The Evening Standard has a new YouGov poll of voting intentions in London, the first London poll we’ve seen since the election was called. Topline voting intention figures are CON 36%(+2), LAB 41%(+4), LDEM 14%(nc), UKIP 6%(-3). Changes are from the last YouGov London poll, conducted back in March.

Compared to the general election this represents an increase of one for the Conservatives, a decrease of three for Labour and an increase of six points for the Lib Dems. A two point swing from Lab to Con is significantly less than polls are indicating for Britain as a whole (currently around about a six point swing). This difference is mostly because the Tories are doing worse in London than elsewhere and the Liberal Democrats are doing better; Labour’s drop in support in London isn’t that different to their drop elsewhere in the country.

On a uniform swing, the Conservatives would looking at taking Ealing Central & Acton, Brentford & Isleworth, Ilford North, Hampstead & Kilburn amd Enfield North. It would be enough for the Lib Dems to reclaim Twickenham, and to put Kingston & Surbiton and Bermondsey & Old Southwark in contention.

Earlier today we also had a new Panelbase GB poll. Topline figures there are CON 48%(+1), LAB 31%(+1), LDEM 8%(-2), UKIP 5%(nc), GRN 2%(nc). Full Panelbase tabs are here

286 Responses to “YouGov/Evening Standard poll of London – CON 36, LAB 41, LDEM 14, UKIP 6”

1 2 3 4 6
  1. @Rudyard

    Well done for keeping the faith matey – I’m getting a bit tired of alpha-male Tories comparing the size of their majorities!

  2. The tabs for the London YouGov poll are on the YouGov website. Top left corner of:

  3. jonesinBangor

    “policies like scrapping tuition fees……may well up their figures further”.

    Perhaps – but it is more likely to be temporary. The electorate are too street wise to be taken in by a competition as to who promises most. They will ultimately stick to the two main contenders – leadership and the economy (plus a good dose of Brexit) in the time honoured tradition.

    My feeling (and it is only that) is that Conservatives probably hit their high at 50% and Labour their low at around 23%. Labour now seem to have stabilised at around 30% and the Tories in the mid to upper forties – 48% even in the Panelbase poll. Danger for Labour is that the Tories are still keeping their powder dry.

  4. GRAHAM.
    In 1983 Labour had Foot and Healey as the front men for the campaign; but admittedly AW Benn undermining it.
    Corbyn won his seat in that GE.

    Benn said the result was a triumph as 8 million people had voted for ‘socialism’

  5. @Andrewm

    Will definately look at the links you kindly provided (thank you).

    With regard to Westmorland & Lonsdale constituency all I do is look at the evidence on the ground (lived here since 2003/4) and compare the ‘Orange tide’ that was apparant in 2010, which was then replaced by a considerable wave in 2015 and now is nothing but a few splashes here and there. Of course there is also the fact of what people say locally, and the enthusiasm for Farron has died as one might expect with any candidate who was hailed as the ‘local boy who will be good for the community’ (whichever party they represent).

    There is of course to be taken into account the fact that Farron may hold the seat as a sitting MP (the incumbancy effect), but that is all now I think has in his favour.

    All the ‘so-called’ evidence I have is only annecdotal, but I thought I would share it with others and clearly I think note it as such. Of course the ‘local’ aspect makes this interesting to me, and as the LibDems are only a minor party with few MPs I like looking at the national implications therfore of the national party and how it could affect the outcome of the GE.

  6. This London poll is very interesting indeed. For what it hints at is that Labour in some of its own territory is resisting the Tory tide. There was evidence of the same resilience in parts of Wales, Merseyside and Greater Manchester. The Marginals in the West Midlands look vulnerable, as do the smaller towns of the North. However, this would seem to indicate a very comfortable Conservative win but by no means a wipe out of the Labour Parliamentary Party.

  7. I find the debate on corporatiom tax rates interesting. To me it seems sensible to increase the rate, if you have a national debt moving towards £2 trillion. National debt has been increasing while the current government have been reducing the rate.

    Here is a link to a table of rates by country. The UK has the lowest rate of major economies. The US rate is nearly double.

    If the extra tax gained is used to invest in the country to help increase economic performance, then surely it is beneficial to business. If part of it is used to reduce or eliminate student debt, then those students won’t be saddled with long term debt. I have heard of students staying in jobs below the threshold salary so they don’t have to make repayments. That cannot be a good thing.

