With Don't Knows left in, Yes leads by five percentage points even on the rounded numbers (Yes 49%, No 44%). That contrasts with last week's Survation poll for this blog, in which the equivalent gap was just two points (Yes 45%, No 43%). I'd suggest, then, that the Panelbase poll is somewhat better for Yes than it may have looked at first glance. It also contained a multi-option question about the various constitutional options, and incredibly, independence is more popular than the two other options (the status quo and greater devolution). Gone are the days when we knew that a multi-option referendum would kill independence off by making a win for Devo More inevitable.
Wednesday, January 27, 2021
Panelbase poll is better for Yes than it appeared at first glance
So just to tie up some loose ends from the weekend - the Panelbase datasets have been published, and contrary to some previous suggestions it turns out that the standard independence question was asked after all. So the question wording isn't an alibi for the slight drop in the Yes vote, but what is a partial alibi is the rounding of the results. The raw numbers show Yes on around 52.4% and No on 47.6%, so they were within a smidgeon of being rounded up to 53-47 rather than down to 52-48. In the overall scheme of things it's not really that far away from the two Panelbase polls in the summer showing Yes on 54%, which at the time was a record high for the firm.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Multi-option referendums can prove to be a proper nightmare in the sense of the end result. What kind of a multi-option referendum would it be. A two-round one or a preference one. If you just take a look at this indy, devomax and status quo example. If it were a two-round referendum the likelihood now is indy and status quo would come into second round and then indy would win. If indy and devomax came into second round devomax would stand a good chance.
ReplyDeleteIf it was a one round preference referendum where you'd list your preferences from one two three devomax might come on the top although it'd have the least number of number ones.
I imagine this time it will be the UKGov that'll insist on the preference one-round multi-option referendum as it would give them the best chance of getting at least something. Although I don't really understand the devomax option - so far it's only a word - it would have to be detailed from a to z what it entails.
Sorry, but could you explain why you think the UK government will insist on a multi-option referendum?
DeleteWhat makes you think they even have the right to insist on anything?
To safeguard its own existence and be able to claim the majority of Scottish voters want to be in the UK in some form, even if it’s very loose.
DeleteIf the UK parties win an election in Scotland, they could put a multi-option ballot to the people.
DeletePerhaps the SNP (& Greens?) should put in their manifesto the pledge to hold specifically a 2 option ballot to the people then, otherwise both governments will want to shape the referendum.
DeleteThe winner of the election gets to shape the referendum. That's fundamental to how democracy works.
DeleteOf course the SNP + Greens could say they back the unionist multi-option vote if Yes parties don't win. If unionists parties respect democracy, they can return the favour by backing a straight Y/N if they don't win.
If “devomax” had the lowest number of 1st preference votes (as you suggest) that is the option which would be eliminated and its 2nd preferences would be redistributed.
DeleteBut why should the UK Government have any say in the format of a Scottish referendum?
If “devomax” had the lowest number of 1st preference votes (as you suggest) that is the option which would be eliminated and its 2nd preferences would be redistributed.
DeleteBut why should the UK Government have any say in the format of a Scottish referendum?
I’m just saying that there will inevitably be a negotiation as Scotland has two governments.
Delete‘But why should the UK Government have any say in the format of a Scottish referendum?’
So that the results can be implemented and not argued about.
No, Scotland only has 1 government. The UK government is not a Scottish government. It does not speak for nor represent Scotland / Scots. This is why it's called the 'UK' government.
DeleteJohnson isn't Scotland's PM, he's the UK PM. Sturgeon is the highest ranking Scottish politician.
The UK government deals with UK matters. Scottish Government with Scottish matters.
UK gov gets a say on Scotland's constitutional future as part of the UK - e.g. devo - as that's a UK matter. However, independence is a purely Scottish matter.
