Will Scotland Leave the UK?

[Mr Angry]

Meanwhile.

"The prime minister has defended the decision not to publish an independence referendum poll that was commissioned by the UK government.

David Cameron told BBC Scotland the government did not routinely publish its opinion research.

But he said the findings of the government's polls were largely in line with other recently published polls."


And another contrary voice.


"David Cameron received a blow on the first day of a visit to Scotland when a former senior British diplomat said "tough but sensible" negotiations would be held on forming a currency union in the event of a vote for independence.

In a challenge to the prime minister, who will reiterate his rejection of a currency union during his two-day trip to Scotland, the former British permanent representative to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe accused the government of arrogant behaviour towards the people of Scotland."


Better Together clearly have a job of work to do if they want a decisive pro union result in this campaign.

I am confused.

Alex Salmond stated in a BBC interview today that

since November, when we launched the White Paper, the average support in all opinion polls for "Yes" has gone from 37% to 45%."

However, an independent site, What Scotland Thinks, states that the latest average on the poll of polls, that the average scores of the last month's polls are Yes on 43% and No on 57%.

And in the previous month, the average was 43%

All in all, some ten polls have been published since the currency intervention. With today’s poll, these now include at least one from every company polling regularly during the campaign.

On average these have put the Yes side on 43%, up two points on the equivalent statistic for all those polls conducted between the beginning of January and the currency intervention. Between them they represent the best sequence of results for the Yes side yet.

And this was the best sequence so far.

So how can it be 45%, if the the last couple of months were the best so far, and they were 43%?

Salmond has no shame at all. I wouldn't be surprised if he simply made it up (although the SNP probably have a way of measuring the polls that let him make that claim without outright lying).

The polls have stalled for now. I hope they give way to drop below 40%, ideally 35%, by September. I wouldn't rule out Salmond making even more ridiculous claims of a Utopia in the Summer. I think he might just think 'screw it' and announce a 'oil dividend' of £500 or more to each citizen if Scotland goes it alone. Wouldn't put it past him.

Originally Posted by Hugh

I am confused.

Alex Salmond stated in a BBC interview today that

However, an independent site, What Scotland Thinks, states that the latest average on the poll of polls, that the average scores of the last month's polls are Yes on 43% and No on 57%.

And in the previous month, the average was 43% And this was the best sequence so far.

So how can it be 45%, if the the last couple of months were the best so far, and they were 43%?

I'd be interested to know what the poll of polls average is, when polls commissioned by any political party or campaigning organisation are excluded. I'm thinking particularly of the Panelbase polls commissioned by nationalists with their dodgy leading questions and their thoroughly compromised sample base, but for balance I'd be quite happy to see any Better Together polls excluded also.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

And another contrary voice.

"David Cameron received a blow on the first day of a visit to Scotland when a former senior British diplomat said "tough but sensible" negotiations would be held on forming a currency union in the event of a vote for independence.

Better Together clearly have a job of work to do if they want a decisive pro union result in this campaign.

Well Salmond keeps on quoting the 'Senior unnamed Government source' who said of course there would be a currency union. He always stops short at the bit where that same source says keeping Trident at Faslane would be a likely bargaining chip for that.

And in any case not having control of your own currency isn't full independence IMO.

But yes the Better Together campaign is atrocious. I'd have thought they'd be able to comprehensively shoot down the Guess campaigns lies and spin with ease.

---------- Post added at 07:57 ---------- Previous post was at 07:52 ----------

Quite a good article with some very valid points raised.

http://ianssmart.blogspot.co.uk/2014...-question.html

But there is one big exception to this aspired for unimportance in Nationalist mythology and that's in what happens if we vote Yes on 18th September. For then apparently the World will for the next eighteen months be at our beck and call. Not only will we be admitted to the EU but we will be admitted on a timescale and indeed terms of our choosing. Not only will the British Government allow us to join a currency union they will do so without *even asking their electorate. Indeed, Angus Robertson has even suggested they would cancel their General Election for our convenience. Not only would we be welcomed in to the NATO (expressly) Nuclear Alliance, we would be so welcome while closing that alliance's most important Eastern Atlantic Naval Base and indeed while possibly promulgating a constitution that forbade the stationing of nuclear weapons within our territorial jurisdiction!

So what if, just if, our negotiations with the EU over membership are not concluded by "Independence Day", specified in the White Paper to be 24th March 2016? What if, by then, the rest of the UK has not in fact agreed a currency union? What if the USA has insisted that the price of NATO membership is the retention of the "non-negotiable" Trident Submarine Base?

What happens then? Is Independence postponed?

Well here is where matters take a more sinister turn. There is a reason that Independence Day is scheduled for 24th March 2016, rather than, say, 24th June 2016 or indeed perhaps the entirely logical 18th September 2016.

There is a Scottish General Election scheduled for 5th May 2016.