    South Wales Citadel is also crumbling, I tjhink.

    In Northern England the formerly ‘single industry towns’ outside the cities are also going away from the Labour Party, I think; north and east of the central spine of England.

  9. @Chris Lane 1945

    I think we agree and share a similar outlook with regards to most of the country. However, why do you think Labour support in South Wales is crumbling? Other than the losses in the Valley, largely to Independents (who are often various shades of renegade Labour) I thought Labour did rather well in the Locals in South Wales?

  10. @ Trevor Warne

    Yes, the Khan odds obviously reflect his non-PLP status. However, I have no doubt that a way would be found to ‘anoint’ him if desired.

    I also think that Labour will be very resistant to choosing a white Anglo-Saxon male next time.

    Meanwhile JC is doing quite well – he is calm and seems to be enjoying himself. And it is reflected in the polls.

  11. @ R Huckle

    When corp tax was at 27% there was a lower rate (21% I think) for small businesses. Has that been mooted today or is it a rise to 26% for all? Many small business owners will say S.d that for a game of soldiers. Then even for the bigger companies what will be the impact on dividend payments? Don’t forget the vast majority of those in private sector have their pension funds invested in shares.and hitting dividends hits share values. Raising corporation tax will impact on pensions much in the same way as Gordon Browns pension stealth tax.

    Raising corp tax is a great vote winner since the vast majority thinks it will clobber just the rich and large corporations. That is a very naive view as it will clobber in so many ways so many people

  12. @Alec

    “From @Rudyard, this shows the problem Labour currently have – “Labour doing well in the metropolis, I think.”
    Labour losing 5 seats in London is seen as ‘doing well’, pretty much sums up the delusional levels of back slapping among Corbyn’s fans.
    Until a more realistic assessment creeps in, I can’t see Labour making much progress.”

    That’s a little harsh Alec.

    Labour our up 4% in London since last month. There’s no reason why the can’t nudge up a couple of points more and reach parity with their 2015 figure.

    As far as seats are concerned that’s a really complex one. I’d be surprised if Labour held Brentford and Isleworth. Firstly, Isleworth is rock solid Tory and I suspect the Tories will be more motivated to vote. Brentford also isn’t really a classic inner city Labour town. Firstly it’s in London fare zone 4 (outer London), and is not very built up at all. Secondly, there aren’t many estates or high rise flats. It was actually a surprise the Tories didn’t take it in 2015. A Tory gain.

    Ealing Central and Acton has been gentrified to the degree that it’s a very odd Labour seat. I guess it’s diverse. However, it’s more aspirational lower middle class and professional middle class these days, than working class. It’s the kind of seat May should be winning, and she probably would were it not for Brexit. Labour should hold this seat for that reason alone.

    Westminster North – my old seat. Another seat Labour were expected to lose in 2015 but held on. Very, very mixed seat. A classic marginal. Some very poor areas, some very very rich areas, and a very diverse population. Very strong anti Brexit vote Also a popular local MP – Karen Buck. This is close but I suspect the Brexit issue and the incumbency factor will allow Labour to hold it.

    Hampstead and Kilburn. Next door to Westminster North. Again a classic marginal. Another area though where the Remain vote was very high. The local MP, Tulip Siddiq actually resigned from the Labour front bench over the Shadow Cabinet’s line on Article 50. A Labour hold.

    Ilford North – unfortunately I don’t know much about this seat. The suspicion is that as this is more East London/Essex man working class territory, and as the area generally voted for Brexit, that the Tories should have a strong chance here. Like Brentford, this constituency is in outer London which should favour the Tories. However, there is the Wes Streeting factor. Wes is marmite. Strongly anti Corbyn he may well have a personal vote that keeps him in place. However, he alienates as many as he draws and that could be his downfall. Tory gain.

  13. @R HUCKLE,

    AW will probably say that this is not the place to discuss policy differences but I do feel I should acquaint you with the law of diminishing returns. It is an inconvenient fact that all taxes have a level, above which, yields reduce. Osborne tested this by making successive reductions in Corporation tax and lo and behold, the tax take has increased. It is not yet obvious that we have got low enough to reach peak yield. Of course if we were to increase rates again there might be a short term increase in tax take before companies could either adjust their opperating model or move elsewhere but in the long term tax take would reduce. This would also reduce employment levels and income tax take.

