New analysis for Best for Britain, Avaaz and Hope not Hate which breaks down the results by constituency, has our most comprehensive picture yet of how the country would vote in a People’s Vote.
The results call the mandate to leave the EU into question. Two thirds of constituencies would now back remaining in the EU.
Our research shows that the country has moved significantly since 2016, with two thirds of constituencies in Great Britain now wanting to stay with our existing deal.
There is majority support for a final say for the people in every single one of the 632constituencies analysed in this research. This research also shows that, in the event of a people’s vote, staying in the EU would win by 56% to 44% leave – the highest level of support for staying in the EU since the June 2016 vote.
For the first time, England joins Scotland and Wales as having a majority of constituenciesthat support membership of the European Union; clear evidence that the question of the 2016 EU referendum needs to be revisited.
So how does this affect current Lib Dem seats.
Those that voted Remain have got more Remainy.
Tom Brake’s which voted to Leave would now Remain.
Norman Lamb’s North Norfolk has seen the Remain vote go up by 6% to 47.7%.
Here they all are…
Wera Hobhouse Bath June 16 68.3% November 18 73.3%
Jamie Stone Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross June 16 50.6% November 18 60.1%
Tom Brake Carshalton and Wallington June 16 43.7% November 18 53.3%
Jo Swinson East Dunbartonshire June 16 73.3% November 18 79.7%
Christine Jardine Edinburgh West June 16 71.2% November 18 75.9%
Ed Davey Kingston and Surbiton June 16 58.45 November 18 65.2%
Norman Lamb North Norfolk June 16 41.7% November 18 47.7%
Alistair Carmichael Orkney and Shetland June 16 59.7% November 18 69%
Layla Moran Oxford West and Abingdon June 16 61.8% November 18 65.6%
Vince Cable Twickenham June 16 66.3% November 18 70.4%
Tim Farron Westmorland and Lonsdale June 16 52.5% November 18 56.8%
And what about seats we have held in the past? Here’s a few random examples from across the country.
Berwick-on-Tweed June 2016 44.4% November 2018 50.1%
Ceredigion June 16 54.6% November 18 62.0%
Chippenham June 16 47.7% November 18 53.3%
Hazel Grove June 16 47.8% November 18 54.8%
North Devon June 16 43.0% November 18 48.9%
North East Fife June 16 61.9% November 18 68.7%
Leeds North West June 16 64.6% November 18 68.4%
Redcar June 16 32.4% November 18 44.6%
Richmond Park June 16 72.3% November 18 74.9%
Sheffield Hallam June 16 64.1% November 18 70.8%
Solihull June 16 46.7% November 18 52.8%
Thornbury and Yate June 16 46.7% November 18 52.5%
St Ives June 16 44.9% November 18 51.2%
And how about Stephen Lloyd’s Eastbourne? Well, it would still vote to leave, but only just. The Remain vote has gone from 42.4% at the referendum to 49.3% now.
So, if you are asked for evidence to support a People’s Vote, refer to this comprehensive study.
The Government can no longer pretend that its actions represent the will of the people.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
West End ward surgeries today #dundeewestend
Speculation over Labour's benefit cuts
Michael Crawford paints a picture of the young David Hemmings
Being a good conference guest
Robin Bennett
Mike Peters
Chris Lewcock
Roderick Lynch
7 Comments
The government has a mandate for Brexit, it is the referendum already won for Leave.
It has no mandate for any particular sort of Brexit.
Say anything about changes in attitude by some.
However, most have not changed.
Some have in either direction.
This party is utilising the so called People’s Vote only to stop Brexit, not to heal this country.
A shame that is.
OK, Lorenzo Cherin,
Do tell how to “heal this country” in the face of the damage of Brexit. What do you suggest? – Extra financial support to help compensate those areas that voted to remain?
Wouldn’t it be good if the open wounds of the 2016 referendum could be wiped out without a further referendum, but despite the malpractice and illegalities of the 2016 campaign, I cannot see any other way of putting a cap on the havoc than a fresh, better regulated referendum, in which if people do vote for a Brexit, it cannot be said that people could not know what they were voting for.
Media Headline….”No 10 denies making plans for second Brexit referendum”…
Well, that confirms it; a second referendum it is!
In the Sunday Times today:
A YouGov survey of 5,000 voters, commissioned by the People’s Vote campaign, shows that support for Labour could fall from 36% to 22% if they helped the Tories to pass a compromise deal.
Under those circumstances, Lib Dems support would soar from 10% to 26%.
