Wednesday, February 10, 2021

Make that TWENTY-ONE in a row: Savanta ComRes poll gives Yes a six-point lead

We now have the first full-scale Scottish poll since the SNP leadership made the idiotic unforced error of sacking their most popular frontbencher just weeks before a crucial election, and we can at least breathe a sigh of relief that Yes still has a lead, and indeed a bit of a cushion.

Should Scotland be an independent country? (Savanta ComRes, 4th-9th February 2021)

Yes 53% (-4)
No 47% (+4)

Depending on your point of view, this is either the twentieth or the twenty-first consecutive poll to show a pro-independence majority - a long unbroken sequence stretching all the way back to the Scot Goes Pop / Panelbase poll of last June.  (It's the twenty-first in a row if you include a Progress Scotland / Survation poll that used a non-standard format.  Personally I think we should be saying it's twenty, but there's such a consensus among Yessers for including the Progress Scotland poll that I've almost given up on trying to make that case.)

When I said that I was worried that the factional behaviour of the leadership in recent days might cost both Yes and the SNP dearly in the polls, what I was really concerned about was that No might return to the lead.  That hasn't happened, but of course the snag here is that Savanta ComRes has recently been one of the most Yes-friendly pollsters.  If, for the sake of argument, YouGov, Survation or even Panelbase were to replicate the four-point drop in Yes support that ComRes are reporting, that would be enough to tip the balance and put No into the lead with those firms.  So the big question is whether ComRes are picking up something real, or whether they're just 'returning to the pack' after a couple of unusually good polls for Yes.  It shouldn't be forgotten that before those two polls, ComRes were reporting very similar figures to other firms - 53% in October (exactly the same as today) and 54% in August.  It doesn't automatically follow, therefore, that other firms will show any drop in Yes support at all - we'll just have to wait and see.

If there has been a genuine swing against Yes, I can think of a number of possible reasons -

1) The sacking of Joanna Cherry.  If it's mainly that, the effect should fade over time, so long as the leadership don't continue to pander to the zealots (for example with further sackings, suspensions or expulsions).  

2) The ongoing fallout from the rift between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond.

3) The media's determined efforts to portray the vaccine rollout as a success story for the UK Government.  I'd suggest that's the least likely possibility, because the public perception that the UK Government have handled the crisis badly, and that the Scottish Government have handled it well, seems to be pretty much set in stone.

Scottish Parliament constituency ballot voting intentions:

SNP 54% (+1)
Conservatives 23% (+4)
Labour 16% (-3)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-)

Scottish Parliament regional list ballot voting intentions:

SNP 43% (-1)
Conservatives 21% (+5)
Labour 18% (-)
Greens 10% (-1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-2)

Seats projection (with changes from the 2016 election): SNP 71 (+8), Conservatives 24 (-7), Labour 19 (-5), Greens 11 (+5), Liberal Democrats 4 (-1)

SNP: 71 seats
All other parties combined: 58 seats

SNP OVERALL MAJORITY OF 13 SEATS

Pro-independence parties: 82 seats
Anti-independence parties: 47 seats

PRO-INDEPENDENCE MAJORITY OF 35 SEATS

So the story of the Holyrood numbers is not one of SNP collapse (because there simply hasn't been one), but of an unexpected Tory recovery - which may have been at the expense of Labour on the constituency vote, but seemingly not on the list.  Why that would have happened isn't entirely clear, because the Tories have been taking a hammering in Scottish polls of late.  I'm wondering if it might turn out to be a freakish finding caused by sampling variation.

I'm slightly bemused by the Scotsman summarising Labour's results as "comfortably around the 18 per cent on both lists".  They're on exactly 18% on one ballot, but they're on 16% on the other.  I'm not sure what person in their right mind would describe 16% as being "around 18%", but each to their own I suppose.

The zealots within the SNP will doubtless seize upon a finding from one of the poll's supplementary questions that 32% of SNP voters back Joanna Cherry's sacking and 13% oppose it - but of course that misses the point entirely.  You'd always expect most of a party's own support base to say they support the decisions of that party's leader, but it's the minority who don't support those decisions you have to worry about.  The SNP simply can't afford to lose, say, one-tenth of their voters just before an election.  Nor can they afford a growing perception that the party is divided - and this poll shows that the proportion of respondents saying the SNP is divided has increased from 39% to 45%.  It's difficult to escape the conclusion that the sacking must be partly responsible for that.

The poll also finds support for GRA reform by a margin of 40% to 26%, which is in stark contrast to other polling in the last couple of years which found overwhelming opposition.  It's highly unlikely that public opinion has turned on its head - the more probable explanation is that this is one of those issues where the answers people give are very much dependent on the way the question is worded.

