With the Liberal Democrats due to hold a closed doors meeting next week to discuss the party's policy on an independence referendum, it seems the SNP are intent on turning the screw on Tavish Scott & co to make sure the chances of a u-turn are maximised.
A press release came out today proclaiming 'LIBDEM MEMBERS 4 TO 1 IN FAVOUR OF A REFERENDUM', a very clever and timely angle to take from a YouGov poll from early September which considered Scottish attitudes to a vote on independence.
The results of the poll were as follows:
I support a referendum on Scottish independence: 63%
I oppose a referendum on Scottish independence: 26%
Don’t know/ no opinion: 11%
For Lib Dem voters it was:
65% for a referendum
28% against
A strong majority in favour of that elusive referendum but according to one Lib Dem insider quoted in the Daily Mail: "It's four-to-one in the membership in favour of a referendum".
So Tavish Scott (a staunch opponent of the SNP's main policy) has a very difficult decision on his hands next weekend. To deny 80% of party members (including Paddy Ashdown, George Lyon and no doubt many more senior figures) the referendum they prefer, he would be setting a damaging and potentially fatal undemocratic precedent for his party as it looks ahead to two elections.
Sadly next weekend's meeting will be held behind closed doors so we won't know what went on unless a Lib Dem blogger or Tweeter breaks ranks to lift the lid. (*hint hint Stephen*)
One thing is sure though, if the SNP doesn't get its coveted referendum, it will be a solid gold policy to take to the people in 2011 and some of the many Lib Dem seats where the SNP are poised in second place like Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine, Edinburgh West, Aberdeen South and Ross, Skye & Inverness West could fall into Nationalist hands as a result.
Salmond vs Trump
1 minute ago
19 comments:
Jeff I thought you were an accountant, or is this why RBS got into such a state.
65% + (generous) 7% (don't knows)= 72% max. Which is more like 2.5 to one. And not 80%. An even split of the don't knows comes to little over 2 to 1.
My own straw poll of members is hard to gauge as there are number of don't knows/ won't tells.
Surely you of all people would trust a Lib Dem insider more than a YouGov poll with a dodgy sample size... ;)
The Lib Dem insider of course saying that he calls it 4 to 1, odds that you are contributing to of course Stephen.
Next weekend'll be interesting. Hope you enjoy the debate!
If the Liberals have such a majority to support an independence referendum I wonder just how much support is in the other so called unionist parties.
From previous conversations even the ultra unionist conservatives have supporters of independence
I've not found it to be four in one, and I've been talking to people from a range of local parties.
I would put it marginally in favour, but there are too many who are refusing to divulge. Which when you consider it is me they are not telling is probably not a good sign.
Stephen, you're a blogger, and it's not the party position. In fact, it's very loudly not the party position. Is there not therefore more incentive not to divulge if you are pro-referendum?
Umm... Not a math major at uni, I take it. Can't possibly be more than 74% if you include the don't knows. ;-)
That is a very large marjority and will hurt them badly if they vote no on a referendum, I suspect.
whilst i support immigration, i think it should always have been on a points based system. and that included people from within the EU as well as outside of it, as scotland and the rest of the UK cannot afford to have milions of unemployed and unskilled people.
it seems from their advisot today that labour policy was from 2001 to let in ANYONE, perhaps on the premise they were a guaranteed vote in future.
whilst griffin talks drivel, this aspect will resonate when any jobs created are being snapped up by new migrants, and often at lower prices. of the last 1.7 million jobs vreated in the UK, 1.4 million were snapped up by migrants, producing alocal working class that is not working as it cannot compete on price. they will work for less.
think about it, if the polish plumber charges 300 quid for a job and the local lad who also hires apprentices and trains them up charges 600 to do a job which bloke do you hire to fix the leaks? and that cuts across every industry.
i would therefore like to know the snp position on immigration as it stands now with so many scots unemployed.
is it an open borders policy, limited by what happens in london, or would they halt immigration to try t give jobs to thos epeople already here, local and immigrant, bringing in further people who add genuine value, business migrants and the like, plus of course some refugees?
i mention this as i feel it would affect some votes coming from labour to the snp.
and this matter would certainly influence my thoughts on independence.
Jeff, score off WAK from the list, you ran a paper candidate last time there, and he got that vote that pushed you into 2nd place on the back of the SNP being in a position to oust Labour from power. You will not take that Holyrood seat on an independence referendum ticket.
And I think that is going to be your problem in a few other seats where you are in 2nd place as well. I think that the SNP will fall back in some area's if that is the issue being pushed at the voters.
As for the Libdems agreeing to support the SNP on a referendum Bill, get the indigestion tablets out for Salmond, he will need them if that happens. He no more wants a referendum right now than I would.
The Libdems need to get their act together fast, but latching onto this policy would be disastrous for them personally up here.
Can you see the Scottish electorate happily watching that bit of puff naval gazing politics being played out during this recession? The cost would become a real issue as well.
Blogger Scottish Unionist said...
"80% of Lib Dems need brain transplants."
