Two new voting intention polls today. The first by Survation for Good Morning Britain had topline figures of CON 48%(+1), LAB 30%(nc), LDEM 8%(+1), UKIP 4%(nc). Clearly there is no substantial change since their poll a week ago. Fieldwork was conducted on Friday and Saturday, after the leak of the Labour manifesto, and doesn’t show any sign of any impact.

The second was the weekly ICM poll for the Guardian. Topline figures there are CON 48%(-1), LAB 28%(+1), LDEM 10%(+1), UKIP 6%(nc). As many have noted, ICM are now are, along with TNS, one of only two pollsters still showing Labour support below thirty points (MORI last poll did the same, but that was several weeks ago when everyone showed Labour that low). It’s not that ICM haven’t shown Labour support rising a little. ICM have been showing Labour recovering slightly, it’s just they’ve been doing so at a slightly lower figures: at the start of the campaign ICM had Labour at 25-26% and they now have them at 27%-28%.

This seems to be a consistent methodological difference. The methodological differences between pollsters are complicated and various, and some of them work in opposite directions (ICM, for example, also reallocate don’t knows in a way that helps Labour) but the most obvious one at the moment is probably the approach to turnout. Traditionally British pollsters have accounted for people’s likelihood to vote by getting respondents to estimate their own likelihood to vote – put crudely, they ask people to say how likely they are to vote on a scale of 0 to 10, and then either weight them accordingly (someone who says they are 8/10 likely to vote is only counted as 8/10ths of someone who says 10/10), or apply a cut off, ignoring people who rate their chances below 5/10 or 9/10 or 10/10. Since 2015 several companies, including YouGov and Ipsos MORI, have also factored in whether people say they have voted in the past, weighting down past non-voters.

ICM and ComRes have adopted new approaches. Rather than basing their turnout model on people’s self-reported likelihood to vote, they base it on their demographics – estimating respondent’s likelihood to vote based on their age and social grade – the assumption being that younger people and working class people will remain less likely than older, more middle class people to vote. This tends to have the effect of making the results substantially more Conservative, less Labour, meaning that ICM and ComRes tend to produce some of the biggest Tory leads.

Full tabs for the ICM poll are here and the Survation poll here.

263 Responses to “Latest ICM and Survation voting intentions”

1 3 4 5 6
  1. With respect to the prospects of a breakaway party; I think it is about numbers and about critical mass. I think a dozen or two MPs joining the Lib Dems or founding a small breakaway party would likely achieve nothing. If there were enough MPs to become the official opposition, that would be different.

    I agree with WB for a great many MPs leaving the Labour Party would be an emotionally traumatic thing to do and a last resort. Whether they jumped would likely depend on whether they considered that they had permanently lost control of “their” party.

    So, if JC continues they may reason that all is not lost and stay but if there were a new leader from Corbyn’s wing they might decide that all is lost and it’s time to start again.

  2. No party needs to split to resolve its issues. New Labour was ascendant for 20 years, then Corbyn et al democratically clawed back control of the leadership.

    The right of the party now needs to put in some hard work to persuade members and win back control. Trouble is they seem too lazy and petulant to try.

  3. I am not concerned about variation in polls, rather the opposite. So many Polls showing 48-30 or thereabouts could we be seeing some herding?

  4. @ cafrew . as it happens I generally agree with you , i’m in favour of a mixed economy model , I accept there is a perfectly valid argument for nationalisation water , railways etc but not other industry where a properly vetted and regulated free market model I would view as preferable ie banks , energy , telecommunications , and I accept that for a centralist , pro-Europe , neo-liberal party immigration and globalisation would certainly be a tricky issues to get a handle on, For the record there is much in the labour manifesto I’m comfortable with thou the anti city of labour stuff does leave me a bit uneasy , and it does to me at least have whiff of a utopian wish list .

  5. That Lib Dem figure of 7% must be worrying in the extreme for them.

    On a UNS, it would give them just 5 seats.

