We have new polls from ComRes and YouGov tonight. The monthly ComRes telephone poll for the Indy has topline figures of CON 37%(nc), LAB 40%(+2), LDEM 13%(-1), Others 10%. Meanwhile the first of this week’s daily YouGov polls for the Sun has topline figures of CON 38%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%, Others 13%. Both are consistent with the picture we’ve been seeing lately of a very small Labour lead.

153 Responses to “New YouGov and ComRes polls”

1 2 3 4
  1. Good to be ahead but the results are not as good as I was hoping they would be.

  2. I am biased but I would say the Labour lead is slightly increasing

  3. Police and thieves…spot the difference!

  4. These practices no longer exist at the Sun.

    Oh that’s alright then!

  5. Ewen Lightfoot,that sounds rather Lord of The Rings.
    However I find your comment difficult to understand,except
    hold on,YES.

  6. 40% is at the high end for a Labour VI with ComRes… they have polled higher only in early 2011. (The lead over Con is smaller now though, by a few percentage points.)

  7. Not sorry, but sorry for being caught,will this be a very
    important definition of this whole sordid affair?

    `,will this be a very
    important definition of this whole sordid affair?`

    The drama will come later when the PM gives evidence at the Leveson enquiry and if Coulson is convicted either for perjury or for phone hacking

  9. Anyone know if we’re going to get an Ipsos/MORI poll this month?

  10. The problem Cameron has it that his erstwhile friends Brooks and Coulson are going to be slowly revealed as utter monsters.

    I don’t think Cameron will take any major hits but his credibility and image are going to suffer. Look at Ms Church today. Hugh Grant.

    They have made serious enemies of some of the most charismatic people on the planet. Murdoch is toppling.

    And there is Gove and Murdoch’s free school too.

  11. There does appear to be a ceiling of around 40% for both Con and Lab. At least when the q is asked on a UK weighted average, of who the voter would chose in a GE.

    If this stays as tight to Election Day, and with the twin dynamics of a polarised electorate and Coaltion politics it could well do, the winner could be decided by a handful of seats in marginal constutuences, or how efficiently a party’s vote is distributed.

  12. The pattern continues. The odd and occasional 1% Tory lead springs up amidst mainly Labour leads in YouGov, and small Labour leads are now being reported by all the other pollsters, including the ICM “Gold Standard” and ComRes which have tended to be the most favourable polls for the Conservatives. My hunch, albeit likely to be shot out of the water by a 5% Tory lead in tomorrow’s YouGov (!!), is that Labour are inching ahead now and that the December Veto bounce for Cameron has more or less fully unwound itself.

    The intriguing question is what next. Do we stick with the small Labour lead polldrums or will the Budget and May local elections shift the paradigm significantly? I don’t wish an untimely death or an application for the Chiltern Hundreds on any MP, but a by-election in a Tory/Labour marginal would be fascinating to behold. Two years into this Parliament and we haven’t had one of those yet, but you never know, I suppose.

  13. RAF
    `There does appear to be a ceiling of around 40% for both Con and Lab`

    But Labour have the added advantage of not being in power against a coalition government…So if the government slips up,then Labour has the potential to pick up voters from both coalition parties

    Also the longer we get away from 2010,the less the blame Labour get for the supposed `mess they got us into`.

  14. Futher news on the South London council transferring their libraries to a leisure group:


    I understand this is a huge issue locally. I don’t wish to comment further for obvious reasons, but this matter has the potential to seriously depress labour’s vote in the mayoral election, particularly if the Council presses on regardless.

  15. @NickP
    “The problem Cameron has it that his erstwhile friends Brooks and Coulson are going to be slowly revealed as utter monsters.”

    Cameron has a talent for picking friends – Coulson, Brooks, Emma Harrison.

  16. liz

    I don’t think Labour’s noses are clean on any of those. But they need to learn from it. The wheels of power have been exceedingly grubby for some time.

  17. @Smukesh

    Or the economy could recover sooner than anticipated, the LDs get their way on Lords reform etc. Many factors may yet bolster or weaken the parties, but it is difficult to see either Lab or Con getting above 40%.

    Think of it another way. Even in the huge landslide in 1997, Lab only got 43-44%. And that was with a large number of traditional Tory voters either staying at home or backing Blair. Ed M won’t win the Blair Tories, not just because of perceptions about him, but because there apoears now to a polarisation between much larger nunbers of Tory and Labour voters than was the case prior to Gordon Brown.

    In addition there are 400 odd seats under the old boundaries that are safe Lab or Con. So there isn’t that much wiggle room.

    It remains to be seen whether Lab can hold on to it’s newly aquired LD exodus. I have my doubts about this. Some have deserted permanently, but all?

