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 5 6
  1. The survey dates of this ‘latest’ London are 27 April – 2 May. So fairly old data and well after the UK Local elections. Some might wish to bear this in mind before taking too much credence from it.

  2. @Robert Newark – look at the figures, and take account of the changes in the tax calculation as well. Osborne reduced the headline rate, but introduced some significant changes in investment allowances and other areas that had the effect of increasing what was counted for CT.

    The headline figures are somewhat misleading because of this.

    I would agree that tax becomes inefficient beyond a certain point, but that this isn’t necessarily linear. As I said above, ditch CT altogether and introduce a tax calculated on the basis of sales would be better. Google can easily pretend that UK advertising is sold in Ireland, but we should then just base a tax on the proportion of their global activity based in the UK. They won’t stop trading here if we do that, and they end up paying a fairer share of tax.

  3. @Robin – “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.”

    That’s the point I was making. Osborne reduced the CT rate but removed quite a lot of the reliefs for capital investment, which is one reason why the CT take rose with a lower rate.

    What he did was directly to reduce investment incentives, and favour profit distribution.

  4. I presume the leak of whichever draft of the ELab manifesto this is, is designed to damage Lab’s prospects under Corbyn?

    While I lamented earlier about the lack of basic decency in the vicious world of Westminster politics, I forgot that the decency levels don’t rise much above the pits, when it comes to an internal party civil war.

  5. Alec
    I do in principle support a change to a tax on turnover, as it would be very difficult to avoid. Such a scheme was set up by Sarkozy in 2008 in France as a means of encouraging new small business start ups. Principally aimed at sole traders it was designed to be simple and straightforward which, indeed it was. It was very difficult and expensive (in cash flow terms) for start ups previously. The downside was that no expenses can be charged but then if the turnover rate is at the correct level that maybe less important.

    I would not be surprised if Mrs May/Hammonda is not looking at turnover based corporate taxes.

    Having seen the headlines of what is in the Labour manifesto, it is exactly what I expected. Another suicide note return to the 1970’s imo.

  6. @Oldnat

    Let them leak away. Lab now up to 30% on most polls. Can they get higher?

    The fascinating part of the Tory/Lab battle this time around is that the Tory campaign is almost exclusively confined to Brexit, whereas Labour’s is almost exclusively confined to domestic policy. In some senses the details don’t matter. This is a pure heart election.

  7. @OldNat

    That should be the Tory/Lab battle in England and Wales.

    It goes without saying that there isn’t much of a Tory/Lab battle in Scotland and none at all in Northern Ireland!

  8. Alec
    “I would have preferred to see the profits based tax abandoned, in favour of a turnover based tax.”

    I agree that that is the logical alternative, and I can see some advantages. It would be a bit complicated to implement though wouldn’t it? Surely there would have to be a different rate for different industries because of the different profit rates? For instance I believe that supermarket companies work on quite thin margins of around 5% whereas others have much higher margins.

    An across the board rate would risk turning some companies into loss-makers unless it was very low.

    Anyway, the proposed rise in corporation tax might be popular in some quarters but I can’t see it affecting VI that much.

  9. On corporation tax, it cannot be analysed except in the context of the entire tax system, and how that impacts on companies’ economic activity.

    It is different the more the company is in the business of profits mad elsewhere – if you can significantly put your overheads in one country whilst having profits taxed in another, then corporation tax rates really become significant. Otherwise you are just shifting round the precise point where tax is paid, but not making that much impact on businesses.

  10. RAF

    “The fascinating part of the Tory/Lab battle this time around is that the Tory campaign is almost exclusively confined to Brexit, whereas Labour’s is almost exclusively confined to domestic policy”

    While in the Tory/SNP battle in Scotland the Tory campaign is almost exclusively confined to opposing independence, while the SNP focus on “a better future”.

    Unsurprisingly, since SCon have done a 180 degree turn on Brexit, they don’t emphasise it much.

