The campaign for an independent Scotland has become something of a poll dance.
It’s been a week since a mysterious pollster named Kelly Brown leaked news that Westminster allegedly covered up results of a survey because it showed a surge in support for the Yes campaign. Ipsos MORI, which conducted the survey, denied employing anyone by that name (at least, not anymore, it would seem), but the allegation still spawned a predictable barrage of accusations from both campaigns. For the Yes camp, Alex Salmond and SNP MP Angus MacNeil lambasted the Tory-Lib Dem coalition for a lack of transparency and spending nearly £50,000 for partisan research, while #publishthepoll trended on Twitter (so now it’s an official “issue”). Union backers, for their part, pointed out that internal research isn’t ever disclosed, but if you really must ask, this particular survey didn’t reveal anything different than other recent polls.
It is perhaps precisely because of “other recent polls” that the Yes campaign was so eager for a bump in support to be published. An ICM poll this week showed No support gaining nine points over last month, now clocking in at 46%, significantly higher than Yes’s 34%. Panelbase also found a boost for the union—though it was a tepid two-point bump—moving the split to 47%-40% with four months to go.
The widening gap seems to deaden gains made by the Yes camp since the New Year, given that a month ago Scotland on Sunday’s ICM numbers pegged them trailing only 39% to 42%—a spread commonly within the plus-minus margin of error. But faced with these mercurial, temperamental polls, it’s becoming more and more rewarding to follow issues (gasp) over survey data to get a read on the campaign.
The SNP is being questioned over its commitment to tackling income inequality (read David Torrance’s piece in the Herald on the legislative “levers” the Scottish government have perpetually overlooked on this issue). Is a full-fledged Scottish social democracy of universal benefits merely waiting for Westminster to butt out before emerging? Or was the ideal of Scottish egalitarianism a myth created as devolution took hold? Either way, to see the Nats tackle the underpinnings of class inequality would make early 20th century union-aligned Labourites scratch their heads.
European Commissioner for Enlargement, Stefan Fule, added to the Yes woes this week with news that an independent Scotland would lose the UK’s opt-out of VAT on many consumer items. New members face a 15% VAT, which the Tories were quick to point out would raise the price of a Guinness Book of World Records by £3, God forbid. Cue SNP rebuttal: according to Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, SNP candidate for European Parliament, Scotland wouldn’t be an accession state, and would argue “from within” to keep their opt-out authority. Lump that one in with the other thousand unknowns regarding an independent Scotland in the EU.
Okay, so an issue-based analysis of the past week doesn’t bear much fruit for Yes, either. (Did I mention a group of 14 biomedical researchers also expressed concern about academic funding, should a border be placed along the Tweed?) But the SNP is still steadfastly courting the youth vote, and has continued to woo undecided voters with a positive enthusiasm mostly unmatched by Better Together. Broader-scale advantages still reside in the Yes arsenal too: First, according to a University of Stirling study published earlier this month, independence supporters are more committed to voting than their union counterparts, meaning election turnout should be considered in pre-referendum speculation. Second, a late summer surge of nationalist fervor can’t be undervalued, given Glasgow’s hosting of the Commonwealth Games, and the 700th anniversary of the Bannockburn.
There you have it—a week of poll-whistleblowers, financial warnings from the Continent, and questions of commitment to social democracy. If the deluge of attacks on the independence campaign tells us anything, it’s that Better Together is not resting on its laurels. And if the oscillating poll numbers since the New Year tell us anything, it’s that a lot can happen in four months.
Submitted by Noah Caldwell
this isn’t about the snp though. it’s not a general election. it’s about the future of a nation and it’s right to live in democracy.
Scotland does live in a democracy. Voting Yes doesn’t mean you’ll get the government you voted for either. Keep in mind the Tories aren’t in power – it’s a coalition – of which there are Scottish Lib Dem MPs. The Yes campaign has been a complete farce since it published the white paper. I have little doubt Scotland could function and be prosperous on it’s own – but every single time a roadblock has been put up by the No’s (Currency Union, Europe Membership, Trade Agreements etc) it’s always called “Scare Tactics”. No, it’s called real challenges you would face & clearly have no answers to. I’ll be voting No – not because I’m scared, unpatriotic or a Unionist – but because I think Scotland is better positioned as part of the UK with a devolved parliament.
