 Today the SNP claimed (ETA: this has now fallen off the internet fortunately there’s google cache), as evidence of their prowess, that 820,000 people moving from the other parts of the UK to Scotland since 2007. This was picked up by the Scotsman, on various blogs and on twitter.
On first glance, it seems pretty shaky. A wave of people totaling more  than 150% of the population of Glasgow coming here in the last 4 years? You’d have noticed that, surely…
On second glance, ok, it’s probably a gross inward migration figure cheekily ignoring outward migration so maybe the net figure’s a bit smaller and they’re spinning somewhat less impressive figures.
On third glance, like the burd you check the figures, scratch your head and wonder what the hell is going on in Gordon Lamb House. The General Register of Scotland (GRS) puts the annuals statistics at less than a quarter of what Joan McAlpine claims.
At which point I started to do my best Ben Goldacre impression and asked the SNP media team on Twitter what they based it on, in case it was a Bit More Complicated Than That.
It wasn’t.
Point man Paul Togneri asserted the piece was accurate and was based on aggregating monthly GRS figures. Which is methodologically dodgy at best, especially given directly conflicting annual figures from the same organisation for the same period.
So it wasn’t consistent within it’s own frame of reference. Maybe the overall impression of increasing migration from England, Wales and Northern Ireland was correct, despite net UK migration being 26,000 rather than the 820,000 that the SNP press release implies? Sadly not. Based on the SNPs preferred measure of medical records transferred each month, in the year ending March 2007 shortly before  the SNP took over 52,153 people from RUK moved here. In the same period of 2011 43,730 people did so.
So the SNP have done so well that 20% fewer people decided to move here since they took charge. Great work that. Well. Done. *slow handclap*
Worse, both net and gross migration to Scotland were higher not only under the previous Labour/Lib Dem coalition in Holyrood but were also higher between 1986 and 1994. So not really that much to boast about at all.
Still, and this is why I’m writing this up, it does give us some insight as to the SNP strategy for 2012. It’s going to be about construction of a narrative that supports independence with Scotland gradually but inevitably and inexorably moving towards independence under the SNP, facts be damned.
That’s my 2012 prediction. So stay frosty folks and trust no-one.
ETA:Â I’d like to point out that Kate did the digging on this and shot their fox, I’m just commenting on it
#1 by Steve on December 30, 2011 - 9:50 pm
It’s not uncommon for Government’s to talk up their own countries, and tell a few porkies in the process. “An end to boom and bust” anyone?
So you’re right, the SNP will no doubt continue to talk up Scotland, and will no doubt bend the truth past breaking point to do so. And when they do that, people should call them up on it as the burd quite rightly did.
Problem is, all the other main parties seem to want to talk Scotland down. They relish the bad news stories. Take the recent news on unemployment figures for example, the Labour party seemed to enjoy that bad news (that basically points to thousands of people having a terrible time) with a little too much glee.
If the alternative to the SNP’s positive spin is negative spin from everyone else, then my prediction for the year is that we’ll be a lot closer to independence at the end of 2012 than we are now.
#2 by Aidan on December 30, 2011 - 9:54 pm
You say “a little too much glee”, I say “gives the lie to SNP claims to unique competence”, particularly given any prior difference is largely due to delaying implementation of UK cuts by a year.
As for this story, it’s not so much positive spin as an outright lie that doesn’t stand up on it’s own terms, let alone anything approaching an objective representation of the facts.
If that’s what Scottish politics in 2012 is going to be about I despair.
#3 by Steve on December 30, 2011 - 9:59 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s vital that the SNP be challenged where they are chancing it. Fuel poverty is another area where they are failing the country in my opinion.
So it’s not so much about whether the other parties challenge them, it’s how. I suggest that needs to be by way of putting forward positive alternatives.
#4 by Aidan on December 30, 2011 - 10:06 pm
So in what way would you criticise this blatant lie in a positive manner?
#5 by Steve on December 30, 2011 - 10:32 pm
OK, it’s humble pie time. You’re right, they really have messed up with this one!
I just looked at the figures, and what the SNP have done is added up all the year end figures which are reported on a quarterly basis.
That’s like someone who earns £20K a year saying that over the last two years they earned 160K because in the year end to March 2010, they earned 20K, year end to June 2010 they earned £20K, YE to Sep 2010 it was £20K, etc etc.
