Wednesday, July 5, 2023

New Survation poll shows independence support continuing to hold up impressively, while the SNP under Yousaf cling on to a precariously slender lead at both Westminster and Holyrood

So let's start with the customary good news - in common with all other recent polls, the new Survation poll shows support for independence holding up well, apparently unaffected by the trials and tribulations of the SNP.  There's a small decrease in the Yes vote from the previous Survation poll, but it's statistically insignificant.

Should Scotland be an independent country? (Survation, 23rd-28th June 2023)

Yes 47% (-1)
No 53% (+1)

As far as party political voting intentions are concerned, I'm not sure this poll really takes us forward on the questions we want answered.  After the recent Panelbase poll showing the SNP level-pegging with Labour on the Westminster ballot, Team Humza must have feared that the next poll would show an outright Labour lead.  That hasn't happened, but the snag is that Survation's results have recently been more favourable to the SNP than we've seen from other firms, and a 3-point SNP lead is in fact the worst result for the SNP in a Survation poll since Yousaf became leader.  So it's perfectly consistent with the trend shown by Panelbase, suggesting that the SNP vote has drifted further downwards over Yousaf's three months in charge.  That could conceivably mean that if other pollsters tested opinion right now, they'd find a small Labour lead or a dead heat.

Scottish voting intentions for the next UK general election:

SNP 37% (-1)
Labour 34% (+3)
Conservatives 17% (-1)
Liberal Democrats 9% (-)

Seats projection (with changes from 2019 election): SNP 26 (-22), Labour 22 (+21), Conservatives 6 (-), Liberal Democrats 5 (+1)

Of course there's the endless argument over whether the SNP are suffering because of Humza Yousaf's unpopularity with the public or because of the police investigation into people associated with the former Sturgeon leadership, but those two concepts are not hermetically sealed from each other.  Part of the problem Yousaf has with the public is that he is seen as Sturgeon's placeman, and so for as long as there is a cloud over her, it's a problem for him and for the SNP as a whole.  That problem can only be solved by fresh leadership, or by a unity team which puts an end to faction-only rule by Team Humza and brings Yousaf's rivals (who in many cases are also Sturgeon-sceptics) into senior positions, thus challenging the public perception that the current leadership is Continuity Sturgeon in all but name.

Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:

SNP 38% (-1)
Labour 33% (+3)
Conservatives 16% (-3)
Liberal Democrats 10% (+1)

Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:

SNP 30% (-2)
Labour 29% (+3)
Conservatives 17% (-2)
Greens 10% (-)
Liberal Democrats 9% (+2)
Reform UK 2% (-)
UKIP 1% (+1)

Seats projection (with changes from 2021 election): SNP 49 (-15), Labour 37 (+15), Conservatives 23 (-8), Greens 10 (+2), Liberal Democrats 10 (+6)

Once again, this poll shows the SNP practically being reduced to the same seat tally they had when they first took power by the skin of their teeth in 2007.  The pro-independence majority at Holyrood would be lost by some distance on these numbers - the SNP and Greens in combination would have 59 seats, and the unionist parties would have 70.

I must just note the weirdness and inconsistency of Survation's treatment of Alba.  In their previous poll in May, they included Alba as an option on both the Westminster and Holyrood list ballots, but this time Alba seem to have been totally excluded across the board - in spite of the fact that Alba took a decent 3% of the list vote in the previous poll, and also in spite of the fact that the obviously less popular UKIP are still being included as an option.  It literally makes no sense, except from a London-centric perspective in which Scotland-only parties are lazily assumed to be of less interest to poll respondents than UK-wide parties, however tiny.

