Reform UK would win if general election held tomorrow, poll suggests
This means that if a general election were held tomorrow, Reform's leader Nigel Farage would probably be elected prime minister.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives had only 15 per cent of the estimated vote share in the lowest result ever recorded by Ipsos, and the highest ever for Reform.
The figures from the polling of 1,180 people show Labour's plunging popularity, after winning the 2024 general election with the biggest majority since Tony Blair.
Only 19 per cent say they are satisfied with the work he is doing, while 73 per cent were dissatisfied, according to the poll.
The figures showed that 54 per cent of Labour voters and 48 per cent of Tory voters have changed their support, with a high proportion of defectors from both going to Reform.
If that played out, there would be just 10 Conservative seats while Labour would be reduced from 403 to 140.
Gideon Skinner, senior director of UK politics at Ipsos, said: 'The disappointment with Labour is clear, even among those who voted for the party in 2024. We know from Ipsos research how difficult it has been to shift entrenched public pessimism over the cost of living, immigration, and the state of public services.
'So far, Britons do not think Labour is delivering the tangible change they were hoping for in 2024.'
Earlier this month, Reform was hit with chaos after the man brought in by Nigel Farage to professionalise the party quit following a row with their newest MP.
Zia Yusuf, a Muslim businessman, described new Runcorn MP Sarah Pochin as 'dumb' after she challenged Sir Keir Starmer over the legality of women wearing the burqa in the UK during Prime Minister's Questions.
After fury broke out about his comment, Mr Yusuf, who had been the target of anger by many activists over several months, announced his resignation. He returned to the party in a new role two days later.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
5 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Blaenau Gwent and Merthyr Tydfil UC claims up since election
Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney Conservative executive member Gareth Potter and Edward Dawson, chairman at the Heads of the Valleys Conservative Federation, have both slammed the Labour government as 2,095 households in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney and 1,852 households in Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare have signed onto Universal Credit since Labour took office. They claim the rise in households claiming Universal Credit is due to Labour's record tax burden and "strangling" of businesses with regulations. Gareth Potter, Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney Conservative Executive member, has slammed the Labour Government over the increase in Universal Credit claims (Image: Gareth Potter) The Chair of the Heads of the Valleys Conservative Federation, Edward Dawson, said: "After Labour attacked businesses with higher taxes and more regulation, it was a sad inevitability that it would result in fewer opportunities here in Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare, and more people signing onto Universal Credit. "Only the Conservatives understand that it is the makers who create jobs and growth, not the Government. "But with more tax rises coming this Autumn to pay for Labour's failures, it is people and businesses in Blaenau Gwent, Rhymney, Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare who will be left paying the price." The Conservatives claim that since Labour entered office, unemployment has jumped to 4.7 per cent, its highest level in four years. Real wage growth has fallen to just 1.1 per cent, and the number of people on payroll has plummeted by over 164,000 jobs since the Autumn Budget, which they claim means more families struggling to pay the bills and more people signing on for benefits, including 2,095 in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney and 1,852 in Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare. The politicians claim that these statistics show that "Labour isn't working" for people in Wales, and that the country is at "breaking point." The politicians claim more than 2,000 people have turned to Universal Credit since the general election (Image: NQ) They say that 1.1 million more people are claiming Universal Credit since Labour entered office in July 2024. This information comes from Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) official statistics, which show that in July 2025, there were 8.0 million people claiming Universal Credit, up from 6.9 million people in July 2024. However, a DWP spokesperson said: "As more people have moved from legacy benefits onto the modernised Universal Credit system since July 2024, it is to be expected that the number of people claiming the benefit will increase." The spokesperson also said: "However, the figures are yet more evidence of the broken welfare system we inherited that is denying people in South Wales and across the country the support they need to get into work and get on at work. "That's why we are rebalancing the rate of Universal Credit to increase work incentives, while also investing £3.8bn over this parliament to genuinely help sick or disabled people into jobs, while ensuring there is always a safety net for the most vulnerable." The DWP's background information states that the final roll-out of ESA customers being invited to claim Universal Credit started in July 2024, and since then, across the country, 494,690 have claimed Universal Credit, as of June 2025. The background information also states that there are numerous reasons people will be in the "No Work Requirement," including having caring responsibilities, and this makes up 46 per cent of Universal Credit claimants. In terms of unemployment, the Conservatives say that unemployment remains unchanged at 4.7 per cent after rising for the tenth month in a row. The unemployment rate for 16 and over was 4.7 per cent in April to June 2025 – up from the 4.2 per cent left by the last Conservative Government. The unemployment rate has risen or remained static every month since June to August 2024, and has now reached its highest level in four years, since June 2021, according to the Office of National Statistics (ONS). The number of people on payroll has fallen yet again, by over 8,000 in July alone, according to the ONS. In July 2025, there were 8,353 fewer people on payroll than the previous month. Since the tax hiking budget in October 2024, there are 164,000 fewer people on payroll. Real wage growth has slowed to just 1.1 per cent. In the three months to June 2025, real wages using CPI inflation was just 1.1 per cent – down from the 2.8 per cent in the prior three months to March 2025 and below the 2.5 per cent the Conservatives left in the three months to June 2024. The Conservatives claim that the "mismanagement of the economy" by the Labour government is "hitting businesses and working people." They say that monthly real gross domestic product (GDP) is estimated to have fallen by 0.1 per cent in May 2025, and that the tax burden is increasing to an "historic high," and inflation is almost double the Bank of England's 2 per cent target. They also say that the Institute of Director's (IOD) Economic Confidence Index found that business confidence has hit its lowest ever since the index's introduction, surpassing the lows seen at any point during the pandemic. The IOD's Economic Confidence Index hit -72 in July 2025, falling from -53 in June, to hit its lowest ever level since the index started in 2016.