*  *  *

I became slightly concerned yesterday that my Somerset Stalker hadn't written his 18,573rd obsessional blogpost about me yet - but thankfully that was rectified before the night was out.  Close one.

122 comments:

  1. I did think their previous poll was at the high end for yes. Their polling on Independence was new so they now be bedded in.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are we seeing the core Indy vote now pretty settled at around 53% on average?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great stuff. How many in a row will we get before independence? 50 100 200 400 800

    ReplyDelete
  4. I still think that poll numbers hovering just over 50% are disappointing. The desire for independence with brexit having kicked in, combined with this unbelievably toxic tory government should have numbers up near 60% at least, even allowing for the ongoing cluster bourach of the SNP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. Yes is not a sure thing yet, even with such perfect conditions for it.

      Delete
    2. Take a step back. Look at the propaganda that is daily in the press and the slanted TV news that is hostile to the SNP led Government. There is now a larger core vote now that we had in 2012 when the first referendum was mooted. The Yes side haven't really started campaigning. The Now Scotland launched last week can now start filling that vaccuum.

      Delete
    3. I hope you are right! It is astonishing how wrong the polls can be at times and Independence must not be one of those times. The propaganda is overwhelming but fortunately this blog and The National keep me optimistic. I am hoping to apply for my Scottish passport soon!

      Delete
  5. The fact that Yes has dropped, but the SNP (and Greens) have barely budged is a bit confusing. I think the bigger factor might be the Tories and UK Government getting a bit of credit for the vaccines. In recent (last 10 days) polls of GB the Tories have been gaining a few points at the expense of Labour.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Scotsman headline "Support for independence falls amid civil war in SNP" is predictable.

    They follow that up in the piece with -
    "Support for independence has dropped below 50% when "don't knows" are included since December with 47% of Scots intending to vote Yes, with 42% voting No, and 10% undecided.".

    I don't have all the raw polling data to hand, but have we ever seen more than 50% Yes on that basis - James?

    It must be very confusing for the reader that they then show a graph of the support for Scottish Independence on the normal basis with all the results >50% since January 2020.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Scotsman itself has commissioned polls from Savanta in January and December had the Yes/No/DK as follows:

      Jan21: 51%/38%/10%
      Dec20: 52%/38%/10%

      Other (recent) survey firms e.g. Ipos/Mori, Panelbase have also shown overall majority support for Yes even when DKs are included.

      See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence for a full list.

      Delete
  7. James,

    As I'm sure you are aware, all the survey companies are showing a decline if you compare latest to prior polls:

    PB YG SU SA IM
    Latest 52% 51% 51% 57% 56%
    Prior 56% 53% 52% 58% 58%
    Peak 56% 53% 54% 58% 58%

    (JL have only ever had one poll so are excluded above).

    Apart from the combination of in-fighting with The Zealotory, sacking of JC and Sturgeon inquiries it could be that some softer Yes have reverted to No as they may have concluded that the arrival of the vaccines means that we don't need Indy after all.

    Maybe just a blip but all of them are registering reduced Yes support.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that's too much of a jump at this stage. As I stated in the blogpost, Yes support with ComRes is simply back to where it was in October. Survation showed only a one-point drop from their last poll, and Panelbase's numbers aren't really all that different from what they were showing in the summer. It's still possible that the apparent drops are happening by chance - admittedly that's getting less likely, but it's still possible.

      Delete
  8. My gut feel is that the "SNP divided" measure is all about Sturgeon/Salmond, and its continuing playout in the media. I just don't accept that the general public will have registered Cherry's sacking. What's her recognition numbers in Scotland? Twitter, on the other hand....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not hard for the public to register that Joanna Cherry has been sacked: all they need to do is see/hear the prominent headlines saying "Joanna Cherry has been sacked".

      Delete
    2. At which point the vast majority would wonder who Joanna Cherry is. I suspect if you polled it, she'd get a modest positive review, but most would say they've never heard of her. They hardly knew Ronald Leopold and he was on the news every day.

      The past few days will not have changed that much.

      Delete
    3. You're trying your heart out on this one, but she *is* pretty well-known and sacking her *was* idiotic.

      Delete
    4. More known than leopold or Rennie? I doubt it James.

      And I've said I like her. I'm disappointed she's not opted to stand for Holyrood. As a heterosexual male (and scientist), I also agree with her on the principle of what constitutes an adult human female, whatever my sympathies on the subject. However, it does seem she's asked to be put on the back benches. If the party leadership allow prominent members to openly attack the party in the unionist media, it will be seen as weak and divided.

      You do this in the dressing room or at training, not in front of the opposition and fans. Otherwise, you will be put back on the bench.

