Gerry struggles on the credibility count

Someone once said (was it Anthony McIntyre?) that the typical Sinn Fein voter would "happily assemble at Dunville Park for the three o'clock spacecraft to take them to a united Ireland" simply because Gerry Adams had told them it would be soon arriving...

He'll probably pull through in Louth but still, it's good to see that even Sinn Fein voters in the Republic are not quite so sheep-like  in their allegiance as their Northern counterparts:

Only 35pc of Sinn Fein supporters believe he was not a member of the IRA

... which is actually not far off the rest of the population's percentage (27%) who think Grizzly doesn't speak with forked tongue.

More importantly:

By contrast (to Fine Gael), Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein are consistently rated as least trustworthy in their ability to deal with all issues.

Even with the four-optioned, Salmond struggles

75% of Scottish adults believe Scotland should not separate from the rest of the United Kingdom, according to a poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion:

Polling Data

In its White Paper on Independence, the Scottish Government outlines four different scenarios for Scotland’s future. Which of these scenarios would you prefer?

The status-quo: Scotland as part of the UK, with a Scottish Parliament that has the power to pass laws and limited tax-varying capability: 36%

Scotland having some additional powers, including the introduction of a new Scottish rate of income tax: 22%

Scotland having many additional powers, such as full financial autonomy from the UK: 17%

Scotland’s full independence from the United Kingdom: 25%

Sample-tested for Scotland specifically (I'm not sure what was the point in asking the question outside Scotland) is small, but still, an interesting spread of figures. Salmond's preference for a four-option referendum is probably on the premise that independence choice would secure the propaganda value of the highest percentage of the four, but even that hasn't happened here.

"Barely Unionist"?

ConservativeHome this morning (thanks once again to FD) has published a survey of the political views of the next generation of Tory MPs. 144 of their candidates in the 220 most winnable seats completed a confidential survey and the one result that is most interesting for me is the revelation that only 54% believe that the Union must be “maintained at all costs” with the remaining 46% admitting to (double negative alert) "not being uncomfortable" at the thought of Scotland going it alone.



I’m not sure this is all as dramatic as it looks on first showing.
Firstly, I also don’t think the Union should be maintained at "all costs"- in the unlikely event that a majority voted against the continuance of the UK then, believing in the standard principles of democracy, I couldn’t in all conscience support any resulting extra-parliamentary action or, (God forbid) terrorist campaign to maintain the Union. The fact that over 50% of prospective Conservative MPs apparently would is actually slightly disturbing

So, if I were a prospective Conservative candidate in one of the 220 most winnable seats, I would then be left with that second, "couldn’t give a toss if Scotland goes" option- which, surprise, surprise I also wouldn’t be 100% comfortable with. So along with the 76 other candidates who didn’t take part in the survey, I wouldn’t have been prepared to deliver an answer on this one.
That doesn't make me "barely Unionist" though does it?

58% of Scots want separation (referendum).

Talk about misleading headlines, a quick glance at this could have given you completely the wrong impression:

An opinion poll commissioned by BBC Scotland has shown a clear majority (58%) of Scots want a referendum on independence next year.

Good

The poll also suggests support for the Union outstrips that for independence from the UK.

Even better.

However, the poll found the percentage of people saying they support "independence" varies widely, depending on how the question is phrased; the options"

1. Salmond’s preferred: "...the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state"

42% agreed with the statement, with 50% opposed

2. "In a referendum on independence for Scotland, how would you vote?",

38% believed Scotland should become an "independent" country, with 54% saying they did not believe it should become "independent".

3. "...which of a range of scenarios were closest to people's views of how Scotland should be governed."

28% backed the option of Scotland's separating from the rest of the UK.
47% were in favour of remaining in the UK, with the Scottish Parliament able to make "some decisions about the level of taxation and government spending in Scotland."
22% said Scotland should remain part of the UK, with "decisions about the level of taxation and spending in Scotland made by the UK Government".

Majority in favour of a referendum, majority in all three possible scenarios against separation. As Alan Cochrane says, it's high time the Scottish Unionist parties call Alex's bluff:

Let's give Alex Salmond and his separatists the fight they pretend to want!

As a result of devolution...

A Populus Poll, which was published in The Times to coincide with the tenth anniversary of Scottish devolution, hit the headlines largely because of the "Only 21% in favour of Scottish Independence" findings.

The responses to several other questions from a Unionist point of view are also worth studying:

1."Comparing the situation now with the period before Scottish devolution, would you say that as a result of devolution… You now support or oppose the idea of there also being an English Parliament, or if you don’t have a view either way please say."

Asked of people in England and Wales:

41% of those questioned in England and Wales support an English parliament as a "result of devolution" with 15% opposed and 44% unsure.

2."Do you now support or oppose the idea of only English MPs being allowed to participate in House of Commons votes on matters only affecting English constituencies, or if you don’t have a view either way please say"

52% of those asked in England and Wales, as a result of devolution, supported banning non-English constituency MPs from votes on English legislation in the House of Commons. 15% were opposed and 32% were unsure.

3. Almost double the number felt that relations had worsened between Scotland and England than got better because of the devolution experiment (although it would perhaps be fair to point out here that 73% also felt there had been no change!).

