Okay, my title is crude – but I’m genuinely surprised that some of the tabloids haven’t made that connection!
Anyway, surely today’s biggest story (well, the story that will interest Better Nation readers the most!) is the news that independence has overtaken continued membership of the UK in an opinion poll for the Herald for the first time in three years.
Pollster TNS-BMRB has asked the Scottish Government’s preferred question in each of its 10 polls over the last four years, asking voters whether they agree or disagree “that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state”.
In this poll, those selecting “I agree” totalled 39% to 38% for those who disagreed.
Support for independence trailed support for the Union by 8 points when the SNP won May’s Holyrood election, and in a little over 100 days of majority SNP Government (albeit with the majority of that time spent on recess!) that has changed into a one point lead.
I guess the question is: why?
As I said in the previous paragraph, the Scottish Parliament has been in recess for most of that period. Â So while the SNP’s performance in government might have been a factor in some people’s responses, it can’t be the whole story – since they haven’t really done anything.
But then, that might be part of the explanation.  With Holyrood in recess, political attention has been focused on Westminster.  And that means focusing on the actions of what is – in Scotland at least – a generally unpopular Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government.  Plus, we’ve seen riots in English cities, apparently based upon reaction to coalition policies, with spending cuts being cited in many cases as one of the reasons for spreading of the riots.
Yes, this is a simplistic explanation – based on little evidence and lots of conjecture – but it does beg another question:
If support for independence has increased because the SNP has not been in the news, what will happen when the Holyrood recess is over and the party are subject to the usual media critiques?
I guess time will tell. Â But in the meantime, presumably, SNP strategists will be digesting these latest polls and working out what the party need to do to keep the numbers for independence moving in an upward trajectory. Â And if that means the party stay out of the news, then that might be what happens…
#1 by ReasonableNat on September 5, 2011 - 2:00 pm
True, the polls are up, and true, the parliament is in recess, but a causal link – hmmmm, evidence?
😉
#2 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 2:08 pm
I know. And I admit, in the absence of data, I’m speculating. Point is simply that it might herald a new strategy for the SNP though – if people are unimpressed with Westminster, it might mean less of a pro-active campaign from the party. Maybe all they have to do is harness the negative views of the coalition…
#3 by ReasonableNat on September 5, 2011 - 4:31 pm
That’s not exactly difficult up here these days, as long as there are tories in number 10 you can probably call discontent with Wesminster ‘intrinsic’.
However, having mocked you I should now admit that on looking at their data over the last four years, it might well be supporting your theory – the part of it that blames discontent with Westminster at least (though perhaps not so much to do with the holidays).
According to just this pollster support for independence peaked in March 2008 at 41%, then gradually declined to 31% in November 2009. During the same time frame support for the union initially declined a little from it’s August 2007 peak of 50% but ended up back on track at 46% again in November 2009. Over this period it is pretty clear that the yes camp was losing votes directly to the don’t knows. Personally I’d put this down to a drop in confidence right in the worst of the financial collapse.
From November 2009 to May 2011 the no camp basically stayed stable, dropping only one point from 46% to 45%. The yes camp regained six points (31% to 37%), and the don’t knows dropped five points (23% to 18%). Maybe it’s just me – but that looks like the same folks, basically pro-independence, getting their confidence back. TNS-BMRB’s own analysis on 7th June 2011 basically says the same thing – no overall increased support for independence.
The interesting bit, and of course I have to admit that this is only one poll, blah blah blah, is that support for independence has increased by only two points since May, and now we’re just two points below that peak level in March 2008, right before the meltdown. On the other hand, support for the union has declined from 45% to 38% – it’s lowest level for four years, and a drop of seven points that is almost neatly matched by an increase of five points in the don’t knows. Unionists are losing confidence in the union.
Now, I admit that I’m biased, but if I were a unionist I’d be very depressed: support for independence is right back where it was before the financial crisis (the unionists biggest weapon right now) and confidence in the union is at its lowest for four years, and dropping…
#4 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 2:18 pm
It’s an interesting angle, but I suspect it’s at least a bit more active than that – I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the poll is in part a thrawn Scots reaction to the intelligence-insulting assault we’ve been subjected to from the anti-independence camp since May.