      And she called her own front bench post 'increasingly irrelevant', which I also totally agree with, but it wasn't going to help in the circumstances.

      I think it's a very bad move to not listen to her and colleagues. You can do that while reminding them what's expected from a team.

      Anyway, she's on the NEC now. Without the non-job of being an irrelevant front bencher, she can focus on that. It's the far better route to policy influence and being down in the south of England every day with nobody listening to you, like certain bloggers.

      Delete
    5. Her ego was getting put of control

      Delete
    6. Oh, I entirely agree that bloggers aren't listened to, which means that the pro-leadership spin in below-the-line comments on the same blogs is even less likely to gain traction.

      If you're seriously asking me whether Joanna Cherry is at least as well-known as Richard Leonard, the answer is self-evidently yes.

      And, as you know, she didn't call her "own front bench post" increasingly irrelevant.

      Delete
    7. She called Westminster politics 'increasingly irrelevant to Scotland'. That covers all Scots MPs and all posts in the pointless shadow cabinet. After all, it's never, ever going to be part of the real cabinet is it? English people would never let a scot near a position of power; only Brits maybe, and that was in the past probably.

      Now we have the ‘SNP should deliver independence by next Tuesday!’ folks who denounce Sturgeon / Blackford for ‘pointlessly wasting time being completely ignored in Westminster’ complaining about Cherry not having a front bench voice their anymore. It’s just silly.

      I note I’m not accusing you of this, but you must surely appreciate this point.

      Being front bench in London is either important or its not. A agree with Cherry that it isn't.

      I can't be angry at Cherry being put on the back benches if I'd like to see her focus on the NEC and even try to get elected for Holyrood.

      If Scots vote Yes, their MPs will need to withdraw from Westminster pretty soon after this. They can only remain their as long as Westminster is making laws for Scotland and Scots will want that to end as soon as possible after a Yes vote. Probably within a few weeks to months.

      Delete
    8. "She called Westminster politics 'increasingly irrelevant to Scotland'."

      Nope, she didn't say that either - you're adjusting the original quote to try to squash it into a hole where it wouldn't otherwise fit.

      Delete
    9. I don't know how else to read this James:

      https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1356233347928883206

      Joanna Cherry QC
      @joannaccherry
      1 Feb
      Westminster is increasingly irrelevant to Scotland's constitutional future and @theSNP would do well to radically re-think our strategy.


      Yes, I agree with her that Westminster (ergo Scottish MPs) is increasingly irrelevant to Scotland's constitutional* future. I have given obvious reasons for this.

      Do you think SNP MPs in London have influence? Are they important? Is the shadow cabinet down there important, driving forward Scotland towards indy, or largely irrelevant to Scotland's future?

      A change of tactic for Westminster is something I agree with; it is pointless being there. The only thing that will have an impact is withdrawing if needed.

      I get the annoyance at Cherry being snubbed, but I don't want good SNP people desiring positions in London. Cherry missed a trick by not trying to stand for Holyrood in May. But then she can now focus on the NEC, which is good news.

      ---
      *def = how a country is governed.

      Delete
    10. Certainly, any change in SNP tactics should be to make Westminster as irrelevant as possible to Scotland's future. I hope nobody wants to make it more relevant as that is called unionism.

      So I do hope Cherry was arguing to make the shadow cabinet down there even less relevant to Scotland's governance. I suspect she was.

      We must remember that in addition to being totally ignored, our MPs are not representative of Scots due to FPTP. I'm happy to see the british system backfire against unionists, but I don't want our MPs deciding Scotland's future. That's for PR Holyrood.

      Delete
    11. "I don't know how else to read this James"

      My suggestion would be in the way it's actually written. If she'd wanted to describe her own former job as irrelevant, I'm sure she would have done so.

      Delete
    12. Ok, fair enough, no she didn't pick her own previous role out, but I took it as her referring to all Scots MPs.

      I hope they are all withdrawing from Westminster within 6-12 months, so shadow cabinet roles should all be dead end jobs, with all Scots MPs seeing it as that. Scots MPs means Westminster laws and that should be over asap.

      Delete
    13. James and I often don't agree, but he doesn't call me a c**t and block my posts for that. SGP isn't a cult.

      Delete
    14. You are not allowed to disagree with cult leaders. This is the first lesson in 'Cults for Dummies', 5th ed.

      Delete
  9. ISP on max 1% again then. The 'split the Yes vote' unionist plan has kinda flopped so far it seems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could that be the reason for the non-publication of some questions asked on the latest Panelbase poll?

      Delete
    2. Watch the Highlands! You are in for quite a shock.

