The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


A question for Willie Rennie

Posted on January 17, 2012 by

Dear Willie, since you're implausibly still peddling this ridiculous fantasy hypothetical, perhaps you could quickly answer a similar one for us. It won't take a moment.

In a two-question 1999-style referendum of the sort you posit in your zany "99-51" scenario, the vote in autumn 2014 instead delivers the following outcome:

In favour of the status quo: 2%
In favour of devo-max: 98%
In favour of independence: 97%

So has Scotland just rejected independence, despite 97% of the electorate voting for it? By your logic it has. Is that seriously your position? With a straight face and everything? Are you going to be the one to tell the 97% of Scots who've just voted to leave the UK that they're staying in whether they like it or not?

If not, please shush with your daft, embarrassing haverings. But if so, we'll wish you the very best of luck with that. And then, if it's all the same to you, we'll run for cover.

13 to “A question for Willie Rennie”

  1. Mal says:

    I think you are missing the point of the question posed by Willie Rennie.
    You have to show us readers each question (you suggest there are two) and the result. We then see whether the result is clear. At the moment, given what you have written above it seems that Independence is people's second choice, so it would be surprising if that was the outcome given there were more votes for staying within the UK.
     

    Reply
  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    …so your answer is "Yes, I would refuse Scotland independence even though 97% of the electorate had voted for it". Righto.

    Reply
  3. Mal says:

    Well, at the moment it appears 98% want Devo-max within the UK. So it would be strange for Scotland to leave the UK as a result.
    All you have to do is write out what the two ballot paper questions were under your scenario and the results and then we can see if you have solved the problem highlighted by Willie Rennie.

    Reply
  4. Morag says:

    Look at today's Herald.  The first two letters cover this point.  The questions are somthing like….
     
    1.  Do you want Scotland to be independent?
    2.  If there is not a majority vote for independence, do you want the Scottish parliament to have increased powers within the devolution settlement.
     
    Willie Rennie is trying to make out that if the first question gets a majority, but then the second question shows an even bigger majority for devo-max, we should not get independence.
     
    The point is that pretty much everyone who wants independence will also favour devo-max over the status quo.  And then there are people who don't want independence who also favour devo-max over the status quo.  So if you ask two questions along the lines of
     
    1.  Do you want an independent Scotland
    2.  Do you prefer devo-max to the status quo
     
    You will always get a bigger majority in the second one.  Because all the pro-independence voters are in there too, added to the votes of those whose first choice is devo-max.
     
    Willie Rennie can't understand that the questions are conditional.  The second question is to allow all voters to express their opinion on devo-max IF independence fails to get a majority.  The way he seems to want to play it, everyone who wanted independence would have to vote no to devo-max, to prevent it getting a bigger vote than independence, which is bananas.

    Reply
  5. Mal says:

    No. The SNP have not proposed to put the questions in that way. They have quoted the 1997 example as a precedent and their 2010 referendum propositions were not those you have quoted.
     

    Reply
  6. Morag says:

    I don't know if this is any clearer, but what Willie Rennie is saying is that if you look at the number of people whose first choice is independence, and that number is smaller than the number of people whose first choice is independence plus the number of people whose first choice is devolution, then independence loses.
     
    The blog post a few below this one – We are the 51%, and the 99% – maybe makes it clearer.

    Reply
  7. Morag says:

    Mal, sorry, cross-posting.
     
    The SNP's 2010 proposal was unclear and poorly set out – I believe the person who wrote it thought it was obvious the questions were conditional, but he didn't spell it out.  This may indeed be the source of Rennie's confusion, but he's  not thinking very straight on his own account.
     
    However, 2010 was superseded by 2011, and we don't yet know what the SNP's current proposal is.  The general tenor of their conversation seems to suggest however that they intend to have the yes/no to independence as the first and main question.  Whether there is a second question about devo-max is anyone's guess, but if there is it will have to be made clear that the question is to ascertain preferences IF independence doesn't win.
     
    Do read that other blog post and its comments.

    Reply
  8. Mal says:

    Thank you Morag.
    I think what you have written about how the 2010 questions weren't right shows the problem. And it is not a problem from Willie Rennie. He has also taken 2010 as questions that are conditional and shown the flaw in that method too.
    Given that you have said 2010 was a mess and we don't know what will be proposed next week, it looks like Mr Rennie's suggestion that matters are not clear is right. I guess everyone in this thread will have to wait until next week to find out if their preferred option is going to be the one promoted byt he Scottish Government.

    Reply
  9. Morag says:

    I don't agree.  I don't think there was any substantial flaw in the 2010 proposals so long as it is understood that the the questions are linked.
     
    Obviously, in such a system, everyone has two votes.  Rennie's interpretation would imply that the second preferences of the independence supporters would cancel out their first preference votes, which is just silly.  He is effectively saying that if the number of people who support independence, added to the number of people whose first preference is devo-max, is larger than the number of people who support independence, then independence has lost the vote.  This is simply brain-dead.  Or deliberately and maliciously obfuscatory.