I raised an eyebrow or two yesterday at the claim from one of Somerset's most-read Tory-voting bloggers that Mhairi Black was standing down because she knew she was going to get pumped at the general election, and because she also knew that if she switched to the Scottish Parliament, she would probably get in on the list.  The latter suggestion is curious due to Campbell's repeated vehement claims when he was floating the idea of a "Wings Party" that the SNP couldn't win list seats no matter how many list votes they took.  It's intriguing that he's now tacitly acknowledging that he led people up the garden path on that point.  And his other claim is innumerate, because Mhairi Black's seat is actually one of the 26 the SNP would hold on the above projections.  It would be a close-run thing, within a few percentage points, and any further worsening of the SNP's national position (which is entirely possible) could put the seat in the Labour column.  But the idea that the SNP aren't even in contention in the seat at this stage doesn't stand up to the remotest scrutiny.  The paradox of the claims that Black is deserting a sinking ship is that the SNP would have had a much better chance of holding her seat if she had been the candidate, because she presumably carries with her a small but important personal vote as an unusually well-known incumbent MP.

The criticism that I think can be fairly levelled at Black is over her claim that Westminster is a toxic work environment.  If you believe that, the logical response is to move the SNP decisively into the endgame for independence so that no-one in Scotland has to work in that environment ever again.  Instead, Black is planning a personal solution for herself only by (if the rumours are true) seeking to switch parliaments.  It seems she finds the ongoing prospect of Scotland's involvement in Westminster toxicity perfectly acceptable provided she isn't personally at the heart of it.

*  *  *

I launched the Scot Goes Pop fundraiser for 2023 a few weeks ago, and the running total has now passed £2000.  The target figure is £8500, however, so there's still quite some distance to travel.  If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop continue by making a donation, please click HERE.  Many thanks to everyone who has donated so far.

8 comments:

  1. Interesting point about the changing environment. As the SNP slides down under Humza, they will indeed rely more and more on list seats. A Wings party could be horribly destructive to SNP MSPs hopes of continued employment. I’m sure Stu would like that!

    But of course the very same thing can be said for Alba, or any Yes party competing with the SNP on the list. I voted for Alba in 2021 when Salmond’s strategy was sound—the SNP stormed to victory in the constituencies and won few list seats at all—but now? I’m scunnered with the SNP now, so there’s that. But I can’t deny that in this political environment splitting the Yes vote inevitably elects more Brits.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point I've always made about the list ballot is that you can't game it because you don't know what the constituency results are going to be at the moment you cast your ballot. You might think you know from the polls, but there have been too many polling errors for that to be the case. For example, the 2011 constituency results were a massive surprise to pretty much everyone. It's not the changing circumstances that render attempts at "gaming the system" inadvisable, it's inadvisable anyway. The list vote is the more important vote, and people should use it for their first choice party. In my case, that party is Alba.

      Delete
  2. If the Rutherglen by-election takes place [no hints as to whether it will or not of course] a decisive result for Yousaf's SNP, either surprisingly excellent or embarrassingly bad, is imperative. The last thing we need is a middling result which leaves us all in no-man's land.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The trouble is: how do you define 'middling' or 'decisive'? Expectations are so low by this point that Yousaf might shrug his shoulders at a 20-point defeat.

      Delete
    2. By-elections should not be taken too seriously as they do not indicate what will happen in a general election.

      Delete
    3. That's an extremely naive comment. By-elections may not always reflect what happens in general elections, but they certainly have to be taken seriously because they can turn the political situation upside down, and make or break leaders - as Mrs Thatcher discovered to her cost in Eastbourne in 1990.

      Delete
  3. To be honest my peers, mid 30s, are mostly pro independence but becoming fatigued with having to continue voting SNP it seems forever .. seen as a bit of gimmicky, nanny state party and amongst some of us we're seeing incursions into "right to roam" what's right all these management zones now, hpas etc which goes against some of our national traditions. I think we want governments to be on their toes, giving us policies people actually want - not taking for granted support due to independence support.

    To me it's a toss up on what's better for independence and the SNP in the long run. Win poorly now with a poor leader and little goodwill or take their medicine and come back stronger from opposition.

    If Labour win of course the media will proclaim indy dead, but everyone in Scotland will know full well it's not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You get suspended in the SNP if you call the Chief Whip a small wee man but get flowers if you are arrested and interviewed by the police for 7 hours as a suspect regarding hundreds of thousands of pounds of missing money.

    ReplyDelete