      Delete
    3. Survation H&I Regional VI:
      49% SNP
      25% Lib
      11% Con
      8% Lab
      4% Brx
      3% Grn
      0% Other

      Delete
    4. Comres H&I Regional list VI:
      50% SNP
      17% Con
      14% Lib
      8% Lab
      9% Grn
      2% Other

      Delete
    5. You have to stop making numbers up!
      Go to the 2016 results website and see how far out you are.

      Delete
  10. Well, I think the last few minutes pretty much confirms my suspicion that "Dooggie R" is the "Poppy" troll. You're not welcome to post here under any moniker - I've made that abundantly clear to you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I note that, in the reply I just deleted, you objected to the word "troll" but did not deny being "Poppy" - who had a track record of posting racist and homophobic comments. So much for your bleating about "progressivism".

      Delete
  11. Could the big shift from Labour to the Torys reflect the hard core unionists and or brexiteers who feel the only hope is to vote Tory?
    Ally

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I think that's just reflecting what has happened in GB polls in the last week or so (Tories up, Lab down) - the London papers who published those polls have been attributing that to the vaccine.

      Delete
  12. The Highland SNP list vote in 2016 was 38% and one SNP MSP was elected. In 2021 the No.1 SNP candidate on the list is Rhiannon Spears who is a very controversial character and very unpopular with a large number of SNP voters.
    If half of those 38% who voted SNP voted ISP we would get TWO Independence supporting MSPs, less Unionists and NOT Spears.
    I do not believe the polls are picking up the list vote intent variations across Scotland.
    I know that dozens of people I know have just left the SNP and will vote still for SNP in the constituency but all intend to vote ISP.
    My view is far from scientific but enough to convince me that variations are not being picked up.
    When voters are made aware of the stance of the SNP list candidates on Womenns Rights I suspect local changes.
    I for one will certainly be doing my best to raise the awareness of these SNP list candidates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are jumping the gun here. The members will decide who will be number 1 on the SNP list and not you. Voting for the list has not yet started.

      Delete
    2. That is your opinion. Set England free, vote 1 and 2 S.N.P.

      Delete
    3. Unknown: Well, let's hope you're right that members will decide who is Number 1 on the list! At the moment there's considerable doubt over that.

      Delete
    4. The SNP won 7/15 seats in the H&I region in 2016.

      That was on 43% of the PR list vote after parties below the 5% threshold were removed.

      The allocation of all seats (C+L) closely matched the PR list as it should.

      Delete
    5. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) trying to misrepresent.

      The SNP got 6 constituency MSPs out of 8.

      The SNP got 1 Regional list MSP out of 7.

      The more consituency MSPs a party wins the lower that parties chances are of winning Regional List seats.

      Delete
    6. The SNP won 7 out of a total of 15 (C + L) seats up for grabs in the Highlands and Islands Region.

      It's a PR system. You get your fair share based on the list no matter which way you win them. If you have already got your fair allocation via constituency votes, you can't demand 2 for the price of one; that's British style FPTP type elections.

      I think you should look up how AMS works.

      Delete
    7. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) says 43% and Julia Gibb says 38%. Which figure truly represents the SNP regional list vote in Highlands and Islands 2016 election?

      Julia of course.

      Delete
    8. "That was on 43% of the PR list vote after parties below the 5% threshold were removed."

      The seats are allocated based on vote shares after parties which failed to reach the 5% regional threshold are removed.

      93.2% of votes went to parties which exceeded the 5% cut off on the PR vote.

      39.7/93.2*100 = 42.6% SNP as the starting point for PR seat allocation.

      I thought everyone understood this.

      Delete
    9. Not everyone it seems. I think there needs to be a bit of education on how the system actually works.

      Delete
    10. Marcia not everyone (like you) can read clearly what is posted. Think about it.

      I know how the system works. My comment was not on how the system works but what was the actual SNP % vote share on the Regional list for H&I.

      Now if you want to join in with your pal Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - go on explain how the system works. Educate me and then I'll tell you where you are talking nonsense. Or crawl back to where you creeped out of.

      You are correct about one thing about your posts they are worth tuppence.

      Delete
    11. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - you posting pish again Skier that is a given.

      Delete
    12. The SNP percentage on the H&I Regional list was 39.7% Julia was nearer with 38% . Smearer Skier with his pointless figure was way wrong.

      39.7% is the ACTUAL percentage of the vote.

      Delete
    13. I'll be here waiting for the two diddys called Marcia and Smearer to educate me 🤣🤣 on how the electoral system works.

      Delete
    14. What immature comments that this IFS person who seems to post under different names. He is like a spoilt child in a bath. Needs therapy by the look of it. Insults demean anyone's arguments.

