There is a new Scottish voting intention poll in the Sunday Times by Panelbase. Topline figures are:

Holyrood Constituency: CON 13%, LAB 37%, LDEM 8%, SNP 37%
Holyrood Regional: CON 11%, LAB 32%, LDEM 7%, SNP 37%, Green 5%

The figures are almost the mirror image of the YouGov poll last week – both have Labour and the SNP pretty much neck and neck in constituency support, but Panelbase have the SNP with a decent lead in the regional vote, which would leave them the largest party in the Scottish Parliment.

In terms of who Panelbase are – they are an online company, who seem perfectly kosher, but seem to have a background in consumer polling rather than political work. In terms of whether the poll is politically weighted, turnout weighted, how the questions were asked, etc, we don’t yet know.

164 Responses to “Panelbase poll shows SNP ahead”

1 2 3 4

    “Can anyone tell me what Scottish Labour’s purpose / idea is?”

    You do ask difficult questions! :-)

    The problem with calculating list seats is working out what the quota will be for different parties to gain an MSP on the list, as the quota rises for parties who have constituency MSPs and drops for those who have not.

    John Dick has regularly pointed out that gaining constituency MSPs doesn’t mean increasing the overall number of MSPs in a region.

    The algorithm used has to account for that.

    Thanks for the help – but for some reason the ‘Extended profile’ option does not appear for me’ I’ve tried it in Explorer and Mozilla

    Works for me in IE, Mozilla and Chrome, but if the button is missing, try this:

    1. Make sure you have the equivalent of “Logged in as barbazenzero.” above the comment box.
    2. Follow this link in a new window or tab:
    3. Select party of choice and press “Update user” button
    4. Return to this page and Shift-F5 to get a fresh copy

  3. You know, people used to say “The Lib Dems will never go into a coalition with the tories – they’re a centre left party, most of their activists hate the tories, and theres this constitutional triple-lock they have to get through….”

    Now, what were you were saying about a SNP-Tory coalition?


    On that basis, a Lab/Con coalition maybe isn’t out of the question. In Scotland both parties share the same right-wing populist views and Lab have voted more often with the Tories than against in this Parliament.

  5. Now that the Archive has reemerged out of the mists, we can see, as usual, some intriguing stuff from the Sunday Times details.

    For those who like to keep an eye on the leadership ratings, business has returned to normal for Cameron (-7 from 0) and Clegg (-39 from -35). The difference being that Lib Dems rate Cameron the same as Clegg ( roughly 70-30 in favour) while Tories do not return the compliment (+90 for Cameron, only +12 for Clegg from +23 last week). Most of the movement from last week came from coalition voters and non or other voters. Labour supporters couldn’t dislike them much more than they do already.

    Ed Miliband in contrast bobbed back up a little bit among all groups. He still has a regular 20% of his own voters saying he’s doing badly though. He also has roughly the same percentage of them saying he’s marrying Justine to improve his image – in the population as a whole the cynics are 43% and the romantics a mere 29% (28% say ‘don’t know or presumably ‘none of my business’).

    Other trackers tend to reflect the return to post-budget normality and as reported there’s a 3% lead for ‘Yes’ in the AV polling (likelihood seems to make little difference).

    There’s a lot of questions on Libya. Interestingly support for the action has increased slightly, even as less people feel it is going well (from +22 to +12) and think Cameron has handled it well (+15 to +10). Labour voters have moved against most on these questions, but there is still surprising agreement on what should or shouldn’t be done across the political spectrum, so some of this may be partisan.

    Political unity is less marked when it comes to peaceful civil disobedience. Labour and Lib Dems find it near identically acceptable (85% v 12%), but Conservatives only back it 57% v 40%. Still they are more likely to shop at Fortnum and Masons. Of course the Met appear to disagree with all three Party groupings as the vast majority of those they arrested at the anti-cuts march were the sitters-in of UKuncut rather than the balaclavaed window breakers of Black Block. Still if the recent stories of undercover cops are anything to go by, infiltration of the latter has presumably reached Chestertonian proportions, so they couldn’t arrest their own people.

