Monday, October 12, 2020

Progress Scotland poll reveals that the public have noticed the Tory trashing of devolution, in spite of the media's best efforts

Over the last few weeks I've been wondering whether the issue of the Internal Market Bill has really cut through with the public, because the BBC in particular have failed to inform viewers that the legislation reverses large swathes of the devolution settlement.  Newly released results from the Progress Scotland poll suggest that, to the extent that the public do have an awareness of what is going on, they're very angry, and also deeply sceptical about the UK government's claims.  So that's good news as far as it goes - but the snag is that there are an awful lot of Don't Knows and neutrals.  So the Beeb's vow of silence hasn't been entirely in vain.

The Bill will lead to 'scores of new powers' coming to the Scottish Parliament: 23%

The Bill will lead to a 'power grab' of responsibilities held by the Scottish Parliament: 33%

*  *  *

The UK government will transfer all relevant powers from the EU to the Scottish Parliament and protect the devolution agreement: 22%

The UK government will not transfer relevant powers from the EU to the Scottish Parliament and will damage the devolution arrangement: 47%

*  *  *

It is acceptable for the UK government to break the rules of international law if it thinks that it will lead to a better trade deal with the EU: 19%

It is unacceptable for the UK government to break the rules of international law even if it thinks it will lead to a better trade deal with the EU: 66%

*  *  *

The Internal Market Bill will make me more likely to vote in favour of independence if there is another referendum: 23%

The Internal Market Bill will make me more likely to vote in favour of staying in the union if there is another referendum: 11%

The Internal Market Bill will make no difference to how I will vote if there is another referendum: 39%

*  *  *

NEW CROWDFUNDER: Yesterday I launched a fundraiser for the next Scot Goes Pop poll on independence, which I intend to commission at some point between now and Christmas.  If you'd like to donate, please click HERE.

21 comments:

  1. 19% think it is acceptable to break international law - must be most of the Tories - the law and order party.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Before Brexit nobody had even heard of the phrase Internal Market.
    It's a handy catch-all for taking back control to London not just from the EU but Holyrood too, and aye the people have noticed.
    As for breaking international law, it's
    what England/UK have done globally since the days of Bruce and Wallace.
    This 'Empire` mindset is exposed as a belief that they own us politically.
    They dress it up as 'Union' but when even Douglas Ross can see how it looks to Scottish voters, then the game is up.
    Meanwhile, they're still involved in medieval patronage dishing out MBEs KBEs OBEs.
    Sometimes even to folk who actually deserve recognition. Though not always.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They didn't want to call it the 'UK single market' as that might imply all the home nations would get a say in the rules.

      We can all safely assume that the brave new internal market will be designed to benefit England while draining resources, wealth and talent from Scotland/Wales/NI.

      It's why Labour and the Libs voted to refuse legislative consent in Holyrood alongside the SNP and the Greens; ironically they are desperately trying to save the UK.

      You know we are living in the last days of Rome when Scots unionists are regularly voting with the SNP against London governance.

      Delete
  3. I'd be one of the 39% who say the Bill will make no difference to how I'll vote. I've been pro-independence for at least 40 years and that's not going to change.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The bill has woken people up to the fact devolution is now a dead duck

    ReplyDelete
  5. As part of the EU, Scotland/Wales/NI/England and & had to abide by the same trade rules, just like all countries in the bloc.

    However, if England wants new 'UK' trade deals, it must make the rules for the whole UK, otherwise the devolved nations could breach the deals it makes, leaving it unable to make said deals.

    As there's no way on earth the devolved nations will get a veto like EU union countries get in such matters, so England will try to trash devolution, whereby destroying what has held the UK together since 1997.

    And Yes is in majority before the devolution trashing even begins. The great constitutional crisis hasn't actually started yet.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am pretty sure about this information you shared because its really helpful for everyone.
    Nearby nursing homes

    ReplyDelete
  7. Am I right in thinking Douglass Ross wis oan the telly complaining about things in Scotland from central London, England?

    I mean whit? How's he got his finger on the pulse of Scotland when he's 400 miles away in a different country?

    ReplyDelete
  8. James re your tweet on Ferrier can't say I am virtue signalling. She did wrong. It was right for the whip to be removed. She is not a serial murderer. She did not try to put an innocent man in jail by perverting the course of justice either unlike some others in the SNP who have gone unpunished. Let's have some balance regarding Ferriers mistake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quality, you asking for balance. Is that what WoS provides these days?

      Delete
    2. "...unlike some others in the SNP who have gone unpunished."

      https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2020/10/new-progress-scotland-poll-suggests.html?showComment=1602438332800#c936967391889384175

      "No she should have told any of them to take their allegations to the police"

      Forgive me, but isn't this is your advice in such cases? If you are unhappy with the 2/9 complainers that were SNP, why don't you go to the police?

