Should Scotland be an independent country? (Redfield & Wilton)
Yes 48% (-)
No 52% (-)
Before Don't Knows are stripped out, the No lead has actually dipped slightly from four points to three.
On Westminster voting intentions, Redfield & Wilton have been oscillating recently between small Labour leads and level-pegging, and we're back once again to the latter today.
Scottish voting intentions for the next UK general election:
SNP 34% (+1)
Labour 34% (-)
Conservatives 16% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-2)
Reform UK 4% (-)
Greens 4% (+2)
Alba 1% (-)
Seats projection (with changes from 2019 general election): Labour 27 (+26), SNP 20 (-28), Conservatives 6 (-), Liberal Democrats 4 (-)
As you can see from the seats projection, level-pegging just isn't quite good enough for the SNP, because when the two largest parties are closely matched, first-past-the-post starts working firmly in Labour's favour.
But what will concern the SNP more than the seats projection (or at least ought to) is Humza Yousaf's personal numbers, because headline voting intentions are often less predictive of election results than leadership ratings. Last month's Redfield & Wilton poll showed Yousaf slumping to a new all-time low net rating of -17. He essentially hasn't recovered from that at all this month, bouncing back only to -16.
But it gets worse. Redfield & Wilton also regularly ask alternative leadership questions, pitting Yousaf in separate head-to-heads with Anas Sarwar and Douglas Ross respectively. Until last month, Yousaf had always come out on top on those questions, perhaps suggesting an underlying respect for his basic competence that the net ratings don't pick up. But last month, Anas Sarwar drew level with him for the first time, and this month Sarwar has overtaken him for the first time.
At this moment, which of the following individuals do you think would be the better First Minister of Scotland?
Anas Sarwar 32% (-1)
Humza Yousaf 31% (-2)
Arguably even more dismal is the head-to head with Ross. Here Yousaf clings on to a six-point lead, but that is staggeringly low in the context of the current Tory unpopularity, and also in the context of Ross being widely regarded as a joke leader.
At this moment, which of the following individuals do you think would be the better First Minister of Scotland?
Humza Yousaf 36% (-3)
Douglas Ross 30% (+2)
We all know Yousaf is only where he is for factional reasons, ie. the ruling Sturgeon faction identified him as their least worst candidate available and pulled out all the stops to get him installed as leader. But there comes a point where the electoral crisis is great enough that factional interest has to give way to party interest. There is simply no point in retaining factional control of a party that cannot win at the ballot box. There are no guarantees, but if Yousaf is replaced by a more popular leader (probably Kate Forbes) before the general election, the likelihood is that the SNP vote will recover a bit, and that might make the difference between defeat and victory. And even if Yousaf stays in harness, bringing an end to factional rule by appointing a unity Cabinet with Forbes in a senior position could have some positive effect.
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 35% (-)
Labour 31% (-2)
Conservatives 18% (-)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-3)
Reform UK 4% (+1)
Alba 3% (+2)
Greens 3% (-)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
Labour 29% (-)
SNP 28% (+1)
Conservatives 16% (-)
Greens 9% (-)
Liberal Democrats 9% (-)
Reform UK 5% (-)
Alba 3% (-)
Seats projection (with changes from 2021 election): SNP 42 (-22), Labour 41 (+19), Conservatives 21 (-10), Liberal Democrats 12 (+8), Greens 10 (+2), Reform UK 3 (+3)
The Holyrood voting intention changes are for the most part statistically insignificant, although because they're in the SNP's favour, they're still enough to push the SNP back into a slight lead in the seats projection - albeit with fewer seats than Alex Salmond had when the SNP first took power with a precarious one-seat advantage in 2007. In spite of what has been said in some quarters, I'm not sure it's impossible that the SNP could retain minority power on numbers like these. Labour and the Liberal Democrats would be well short of a majority between them, and once you add external support from the Tories into the mix, the arrangement becomes presentationally very messy.
Alba will be moderately heartened by these numbers - they're still not projected to win any seats, but they're only two points behind Reform UK, who are projected to win three seats. So that shows you what's possible with a modest increase of support.
* * *
The 2024 Scot Goes Pop fundraiser is now underway. Please click HERE if you'd like to help keep this blog going strong throughout this crucial general election year.