…”since the 700th anniversary of the banockburn”
Did the burn not exist before then?
I guess that was meant to read “700 years since the battle of banockburn”?
As rightly pointed out above the vote for independence is not about one party, but about who decides which policies should be adopted in Scotland. Currently we do have limited powers to affect social policy, but many key issues are still decided by Westminster, including benefits.
My main reason for voting independence is this: Scotland currently has 2 Pandas in Edinburgh zoo, and only ONE solitary conservative MP in westminster. We have more pandas than tory MPs, but we are subjected to the rule of a Tory party which has introduced policies we have not voted for.
In fact, Scotland has never swung the balance of power in Westminster, as since the second world war if you were to remove all scottish votes from the electorate, not one election would have turned out differently in terms of the ruling party.
What that demonstrates is that we have a democratic deficit in this nation, which is played out before our very eyes in this parliament by struggling scots having to accept austerity measures from a government we never voted for, one which has ruined the lives of countless unemployed & disabled people.
Voting yes does not guarantee social equality for Scotland, but it does guarantee no more middle class, Eton cronies ruling our country, deciding our benefits policies and pandering to the population centre in the South East of England.
A yes vote is a vote for real democracy, for Scotland to stand shoulder to shoulder as equals with the other nations surrounding us, including the rUK.
Something i thought of recently, i like my next door neighbour, in fact we help each other out, etc. But i wouldn’t be happy if they decided the affairs of my household. That is the position we are currently in, with less than 10% of the UK population we will never call the shots, but with our own empowered parliament, we at least have the powers we require to govern Scotland the way we choose, not by Tory governments and unelected Lord’s in westminster.
The only way to allow Scotland to choose a more equal society with our vast natural resources, human talent and global connections is to vote yes in September. That is what i will be doing, what about YOU?
Sir, your word “allegedly” should have also been just before ‘Kelly Brown’. There is no one named Kelly Brown employed at Ipsos MORI.
Sir Robert Worcester
Founder, MORI
Matt..everything you said that be applied to where I live too. The ACT in Australia. We have never been the decisive factor in any vote and usually have different voting patterns to the rest of the country. And every election has dramatic effects on the ACT economy and property prices via mass job losses. The last election for example has caused ACT housing growth rates to reduce to approx. 0.2% compared to the rest of Australia with areas like Sydney and Melbourne pushing 10-15%.
Then you end up having states like Western Australia constantly complaining about not receiving a fair share of the tax since they have to support the ACT and other states etc. So basically what I’m just trying to say is that in the end their will always be democratic deficits.
They way that all the NATS will beleive the “bluff.bluster and scaremongerin”is to gain independenc.Then we can all say”told u so”.land of milk n honey it wont be.good luck.ul need it.
Independance is sacred thing scots are afraid to vote yes poorer countries are indep why not scotland
IFurther to the above post.ive been reading posts on other sites from both sides.The Nos have come out with some corkers..The Yes seem to have been brainwashed by the SNP.When people say “no ifs or buts”it wont hapoen then it wont.This is politics but its turning Scots against English and vice versa.The NATS hate anything ENGLISH including the people.RASCITS.
The issue of bank account protection is going to bury the YES campaign, long before the Commonwealth Games even start.
Click here for the official Scottish Parliament petition on this. It makes for a very interesting read indeed. We should all sign it.
It’s embarrassing to hear the SNP repeat the “you’re just scaremongering” line over and over, against those of us who mention real problems that an independent Scotland would face. Personally I think independence is a nice idea, but the sad truth is that it wouldn’t work in practice and most of us would be worse off. I also think the SNP are lying to us left right and centre and they are incapable of showing responsible leadership.
What happens if we don’t get into the EU?
What happens if we don’t get a currency union with the independent country next door?
What happens if Shetland goes independent and takes most of the oil?
The SNP can’t show any leadership on these issues. They can’t say “If we’re not allowed into the EU and we fail to agree a currency union with an independent rUK, and we lose most of the oil, then we will go it alone and we will thrive?”
And now there’s a fourth issue, which has a very down-to-earth relevance for all of us…
What happens if there’s another financial crash? Inside the UK, our bank accounts are protected to the tune of the first £85000, under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Will Alex Salmond promise that they will stay protected in an independent Scotland?