Think EU and the UK. The EU parliament was not one of the UK's governments was it? It didn't represent or speak for the UK. And when it came to brexit aka 'independence', the EU had no say in the decision to leave, nor did it attempt to. It's because the EU isn't racist anti-British in the way the UK is racist anti-Scottish. Presumably.
Fair parallel, although many would say the UK was governed by the EU in many areas (but, crucially, not the constitution).
DeleteWhatever the argument, the UK government will legally have the right to have a say, whether they should or not is a different matter, because the nation state is currently the UK.
I think UKGov should have absolutely now word in a Scottish referendum, but I also think that they will insist on having a word, which will absolutely have to be resisted.
DeleteYes - you're right - if devomax came third then, it'd be eliminated straight away. But still generally - multi-option referendums are tricky generally.
Devomax now can mean everything and nothing - the same as Brexit before the referendum. Giving any flesh to the meaning of it is impossible anyway as the Tory factions could never agree what it is they want, they couldn't agree with the Labour and LibDems and it would involve the complete overhaul of Westminster, arrangements with Wales and creating a parliament for England. So
By trying to have a say, the UK can only damage the union and increase the likelihood of it's breakup. If the EU had tried to interfere in the brexit ref, I'd have gone from pro-EU to voting leave in an instant. Johnson has already done serious damage here with his S30 approach, and can only do more by continuing to obstruct. If he doesn't want this settled by voting, he'd better be prepared to put English jackboots on Scottish Streets because that is the only alternative to peaceful voting.
DeleteWhat both the UK and Scottish governments must remember is that they don't 'own' Scotland. Scotland belongs to the people of Scotland, who select some people to run it for them and pay the wages of these, Johnson included. These folk don't get to tell Scots what to do, it's the other way around. If Johnson is PM of Scots, then we tell him what to do. If he's telling us, then he's not our democratically elected PM, but a dictator.
And the Nazis 'legally' gases the Jews. That was completely legal in Nazi Germany. However, it was a clear breach of human rights while forcibly controlling other occupied countries was a breach of the rights to self determination. Legal must also be compatible with human rights otherwise it's not legal.
I fully accept your points. I agree with most of them, except where does that end - what if 60% of Shetland wanted to leave Scotland, what about turnout? Are there no circumstances in which the bigger entity gets a say in the franchise in your opinion? Particularly when it’s close and you’re fighting for your existence?
DeleteWe've had this discussion before. You clearly don't understand how things work. To qualify for self-determination under internal law, you need to convince the world you are a distinct historic nation / people living on what is your historic homeland.
DeleteShetland is historically part of Scotland rather than a distinct nation / country, which is why it's people nationally identify as Scottish rather than Shetlander. They may have their own Shetland local identity, but they freely say they are Scottish (e.g. 2011 census). They actually self-identify as more Scottish than some regions of Scotland!
If Shetland starts to develop its own national identity, with Scottish fading away, then it's likely its voters would seek more and more autonomy. In time, this might get to the point where they are increasingly recognized as not Scottish, but their own distinct nation living on their historic lands. They would then start to gain the right to self determination as a people. Think Greenland/The Faroes.
Really the two come hand in hand; distinct peoples normally seek self determination because they see themselves as distinct. As a result, regions of countries don't see this because they don't see themselves as distinct. So Essex or Shetland going for indy just isn't something that happens.
That's why international law is very clear it only applies to distinct historic nations/peoples. 'Regions' don't have the right unless they fall into this category and when they do, they generally end up with varying autonomy. Where this is repressed, it always ends up with fighting; hence I said England will need jackboots if it doesn't want to do things by the ballot box.
There is obviously zero doubt about Scots being a historic people nation; most of Scotland's history is as an indy nation with the union very recent. The British claim to being a people is much weaker due to the lack of British law, language, culture etc.
Really if brits want to push this, they should stop talking about a 'union' as that immediately hands Scotland nation status with the right to exit. Instead, they should try to wipe the concept of Scotland from existence.
Good luck with that.
I don’t think it was fair or kind to say I clearly don’t understand how things work. I study it a great deal.