Alternatively donations can be made direct to my Paypal account. In many ways this is preferable because the funds are usually transferred instantly, and fees can be eliminated altogether depending on which option you select from the menu. My Paypal email address is:
jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk
See in Spain with it's PR system 35% of the vote would be considered a good, probably winning showing.
ReplyDeleteIt's a sign of the standard SNP are held to (correctly I may add if it's about taking us to independence as it should be). They are supposed to be a national cause so high 30s for an "ordinary" party isn't enough.
Not that this really helps any but just a thought.
I have a feeling Indy isn't a live issue and people are using the opportunity to vote for someone else because they don't see Indy as being on the line. It's always my priority but don't think it is for an important amount of others.
In the GE 5 years ago, in Scotland the SNP got 45%, and Labour got 19%. That is the standards.
DeleteIt’s encouraging support for independence remains consistently high, albeit just below 50%, despite the SNPs problems.
ReplyDeleteSo it's incredibly enlightening that any Redfield & Wilton poll is entertained as genuine by any serious person in Scotland let alone such an unbiased? blog as this
ReplyDeleteTheir nickname Redcoat & Wilton was not earned for no reason
What does "genuine" mean? However reliable or unreliable the numbers may be, it's clearly a genuine poll.
DeleteAnon at 7:57, I tend to agree with you. Personally I think Ipsos and Find Out Now are much more reliable.
DeleteWell, I think we can all agree on that, KC. They're growing into the role and showing sureness of touch.
DeleteAppears “Anon” at 9:16 isn’t as easily fooled as a certain other poster😀.
DeleteHow do you know they weren't one and the same? That would mean...gosh...that you've been fooled, KC.
DeleteKC the resident House Jock is in to his childish foolish games and proves he is nowt but a fool.
DeleteIndependence for Scotland, come on the guy’s only havin a bit o banter.
DeleteYou're talking about yourself, KC, presumably.
DeleteFrom recollection, I think it was this polling company that Political Betting, Ballot Box Scotland and another outlet (who's name escapes me) questioned the reliability of.
ReplyDeleteMarked variance with contemporary polls from other companies and even inconsistencies between their own polls seemed to be highlighted.
I remember Mark McGeoghegan once mumbled something negative about them but whatever it was he said didn't strike me as especially convincing. No idea about the others you mention. I think Redfield & Wilton can be fairly criticised for a touch of bias (perhaps unconscious bias) in their write-ups and in the framing of their questions. I wouldn't say "inconsistency" is a problem, though - they use the same questions again and again, and their results are relatively stable from month to month.
DeleteIf you agree as you say that Redfield and Wilton are biased, then nothing of what they find can be taken seriously, you can't cherry pick the bits you personally like and dismiss the other bits, doing that makes you as biased as Redfield and Wilton
ReplyDeleteYou sound a bit disgruntled, KC. Disappointed that the Yes vote is still so high? We feel your pain.
DeleteSounds like certain other commentators aren’t just cherry picking polls but cherry picking pollsters.
DeleteYou mean yourself, KC?
DeleteYou got it wrong🤣, anon at 10:15pm and 8:20am WASN’T me🤣
DeleteYes it was.
DeleteLOL. OK. I've been rumbled 🤣
DeleteSeriously these comments weren’t from me. So no, I haven’t been “rumbled”.
DeleteLooks like I might not be the only “Lifelong Unionist “ on here!
A gang of emojis you just typed aren't the same as other people laughing with you. ;-)
DeleteCalm yourself! Changes are just sampling error -- ChatGPT.
ReplyDeleteIt would be quite fun having ReformUK in Holyrood fighting to abolish basic-rate income tax for front-line NHS and social care staff. They would look like the most left-wing party in the building.
ReplyDeleteI don’t follow them at all. Such a policy sounds iffy to me though. Sure they’re not into Flat Tax instead, beloved of the rabid right worldwide, where various income brackets are abolished so the rich get even lower taxes?
DeleteThat’ll help nurses.
One of their more interesting tax proposals is to raise the threshold for the basic rate of income tax from £12,570 to £20,000.
DeletePlease stop using the word "staggering". It is a horrible word.
ReplyDeleteI'm staggered that you should even ask such a thing.
DeleteStaggering, already? It’d not even Patrick’s yet. Steady on the booze, James! ;-)
DeleteIt would be nice if R&W asked Yousaf vs Forbes in their alternative FM question. Yousaf vs Salmond too?