That is just stupid. So stupid in fact, it’s hard to believe it was a deliberate lie!
So my spin would be, I can add up, vote for me.
#6 by scottish_skier on December 31, 2011 - 11:43 am
Looks to me like someone made a math booboo, HQ failed to check it, then realised it did not add up so removed it. Bit of screw up but as a storm in a teacup I can’t see it causing a mass collapse in support for the SNP.
Far more importantly….I note that SNP membership is storming ahead, topping 20,000 now. Only they and the Greens (as mainstream parties) are seeing membership on the way up. In contrast, for Lab, Libs and the Tories membership continues to decline steadily. From what I have read, Labour have not revealed a full breakdown for the recent leadership election ballots as this would show their membership to be the lowest it has been for over half a century.
I think its great to see so many people taking an active interest in politics again; the SNP must be congratulated for that.
#7 by Aidan on January 1, 2012 - 5:52 pm
Well it won’t cause a mass collapse because these things tend to run, retracted, corrected or otherwise – it feels truthy and people will continue to believe it.
#8 by Dr William Reynolds on December 31, 2011 - 7:24 pm
I very much respect Joan McAlpine but I will concede that I am puzzled by these figures.I suggest that Joan is invited to comment on them so that we can understand the basis for the claims being made.In that way we can decide whether or not the claims are based on wrong calculations,or a blatant lie.
While it is possible ( even likely) that the SNP are putting their own spin on this,Aiden is clearly just as capable of putting his own spin on events.The allegation that the SNP will ignore facts in the period before the referendum is unexamined rhetoric. There is a need to provide the basis for his conclusion that because an SNP politician may have got something wrong,that this is evidence that the SNP will suppress the facts about the independence debate.I would hope that the editors of this site who have strong political views,do not allow those views to get in the way of the quality of analysis and synthesis.
#9 by Aidan on January 1, 2012 - 5:53 pm
I did ask her on twitter before posting this. Answer came there none.
#10 by Doug Daniel on January 5, 2012 - 8:37 am
What a disgrace. How dare she not reply to every single tweet, even in the Christmas/New Year period? Does she not realise tweets are more important even than letters, emails or parliamentary questions?
#11 by mav on January 1, 2012 - 9:00 pm
Mr Reynolds,
You mean, if you hold political views (that disagree with your own) please desist from writing articles that suggest MSP’s who represent the party you support are either dissemblers or incompetent or stupid. 21st Democracy (Syrian style)
#12 by Una on January 1, 2012 - 10:03 am
This looks like a dumb mistake made by a skeleton team in silly season rather than any kind of conspiracy to deceive. The Scotsman should have taken the time to check it, at least.
#13 by Aidan on January 1, 2012 - 5:55 pm
oh aye, definitely the Scotsmans fault and not the journalist MSP who should know better….
If it was a case of “this isn’t really quite the case, you’ve fudged the numbers but the story basically stands up” that’d be one thing, but it’s a total confection at odds with the actual reality.
#14 by douglas clark on January 1, 2012 - 6:42 pm
Storm, a, in, teacup. Perm into a well known phrase or saying Aidan. You really have to be desperate to make a mountain out of this particular molehill.
_____________________________________
The SNP collapsed and shut down because of an arithmetic error. Alex Salmond accepted that that no political party could survive the incisive criticism of a couple of bloggers.
“We are giving up on independence, and will accept every figure Westminter has to offer”, said a contrite and defeated Alex Salmond.
Aye, right!
#15 by Aidan on January 1, 2012 - 9:21 pm
Better Nation today shut down as it realised criticising a political party for making things up was utterly pointless
#16 by Dubbieside on January 1, 2012 - 9:51 pm
Hallelujah
#17 by Erchie on January 1, 2012 - 9:52 pm
Aidan
You might have time enough to spare
But this was Hogmanay an Ne’erday
Do you not think Ms McAlpine might, just might, have FAMILY things to attend to rather than be at your beck and call?
#18 by Aidan on January 1, 2012 - 10:14 pm
Actually it was the 30th, they’d put the press release out and had the time to initially defend it and then remove it.
But otherwise totally correct, how dare I be so arrogant?