Moore and Alexander’s recent comments, while probably too late to affect the poll in themselves, are typical of the intellectually bankrupt rubbish we’ve been subjected to, proclaiming a “positive” argument for the Union that in every case has turned out to be the same “too poor, too wee, too stupid” bollocks with a molecule-thin veneer of new paint in the form of “banks too broke” slapped on top.
I doubt voters particularly enjoyed delivering an SNP landslide and then being immediately told by everyone and his dog that of course, they hadn’t voted for the SNP’s main policy.
#5 by IanH on September 5, 2011 - 2:29 pm
The usual problem for politicians, the more we see of them the less we like them 😉
There has been plenty of airtime for opponents of the SNP during the recess, but very little response that I’ve seen. Maybe sitting it out and letting the unionist side of the argument irritate people is already the strategy
#6 by Ken on September 5, 2011 - 2:33 pm
I find it more telling that almost 1/4 either don’t know or don’t care.
This, coupled with a pretty dismal 50% turnout in the May elections (down from an already poor 51.7% in 2007) compared to 70% in Ireland (67% in 2007), or a more comparable Northern Ireland – a historic low of 55% in rather boring elections this year (down from 62% in 2007), speaks volumes.
#7 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:07 pm
True – turnout will be a major factor in any referendum. You do have to think that, with something as major as Scotland’s future in the UK up for grabs, more people will turnout in that though, no?
#8 by Ken on September 6, 2011 - 9:17 am
I would certainly HOPE so given its significance, but the combination of not only continuous but declining low turnouts in what is effectively a Scottish General Election, and apparent indifference to a ‘yes/no’ question after decades of having it in the air makes me think any person or party crowing about a lead of a single percentage point (and that figure being a dismal 39% in favour of your proposal) has an awful lot of work to do in a short space of time.
Plus, although I agree not directly comparable – referenda on the future of your country doesn’t always translate and trickle down to everyone. The Nice and Lisbon Treaties in Ireland suffered woeful turnouts first time round. It’s easy to assume high interest and turnouts in ‘hack circles’ (no offence!) but I’d never bet on it.
#9 by Gaz on September 5, 2011 - 2:59 pm
I’m pretty sure this is a reaction to the negative and hysterical rantings of the Unionists at the prospect of a Referendum since May.
The challenge for the SNP is to consolidate those who have been driven into its arms for negative reasons with positive reasons for staying on side.
#10 by Angus McLellan on September 5, 2011 - 3:46 pm
Timing is just as important in politics as in comedy.
It would be foolish for the SNP to be making big public pronouncements on the matter when the Unionist parties have done such a great job of “obsessing over independence” since May. It might be different if they had a coherent message or a credible one, but when Isobel Fraser on Newsnight can say that the latest interventions by Alexander and Moore might be seen as “disrespectful” and discredited, that’s plainly not the case. With Calman’s unnatural offspring heading north soon, and separation being part of the Tory leadership campaign, there’s no need to worry that the press and opposition might stop doing the SNP’s work for them.
#11 by Nikostratos on September 5, 2011 - 4:04 pm
Yeah well with the snp msps away and not causing any more mischief people can be more relaxed about Independence but once they come back and start bulldozing their way through the Scottish constitution forcing unwanted reforms(drink drink etc)
then we will see how they fare
#12 by Jeff on September 5, 2011 - 4:56 pm
Minimum pricing was in the SNP manifesto and they won a majority so, umm, what’s your point caller?
#13 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 4:35 pm
Also, I’m surprised more wasn’t made by the SNP (or the elements of the media more sympathetic towards them) of Moore’s assertion that if Holyrood rejected the Scotland Bill, it’d be forced through by Westminster anyway. That was an extraordinarily stupid piece of arrogance almost guaranteed to put a couple of percentage points on support for independence by itself.
#14 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:09 pm
Agree. That was a spectacular misunderstanding of public perception vis-a-vis public attitudes towards devolution.
#15 by Doug Daniel on September 5, 2011 - 4:51 pm
It may simply be that, with a referendum now guaranteed for this term, there are more people taking it upon themselves to properly work out where they actually stand on the issue. The results of this have then hopefully led them to a positive conclusion, which is perhaps what we’re seeing here. After all, we’ve yet to see any truly positive arguments for the union put forward by anyone, so unless you’re already inclined towards keeping the union anyway, you’d be pretty hard-pressed to find a real reason for being in favour of it.