      Delete
    15. While I am waiting for the two diddys to explain how the system works.

      Let's consider Smearers comment above - "You get your fair share based on the list no matter which way you win them.

      Example, In 2021 the SNP win an overall parliamentary majority via the constituency seats - say 68 seats out of 73 constituencies and this represents 68 out of the total of 129.

      They then get 33% of the votes on the Regional lists getting only I additional seat. 68 +1 = 69 seats out of 129 seats = 53.48% of seats. According to Skier this should be approx 33%.

      Fact - if you win a consituency you win it. Therefore if you win all 73 constituencies you can not get less than 73 as a percentage of 129 = 56.59%. Therefore if you get 40% of the vote in the list the numbers of MSPs will not reduce from 56.59% to 40% as per Skiers statement.

      Delete
    16. Unknown please stay unknown - " he is like a spoilt child in a bath." That reads like an insult to me. So I guess you are like a spoilt child in a shower who cannot even think of a moniker.

      Delete
    17. Still waiting Marcia and Smearer. How does the electoral system work for Holyrood.

      Delete
    18. Nothing from Smearer or Marcia. Arrogance and ignorance sums up this pair. The truth is they don't have a clue how the electoral system works for Holyrood but they have the cheek to tell me to learn how it works.

      Delete
    19. It already has been explained to you IFS/Cubby/Whatever. Only a child would deny that. Then again, look who I am replying to.

      Delete
    20. Pony/Scottish Skier/whatever - no it hasn't they don't have a clue and if you think they do then you are just as ignorant.

      Why don't you let them speak for themselves - oh that's right it's really you Smearer Skier.

      Delete
  13. Any Cherry/Salmond issue would be more likely to have an effect on the party's support rather than independence support.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think there may be one other factor you don’t mention. The past few weeks have not seen the EU at its best and the pro-union, pro-Brexit MSM have made the most of this. For people who favour independence – at least partly – as a route back into Europe and the wider world this is a problem. If re-joining the EU comes to appear less attractive then the whole calculus about independence could be thrown into doubt. With luck this will only be a passing phase, but it‘s real issue for many people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or on the other hand, some voters see a bit of stability in the EU not to mention the rights that come with being in the EU. One friend who voted No in 2014 suprised me by saying she will vote Yes in the next referendum. I thought she was a diehard Unionist to the core.

      Delete
  15. What a waste of time and energy these past few weeks have been. SNP support is stable, SNP voters back the action taken taken over Cherry (with Tories most opposed) and the public back GRA reform with men more opposed than women. That we've allowed the discourse to be overwhelmed by a minority of twitter rabble rousers with disproportionate influence is regrettable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As explained in the blogpost (you won't like this but it's true), other polling has shown overwhelming opposition to self-ID. So today's result cannot be taken as crudely meaning "the public support GRA reform" - it clearly depends on how the question is asked.

      I'm not sure I'd describe Joanna Cherry's sacking as a waste of time - more like a monumentally idiotic thing to do just three months before an election.

      Delete
    2. The BBC is putting up lengthy articles trying to explain to people that there is some big SNP scandal they should know about, understand, and be influenced by, it's kinda obvious nobody really cares.

      Delete
    3. I just don't think the GRA is the vote loser the Malcontents "wish" it to be. People, in general, are no longer "threatened" by those kind of gender issues.

      Given the plethora of adverts that highlight different sexualities and relationships, and the popularity of TV shows that have either openly trans/gay/whatever hosts or "diverse" casts (Star Trek Discovery is absolutely bursting with "diversity"), it is difficult to reconcile the Malcontents twisted description of the GRA with sponsors willingness to put their money behind "woke" agendas.

      As to the Malcontent internet presence, it is a regrettable consequence of the current majority for Indy in polls. The powers-that-be couldn't pass up an open goal like the Malcontent blogosphere to hack away at the roots of the Indy movement. While the Malcontents witter on about "conspiracies" and the moles in the higher echelons of the Scottish govt, they are oblivious to the false flags that infest their own threads. Why go to all the trouble and complexity of inserting under cover operatives into positions of power in a "foreign" govt when you simply post all the anti-SNP/anti-independence propaganda you like on much read, supposedly pro-Indy web sites (actually getting praised for it by apparent pro-Indy activists) for a fraction of the cost and risk. Unionists are laughing themselves senseless over this.

      For the moment it has not cut through to the general population. But, regrettably, it will. And when Indy falls on the back of their senseless, smug activities they will simply walk away, whistling a tuneless tune, hoping nobody notices they've gone.