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why did Lucy Connolly receive a 31-month sentence for Southport tweet?
The case of Lucy Connolly has sparked intense debate since she was jailed for inciting racial hatred online following the Southport attacks, with some criticising her sentence as excessive. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Connolly's sentence was 'harsher than the sentences handed down for bricks thrown at police or actual rioting'. Here, the PA news agency explores her case and 31-month prison sentence. – What offence did Lucy Connolly commit? Connolly pleaded guilty in September to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X, formerly Twitter. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.' The post was viewed 310,000 times in three and a half hours before she deleted it. The charge, contrary to section 19(1) of the Public Order Act 1986, said that she 'published and distributed written material on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, which was threatening, abusive or insulting with the intent thereby to stir up racial hatred or whereby, having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred was likely to be stirred up thereby'. The 1986 Act covers offences around incitement, public disorder and harassment, and covers both online and offline offences. – How was Lucy Connolly sentenced? Connolly admitted a 'category 1A' offence, meaning that her culpability was deemed to be in 'category A', and the harm was in 'category one' – both the highest categories. Guidelines on how to sentence offenders for several crimes are published by the Sentencing Council, an independent body which is led by the judiciary. The guidance for racial hatred offences states that those who commit such a crime are to be deemed to have high culpability if they demonstrate one or more of three factors. These are using a 'position of trust, authority or influence to stir up hatred', showing an 'intention to incite serious violence' and demonstrating 'persistent activity'. A publication is considered to cause 'category one' harm if it 'directly encourages activity which threatens or endangers life', and there is 'widespread dissemination'. The maximum sentence for the offence is seven years behind bars. Defendants who commit category 1A offences can be sentenced to between two and six years in prison, with the 'starting point' for sentences – the point used before aggravating and mitigating factors are considered – being three years. – How did the sentencing judge categorise the offence? During sentencing, Judge Melbourne Inman KC said both prosecution and defence barristers agreed that the case involved a 'category 1A' offence. He said the timing of the post was a 'further significant aggravating factor' to the offence, which came amid a 'particularly sensitive social climate'. He added that in the three and a half hours between Connolly publishing and deleting the post, it was 'widely read', having been viewed '310,000 times with 940 reposts, 58 quotes and 113 bookmarks'. In mitigation, Judge Inman said Connolly had no previous convictions, that it was her first time in prison, that she did not repeat her statement and deleted the post, and that she 'sent some messages to the effect that violence was not the answer'. He also said he accepted she still 'very keenly' felt the loss of her own child several years ago, and that she regretted her actions. But he also found that Connolly had 'little insight into, or acceptance of' her offending. He said: 'Whilst you may well have understood the grief of those who suffered their own tragic losses in Southport, you did not send a message of understanding and comfort but rather an incitement to hatred.' He added that the sentence he would have imposed after a trial was one of three and a half years – 42 months – but then reduced this by a quarter because of Connolly's early guilty plea, resulting in the final sentence of 31 months. – What happened when Connolly appealed against her sentence? At the Court of Appeal in May, judges dismissed a legal challenge against her sentence. In a written judgment, Lord Justice Holroyde, said: 'There is no arguable basis on which it could be said that the sentence imposed by the judge was manifestly excessive.' Lawyers for Connolly had said that Judge Inman 'miscategorised' the offence, claiming her culpability should have been deemed as 'category B', and that the mitigating factors outweighed the aggravating features. But Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mr Justice Goss and Mr Justice Sheldon, ruled that Connolly 'willingly pleaded guilty' to the offence and that Judge Inman was 'entitled, and indeed obviously correct, to categorise the case as he did'. Connolly's husband, Conservative councillor Ray Connolly branded the decision 'shocking and unfair'. The Northampton town councillor, and former West Northamptonshire district councillor, said his wife had 'paid a very high price for making a mistake'. But Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer defended it earlier this year. He was asked about Connolly's case after her Court of Appeal application against her jail term was dismissed. Asked during Prime Minister's Questions whether her imprisonment was an 'efficient or fair use' of prison, Sir Keir said: 'Sentencing is a matter for our courts and I celebrate the fact that we have independent courts in this country. 