  11. Hi Alec

    “Putting aside the standard gripes of how to pay for everything,”

    Isn’t it the salient point that you can’t put those gripes aside? If you could an election would simply be a contest of who could promise the most spending.

    I think the Labour party are being very naive, of course many people will respond positively to individual policies which sound nice e.g. no tuition fees. However, each person only gets one vote and they might like one or more individual policy and even say so to a pollster who asks them, but when they cast their vote the overall perception of economy management (and probably leadership) will be the important factor, as other polls have found.

    Labour and Corbyn are massively untrusted on the economy, so to offer lots of spending is naive when the Tories and the right wing press will simply say, incessantly, that their sums don’t ad up.

    This is why I think Labour is heading for a wipeout.

  12. @Woody

    “Labour and Corbyn are massively untrusted on the economy, so to offer lots of spending is naive when the Tories and the right wing press will simply say, incessantly, that their sums don’t add up.”

    They may say that, but Labour are going to some lengths to get independent experts verify that their sums do add up.

    Take today’s education policy pledge funded by raising corporation tax. The IFS said that while it may not be the best thing for the economy, the sums did add up.

  13. There does seem an awful lot of people turning out for these Corbyn rallies, if they are turning out at a rally they will turn out to vote. Maybe there is a shy Labour effect and maybe the polls have over compensated for GE15. So maybe the VI is nearer 35% Lab 41% Con

  14. Barry Goldwater and Michael Foot had some great rallies…

  15. Hi RAF

    The IFS statement, which has been parroted all day, simply said that the CT rise would cover the cost of the Education spending in the short term but would have a detrimental impact in the longer term. It didn’t even know about these other policies so I expect that come the final totting up the IFS will be in the “it doesn’t add up” camp

  16. Hi Bill Patrick

    I think Neil Kinnock had a very successful rally in 1992.

  17. Just some random thoughts but…

    Does anyone else have a slight feeling these polls maybe be slightly underestimating the Labour support? And over estimating the Conservatives support? There was an awful lot of people at Corbyns rally in York Wednesday and a decent turnout in Leamington earlier in the week.

    Theresa May hasn’t really got going. Seems like she is happy to play it safe and stick to small crowds in controlled environments and not really engage with Joe Public… She appeared on the BBC One Show on Tuesday and looked uneasy in that environment. It’s as if she had no personality outside politics and is robotic in a way. Undecided voters pick up on things like this.

    Whereas Corbyn seems to be doing the opposite, he’s out and about, engaging with people and connecting with them Labour are definetly targeting the young vote. They have promised to scrap tuition fees and this leaked left wing manifesto will appeal to students and young people.

    I read somewhere nearly 1 million people have registered to vote since the election was called (closes 22 May) and if you just ASSUME these are most likely all young Corbyn supporters for arguments sake : 1,000,000 ÷ 650 seats = extra 1,538 Labour votes per seat… It could affect marginals.

    Once you add together – possible accurate polls, loyal ‘New Labour’ type voters voting despite the Toxic Corbyn effect, no Lib Dem rival and these extra new young registered voters… then the Conservative Majority may well not be that big.

    And to cap it off the Conservatives bring up Fox Hunting again. People are immune to seeing humans being killed (happens every week on the news with ISIS / Syria), but a picture of a cute, fluffy fox dead and covered in blood = vote loser. It will being doing the rounds on Social Media no doubt… Why risk it? Why even go there? Stupidity.

    I will be voting Conservative and I want Theresa May to win but the crowds and campaign so far, do have me a little skeptical of the polls.

    Just thoughts, not facts but it concerns me.