      Obviously, you don't believe the SNP should punish them internally, but rather the police should deal with it; you've made it clear you think that's the best approach in such situations.

      Personally, as I said before, I think initial internal investigations have merit, but I know you don't believe in these as you said so.

      Delete
    3. As for ferrier, the SNP are dealing with the matter sensibly IMO.

      When I first heard she got the train, I couldn't believe it; why on earth had she not just isolated in her London residence?

      Turns out she doesn't have a home in London, so had nowhere to self isolate. Apart from the hotel she stays in I suppose, where she could have given staff and other guests covid in a super spreader event. Hi, I have covid and would like to check in! :-)

      So her actions made a little more sense, and I agree with her covid makes people irrational. I've seen it in many folk; they have all sorts of weird ideas about how to deal with it, particularly when they are scared. Fear makes people totally irrational. She should have contacted the relevant authorities an sought advice, but instead she 'ran' home.

      Given I have not had the chance to interview ferrier, I'll let those in charge be the judge. However, it doesn't seem her motives were overtly selfish, which is key to me. Cummings had a comfy pad in London; ferrier does not. Seems instead she was just irrational / stupid.

      As for her stepping down...I am not a constituent so have no right to demand that of her. It's up to those who elected her to judge whether they want her representing them any more.

      Delete
    4. skier - more pish from you - king of liars and misrepresentation. So no I won't forgive you.

      They have gone unpunished for lying in court got it now - idiot. Both the SNP and the justice system should punish them.

      Skier - I have told you before stop your crass misrepresentations - fucking moron of an idiot that you are. I never said I do not think internal investigations have merit

      The text you quote refers to the two complainers that the NEW Scot gov process produced a report on. Both of these complaints had already been investigated in the past by the Scot gov that is why I said that to devise a new process was wrong to retro look at a complaint that had already been investigated.

      Of course the other 8 complainers did indeed go direct to the police. I'll repeat that for you the other 8 complainers (liars) went direct to the police bypassing the Scotgov internal processes.

      The new Scotgov process was designed to get Salmond it failed spectacularly.

      So the Murrells and their cabal double down on their Salmond persecution.

      The criminal case where 8 new complainers ( liars ) suddenly came out the woodwork also failed spectacularly.

      Disgusting evil actions. Abuse of power and misuse of public funds.





      Delete
    5. "They have gone unpunished for lying in court got it now - idiot. Both the SNP and the justice system should punish them."

      You said previously that it was not up to a party/company to punish crimes, but such matters should be 'dealt with by the police'.

      Are you now saying that you agree with the original Holyrood investigation into the Alex Salmond allegations? Or at least an SNP investigation?

      This seems to contradict your earlier position that the Salmond matter was for the police and not for Holyrood/the SNP to deal with.

      I quote you again when I asked what Sturgeon should do in the face of allegations of wrongdoing. You said:

      "No she [Sturgeon] should have told any of them to take their allegations to the police"

      Why don't you think this should apply in the case of the complainers? It seems a bit like you have double standards.

      Delete
    6. Please confirm:

      In the case of people you support (e.g. Salmond), you believe there shouldn't be any company/party investigation into accusations of their wrongdoing, but the 'police alone should handle things'.

      In the case of your opponents (e.g. the Salmond complainers), you believe there should be internal investigations to 'punish them', even if the police don't see reason to purse the matter?

      Is that about right?

      Delete
    7. Skier - you really can't read well can you. Take your crappy wind ups and stick it.

      Delete
    8. Dear AMC never mentioned WOS you did so I guess you know more than me. So in a nutshell please answer your own question old boy.

      Delete
  9. Skier -" as for Ferrier "

    I agree with all you said about Ferrier except your opening sentence.

    Sturgeon has told Ferrier to resign as an MP as have some of her colleagues. So you showed your Sturgeon fanboy credentials right at the beginning of your post even though the rest of your post contradicted your first sentence.

    This shows some cognitive dissonance on your part - even when it's you personally that posts a viewpoint that criticises the actual action taken by the SNP you set it aside and say " the SNP are dealing with it sensibly".

    Boy you have problems and it isn't just wilful misrepresentation and lying and being an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand your point. Can you explain it more clearly?

      Ferrier was elected as an SNP MP. The party therefore has the right to say she should step down and recontest the seat without any benefit associated with that status.

      The party she stood for (using their funds, status, policies) and her constituents are the only groups with the right to call for her to stand down.

      If I was in her situation, I would step down if the party I stood for asked it of me. I might recontest the seat as an independent if I felt my constituents wanted that.

      Delete
    2. " I don't understand your point" - well no shit and I don't give a shit.

      Delete
  10. In years to come parents will say to their children you need to stop lying or you will end up like Nicola Sturgeon.

    ReplyDelete