Sky News are reporting tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sunday Times as having topline figures of CON 37%(nc), LAB 33%(-1), LDEM 17%(nc). There is clearly no significant change in the voting intention, and YouGov now seem to be showing lead of around 4 or 5 points, down from a week ago when their lead seemed pretty consistent at 6 points.

UPDATE: Looking at the rest of the YouGov/Sunday Times poll, the public think that the Conservatives are far more likely to cut spending on frontline public services by 50% to 14%. However, they also think the Conservatives are more likely to increase taxes (by 37% to 26%). The implication is that people think the Conservatives are more likely to actually cut down the deficit… but that this is not necessarily a political plus!

With Samantha Cameron about to join the campaign trail, there was also a question asked whether she or Sarah Brown would make the better Prime Ministerial consort – 29% said Sarah Brown to 25% for Samantha Cameron.


439 Responses to “YouGov Sunday Times poll – 37/33/17”

1 5 6 7 8 9
  1. Philip JW

    Any chance you can give Amber your General election prediction %’s for this week on the other thread. Thanks ;-)

  2. Make your predictions thread is showin at the top of this page on the second coloum just below where it says ‘RECENT COMMENTS’ for those that are lost..

  3. if not the direct link is here.. (not sure if this will be moderated)
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2495

  4. WOLF MACNEIL

    Thanks
    Interesting thoughts.

    The Sunday Times today follows the recent speculation about a “left looking” Labour Party in the new HoC.
    In the event of a minority Con administration, with LibDEm support , one can see the turmoil in Labour leaving the centre left / Blairite space available for Clegg .

    Any thoughts?

  5. John B Dick

    Sorry. I didn’t make myself clear.

    1. I wasn’t suggesting that not joining a coalition with the SNP was the cause of LD decline. Simply describing the time line. However, I think it is reasonable to suggest that not doing so moved them from being a main player, and allowed the focus to be primarily on the SNP and Lab as being the two main players. Marginalisation doesn’t attract support.

    2. My point about the anti Tory strength in the Highlands & Islands was not to suggest that the rest of Scotland was supportive of them! Simply that in the LDs area of greatest strength in Scotland, Tory support is much lower than normal demographics and the % seeing themselves as “British not Scottish” would suggest. Consequently, it seemed unlikely that LDs there would be happy with support for the Tories at Westminster.

  6. RE The Banking Collapse

    When a bank collapses, it starts a run on other banks. Both cash withdrawals by worried depositors & panic selling by shareholders.

    It is almost impossible to contain. Many banks will go into administrative receivership.

    When that happens, the government has to step in pay all the depositors up to £50k. Can you imagine what that would’ve cost the tax payers – both in guarantees & bureaucratic costs?

    And that isn’t even the scariest part. When a bank goes bankrupt, all loans & mortgages it’s made can become due immediately. You no longer have 15 years to pay your mortgage – you have about 15 weeks if you are lucky.

    Imagine that situation throughout the world!

    A second string would be that insurance companies would have also been tipped into bankruptcy (AIG & Direct Line would certainly have gone). Millions of individuals & businesses e.g. unable to move vehicles because they were no longer insured.

    Many people would’ve dithered & considered it too big a responsibility – leave it to the markets to sort it all out. It would’ve been a financial meltdown with consequences that we can barely imagine.

  7. @Amber Star
    You are precise in your assessment. It is not well understood just how dire the situation would have become if our Government had stepped back and refused to act.
    Luckily we had someone in power at the right time who judged correctly and acted accordingly.
    Your posts highlights this well and is very informative. Thanks

  8. @AmberStar & Steve A.

    Another economic titan who tried to step forward and pour lots of money into saving the banks from disaster in the Autumn of 2008 was… George W. Bush. And, if Congress had backed him, he would have done the job, and would still have been responsible for presiding over the events that led to the disaster!!

    Brown’s performance in Autumn 2008 was good. But it doesn’t mean that we ignore the previous 11 years of economic mismanagement – nor that he has run government economic since largely with the aim of electioneering. Big problems, and all Brown cares about is his Campaign to Re-Elect the PrimeMinister.

    But, you are right, that this is his best card. As one Labour MP enthused when Lehmans went down: “This could be Gordon’s Falklands…” Disaster for many, electoral opportunity for Labour – and that is how the man of integrity has been playing it. May win.

  9. I notice that YouGov polls consistently give lower Tory leads than all other polls taken together – the average difference is a lead of roughly 5% for YouGov polls as against 7% for all others. Any ideas why this is?

  10. @ JOSEPH1832

    President Obama has retained on his team some of the economics advisors who worked with Bush. This has not been popular – so why do it?

    Because they have learned a great deal from their experience before, during & after the crisis. One thing most people can agree on, real world experience is something that should be valued.

    Whether it should be valued above the enjoyment derived from punishing somebody for what we perceive as a mistake, well that is for each individual voter to decide.

  11. I am too close professionally to the situation on bank failures to say more. But both Adair Turner and Mervyn King are clear that the underlaps in the previous regulation system were the reason why the absurdly dangerous risks taken by NRock were not prevented, and similar considerations clearly apply to RBS and HBOS, both of whom as noted were very close to Gordon Brown who would have protected them from any strong regulatory intervention.

    Note that AFAIK all the objective statistics about the relative performance of the UK’s economy under GBrown point to one conclusion only.

    Recall also that Cameron got an excellent first in PPE from Oxford whereas GBrown has no formal qualifications in economics whatsoever. He may be a lot brighter than most Labour politicians, but no brighter than Cameron let alone people like Willets, Redwood and Letwin. He also has, I am reliably informed, the sad tendency of thinking that he’s the smartest person in the room, and making this view clear, even when he manifestly isn’t.

  12. @ NBEALE

    Recall also that Cameron got an excellent first in PPE from Oxford whereas GBrown has no formal qualifications in economics whatsoever.
    ————————————————————–
    One thing most people can agree on, real world experience is something that should be valued.

  13. So hard to resist responding to such stupidity…..perhaps Ant would be better off cutting out the initial ridiculous comments than the people correcting them. Or at least as well as.

  14. NBEALE

    Peter Kilfoyle, outgoing Labour MP of many years experience, wrote an article in the MoS about their current top team. It was very interesting reading-his opinion is that they compare poorly with many of their predecessors.

  15. @ Colin

    ‘In the event of a minority Con administration, with LibDem support , one can see the turmoil in Labour leaving the centre left / Blairite space available for Clegg .’

    I think that the LD leadership desperately hopes it won’t even need to face the issue on 8 May of supporting either Con or Lab in any shape or form. Its least bad situation would be the Tories as largest party, short of a majority, and enabling LD influence on what they would want to be seen as ‘responsible and fair’ economic and fiscal management, and working with other parties in what it would want to be seen as ‘progressive and constructive opposition’.

    Ideally, though, they’d see the Tories having a small majority, and Labour well beaten and distracted by the rebuilding process, thus – in LD eyes – neatly setting up both targets, in England at any rate, ie the Tories in the suburbs and shires, Labour in the inner cities and towns.

    In all circumstances, I think the term ‘Blairism’ (cf Thatcherism) will disappear as fast as Winter is now vanishing from most parts of these islands. Thank goodness, in both cases!.

  16. Thanks WOLF

    Very interesting thoughts again.
    Clegg must feel at the centre of the universe just now, given his Press coverage.

    I like ” I think the term ‘Blairism’ will disappear as fast as Winter”. It will certainly be a different Labour Party to the one TB built…..one that is recognisable as a Labour Party perhaps.

  17. Amber – I agree with you about the banking collapse. It would have been just un-imaginable. HBOS presenting effectively false accounting in the run up to the crisis, also RBS (and I’m sure most of the others.

    I often think of politics in this way. When a house of cards THAT big falls down (see also Blair the moment they told him about 9/11), all bets are off. Just imagine how it must feel to know SO much rests on your shoulders, that the decisions you take will affect the world, maybe even make or break a new world order.

    If anyone’s forgotten what was on the cards during September – November 08, I haven’t, We were on a knife edge. Lehmans, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Northern Rock, RBS, Lloyds, AIG, Iceland, it was just unthinkable.

    The very fact we are where we are now is pretty incredible when you put it that way. It really would be a very different world today if the “free markets” had been left to fall.

  18. Hello Colin

    ‘Clegg must feel at the centre of the universe just now, given his Press coverage’

    It’seither far too hot or -273K out there! I think he’s trying to keep his feet on the ground – 60+ seats to try to hold, and a few dozen more to strive for.

    ‘It will certainly be a different Labour Party to the one TB built…..one that is recognisable as a Labour Party perhaps’

    That’s a very interesting question. With the current leadership warning loudly of the dangers, I think that a defeated Labour Party would probably avoid opening up the old wounds (from SDP ‘splitters’ through to Blair/Brown rivalry), but what would a Labour party look like in the 21st century?

    Given the relative lack of solo electoral success of socialist and social democratic parties across the World in recent years, I imagine that they’d have in mind future coalition-building, eg Red-Green models. But the UK electoral system – even with AV – would not be much help to them in that direction.

    Must get outside for the day….

  19. The truth is that banking, by virtue of the size and importance of the banks, isn’t really a ‘Free Market’ in any meaningful sense of the word. It is, and will have to remain, a government-backed enterprise. My recollection of the Tory reaction to each measure taken by the government (and I agree that most if not all of those measures were necessary) was to deride them for arriving at a situation where they had to do it. (Nationalising banks, printing money etc). Not very edifying, but that’s opposition for you. Labour were no different when they were in opposition, attacking the Tories for anything they did regardless of the merit in it.

  20. Dave-in-S: …..”I’m sorry”………I’m afraid”………

    No you’re not: but you’re certainly self-opinionated.

    I don’t think your constant use of capitals helps you in any way either – it just makes me feel that I’m being shouted at by someone who’s rather rude – and I’ve no idea what relevance any of it has to a forum on polling analysis.

    AW: Apologies but comments such as these are becoming increasingly common and increasingly tedious.

    Paul.

  21. It got very nerdy overnight -like a Harry Enfield sketch on Tory Boy sometiomes. Let’s have a poll hopefully!

  22. Dear all,

    Here’s for a non-partisan day of blogging.

    All in favour say hi!

    If you think someone is a liar, bully, incompetent etc. could we save it for political betting. they welcome that stuff on there. If your just here t win your argument you learn nothing. except of course that you have a unique gift for giving others headaches.

  23. Yes I am as tribally Labour as they come, but I always try to stop myself from typing partisan nonsense like, as far as I can see, ALL the contributions from Dave in Southampton. Can some of you not read the comments policy? Please don’t ruin this excellent site, find another one to air your prejudices on. I could rebut some of the comments, but this isn’t the place to do it.

  24. @Barnaby

    I am in total agreement.

  25. @ Dave in Poor Southampton

    I am taking the fifth amendment with you Dave until you agree to be more constructive/objective.

  26. “The idea that the EU would economically ostracise the UK if we left is a canard. Our trade is worth as much to them as theirs is to us. There would certainly be costs, but they would probably be less than the amount we would save in EU contributions and in the maintenance of our share of the EU parliamentarians.”

    Sorry, I just thought some facts needed to be cleared up here. Read this:

    http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/?p=2184

    As far as direct costs go EU membership is fairly minimal. As for ‘indirect costs’ – to be honest, I’ve never been entirely sure what people are even referring to when they mention them.

    As for ‘our trade is worth as much to them as theirs is to us’ – look at under the economy section of this:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html

    Our biggest trading partner appears to be Germany (within the EU obviously) – unless my mental arithmetic is way out. In fact, with the rest of the EU we have what can be described as a quite substantial amount of trade.

    The UK does not constitute 50% of the EU economy. We would be hit FAR worse than the rest of the EU if this hypothetical split did happen – it would be an inconvenience for the EU but it would be a catastrophe for the UK.

    Anyway, as for polls – I haven’t much new to add, but I agree that it looks as though the CON lead is slowly narrowing.

  27. @Duncan,

    The tabloids are fixated over Europe.

    Ordinary voters don’t rate it as a primary concern at all.

  28. Hi Eion !
    I normally read threads from the bottom up, unless I get a clues as to any pointless jousting, soo just “Hi”, thanks for the warning, and looking forward to less febrile times, and more moderation…

  29. @John T T

    “pointless” you said it. I rememebr doing it in primary school. It was fun then since you were only just formulating ideas about things. We are all past that now aren’t we? :)

  30. with there being so many Yougov polls ONE EVERY DAY we are only getting to hear the one voice and that is the voice of Yougov as thery are drowning the other polls out

  31. “Brown did save us from financial meltdown” — we actually HAD a financial meltdown which the financial regulation system, created by Brown, did not forsee or prevent.
    Indeed it ENCOURAGED it – by the ‘light touch’ financial regulatory system created by … Brown. The FSA are now saying they are going to change the ‘light touch’ to a ?? ”firm touch’ system since the previous regime failed.

