Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 40%, LAB 38%, LDEM 10%. It’s the first Tory lead from YouGov for the best part of a week, but only serves to underline that the two main parties are still pretty much neck-and-neck.

This has been the position in the polls for about seven weeks now – ever since David Cameron’s “veto” at the European Summit, and probably reinforced or replaced by the turbulent month that Labour have had since then.

121 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 40%, LAB 38%, LD 10%”

1 2 3
  1. @ Hannah

    “I know they’re appealing the proposed boundaries in several areas.”

    Please, “appeal against”, not “appeal”. It’s a recent Americanism I really hate, like using the euphemism “issue” instead of “problem” and “protest” instead of “protest against”.

  2. Is there such a thing as Morphological Prejudice ?

    Strewth * !

    * a word demonstrating absence of prejudice against antipodean morphology :-)

  3. On the Sweden query: I have not really been following this Euro budget proposal that closely (unlike in England, people do not go bananas over EU policy developments), however, one thing that has been crystal clear in recent weeks is that this Euro question was a significant factor in Håkan Juholt’s sacking last week as Leader of the crisis-ridden Social Democrats.

    It was when Göran Persson (the last Social Democrat PM) appeared all over the media 2 weeks ago that I finally realised that Joholt’s days were numbered. Normally pretty reclusive these days (think John Major), he only pops up in public when a matter is deemed critically important. He publicly said that Juholt was wrong to oppose Reinfeldt on this Euro budget proposal. Reinfeldt had requested cross-bloc unity on this issue, and Persson clearly thought that lightweight Juholt was playing silly student politics in saying a blank ‘No’.

    Note: the first act of the new Social Democrat leader Stefan Lövfen last week was a swift U-turn: his party now backs Reinfeldt.

    The Euro claimed another victim last week: the leader of the biggest political party in Sweden, which ain’t even in the Euro.

  4. @ NickP

    Re public sector pensions. Apparently the government have not provided any actuarial assessments of the scheme to inform whether it is affordable or not.

    If I were a teacher in my twenties or thirties, I would not be happy to have to work to 67 to receive my pension. When you have paid more into the scheme than older colleagues and you see them retiring at say 60, with a very good pension, this is totally unfair. The governments whole proposition for everyone, is that because average life expectancy has increased by about 4 years over the last 30 years, that people should work several years extra.

    The same is the case with people in the private sector as well. This is why so many people don’t bother to pay into a pension scheme, potentially causing governments in decades to come with a major headache.

    It is no wonder that many professionals look to emigrate to places like Australia and Canada, where they can obtain better pay and company benefits.

  5. My contribution seems to have been moderated, so I guess pensions are off topic.

  6. My last post was referring to a previous post by NickP that is no longer on here.

    Hope my post is general and not partisan. A bit off topic, but the whole pensions issue is something that may have an affect on polling, if Labour had a different policy to the government.

    I am not sure what Labours position is on pensions, as they were put in a difficult position with a review by ex Labour minister John Hutton. The media is now reporting that the pension changes being proposed by the government will not save any money according to the IFS. This is what NickP was referring to.

  7. The Government could argue that career average pensions are fairer even if they don’t save much money, if any, with the pension age increases.

    Big losers will be people who are promoted several times over the years.

  8. @NickP

    “Big losers will be people who are promoted several times over the years”

    In other words, there will be much less incentive to strive for promotion, especially in the latter part of the career. It will directly contribute to people reaching a certain level and then ‘coasting’.

  9. @ R. Huckle
    Re public sector pensions. Apparently the government have not provided any actuarial assessments of the scheme to inform whether it is affordable or not. ”

    1. One of the things that has most angered teachers that I have spoken to is the Government’s refusal to publish the full figures, which has allowed the rabid right-wing press — Telegraph, Mail etc — to publish anti-pub. sector nonsense without fear of contradiction.

    2. I have always been a Lab. supporter but when I head Balls stating that it was now Lab policy to eternalize the savage cuts in Pub. sector pay & pensions, I felt disenfranchsied. No doubt many lapsed LDs pub. sector employees find themselves in a similar position, tho I don’t know their proportionat nos. in overall LD support.
    Part of Lab’s prob. in recents GEs was their failure to get their vote out: 2005, anti-Blair, War, 2010, disillusioned with Brown. It came out in May, 2011 in many regions, but if all they have to offer is the same lazy, unimaginative, bullying policies towards the Pub Sec. as the other parties [including the SNP] then why should I, or lapsed Pub Sec LDs, bother to vote?
    I realise that Miliband has to appeal beyond his core vote, as Blair did, but at the moment he is danger of appealing to neither his traditional or his potential supporters. The message is unclear & I’m not in the least surprised that Labs are slipping in the Polls.

  10. Stuart Dickson @ Phil,

    – “… no longer part of the UK.”

    “Huh? How so? Her Maj will still be our head of state, so her kingdom will still be united, under her good self.”