      Delete
  16. These polls are meaningless so long as there is no mechanism in place or in prospect by which the public support indicated can be connected to the democratic process. It wouldn't matter if support for independence was at 80% if there's no way for people to actually vote. As things stand, we can have absolutely no confidence that the SNP will, if elected to government, deliver a free and fair referendum.

    Without a credible commitment to specific action on an appropriate timescale, we could be looking at a repeat of 2017. If the SNP is to be more than the party with independence in its constitution then the leadership need to step up... or step aside.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kinda puzzled. 2017 was of course a UK election. How on earth could that have delivered a Scottish referendum?

      Delete
    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - through a manifesto mandate for a referendum. Surely you read your own party's manifesto.

      Delete
    3. We had the bizzare situation in 2017 where the SNP declared "this is not about independence"
      That's why we cannot claim it as a legitimate mandate.

      Delete
  17. UK government need to act; welfare and the economy being reserved matters.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-finance-regulator/more-than-40-of-britons-in-poor-health-or-struggling-financially-amid-pandemic-says-uk-regulator-idUSKBN2AB10R

    More than 40% of Britons in poor health or struggling financially amid pandemic, says UK regulator

    ReplyDelete
  18. This didn't take long.

    https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/brexit-eu-share-trading-amsterdam-london-cboe-euronext-085836356.html

    Amsterdam overtakes London as Europe's share trading hub

    Amsterdam has overtaken London as the share trading capital of Europe, just a month after Brexit became official.

    I think people must remember we are only just starting to experience the disaster of brexit.

    1.3 million skilled workers have already fled, with the UK population projected to fall for the first time in a century. Yet unemployment is rising rapidly.

    ReplyDelete
  19. SCHRODINGERS STURGEON

    1. I have no involvement in the process. I have no knowledge of complaints against former ministers. It is all the responsibility of the Permanent Secretary. That's what the signed off process says.

    2. I thought it was important that the women's complaints were properly investigated and not swept under the carpet just because of the seniority and party affiliation of who those complaints were about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, this is why she didn't intervene.

      Delete
    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2914) - didn't intervene in what?

      Delete
    3. On behalf of her long term friend and mentor, Salmond.

      Delete
    4. Smearer Skier (liar since 2024) - In the investigation in to what. As a self proclaimed highly qualified scientist surely you can specify your meaning more clearly.

      Delete
    5. You are just being stupid now. Again.

      Delete
  20. Who'd a thunk it! Why did nobody warn about all this?

    https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/brexit-trade-arrangements-unmitigated-disaster-175428762.html

    Brexit trade arrangements an ‘unmitigated disaster’, food sector bosses tell MPs

    Food industry bosses have condemned Brexit as an “unmitigated disaster” and claimed the cost of disruption has caused some firms to shut for good.

    Sector leaders also told MPs on the International Trade Select Committee that companies will struggle to recover lost exports as a result of Brexit.

    Ian Wright, chief executive of the Food and Drink Federation (FDF), said food exports have been cut by at least half since the start of January despite the Government’s last-minute Brexit deal.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Joanne Cherry wasnt sacked though was she ?
    She was only removed from a committee , isnt that right ?
    Shes still an MP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Almost none of that is true. She was sacked. She wasn't removed from a committee. She's still an MP but that's not in the gift of the leadership anyway - MPs can only be sacked by voters.

      Delete
    2. Just how hard can it be for Terence and Andy to understand what happened - too bloody hard for them it seems.

      Delete
    3. Do the shadow cabinet get paid more? I know they don't from parliament, but what about the party?

      Delete
  22. I Agree Peter. The voters need a short-dated timetable so there's no possible doubt about what happens after an SNP or YES parties majority in May..
    Covid IMO will likely be well subdued and under control by summer.
    There also must be absolutely no ambiguity about commitment in either the Greens or SNP manifestos to the referendum.
    Not just a policy but the number one priority so there is no doubts for the Unionists to play on anent a watertight mandate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ramstam, if an election happens in May and a mandate for a referendum is delivered there is no reason Covid should prevent a referendum this year. Both involve voters going to vote or posting a vote. So what will the excuse be this time?

      Delete
    2. There may be no legislative reason for not holding one this year but the Scottish govt (unlike you and your Malcontent buddies) have to WIN it. While you seem (your motives are still suspect to me) desperate to hold a referendum tomorrow if possible, the electorate may not share that enthusiasm. The Scottish Govt has to take that into consideration when deciding to pull the trigger on another referendum. Ignoring people's concerns over the pandemic taking second place to Indy could be very easily spun against YES and see a collapse in Indy support.

      I suspect you are very aware of this but don't care. I suspect (despite your suspiciously generic "look at me, I'm a real Yesser" pseudonym) that independence is the last thing on you want to see happen. I've yet to see a post from you that is any way likely to further the cause of independence. Indeed, every one has been an attempt to undermine confidence in that cause. By their actions shall ye know them .... and I think we all know what you are.