'I am strongly in favour of free speech, we've had free speech in this country for a very long time and we protect it fiercely. 'But I am equally against incitement to violence against other people. I will always support the action taken by our police and courts to keep our streets and people safe.' – What has the response been to her case? Lord Young of Acton, founder and director of the Free Speech Union, which funded Connolly's legal challenge, said: 'The fact that Lucy Connolly has spent more than a year in prison for a single tweet that she quickly deleted and apologised for is a national scandal.' Conservative and Reform politicians have decried what they call 'two-tier justice' in her case comparing it with that of Ricky Jones, a suspended Labour councillor who was found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder at an anti-racism rally in the wake of the Southport murders. Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Reform UK's deputy leader Richard Tice has also proposed 'Lucy's Bill' after Connolly's case in Parliament, which would allow people to mount mass appeals against punishments they deem to be too severe or lenient.
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Watchdog urged to probe ‘dangerous shambles' of Afghan relocation data breaches
A watchdog has been urged to investigate the 'dangerous shambles' of Afghan relocation data breaches after the Ministry of Defence reportedly admitted more than previously known. A freedom of information request by the BBC revealed there have been 49 data breaches in the past four years, including four already known to the public. Seven breaches were serious enough to be reported to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), three of which had not been made public, the broadcaster reported. Those three included one in 2021 and two in 2022, the same year a major leak prompted the Government to obtain an unprecedented superinjunction barring journalists from reporting it. Sean Humber, a lawyer at Leigh Day, which acts for Afghan citizens affected by previous breaches, said the latest reports are 'shocking' and confirm the MoD 'appears to be institutionally incapable of keeping personal data safe'. He said: 'These data breaches betray a cavalier attitude to keeping such sensitive information safe as well as a complete disregard for the potentially life and death consequences of failing to do so. 'The Information Commissioner's Office must now roll up its sleeves and carry out a thorough and immediate investigation of what appears to be systemic failures of data protection policies, procedures or practices by the Ministry of Defence. This dangerous shambles cannot be allowed to continue. 'All those affected must be notified of the breach of their personal data, including the personal data affected, without further delay and appropriate steps taken to ensure their safety.' Adnan Malik, of Barings Law, which represents 1,500 affected people, said: 'This represents a deeply alarming data failure and the recent 49 Ministry of Defence breaches make clear that the Afghan case was not an isolated error but part of a wider and troubling pattern of negligence. 'Transparency is not optional; it is critical for protecting individuals, maintaining public trust, and ensuring that lessons are learned to prevent future breaches.' The MoD did not provide any details of the nature of each breach. Last month, a High Court judge lifted the gagging order relating to the major breach, which saw the details of 18,714 applicants for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released in 2022. When the breach was discovered more than a year later in August 2023, the MoD was granted an unprecedented gagging order amid fears the Taliban could target would-be refugees for reprisals. It also saw the establishment of a secret £850 million scheme, the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR), to bring thousands of those affected to the UK. Arap was responsible for relocating Afghan nationals who had worked for or with the UK Government and were therefore at risk of reprisals once the Taliban returned to power in Kabul in 2021. An MoD spokesperson said: 'We take data security extremely seriously and are committed to ensuring that any incidents are dealt with properly, and that we follow our legal duties. 'All incidents that meet the threshold under UK data protection laws are referred to the Information Commissioner's Office and any lesser incidents are examined internally to ensure lessons are learned.' The ICO said it continues to engage with the MoD to be 'assured that they have made the required improvements'.