ReplyDeleteSalmond would do worse than to Tory in shorts, sadly. The media destroyed him as far as the public is concerned.
DeleteHumza vs. Kate would be informing.
“The Tory in shorts” —iPhone
DeleteKC is the new GWC on SGP - best to ignore the fool.
ReplyDeleteGWC ??
DeleteIf "Knickerless" doesn't ring a bell, you had to be there.
DeleteR here:
ReplyDeleteIf we really believe Kate Forbes can make a huge difference, then it goes without saying you mean this as part of the SNP. If there is a residual feeling the SNP still actually are the vehicle (just minus the driver) should the grassroots not start to join and unify behind that vehicle once again?
I wanted Alba to work like a Brexit Partyesque movement (political differences aside, topping up the SNP). Not tearing it down or competing against it in meaningful terms.
I’ve come to the conclusion we need to think efficiently as well as emotionally. I.e. what is the quickest way for Scots to demonstrate their desire for independence. Whether you like it or not, most people in Scotland still consider SNP the party of independence. That is what they stand for, whether the current leadership have the gumption to do much about it as another thing. But the recognition in the population is there.
Is it quicker to our goal to kill off the SNP and start new parties? I commend the passion and the fire of these groups but I don’t think tearing down the SNP is, in the end, advantageous. I think we’ve already found out the answer to that project, for good or bad. We now have further splits from this project happening now. This might make us feel better but it doesn’t take us forward.
Is it more efficient to convince the 10-15% or so people, who have already voted SNP in the past to use the SNP as the vehicle in spite of the leaders, or is it easier to convince more than half the population to vote for another vehicle entirely? Coldly, I would say the former.
Do you think the north of England were in love with Tory ideals or do you think well heeled, erudite Tory women were in love with Boris Johnson? Both overlooked failings for a wider goal. The Tories are savvy enough not to tear down their party every time they have a set back.
If Ash Regan had won the leadership a substantial amount of the SNP would not have been happy. We would still expect them to put their hand to the wheel, not start a new party.
Ultimately, if independence is a live issue, is cared about enough by the Scottish population, there is a party already well known both by the people here and abroad who they can vote for in consolidated numbers to express that desire – in spite of the loonies which may hide amongst it.
The fact of the matter is independence is not a live issue and that isn’t entirely down to the SNP, although inevitably bad policies have come to bite; it’s down to the people of Scotland themselves. Enough Scottish people, the swing vote, are Indy curious but not Indy fundamentalists. That is the sad fact.
Do we need a new SNP leadership? Undoubtedly. But end of the day, if Scots grabbed the Thistle and just voted SNP anyway in say 50%-60% numbers we’d be in a different ball game regardless of the leadership.
Just my view, ive been considering this for a while. I've been a member of SNP, Alba and now nobody. Can be convinced otherwise but to be me the best way is unity; therefore, no better time than the present to begin that.
Couldn’t agree more, well said.
DeleteHypothetically, if the SNP got the surge of support you wish for, that would *strengthen* Humza's position immensely. The continuity faction—Nicola's hand-picked second-rate successors—would be waving to the packed conference hall crowds in long ovations, slapping themselves on the back for a job magnificently done. What policy won us all this again? Beats me. Must be all of them. Let's push trans!
DeleteOne thing I can tell you: they wouldn't touch independence with a bargepole. Far too "contentious", just like the Tories say. Scotland would have voted for more of the same, and they would gladly deliver it.
End of hypothetical. Scroll up and look at those polls again. Fortunately for all of us, Scots just aren't buying the Indy-lite SNP. Humza's in damage limitation mode, as he will be throughout his leadership, however much longer it lasts.
I do agree with you that we shouldn't aim to destroy the SNP, and very likely have no such power anyway. They are the vehicle of independence. The driver at the wheel is the problem needing solved.
Whatever you think of them, if you go outside and ask any random person what the SNP stands for the first word people will say is "Independence". They'll have a gut full of other things to say but that will be common among all. This nonsense that they aren't seen that way by the vast majority is echo chamber stuff. Popularity is another thing, policies are another thing, leadership is another thing, strategy as well... but everyone knows SNP stands for independence. Why people think we should throw that away or actually attack it and compete against it, is madness to me. I'm sure there were utter slimeballs in the African National Congress as well but popular movements are taken forward by the people. They just need the vehicle.