From the retired blogger who cannot stop.
Such stunning wit and repartee has never been seen before. No wonder you are trying to retire as you feel the ground falling in beneath your red white and blue wellies.
Actually there's an even better argument for saying the SNP won't do well in West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine in 2011 - it won't exist! :)
In the proposed new boundaries WAK gets split between Angus North and the Mearns (Stonehaven and Laurencekirk), Aberdeen South and North Kincardineshire (Portlethen) and West Aberdeenshire (Deeside communities).
Don't know a massive amount about the South Aberdeen-shire political scene but certainly given the strength of the SNP in Forfar, Brechin and Montrose - Angus North and the Mearns seems a fairly winnable seat from a SNP point of view.
How the other two turnout might well be effected by the Lib Dems' view on allowing the referendum to take place or not.
So Tavish Scott (a staunch opponent of the SNP's main policy) has a very difficult decision on his hands next weekend.
If the decision goes against him Tavish has no choice but to resign.
For all the unionist parties simply putting the question to the electorate is nearly as dangerous as a yes answer because it informs the electorate that there is a choice.
What's exciting the Lib-Dems is whether refusing a referendum point-blank is more dangerous to the UK establishment and the union than agreeing in principle to hold one sometime in the future with maybe two questions, maybe three and definitely not on St. Andrew's Day and not if the SNP get to write the questions and maybe Calman, what about Calman? and probably better not to hold it when the Conservatives are in power in Westminster and probably better not to involve the Scottish electorate at all if possible but to be favour of the principle of holding a referendum, yes.
''As for the Libdems agreeing to support the SNP on a referendum Bill, get the indigestion tablets out for Salmond, he will need them if that happens. He no more wants a referendum right now than I would.
Can you see the Scottish electorate happily watching that bit of puff naval gazing politics being played out during this recession?''
this is the time for the discussion to be had - being brought to our knees by bankrupt Britain - now is the time to build a good strong economy such as the Scandanavian's have done to withstand the recession. Also getting mildly amused at the suttle personal abuse about the FM eating habits/weight in the posting. Look in the mirror and see if you see Twiggy.
"Also getting mildly amused at the suttle personal abuse about the FM eating habits/weight in the posting. Look in the mirror and see if you see Twiggy."
Anon, excuse me, but the reference to indigestion tablets was not anything to do with the FM's weight! And if you can point me to a post where I make that kind of personal attack on him anywhere in the blogsphere, I would be very interested.
And as for your last sentence, I find that not just nasty, but positively creepy. But I did wonder who the Anon on here was who responded to my posts, now I have a fair idea!
It's one of those questions which constantly receives a positive answer - it's like asking someone "Do you want more say in how the country is run?" Of course they'll say yes!
I see Tavish has stated categorically that he will 'not be the handmaiden of independence'. Setting aside the troubling image of Viking Scott as any kind of maiden, it seems an odd time to make such a comment given the party are discussing the policy next weekend. It does rather look like Tavish has made up his mind on behalf of his Lib Dem party so if I was amongst that 80% I'd be pretty disappointed.
"80% of Lib Dems need brain transplants."
Presumably the other 20% need brain implants…
Sorry, couldn't resist. From a democratic viewpoint, I'd welcome the Lib-Dems chucking Scott and getting someone with at least half a brain for a change.
Politically of course, I'd like them to keep doing what they're doing, floundering around in the shallows making a mess of things. Ties in well with the intended 2011 election dialog (They don't want you to have a say, so you REALLY have to vote for us)…
"now is the time to build a good strong economy such as the Scandanavian's have done"
Do you mean Norway and Sweden? Or the Nordics including Denmark and Finland.
That's a bit sweeping... Sweden was in danger of being brought down by it's lending to Latvia a couple of weeks ago I thought. But then I only read the Economist every so often.
Finland is very worried about it's economy long term (reliance on few manufacturers and logging).
I know Norway is in a strong position but Denmark's central bank is warning about it's labour competiveness and stimulus spending (which sounds familiar).
(None of this has anything to do with the lib dem support for a referendum though unless there is a question on whether we can join Norway.)
Fitalass wrote "But I did wonder who the Anon on here was who responded to my posts"
erm, you did realise that on a comments board there can be more than one anonymous person responding to your posts I suppose?
Salmond has always wanted a referendum on independence, the idea that he fears one is entirely a unionist fantasy as is the pathetic claim that constitutional issues are an irrelevance.
The only people needing Gaviscon extra strength at the thought of an independence referendum taking place are the London loyal status quo merchants or as we prefer to call them the opposition parties.
Fitlass I don't think Salmond fears a vote at all. An independence vote has a very good chance of winning even if the majority of Scots were nomally opposed if asked in an opinion poll.
As described by Anon the "Status Quoists" really are much less likely to go out and vote. Even in a worse case scenario, anything above 40% support is going to be a success in demontrating momentum and would position the SNP well for another future vote.
People aren't exactly motivated to vote for the Status Quo (or buy their albums).
Post a Comment