    As for the Tories, the policies they are pursuing is completely alienating the left and centre left, and even parts of the non-aligned centre, so over 40% will not happen

    All IMHO, of course!

  18. Again in the A4E situation, No 10 denying that they were told about ongoing fraud allegations when Emma Harrison was appointed as Families tsar

    A situation not very different about Coulson and No 10 denying that Clegg or Guardian making specific allegations about Coulson

  19. @LizH

    “Cameron has a talent for picking friends – Coulson, Brooks, Emma Harrison.”

    Come on, be fair,, that Jeremy Clarkson seems like a good egg!! lol

  20. Before retiring to my cell, I would like to share that I believe, credo, (is that IMO here?) that Com Res must be exaggerating the Lib Dem figure by about 7%, and that YG is doing the same by about 3%.

    These lib dem voters will go, I think, mainly to their coalition friends who are treating them so well.

    How to Saints Shirley and Vincent see things I wonder?

  21. RAFt
    `Think of it another way. Even in the huge landslide in 1997, Lab only got 43-44%.`

    The Lib Dem vote was not as low in 1997 as it is now…Recently Tim Montgomery made an interesting observation` It took the Tories 13 years to increase the voteshare by 5 %,it took Labour 5 days to do the same`
    All made possible by Lib Dem supporters deserting them

    Blair has recently made some interesting observations…He believes that Cameron has gone into a blind alley-way.And his strategy for Labour to return to power is to have enough policies to hold onto Lib Dems,be pro-public services reform,have enough business support at the next election and reassure the public on the deficit even while advocating a small economic stimulus…And he knows a thing or two about winning elections.

  22. @LIZH,

    thats a bit partisan to be honest. many of those same media friends were highly courted by Blair, Brown, Alistair Campbell etc

    Interesting polls. I like a strong opposition, so wouldn’t mind Labour opening up a bit of lead. The worst thing about the Thatcher and Blair years was the lack of any credible opposition.


  23. @ChrisLane1945

    More concerning than LD voters is the bulk of LD MPs, particularly those in the Government. The word “National” followed by “Liberals” send a shiver down my spine!

  24. Once again, following on from the IoS/Sunday Mirror poll, the ComRes tables appear internally inconsistent. It’s no longer possible to derive the “headline” figures taken from Table 5 from the turnout weightings in Table 2 Page 4.


    1. ComRes must surely have changed their methodology without disclosing details of the extra weighting they have applied in this poll. Is this in breach of BPC rules?

    2. This poll is not comparable with previous ComRes telephone polls, despite it being presented alongside a series of previous Indy polls.

    3. 10 minutes work with a pocket calculator reveals that the “old” methodology, using the voting intentions weighted to turnout values in Table 2, would give shares of Con 35%, Lab 40%, LD 13%. I suggest that these are the figures that should be compared to the 1% Labour lead in the previous Indy telephone poll.

    Anthony – Your views and any insight on what ComRes have done would be much appreciated.

  25. RAF.
    I agree that National Liberals is what we may be seeing develop.

  26. agreed it does look like the tiny Labour lead has graduated to small. Labour have got the vote back they lost at the 2005 election (probably not the same people, but you never know), Conservatives fitfully winning back and then losing those they lost a long time ago. We’re still in hung parliament or tiny majority territory next time.

    I think it safe to assume no handouts in the budget are possible, so no help for the government there.

  27. @RAF

    “Or the economy could recover sooner than anticipated, ”

    Depends on what you mean by recovery. Economic indicators pointing in a more positive direction, on their own, won’t necessarily shift votes unless they translate into a genuine feelgood factor, where voters actually experience rising standards of living. Reduced borrowing and a smaller deficit aren’t politically potent economic indicators and neither are unemployment figures. Low inflation, rising house prices, increasing job security, low interest rates; now those tend to attract support for an incumbent government. Now, we might have a smaller deficit, lower borrowing and moderate growth by 2015, although none are nailed on certainties by any means, but if the recovery has been a largely jobless one with house prices stagnant and wage and pensions largely flat-lining, or even declining in real terms, I don’t see a feelgood wave for an incumbent government to surf, especially if they are locked into May 2015 as an election date, when the circumstances that apply then are largely resistant to political manipulation.

  28. “If the Blair/Brown governments could survive their levels of animosity, it’s hard to imagine the Coalition will fail. It’s in no one’s interest.”

    This is the second reference I have seen from the LD camp. Last week Farron was comparing the Con/LD coalition favourably to the “Brown/Blair coalition” and the very public recriminations which emerged.