So, a poll employing a reasonable sample (just below a thousand) delivering just slightly over a 20% percentage wanting Scottish independence (the figure in England and Wales wishing Scotland to separate from the rest of the United Kingdom was even lower, 15%).

But the fact that, as "a result of devolution", the poll shows a total net majority in England and Wales now favour "English votes for English measures" and that a majority of those asked with an opinion wanting an English parliament should ring Unionist alarm bells; if and when an English parliament ever comes into being, then we are beginning the slow but inevitable countdown to the end of the United Kingdom. However, unfortunately, the argument against allowing the English electorate the same choice (via a referendum) as that already offered to N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales doesn’t stack up either logically or morally.


Hattip CEP.

All a question of presentation...

A slightly different (although less newsworthy) interpretation:

. Over two-thirds of English people say Scotland gets its fair share of cash.
. Over 80% of English people wish to keep Scotland in the UK.
. 57% of English people believe England should continue to be governed by Westminster.

I've got to say that along with Scottish Unionist, I think the findings contained here are overall positive from a Unionist point of view; the fact that the SNP have studiously ignored them is probably proof enough of that....a United Kingdom whose citizens continue to get along just fine with each other just doesn't fit cosily into their narrative.

No to Barnett!

So voted readers to this blog, by a percentage of almost 3 to 1. Two things surprised me about this poll; first the comparitively low turnout (less than 30% of my daily average readership voted), secondly the fact that no one took up the challenge of actually defending Barnett (as opposed to attacking the argument against it). My own opinion is that whilst Unionists in N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales are embarrassed with having to justify the present system within the context of a continuing Union, nationalists can't lose whatever happens; if it continues then the present beneficial funding continues to be funnelled into their respective parliaments/assemblies/talking shops, if it is cancelled then they can point to Perfidious Albion once again robbing the Celts of what is rightfully theirs. The onus is very much on Unionists therefore to more proactive on this topic, being mentioned once indirectly in an inter-Unionist tirade is not good enough- alternatives are needed.

You might have been told that...

Opinion once again being presented as fact?

Loyalty itself has different meanings in different parts of Britain. Asians in Scotland, particularly those born in Scotland, describe themselves as Scots and tend to be more loyal to Scotland than Britain. The bulk of the Muslims in Scotland now support the SNP and back the demand for an independent Scotland. Asians in Wales also describe themselves as Welsh Asians and appear comfortable with their Welsh identity. In contrast, Asians in England tend to describe themselves as British Asians; and see Englishness as an exclusive identity that is closed to them. Their local loyalty belongs to Britain as a whole and many regard the demands of their Scottish Asian brothers and sisters across the border for an independent Scotland as treason.Ziauddin Sardar

Yes, I know one or two, shall we say high-profile, Muslim members of the SNP have been in the news recently, but leaving that aside, does any statistical evidence exist for those two sentences I've marked in bold?

And moving onto "dodgy stats being presented in dodgy way to confirm dodgy prejudices of readership", how about this:

According to a recent survey of 2,000 British youth carried out by the British Council:

Three- quarters said immigrants do not pose a threat to British workers' jobs and 88% said they thought the *influx* of people from abroad was no risk whatsoever to security and public order.

Possibly the Daily Mail may have put a different interpretation on those two headline “facts”, but it was these next couple of nuggets of *information* which most intrigued me:

In spite of greater European integration since the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992, just 7% of Britons surveyed said they felt like a European citizen, while 40% considered themselves to be British.

So, does that mean that 40% feel themselves British, 7% European and the remaining 53% English, Irish, Scottish, Ulsterish, Welsh, Cornish, African, Asian, West Indian…Martian or what exactly?
We don’t know, because true to form (and I’ve had the dubious pleasure several times of working with them, so I know how shambolic, despite all the cash thrown at them, the British Council’s organisation and administration can really be), the British Council has, to date, omitted to publish the full survey; it has instead decided to leak the more alarmist interpretations of the poll to those bastions of fairness, the Daily Mail and Express (and given Migration-Watch a much needed boost, now that all those Poles are inconveniently deciding to head home).

It’s on these kind of cack-handed surveys that half-truths and downright lies are pedaled by racists and xenophobes and this being the case, the British Council has the responsibility to all the UK’s citizens to make sure, at the very least, the full information can be accessed by those wanting to consider in a little bit further how attitudes may be changing in our society.

Not a very close call

When faced with these kind of “commissioned” surveys delivering favourable results for the organisation which commissioned it, I tend to take the findings with a pinch of salt- especially when there appears to be no link to the actual survey itself, still:

90% of Welsh electorate wanting Wales to remain part of the United Kingdom sounds healthy enough figure to be going on with and is one that doesn’t really leave itself open to misinterpretation or statistical error.

Trust us, you are happy!

THE traditional image of Scots as dour, doom-laden pessimists was shaken yesterday by a new Europe-wide survey showing them to be among the happiest people in the Continent.

The research, carried out across 24 countries, found Scots are failing to live up to their caricature. They are now the happiest in Britain and the third most contented in Europe, beaten only by the Swiss and the Danes.