    The effect on dividends would be catastrophic and the biggest losers would be pension funds, including the massive local government funds, leading to increased contributions from either the tax payer or the workers. Result – one dead goose, no more golden eggs.

  14. spending promises

    there is a saying that socialism is fine until they run out of spending other peoples money. Never was it better illustrated than today.

    having said that congratulations to to the libdems who found a new money tree today. £100 bn extra spending potential by not exiting the EU. This ,quite clearly, having been discovered in Vince Cables back garden is available right now to meet spending promises.No doubt the said tree can be plucked and replucked by them until the nation is well and truly plucked or something quite close.
    I suspect that the Tories are letting them get it all out there before the onslaught begins.the key brexit will be the one JC fudged:

    Are there no circumstances in which having no brexit deal is better than having some deal ? And if so will you walk away in those circumstances?

  15. @S Thomas

    “Are there no circumstances in which having no brexit deal is better than having some deal ? And if so will you walk away in those circumstances?”

    You’re assuming the Tories have an answer to that question! If they have, I haven’t hear it.

  16. RMJ1

    All very plausible, but like a lot of widely accepted neo-liberal economic theory, based on very little or no evidence whatsoever.

  17. @NICKP
    The evidence is there for all to see. Look at Corporation tax receipts. Some people don’t wish to see it or draw the obvious conclusions. The effect on company profits, employment, dividend levels and pension funds should be obvious also. Anyway, I am away to the garden to plant a magic money tree. If Jeremy and Vince can have one, I want one as well.

  18. no wonder Germany’s in such an economic mess as it’s missing out on all that extra corporation tax it could be collecting if it lowered its rate from 29.72 per cent!

  19. Not one mention of swingback or crossover on ukpr, I must say that I rather miss it all.

  20. “Magic Money Tree”.

    Like, say, £350 billion pounds printed and given to the banks?

    Tax receipts vary according to economic cycle, and anyway, if you announce that tax rates will drop next year, you’ll be amazed how many rich people will arrange to get paid a wee bit later.

    Hello to you again.
    Last Election was a vg tory performance. Tories still lead in Wales on the polls, by six points. I should think that shy tory syndrome is very pronounced in the Land of my Father, and Mother.
    Last GE the losing Labour MP for Gower-of all places- said that Labour culture is dying; the old myths of less force now.
    I expect losses for Labour there

  22. Alyn & Deeside
    Cardiff West
    Clwyd South
    Newport East
    Newport West
    Ynys Môn
    Seats projected by ITV report to go Tory under the 6% lead

  23. @RUDYARD

    Is that just anecdotal from Rod Liddle? To get that we would need something like 40-31-12-7 Which means the current polls are nearly as wrong pro tory as they were pro labour at GE2015. Would be a big disappointment for TM who must be expecting a 60 Maj as an absolute min. Labour should be cock a hoop as that would surely almost guarantee a return as HMG in 2022 assuming they can convince Corbyn to retire before then.

  24. @AR558

    Depends on who is elected to lead Labour after Corbyn surely? (I think the rules under which a list of candidates is formed from will likely change at or soon after this years Labour Party Confernece.)

  25. ‘Conference’. (I am sure I am not the first or last to wish their was an ‘edit button’. :) )

  26. @CROY

    After 12 years of a Tory PM, they will be a swing to LAB, yes the size is variable but if the Maj was 30-35 it would definitely be attainable for LAB to get a MAJ in 2022. If the MAJ is >75, realistically Hung parliament is the best LAB are likely to manage. (Like 2010 was too big for Cons to over come). Tories have increased seats 4 GE’s in a row 165-166-198-306-330 and should easily make it 5 in a row, the pendulum will begin to swing back. Remember the economy was booming in 97 and still the Tories got murdered as people just wanted a change.

  27. @RAF
    Brentford and Isleworth is a bit more complicated than that. It also includes Chiswick (rock solid Tory) and Hounslow (rock solid Labour)
    Isleworth is certainly not rock solid Tory (3 Lab councillors) whilst Brentford is a mixture of large council estates, Victorian terraces and modern posh flats.
    It’s probably classic marginal with creeping gentrification offset by a growing BAME population, still pretty Laboury.
    I’d have said it was a goner but the polling may suggest it’s going to be very close.

