We’re going to enjoy this one while we can, because there’s a big barren fortnight across the last week of December and the first week of January when no politics happens at all, so we probably won’t see these sorts of numbers again for a while.
Crivvens.
This morning we’ve been double- and triple-checking our story from last night, because we were so sure we must have missed something. Even given the low esteem in which we hold the integrity of the hapless “Better Together” campaign, we felt that they surely couldn’t have made such an idiotic and fundamental error, and that instead we must have misinterpreted a word or a sentence somewhere along the way.
But no. We were wrong in that assumption. They really ARE that dim.
There’s an atrocious piece of journalism in this morning’s Guardian, and on this particular occasion we’re referring to its technical standards rather than any bias or spin. Here are the opening paragraphs:
We’re confused already.
We’ve had a closer look at the Institute for Fiscal Studies report from this week.
Basically, the conclusion of the report is that if an independent Scotland continued to do exactly the same things over the next 50 years as the UK does now, it would have to grow its GDP by 1.9% to cover a predicted fiscal gap, while the UK would only have to grow by 0.8% to cover a similar gap. According to the IFS, this 1.9% shortfall would mean a 6% cut in services or a hike of 8% in income tax in an independent Scotland.
However, close reading of the small print in the IFS document highlights facts and forecast figures that appear to contradict the IFS’s argument and instead point to a situation where an independent Scotland would actually be in a similar fiscal position to the UK. Confused? Yes, so were we.
From this morning’s Daily Record:
– Number of Scottish Lib Dems MPs who didn’t vote for an opposition motion: 11
– Number of Scottish Labour MPs who didn’t vote for their own motion: 10
– Number of UK Lib Dem MPs who didn’t vote for an opposition motion: 55
– Number of UK Labour MPs who didn’t vote for their own motion: 47
Where should we drop this delivery of stones for Torcuil Crichton’s glass house?
Just for a little bit of fun, we thought we’d dig out how much money was claimed for accommodation last year by the 47 Labour MPs who couldn’t be bothered to turn up and vote to abolish the bedroom tax yesterday. (You can look up the data here.)
It was this much: £387,439.
That’s more than a third of a million pounds, paid by all of us, specifically for second homes so that MPs can be close to Parliament and attend votes there. It doesn’t include any of their other expenses. It only covers those 47 Labour MPs.
It’s an average of £8,243 each. It would pay the bedroom tax for a year for 532 people.
See if you can guess which piggy was the greediest out of the 47.
It’s the 1st of November and we almost forgot to do a stats post. Tch, eh?
We’re calling one of those numbers another landmark.
This week it was claimed by Stuart Adam, senior economic researcher at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), that taxes would have to rise almost 14% in an independent Scotland, if they were the sole method used to fill the Scottish budget deficit.
It’s a dramatic headline, for sure. But is it an accurate reflection on the relative finances of an independent Scotland and one that remained part of the United Kingdom? As ever, you have to dig a little deeper to find out what’s really going on.
Just when you thought it was safe, we’ve got one last bit of data for you from our second Panelbase poll, which seems to have really grabbed the attention of the Scottish political world (as best observed in the furious, hysterical reaction from “Better Together” activists on Monday evening when Scotland Tonight announced they were going to be referencing it in the show).
We asked people a couple of questions about their voting intentions in various circumstances, but some of the most intriguing and revealing results came when we inquired as to how they planned to vote in the 2016 Scottish general election.
Something that Professor John Curtice said in an extensive and fair review of our second Panelbase poll today gave us some cause for thought.
It’s hardly a secret that the No campaign has spent just about every waking hour of its existence frantically trying to turn the referendum into one on the SNP and Alex Salmond in particular (despite the seemingly counter-productive nature of the tactic).
For all they’re worth, they try to present independence as being a proxy for a single political party, when in fact it’s the exact opposite – an attempt to restore Scotland to a meaningful democracy, rather than the stagnant one-party (Labour) state it’s been at every UK general election for the last 60 years.
And when we read Prof. Curtice’s article, it dawned on us that we now had the tools and the ammunition to blow that particular smear apart once and for all.
The last of our poll data releases yesterday highlighted perhaps the biggest factor in deciding the outcome of the independence referendum – the views of the undecided. Cross-referencing those yet to make up their minds with the other questions in our survey tells us much about the arguments that will win or lose the vote.
So just before we make the full data tables available for any old Tom, Dick and Harry to peruse, here’s an exclusive early sight for the people who paid to make it happen.
Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)