DeleteI accept your argument. I just don’t believe it’s as black and white as you make out, in law.
I don’t want to upset you so I’ll leave it here. You’re clearly a very intelligent and principled person.
To argue Scots don't have a right to self determination, you need to argue in law that they are not a people and Scotland isn't / never has been a country. It's really that simple.
DeleteAnd as I noted, Scots dictate to Johnson what to do as we pay his wages, not the other way around. That's how democracies work. It's in dictatorships where the government dictates to the people what the score is.
This seems pretty clear to me. The UK is signed up to this. In part 3, it even says the UK government should actively promote the right to Scottish self determination.
DeleteIf Scots can't freely self determine, it stops being a union and becomes a forced English colonization.
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx
PART I
Article 1
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
And who decides who is a people? Ultimately, people themselves decide that. Hence the vast majority of Scots report themselves as 'Scottish not British' when asked what their national identity is. They collectively see themselves as a nation and that's the reason Scotland exists; because it's people felt they were Scottish.
DeleteWhat British failed to do is become a national identity; only a minority identify as that so there is no country where self described 'British' people are in majority. Hence the lack of a British language, culture, laws etc.
Union 2.0 says Smearer Skier is clearly a very intelligent and principled person.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 yes Britnats just love Smearer Skier.
DeleteJohnson making a non-essential trip to Scotland today, putting lives at risk.
ReplyDeleteReally is one rule for English imperial toffs and another for the rest of us.
Anyway, likely a few more indy votes in the bag.
Sturgeon is going to enjoy reminding the Tories in Holyrood that Johnson has given the ok to legislation + campaigning on the future of the UK during covid.
ReplyDeleteThe latest UK wide Yougov poll for Westminster.
ReplyDeletehttps://docs.cdn.yougov.com/0oehl96hgy/TheTimes_VI%20voting%20intention%2026-27%20Jan.pdf
Scotland sub sample SNP 49 Con 24 Lab 15 LD 4 GN 2 Reform 1 other 5.
Some shocking feedback re Brexit, and votes for UKIP!
Deletehttps://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-economy/first-flashes-of-brexit-trade-trouble-appear-in-uk-data-idUSKBN29X0PP
ReplyDeleteFirst flashes of Brexit trade trouble appear in UK data
Manufacturers and services firms have been hit hard by supply chain and export disruption, according to data company IHS Markit.
British factories reported the steepest increase in supplier delivery times among the six “flash” preliminary Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) surveys published by IHS Markit last week for France, Germany, Japan, Australia and the United States as well as the United Kingdom.
“This was almost exclusively linked to both Brexit disruption and a severe lack of international shipping availability,” IHS Markit said.
So 'sorry I killed so many with my herd immunity' Johnson went ahead and broke covid rules to travel up and down the UK politically campaigning with his wee visit to Scotland.
ReplyDeleteTravelled from ground zero of the English variant to go around key vaccine facilities in Scotland putting these at risk of outbreak all the while telling the rest of us 'jock vermin' to shut it and stay at home.
If I was a unionist, I'd have my head in my hands today.
Long live PM johnson!
Why didn't he visit Wales or Northern Ireland today if he wants to keep the Union?
DeleteWhy is he visiting a hospital?
DeleteHealth is devolved, so that torpedoes the "essential visit" angle that's being peddled.
He's clearly broken covid laws. What he did could have easily be done from home via Zoom or teams.
DeleteHis job as PM is to set an example to the people of how to follow covid rules. A virtual visit to Scotland where folk could have interacted with him online would have been exactly the right thing. Nobody could have complained.
Instead, he openly campaigned for unionism flouting the law and putting lives at risk. If someone dies due to catching covid via his visit somehow, he will have blood on his hands.
I think police Scotland should investigate.
I believe that the police have received a few complaints regarding the visit and seem happy that he has not broken and rules:
DeleteA Police Scotland spokesperson said: "We have received a small number of complaints regarding Prime Minister Boris Johnson's visit to Scotland.
