Probably not, as it happens. (Image: Flickr/Liberal Democrats)
Show Hide image

About that Liberal Democrat "private polling"...

The Liberal Democrats made a splash with their private polling. But the published results indicate that they may be grasping at straws.

The Liberal Democrats made a splash recently when they briefed a series of favourable private polls showing the party doing better than the national figures would suggest. Our sister site, May2015, went so far as to declare that the party will win "at least" 30 seats on the back of the figures. Now they've released one of the polls, showing the party just a point behind in Hornsey & Wood Green, a seat that, as I've said before, Labour expect to win even if they fall short badly across the country.

The numbers have already been greeted with scepticism by others in the polling community. The survey is weighted back to 2010 recalled voting, rather than to the midterm of the parliament. According to James Morris, Labour's pollster, this would transform Labour's narrow lead in the constituency to a seven-point one. Laurence Janta-Lipinski of YouGov, meanwhile, warns that the poll's structure - which asks respondents whether they approve or disapprove of the local candidates before asking the final question - many distort the outcome.

It may be, of course, that the Liberal Democrats' private pollsters are just smarter than everyone else's pollsters. So let's take the number at face value for a moment. Lynne Featherstone has been the Liberal candidate in the seat since 1997. She's an active, hard-working, high profile, and has held that she's held for a decade, the last time by more than 6,500 votes. Compare that to say, Berwick-upon-Tweed, where the longstanding Liberal MP, Alan Beith, is retiring, and his would-be successor, Julie Pörksen, inherits a majority of just 2,690. Or Wells, where the party has the benefit of incumbency but Tessa Munt has a majority of only 800.

Put bluntly: even if this "secret poll" is taken at face value, if the Liberal Democrats are a point behind Labour in Hornsey & Wood Green, what kind of a bloodbath are they facing elsewhere?

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.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Voters are turning against Brexit but the Lib Dems aren't benefiting

Labour's pro-Brexit stance is not preventing it from winning the support of Remainers. Will that change?

More than a year after the UK voted for Brexit, there has been little sign of buyer's remorse. The public, including around a third of Remainers, are largely of the view that the government should "get on with it".

But as real wages are squeezed (owing to the Brexit-linked inflationary spike) there are tentative signs that the mood is changing. In the event of a second referendum, an Opinium/Observer poll found, 47 per cent would vote Remain, compared to 44 per cent for Leave. Support for a repeat vote is also increasing. Forty one per cent of the public now favour a second referendum (with 48 per cent opposed), compared to 33 per cent last December. 

The Liberal Democrats have made halting Brexit their raison d'être. But as public opinion turns, there is no sign they are benefiting. Since the election, Vince Cable's party has yet to exceed single figures in the polls, scoring a lowly 6 per cent in the Opinium survey (down from 7.4 per cent at the election). 

What accounts for this disparity? After their near-extinction in 2015, the Lib Dems remain either toxic or irrelevant to many voters. Labour, by contrast, despite its pro-Brexit stance, has hoovered up Remainers (55 per cent back Jeremy Corbyn's party). 

In some cases, this reflects voters' other priorities. Remainers are prepared to support Labour on account of the party's stances on austerity, housing and education. Corbyn, meanwhile, is a eurosceptic whose internationalism and pro-migration reputation endear him to EU supporters. Other Remainers rewarded Labour MPs who voted against Article 50, rebelling against the leadership's stance. 

But the trend also partly reflects ignorance. By saying little on the subject of Brexit, Corbyn and Labour allowed Remainers to assume the best. Though there is little evidence that voters will abandon Corbyn over his EU stance, the potential exists.

For this reason, the proposal of a new party will continue to recur. By challenging Labour over Brexit, without the toxicity of Lib Dems, it would sharpen the choice before voters. Though it would not win an election, a new party could force Corbyn to soften his stance on Brexit or to offer a second referendum (mirroring Ukip's effect on the Conservatives).

The greatest problem for the project is that it lacks support where it counts: among MPs. For reasons of tribalism and strategy, there is no emergent "Gang of Four" ready to helm a new party. In the absence of a new convulsion, the UK may turn against Brexit without the anti-Brexiteers benefiting. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.