The Scotsman, 19 September 2013:
“Only one in ten voters would prefer the next General Election to result in another coalition government, a poll has found as Nick Clegg sought to convince voters it was in the country’s best interests. More than two thirds (67 per cent) would prefer to see an outright victory by one party.
One other thing struck us about the YouGov poll for the Sun we mentioned earlier today. It recorded voter responses by both how they voted in 2010 and how they plan to vote in 2015, and the numbers were drastically different.
If for the sake of argument we regard the Lib Dems as still being very broadly on the (relative) left of the UK political spectrum, and the emergent UKIP as obviously on the right, we get a rather chilling result.
[Over the coming months we aim to bring you the breadth and depth of the Yes vote under our “Perspectives” tag, because there’s no such thing as a “typical” Yes supporter. Yesterday we heard from 15-year-old Saffron Dickson. Today it’s the turn of one of the many English people living in Scotland who want out of the UK too.]
I saw a poll last week that gave the Yes campaign for an independent Scotland a 1% lead. The last time I looked, the No camp had had it by a country mile. Is this phenomenal turnaround any kind of surprise? Not in the slightest.
In an era of such abject political mediocrity, Alex Salmond stands out like a giant redwood among a field of saplings. It’s hard to imagine how far behind he would have to be for the No campaign to feel truly confident of success. A few weeks before the last Scottish Elections he was 20 points adrift, but when the ballots were counted he won by a country mile.
I’m no kind of betting man, but if I was, it would be a no-brainer as to where punt my cash. Not only is Salmond the standout politician of his generation in terms of getting ballots into boxes, the lineup who are going try to take him down aren’t even close to being in the same league. All of which makes it seem more than likely that Scotland will be its own nation in a year’s time.
It occurred to me the other day that I’ve now spent a third of my life up here as a “white settler”. I’m now a well and truly established immigrant. My English roots, though, don’t deny me the chance to have a vote on Scotland’s future and, unless something changes in a big way, that vote is almost certainly going to be Yes.
Vote No in 2014 and one of these three could be your nation’s leader:
The full data tables are here. In them you’ll learn that just 6% of Labour voters think Ed Miliband is “strong”, only 13% of Conservative voters think David Cameron is “in touch with the concerns of ordinary people”, and incredibly, as many as 13% of Liberal Democrat voters still think Nick Clegg “sticks to what he believes in”.
You could have one – or quite possibly two – of those guys, who even their own supporters overwhelmingly think are useless. Or you could have a Scot leading a government of Scots elected by Scots making all the decisions about Scotland.
It’s your choice. You’ve got a year left to think about it.
We couldn’t help but notice this new BBC referendum logo.
We like how they’re thinking.
[15-year-old Saffron Dickson’s passionate, articulate contribution to a Radio 5 debate in Glasgow this week captured the hearts of everyone in the independence movement. She’ll have a vote in the referendum a year from today, and we asked her to tell us why she’ll be using it to say Yes. These are her words.]
As a young person living in Scotland, I believe wholeheartedly that Scotland is the most beautiful and prosperous country I know of. I realised this at a very young age, I might add. The site of the ‘Better Together’ campaign never really appealed to me.
I’ve always made a point of never believing or following anything I can’t fully intellectualise, so the Yes campaign was the only way for me. Living with a strong political family, I’ve always had an interest in politics, but rest assured I’m not voting Yes based on family. I’ve debated this vigorously, and my heart and my head just want what’s best for Scotland.
So it’s getting close to that time. How do we feel about gathering the team here?
No campaign director Blair McDougall speaking to BBC News this morning.
Don’t you think he looks tired?
We’ve just had a response from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation to our article of this morning. The Foundation has confirmed on the record, through its Twitter account, that the deputy leader of Labour in Scotland misrepresented its views on the BBC Radio 5 Live debate yesterday morning. Its reaction is below.
The accusation that the Yes campaign proposes an impossible Scotland of low tax and high spend (often mocked as “Scandinavian spending with American taxation”) is a tactic frequently used by ‘Better Together’ to undermine the economic case for independence, with the implication that services would be cut due to lack of funds.
(Of course, they say that independence means slashing taxes at the same time as saying taxes will rise in an independent Scotland, but we’ll let that go for now.)
It’s an allegation commonly placed at the feet of the SNP (usually by Labour when wielding the old “Tartan Tories” stick, whereas the Tories prefer to insist that the SNP are dangerous neo-Marxists) that looking to offer tax breaks and incentives to encourage development is in actual fact right wing low-tax economics.
But that’s not necessarily the case. Cutting one or two taxes to boost growth doesn’t create a “low-tax economy” any more than cutting out a single sausage from a full English breakfast makes it low-fat.
Yesterday we pointed out a pretty disgraceful misrepresentation by Labour of the findings of an impartial, non-political research study which found that an independent Scotland would be far better placed to reduce inequality. But it wasn’t the only one.
Here’s the party’s deputy leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar, speaking at yesterday’s interesting two-hour BBC Radio 5 Live debate (for some reason that link only shows the last 50 minutes, although the earlier part had been televised too) at the Fruitmarket in Glasgow on the subject of child poverty.
We say “speaking”. We mean “lying”. In Sarwar’s case the words are interchangeable.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