Perhaps some of it is people seeing the English riots and thinking, “I don’t recognise that country”. Perhaps issues like the Supreme Court rammy and the Megrahi release again being criticised by those in London have highlighted the widening schism between Scottish and British/English mindsets. Or perhaps they simply asked more pro-independence people than usual!
39% to 38% is not enough to make me feel like we’ve “arrived”, although it’s still interesting to see. After all, the SNP’s triumph in May started off with the polls very gradually creeping up in the SNP’s favour…
#16 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 5:08 pm
You realise that most Scots think the Megrahi release was wrong right?
#17 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 5:16 pm
Only by a narrow margin. And while they may think it was wrong, that still doesn’t mean they like being lectured about it hypocritically. Is Ronnie Biggs dead yet?
I’m not aware, though, of the poll providing any correlation between “people who support independence” and “people who think it was right to release Megrahi”. So it’s a rather abstract point.
#18 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 6:32 pm
It was the assertion that criticism of the Megrahi release was a dividing line between “Scottish” and “British/English” mindsets, especially given the criticism of it from a lot of Scots. Seemed odd thing to bring up is all.
(Personally I think it was the right thing to do, on the medical evidence available. But then I think the timing was bloody suspicious, as was the original conviction, so… )
#19 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 6:38 pm
So we’ve moved from talking about a poll which gives a marginal lead to a Yes vote in an independence referendum, to a debate on public attitudes on the Megrahi release and whether those attitudes correspond to particular positions vis-a-vis independence. Interesting, but how likely is the Megrahi thing to play a part in a referendum which is still (probably) at least 3 years away?
#20 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 7:17 pm
I guess my point is really that there was a conflation of being “anti-SNP Policy” and being parting of the posited “widening schism”.
I’d really quite like it if folk just shut up about Megrahi, it’s dull and I’m very sorry for perpetuating it. 😉
#21 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 7:31 pm
I don’t think the Megrahi affair will play in the referendum at all. It clearly didn’t in the Holyrood elections, despite the concerted best efforts of the MSM, and if there’s one thing we can surely be certain of following recent events it’s that he’ll be long dead by 2015.
I think Aidan chose to misinterpret Doug’s comment somewhat in any case – Doug can correct me if I’m wrong but it didn’t seem to me that he was saying there was a schism between Scots and English people over the release per se, more just that Scots didn’t appreciate other nations lecturing us about, and meddling in, our internal affairs.
#22 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:10 pm
No, I don’t think it will either. Which was my point – in a discussion about the referendum, its pretty much a moot point, no?
#23 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 9:41 pm
Not Megrahi as such (good grief I hope not), but I wonder if people actually perceive criticism from folk like David Cameron of the decision as other nations meddling in our internal affairs. Clearly the criticism from the US gets peoples hackles up a bit more but we’re not proposing independence from them.
I don’t really think people share the SNP / strongly independence inclined perception of things like the Supreme Court or UK Govt comments on Megrahi as evidence of a growing schism between Scottishness and Englishness.
But, then, I’m an incorrigible Unionist..
#24 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:55 pm
You are, but we don’t hold it against you.
I think the problem for nationalists is that there is no clearly defined notion of what constitutes “Scottishness” (or “Englishness” for that matter) so there is a tendency to define it by what it is not – ie, the Supreme Court is not Scottish, therefore it constitutes part of the narrative constructed to help build the schism.
Not being “folk” I’m not sure I can speak for them (and by “folk” I assume you mean the “non-political classes”?). But its my perception that there’s likely a scale of things which affect considerations with regards the constitutional arrangement. Comments by the PM are likely to be at the lower end of that (assuming the don’t affect material things) whereas actions of the Supreme Court, if they have a direct impact upon the “independence” of the devolved legislature, might well be seen as more influential in affecting people’s attitudes towards the “schism”. As in, if they think that an outside body (such as the Supreme Court) is impinging upon the Scottish Parliament’s abilities to do what it is allowed to do, then they are perhaps more likely to be persuaded of the case for independence. Assuming a) that they think it is a bad thing that the Scottish Parliament is being interfered with and b) that they are actually aware of it happening.
Anyway, that’s kind of what I think.
#25 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 10:35 pm
I guess it’s really a and b that I think the man on the Coatbridge Omnibus doesn’t care much about. In particular I think a is probably highly subjective based on what the actual interference is about.
