Monday, November 16, 2020

Scot Goes Pop / Panelbase poll: Staggering three-quarters of voters think the BBC have failed to make the public aware of how the Internal Market Bill will reduce the Scottish Parliament's powers

As I mentioned the other day, one of the difficulties of polling about public attitudes to the Westminster power-grab contained in the Internal Market Bill is that most people aren't even aware of it, due to the mainstream media's abject failure to report it.  No-one would expect anti-independence newspapers to go out of their way to draw attention to something that would be unhelpful for their side of the debate, but what of the public service broadcaster that so many people look to and trust to give them impartial information?  I thought it might be worth asking respondents what they think about the BBC's non-reporting of the power-grab.   

Do you think the BBC have done enough to make the public aware of the changes to the Scottish Parliament's powers proposed by the Internal Market Bill?  

Yes 23%
No 77% 

I was actually quite staggered by that result - I thought we might see an even split, with independence supporters being critical of the BBC and unionists more content.  But in fact this is a rare example of literally every demographic or political group mentioned in the datasets reaching the same conclusion.  89% of SNP voters, 68% of Labour voters, 74% of Liberal Democrat voters, 62% of Conservative voters, 86% of Yes supporters, 63% of No supporters, 77% of people born in Scotland and 76% of people born in England all agree that the BBC have failed to properly inform the public. 

My guess is this will have happened because of a straightforward logical process.  Having been just asked a question that summarised the changes to the devolution settlement that the Internal Market Bill entails, respondents will have come to the inescapable conclusion that what is happening is important enough that the public should know about it, and will also have realised that they've heard very little about it on the BBC.  Even for many Tory voters, that will have left only one possible answer to the question. 

So to summarise what we've learned from this poll: when the public know about the power-grab, they think it breaches The Vow and shouldn't happen without a referendum, but many of them don't know about it because the BBC haven't told them, and they think that's wrong.  I'm not sure that's a great look for the state broadcaster.

*  *  *

There's still a little bit more to come from the poll - if you'd like to be the first to know, you can follow me on Twitter HERE.

*  *  *

You can read my piece in The National about last night's results HERE.

42 comments:

  1. Brilliant James .Well done. I would say you have the unionists rattled with these poll findings.
    It will be interesting to see how they respond and what their next line of attack is, to defend their precious union.
    Ally

    ReplyDelete
  2. Johnson has given the game away with his comment about devolution being a disaster. He has undone all the work of the Britnat media in trying to ignore the fact that the Tories want to roll back the result of the 1997 referendum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. James, Facebook are flagging links to your blog with their "contains sensitive content" symbol. Might be worth chasing them up about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's been like that for the best part of a year.

      Delete
    2. One of the many reasons I stopped advertising there and even deleted my account. (Not that they miss it but you do what little you can)

      Delete
    3. I've posted numerous links before without that coming up. Maybe they've only just noticed me!

      Delete
  4. The once in a generation lie is growing arms and legs.

    Robert Jenrick Tory MP says on Sky News- "The leaders of the SNP themselves only a couple of years ago said it should be settled for a generation."

    All the Britnats have left are lies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it's pretty clear Boris just can't keep saying No. Otherwise, there'd be no need to bother with the whole 'generation' lie; the could just on with English brexit and forget about what happens in Scotland.

      Nope, the pressure is getting too intense, so desperately trying anything to get Scots to not vote SNP in May. The vote splitting plan has been a giant flop after a lot of investment, so this is about all they have now.

      Delete
    2. Of course he can keep saying "no". We can go ahead with a Plan B, but we're utterly powerless to stop him saying "no". We can only control what we do, not what others do - it's one of the basic rules of life.

      Delete
    3. To be technical, A section 30 isn't in his power. It's an act of the UK parliament. He could say No and the parliament could pass it. He could say Yes and the parliament could refuse.

      But that aside, if iref2 just wasn't going to happen, why all talk about it? Why even bother with the generaiton stuff? Why even bother about the SNP winning May 2020.

      If it's a simple as Boris saying no, and that's that, none of what's happening makes any sense at all.

      Delete
    4. What are the war games and consultancy for? Why spend any cash at all? If Boris saying no solves it all for a generation, why roll broon and major out for interventions...

      I'm not saying don't work on a secret plan B, but plan A seems to being perfectly well right now. It's given Yes a majority and the more Johnson acts like a prick on it, the more solid that will become. Then he'll fold like a cheap suit like he did over cummings and everything else.

      There's blind panic in unionist circles, particularly since the attempt to splinter the Yes vote - using e.g. the Salmond and trans things - has failed utterly. No people's front of Judea has emerged, even with the BBC promoting this.

      Now they are back to 'But you said a generation!' which is just desperate silliness of the highest order.

      Delete
    5. SS - WGD made the same case as you in one of his articles. It was, of course, made 1000 times better but even he did not say when the indyref would take place based on a sec 30 so called gold standard or based on a non sec 30.