"This is a working visit in his official capacity as Prime Minister and we are policing the event appropriately."
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/boris-johnson-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-23400962
Until such time he is convicted of breaking any laws me must not make statements like 'he has clearly broken covid laws'. Its only Unionists that do things like the, eg stating the Salmond had broken the laws.
If someone dies he has blood on his hands. He could have worked from home and done the visits via Zoom. He clearly doesn't care if he kills people.
DeleteLoads of pics of him breaking the 2m rule. He is even pictured attempting (and maybe making) physical contact with people for the cameras. So much for the apology the other day; clearly didn't mean it.
DeleteErm, this absolutely isn't respecting the 2 m rule.
Deletehttps://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/11A31/production/_116714227_065411104.jpg
I hope the poor soldier and family/friends don't end up with covid. Even if Johnson isn't infected, he could be carrying it on his clothes. He's come from ground zero after all where 1 in three infected don't even show symptoms.
Jesus, he's actually going around touching everyone.
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-55829578
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - back to referencing the British State broadcaster as a valid source of news. Only Britnats think that way.
DeleteSmearer Skier says - "Long live PM Johnson" - slip up - showing your true Unionist colours there.
I had a look at the Wings website and I note it's not got anything condemning the visit. It's hard to remember the last time that site ever attacked the Tories or even had a pro-indy story.
ReplyDeleteSmearer Skier (liar since 2014) quite rightly says it is not acceptable to tell James Kelly what to write about on his blog and then proceeds to tell another blogger what to write about.
DeleteLies and hypocrisy are the trademark of Smearer Skier.
Monica Lennon pushing the devolution max option on a referendum. Of course British Labour broke the Edinburgh Agreement by issuing the Infamous Vow. Anyone know what Murray Foote is doing these days? Is he working on the follow up - Vow2.
ReplyDeleteBritish Labour then followed it up by voting against devomax in the Smith Commission. Swinney celebrated getting Stamp Duty -useless twat.
Politics in Scotland is a sad farce.
Your defense of Johnson is admirable IfS.
ReplyDeletePics of him breaking the 2 metre rule is all over the papers; going around touching key workers to see if he can infect them with virus picked up in England.
Not reported on English blogsites of course; they don't attack the Tories, just Yes parties.
Smearer Skier liar since 2014.
DeleteOh and since Johnson isn't being arrested by the police on the advice of the CPS, I think we can safely conclude that these are not controlled by Sturgeon and hubby as some conspiracy theorists claim.
ReplyDeleteThe plotters seem to have called their Whattsapp group Vietnam. As they are nasty liars like Smearer Skier a more accurate title would have been Liars United.
DeleteThe Crown Office deliberately holding back from the public evidence of a plot to send Salmond to jail. The Lord Advocate (Wolfy) sits in the Scotgov Cabinet and controls the Crown Office. If there is no plot why not release ALL the evidence and then all the others involved can say they misspoke as well. Not a word from Ruddick about what she did or didn't do after getting the messages from Murrell. Following lawyers advice? The classic no comment. Is she paying for that legal advice herself or using Smearer Skiers donations. Maybe it's Ramstams donations.
Or Julia Gibbs donations. Perhaps Rocksie chucked in a few Bob.
Will you SNP members ever wise up and get a leadership that actually wants independence.
Will you SNP members ever wise up and get a leadership that actually wants independence.
DeleteEnglish Tories do this too, i.e. tell the jocks how to run their own house.
Smearer Skier ( liar since 2014) - I know there is no chance of you ever wising up.
DeleteUnlike you I have never posted " Long live PM Johnston". Only a Tory Britnat would even consider posting that never mind actually do it.
You of course are more than happy to contribute to lawyers fees to help Murrell - liars United.
When I contributed funds to the SNP it was for Scottish independence not for people like Murrell to spend on lawyers fees to help cover up his disgraceful actions.