I have no evidential basis for those statements though.
I do agree there’s a concerted effort to generate or widen that schism, but I disagree that there aren’t well defined notions of national identity in play now – I think people are more than capable of multiple strongly held national identities.
I’m Scottish and British, but not English and definitely perceive English people as being of a different nationality. And so do the English people I know who live in Scotland (unless they’ve adopted a Scottish identity, as several people I know have).
But people can identify as a particular nationality, in opposition to other nationalities, without it informing every aspect of their politics. It’s that adoption of nationality as the defining prism through which things are viewed which I think separates the SNP from the wider electorate and makes things like the supreme court stooshie and Westminster commenting (but notably not interfering) on Megrahi seem much more relevant to the wider debate than they actually are.
That sort of thinking leads to ugly grievance politics – which is kind of reflected in the crowing about Iain McWhirter’s column this week.
#26 by Doug Daniel on September 5, 2011 - 11:39 pm
You’re quite correct Rev – I would be a fool to claim that people are turning to independence solely because they think it was correct to release Megrahi, and I’m a bit puzzled that Aidan even chose to focus on that point, almost as if to try and obfuscate the main point I was making, which I’m sure he wouldn’t do.
You don’t have to agree with the decision in order to disagree with the way other countries have been hectoring Scotland about it. It’s like the old saying about freedom of speech – disagreeing with what someone says, but defending their right to say it. The election showed us that it is not, in itself, a deciding issue for most people; but the resultant criticism Scotland has received from others may play into this general feeling that we’re of a different mindset than others. Whether that’s actually true or not is a different matter, and it’s inconsequential anyway, as feelings often win over facts.
#27 by Aidan on September 6, 2011 - 12:18 am
You’ve totally not read any of my subsequent posts ahve you?
#28 by Doug Daniel on September 6, 2011 - 11:21 am
I just wanted to point out that the Rev had correctly gotten my point!
#29 by Indy on September 6, 2011 - 7:54 am
The Megrahi issue is a good example I think of how politcs and political perception is quite complex and works on different levels. It’s not simply about issues. If you took a poll which asked “Irrespective of whether you agree with the decision to release Megrahi, do you believe that the SNP took the decision in good faith and told the truth about the reasons the decision was taken” that would be an interesting question – and I suspect a large majority would answer yes. And believing that a government has acted in good faith and told the truth is actually a reason to vote for them – even if you disagree with the decision they took.
People vote for all kinds of reasons, it can’t be analysed simply in terms of policy or individual decisions. I remember talking to a voter once who said I don’t believe in what your party stands for – but I believe that you believe in what you stand for and so I will vote for you. That is part of how people evaluate a political party which is sometimes overlooked, they are looking for a certain level of integrity, even if they don’t agree with every decision.
#30 by Don McC on September 5, 2011 - 5:26 pm
I must have missed that poll, Aidan. Or were you being tongue in cheek, you naughty scamp you.
#31 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 5:57 pm
No, there actually was a poll a week or so ago showing the number opposed the the release had grown to 55%.
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2851/The-majority-of-Scots-still-disagree-with-decision-to-release-alMegrahi.aspx
#32 by Don McC on September 5, 2011 - 9:13 pm
Got to admit I was completly unaware of that poll. Thanks for that, Rev.
#33 by Aidan on September 5, 2011 - 10:36 pm
It’s one of series, AFAICT no poll has shown a majority in favour of it.
#34 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 6, 2011 - 12:18 am
Lots and lots (and lots) of polls showed large majorities in favour of the release at the time. A whole series in local newspapers from various regions, in particular – people used to post the lists of them in comment threads, with anywhere from 60% to over 80% in favour. It’s unsurprising that support has declined steadily as he’s gone on living.
#35 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 6, 2011 - 11:01 am
Knew I could find it somewhere. You’ll have to ascertain the veracity and validity of these quoted figures for yourself, but they’re taken from a post on Blether With Brian and the list was widely spread around at the time. The figures related to polls conducted by the named newspapers, and the numbers quoted are those in agreement with the Scottish Government’s decision:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2009/08/rumblings_of_discontent.html
Dumfries & Galloway Standard 88.4% in favour
Annandale Observer 73%
Perthshire Advertiser 90.6%
Ross-shire Journal 87%
Scotsman 58%
Lennox Herald 80.5%
Oban Times 89%
Kilmarnock Standard 72.5%
East Kilbride News 71%
West Lothian Courier 75.2%
Hamilton Advertiser 60.3%
Airdrie Advertiser 56.1%
Wishaw Press 83%
Paisley Daily Express 62.23%
#36 by Doug Daniel on September 5, 2011 - 11:41 pm
“wrong right” sounds like some sort of Orwellian term for “indifferent”, which, in the grand scheme of things, is probably exactly how people feel about the actual decision itself.