      So when will the referendum happen? Or are you going back to your previous stance of your Tory personality and saying we need to wait for 5 years of Johnson saying no just to make sure the numbers are high enough to win.

      PS - The ScotgovSNP did the Salmond thing as you call it. Now there may be some ordinary Britnats and Secret Service in there but are they all Britnats?

      Delete
    6. Or are you going back to your previous stance of your Tory personality and saying we need to wait for 5 years of Johnson saying no just to

      Why do you lie like this? It just means people won't trust you. I, of course, have never said the above, hence you can't provide a link to me doing so. Ergo, readers see you as a liar, making your posts on here a waste of time.

      Delete
    7. SSS - 😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣😂😂😂😂🤣🤣 you are the biggest liar on this site. You misrepresent, deflect, mislead and erect straw men all the time. But I'm guessing this is your personality posting that has a very poor memory.

      A very sad problem you have but it is probably treatable if you recognise it.

      Your post is of course a deflection from the fact that you cannot say when this referendum is going to take place. Anyone other than Blackford saying it is next year?

      Delete
  5. I'm not sure why the Scottish Tories are bothering to distance themselves from BJ's remarks. It's pissing off their course support, and no "moderates" are going to vote for them anyway. The replies to Douglas Ross's tweet are mostly along the lines of "the plastic parliament should be nuked with everyone still in it, and you're as treasonous as Jackson Carlaw for suggesting otherwise".

    ReplyDelete
  6. LOL, Scottish Tories must be really chuffed this morning. Boris couldn't have crapped all over them from a greater height with the devo comments.

    He really is the gift that keeps on giving for Scottish indy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wait, are the English Tories now pejoratively calling Scottish people 'separatist nationalists'.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54965585

    They realise that most Scots back indy? It's not a minority pursuit now. That kind of language is a racist insult to the Scottish nation as a whole.

    Times have changed; Scotland isn't unionist now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're always gibbering on about what a "cowardly", "pathetic", "weak" etc country England is, so I'm not sure why this "racism" has you reaching for the smelling salts.

      Delete
  8. What a deplorable performance from the Lord Advocate at the Harrassment Committee meeting this morning. Has this guy ever given a straight answer to anything in his life. No wonder lawyers charge by the hour - this guy uses a thousand ums, and more ums, haaas, buts and waffle to take an eternity to not answer a question. Yes to NOT answer a question.

    Of course what should anyone expect from a Lord Advocate who has admitted to a previous malicious prosecution that could cost the public purse between £20 million to £100 million.

    ReplyDelete
  9. What dilemma? If all Johnson has to do is say no for a generation, where is the dilemma?

    Surely our special, treasured, precious union is safe and the sun will never set on the empire now?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54842734

    The UK government's Scottish independence dilemma

    ReplyDelete
  10. Evans does not exist constitutionally she says at the Harrassment Committee today. Easy to sack someone who does not exist then - it seems not.

    Evans is the person who does not exist but is responsible for everything in the Scottish gov but is not responsible for mistakes made by others - the havers did not provide the hidden docs not her. Evans could not answer a bundle of questions. Evans still maintains the Scotgov procedure (not her procedure she strongly insisted) is just fine and dandy nothing wrong with it - what a joke!

    Beginning to think Sturgeon has set her up as the fall guy.

    So we have the Scotgov hiding behind the anonyminity of the alphabet women.

    So we have Scotgov refusing to release the formal legal advice they got.

    We have the Scotgov redacting docs and not answering questions all over the whole business due to the LPP and anonymity.

    We have Scotgov personnel continually hiding docs and having to amend their testimony to reflect the truth.

    What a disgrace the whole business is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Evans is an Whitehall employee; Permanent Secretary assigned by the Home Office to the Scottish government.

      https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/civil-service/about/our-governance#permanent-secretaries

      https://news.gov.scot/news/scottish-government-permanent-secretary-announced

      The [Evans recruitment] competition was conducted by the [UK Government] First Civil Service Commissioner in accordance with the Civil Service’s recruitment principles, which provide for an open competition on merit, with the First Minister invited to choose between those candidates deemed suitable for appointment.

      Sturgeon got to pick any colour as long as it was union jack.

      It's why Salmond called for Evans to resign rather than Scottish ministers to fire her; it's only Whitehall - Evan's employer - that can fire her.

      Delete
    2. SSS - not sure if any of your multiple personalities actually follows what is going on but I doubt it as all you can do is post the same stuff.

      go at to

      Stu


      Delete
    3. SSS - I'm betting that every one of your multiple personalties are not to keen on Stu Campbell so if you really thought I was Campbell I very much doubt you would be saying okey dokey Stu.

      It is of course another classic bit of deflection because you have not got a clue as to what is happening in the Harrassment Inquiry. But that's not really anything new for any of your personalities - is it.

      Scoop Skier tells us that Sturgeon got to pick Evans from a shortlist of 3 selected by the UK Civil Service - wow what a scoop. Your knowledge is so great Scoop Skier.