    The taxpayer saved us from a financial meltdown by buying huge stakes in various banks. The only active measure taken by Brown actually cost the shareholder of Lloyds a small fortune and the Chairman his job.

    You hardly need a brain the size of a planet to spend other peoples money (or simply print it). It is a bit more difficult to get it back though.

  32. Morning everyone.
    Another day and another week.

    I think its time we moved on from the rather stale ‘conversations’ people have been having including one poster at turned 3am this morning – for goodness sake, can’t you sleep-lol

    I firmly believe now that the narrowing of the Conservative lead has finally halted and i know you Labourites won’t want to hear a word of it – but it looks as though it might have stopped.

    I can see the lead either staying very much the same this week or maybe even perhaps widening just a tad mainly because of the Trevor McDonald interview which i thought was very good and well presented.
    Also the Expenses saga just never seems to go away and its mainly Labour that is taking most flack!

    Finally Peter Kilfoyles article on Sunday is also very telling don’t ya think?

    So we are now onto another week of YouGov polls and my prediction for tonight is.

    Con 42 Lab 28 LD 17 :o

    Did I really say that?-lol

    Just joking and a touch of wishful thinking.

    My real prediction is:

    Con 38

    Lab 32

    LD 19

    That looks a bit more sensible eh? ;o

  33. Mark Johnson – Interested to hear your opinions on interview last night, if we’re allowed, would you mind giving me a summing-up of what you thought?
    Which parts in particular do you think will help him in the polls?

  34. Is there a Sun tracker poll today? They published one about health policy on their website in the early hours but I can’t see anything about voting intention.

  35. @Sue

    Almost everything about it Sue—as a Labour supporter I appreciate you will only look for all the bad/negative points so I’ve really sorry to dissappoint you! :o

    It was a far nicer portrayal of David Cameron and his life/family/wife etc etc than the gordon Brown ‘interview’ Even the admission about sacking his ‘best’ friend George Osborne was refreshing to hear and of course he is covering himself if it actually comes to that!

    And YOUR view on the Peter Kilfoyle article Sue?

  36. It ill be interesting to see if Cameron enjoys a bounce from his interview? Is there any word on the viewing figures. I think Brown’s was 4 million at its peak.

  37. Is it true David Cameron’s father made no appearance? I wonder why…. just reading through the reporting of the interview. Cameron “at ease with himself” seems the conclusion.

    I wonder how voters will respond to that…… Brown did not seem so “at ease” i don’t think.

  38. Yes Mark, I am a Labour supporter, but that really doesn’t preclude me from a non-partisan assessment. I genuinely wanted to hear you views and which bits you think will appeal most to voters.

    I’m sorry, I don’t know what the Peter Kilfoyle article is, do you have a link?

  39. Sindel – no, there isn’t any polling done on Saturday or Sunday daytime. The NHS questions in the Sun today were done last week.

  40. @Sue,

    The only link I could give you would be to go to the Mail on Sunday website which is the paper I read it in yesterday.
    Do read it, it is quite enlightening as to the disenchantment within the ‘true’ Labour party ranks!

    People like Peter Kilfoyle really are VERY true to their Labour/Socialist principals which if course would not win them any elections in this day and age which is why Blair had no alternative but to ditch many ‘old’ Labour ideals and principals move the party to the centre ground and even right of centre to appeal to former disgruntled Tory voters and in the process ‘steal’ many Conservative ideas and policies!

    It was all smoke screen and mirrors in a way but it actually worked but the true socialists are now lurking in the background to jumpout whether Labour win this time or not—much blood and tears to come I’m affraid for your lot whatever happens!

  41. It would be interesting to have a poll on whom LibDem voters think their party should support in the event of a hung Parliament. Surely one of the polling companies is thinking of doing that?

    I remember a couple of years or so ago, the Economist published a survey of the policy attitudes of Con, Lab & LibDem voters. This showed that on a wide range of policy issues, LibDem voters were more “left-wing” than Labour voters, the main exception being on privatisation/nationalisation where the average Labour voter still hankered after nationalisation. If this is true, it would suggest that a Con/LibDem coalition would be a big vote-loser for the LibDems.

  42. OK Mark, so no real answers about last night, but you urge a Labour supporter to read a Mail article on a dissatisfied labour MP? Lol
    I will read it now, as I like balance, but not really playing the game, is it?