      Delete
    3. If Yes doesn't win iref2, it would likely be another 5 years before another can be realistically held. It would be hard to justify to the electorate having another go until they at least give a new mandate via a holyrood election. Not impossible, but hard. And if you go against the wishes of the electorate, they will punish you.

      Of course it's impossible to be 100% sure you'll win, but the long term trend is too yes, so just making an educated gamble at the right moment is all you can do.

      The SNP were bounced into 2014 by an unexpected majority and david Cameron. Yes lost because it was on the back foot from the beginning and spent the whole campaign just regaining lost ground / solidifying the 45% that were interested in indy in 2011.

      Delete
  23. What's important though in terms of people's lives and livelihoods is whether sturgeon first technically 'heard' about the alleged allegations on the Thursday or the following Monday.

    https://www.cityam.com/ftse-100-falls-as-uk-gdp-endures-record-slump-in-2020/

    FTSE 100 falls as UK GDP endures record slump in 2020

    ReplyDelete
  24. Martin Hannah The National journalist resigns from the SNP after 20 years of membership he says in his article in The National.

    How long before Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) calls him a Unionist and a criminal for holding on to key information.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only people who withhold key evidence are criminals. Like you unless you actually don't know anything.

      Delete
    2. And who on earth is Martin Hannah? I've supported the SNP since 1992 at high school and I've never heard of him.

      Delete
  25. How long before Marcia comes along and drools you are so right Skier that Martin Hannan is a Unionist and a criminal - drool drool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Martin Hannan is a Unionist and a criminal'

      These are your words, not mine. All I said was that I didn't recognise the name. I've had a look at the face too and no, I've never seen that either.

      Also, in my experience, it is only unionists that are pleased when people resign from Yes parties. Independence supporters are never happy about this, but saddened.

      Delete
    2. Liar once again Smearer Skier. You lie like Trump. Not my words Smearer.

      Smearer you are a pathological liar.

      Delete
    3. Do you think people are incapable of reading "Independence for Scotland" (aye right)? Skier never wrote or inferred any of that. As can clearly be seen. They were completely your invention. Yet you call others liars for pointing this obvious fact out. Perhaps you have gone too far down the Malcontent rabbit hole to know the difference between debate and malicious trolling, but I feel you know what you are doing and simply don't care. You are here to shut down debate, not contribute to it. Troll.

      Delete
  26. I read that the courts have agreed to let the committee publish more from the submissions, so giving the green light for Salmond to attend.

    Very good news.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://news.stv.tv/politics/alex-salmond-committee-to-discuss-court-ruling-on-evidence?top

      The Alex Salmond inquiry committee has called a meeting to discuss a court judgment about the former first minister’s evidence.

      Salmond was expected to appear before the Holyrood committee investigating the Scottish Government’s botched handling of sexual harassment complaints against him on Tuesday, February 9, but he declined to do so after it failed to publish evidence he submitted.

      The committee voted not to publish the submission or a redacted version of it, citing legal concerns over orders to protect the anonymity of complainers.

      But a judge has now amended a court order which prevents the publication of information likely to identify any of the accusers in the Salmond trial to clarify its scope.

      Delete
    2. It's weird IfS, how come I want Salmond to attend and say his piece by you apparently don't?

      I thought you were all for him going public?

      Delete
    3. Salmond's evidence already is public, and has been for a while. I think the main upshot is that the general public view Salmond, Sturgeon, and the government as liars, and have such a low expectation level, they aren't particularly bothered about it.

      Remember that the inquiry is into proven government incompetence in the first place.

      I get the feeling that a Scottish inquiry into Grenfield Tower would try to make everyone forget it was about a tower block burning down with people inside. After all: The Scottish government's response to Grenfield has been a seriously kak-handed attempt to get every house in the land equipped with the same smoke detectors that every flat in Grenfield Tower had. Presumably so that the last thing you ever hear is a high-pitched beeping noise. The responses from my 8 MSP's were mostly non-existant, and the other two were pointlessly political. Like a mirror image of the Fabiani inquiry ('oh, we wasted £500,000. What are we going to do to make sure it doesn't happen again? Nothing). Strangely, no-one expects anything better. It's like a nation of political zombies.

      Delete
    4. Salmond needs to be questioned on his submission, otherwise it becomes worthless. You can't use the testimony of a witness in a court case if they refuse to be questioned for very good reason; it isn't fair justice.