#19 by Erchie on January 1, 2012 - 10:37 pm
30th was Friday, Hogmanay Saturday, Today is Sunday
My point stands
Could you not make allowances that this is a time people spend with families, preparing, enjoying, clearing up
Flipping heck!
#20 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 10:52 am
Look, if people want to issue press releases at this time of year that’s fine, but they can expect to be picked up on them.
#21 by Barbarian on January 1, 2012 - 11:56 pm
Happy New Year everyone!
My predictions?
The SNP will make gains in the council elections.
Health should remain strong, and especially when you see the impending destruction of the NHS in England.
That’s the good news, now for the bad:
If the SG implement the proposals set out in Transport Scotland’s consultation, they are going to suffer badly. Just remember at present, the rail companies can bring in a bigger rise in the fares than the rest of the UK. If it happens, they will suffer.
Europe is going to haunt the SNP as their referendum campaign takes shape.
Fuel and energy prices are also going to cause problems, and green energy policies to date have not caused a single reduction in bills.
The biggest problem however will be unemployment and the slowdown of the economy. The retail sector is already suffering and it is likely there will be a surge of closures that cannot be offset by Amazon. Many of the factors are external, but that doesn’t matter if you are in government.
The council elections will provide a boost for the SNP, but after that I think they are going to find things a lot harder. And if they focus too much on the referendum, it will make things worse.
#22 by Dr William Reynolds on January 2, 2012 - 8:00 am
No Mav I did not say that if you hold political views that differ from my own,that they should not be expressed.If you go back and read what I said you may notice that I was also sceptical about the figures.What I was challenging was an unexamined assumption being presented as evidence of how the furure would look
Contrary to Mav’s suggestion,I welcome the facr rhat a range of political views are represenred on this site.That is what enriches the site and makes it a valuable resource for readers.Of course,sometimes (as on all blogs) people will misunderstand, confuse opinion with fact,and even be disrespectful to those who hold opposing views.No problem providing they are not too abusive.However,those who are on the editorial team and/or write articles,need to have higher standards than the rest of us.That requires that they always provide the basis for their arrumptions,and try to control biases that are politically motivated.Aiden was absolutely correct to challenge the figures.However,he then leaps to a conclusion that the SNP do not care about facts.This is an assumption that merits more detailed examination.
To summarise,I am saying,lets examine the evidence,before making conclusions.Additionally,do not use one incident to make a prediction about the future.For example,I do not take it as a given that Ms Baillie (the labour health spokesperson) is deliberately lying about hospital infection rates.It is reported in Newsnet Scotland today that she used 2005 stats on hospital infection rates to suggest that infection rates in Scottish hospitals are higher than the SNP government claim.Even if Ms Baillie is deliberately misleading,I cannot leap to a conclusion that labour politicians do not care about facts.Anyone suggesting this needs to defend the assumption so that the readers can examine the analysis and the synthesis of the evidence examined to reach the conclusion.That was what I was saying MAV.
#23 by Indy on January 2, 2012 - 9:32 am
The SNP press office clearly made a boo boo allowing that to go out without checking the figures. The Labour press office also seem to have made a boo boo putting out a press release attacking the SNP on hospital acquired infections using figures from before 2007 i.e when Labour were in power. Oops. Quite possibly the Tories or Lib Dems might also have put a howler out but who can be bothered checking eh?
And the moral of the story is …. Maybe don’t do stuff like that over the festive period. Maybe, just maybe, give the politics a rest until the holiday is over!
#24 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 10:55 am
Do you have a link to the press release? The only thing I’ve found on this is is the newsnet scotland article which is unreferenced.
#25 by Indy on January 2, 2012 - 11:30 am
Come on, I don’t get Labour press releases emailed to me.
I read the story in the Herald on page 6. It was written by Robbie Dinwoodie (who I think can be taken as a reliable source) and who said that Labour had used statistics from its own time in office to describe Scotland as “the superbug capital of Europe”.
I could, of course, use this to accuse Jackie Baillie of deliberately lying or being incompetent but what’s the point? Someone didn’t do their research properly. Big deal. These things happen because people are not perfect and presumably during the holiday period they are running on reduced staffing so there aren’t other people there to say hang on I think you might have the wrong end of the stick here.
