Tuesday, May 4, 2021

Amazing Alba: Alex Salmond's new party sees support increase in Opinium and YouGov polls, as pro-independence parties head for big majority

Apologies for being a bit late in getting these numbers up - but I can promise that I haven't been idle on your behalf.  I've spent the day writing three articles for The National (including this one), and also recording a podcast with Chris McEleny, which hopefully I'll be able to bring you at some point tonight.  

Scottish Parliament constituency voting intentions (Opinium / Sky News, 28th April-3rd May):

SNP 51% (-2)
Conservatives 23% (+2)
Labour 19% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 7% (+1)

Scottish Parliament regional list voting intentions (Opinium / Sky News):

SNP 41% (-3)
Conservatives 23% (+1)
Labour 17% (-)
Greens 8% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (+1)
Alba 3% (+1)

Scottish Parliament constituency voting intentions (YouGov / The Times, 2nd-4th May):

SNP 52% (+3)
Conservatives 20% (-1)
Labour 19% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-)
Greens 2% (+1)

Scottish Parliament regional list voting intentions (YouGov / The Times):

SNP 38% (-1)
Conservatives 22% (-)
Labour 16% (-1)
Greens 13% (+3)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-)
Alba 3% (+1)
Reform UK 1% (-)


  1. How might this affect the number of SNP seats vs independence supporting party seats? Are we still looking at a slim SNP majority combined with an independence supporting super majority?

    1. It own't affect the number of SNP seats at all, since Alba will pick up regional seats which the SNP can't win. That is why Salmond has been saying from day one, SNP 1 Alba 2, which will maximise independence MSP's. Of course Lady Sturgeon has her face set against it because of her personal vendetta, but the interests of the country come before her prejudices and spite.

    2. The supermajority message does seem to have got across. Greens have climbed steadily since it was put forward and are on a solid 10%. 13% in yougov is a new high.

    3. The Greens aren't that interested in indy, as they have said. They are, however, very keen on jobs for the boys, as promised by Nikla.

    4. The internal split in the Greens (pro/anti indy) is something I've always conjured with....I have no idea.

    5. " How might this affect the number of SNP seats v independence supporting party indy seats".

      Oh do shut up ......idiot.

  2. These figures would definitely give the SNP a majority on constituencies alone.

    1. % for Yes parties on the PR list has remained steadfastly above 50%. It dropped to just above that at the peak of #committeegate, but has since steadily risen in PoP averages.

      Those advocating a vote for unionists parties - such as the Somerset Tories - will be disappointed.

    2. Risen to 52% now I forgot to add, so we could see a really clear Yes party % of votes. That doesn't matter shit legally in terms of iref2 legislation, but it's symbolic.

      I harbor a secret hope that this is slightly underestimated due to 2014 weighting issues, but I'd take current averages!

    3. I agree. Assuming an SNP majority, the last argument unionists have in having a moral argument to want to have another referendum blocked is if unionist parties get 51% of the vote.

      That said, a low turnout might also be argued to be a case against, but that would be a brace argument...Galloway?!

    4. Galloway....the place or the cat?

    5. Moral is nice, but of course meaningless in law because it's vague and means different things to different people. For example, ultimately, you could say it would be morally wrong if Yes parties got a majority of MSPs, but did not legislate for a referendum, irrespective of vote share. What's the point in voting if your party wins but doesn't do anything? The iref is no different to any other policy. In fact it's much less significant as legislation for it changes nothing. The only change would come from the government choosing to act directly on the instruction of voters in the referendum.

      For the election, >50% for yes parties just, ultimately, makes it harder for unionists to campaign. Takes a soundbite away. Legally it makes jack s**t difference. The public won't see any real difference. And why would they, as they get the final say anyway.

      And of course judges won't care for example; they just decide if something is illegal or not. If Scotland had full FPTP and Yes parties won a majority on 35% of the vote (like UK labour in 2005 for Westminster) the courts would rubber stamp a referendum. Legal.

      If the Scottish government just declared indy based on a simple bill, that could even be legal, even if it morally disputable. After all, that's brexit in effect; 2/4 nations objected, yet out we went. Morals pished all over. But we see the effects of that; it is destroying the UK, so Scottish indy should not be forced, but the clear will of Scots.

      This is why I personally have no excitement for a 'supermajority' disproportionate to shares. If it doesn't represent popular will, then it will not change anything.

    6. "If the Scottish government just declared indy based on a simple bill, that could even be legal"

      No, there is no way that could be legal.

  3. The SavantaComRes poll out just now - has the SNP crashing on 59 seats, six shy of a majority - with little change in the unionist camp. :/

    So. Do we need SNP x 2?

    1. Maybe we just need a healthy scepticism about ComRes polls.

    2. Survation poll for The Courier today suggests Comres needs to be taken with a huge pinch of salt !

  4. ...look forward to your blog, because this is a miserable way to head to bed...

    1. I'm not going to rush to post about it, not because I'm avoiding the subject, but simply because I've only just posted the podcast, and I don't want that to get lost. But look, the ComRes poll is not the most recent poll - the YouGov poll is slightly more up to date and shows a huge pro-independence majority with both the SNP and Greens making gains. That doesn't necessarily mean that ComRes are wrong, but it's a strange-looking poll when viewed in that context.