      Delete
  11. SSS - well Swinney and Sturgeon should have insisted on the Civil Service being totally devolved and under the Control of the Scottish gov during the Smith Commission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn, why didn't they think of that! I'm sure Westminster would have agreed, and handed over control of broadcasting too Stu.

      Delete
    2. SS - yes that is the type of pathetic surrender negotiating crap that would serve us well when it comes to negotiating independence. Thank goodness you will be off bashing some rocks or least one of your personalities will be and not involved in any negotiations. So have Wales or N Ireland an independent civil service?

      Yes and pathetic Swinney should have held out for control of Broadcasting as well.

      I used to think Swinney was the most boring person in the Scotgov but Wolfe boy beats him by a mile.

      Delete
    3. Well Scoop Skier - the fountain of all knowledge - well at least one of his multiple personalties thinks he is -

      So have Wales or N.Ireland an independent civil service?

      Or is this another unanswered question to be added to the list?

      Delete
  12. The hint that 'Independence for Scotland' is indeed the Rev Stu Campbell by signing off as 'Stu' - post at 3:30pm - can only be cleared up by the Reverend Stu Campbell embracing or denying this new persona.

    He probably can't be arsed, either way.

    Either way, it just seems odd.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Douglas - I never signed off as Stu anybody. What is odd that you bother your arse about some sort of random glitch.

      Delete
  13. Wis it no the Tories that introduced English EVEL Devolution?

    Some would argue that was their biggest mistake; Fueled the rise of separatist nationalists like Johnson.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The General Sec of the FDA union has written to Fabiani complaining about her Committee being beastly to these poor wee senior civil servants. This, of course, is in addition to Swinney sending a letter saying the same.

    It seems that ministers want civil servants to carry the can when it goes pear shaped but claim full Ministerial responsibility when everything is hunky dory.

    So is it just Britnat civil servants to blame for this scandal.

    Or is it Ministers as they are ultimately responsible. I wonder which Minister(s) are actually involved - not many have been interviewed by the Committee. Anyone want to have a guess?

    Or is it BOTH the civil servants and the Minister(s) who are responsible.

    My opinion is that the whole scandal has been a terrible abuse of power and misuse of public funds. If Ministers have no control over or responsibility for what their civil servants do in their name then should they be Ministers. If they do then again should they be Ministers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another copy and past there Stu?

      Delete
    2. SS - naw that is your style Scoop Skier - you haven't a clue what is going on in the Harrassment Committee. You just copy and paste Evans is a Unionist and that's that - laughable ignorance - too lazy to read all the documentation - bashing rocks more your thing.

      Delete
  15. James honestly!! You continue to shame the heel dragging SNP with these polls.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Law now passed that the 2021 election can be delayed for 6 months if required due to corona virus (or just don't want a referendum).

    Funny when Blackford said a referendum would happen in 2021 he didn't say only if the election is not postponed for 6 months due to the virus.

    THE RECENT SNP HISTORY

    The referendum is going to be next year (2018).

    The referendum is going to be next year (2019).

    The referendum is going to be next year (2020).

    The referendum is going to be next year (2021).

    So when is this referendum taking place? A true party of independence would put a mandate for independence it its manifesto for May 2021 not be passing laws providing the ability to postpone the election. We are out of Europe, we have Johnson threatening devolution, we are a consistent majority in the polls. SNP action towards independence - ZERO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Says stu who's don't the grand total of fuck all to deliver indy, but instead just constantly attacks indy supporters / parties.

      Scottish public 2018 = we don't want an iref/indy next year
      Scottish public 2019 = we don't want an iref/indy next year
      Scottish public 2020 = ok, we think we maybe want an iref/indy next year now

      Delete
    2. Scoop Skier - one of your personalities is obsessed with Campbell. The rest post a lot of drivel.

      So when is the referendum? That question is to each of your multiple personalities including the Tory.

      Your post would be more accurate if you changed Scottish Public to Scottish National Party leadership.

      In the USA they have just had an election with approx 150 million voters and a lot worse corona virus situation than us.

      Delete
    3. I don't know what you mean Stu. Is that not your name? It's just you signed off with that name. My name's Ross.

      I'm basing my theories on national polling and the fact less than 50% voted for pro-indy parties in 2016, 2017 and 2019.

      Narrowly, but sadly the case. What are you basing your theory on?

      https://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-vote-in-the-in-a-scottish-independence-referendum-if-held-now-ask/?removed

      https://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/in-principle-do-you-think-there-should-or-should-not-be-a-referendum-on-scottis/?removed

      https://whatscotlandthinks.org/opinion-polls/scotland-poll-results/?keyword=referendum

      Delete
    4. Theory - what crap are you going on about now. Stick to your rock bashing.

      So when is this referendum happening?

      All you Sturgeon fanbots are like fundamental USA christians the second coming will be soon, soon I tell you soon. So soon you can never give a date - surprise surprise.

      Delete