  18. Well, I think it’s all very interesting. Nobody’s manifesto ever adds up (the tories habitually have ‘no plans to raise VAT’ but an unplanned rise follows the election as night follows day)
    This is the first time I’ve thought Lab could make some serious progress. Everybody assumes what politicians say are lies but there are some real attention-grabbers in there. After all, I suspect people really knew that there would not be £350M per week pumped into the NHS as a result of Brexit but there seems little doubt that it had a pretty big influence.
    I just wish Labour could get across the fact that taxes are currently higher than at any time during the last Labour regime and that the Tories have always borrowed more than Labour, even leaving aside the last 7 years

  19. “II just wish Labour could get across the fact that taxes are currently higher than at any time during the last Labour regime and that the Tories have always borrowed more than Labour, even leaving aside the last 7 years”

    ————–

    Well maybe they can get it across in the Mirror, but in the Times, Telegraph, Mail, Graun etc.?…

  20. It’s at this stage I wish somebody would do some constituency polling, and then again in 2 weeks so we can see how the campaign is going where it matters (pretty please, Lord Ashcroft?). We’re seeing UKIP voters going to the Tories, and we saw the same at the local elections, but UKIP support is typically highest where the tories did well anyway. How many 2015 seats that were Lab>Con>UKIP are actually at risk of being flipped Blue by this movement? On the other side, it would be interesting to see where Labour are losing votes, as again if they are losing support in seats they don’t hold anyway, it’s not a problem.

    As things stand its still good for the Tories and bad for Labour (and not great for Lib Dems so far), but its still so difficult to tell quite how good and bad it could be.

  21. @Bigfatron “I am less convinced – I suspect May will use a large majority to push through a ‘harder’ Brexit, with the risk of pissing off her small, moderate wing, but permanently ending the larger Tory rift on Europe.”

    I agree this is the only sensible strategy. There are relatively few ultra-Remainers. The party clearly has united on delivering Brexit, even if many have reservations on what will happen to the economy without a good deal.

  22. This London poll makes for very gloomy reading indeed for Labour.

    If these figures are correct for London it must mean that polls covering the whole country are concealing even larger swings against Labour elsewhere than is initially apparent, which likely explains Labour’s recent terrible performance in the local elections.

    It also explains the Lib Dems unexpectedly lack lustor performance outside London.

    If the difference in swing in London is as severe as this suggests Labour is set to be driven back into London and core areas of certain cities, and will, in this election, cease, in any sense, to be a UK wide Party.

    It also has implications for the share of the popular vote which will finally be recorded on the day. Turnout is much lower in London and the inner cities than elsewhere.

    So if Labour’s vote is concentrated in the areas of low turnout it’s National share will be even lower than the Opinion Polls are suggesting.

    Furthermore by inflating the apparent share of the popular vote in the country as a whole, London is misleading voters in certain Tory winnables into thinking that Labour are ahead there and so hardening the determination amongst Tory canvassers to keep going and Tory voters to turn out, whilst misleading Labour people into thinking they’re likely to win.

    It might not even be certain that this Labour lead in London is saving many marginals there. The Labour vote might be solidifying in London seats in which they have big majorities, but not in the marginals.

    If Labour aren’t careful they are in for an even bigger catastrophe in this election than the polls suggest.

  23. Looking back again at these London figures it appears to me that the Tories must now be on more than 50% of the popular vote in England outside London, and might even achieve that feat on the day

    Considering the wide range of alternatives available, that would be an astonishing achievement, especially if combined with ending up well behind the Tories in Scotland and even losing to the Tories in Wales.

  24. With regards alternatives to CT, we already have a tax on turnover. Its called VAT.

  25. On company tax.

    Companies pay a balance of taxes on their activities, the main ones being:

    Rates on their premises
    Vat on their sales
    Corp tax on their profits
    Employers NI

    It is not uncommon for tax paid to be close to 40% of the money they receive from their customers. We already have a balanced tax system where companies are taxed in different ways on their activity. Taxing turnover is a bit daft really because it would mean activity would face double taxation if it was out sourced, in addition to low margin businesses being penalised at the expense of high margin business (eg professional services or property development).

    The tax increase proposed is taking tax from 19% to 26%; increases tax to pay by more than a third. Would that make companies think hard about booking profit in Ireland where the tax rate is 12.5% or relocation their HQ to Dublin or Geneva? That I guess would be the risk of the policy.

  26. Neil

    Well, firstly I personally voted Remain. Still, as you say, Project Fear negatively impacted the outcome it seems.

