Then and now, part 99 190
On the left, the Daily Record two years ago.
On the right, the Daily Record today.
On the left, the Daily Record two years ago.
On the right, the Daily Record today.
For over two years now, this site has been warning that the UK government will take the earliest opportunity it thinks it can possibly get away with to abolish the Barnett Formula, the funding mechanism which the No campaign sold as the biggest benefit of Scotland remaining in the Union.
The Formula is hated almost everywhere else in the UK, by both politicians and the English (especially) public, who see it as an over-generous subsidy to the scrounging Jocks, and with the threat of independence theoretically removed after the referendum there’s very little protecting it.
Neither Labour nor the Tories – with just one Scottish MP each – would have much to lose politically from reducing Scottish funding by billions of pounds they could use to bribe swing voters in England instead. Barnett’s partial survival was the only solid commitment made in The Vow, but it’s set to be slashed by the Scotland Bill, and the smaller it gets the less resistance there will be to its total removal.
This week the House Of Lords made lots of headlines by highlighting the shambolic, half-baked state of the Bill, which hasn’t yet come up with a “fiscal framework” to replace the bulk of Barnett. But make no mistake – the Lords want it gone just as much as everyone else does.
We’ve been pondering this week whether or not to hold a quick fundraiser to pay the £750 fine levied on us recently by the Electoral Commission for being a bit late with some indyref paperwork, readers.
(Our feeling is that there’s still plenty money left in the Wings War Chest from this year’s big crowdfunder, but lots of people have specifically asked for one for the fine, mainly to make a point to both the Commission and the little army of Unionist trolls who almost exploded with glee when the news came out late last month.)
But we’re not sure we can compete with this.
The Additional Member System by which the Scottish Parliament elects its MSPs is a fascinating construct. One of its functions, at least in theory, is to ensure that every party gets its best and brightest talents into the Holyrood chamber, by providing them with a “second chance” in the form of the regional lists.
The Conservatives, for example, would be hard pushed to ever get their leader elected if they could only contest constituency seats. Ruth Davidson got a pitiful 1,845 votes in Glasgow Kelvin in 2011, and whatever you think of the Tories it’s hard to dispute that she’s one of their more able operators. (Faint praise though that may be.)
One weakness of the system is that regional MSPs are sometimes seen as “second class” members, having been personally (and in Davidson’s case, comprehensively) rejected by the electorate but still snuck in against the voters’ wishes under cover of the list. But in the current era of remarkable domination by the SNP, for the opposition it’s increasingly being chosen to fight for a constituency that’s the booby prize.
Here’s a very quick one from our latest poll:
“From 0 (absolutely no chance) to 10 (a certainty), what do you currently think is the likelihood of Labour winning the 2020 UK general election?”
Above the midpoint (ie people who DON’T think Labour will win): 56%
Below the midpoint (people who DO think they’ll win): 28%
Get ready for Tories until 2025 at least, folks.
When we commission polls we don’t like to just ask people easy questions like who their favourite member of One Direction is. We like to put them on the spot and make them actually think about stuff, and this time was no different:
“The UK government is imposing severe cuts to tax credits and benefits in order to save £12 billion from its budget. Scotland’s per-capita share of the cuts would be around £1 billion.
The Scottish Government will in future have the power to compensate those who lose out, by creating new payments it’ll have to fund itself.
Which of the following is closest to your view?”
Because we thought it was unlikely any Scottish Labour MSPs would be taking our poll, we decided to discount the “magic lots of extra money out of thin air” option and only allow respondents to pick from intellectually-coherent choices.
Their answers were enlightening.
The task facing the Scottish independence movement is to change the minds of just 6% of Scots. That’s all it would take to turn September 2014’s defeat into a victory if and when another referendum comes around, and when you put it like that it doesn’t sound like an impossible job.
The question for Yes supporters is where to focus their energies. A proportion of people who live in Scotland will never vote for independence no matter what, for a variety of reasons we don’t need to go into here. But we’ve always wondered exactly how big that proportion was, so in our latest Panelbase poll we just asked straight out.
The House of Lords has been in the news quite a bit recently, one way and another. So in our latest poll we thought it might be fun to ask a few questions about it.
We decided to have something for everyone.
A few weeks ago, we were told by a source that BBC Scotland’s flagship weeknight current-affairs show Scotland 2015 was recording some truly shocking viewing figures, in the region of 5,000 people a night. When we sent the BBC an FOI request for the stats, it was rejected, like almost all FOIs to the Corporation are.
We also looked into trying to get the data from BARB, but they weren’t very helpful either. So the only option we had left to get any sort of idea at all was to ask in our latest Panelbase poll.
When the results came in, we understood why the BBC wanted it kept quiet.
This one rather speaks for itself.
(Data below from our latest Panelbase poll.)
And has no more luck this week with hapless Scottish Labour list MSP Claire Baker than he did with her habitually mendacious colleague Jackie Baillie last week:
Brewer’s weary sigh at 2m 14s speaks volumes.
One of the stranger criticisms regularly levelled at this site is that we don’t attack the SNP/Scottish Government enough.
That’s weird firstly because it’s not like there’s currently a shortage of hostile media scrutiny of Nicola Sturgeon and her colleagues, and secondly because we’ve never in our four-year life claimed for a moment to be neutral.
But the reality is far more nuanced than that.
Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)