The poll shows that Labour’s supporters want a People’s Vote by a margin of almost three to one — and an even bigger proportion would stay in the European Union if they were given the chance.
Those who voted Labour last year and remain the year before say they are more likely to switch to the Liberal Democrats (49%) than stay with Labour (41%). The survey suggests no compensating boost among those who voted leave in the referendum. In fact, it would be the Conservatives who would benefit if both main parties backed Brexit. Their support among leave voters would rise from 62% to 69%. Labour support among leave voters would slip from 21% to 19%.
Respondents, by big margins, think the withdrawal agreement would be bad for jobs and the NHS with four times as many saying it would make the economy weaker rather than stronger and five times as many concluding that it would raise prices in shops.
For most of this year, “remain” has led “leave” by an average of four to six points. But a more specific question which presents voters with a real choice between leaving on the terms negotiated by the government or staying in the EU shows a much larger gap of 18 points — 59% to 41%.
Findings from the poll show that of the 17m people who voted leave in 2016, only 60% (10m) say they would vote for the government’s deal, as many as 12% (2m) would vote remain, while 3m are not sure or would not vote.
In contrast, of the 16m who voted remain in 2016, 13.5m would still vote remain, while 1.4m would vote for the deal and 1m are not sure or would not vote.
Supporters of staying in the EU are significantly more enthusiastic and inclined to vote than leavers. Counting only those who say they are certain to vote in a new referendum, the option of staying in the EU currently leads by 63% to 37% as an 18-point lead among all electors widens to 26 points among those certain to vote.
Moreover, most Labour/leave voters who take sides back a people’s vote, by 56% to 44%. Again, the evidence suggests little downside to Labour backing a people’s vote. Indeed, among Labour supporters generally, such a vote is massively popular, with 77% in favour and 23% against.
I’m all for campaigning to remain, on the grounds that Theresa May has made a total mess of negotiating a deal and people are increasingly realising that remain is the best option. However, making claims about constituencies on a poll of only 8,154 people i.e. less than 15 voters per constituency is risible. MRP as a methodology is simply not up to it, but there are lots who like to talk it up (especially when it agrees with what they want to argue).
One more person in the representative and random sample (assuming it is truly representative and random) who said leave rather than remain would be a swing of over 14% in a constituency, but on a quick scan, I can’t spot a single seat that shows a move towards leave since the referendum. Those with more time and computing power should be able to find the exact number and estimate the expected number that would buck the trend, but the tendency for MRP to swamp the local with national trends is well known.
Indeed how the campaign considers its analysis for Hastings and Rye (Amber Rudd’s seat), is worthy of special mention, when it gets a split of 50.5% to 49.5%, way less than any margin of error, is truly astonishing. Amber Rudd and indeed Stephen Lloyd are not so naive.
Martin
I think much of your comment is fine.
I have disliked the immediacy of the view expressed uby this party, that Brexit, after the poll, must be stopped, rather than discussed, adapted, considered, moderated, ah…that word again!!!
I think exit fromBrexit has been what has kept this party so feeble in the public view.
A mantra is not a policy.
What do the leaders of it say of an EU army, no veto, majority votes, ever closer enlarged union.
Nobody advances the cause of the EU by sounding incredulous , in this party, about the rather lousy and stuck up attitude the EU organisation leaders, out of touch EU stalwarts, have to this country and the attempt to go for the Brexit voted in favour of by the electorate.
If the deal of May is awful, that is also the deal of twenty seven states combined, what of their intransigence or incompetence, it should be seemed to be at least shared.
I think this party is right to call for another vote, but has been wrong to presume, rather than be seen as a vote on a particular deal, a version of Brexit, it is, in the view of this party, a way to …exit from Brexit, that only.
The real question is what impact a campaign makes. Everyone assumed that would would stay in Europe until the boxes were opened. If we really think that a referendum is possible we should be honing our arguments now, and I see no sign of that.
The fact is of course that the problem for what is being called a bad deal is the Irish question. The backstop does mean that we will have problems because there won’t come a time when what is impossible becomes possible.
I realise of course that few, if any, MPs care about Ireland – but the bit that is in the U.K. is their responsibility. It is time that they took their respomsibilities seriously. Is it not time that the people of the rest of the U.K. had a say on the future of Northern Ireland?
For the avoidance of doubt, as they say, I support our staying in the European Union, but we had a referendum. It was not properly written. Someone had the idea that if they made the question short and simple everyone would understand it. Or they had no idea what they were doing? I do not want to see the U.K. as the Singapore of Europe. But without a clear campaign in favour of staying we will be in a worse mess than we are now: