Connect with us

Published

on

We’re now more than four weeks into the campaign and can see how the parties are faring in seats they have been targeting, for better or worse.

Watch this week’s journeys on our animated map below.

This campaign is being fought on new electoral boundaries, with many constituencies undergoing significant changes since 2019.

For the purpose of this analysis, we use notional results based on calculations by Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher, honorary professors at the University of Exeter, which estimate the 2019 election seat results if they had taken place on the new constituency boundaries.

Shying away?

It is safe to say the campaign is not going to plan for Rishi Sunak. When the prime minister made his surprise election call on 4 July the polls were not looking good for the Conservatives, but it was assumed the gap would narrow in the run-up to election day.

The reality has been different. The Conservatives are still 20 points behind, but both main parties have shed support to the Liberal Democrats and Reform – which is proving to be more of an issue for the Conservatives than for Labour.

Whereas last week we showed Sunak fighting a lonely battle, this week there were rumours of him backing away from campaigning altogether. He made just six visits this week, a figure which has been gradually declining as the campaign progresses.

Despite this slowdown in campaigning, Sunak maintains the overall largest tally of seats visited, at 41 since the start of the campaign compared to 31 for both Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and Liberal Democrats leader Sir Ed Davey.

He was dealt another blow when the latest Sky/YouGov MRP poll was released on Wednesday evening.

Comparing this poll, conducted from 11-18 June, to the one fielded more than two weeks earlier from 24 May-1 June, it appears the Conservatives’ fortunes are worse now than the already dire state they were in when the election was announced; their projected seat tally has dropped from 140 to 108.

Are the visits helping?

We can compare the change in performance of parties between these two polls to assess whether things are improving or getting worse for the leaders in areas they have visited.

These projections are based on respondents’ voting intentions at the time the polls were conducted, with calls for who will win seats rated from lowest to most confident projections, as either: “tossup” (too close to call), “lean”, “likely” or “safe”.

For Sunak, 12 of the constituencies he’s been to since the start of the campaign are now in a worse position for the Conservatives than earlier in the election campaign.

Of course, this might not be directly because of the prime minister’s visit, and some trips were made after polling was completed, but it will do little to cheer the faltering campaign’s spirits.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Lib Dem threat

A particular problem for the Conservatives is the potential efficiency of the Lib Dem vote in this election, picking up votes in just the right places to hurt the Tories.

On a projected national vote share of 11.6% – the same as their 2019 result – they are projected to win a massive 67 seats, more than six times the number they notionally won in 2019, and which would be the highest number since the formation of the Lib Dems in 1988. All of their potential gains outside of Scotland are at the expense of the Conservatives.

This can be seen in key Con v Lib Dem battlegrounds visited by Sunak: eight of those have moved in favour of the Lib Dems. Places like Wokingham, graced by Sunak in week two and Davey in week three, where the Conservatives have a 23.2% majority, are now leaning more towards the Lib Dems.

In 23 of the seats the prime minister has visited, there has been no projected change in fortunes. But 18 of those are ones his party is (still) on course to lose. This includes places like Devon North, which he visited on Tuesday, where a 13.3 point swing is needed for the Liberal Democrats to gain from the Conservatives – and they are expected to do so.

Tory gains

Things improved in four of Sunak’s previous stops, notably including his home turf visits in Yorkshire. His own constituency Richmond & Northallerton, that he’s visited twice, has been upgraded from “lean” Conservative hold to “likely” hold, and Thirsk & Malton has edged from “toss-up” – meaning it’s too close to call – to “lean” Tory hold.

Perhaps his focus on the area is paying dividends.

Labour’s decrease to a still healthy projected share of 39% means they’re doing worse in seven of the constituencies Starmer has visited. Derby South was downgraded from a “safe” hold to a “likely” hold, with an increase in Reform’s vote share between polls eating into Labour’s potential majority, and the “toss-up” of Finchley & Golders Green in London inching in the Conservatives’ favour.

Read more:
Parties raise ÂŁ5.8m in a week
Farage says West ‘provoked’ Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

JK Rowling will ‘struggle to support’ Labour

There has been no change to the predictions in 22 Starmer-visited seats, where Labour remain frontrunners to gain. All bar one – Inverclyde & Renfrewshire West, which they hope to take from the SNP – are currently held by the Conservatives.

Things got better for Labour in two seats visited by Starmer. Worthing East & Shoreham, which Starmer visited in the first week of the campaign, was upgraded from a “likely” to a “safe” gain from the Tories. Nuneaton in the West Midlands similarly went from “lean” to “likely” since he stopped by on 10 June, just before the second poll.

Meanwhile, Davey has the most glowing report card, with 18 of his 31 visited constituencies looking more favourable to the Lib Dems between polls.

This includes Carshalton & Wallington, a highly marginal constituency in London where the Lib Dems came second to Conservatives by just 1.3% in 2019 but are now projected to claim a “safe” win, up from a lower confidence level of “lean” in the previous MRP. Sunak visited the area early on in week one of the campaign while Davey visited this week.

Farage factor

The other big winners in vote share over the last few weeks have been Reform, following Nigel Farage’s explosive return as leader.

Reform’s increase in projected vote share to 15.4% would put them in third place nationally, above the Lib Dems. But while this certainly appears to be hurting the Tories in particular, it is less efficient at picking up seats for Reform, of which they are currently projected five.

Neither Sunak nor Starmer have visited any of the seats that Reform are now projected to gain. That includes Clacton, where it is now projected “likely” that Nigel Farage will overturn the 56.31% Conservative majority.

It would be the eighth time lucky for Farage if he does manage to convince voters in Clacton. Over 30 years he has stood in seven different parliamentary constituencies but thus far has failed to win.

Reform launched their not-a-manifesto on Monday from Merthyr Tydfil in South Wales; with Farage saying the location was chosen “because it shows everyone exactly what happens to a country when Labour is in charge”.

They placed third here in 2019 but are projected to overtake the Conservatives and finish second to Labour, according to our latest MRP poll.

Sunak also took a swipe at Welsh Labour when he was in Clwyd North to launch the Welsh Conservative manifesto on Friday, where he said it was a “great country, but a country let down by Labour”.

Battle for the South West

This week there has been an increased interest in the South West. Previously a Lib Dem enclave, especially in their 2005 heyday, they had lost all but one of their seats here by 2017 and Bath is the only remaining constituency they are defending.

The Lib Dems are looking to make serious headway here, reflected in the number of visits the area has received.

This week alone there have been six visits to the region – two by each of the three party leaders vying for seats here. Sunak was seen in Torridge & Tavistock where the Conservatives are expected to fight off the Liberal Democrats with their 41.9% Tory majority.

Starmer made a rare defensive visit to Labour’s Bristol North West on Monday, while Davey was in Yeovil where his party will need a 13.5 point swing to beat the Conservative candidate.

The prime minister has visited 16% of the seats in the South West, more than any of the other leaders have in any other region. Davey has been to 12% of the constituencies here and 11% of those in the South East, highlighting the Liberal Democrats’ southern targeting.

Looking to appeal to broader sections of the electorate, Starmer has been much more dispersed in his regional campaigning. His maximum is the 7% of seats he has visited in Greater London, closely followed by the 6% he has stopped by in Wales.

So far 31% of the constituencies in the South West have been visited by at least one of Sunak, Starmer and Davey. The North West is the least frequented in England, where they’ve been to 11% of seats. However the parties have been sending other representatives there, such as deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner, and Scotland has been targeted more by the Scottish versions of each party than by the national party leaders.


Dr Hannah Bunting is a Sky News elections analyst and co-director of The Elections Centre at the University of Exeter.


The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

Continue Reading

Politics

Mission: Impossible? Chancellor heads to the IMF with a very big challenge – and she’s not alone

Published

on

By

Mission: Impossible? Chancellor heads to the IMF with a very big challenge - and she's not alone

There will be much to chew over at the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) spring meetings this week.

Central bankers and finance ministers will descend on Washington for its latest bi-annual gathering, a place where politicians and academics converge, all of them trying to make sense of what’s going on in the global economy.

Everything and nothing has changed since they last met in October.

One man continues to dominate the agenda.

Six months ago, delegates were wondering whether Donald Trump could win the November election and what that might mean for tax and tariffs. How far would he push it? Would his policy match his rhetoric?

Donald Trump. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Donald Trump. Pic: Reuters

This time round, expect iterations of the same questions. Will the US president risk plunging the world’s largest economy into recession?