      And an 'overwhelming, once in a generation' majority of the Scottish public believe Sturgeon to be generally telling the truth:

      55% Telling the truth
      45% Not telling the truth

      Among Yes voters, this rises to 71%.

      https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/xzean1bi82/InternalResults_SalmondSturgeon_210125.pdf

      You should really establish the facts before posting.

      Delete
    5. I couldn't care less about the majority in some poll. I don't think she is entirely truthful, and most people I know have a lower opinion of her. Some people I know actually think Sturgeon is a vehicle. I think she is a person, but I would prefer if she hadn't nailed her effigy to the bows / turned herself into a flag.

      Delete
    6. Sure, less than 1/3 of the Scottish population think like you, mainly unionists. This group includes your friends. Shockeroonie.

      'Politician not trusted by significant section of population' is hardly an usual phenomenon' and isn't normally considered disastrous for democracy.

      TBH, I think she's probably bent the truth too in an effort to protect Salmond, her friend and mentor. She has now admitted she agreed with him to try and persuade Leslie Evans and the UK civil service of mediation, then backed out after realising she should not interfere in such a way with the investigation.

      This does tie in with the original accusations she was 'colluding to protect him and lying that she wasn't'.

      Delete
    7. The only folk turning themselves into a flag are the rabid London-rulers clinging to the false notion that Scots want to tug the forelock to the faded and delusional remnants of the British Empire.
      Nicola Sturgeon prefers an NHS logo and is in tune with the thinking of the Scottish people.
      The Union flag disrespects the Saltire even getting the colour wrong.
      Red white and black - let's take our country back.
      Oh Aye and we say slaver in Scotland not "drool".
      You've maybe not heard of that in "The country where you are".

      Delete
    8. Smeaer Skierb(liar since 2014) - I never said I didn't want Salmond to turn up at the Inquiry.

      You Smearer, like Trump, are a pathological liar.

      Delete
    9. The Scottish government and Scottish parliament have been corrupted by Sturgeon and her gang.

      Delete
  27. Polls on Scottish independence for the last year have just been proxy polls on Scottish plague vs. English plague. Plague has been about the only thing in the news for a year. Scotland has been luckier than N. Ireland, and about the same as England as a whole. But all governments in the UK have done very badly.

    With a population of about 30MM, plague deaths in Taiwan have amounted to about 70. Not in a day - in a year. Their government public health broadcasts are fronted by a cartoon dog. Their track / trace scheme was put in place by a transexual. In the UK, the plague is seen as a political vote opportunity. For example: the Scottish government has a public health secretary. No-one knows his/her name. However, everyone knows the name of a dentist who is an expert in health beurocracy. I'll listen to him when people's incisors catch covid.

    I wouldn't take polls in the UK seriously ATM.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Taiwan is an independent island state like the UKofGB and, obviously, unlike Scotland.

      It and New Zealand... show what can be done with independence.

      Delete
    2. @Mouse - on Covid,
      Scotland is not "About the same as England"
      Today's figures show 1 in 80 in England have it compared to just 1 in 150 in Scotland.
      Not about the same at all.
      And BTW Covid should not be an issue anent the May election.
      It didn't stop the US poll and ours IMHO is more important as it will deliver the Indyref we all want to see Eh Mouse?

      Delete
  28. As we can see, the Scottish government, and the Welsh government is allowed to close borders / isolate everyone traveling across them. But the time for that action was a year ago, and the genie is well out of the bottle.

    I hope you are not in that cohort of ballonheads who think that nothing can be achieved because of the wrong flag. Because flags aren't going to make a difference to those inerts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Erm, there are rules in place. Are you arguing that people coming from England to Scotland and Wales have not been following these?

      Sounds a bit anti-English.

      Delete
    2. You are not acquainted with border checks that the Welsh government have placed. Also, people in Glasgow are currently not generally allowed to go to Edinburgh. On fear of prosecution. The idea that the Scottish government aren't allowed to impose totalitarian border restrictions is just wrong. Anyway - it's too way too late.

      Delete
    3. Why would they need to impose tougher border restrictions with England unless you are implying folks from England cannot be trusted to follow current travel controls?

      Delete
    4. I find your cliche internet obsession far more interesting. Have u every tried to switch it of for a couple of weeks and talk to people?

      Delete
    5. It's kinda weird if you are interested in my behaviour like that. I don't have any interest in how others spend their time; it's pretty stalkerish to be like that.

      I only spend 30 mins max on blog comment posts a day in total, often less, during breaks. Socialising in person at the moment isn't the done thing; using the internet is. As a key worker, I do get to go to work regularly, which breaks the cabin fever.

      I understand some people may be really slow to form their thoughts and type legible sentences*, but that doesn't apply to everyone. Don't assume people are as slow as you when judging here.

      ----
      *The giveaway is personal insults

      Delete