  28. @AR558

    I agree totally about the pendulum swinging back, but there would have to be an alternative that appealed, Corbyn or another left wing Labour leader will I doubt cause such a swing to occur.

    In 1997 Blair and New Labour provided it and hence the swing of the pendulum, without them (or some other such leader of appeal) I doubt Labour would even make but a minor dent come 2022. (Of course if Labour hasn’t split inbetween times that is.)

  29. @CHRISLANE1945

    I live on Ynys Mon (currently held by Labour). I’m also a Plaid member and was leafletting for them for the local elections the other week. During those I voted Plaid but in the forthcoming GE I shall be voting Tory to make sure full BREXIT goes through unimpeded and if my experiences door knocking prior to the locals are anything to go by, and awful lot of Plaid & Labour voters are behaving the same as me.

    My opinion (for what ts’ worth) is the Tories will take this seat easily, Plaid runners-up on a reduced vote share, Labour third on a reduced vote share.

    I’ve laready bet £50 on the tories to take the seat.


    Fair points about Brentford and Isleworth.

  31. I agree with those who say that the E(&W?) CPS decision was the right one.

    What is disturbing, however, about the way in which politics is being conducted is the lack of any sense of moral responsibility about “cheating the system”; being fined by the Electoral Commission; or while mounting the “everyone is as bad as us” defence being “economical with veracity”.

    May – ““But all I would say is actually if we look at the expenses issue, we have seen all the major parties and the Scottish nationalists being fined for mistakes having been made on national expenses.”

    One can probably forgive May for referring to the SNP (presumably) as “the Scottish nationalists”, since she isn’t very well informed on Scottish matters, but to go out of her way to invent that they were fined by the Electoral Commission, seems to suggest that she is a politician for whom the truth is an irrelevant concept in an election.

    There is a basic level of decency below which no politician should fall. Sadly, that level isn’t even recognised by some participants in the cesspit of Westminster.

  32. oldnat

    Who was it who did fine the sNP? someone did ,presumably, because they transgressed in some way.?

  33. S Thomas

    Nobody fined the SNP for breaching election expenses. May made it up. It was a lie.

    Of course, if anyone is so partisan as to believe that because Mrs May said something, it must be true, then their only hope of surviving in this cruel world is to be a lawyer, punting any old crap to the jury, in the hope that they won’t see their client as the professional criminal that they clearly are.

  34. @oldnat

    The SNP.have formally stated tonight that the party has never been fined by any regulator. May was in full Trump mode.

  35. My gut feeling is something in the region of a 80 to 120 conservative majority , alas I’ve come to assume that whatever the result the corbynistas will inevitably find a positive spin to justify Corbyn’s retention , I just can’t see how the moderates and the left will ever reconcile .

  36. This may have already been stated but I haven’d read all the posts. So here goes…..

    The London poll shows the Conservatives up 1% and Labour down 3% since the General Election. If that were replicated across all the UK then the Conservatives would have 38% and Labour 27%. That is precisely the projection from the recent local council elections. Spooky! From the local elections a Conservative majority of 110 (I believe) was projected. If we factor in that local elections usually don’t favour the Conservatives, and London is deemed to be going relatively less badly for Labour than the rest of the country, then surely the London poll is actually good news for the Conservatives!

  37. Is there a mid-week YouGov national poll due? (I know there was the YouGov London poll published today.)

  38. @R Huckle

    The US corporation tax promotes perverse effects. It is well known that US companies do not send overseas profits back to the US, as it would attract 40% tax. Instead they us overseas profits to buy foreign companies (and overpay for them). Neither of the US parties desires this outcome, but they don’t seem able to agree a way out of this outcome.

    Colbert may have optimistically claimed that “The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest [number] of feathers with the least possible amount of hissing.” You appear to believe that this is possible. As a cynic, however, I suspect that all too many politicians are so keen to obtain the feathers that they kill the goose in the process.

  39. @Croy

    Yes – Tory lead down 1 to 16.

  40. @RMJ1 – “It is an inconvenient fact that all taxes have a level, above which, yields reduce. Osborne tested this by making successive reductions in Corporation tax and lo and behold, the tax take has increased.”