  6. @ BERNARD – thank you for posting the poll. Note LDEM have 0-2 gain opportunities in Scotland and S.West London has 3 seats (1 hold, 2gain) that are highly dependent on the Remain=LDEM voter. UNS method probably misses these, however, yes I’m sure it’s alarming for them.

    With more news on Brexit proceeding “better than expected” (by LDEM potential voters anyway) I think what we’re seeing in the polls is the Remain switch-in voters switching back (to LAB or Green). LDEM have horrific churn. They lost almost 50% of their 2015 vote (to CON and LAB) and now looks like struggling to keep the new VI switchers they gained from LAB and Green.

    I like to look at the “loyalty” section VI versus 2015 actual vote as you can see who is loyal and where the switchers have gone.

  7. After the day I have had tele canvassing Coventry NW for the Theresa
    May Presidential Election, I can tell anyone interested that the Labour beast is wounded, but not dead.

  8. Kantar: CON 47 (+3), LAB 29 (+1), LDEM 8 (-3), UKIP 6 (-2)

    Changes since the last poll a week ago. Research 11-15 May

  9. Figures for the Lib Dems seem all over the place. The last 2 polls yesterday had them up a bit after a couple of drops at the weekend and this one is down again.

  10. TNS poll
    Con 47
    Lab 29
    LD 8
    UKi 6
    Grn 4
    Snp 4

  11. There is some humour in this election still: Buttonwood in the economist:

    “Old McDonnell has a plan. He eyes IOUs”

  12. @ Graham


  13. @Marco Flynn

    I agree about the uneasiness, I’m uneasy about all of them because we don’t really have enough experience of Theresa, Jeremy or even Farron and Nuttall as leaders to know where they really stand.

    Jezza’s policy announcements aren’t that extreme, but of course peeps will worry about his hinterland, what else may follow. They may worry about Theresa’s too: how much have things really changed since Cameron? She’s being even more cagey than Jezza…

    I don’t want too see too much nationalisation either. Energy is one thing, but I’m not having Gove or Blears designing the “National Synth”. Horrible thought. Unless I get to do it, obviously. Anyway they may not nationalise but just introduce a state player into the market. It seems a little vague…

  14. Poverty, inequality and falling living standards are important issues, but what most television vox-poppers seem to want is a leader with a bit more ‘oomph’. If Corbyn is to turn this polling supertanker around he needs to forget boring policy and put on some leather pants. And I mean rock n’ roll pants, not lederhosen.

  15. Yes, he doesn’t show his legs, not like Nicola and Theresa. Cameron showed his legs. Not sure about Blair or Cleggo…

  16. MikeB

    Now that is a truly horrible thought. I haven’t even had my tea yet. Leather pants now that will definitely not get my vote. To be honest the thought of any of the leaders in leather pants put me off- now Boris and maybe!

  17. @trevorwarne

    “thank you for posting the poll. Note LDEM have 0-2 gain opportunities in Scotland and S.West London has 3 seats (1 hold, 2gain) that are highly dependent on the Remain=LDEM voter. UNS method probably misses these, however, yes I’m sure it’s alarming for them.”

    Not sure that is true in Scotland where the remain voter has the SNP option. The SLD’s have to position themselves as the Unionist option which gives a vote in a referendum on the terms of Brexit.

  18. Sea Change
    Many thanks for your 2.50 post
    I am almost of your fathers generation although he is 11 years older than me. Like him I also completely rejected Osborne’s/Cameron’s project fear and what rubbish it turned out to be.
    I can still remember the war although I was much younger. My most vivid memory is of a V1 engine cutting out and watching it gliding down. It landed about 150 yards from our shop and of course our shop windows were blown out. We were unhurt, although as you can imagine at 4 I screamed the place down!
    Rationing was tough and I can also remember the awful winter of 1947, when I prayed for the coal delivery to arrive, we were so cold. I was a production director during the 70s so you can imagine how I enjoyed the 3 day week and the strikes. Actually I almost enjoyed the latter when I was involved directly as I found negotiating with trade unions relatively easy. I never had to back down to Union pressure, something I am very proud of.
    Totally agree with your latter points, we will find a way and it will be much better in the medium to long term.