#37 by Iain Menzies on September 5, 2011 - 5:14 pm
couple of things i saw from the break down of the numbers.
First the age balance doesnt play in favour of independence. Those who are most likely to vote (older folks) are much more pro union than anti.
i dont know if the headline numbers take that into account, i couldnt see anything on the pdf that would suggest they were, and i hope we can all at least agree that what matters is what happens when there actually is a vote….rather than doing a dance cos less than 40% of people said anything one way or the other.
The second thing is that that question is one that general undecideds would be quite happy with….it isnt a straight up dissolve the union question so it doesnt really speak all that much to how many scots are pro or anti union.
ps this isnt a party political post just highlighting a few, well realities of the poll. so dont all gang up on be for being a stupid/evil/illiterate/pessimistic unionist…..not that anyone on her is ever like that 😉
#38 by Gary Cocker on September 5, 2011 - 6:08 pm
So what you’re saying Iain is that in, say, 20-30 years time once the older generation has passed and the pro-Nat youth of today are responsible voters, that we’ll win a referendum at a canter? 😉
#39 by Iain Menzies on September 5, 2011 - 6:29 pm
i dont know about that…..longer life expectancy and well and awful lot of the younger nats i know seem to be leaving scotland…..cant imagine who im thinking of eh gary…
#40 by Rev. S. Campbell on September 5, 2011 - 6:31 pm
This has always been the case, as Labour’s dyed-in-the-wool diehards die off. Why else do you think Salmond said a referendum was a “once a generation” event…?
#41 by Nikostratos on September 5, 2011 - 6:53 pm
Yeah well Jeff no doubt the EU (which the snp support wholeheartedly) will crush any attempt at minimum pricing
and having a majority in a devolved executive does not give the snp the right to take away peoples rights to buy what they want when they want and how they want(drink is not illegal ‘YET’)
I strongly suspect yer a teetotaller ?
#42 by Jeff on September 5, 2011 - 7:07 pm
That’s fine, but you’re point about the EU is wholly removed from your original point. You seem to be desperately trying to suggest that an SNP majority is undemocratic which is, of course, ridiculous.
And I’m enjoying a lovely bottle of Riesling here, and it wasn’t that much but it’d be unaffected by minimum pricing.
Anyway, this is all getting off topic from Malc’s original post so we’ll leave it there. Cheers!
#43 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:15 pm
I’m with Jeff here: its kind of off-topic, but I’m going with it anyway: a party prints a manifesto, wins a majority, puts manifesto into practice. That’s how politics works. I fail to see how, when the party clearly set out a policy pre-election – and people voted for them – that their enacting that policy is somehow illegitimate.
By all means disagree with the policy, and debate it on its merits, but please recognise the democratic process as it exists.
#44 by Barbarian on September 5, 2011 - 8:10 pm
Good lord, a political blog with some realistic comments!
I think the article is spot on: no sign of the SNP, just the big bad wolves (well, Yorkshire terriers) of Westminster.
Problem with these polls, is that politicians will highlight those that are favourable to them.
The problems for the SNP have yet to come, and one of the key ones will be Europe.
#45 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:16 pm
Makes a change eh?
It has been a quiet period for the Scottish Parliament generally – and I was half-joking when I suggested that the numbers reflect more attention being directed towards Westminster. But I do suspect that there will be some strategising going on based on this polling…
#46 by Indy on September 6, 2011 - 8:12 am
I don’t think there will be. There is always a lag between public perception and political events. That’s why polls did not really reflect the swing to the SNP prior to the election, although on the ground people were picking up on it. I don’t really know why that happens, except that most people don’t follow politics that closely. They pick up on the mood as much as the issues. The fact that independence is more popular now is, in my opinion, almost entirely attributable to the fact that the SNP won a majority. That almost gives people permission to say that they support it.