  43. @ Sue Marsh- I did watch Trev meets Dave

    a few of my observations

    It would have done DC/Tories no harm the show. He and Sam came across very well and portrayed them as what they are, a nice upper middle class family, with a bit of cash, but not completly out of touch with modern Britian as people try and portray them.

    DC is very at ease with himself and is a good communicator, this will help on the campaign trail. His experience from Cameron Direct Q/A sessions will help him in TV debates

    It could also be viewed the other way as, a confirmation to0 many as Dave the lightweight, good on telly but not much else underneath. Or even it could be seen as DC is to nice to be PM and does not have the ruthless streak needed to make the tough calls.

    Though Sue the target audience of the show was not you or I.

    Will it help him the polls, maybe a little bounce in the short term, but certainly not a game changer

  44. @Derek,

    I rememebr a similar poll. And I also agree libs are closer to labour than tory in policy terms.

    I think historically this bears out also.

    There is a problem though, Joseph Chamberlain, LLoyd-George, Winston Chruchill and others have moved towards tories when it suited them politically. I also think Lib ideals tend to flux, they’re a more pragmatic bunch than the blue and red cousins.

    It would be electoral suicide to do a deal with an unpopular labour party……

    for some of these factors I don’t think we can rule out a volte-face

  45. @Sue

    If you had taking care in reading my reply to you Sue I actually answered all what you asked of me with going on and on like some do on here! :o

    I actually said almost ALL the interview showed him in a good and true light.
    Very much at ease with himself in life unlike Gordon Browns interview where he looked VERY ill at ease with the whole set up!

    And further more I would say there was really not much to upset the apple cart in the way of opinion or votes during the hour long interview.
    As I said before as a Labour Supporter you will obviously find things that you thought might ‘trip him up’ a little but as a Tory Supporter i’m affraid I couldn’t find anything :o

    Yes–I asked YOU a Labour supporter to read the article about one of YOUR MPs Peter Kilfoyle I read it as a Conservative supporter so I don’t quite understand what you are getting at!

  46. Eoin

    I think Brown is more of a problem than his party. A LibDem deal with Labour headed by someone else would fly I think.

    As a LibDem myself, I think Cameron as PM with St Vincent of Cable as Chancellor would be a good combination for the country, but I fear it would damage the party as the Tories would blame the LibDems for the nasty financial medicine that is inevitable.

  47. I’m “getting” at the fact that your responses sound like an argument when none was courted.

    Still, I just read the article, and he seemed to me a good, honest man who is tired and disillusioned.
    He’s worked in politics a long time, a good Old Labour man, not impressed with New Labour, as many weren’t when we moved away from the militant left.
    He despairs of ever having good left wing candidates again, whilst I read an article in the Sunday Times about how the unions will take over after the election and Labour will lurch to the left!!
    It’s sad that an old faithful like him cannot leave satisfied with a job well done, sad that he sees little noble in our current politicians on both sides and I agree wholeheartedly in his assessment of parliament becoming far too un-representative of the public as a whole.
    I AM a socialist, I always will be down to my toes, but it doesn’t mean I’m not also sad at our current state of play and hope to see some changes. Changes I will work for from within my party as I’ve always believed you can’t complain and sit on the sidelines at the same time.

  48. Sue Marsh

    I am not after a argument! , just your thoughts please. I posted at 11.24, a bit of feedback on Trev meets Dave

  49. @ Simon Ha! Sorry, not directed at you, but at Mark.

    I thought the interview was “nice”. I particularly liked Sammy and thought the bits where they spoke about Ivan were very real and touching.

    I would question whether “Dave” should have aimed for “nice” at the moment. Had I been advising him, I’d have suggested a very serious one on one interview addressing his aims and dreams for the country, trying to outline his vision. He seemed keen to answer criticisms in it. IMO he would have been better not referring to them directly, but instead answering them by a “I’m a serious politician up to the job kind of interview.
    I agree though, don’t think anything will lose him votes. Just don’t see much in it to gain him many.

  50. @ Sue

    Very astute analysis.

    Dave is deemed by many liekable enough guy. He’s certainly regarded as less ‘nasty’ than previous Tory leaders. People think he is fairly serious about wanting to change the party.

    Many question whether he could stand up to the Redwood’s Portillo’s and other such demons when they raise their head mid term.

    I did not see the interview so I do not kno whow he addressed this. But I think if i had been advising him I would have told him to pitch it quite serious…. I thought that was the reason he chose Trevor I thought it was trailed as more hard-hitting that the Brown Piers love in.

1 5 6 7 8 9