  19. Sea Change

    Thanks for the interesting news about the ECJ ruling. It really is ironic.

  20. @Bernard

    “Remarkable how thing have almost completely reversed in 20 short years.”


    Not that remarkable when you factor in liberal media. Major’s administration weren’t that economically liberal, thus worrying much of the press who are, and were quite pro-EU and even flirting with the Euro in the ERM, to alarm the anti-EU section of the press. Consequently media switched to Blair’s form of liberalism.

  21. Is Labour’s strategy to go for voter share not number of seats?

  22. Looking at latest polls Election Calculus gives majorities of146 for one and 96 for the other, the first below 100 for a long time. Actually it seem as somebody else said it’s polldrums with majority somewhere in the region of 100-150.

  23. Is Labour’s strategy to go for voter share not number of seats?

    That would be hypocritical unless they’re about to endorse electoral reform.

  24. hireton.
    “expect major dislocations in financial services.”

    Whatever else you might say about banks, they are seldom slow to guarantee their own incomes. While everyone else has been messing about wondering what to do, I am sure they are ready for a smooth continuation of business, including whatever rlocation proves necessary as things develop.

  25. “Is Labour’s strategy to go for voter share not number of seats?

    That would be hypocritical unless they’re about to endorse electoral reform.”

    Not if they expect to loose and are only interested in the Corbyn dynasty continuing.

  26. “Is Labour’s strategy to go for voter share not number of seats?

    That would be hypocritical unless they’re about to endorse electoral reform.”

    Not if they expect to loose and are only interested in the Corbyn dynasty continuing.

  27. @ HIRETON – Scottish LDEMs (1 Hold, 0-2 Gain)

    LDEMs have two realistic Gain chances:
    Dunbartonshire East
    Edinburgh West

    In both cases it looks like they already secured some tactical vote support in 2015 (after IndyRef1 attempt to keep SNP out of those two) and given CON v LIB Brexit views they might not get that this time.

    With Greens pulling candidates in both seats I think it will be very close. Betfair has LIB as favourites to win Edinburgh West and about neck-neck in Dunbartonshire East.
    Looks like someone v.keen on SLIB winning Edinburgh West
    (if you think SNP hold that seat you can get 3-1 – I’m tempted!)

    The LIBs have a serious hypocrisy issue: denying need for IndyRef2 while the national party wants Brexit2 – not sure that sells well.

    The SLIB support is very isolated and not sure even Scottish specific polls will give us too much indication on the pocket support for these two seats. Do SCON voters vote SLIB in those seats to keep SNP out (as they did to some extent in 2015) or do SNP keep them with lower % of the vote but a more split opposition?

  28. @Trevor

    Good spot , I can only assume the locals don’t like the ‘new’ SNP candidate Toni Giugliano. Some local/private polling might be giving someone in the know a good tip off, although it’s not like it’s the 7 June already, still a long way to go. The trouble with bet fair is that in that situation even if you willing to bet a re-mortgage you might get no takers. I’d stay clear.

  29. @northernruralmodeoman

    I know Edinburgh West very well (my mother lived there for thirty years and I still stay there when I visit my step father), spent five days there a fortnight ago.

    Probably more important is the more recent history of the seat:

  30. @BARDIN1

    Ahhh. Ty local knowledge is too important when looking at individual seats. You’ll be taking Trevors money then?


    The Scottish Greens are standing in only three seats: Falkirk, Glasgow North and Edinburgh North and Leith.


    I got in early with SNP under 49.5 seats so just put a little on SNP winning Edinburgh West (at 3.95) as a “hedge”.

    I think SCON will win 9 but of the remaining 50 seats I see:
    The 2 SLIB ones as coin flip SLIB/SNP
    Edinburgh South maybe stays SLAB but close.
    2-3 others where SCON might win if the tartan Tories turn out in force.

    So SNP as 44-50. If SLIB win Edinburgh West then its 44-49 and the under 49.5 pays out. Might even win both bets if SNP take E.West but SLAB keep E.South or CON win an extra seat like Stirling.

