Recent Posts

The unadjusted figures for this would be Lab 44%, Con 25%, and a lead of 19 points - so much like other recent polls. 

( or Lab 32, Con 18, LD 7, Grn 5, Ref 7, SNP 2;and Don't know or won't vote 27%)

I don't think there is much history of polling from immediately prior to a General Election  understating the LibDems. The polls have generally been fairly accurate for them, although of course their overall share vote is a poor guide to the number of seats they take, as this depends on how they perform relative to the Conseratives. 

But there is a fairly consistent pattern of the LibDems improving their share of the vote when we get to an General Election. To test this, I've made a comparison of the actual LD vote share to their average polling figure from 12 months earlier (so Dec 2018 for GE 2019, for example).

The comparative figures are:

GE2019 11.8% v 9% in polls 12 months before ( +2.8)
GE2017 7.6% v 7.1% in polls 12 months before (+0.5)
GE2015 8.1% v 8.7% in polls 12 months before (-0.6)
GE2010 22.7% v 19% in polls 12 monthss before (+4.6)
GE2005 22.7% v 21% in polls 12 months before (+1.7)
GE2001 18.3% v 15.4% in polls 12 months before (+2.9)
GE1997 16.8% v 16% in polls 12 months before (+0.8)
GE1992 18.3% v 14.4% in polls 12 months before (+3.9)

Quite variable results, but the range is from 'no improvement' to around 4% higher, at best; and the average is a 2% higher vote share than in the polls from a year earlier. 

I lived in Outer  East London (Redbridge) for many years without needing a car, which made me wonder whether the West side of London is less well served.

Looking at the Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituency, it is served by Seven tube stations, over three different lines: I think these are Uxbridge, Hillingdon, South Ruislip, Ruislip Gardens, West Ruislip, Ruislip and Ruislip Manor, which leads me to think that Ruislip in particular is rather well-served for public transport . An eighth station, West Drayton Overground, is on the constituency's southern boundary.

[ A few other stats for anyone who is interested: there is a significant proportion of households in Outer London which have no car (31%). This contrasts to only 16% in the neighbouring SE England region. And a slightly higher number of those who live in outer London (32%) say that they are able to live 'car-free', compared to 50% in Inner London. ]

centreforlondon.org/blog/car-ownership-census/

Looking at the polls from before and after the Uxbridge & South Ruislip (plus 2 others) by-elections on 20 July, the actual impact seems to have been close to zero.

The 11 polls since 20 July show an average Labour lead of 19.4%, whereas the 11 from 9-20 July showed a 19.2% lead.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

I think there's a fair chance that Rutherglen will  also have no polling effect. 

 It's terrible when someone bangs on endlessly about their own obsessions, isn't it....

This poll is now very old news. The fieldwork by Survation was in April, but the 'CLA' did not release it until late May. We discussed it here on UKPR2 on 28 May. 

Survation's figures still show the Tories 5% ahead (41/36), so 'Labour doing well' is on a comparative basis. The swing of 17% compared to GE2019 was 3 points higher than Survation's nearest full GE poll. This is despite the Tories retaining a slightly higher percentage share of their (large) GE2019 vote in these rural seats. 

And of course, Labour's lack of local organisation in rural areas is nothing new. It will have been a factor at previous elections, so  this should not affect the relative result - which is what a 'higher than average' swing is. 

NEW Westminster Voting Intention


📈19pt Labour lead - largest since Feb


🌹Lab 47 (+1)

🌳Con 28 (=)

🔶LD 10 (-1)

➡️Reform 4 (-1)

🌍Green 3 (=)

🎗️SNP 3 (=)

⬜️Other 5 (+1)


2,240 UK adults, 21-23 July

[Savanta don't prompt for Green or Reform, hence lower figures for them than most other pollsters]

The polls are almost certain to narrow closer to an election, but it is also highly likely that Uniform National Swing will not be a good model for seats won.

All pollsters' figures show larger than average Con to Lab swings wherever the Tories have larger support. So we have all the regional cross-breaks for the South and Midlands of England  showing larger Con to Lab swings, and Leave voters swinging far more than Remainers (among whom Labour already had a large lead). Then there are samples such as R&W's regular 'Blue Wall', and recently their 'Red Wall' which show higher swings than their general GB figures in seats which the Tories hold. We've even had rural voters swinging 18% to Labour per Survation, compared to around 14-15% in their full GB polls. Conversely, the Conservatives are seeing lower swings against them in London and in Scotland.

This is why pollingreport's UNS shows 'only' around an 80-seat majority despite being based on polls with Labour close to 20% ahead. Electoral Calculus shows a similar majority in the event of an 8% Lab-lead, with tactical voting. 

Has there ever been any objective attempt to establish whether "Grade Inflation" has really happened in relation to Degree levels, A-Levels or GCSEs/'O'Levels? 

It's often cited as if it were a fact, purely on the basis of more pupils achieving higher grades. However, I have never heard of any study objectively comparing the actual work or exam papers of 20-40 years ago with those of today. When challenged, the stock response is often just a litttle anecdotal tale of generous marking or simply to claim it is self-evident from results.