We always have to remember that for generations the concept of independence has been ridiculed and pushed to the sidelines as a romantic fantasy that proper grown-ups rightly rejected as impractical. I don’t know how many people I’ve spoken to over the years who have said “yes I quite like the idea of Scotland being independent but it’s never going to happen in the real world is it, you are just kidding yourself on about that”. The SNP having won a majority makes it a bit more real though, doesn’t it?
#47 by Don Francisco on September 5, 2011 - 8:13 pm
I think Malc has a point about the unpopular govt in Westminster – spectacularly unpopular in Scotland given the last election results. Not only are they being unpopular but they are being incompetently unpopular, u-turn after u-turn with little or nothing to crow about. It doesn’t look to be getting any better either. Given the chance I imagine much of England would like to seperate from them too!
I’m Unionist and since the election I’m increasingly thinking it is game, set and match to Salmond. The opposition to SNP in Holyrood is more laughable than the Coalition govt. It’s like watching Scotland under Berti Vogts.
If I was Salmond I’d keep on with the (largely) uncontroversial policies and hold off the worst of the cuts for as long as possible – in this sense the enemy is not political opposition but time (though even if the SNP did have to enact cuts they’d struggle to be as incompetent as the coalition).
#48 by Greig on September 5, 2011 - 8:23 pm
Suspected correlations between pro-independence sentiment and the positive state of Scottish football seem to be out the windae. Or, perhaps, is the woeful Levein a pro-Union point man after all?
#49 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:18 pm
Levein a “point man”? With his 4-6-0 formation pointedly aimed at getting a point, you might have a point.
#50 by Malc on September 5, 2011 - 9:22 pm
All, I know its a while since I’ve posted a proper article here but the rules on comments haven’t changed.
I’m (we’re) happy to publish comments which go (slightly) off-topic (witness the above!) but comments which make claims without evidence (which may result in libel actions against us!) or use such language as does not befit proper debate will not pass moderation.
I don’t want to make a big deal out of it, because the majority of our comments are grand and the debate is great. This is just a wee reminder as a couple of comments have fallen foul of these guidelines on the last couple of posts. As you were.
#51 by Douglas McLellan (@douglasmclellan) on September 6, 2011 - 1:09 am
I am concerned that my party and the others have not yet grasped something quite profound about the May result.
The SNP national message (as opposed to some local leafletting) was for a positive, ambitious and confident Scotland. Labour & Tories are already on their “Scotland isn’t capable” narrative that most of them have continued to this day. Tavish had his “a vote for the SNP is a referendum vote for an independent Scotland” which was a stupid position to take at the time and recent actions by Lib Dem Cabinet minister are no better than the “not capable” narrative.
Scotland voted for a positive vision of a self-confident nation in May and the SNP have only had to stand back and watch as the Unionist parties have continued to attack this vision which can only slowly drive up the support for independence.
The SNP had no really unpopular policies in their manifesto, can point to Westminster denying Scotland the powers they think it needs to grow economically and can listen to the negative visions of Scotland that the unionist parties continue to espouse. The people of Scotland rejected that negative view and continue to do so. The only way the polls can go at the moment really is towards a yes vote.
(P.S. I don’t believe for a single second that the riots were a result of Coalition policies. There is no way a Westminster government, in the space of a year, can drive people in several cities to the point of running over innocent people with a car, looting televisions, burning down their neighbours homes, destroying local businesses etc.)
#52 by Craig Gallagher on September 6, 2011 - 4:35 am
Pretty interesting comments from everyone, I’m pleased to see only one or two mischief makers from the crowd having a dig.
It seems to me that Alex Salmond is a master political forecaster. I’m not sure he knew that Scotland was going to deliver him a crushing political majority – certainly, he expected to win, but not by that much – but since then he has largely played the part of the tortoise, while his opponents hare and haver on about what powers he and the SNP have and haven’t a right to have and use.
I agree with Malc that the Nationalists got their digs in early, made a few points about the democratic mandate they’d received and what extra powers they’d like, and then left it to the inchoate ramblings of their highly diverse opponents to bring public opinion around. The experience of facing down a negative and reactionary opposition in the previous session of the Scottish Parliament seems to have taught him that the most damaging blows to the Unionist parties are often self-inflicted.
As Napoleon said, “Never interrupt your adversary when he is making a mistake.”