    Aren’t you picking up from Alex Salmond as mis-interpreted by the Scotsman.

    Angus Robertson correctly distinguishes and notes that there is no such thing as a United Kingdom and never was but that there are United Kingdoms in the sense that the common head of state opens united parliaments.

    If there was a United Kingdom it would have been E1R in England.

    Canada is not part of the United Kingdom, quite recently even less so than formerly thanks to the Queen of Canada signing a really clever Statutory Instrument. [I think the Queen of the United Kingdoms might have done one too] .

    If Scotland becomes independent, I’m sure the Queen of Canada will be able to offer advice, in French if preferred.

    Like many aspects of separation there is precedent that can be followed. The first question is “How was this done the last time, and how did it work out?”

    I don’t know what the answers are, but the Queen’s staff have got them all for copy’n’paste without having to think up anything new.

  11. It does appear that the Press have decided it’s time to savage DC over the Veto-That-Never-Was, rather than just let him get by on appearing to have vetoed something or other that the nasty Europe was doing. Helped in substantial part by DM knowing when to apply lemon and salt to the wound, and the Conservative party eurosceptics acting like the Tea Party…


    The Tories were trying to have the cake and eat it too and it seemed to have worked until now…But the media are now in a more questioning mood after the RBS events…Tory commentators like Toby Young saying that the `U` turn doesn`t matter because the fiscal union may never go ahead…25 nations have agreed to the deal and planning to sign the fiscal pact in March…Does it look like it `may never go ahead`?

    However I agree with Cameron`s assertion that this was the right thing to do to avoid a confidence crisis exacerbating the Eurozone crisis.

  13. @”the Tea Party…”

    Wonderful first episode of the John Adams re-run last night.

    I missed that episode first time around.

    It wasn’t just tea overboard-got very nasty.

    Absolutely superb series.

  14. John B Dick,

    I really don’t think that the Unionist side have even begun to appreciate the fankle that they have got themselves into. They have been played. And played extraordinarily well, by masters of the sport. In fact, most of them still don’t realise that their nice, chubby, juicy sea trout in on the hook, and as it gets wound in to the bank, the ghillie is unsheafing the gaff.

    May their demise be swift, and only a little painful.

  15. “May their demise be swift, and only a little painful.”

    Nice people -not.

  16. Stuart

    No doubt the timetable you have seen only includes the key events. I suspect that there is another already one well developed listing opportunitie and target dates.

    Humza Yousaf has his own showing the national days of every commonwealth country with a cultural association for its migrant families.

    Do any of them want a speech listing the benefits of self-determination?

    Get the specialist: HY, none better. That’s his job.

  17. @ Old Nat from 10.47pm from yesterday.

    I’ve read some ridiculous comments on these pages but I think your “textual analysis” of EM’s speech is one the most hilarious. “He mentioned Scotland 23 times, he mentioned “I/me” 54″.

    That is a ridiculous argument – whatever you think of EM and what’s he proposing, anyone who speaks about their vision for something (be it Scotland, the NHS, or a EU veto) will us the words “I/me” a lot.

    The real question is what is after the “I/me” statements and (much more importantly for this site) what it means for polls/polling and public opinion.

  18. Adrian B @ Oldnat

    “That is a ridiculous argument – whatever you think of EM and what’s he proposing, anyone who speaks about their vision for something (be it Scotland, the NHS, or a EU veto) will us the words “I/me” a lot. ”

    He did the right thing. It is always best to speak about what you know about.

  19. @Colin

    Regarding your post here

    There were four[2][3] Swedish conditions:
    * Sweden’s right to decide if the euro will be introduced should be clearly stated in the pact.[1]
    * Sweden will be guaranteed the right to attend summit meetings of eurozone countries.[1][3]
    * Sweden not be required to transfer any decision-making power on its budget from the national parliament[2][3]
    * Labour market guarantees[3]

    As pointed out, parliamentary approval could not initially be obtained by the government of Fredrik Reinfeldt because his government is a minority coalition government (his party is the Moderate Party,[4] the coalition is called “Alliance for Sweden”,[4] the coalition is *just* short of a majority[4]). To get approval he had to obtain the agreement of the opposition, the Social Democrat party.[3] The Social Democrat party was headed by Håkan Juholt[3] who refused to approve it.[3] He was defenestrated and a new SD head appointed, Stefan Löfven.[3] Löfven approved[3] it PDQ. Parliamentary approval was obtained on 2012-01-27.[2] Sweden approved the new treaty.[1]

    As for your point about the latest draft, the PC I’m on today does not have a PDF reader so I cannot tell you. You can read it for yourself here[5] which you can get from here.[6] The treaty is called “Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union”.

    Regards, Martyn

    [1] h ttp://
    [2] h ttp://
    [3] h ttp://
    [4] h ttp://
    [5] h ttp://
    [6] h ttp://

  20. MARTYN

    Fantastic-thanks very much

  21. @Colin

    You’re welcome

    Regards, Martyn

1 2 3