My own experience of seeing lessons in my local Primary School over the past 15-20 years always leads me to reflect that the teaching and learning going on is far better than I experienced in the 1970s. It is clear to me that today's 11 year olds (and those of the past 15 years)  are better educated than my generation was at the same age. And after decades of working on a 'School Improvemnet Plan', I find it bizarre to hear claims that any actual improvements are really the result of more generous marking rather than better teaching and a better understanding of the process of learning.

If you look at athletic records, it is clear than over time standards have been continually rising, and records broken, due to better-honed traning methods. Could the same be happening in academia, explaining the rise in grades rather better than anecdotal "Grade Inflation"? 

A new Deltapoll for 21-24 July shows their highest Lab VI since March, and a 23% lead:

Lab 49% (+1)
Con 26% (+2)
LibDem 9% (-2)
Green 5% (nc)
Ref 4% (-2)
SNP 3% (nc)
PC 2% (+1)
UKIP 2% ( !?)

Also a 60/40 lead for re-joining the EU, after removing DKs - a new record for Delta, whose 3 previous polls in July have all been around 56/44 on this. On the other hand, they also show a mini-revival for UKIP, and have Plaid Cymru taking 20% of all the 18-24 sample, so maybe better to take all this with a pinch of salt.

Tables are here . They have incorrect dates at the top, which does not inspire much confidence, either.

deltapoll.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Deltapoll-230724_trackers.pdf

As mentioned with their previous poll, I still wonder if they have recently made an unannounced change of methodology. Their last 5 polls show an average Lab lead of 22%, whereas their 12 in January-March averaged 17%. 

Opinium adjust back to 2019 turnout levels, while YouGov do not. But their fieldwork findings are very similar, so that 'unadjusted' Opinium looks much like YouGov, and vice versa.

Even after an adjustment to 2019 turnout levels by party, YouGov's current Con VI is only around 27% (or 24% without) . Opinium's last 4 polls (after adjustment) also average Con 27%. 

But as you say, this isn't realistic for a GE figure. Both YG and Opinium prompt for Reform and Greens. They get an average of around 8% for Reform. I'd expect more like 3-4%, with nearly all of the difference going to the Tories. Labour are likely to get back some support from the Green VI, too - particularly in close contests, where there is a clear pattern from previous GEs of a lower Green vote. 

Survation's polls are useful in this respect, as they do not mention any party names in their Voting Intention question. The effect of this generally seems to be to halve support for Ref and Greens, and conequently give more to Con and Lab. Most recently their figures were Lab 46%, Con 28%, LD 12%, Ref 4%, Green 3%. This would then still need an adjustment for 'Don't Knows', but Survation record fewer of these (as 'undecided') than other pollsters due to the way they structure their questions. 

We don't have a pollster who reflects both the 'squeeze' on Ref/Green and the reversion of 'Don't Knows', but if we did, the figures would be around Con 31, Lab 44. 

The other factor to bear in mind is that there is likely to be an issue with 'false recall' in many pollsters, apart from those with panels - namely YouGov and Opinium. An obvious example is Savanta, whose respondents generally include roughly equal numbers of voters who claim to have voted Labour as Tory in GE2019. If there is a proportion of voters who have forgotten they switched to the Conservatives, then this inevitably skews the headline figures their way. As a result, Savanta's 'raw' figures, with lab leads of 25-30% turn into headline leads of around 15%. So they may be getting about the right result for the wrong reasons. 

That's exactly what Opinium's 'new methodology' does. They re-weight those voters who give an actual Voting Intention, so that the implied turnout matches that of GE2019.

And the result is a 6 point reduction in Labour's lead from 23% to 17%, as described yesterday. 

The last 4 YouGovs have averaged a 22.5% Labour lead, so if the same were applied there, we'd again get around a 17% 'adjusted' lead. 

21% was the average loss to the Tory vote, across the 3 by elections - 7% in Uxbridge, 26% in Selby and nearly 30% in Somerton.

But the Con to Lab swings averaged 'only' 15% in the two Con/Lab contests, 6.6% in Uxbridge, 23.7% in Selby.

This is still in line with the current polling average: a 19% lead is a 15% swing from GE2019. 

And other than Uxbridge, the pattern continues of 'above average' swings in Con-held seats, and 'below average' in Lab held by-elections. Selby's 23.7% swing was nearly 9 points ahead of that implied by current polling, whereas in Labour-held West Lancashire 6 months ago, the swing was around 6 points below the polls at the time.

We've just joined CPTPP without any referendum, so there is a recent  precedent. 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSy_lwQUR9Y


But to answer, Carfrew' s question, the only poll I can find ended up as a tie on the question of whether we should have another referendum in the next 5 years. 

www.whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/do-you-think-there-should-be-another-referendum-in-the-next-5-years-on-britain-rejoining-the-european-union/

As this is lower than the 58% who typically want to rejoin (and 61% per YouGov's most recent poll), it seems that there must be some who just want to rejoin, but don't want a referendum (as we've done with CPTPP). I would imagine that most Leavers don't want a referendum where they would be likely to lose.