Tories will make no gains in Scotland, poll shows

YouGov survey suggests Tories will fail to improve on single Scottish seat.

There's a new Scottish poll from YouGov in the Scotsman this morning which suggests that the Tories will struggle to improve on the solitary seat they gained in 2005.

The poll puts Labour on 37 per cent, down just 2 points since the last election, with the Lib Dems down 1 to 22 per cent, the Scottish National Party up 3 to 21 per cent and the Tories up 1 to just 17 per cent.

If repeated on a uniform swing, the figures would allow Labour to regain Glasgow East from the SNP and Dunfermline West from the Lib Dems. Meanwhile, Nick Clegg's party would gain Edinburgh South and the SNP would take Ochil and South Perthshire from Labour.

Here's a full breakdown:

Labour 39 (+2)
Lib Dems 12 (+1)
SNP 7 (+1)
Conservatives 1 (nc)

Based on the Tories' current poll lead, the minute swing to them in Scotland implies, however, that they're performing disproportionately well in other regions such as the Midlands and the south of England.

All the same, presented with the poll finding by a Scotsman journalist, Cameron replied:

Poll . . . poll shmole. We have got a big one on Thursday. What's the point of worrying about polls now? Everyone has got a chance to vote on Thursday.

That Cameron has been forced to resort to the line "There's only one poll that counts" is sign of diminished confidence in the party. The Tories are neither where they wanted to be, nor where they expected to be.

The weeks that Cameron hoped to spend leading a majority government will now be spent desperately trying to win support from the Democratic Unionist Party and others.

Follow the New Statesman team on Facebook.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.