Of course the answer is “no, he won’t”.
The point of the petition is to force him actually to say that.
All they’ve said so far is that we’re just moaning minnies who say what “Westminster” and “the Tories” want us to say. Those are just codewords for “the English”
They can’t take those of us seriously who raise real issues. Their whole response boils down to “Don’t raise issues! Get a happy smile on your face as you look forward to Camelot!”
Independence would be an irreversible disaster. People who are intending to vote “Yes” should get some of the stars out of their eyes and reconsider!
Scott Bowie………But it is about the SNP.Ok you are voting for the break up of the Union.For Scotland to become indi.But its the lies and down right RACISM directed towards the English that the SNP spout.You are voting for the ideaology of the SNP.The ridiculous fantasies of Mr Salmond wont happen.This is turning into a ego trip for the SNP.Blame the nasty Englush for all our ills.It is turning Scots against Englush and vice versa.
Will the Scottish Government promise that an “£85000 is protected” rule will still apply to our bank accounts if Scotland goes independent?
Write to your MSP and get them to ask Alex Salmond that question.
Or write to Alex Salmond directly.
Or sign the Scottish Parliament petition to force him to answer.
If they unambiguously answer “Yes” to the question before the referendum, then I will vote for independence. If they don’t, I will vote “No”.
This is a very real and practical issue for almost everyone in Scotland.
The SNP are acting ridiculously by saying the UK Government hid this poll which supposedly shows “YES” are doing so well.
They are trying to conjure up a momentum in their favour by pretending it already exists.
Here’s the truth: in the 63 proper polls conducted since January 2012 (click here for the list), “NO” has always been in the lead – apart from in one, in August 2013, which the SNP commissioned themselves.
More Scots vote in UK general elections than in Scottish general elections. That tells you a lot. Nobody in their right mind wants the local council running its own country.
As soon as the bank account protection issue hits home, there will be some momentum – a big load of momentum towards “NO”.
It would seem Mr Salmond live’s in another world to the real everyday people of Scotland a World full of his own fantasies
why do we want to break up one of the most successful countries in the world a country we built ,we already make our own decision we have our own parliament we are part of one if not the best country in the world to live in Britain
to which i feel very proud of.
It’s all about oil folks and that’s not going to be here for much longer it’s a yesterday fuel.
Mr Salmond loves the sound of his own voice but he ducks the real questions ,the grass is not always greener.
Jesus. Whats wrong with scottish people. Do you still need England to hold your hand and guide you through all lifes choices. Show some spirit , this more than being 500 quid better off. From a puzzled Englishman.
You naw lot make me laugh. You really should take off your dark glasses and stop believing the lies and deceit being peddled by the biased media. Check this out …. that is if you can be bothered !…..http://theconversation.com/an-independent-scotland-would-have-a-stronger-economy-than-you-might-think-27845 . This is what is in store for us if do not win this thing ! You have been warned !
‘Labour’s paper on welfare has been fatally undermined by their own policies today – which would see people in Scotland receive lower rates of benefits than people in other parts of the UK.
Despite Labour’s paper today saying that people in Glasgow and Edinburgh should be paid the same amount in benefits and pensions as people in Gloucester and Essex – the party has already announced welfare plans which guarantee exactly the opposite.
Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls has already detailed plans for a regional cap on welfare – which could see higher benefits paid to people in areas like London compared to other parts of the UK.
Commenting, SNP MSP Linda Fabiani said:
“Labour’s paper on welfare has absolutely no credibility – and has been directly contradicted by the party’s bosses in London and their plans for a regional welfare cap.
“The central platform of Labour’s claims on welfare today was that people in Edinburgh should be paid the same in welfare as people in Essex – but Ed Balls has already confirmed that Labour plans for people in Scotland to receive less in benefits than people in London in the event of a No vote.
“It’s clear that Labour are trying to face both ways on welfare – they say one thing in Scotland and another thing in Westminster.
“But no matter how hard Labour in Scotland tries to hide it during the referendum campaign, the fact is that the Westminster parties are engaged in a race to the right on welfare – and in the event of a No vote it is ordinary people across Scotland who would suffer.
“With a Yes vote we can take a different path – and create a welfare state that supports vulnerable people and is a springboard to a better life – rather than one which punishes people who need support.”’
Comments are closed.