    However, I am not sure why people’s deep mistrust of the establishment in general, and the EU in particular (to put it v mildly), is going to mean they vote for policies unrelated to the EU in that sense, that might trigger the economic malaise that we have so far avoided.

    That’s making 2 + 2 = 5, and it’s not a logic I subscribe to at all.

    More than ever we need to show the world we are open to business every bit as much as other countries businesses could opt for, not proactively demonstrate that we are retreating into isolation (effectively) through some socialist ideal of raising the tax intake regardless of the terrible timing, which is likely to reduce investment, jobs, wages, and even the total tax intake itself.

    Whether you’re for higher Corporation taxes or not, there’s a time and place for everything.

  27. At least the Labour proposals would solve the immigration problem. The numbers would still be in the hundreds of thousands but they would be going out instead of coming in. Come to think about it, there would be more houses available too, even though house building would probably cease. What’s not to like?

  28. Hello

    So 4 weeks to go. I’d be interested in views of people more experienced in watching polls what the realistic last time for any meaningful changes in the polls are.

    What I mean is setting aside (i) small changes because of differences between polls and reality etc and (ii) small late swings of a % point or two which often happens, at what time does TM breathe more easily and take comfort that the double digit, mid-teen lead is real and its too late for that to gradually get whittled down? I’ve been half expecting it to creep down bit by bit and end up in the mid single digits but at some point, it gets too late for a meaningful change and whether the blues win by 10%, 15% or 20%, it still delivers a lot of seats and a large majority. I’m thinking about factors such as Blair launching a new centralist party, some social-media storm dramatically changing the polls….at some point, it becomes to late for something like this to change things. (I’m assuming no scandals etc happen which are game changers).

    Thanks

    Adam

  29. The London vote shares I came up with based on regional data looked different to this YG London poll.

    When I looked at the dates the data was collected, it’s out of synch with the data I used (the London poll data is older).

    Looking at the same data point, my data showed Labour 40 Con 34 LD 15 UKIP 5 vs the London poll Lab 41 Con 36 LD 14 UKIP 6

    I’m happy with that !

    BTW my data showed a closing between Lab and Con since the London poll data was taken, latest being Lab 37 Con 37 LD 14, UKIP 6.

  30. Adam – Brexit and how voters who ignore other issues vote; whether Lab leavers, 2015 UKIP voters or those who don’t usually vote in GEs but did in the referendum make this Election unique.

    All GEs are unique of course but this one has a dominant issue for more voters in a way I can’t recall (my first 1979 when 16). Labour leavers (or more accurately non-Tory leavers) will bring a bonus vote to the Conservatives that is clear but 3%? 5% who knows and some is Corbyn related perhaps.

    (E&W as 2015 was arguably pro/against indy in Scotland).

  31. @Jamie

    It’s worth remembering that firms can also reclaim VAT on their inputs.

  32. @Jamie – “The tax increase proposed is taking tax from 19% to 26%; increases tax to pay by more than a third. Would that make companies think hard about booking profit in Ireland where the tax rate is 12.5% or relocation their HQ to Dublin or Geneva? That I guess would be the risk of the policy.”

    Yes, I think essentially it would, which is why I picked on this as something Labour had made a mistake on.

    Lots of people also pointed out that we do have VAT, which is a turnover tax, which demonstrates that my posts were very clearly written.

    What lots of economists (from left and right) are talking about is a profit tax based on turnover. Say Google makes $12b global profit, HMRC will decide, either from Googles published accounts or by sticking their finger in the air, how much of Goolge’s activity is conducted in the UK, and then tax them X% of profits based on that.

    Public listed companies have to disclose earnings and profits etc, due to stock market rules, but if large private companies that are registered in tax havens don’t publish full details of their accounts, then HMRC simply decides what they think their profits are and then sort out the tax.

    The worst thing that could happen here is tax haven companies start being more open about their profits if they think they are being overtaxed – which would be fine – and in the very worst case, companies decide to cease trading in the 6th largest economy in the world. This would also be fine, as the rules of economics suggests someone else would pop up to replace them.