    There is scope for the differentiation strategy to get quite acrimonious. For instance Teather vs Gove/Letwin/Hilton over a plan to axe child poverty monitoring:


  29. Tonight’s YouGov details

    Con 38
    Lab 40
    Lib Dem 9
    UKIP 6
    SNP / PCY 4
    Green 2
    BNP 1
    Respect 0
    Other 1

    Approval 29 – 55 = -26

    Non-voters 27%

    Tables are here:


    What is most striking about the headline figures is the high non-voters. This is no one-off, it was 28% in the ST poll – only equalled once before this parliament. If the public are becoming disillusioned with the government they’re not rushing into Labour’s arms.

    This is confirmed by the trackers which are the set that ask Here is a list of problems facing the country. Could you say for each of them which political party you think would handle the problem best? There are significant drops for the Conservatives on most topics (this compares with a poll a fortnight ago when Labour led 42-38 so it’s not a partisan effect). The NHS is down 5 points as you might expect, but every other category is down 2 to 4 points as well.

    But Labour hasn’t benefitted – it’s down 1 to 2 points in most categories (The biggest rise is for the Lib Dems on the NHS. To 7%). Equally on leadership qualities Cameron continues to decline, though not to the depths of last summer – though he does hit a new low on ‘honest’ (14%, same as Miliband one point up on Clegg. Such unanimity). But Miliband also loses a point on a lot of categories.

  30. @Roger Mexico – considering the declines are quite small, and with all parties I’d say a lot of it is down to sample varaition, rather than anything deep. The only one I’d bet on is the decline in the NHS trust.

  31. Regarding the Lib Dems, there were two interesting pieces in the Paper That Must Not Be Linked To recently. The first was by Jonathan Freedland, who I don’t normally rate. But here his usual fault – a willingness to parrot the standard Westminster wisdom without question – is a strength, because he repeats the insider delusions without realising how odd they are. Most notably:

    The Lib Dem leadership admits it is unloved, but is aiming for grudging support. They picture left-leaning voters turned off by Ed Miliband who admire the Lib Dems’ steel on the deficit. Similarly, they imagine right-leaning voters who, repelled by Bullingdon poshness and the NHS reforms, admire the Lib Dems for acting as a taming influence on their Tory partners. That’s why Clegg has ordered his MPs to repeat the same line in all media appearances – “We’re doing the right thing” – so that his party might win grudging respect from voters who prefer a Tory government with the Lib Dems to a Tory government without.

    Naturally there is no reference to any evidence for this, possibly because the polls show none. But if these are the straws the Lib Dem leadership are grasping at, they are in serious trouble.

    The other article is by Chris Rennard, the former Chief Executive of the Lib Dems and concerns itself with electoral process. It needs to be read in full, but Rennard is convinced that the Conservatives are trying to do all they can to adjust the system so that they will continue to be elected come what may. He particularly worries about how making voter registration optional could skew the electoral roll and seems to blame Clegg for locking the Lib Dems into a five year parliament. He’s the sort of person (a Party apparatchik) who would normally be seen as an automatic loyalist, so it’s clear there must be a lot of discontent among the Party’s electoral tacticians.

  32. Boo Boo

    A lot of those Conservative drops will be statistically significant (4 points certainly will be), but it’s the pattern, repeated across all seven categories, that makes me think there is a general disillusion with Tory competence without any gain elsewhere – except in DK.

    It may be only temporary of course, due to a blitz of bad news, but it shows vulnerability of the Conservatives without the ability of Labour to really benefit.

  33. NatCen has published a report on the “English Question” (not a banned subject on here!)


    For polling geeks, Section 7 has an interesting analysis of the difficulties caused by trying to identify changes in opinion over time, when the questions themselves change.

    The fact that the authors clearly don’t understand the difference between identifiable and non-identifiable expenditure, is entirely another matter.

  34. @Roger Mexico

    But the 4 point drops are only in about two categories. The majority are 2/3 drops – reatively small, which is what makes me think most of it is sample variation. We’ll see how numbers show in the coming months as to wherther it’s just sample variation + bad news, or a trend. The trend of general dislluionsment with all the parties as been one for sometime now, I’m not surprised there are those now dissatisfied with the government but reluctant to go to Labour. I suspect that’s the feeling among many floating voters.

  35. OldNat (and John B Dick)

    I know that the received wisdom is that the NHS changes have nothing to do with Scotland, except maybe through indirect financial effect, but I wonder if this is true. When the Bill was first being discussed one of the points being made was that it opened areas of provision to private companies and once that had happened, EU competition law made it difficult to exclude them again.

    If that proved to be the case, might such rulings also include the other (current) parts of the UK even if the actual practice only happened in England? Would EU law be judged to apply to all of the UK equally and so certain ways of running a Health Service (no matter how efficient) be deemed anti-competitive?

