Four internet polls this week have suggested the referendum race – which today enters its fully regulated phase so far as campaign spending is concerned – continues to be very tight. Both YouGov (in one poll) and TNS put the two sides on 50% each (once Don’t Knows are left to one side) while with a 48% figure for Remain, ICM put support for staying in the EU below 50% for the first time. Meanwhile YouGov published a second poll that gave Remain no more than the narrowest of possible leads.
ICM’s data were weighted by reported probability of voting, which reduced the Remain share by one point. TNS did not include the responses given by those who initially said ‘Don’t Know’ but then said ‘Remain’ or ‘Leave’ in response to a follow-up question; if they had been included Remain would have been credited with 52%. But none of this dispels the impression that the contest is anything but close.
But what if we look underneath the bonnet? Is there any evidence that either side is making progress in persuading voters of the merits of their side of the argument, progress that might perhaps eventually bear fruit in the form a swing in vote intentions? Here it is the first of the YouGov polls (conducted for The Times) that is most illuminating. For it asked its respondents a series of questions about what they thought the consequences of remaining or leaving the EU would be, questions that the company previously asked in February (immediately after David Cameron had concluded his renegotiation of Britain’s terms of membership). We can thus see how much difference, if any, the last couple of months of campaigning has made to voters’ views on the issues.
In truth, neither side seems to have made much of an impression. For example, 31% now think we would be economically worse off if we left the EU while 24% reckon we would be better off. The figures are virtually identical to those last February when they were 31% and 23% respectively. Equally, at 32% the proportion who think it would be good for the NHS if we left the EU is little different now from the 30% that were of that view two months ago. Meanwhile there is an equally small increase, from 11% to 14%, in the proportion who think leaving would be bad for the NHS.
But there are a few instances where one side or the other has made progress. Immigration is now seemingly even more of a strong card for the Leave campaign. The proportion who think immigration would fall if we left now stands at 55%, up five points on February. Meanwhile, more surprisingly perhaps, there has been an increase, from 16% to 25%, in the proportion who feel that ‘we would be less at risk from terrorism’ if we left the EU (while the proportion who take the converse view remains at 10%). True, this is an issue on which most people (48%) are still to be convinced that remaining or leaving would make a difference either way. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister’s argument that the UK would be more ‘secure’ if it remained in the EU is not proving to be as persuasive as many Remain strategists seemingly assumed it would be.
However, one argument on which the Remain side has made marked progress is its claim that prices will go up if we leave the EU, a claim that features quite prominently in the government’s controversial information leaflet that is being distributed to all voters. Now 36% believe that prices would increase, up from 23% in February. Only 6% think that prices would fall as a result of leaving the EU, little different from the 8% who were previously of that view.
What these trends suggest is that while the two sides have made some progress on those issues on which they were already relatively strong in the eyes of voters, neither has had any success in counteracting its negatives. As a result, the arguments have become yet more evenly balanced in the eyes of voters. On the one hand they consider voting to remain in the EU to be the ‘safer’ bet economically. On the other hand, they regard leaving as the better way of ensuring that Britain’s borders and its health service are ‘protected’. Little wonder voters appear to be divided so evenly down the middle on which way to vote.
By John Curtice
John Curtice is Senior Research Fellow at NatCen and at 'UK in a Changing Europe', Professor of Politics at Strathclyde University, and Chief Commentator on the What UK Thinks: EU website.
The young will value having the economic strength of the EU around them. At 90+ I have had the time to savour the value that the EU economy holds for me. It would be extremely rash to vote to leave the EU.Report
I am female 69 1/2 years old, educated with Diploma of Sciences in Nursing & a Post Grad. MA History
from Exeter Uni (in my 50o. Speak fluently several languages & still teach French part time. I don,t think
that makes me an old uneducated folk. AND I WILL VOTE TO LEAVE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. MY DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN MONTHS AGO & I WILL NOT CHANGE MY MIND. I,ve read the above comments. Anyone deciding to VOTE LEAVE seems to me FAR BETTER INFORMED. The REMAINers
only present doom & gloom with statements like”we don,t know what will happen, a leap in the dark,
could & might this & that. Ah, that is so “POULE MOUILLEE”. At my age & with still my good reasoning intact I choose to VOTE LEAVE. I would rather deal with a national governing body than a continental one which is ENTIRELY, I REPEAT ENTIRELY UNACCOUNTABLE. Neither do I want to be run by the nose by the Germans. It may not be arms invasion but it surely looks like MONETARY INVASION. The
result would be the same, you would be SUBJUGATED, that means under their thumbs. & again we would have no FREE BRITAIN BUT DEUCHLAND UBER ALLES. Kinds regards Marie-Bernadette Report
My grandad and a very very large percentage of leave voters seem to be repelled by the EU simply because they don’t like the idea of “those damn French and Germans” running our country, which really is just traditional old people racism and doesn’t sound very educated to me at all, especially since their beloved monarch Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is more German than Aldi. Frankly, they have protected the rights of our workers, consolidated the Human Rights Act that British lawyers drafted under Winston Churchill (which the modern Tories were disgusted by because they knew it meant they couldn’t spy on people like they wanted to, and it would protect us from Thatcher’s idea of a police state) and Germany and France are both fighting the most destructive aspect of TTIP, the Investor-Sate Dispute Settlement Courts. Meanwhile our own government will sign us up to TTIP whether or not we leave the EU, just with all of the nasties that benefit their chums in big business. I’d rather have the EU protecting the real people of this country from the Tories than going it alone for them to destroy our country.Report
I have to say I take exception to the comment “just traditional old people racism and doesn’t sound very educated to me at all, especially since their beloved monarch Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is more German than Aldi.”
If anything The Queen had she followed normal procedure would have become part of the Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksberg family which is basically Danish. (The Greek connection came in with the election of one of the sons of Christian IX of Denmark to the Green throne) Queen Victoria became a Saxe Coburg Gotha on her marriage to Prince Albert so one would assume therefore, given your comment, that you recognise the fact that a wife normally follows the husbands family line. In this case it could have been Mountbatten due to his grandfather on his maternal side taking the name from the more Germanic Battenberg. However the Queen is a Queen Regnant rather than Consort and to maintain the family name Windsor was kept upon her marriage. Whichever way it was Prince Louis of Battenberg, his Son the Earl Mountbatten of Burma and Prince Phillip himself all actively fought for this country. Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor joined the armed forces, Her Father George VI fought at the battle of Jutland for this country. I have to ask have you do so yet?
I think the fact that we still have a monarchy (which to be fair does have a fair amount of European blood mixed in with it even if it does descend directly from the Scots Stuarts through Sophia of Hanover who’s mother was Elizabeth of the Paletine and sister of Charles the FIrst) tdoes have such a hybrid of ancestry just shows how tolerant we actually are and the term racist which you use to describe older peoples attitudes. If we hadn’t been they wouldn’t be here now.
As to the older generation (including it seems your own grand-dad) not sounding very educated because they wish to leave the EU. I would point out that if they were uneducated how have the modern generation become educated. Many old people are retired and perhaps not familiar enough with computers to be in a position to read your insulting comments but many still have degrees and high levels of intelligence. Also many of the oldsters had no option but to fight for this country, When you have, or are prepared to do the same, you may be in a position to have your views respected but to be so condemning of their views, and even if disagreed with, deserve more respect than you would appear to be willing to give them, or even your grandfather. I am sure he must be suitably proud of you
As to TTIP that is an argument for another dayReport