    LDEM in S.W.London is more interesting. The new EU-UK FTA avoiding the national parliaments is another big nail in the project fear coffin. I can’t really see the LDEM revival and expect them to slide back in the next London poll. Project Fear 2.0 just doesn’t sell well with bankers, etc. when FTSE at new highs and people like winners.

  33. Lol

  34. @ BARDIN1 – SNP news on Edinburgh West is fairly old though? Michelle Thomson was kicked out of SNP ages ago. If she had stood as an independent she might have split the vote but by not standing does it not show SNP want to repair some image issues? Green’s also not contesting that seat (small % of vote but might be crucial)

    I had a good look at 2010, IndyRef and 2015 voting and I think we saw quite lot of tactical voting in 2015 between SLIB and SCON. SLIB collapsed across Scotland very similar to England-Wales with the exception of the Orkney seat (special case) and the two seats they might well have held.

    The (admittedly limited) sources I have in Scotland tell me SCON and SLIB are not buddies anymore (due to Brexit) and SCON will vote for their own party even if it keeps the seat for SNP.

    With Holyrood being MMP, Scottish parties are more focussed on %s than UK parties should be (ie SCON would rather up their own % than help SLIB win seats back from SNP). Compare Edinburgh West SLIB and SCON moves between 2010 and 2015 to other seats in Scotland – looks like 2015 was a tactical alliance to me?

  35. @Trevor

    Indeed it is old news but not that old (she is reported to have voluntarily resigned the SNP whip in late 2015). I really don’t know how much effect that will have locally

    Re alliances etc I think Brexit has complicated what was an already complex set of multiple loyalties.

    The SNP gained significant support from ‘stop the Tories’ tactics which may have drawn in some SLib voters and certainly seems to have drawn in some SLab voters.

    Brexit has further complicated things. Anecdotally I know of SNP voters who will not vote for them this time because they are pro Brexit but will revert after (On the basis they want Independence but don’t like the EU)

    I don’t know how its going on the ground – bizarrely the labour Manifesto will probably appeal to a few former SLab supporters who found the PLP too much to the right, it does after all copy much of the SNPs previous policy programme

    I need a shrugs shoulders icon!

  36. I wonder if Labour’s proposed 78.5% rate of deduction on income over £100,000 will picked up by the media and if it will have an effect on the election:

    45% tax
    2% NI
    22.5% Personal allowance withdrawal

    9% student loan repayment as an extra for some

  37. Trevor Warne

    “The (admittedly limited) sources I have in Scotland tell me SCON and SLIB are not buddies anymore (due to Brexit) and SCON will vote for their own party even if it keeps the seat for SNP.”

    I don’t think that any source is adequate to tell if that suggestion is accurate or not – at least in terms of the folk who will vote SCon or SLD (as opposed to the politicians and activists).

    As BARDIN1 says “Brexit has complicated what was an already complex set of multiple loyalties.”

    Even in 2015 the tactical voting attempt, by the Unionists, didn’t succeed – partly because their voters didn’t have a clear idea as to which party was best placed to beat the SNP.

    In the majority of Scottish seats the answer is quite simple – none of them!

    In a dozen or so, SCon would be the obvious recipient of votes from those whose primary reason for voting is anti-independence. But there will also be many non-indy folk who baulk at voting Tory – and specifically for the particular brand of Toryism being currently pushed by Davidson.

    In seats where the two minor “major” parties have a chance, their message will be confused by the media portrayal of “only the Tories”, so the tactical voting hope may fail again.

    I suspect that this election might actually be rather unpredictable in Scotland. As most voters will assume that England will put May into power anyway, they just might decide to vote for the party that most closely attunes to their beliefs – since it will make damn all difference to who is the next UK government anyway! :-)

  38. “McCluskey said he blamed “the constant attack of the media on Jeremy Corbyn and the image that they’ve pinned on Jeremy” ”

    There is something Orwellian about this sort of thinking. I am no fan of our press [in general] but to blame them for his lack of popularity, simply because they have quoted his own words back at him, is just silly.

    I think Ed Miliband had far more to contend with via distortions.

  39. @Oldnat

    There is a good article summarising the massive changes in Scottish politics and how the electorate responds to different election. It is here and I copy and paste a couple of paragraphs.

    “The SNP held on to its vote share from the 2012 local elections, about a third of the vote. Yet this is well down from its share in the 2015 UK General Election when they scored 50 per cent and the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections where they scored 47 per cent of the constituency vote and 42 per cent on the party list. Labour continues to decline, squeezed between Conservative unionism and SNP nationalism. Its vote fell to 20 per cent, from 31 per cent in 2012 and also from the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections (23 per cent in the constituencies and 19 per cent on the lists). The Conservatives achieved their best result since the 1980s, consolidating their position as the second party of Scotland with 25 per cent, about double their 2012 score and a slight improvement on their share in the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections (22 per cent in the constituencies, 23 per cent on the list).

    It is not possible simply to extrapolate from this to the June General Election. Turnout will be higher, there will be fewer significant independent candidates, and Scottish electors have shown an ability to vote differently at different levels of government. The first-past-the post system used for Westminster elections encourages tactical voting. Taken together with the results of the 2016 Scottish elections, however, it bodes well for the Conservatives in the short term. They made significant progress in areas where they can realistically expect to pick up Westminster seats, such as the Borders, the North East and Perthshire. In the longer term, however, they are a similar bind as the other parties. Their new supporters among the formerly Labour unionist middle class will mostly be Remainers. A Scottish Conservative Party tied to a UK Government supporting a hard Brexit, austerity and welfare retrenchment may soon lose its appeal to them. “

  40. Crofty

    “I think Ed Miliband had far more to contend with via distortions.”

    Very much so. But it doesn’t suit these people’s narratives.

  41. “There is something Orwellian about this sort of thinking. I am no fan of our press [in general] but to blame them for his lack of popularity, simply because they have quoted his own words back at him, is just silly.”


    Yes because stuff like trying to make it sound like Corbyn’s car ran over someone, rather than someone ELSE’s car, is “quoting his own words back at him”. Corbyn has no one else to blame but himself!!

    There’s something Orwellian about distorting reality. At least Ed M, did actually eat that sandwich…

  42. May we’ll be true. The had to go after Ed M. more… he’d reached 45% in the polls after press punished Tories with trumped-up Omnishambles when they backed Levinson. Plus he didn’t suffer the PLP resigning en masse…

  43. Also, Cameron was weaker in the polls in the run up to the election…

  44. @ OLDNAT/BARDIN1 – agree Scotland is complicated. My friend told me to look at 2010-IndyRef-2015 as “evidence” that 2015 had tactical voting (that might not happen in 2017).

    Scotland % in 2015 (change from 2010)

    SNP 50% (+30)
    LAB 24.3% (-17.7)
    CON 14.9% (-1.8)
    LD 7.5 (-11.3)

    Edinburgh W.

    SNP 39% (+25.8)
    LIB 33.1% (-2.8) – much better than elsewhere as better option to block SNP
    CON 12.3% (-10.9) – much worse than elsewhere, LIB had the better chance of stopping SNP

    Dunbartonshire E.

    SNP 40.3% (+29.8)
    LIB 36.3% (-2.4) – much better than elsewhere, best option to block SNP
    CON 8.6% (-6.9) – worse than elsewhere, so low to begin with that LIB was the clear option

    Dumfriesshire, C+T
    CON 39.8% (+1.8) – just held it, with help from tactical vote
    SNP 38.3% (+27.5)
    LIB 2.7% (-17.1) – the less likely union party so annihilated due to tactical union vote for CON

    The tactical vote for LIB in their two best chances failed in 2015. We know SNP are down from their 2015 peak but if the LIB vote in 2015 had some tactical help from CON then you can see a situation in Edinburgh W. where:

    SNP 34% (-5) – note they should gain the Green 2%
    LIB 28% (-5) – lost some tactical vote from 2015 and LIB generally lower in Scotland
    CON 25% (+13) – 2015 tactical LIB voters not helping them so much in 2017 plus general CON improvement

    NB ignored LAB/Others so % don’t add to 100.

    He thinks SNP will do better than expected because the opposition vote is going to be even more split than it was in 2015. SNP holding seats with a lower %.

    Also, as you say, since everyone knows it will make no difference on a CON UK win why bother with any tactical alliances – just go for %s and every candidate for him/herself.

  45. @MarkW

    Maybe you weren’t aware but even though who you vote for is secret the fact that you have voted isn’t. You can buy lists of this information from local councils.

  46. Carfrew.

    That’s rather specious and your sarcasm not really needed. I haven’t read anyone claiming that Corbyn was the actual driver, or that the incident was intentional – or indeed anything being made of it all really.

    It was certainly inaccurate and incomplete reporting but, since you’ve mentioned it a number of times already, perhaps you’d like to say whether you feel that that incident was what McCluskey was referring to, or whether is was simply the huge volume of statements, that are on record [or video….] made by Corbyn and going back over many years that will be constanly thrown at him by most of the media ?

    That was certainly, and clearly, the basis of my comment and I think it is disingenuous of people like McCluskey to pretend that those issues should somehow be left unmentioned.

    It’s just how politics works.

  47. @Jamie

    “I wonder if Labour’s proposed 78.5% rate of deduction on income over £100,000 will picked up by the media and if it will have an effect on the election:
    45% tax
    2% NI
    22.5% Personal allowance withdrawal
    9% student loan repayment as an extra for some.”

    I doubt that will be an issue for most Labour voters.

  48. @ SAM – thank you, good article (a tad biased perhaps tho?)

    I agree CON upside is limited but if they can unite more of the NO vote then you could see them nudge closer to 30%. We’ll see what the CON manifesto brings. My suspicion is we’ll see a clear break from Cameron/Osborne austerity but perception is difficult to shift.

    SNP will want to highlight the gaping hypocrisies in all UK parties. LIB want Brexit2 while blocking IndyRef2. CON want Brexit but not Indy. LAB – who knows what they want?

    I have a side bet with my friend that SNP will not win a seat with a % below 35%. He didn’t pass on the knowledge of the 2015 tactical voting until we’d bet. He thinks it will one/both of the LIB targets.

  49. Trevor Warne

    “LAB – who knows what they want?”

    Well, we know that Corbyn has come down firmly on the side of no Scottish Independence.

    It’s an interesting stance from someone who supports Northern Ireland continuing the Irish exit from the UK. No doubt he has a logical reason for it, but the contradiction isn’t easily explicable – unless he is simply a British Nationalist among his other beliefs.

    However, it still continues to mean that three Unionist parties are competing for around half of the Scottish vote, while only in Glasgow North is there a serious competition between the two pro-indy parties.

    Most councils will be agreeing their governing party/parties this week. The coalitions adopted by the councillors (often under heavy pressure from party HQ) will influence some voters.

    “I didnae vote X tae hae them going into coalition wi thae bastards in Y!” may only be a transitory response, but any election campaign is transitory too!

  50. @Croft

    Your post is unhelpful in almost every particular…

    – Bit “specious” to try and take the moral high ground after trying to label as “Orwellian” and “silly”

    – I didn’t suggest that anyone “say that Corbyn was the actual driver”, so that’s more speciousness. I said they made it seem like it was his car, which is the case

    – nor did I say anything about the “incident being intentional”.

    – as for mentioning it a number of times already, that’s a bit of a stretch as well. I confirmed to Syzygy that I hadn’t been aware that it wasn’t Corbyn’s car when she pointed it out.

    I don’t have a problem acknowledging that they will also quote Corbyn, but that’s a straw man of yours: I was just pointing out that it is not at all silly to note that he will also be misrepresented.

    I shouldn’t need to clarify this stuff, as I even noted it might have been worse for Ed M. (Not to mention his late father being subjected to it).

    Hope your knee is ok etc.

1 3 4 5 6