    Many people will say such ideas are outrageous, but let’s face it – if we were sitting here reading about economists plans for a global economy based on the neol!beral nonsense we’ve lived through for the last 5 decades, we’d be be saying that was outrageous.

    Time for a wholesale change, and it really isn’t that difficult if we simply decide that there are ways nation states can manage their affairs for themselves, instead of letting corporations dictate policy.

  33. Oops – ‘not’ very clearly written!

  34. Just came across a curious statistic from the ONS feb 2017 migration statistics. Reading through to see if there was anything about to be used as inflammatory material I happened on the table for NI registrations. This has two lovely lines showing from 2010 a fall in registrations for non-EU nations, and a rise for EU registrations. I do believe this just might demonstrate the reason why there have of late been more EU registrations.

    The government crackdown on immigrants worked! But of course, it only applies to those from non-EU countries. The free market of employers in the UK reacted by deliberately recruiting more people from the EU, thus pushing up numbers from there.

    Like as not, this isnt about push from the EU to come here, but pull from UK industry demanding labour. Leaving the EU will do nothing to solve this, and can only result in a reversal of the trend. There is even a tiny tail on the figures, where post-referendum non EU registrations have tweaked up, while EU registrations have tweaked down. Non-significant, of course. Oh the nature of unintended consequences.

  35. @Chrislane1945 @Ronald Olden

    I entirely agree with your analysis as to what is likely to be going to happen outside of London and the major metropolises.

    Chrislane1945 you’ve stated that this election will be no better for Labour than 1935 and perhaps significantly worse but not as bad as 1931.

    I have extrapolated the 1935 result to a 650 seat house and then would see the Tories on 408 seats with a 166 Majority as a minimum.

    I think that kind of result is likely, I can’t see Labour beating their 1983 vote share and the Tory vote share will be considerably higher.

    The Tory VI is holding steady mid to upper 40s and before Crosby’s Cannon broadsides do maximum damage while Labour have all but shot their bolt already.

  36. A company’s income derives from money paid to it for the goods or services it provides. Therefore all company taxes are paid for by customers.

  37. @ CMJ – I also had data from crossbreaks showing CON quite a lot higher in London (with reverse of course in LAB) but I was only using the YouGov polls so missed the narrowing you saw.

    The larger sample of ES poll (versus small crossbreaks in nationals) means it should be more trustworthy.

    I’ll be keen to check crossbreaks on national polls to see if confirm one way or the other.

  38. Regarding Brexit there seems to be only two courses

    1 Years of negotiations and long transition period leaving U.K. semi-detatched until eventually rejoining. Thinking about it 27 national parliaments have to pass the deal – that is not going to happen without conflict and hold ups. The two years can be extended so extended negots and extended transition period 10 years or possibly rejoining when political mood changes

    2. Leave soon on WTO terms – this year. Weather the storm, restabilise by election in 2022.

    My guess is 2 and May needs the majority to ‘weather the storm’ and hopes that the situation is stabilised by 2022

  39. SEA CHANGE.
    Good Morning; I have had a lazy start to the day in Bournemouth East, on my day off from the classroom, before I run through some wards in the Constituency here, which may well be a Tory hold!

    I agree that Labour will not go down to 1931 levels, but there may be a split in the Party after the GE if Corbyn decides to stay on.

  40. I don’t think anyone pointed out what perhaps is obvious, that VAT is a tax on all goods, whereas the others discussed are currently taxes on only goods made in the UK. The former does not disadvantage UK manufacturers, while the latter do.

    Similarly, taxes on turnover from companies operating outside the Uk would give a level playing field to UK based companies.

  41. Looking at the latest YouGov figures the 16 point lead is very much in line with other recent polls showing leads in the range 16-19 points which would give majorities in the 100-130 range for the Tories. I see no need to think about modifying my own forecast at the moment. As always i will be more interested in the detailed questions in the YouGov poll.