    Reply
  10. Mal says:

    No. You can't offer a criticism of the 2010 proposals and then say Willie Rennie is wrong to agree with you and say that they are flawed. He seems to understand entirely that they are linked. Hence his further point that, if they are consequential and dependent then, if Devo-Max loses, Independence automatically falls. I guess that isn't something that independence supporters would like to happen.
    But to return to the question at the top of the page, Devo-Max is inside the UK and gets more support than Independence which is outside. That is the major divide between those two questions which is not picked up at all by the other analysis offered on this page.

    Reply
    • Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      …so to recap, your position is that yes, you’d deny the Scottish people independence even though 97% of them had voted for it. I’m glad we’ve got that clear.

      Reply
  11. Morag says:

    Yes, I think that's what he's saying.  If he isn't, then maybe he can explain himself more clearly.

    Reply
  12. Mal says:

    Yes, happy to help further.
    The main thing is for RevStu just to clear up the point I made right at the top – to show me his theory on the ballot paper wording that gives 98% for the UK option and 97% for the Independence option.
    I know that Morag has had a bash at coming up with some questions. But they aren't anything like any of the questions that were puiblished for 1997 or 2010.
     
     
     

    Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,791 Posts, 1,222,742 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • sarah on Safety First: “Hooray! Welcome back, Chris. Will the public finally get the message as to who is responsible for spreading this faux…Jul 26, 07:58
    • Effijy on Safety First: “Well Done Chris! The police have become something of a farce in recent years. Homes with professionally monitored intruder alarm…Jul 26, 07:36
    • Frank Gillougley on Safety First: “Welcome back Chris you have been sorely missed. Your commentary is essential Saturday viewing. Everybody knows the small things are…Jul 26, 07:35
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Have it your way, YL Sah! Only, your way, the Declaration of Arbroath is hoaching with lies. Whoops 🙂Jul 26, 04:32
    • Young Lochinvar on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “He’s thrown himself into the arena of public consciousness. Taking notes in his book of grudges and pulling his nostril…Jul 26, 02:14
    • Young Lochinvar on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Fingers crossed. I suspect there is a lot of money backing it though..Jul 26, 01:58
    • Young Lochinvar on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Just exactly the same “green and pleasant England” propping up failed Scotchland too wee too poor too stupid, begging bowl…Jul 26, 01:42
    • Young Lochinvar on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Correct. It was a dynastic takeover following on from the Picts apparently taking the biggest hit (hierarchy wise) from standing…Jul 26, 01:31
    • Mark Beggan on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “The damage is being acutely felt across every sector. This Upton maniac has not only shown himself for what he…Jul 26, 00:28
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “What makes you think it was an accident, Rob? The sterling efforts by the Covid Spreaders, long after it had…Jul 26, 00:27
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “What make you think it was an accident, Rob? The sterling efforts by the Covid Spreaders, long after it had…Jul 26, 00:24
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: ““Do the Norwegians lie in their beds at night fretting over whether their country has an impact out of proportion…Jul 26, 00:14
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Given the historical concerns over the damage to the environment (and human health) caused by female hormones found in fresh…Jul 26, 00:05
    • Rob on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Everyone believed it was possible, it has been for some considerable time. What no-one believed was that it was possible…Jul 25, 23:54
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Northcode breaking entirely new ground on Wings BTL. He’s been colonised to the power of two. Colonised squared in other…Jul 25, 23:51
    • robertkknight on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: ““However there is no doubt that we had an impact out of proportion to our size. The problem will be…Jul 25, 23:49
    • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “3-YEAR-OLD WITH PUBERTY SYMPTOMS AFTER EXPOSURE TO FATHER’S ‘SEX CHANGE’ DRUGS A three-year-old has experienced signs of puberty after exposure…Jul 25, 23:22
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: ““ardent nationalists for a madeup “country” they couldn’t find on a map” What was it the Burns boy wrote? Something…Jul 25, 23:01
    • Northcode on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “This: People who identified themselves as Picts formed a majority group in the new kingdom, and most of them remained…Jul 25, 23:01
    • Nae Need! on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Yip. A criminal mafia. And a disgusting bunch of perverts to boot.Jul 25, 22:22
    • Nae Need! on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “:=)) you’re no wrong.Jul 25, 22:19
    • Mark Beggan on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Call me anglophobic but there’s a little England in NHS Fife.Jul 25, 22:10
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “@Rob I suspect you may be new on here. So you won’t know that according to the usual Wings BTL…Jul 25, 22:04
    • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Marie, as a Scottish Republican and Christian, I’ll post this comment here if I may — SOME HISTORICAL SCOTTISH CONTRIBUTIONS…Jul 25, 21:54
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “@Rob says: 24 July, 2025 at 1:54 pm All that needs to be said, and can be said, to summarise…Jul 25, 21:49
    • Aidan on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “EvidenceJul 25, 21:46
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “FFS, Marie. Open the een the Guid Gowd gave ye. Learn to deal with the world as it is -…Jul 25, 21:38
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: ““Tnere’s no two way’s about it.” Erm… two way’s of what?Jul 25, 21:32
    • Hatey McHateface on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: “Good to see you self-identifying as a Pict, NC. I can happily address my racist bigotry at you. And I…Jul 25, 21:30
    • Xaracen on Everybody’s Normal Nowadays: ““Yes – you’re happy to waffle endlessly about how the treaty doesn’t “subordinate” Scotland to England, but as soon as…Jul 25, 21:26
  • A tall tale



↑ Top