    I have no idea if this was true of the original Bill, if it would be true now or indeed if anyone else has the faintest idea. But do they?

  36. Boo Boo

    One 5 (health) three 4’s a 3 and two 2’s. Statistically 3 would be significant. So fairly consistent and I think there’s something there – though it could fade if the news goes off domestic issues (possibly not with the budget coming)


    I don’t know.

    If the possibility you raise were to be true, then no policy adopted at Westminster could be adjudged to be an “English only” law.

    My understanding is that The European Charter of Local Self-Government, would mean that this wouldn’t be the case, and that the actions of the UK Parliament (acting as the effective English Parliament) wouldn’t automatically apply to the more sensible parts of the UK!

    However, you raise an interesting point. If you were right, that would add a fair number of percentage points to that side of the constitutional question which would lead to that no longer being relevant to those of us in Macbeth’s country [1].

    [1] How’s that for convoluted phraseology to get round the ban?

  38. @OldNat

    Except that is it not the case that those pining for a UK “without a North/South Union” still want to be part of the UK

    OldNat – Legally, I do think you’re right by the way

    [what is banned, exactly?]

  39. OldNat

    Forget what I just said. It’s late…

  40. OldNat

    But if it were true it would be too late. Even if North Britain left and then returned to the EU can you re-establish grandfather rights? :D


    While such a situation would be pretty disastrous for NHS Scotland, NHS Wales, and Health and Social Care in NI, the political effects would be the same on the constitutional question.

    However, we could simply apply to become part of Mann and get round it that way. :-)

  42. Average approval ratings by calendar month (Dec-Feb):


  43. @ Old Nat

    “If the possibility you raise were to be true, then no policy adopted at Westminster could be adjudged to be an “English only” law.”

    I don’t think that proposition would make sense.

    But I was going to ask you about this. This whole workfare scheme everyone was debating yesterday, does that exist in Scotland? Does the Scottish government have power over welfare and unemployment insurance (or equivalent to that) and to regulate it? Or is that left to Westminster?

  44. @SOCAL



    Supposed to be for kids, but it does the trick. ;)

  45. Statgeek

    I was going to reply to SoCalLiberal, but you did it much more effectively than I would have done!

  46. @ Billy Bob (from the last thread)

    “One analysis I read had Rudd as a policy genius, but hopeless at implementation… whereas Gillard is very effective – but weak on policy formation. Pity they can’t work together.

    The position was the reverse when she replaced him in 2009, with polls showing Gillard more likely than Rudd to pull Labour back from a losing position against Abbott at the GE. She was also able to totally outsmart Abbott when it came to coalition building.”

    It is a shame they can’t work together. I get the feeling that they generally couldn’t stand him but while he was extremely popular, there wasn’t much they could do about him. But as soon as he showed electoral weakness, they rushed to get rid of him.

    She did outsmart Tony Abbot but isn’t he like Australia’s version of Rick Santorum? Like Rick Santorum except with the intellect of Dan Quayle or Jack Kemp? Is he really that hard to outsmart?

    “There was a bit more background in Saturday’s paper:


    Incidentally there has been some speculation that had Rudd had won this latest “spill” it could have precipitated an immediate election – if he was unable to command the confidence of the assorted Greens and Independents.


    It’s funny that they call it a “spill.” Do you guys use the same term for leadership challenges within the party?

    I think that might have been what did him in. I take it that the Aussie MPs select the leader and they may have wondered what might happen if Rudd took over only to see their coalition government fail and get defeated in a reelection landslide in a forced new election.

  47. @ Statgeek

    “Supposed to be for kids, but it does the trick.”

    Lol, that’s okay. I’m a big kid at heart I think. That answers my question so thank you.

    @ Old Nat

    Seems that Scots are governed under this scheme too (according to Statgeek’s link) and this isn’t an area where the SNP can reverse or change a Westminster policy. You know for once in my life I’m actually grateful for the lack of intellectual curiosity among Republicans. Because this seems like something they would really like and push to replicate here (if they knew about it).

  48. Quick question about accuracy of old polling – I’m comparing the positions of various oppositions (using ICM), but the accuracy of all polling pre-1997 has often been called in to question, so would this be a fair thing to do?

  49. Also, on the NoW thing – the e-mail evidence (submitted to Leveson) now suggests that Coulson knew that hacking was relatively widespread (100-110 victims) and back in July, Cameron said “If it turns out I’ve been lied to, that will be a moment for a profound apology, and in that moment, I can assure you I will not fall short.”
    Could Miliband force Cameron in to a big public apology while the story is still ongoing or would doing so be no big deal because any toxicity from the story has already hit?

  50. tingedfringe

    I think Ed will wait for Coulson to be jailed for perjury.

1 2 3 4