Yes, he put on a bombastic display on his so-called “Liberation Day”, but will he now row back? Have the markets effectively checked him?

Behind the scenes, finance ministers from around the world will be practising their powers of persuasion, each jostling for meetings with their US counterparts to negotiate a reduction in the tariffs set by the Trump administration.

That includes our own chancellor, Rachel Reeves, who is still holding out hope for a trade deal with the US – although she is not alone in that.

Read more:
PM and Trump step up trade talks
Ed Conway on the impact of US tariffs

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Could Trump make a deal with UK?

Are we heading for a recession?

The IMF’s economists have already made up their minds about Trump’s potential for damage.

Last week, they warned about the growing risks to financial stability after a period of turbulence in the financial markets, induced by Trump’s decision to ratchet up US protectionism to its highest level in a century.

By the middle of this week the organisation will publish its World Economic Outlook, in which it will downgrade global growth but stop short of predicting a full-blown recession.

Others are less optimistic.

Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF’s managing director, said last week: “Our new growth projections will include notable markdowns, but not recession. We will also see markups to the inflation forecasts for some countries.”

She acknowledged the world was undergoing a “reboot of the global trading system,” comparing trade tensions to “a pot that was bubbling for a long time and is now boiling over”.

She went on: “To a large extent, what we see is the result of an erosion of trust – trust in the international system, and trust between countries.”

IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva holds a press briefing on the Global Policy Agenda to open the IMF and World Bank's 2024 annual Spring Meetings in Washington, U.S., April 18, 2024. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
Image:
IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva. Pic: Reuters

Don’t poke the bear

It was a carefully calibrated response. Georgieva did not lay the blame at the US’s door and stopped short of calling on the Trump administration to stop or water down its aggressive tariffs policy.

That might have been a choice. To the frustration of politicians past and present, the IMF does not usually shy away from making its opinions known.

Last year it warned Jeremy Hunt against cutting taxes, and back in 2022 it openly criticised the Liz Truss government’s plans, warning tax cuts would fuel inflation and inequality.

Taking such a candid approach with Trump invites risks. His administration is already weighing up whether to withdraw from global institutions, including the IMF and the World Bank.

The US is the largest shareholder in both, and its departure could be devastating for two organisations that have been pillars of the world economic order since the end of the Second World War.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

Here in the UK, Andrew Bailey has already raised concerns about the prospect of global fragmentation.

It is “very important that we don’t have a fragmentation of the world economy,” the Bank of England’s governor said.

“A big part of that is that we have support and engagement in the multilateral institutions, institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, that support the operation of the world economy. That’s really important.”

The Trump administration might take a different view when its review of intergovernmental organisations is complete.

That is the main tension running through this year’s spring meetings.

How much the IMF will say and how much we will have to read between the lines, remains to be seen.

Continue Reading

Politics

Labour WhatsApp messages on Supreme Court ruling point to future tensions on trans issues

Published

on

By

Labour WhatsApp messages on Supreme Court ruling point to future tensions on trans issues

It’s no great surprise that members of a Labour MPs’ LGBT+ WhatsApp group would be raising concerns about the impact of this week’s Supreme Court ruling on the trans community.

But the critical contributions reportedly made by some of the group’s higher-profile ministerial members highlight the underlying divisions with the Labour Party over the issue – and point to future tensions once the practical implications of the judgement become clear.

Messages leaked to the Mail on Sunday allegedly include the Home Office minister Dame Angela Eagle writing “the ruling is not as catastrophic at it seems but the EHRC [Equality and Human Rights Commission] guidance might be & there are already signs that some public bodies are overreacting”.

Culture minister Sir Chris Bryant reportedly replied he “agreed” with another MP’s opinion that the EHRC chair Baroness Falkner was “pretty appalling” when she said the ruling would mean trans women could not use single-sex female facilities or compete in women’s sports.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Gender ruling – How it happened

Government sources argue these messages are hardly evidence of any kind of plot or mass revolt against the Supreme Court’s ruling.

But they still raise uncomfortable questions for a party that has been on a tortuous journey over the issue.

Under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour was committed to introducing self-identification – enabling people to change their legal sex without a medical diagnosis – a position dropped in 2023.