    You are working on an extremely thin evidence base here.

    The cut in the main rate from 28% – 26% in 2011 was followed by a fall in receipts of around £2b, which rose in 2012 when the rate was cut again to 24%, but remained below the level when rates were at 28%. In 2013 the cut to 23% saw a small rise in total receipts, which rose again in 2014, so you might think you have a point – but then you would need to answer the question why in all those years of falling rates was the total tax take lower than in 2007, when the rate was 28%?

    In short, there is no evidence at all for you assertion, and every evidence that the general cycle of the economy exerts a far greater influence on corporation tax take that varying the rate between 21% and 28%.

  41. Con 46 (-2)
    Lab 30 (+1)
    LD 11 (+1)
    Ukip 5 (-)
    Others 8 (-).

  42. Tory lead -3 sorry. I clearly can’t count!

  43. @ RMJ1

    “AW will probably say that this is not the place to discuss policy differences but I do feel I should acquaint you with the law of diminishing returns. ”

    Yep aware of that, as i did study economics years ago.

    But given the US has some of the same issues, why is their rate 38%. Germany a rate of 29%.

    Other countries obviously believe that overall they can charge more corporation tax, without too much of a consequence.

  44. @OldNat

    It seemed to me that as well as her comments on the supposed wrongdoing other teams, May’s defence of her own side was a bit off too. She repeatedly claimed that “The CPS said no-one did anything wrong,” when actually they said that while there was wrongdoing, they didn’t have conclusive evidence that there was criminal intent behind it. She would no doubt say that she was just paraphrasing for simplicity’s sake, but it stuck out as a bit naughty to me.

  45. Corporation tax.
    BBC demonstrated on the 10 o’clock news how the tax take is higher now that it was when it was 28%. 50bn against 42 or 43bn I think.

    Trump is planning to reduce US corp tax. Macron is also planning to, to stimulate the French economy. Ireland already has a rate of 12% and as a result attracts much business there.

    To say a low rate does not stimulate the economy is nonsense.

  46. Got to say, the news coming from the Labour manifesto shows some balls, if nothing else.

    Putting aside the standard gripes of how to pay for everything, it’s a punchy list that seeks to tackle head on the long, long list of things that are really badly wrong in the UK. Stuff that is being almost totally ignored by May.

    Traditionally we would see this being palmed off as a 1980’s socialists wet dream, and the second longest suicide note in history, but this is the era of fake news and alternative realities. Can Corbyn’s relentless aim at real issues and simplistic sounding solutions gain a foothold in the minds of disaffected voters?

    It’s clear now why he commenced his campaign as the anti elite option – he is seeking to capture the mood of messianic acceptance that doesn’t focus too much on the detail, like Trump and Brexit.

    It’s a strong current he swims against, but I’m not going to criticise him for talking about solutions to the big problems. In this benighted neol!beral world of trickle up nonsense, this is rather refreshing.

    On the detail – many areas of uncertainty, but one disappointment for me. The talk of reversing cuts to corporation tax as a source of funding will sound alarming to businesses, but is a little lacking in imagination. I would have preferred to see the profits based tax abandoned, in favour of a turnover based tax.

    CT is relatively easy to avoid, especially by big corporations, but if this tax is abandoned altogether in favour of a tax calculated on the basis of turnover within the UK tax jurisdiction then that would be one way to bring the multinationals back to ground.

    Overall though, I suspect Labour know this manifesto will be bombed by the usual sources, but I guess they are hoping to launch an upswelling of the disaffected, and we’ve seen how impactful that can be when it works.

  47. @RAF

    Thank you. :)

  48. The labour manifesto leaked to the BBC and the Telegraph. That is a spoiler for Labour. Opponants can take it to pieces before labour has had the chance to spin it to best effect. Will it have any effect on the polls?

  49. A key issue about Corporation Tax is what it would do to investment, a point the Tories were trying to make on R4 this morning. However, I don’t think any argument that an increase would damage investment holds any water at all when UK business has utterly vast sums of cash sitting idle.

    Where a large increase in Corporation Tax could be truly beneficial is if it was accompanied by substantial relief for (real) investment (i.e. not just buying up some other company).

1 2 3 4 6