  42. @Adam

    Final two weeks many elections turn then because people start paying attention. Remember a majority is not good enough for May she needs to considerably increase it or this will all seem a waste of time. I think many elections turn in the last couple of weeks, GE 92, HR 11, AV referendum, arguable EURef.

  43. @Trevor Warne

    I only use You Gov data.

    That fact that I was within the MOE of a poll means I’m quite happy.

    The key is how the cross breaks are processed to overcome the small and potentially unrepresentative nature of a single data point. That is why I use EWMA.

  44. Candidate List Day! – Looking for the “will not runs”

    LDEM putting someone up everywhere, except Brighton Pavilion – Green Seat! (ie as expected):
    http://www.libdems.org.uk/ge_2017_candidate_list#

    Obviously so are LAB and CON:
    http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/general-election-2017-candidate-list
    (haven’t see full CON list yet)

    The important list (for seat predictions) will be UKIP (if they do not post a candidate and we assume most of those votes subsequently go CON).
    If I see it first I’ll post it, but if anyone beats me to it, could they post it up.

    Scottish Greens – heard they need to post 10+ to get funding but likely to avoid any swing SNP seats. As discussed with ProfHoward I don’t think it will make much difference anyway. Possibly Stirling, very outside possibility of Edinburgh seats.

  45. Dave,
    “A company’s income derives from money paid to it for the goods or services it provides. Therefore all company taxes are paid for by customers.”

    Customers derive their income from companies who employ them and will not work for a wage they regard as inadequate. . Therefore all personal taxes are paid by companies. Chicken and egg.

    The important thing is to intervene in the money cycle in such a way that money does not pile up in the hands of one group at the expense of another.

  46. @Chrislane1945

    Bournemouth East. Are you seeing much of a Lib Dem revival there? Con % should be close to 60% with the UKIP collapse.

  47. CL1945

    @” but there may be a split in the Party after the GE if Corbyn decides to stay on.”

    This is going to be fascinating, now we have seen the Labour Manifesto.

    You have to hand it to JC-he sticks uncompromisingly to his Bennite principles.

    So-if the second attempt by Labour in 35 years to get a majority to vote for this stuff fails-what then?

    If Corbyn resigns -as he should, having failed with a radical plan,-then Labour returns to the Centre Left.

    If he stays , to ensure Labour remains Bennite, then the Centre Left must surely leave him?

    Mind you-I don’t discount the attraction to the public of an attack on rubbish train services/rip of energy suppliers/NHS & School funding shortfalls/Low Pay/Corporate Tax avoidance & evasion/etc etc.
    But the usual JC bogeymen you have to accept with the package will surely frighten the horses?

    As I say-you have to admire his commitment-but I think he has gone over the top , if the leaks reflect what finally emerges.

    The poll movement post Manifesto launch will be interesting.

  48. Has anyone else noticed the advertisement for a certain bookies asking what are the odds on a Labour Majority from the GE?

    The advert which I saw when loading this site this morning has a load of varying odds, all scratched out, and then announcing their odds of 33/1, then comments saying they didn’t just pluck this from the air, and the picture they use is a certain ‘Diane Abbott’.

    The total disaster of her interview last week will remain in the electorates conscious and subconscious thoughts throughout this campaign (as demonstrated by the advert), and that could end up being a major negative come June 8th.

    (I have not mentioned the name of the bookies as not sure it would be either permitted or thought of as ‘bad form’ to do so.)

  49. @Danny “Customers derive their income from companies who employ them and will not work for a wage they regard as inadequate. . Therefore all personal taxes are paid by companies. Chicken and egg.”

    Not true. Customers derive their income from many sources. private investments, asset sales, public share dividends, interest on deposits as well as salaries.

    Whereas all company tax is indeed paid for by customers.

  50. @ CMJ – thanks. My crude average of last three crossbreaks was a little simple and agree on sample sizes, etc. would have expected 2-3pts MOE. Can I ask – what is EWMA? I feel like I’m missing something beyond just poll – poll differences.

1 2 3 4 5 6