Back in 2021, Sir Keir Stamer said the then Labour MP Rosie Duffield was “not right” to say “only women have a cervix”. But three years later he acknowledged that “biologically, she of course is right”.

Duffield, who now sits as an independent, is asking for an apology – but that doesn’t seem to be forthcoming from a government keen to minimise its own role in changing social attitudes to the issue.

The Conservative position on this has also chopped and changed – with Theresa May‘s support for gender self-ID ditched under Boris Johnson.

Read more from Sky News:
School leaders issue warning as free breakfast clubs set to open

Four things to avoid if you’re doing the London Marathon

As the Conservatives’ equalities minister, Kemi Badenoch led the UK government’s fight against Scotland’s efforts to make it easier to change gender – and she’s determined to punch Labour’s bruise on the issue.

This weekend, she’s written to the cabinet secretary calling for an investigation into a possible breach of the ministerial or civil service code over a statement made by the Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson in response to the ruling, which said “we have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex”.

The Tories claim this is false, because last summer Ms Phillipson herself gave an interview in which she suggested that trans women with penises could use female toilets.

Ms Phillipson has been approached for a response.

Her comments, however, are entirely in keeping with the government’s official statement on the judgement, which claims they have “always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex” and welcomed the ruling as giving “clarity and confidence for women and service providers”.

The government statement added: “Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.”

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Crypto is not communism’ — Exec slams BIS’ take on crypto

Published

on

By

‘Crypto is not communism’ — Exec slams BIS’ take on crypto

‘Crypto is not communism’ — Exec slams BIS’ take on crypto

The Bank for International Settlements’ (BIS) push to isolate crypto markets and its controversial recommendations on DeFi and stablecoins is “dangerous” for the entire financial system, warns the head of a blockchain investment firm.

“Many of their recommendations and conclusions — perhaps due to a mix of fear, arrogance, or ignorance — are completely uninformed and, frankly, dangerous,” CoinFund president Christopher Perkins said in an April 19 X post, referring to the BIS’ April 15 report titled “Cryptocurrencies and Decentralized Finance: Functions and Financial Stability Implications.” 

BIS recommendations exposes TradFi to risks of “unimaginable scale”

“Crypto is not communism,” Perkins said, pushing back against the BIS’ call for a “containment” approach to isolate crypto from traditional finance and the broader economy.

“It’s the new internet that provides anyone with a connection access to financial services,” Perkins said. “You cannot control it anymore than you control the internet,” he added.

Perkins warned that a containment approach to crypto would expose the traditional financial system to massive liquidity risks “of unimaginable scale,” especially when the crypto market operates in real-time, 24/7, while traditional financial markets shuts down after trading hours.

“If implemented they will cause–not mitigate–the systemic risk they seek to prevent.”

The report warned that the number of investors and amount of capital in crypto and DeFi have “reached a critical mass,” with investor protection becoming a “significant concern for regulators.”

Cryptocurrencies
Source: Michael Egorov

Perkins pushed back against the BIS’ claim that DeFi presents significant challenges, arguing instead that it represents a “significant improvement” over the “opacity” and imbalances of the traditional financial system.

Related: Crypto industry is not experiencing regulatory capture — Attorney

Responding to the BIS’s concern about the anonymity of DeFi developers, Perkins questioned its relevance:

“Sorry, but when was the last time a TradFi company published a list of its developers? Sure, public companies provide a degree of disclosures and transparency, but they seem to be dying off in favor of private markets.”

Perkins also critiqued the BIS’s concern around stablecoins that it could lead to “macroeconomic instability in countries like Venezuela and Zimbabwe.”

“If there is demand for USD stablecoins and it helps improve the condition of anyone in the developing world, perhaps that is a good thing,” Perkins said.

Cryptocurrencies
Source: Christopher Perkins

Perkins wasn’t alone in criticizing the controversial report. Lightspark co-founder Christian Catalini also weighed in, posting a series of critiques on X that same day. Catalini summed up the report with the analogy:

“Think: writing parking regulations for a fleet of self‑driving drones — earnest work, two technological leaps behind.”

Magazine: Altcoin season to hit in Q2? Mantra’s plan to win trust: Hodler’s Digest, April 13 – 19

Continue Reading

Trending