MOG

    If the link works for you, it’s probably just a permissions issue. I don’t use OneDrive myself, but I would guess that it has some method of making documents private, public or somewhere in between.

    Looking forward to some polls tonight. I doubt things will have changed much, apart from small transfers from BXP, but the fun is in not knowing and (maybe) being surprised.

  38. MOG
    I have shared things via Google Docs before. There is a setting you can select, something like, “Anyone with the link can access,’ and they give you the link code. I’ve never us onedrive so can’t help on that I’m afraid.

  39. The comments about broadband. I live on Devon /Cornwall border and a lot of businesses have now been set up using line of sight broadband. Bouncing from one property to the next. Everyone locally can get 30 mbs for £30 a month. Businesses up to 200 if needed. Most people have got round the problems. Think it is a vote winner but will put tiny internet providers out of business.

  40. Another example of caring conservatism (not):


    I’d like to be surprised that this hasn’t made the news as far as I can see, but sadly I’m not.

  41. @MOG

    Try a free spreadsheet program (or excel if you have it), and stop putting your data in someone’s cloud. It’s their data now. They want their cut for hosting it.

    Then upload to a free file host site (if you can find one). Or better yet, pay a tiny amount annually for a domain and host it yourself (best not to host large file sizes, as multiple downloads will eat up your allowance).

  42. Tweet by Paul Brand on the fire in Bolton

    “UPDATE: I understand the authorities suspect that the cladding was a form of high pressure laminate (HPL) which has already been deemed unsafe by govt, combined with even more dangerous foam insulation. If so, private landlord should have removed. Experts sent in to assess”

  43. @ Sam; thanks for the link to the Slugger O’Toole article; this of course could become important as the Conservatives have been used to a net +9 supporters from NI in the HoC. Now of course they have largely burned that bridge anyway but we could expect any SDLP or Alliance MPs to be active supporters of #Ref2 if it’s very tight on 13th.

  44. I see the Beeb has an article showing lot of old pics of Scotland. As usual, they either get it wrong, or thing really were terrible in the 1960s in Scotland:

    https://ibb.co/ctc6KJ6 (In case they change it)


    Yeah, yeah, cheap laughs etc. Paying for state propaganda is sooo 20th century. No wonder Scots are ignoring the license fee en masse.

  45. Just for a good measure, according to Resolution Foundation the average working time a week was 32 hours in 2015.

  46. OldNat, thanks for giving your view and answering my question.

  47. “FT Exclusive: A UK government scheme to replace dangerous cladding after the Grenfell Tower disaster has approved preliminary funding for just one building, leaving up to 17,000 households in blocks with similar panels.”

  48. MoG

    I use OneDrive, but sadly your link puts me into starting a new use of OneDrive, and I couldn`t see your carefully assembled data.


  49. Just one more comment on the broadband.

    If the wave-length is high, frequency is low (less responsive) and vica versa, so it needs support (masts) to enter certain places. The wave-length opened to 5G is pretty high.

    The responsiveness of the fibre optic line (all the way) is important if a particular database is queried simultaneously as queries from low response rate could shut down the database or could lock out the query which would be dangerous for businesses reliant on it – you can try it by deliberately misspelling a combination of search words on a search engine other than Chrome.

    I’m in support of making free access to relatively high speed broadband a citizen right, I’m less sure about the full fibre optic but building it probably doesn’t really matter.

    As to nationalised network (I’m in favour of joint control of users, suppliers, owners and employees rather than a government organisation) – it is such a complementary asset (David Teece) that would make the recovery of the cost almost certain.

1 2 3