#26 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 11:57 am
It’s just odd because the story isn’t on the Herald website, the Scotsman or the BBC and there’s no PR on the Labour website about it so all I’ve seen is reaction to it.
#27 by Indy on January 2, 2012 - 12:06 pm
You may need to actually buy a paper then – the old fashioned way!
#28 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 12:13 pm
That’s just crazy talk
#29 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 3:35 pm
Scotsman’s got it now http://www.scotsman.com/news/health/labour_slams_scots_hospital_bug_levels_1_2033494 with predictable comments.
There’s a more complicated issue about MRSA and MSSA rates told by the data at the monitoring site http://www.documents.hps.scot.nhs.uk/hai/sshaip/publications/mrsa-quarterly-reports/sab-appendix1-q2-2011.pdf but I haven’t found an equivalent for HAI rates generally, just MRSA/MSSA and CDiff.
#30 by Indy on January 2, 2012 - 3:50 pm
According to Nicola Sturgeon on twitter the story was based on this parliamentary briefing – specifically the figures in appendix 4: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/SB_11-80.pdf
That’s clearly sloppy but as I said I don’t myself see any point in people getting too irate about it – as with the SNP migration story I suspect it’s a bit of a reflection of the time of year more than anything else. Though having said that even if they thought the figures really were from 2007 surely they must know that things have changed since then. It would be a bit weird if nothing had changed regarding HAIs given the amount of money and attention that has been thrown at the problem.
Here’s a thought. Maybe in both cases people approached the figures thinking what political point can be scored here rather than actually reading them on the basis of what they mean.
#31 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 3:54 pm
Kate’s gone into this in depth over at her eyrie http://burdzeyeview.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/labours-gets-its-hra-stats-in-a-twist/
I think it’s definitely a case of opportunistic point scoring, and it’s really depressing me that this is how 2012 is going to go.
#32 by Peter on January 2, 2012 - 10:13 am
I think your claims about these figures are misguided, I looked at the GRS table that you provided the link for and that table clearly shows that incoming numbers are around the 400/500k mark. Is this table incorrect ? If not, then I don’t understand your gripe ? Is it that the SNP didn’t quote ‘net’ figures ?
#33 by Aidan on January 2, 2012 - 10:56 am
No, the table is correct but shows incoming numbers around the 40,000 / 50,000 mark. You’re reading the scale wrong.
#34 by Indy on January 2, 2012 - 4:00 pm
You don’t know that it will. Whether Labour or SNP, people have to know that most voters find this kind of stuff too boring to be endured. I really can’t see any choice but for people to up their game a bit in 2012 and I am sure they will.
#35 by Ian Smart on January 2, 2012 - 6:59 pm
I just want to claim the credit for first noticing the SNP Figures couldn’t possibly be right, although the credit for getting to the bottom of where they actually went wrong clearly lies with Aidan and Kate. My first thought was that, perhaps, an extra zero had crept in to the figures.
At the time however I never thought this was any of this involved a conspiracy of any sort. It was just cock up. Joan McAlpine’s only error seems to have been, when asked for a quote, not to pause for a moment to think that if 820,000 people were living here who weren’t here four years ago then surely she (along with the rest of us) would have noticed. Indeed even those in favour of a very liberal immigration policy might hesitate to welcome an influx on that scale over such a short period!
Even that error however is surely excusable between Christmas and New Year.
Everybody should just chill out. There are a lot more things to get animated about.
#36 by M G on January 2, 2012 - 7:47 pm
Aidan,the BBC did run with this story, I heard it this morning (07.55) after finishing my nightshift. “If its a case of opportunistic point scoring this is really depressing me that this is how 2012 is going to go “You said it !!
Actually Aidan, there is something we can all do to avoid this, its called evolve.
We know this kind of politics has been bread and butter to the political scene in Scotland (for too long ),release press release,public listens,lets try to evolve and progress the debate on a bit…
.Politics in Scotland is changing and
I for one literally tune out with this kind of blanket politicking (especially when I know the subject better than the good lady )so yes on all sides the method of debate has to improve .We are no longer in the 70s ,people are very savvy and to continue to try to keep the format whether that be political parties or the BBC may turn out to be like the dinosaurs -extinct .