Having experienced their hospitality in Copenhagen when Northern Ireland played there a couple of years ago, I’ll agree wholeheartedly, the Danes are shiny, happy people, who, more importantly, also like their beer and a good old sing-song....but the Swiss...seriously???!!!

Back to the survey:

The Scottish part of the survey was conducted between May and November last year, after the SNP came to power. It became a party-political issue yesterday, with Nationalists claiming their short time in government had been, at least partly, responsible.

Hmmm…and who conducted the survey?

As well as scotching some unwelcome national stereotypes, the Scottish Social Attitudes survey, carried out by the government-backed Scottish Centre for Social Research, also countered academic research findings which suggest that Scotland was, on average, a less happy place than the rest of the UK.

Double hmmmm....!

If you can't beat them?

Speaking as unionists, we feel the greatest threat to the union is not the SNP, but the collective incompetence of the unionist parties. For that reason, we have set up this forum to discuss and debate politics, policies and good governance.

I think the Scottish Labour Party and Ms Goldie became Unionist Friends of the SNP sometime ago.....

An acceptable quid pro quo?

When I’ve blogged previously about opinion polls on Scotland’s constitutional future, it’s been pointed out to me the importance of the phrasing of the question posed to the sample. My own opinion remains that the external events occurring at the time of the questionnaire are more important than the actual wording of the question, but anyway YouGov, for the Daily Telegraph have used the SNP’s preferred wording for their latest questionnaire:

The latest rejection of separatism was based on the Scottish National Party's preferred question in a referendum.
It wants to ask voters in 2010 if 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

The results:

The "No" vote has a clear 12 point lead over the "Yes" vote, with 48 per against independence, 36 per cent in favour and 14 per cent unsure

And the remaining 2% were too busy watching Eastenders or whatever to even answer the phone presumably. But back to the results, a majority believe in continuing the Union; I’d say that’s true, but I’d also say that the size of the majority is a very fluid one dependent on current events and you really can not read too much into or rely on that figure transferring to the actual “do or die” referendum. And there is always a fair degree of putting your own interpretation on the results; instead of “only a third believe in separation”, how about “less than 50 %” wish the Union to continue”?

The more intriguing aspect of this survey is the fact that with the drop in favour of separation, there has been a simultaneous and apparently contradictory rise in the popularity of the party which actually has Scottish independence as its raison d’etre. There are different interpretations which can forward for that (an idiot of a PM and the meltdown of Scottish labour are two good ones to start with), but if it does turn out to be a long-term trend, it poses challenging questions for Unionism. And not all of those questions need have negative solutions; for the immediate future of the Union, it’s imperative that we get rid of Brown and that the Labour Party in Scotland is completely shaken up and revamped (having the Scottish Tories remembering they are also a Unionist party would also be a nice bonus, but that’s probably too much to hope for at the present moment). If those two tasks can be achieved without too much of a dent in the majority for the Union, then I think that a temporary rise in the SNP’s popularity may not be too high a price to pay.

Anybody seen the two Jims?

If you’ve been following the MSM today, or better still and more up to date, the various Tory blogs (here,here and here), you’ll have seen that the press-release I first blogged about a couple of weeks ago has truly exploded, slap-bank in Giles Chichester’s face.

This is a story which is not going to disappear...so, just to be on the safe side (of course), isn’t it about time the EU Parliament’s two Unionist representatives, Jim Allister and Jim Nicholson also got their reply back asap to Open Europe?

Update:
Jim Allister has answered the questions here.
Which just leaves Mr Nicholson....

Lords come to their senses a bit too late

FOUR out of five peers believe that the Government’s programme of devolution has damaged the Union, according to a poll released today.

As a famous philosopher once said…"Duh!"

Labour argued that the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and Assemblies in Northern Ireland and Wales would see off separatist forces by giving an outlet to legitimate demands for Britain’s nations to govern their own affairs.

What they may have argued and what their real intentions were...two completely different things; they were established for purely selfish political reasons, Blair and Co believed that these two devolved assemblies would introduce the Thousand Year Labour Reich in all three legislatures (Westminster,Cardiff and Edinburgh) and as a nice side benefit kill off the Tories and also their separatist rivals in Scotland and Wales.

But with a Scottish National Party executive governing at Holyrood and Plaid Cymru in coalition with Labour in Cardiff, a large majority of peers quizzed for the poll said they believed the opposite outcome had resulted.

Again, like, duh!
They didn’t really think this through- you can’t kill off independence by giving more independence- it just whets the separatist appetite.

Among those who felt nationalism had been fuelled by devolution were 75% of Labour peers and 50% of Liberal Democrats – the two parties which pushed through the legislation.

Well, if that's the case, I can only hope their guilty consciences keep them awake at night.

The nats won't like that....

According to a survey carried out by Nat-Cen in England:

Just 16 per cent of English people said England would be better off if the union with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland was ended.

What? Northern Ireland has been also included...but...but...but...
And...

But only 19 per cent said Scotland should become independent, down from 24 per cent in 1999

Oh dear, is that the sound of a multitude Celtic (and English) nationalist balloons being burst I hear?