Let's just speculate as to the fate of a Party who, by then, might have been exposed as misleading the Scottish people on the ease with which Independence: EU membership; currency union ; NATO membership would be accomplished. Who were faced with mass unemployment at the Clyde shipyards and the (formerly) Edinburgh Banks. Whose "optimism" over oil receipts had proved unfounded leading to them having to set a budget for the year ahead involving deep cuts to pensions and benefits and steep increases in personal taxation. Whose unilateral promise of an open border but a different immigration policy were belied by the customs barriers now erected by the British Government? What would be the electoral fortunes of such a Party?

Would they not inevitably say that on 18th September 2014 past people had voted for independence. And for that Independence to take place on 24th March 2016. The unfulfilled premises to that vote were "not their fault." Independence, without the EU; without the Pound; without NATO; without an open border would just have to go ahead. The people could vote for who they liked on 5th May 2016. The incoming Government, of whatever stripe, would be faced with a fait accompli.

[Mr Angry]

An interesting blog post as you say.

I suspect much of the content is a follow on from what the house of lords recommended recently as covered here. As we can see, the whole issue of a Scotland after the referendum vote is tied to negotiations under the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement which Cameron has again said he would "stick absolutely" to. I would imagine that will involve moveable dates.

This (behind paywall) may cause some "tensions" if the Independence vote comes out in favour of staying in the Union....

English votes may kill off independence

The poll suggests slightly more Scots support than oppose independence (44% versus 42%, with 14% undecided) ahead of September’s vote.

But it indicates that English voters, who account for 10% of Scotland’s electorate, are 66% against independence, with 27% in favour — which could make the difference between success or failure for the Yes campaign.

When the views of English and other non-Scots are combined with Scottish voters, 40% favour independence while 47% support the Union and 13% are undecided.

If those who have not made up their minds are excluded, the Better Together campaign enjoys an eight point lead (54% against 46%). It is the latest poll to suggest that progress made by the Yes campaign in recent months has halted.

There are some concerns that the effect of English votes in potentially making the difference between success or failure for the Yes campaign could lead to increased tensions in the event of a narrow No vote.

On the other hand, if it had been possible to give votes only to those UK citizens who were born in Scotland, there would probably still be a 'no' ...

A whole range of recent polls (even a dodgy Panelbase one) have shown support for Yes stalling, and in most cases going backwards.

[Osem]

My oh my, Jimi's been a long time compiling all those book/film/documentary quotes claiming England won the Battle of Britain...

Originally Posted by Osem

My oh my, Jimi's been a long time compiling all those book/film/documentary quotes claiming England won the Battle of Britain...

Sadly, Jimi is no longer "with us".......

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Chris

On the other hand, if it had been possible to give votes only to those UK citizens who were born in Scotland, there would probably still be a 'no' ...

A whole range of recent polls (even a dodgy Panelbase one) have shown support for Yes stalling, and in most cases going backwards.

It seems you're on the money there, Chris.

It's worth remembering that there was predicted to be a "Yes bounce" after the currency intervention by Alexander OsBalls. That bounce was then followed by the SNP spring conference, which was their last decent chance to get their own undiluted separatist message onto the telly. From now on, the broadcasters in particular, are going to be scrupulously balanced (BBC Scotland did a set-piece studio interview with Eck last week, purely because Cameron was in Scotland for two days, and said lots about the referendum).

When the facts for and against are presented, and people then get to express a view in absolute secrecy, there is a substantial natural majority in favour of the Union in Scotland, and not just amongst us English settlers. Although the demographic is somewhat skewed, the best illustration we have so far are the mock referendums held on university campuses all over Scotland in the last 6 months. IIRC every single one of them has voted No, and most of those have done so by a very comfortable margin.

None of this means we should be complacent. The SNP will make shameless propaganda out of every podium finish Scotland achieves at the forthcoming Commonwealth Games (quietly omitting to mention the role the UK training structure plays in developing elite sport in all the home nations, but that's par for the course) and there is always the risk of what the strategists call a "black swan incident". We also need to ensure all potential No voters understand that they will only get a No if every single one of them actually goes out to vote.

But, on balance, things are on course.

[weenie]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Sadly, Jimi is no longer "with us".......

Why was he tae good with his Scottish talk LOL ... I used to enjoy his feedback whether good or bad it made me chuckle. I say bring back jimi ... he wasn't that bad was he guys?
I would have thought it would have been better to allow him to stay on the cf if only to brag if/when Scotland won the yes vote or slag him off if he was wrong either way a missed opportunity IMO.

Jimi is alive and well on at least one other internet forum, where I imagine he continues to post his opinions of this website.

Originally Posted by Chris

None of this means we should be complacent. The SNP will make shameless propaganda out of every podium finish Scotland achieves at the forthcoming Commonwealth Games (quietly omitting to mention the role the UK training structure plays in developing elite sport in all the home nations, but that's par for the course) and there is always the risk of what the strategists call a "black swan incident". We also need to ensure all potential No voters understand that they will only get a No if every single one of them actually goes out to vote.

But, on balance, things are on course.

Can you think of anything which Salmond could "pull out of the bag" to make it closer? They're promising a lot that I can't see anything other than something utterly ridiculous.