DeleteIn that hypothetical alluded to, events and popular support would overtake one person in the leadership. Kate Forbes and others are in the SNP. It would be Team Scotland. I don't care if it strengthens them, popular will overtakes it. If we've not got the gumption to just vote for the obvious independence party, a bit like Home County Tories voting for Bozo to get what they want, we can't complain too much as a country. The option is there already.
What I am saying is, it's now clear to me SNP are the vehicle with the wrong driver but if 2m people push a car it doesn't really matter if one person is driving it. I'd change the driver but I think we need to just start unifying around the idea that this is about a vehicle to independence, not about one man's leadership. In fact, 2007-2014 was as much about Salmond's team as himself.
The last 9.5 years have also proved what happens when Scots vote SNP but the SNP leadership doesn't want independence. You have noticed we're still resolutely stuck in the union, haven't you? Even with all these polling leads and golden chances.
DeleteAnonymous at 1.40 in what way does that show precisely what you think it does?
DeleteIt shows issues people consider important when making their vote. It doesn't say anything about what voters think the SNP stands for.
I'm a fairly easy going person, not prone to being demanding but seriously what are you on about?
I would also say that just demonstrates Indy isn't a live issue and enough voters are Indy curious not Indy fundamentalists. Goes precisely to my point.
DeleteYour point is circular.
DeleteFrom 2015 through to the end of Nicola's leadership, Scots voted SNP in heavy numbers. We went through Brexit, Covid, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. Yes polled as the majority will continuously for a year.
How was that not enough to force the SNP to act on independence *just as you described*? Where was all this "2m people push a car it doesn't really matter if one person is driving it"? It bloody well did. We are NOT INDEPENDENT, are we, despite the chances of a lifetime all lined up! Why didn't Nicola go for it? Only one person knows. It wasn't down to all the rest of us.
They did. They called for a Defacto referendum of our people in Dec last 2022. Wind went out the sails for a host of reasons which meant people equivocated on whether the timing of that was right. But she did state it was the way forward. I know others were too busy with other things to remember it but it did happen.
DeleteWe're not independent because they needed to call a referendum to get it, it's not done by opinion polls. Calling a referendum outside of a general election was shaky legal ground, we were in the middle of COVID during the Yes opinion polling.
They would never have called the defacto GE election strategy at all if they hadn't got the vote I described, so yes, exactly.
DeleteAnon at 2:52, you are correct and unfortunately support for independence, although staying steady, hasn’t been as high as it was during Covid.
DeleteAs for the chart: there are two ways to read it.
ReplyDelete1. Scots apparently vote SNP despite their low regard for indy and it's better for the SNP's election chances to wheesht about it.
2. Or that everyone and their wee ginger dug knows that independence is off the table because the SNP gave up on it.
Polls are informative on this, too. Because all you need to do is to look at the cross tabs for SNP voters. They are overwhelmingly Yes, despite the party's efforts.
I have just watched FM's Questions. Humza Yousaf's performance was trance-inducing. He spoke in a low voice all the way through. He fumbled with his notes and did not always seem to be able to pinpoint the information he needed. As I sat listening I almost fell asleep at one point.
ReplyDeleteHe was answering questions on the number of drug deaths in Scotland. All the usual accusations and excuses were offered by all the people involved. These were repeated ad nauseum, round and round and round. Nobody mentioned the fact that Scotland has a very long history ranging from political neglect to outright political attack from both Labour and Tory. This has led to the present high levels of deprivation and poverty which in turn has led to the high incidence of drug taking in Scotland.
We are unlikely to get better treatment from any UK government in the future. Surely it is not beyond the wit of Yousaf and his political advisors to start shouting about the causes and effects of neglect, deprivation and poverty on Scottish society and stop mumbling about sharing out small amounts of resources amongst organisations dealing with the results of drug addiction. This is like treating a ruptured aorta with an aspirin and a sticking plaster. Dare I say they could point to the trillions poured into UK coffers from Scottish resources and at least mention the benefits of (excuse the word) Independence.
Humza is growing into the role and showing sureness-of-touch. He made a great speech at conference. We can all agree.
DeleteHe’s settling very nicely into the crapper.
DeleteA great speech at Conference? Preaching to the choir; he should try preaching to the heathens and pagans.
ReplyDelete