    Neil and OldNat have already discussed one result of the most irritating politicians quiz. It has to be pointed out that panel members found all those they were asked about more irritating than not. Vince Cable got nearest to neutrality with +1 (39% irritating, 38% not).

    The question was presumably triggered by Cameron’s denunciation of Ed Balls as the most annoying person in the country. However irritating as the public think he is (+20), Balls was surpassed by Cameron’s own Chancellor and Party Chair (Osborne and Warsi both +22), not to mention Balls’ own previous leader (Brown +25) and Deputy (Harman +26).

    Cameron himself was a mere niggle (+3), Hague only on +10 and Clegg surprisingly low at +11 (maybe people don’t hate him, they just think he’s wrong). Despite the tabloid hate campaigns, Miliband is +15, and not only does John Bercow only score +18 (mainly from Tories), but 46% say ‘don’t know’.

    Professional irritant Lembit Opik scores +45 (in the unlikely event of him getting the Lib Dem nomination for London Mayor, can we replace hustings with ‘Have I Got News for You’?). However topping the poll was the Prince of Darkness himself, Peter Mandelson at +47. Though he must be hurt to be dismissed with such a minor tag as ‘irritating’.

    Meanwhile Conservatives (50% v 40%) are much more optimistic about the next 100 years than Labour supporters (48% pessimistic v 40%). Just how long do they expect the coalition to go on for?


    THank you.

    I am very sorry to hear of that.

    I have just Googled for closure of REgional Cancer Centres & can find no references.

    Could you send me a link-it sounds like a terrible idea.

  7. Alec


    I don’t really understand why GP commissioning-on which there has been a cross party consensus -suddenly becomes a problem.

    I know nothing about my PCT. I don’t know how I would influence them if their decisions adversely affected me.

    GPs seem much more accessible.

    Provided their consortia are properly accountable, and work with hospital clinicians & the new LA Public Health functions, surely we should get better co-ordination across the piece. ?

  8. “On that basis, a Lab/Con coalition maybe isn’t out of the question. In Scotland both parties share the same right-wing populist views and Lab have voted more often with the Tories than against in this Parliament.”

    A Lab/Con government would certainly be better for Scottish devolved governance than would be a SNP minority administration with its AS cult-of-personality.

    More likely though to be another permutation (than either of these two)…


  9. Rob Sheffield

    I see that you are suffering from evidence deficit again.

    (I do hope you aren’t planning a fishing holiday in Scotland if Labour win – they’ll have you in jail on a minimum 6 month sentence!)

  10. As for a Labour/Tory coalition, I doubt it would happen, for all sorts of reasons – not least of which is the dislike that each side has for the other, but its not impossible – simply unlikely.

    At Westminster, we have seen a good working chemistry between the leaderships of the two coalition parties help to drive through the formation of that coalition, against the better instincts of the activists of both parties.

    Alex Salmond and Annabel Goldie have a good working relationship and there is evidence of a good personal chemistry between them. This makes it more likely than a Labour/Tory coalition.


    My point was made earlier. Unless the LDs and/or Greens combined with one of the big two can gain an overall majority, then any coalition seems unlikely.

    Labour have adopted so many SNP policies that the combined votes of both parties guarantee they will be implemented.

    For their right wing populist ideas on crime, Labour would happily accept Tory votes.

  12. OLDNAT

    Do you think that if the Cons Bavarianised and rebranded as a Scottish party that would do?

    A Brown

    If we had had a PR federal parliament 50 years ago the SNP would be where the Greens are, and the Greens would be polling twice as much as the fourth party.

    We ddn’t, and I’ll take independence now instead. Not for nationalistic reasons, nor economic ones, but to get a parliament fit fo purpose.

    I won’t get that any other way in my lifetime and I want it for my dual nationality grandchildren. I don’t care if we are better off financially or not, or what happens to the English. I am certain my grandchildren would be happier and could be proud of living in a country where the national parliament respects the founding principles of the Home Rule parliament and the values inscribed on its mace.

    A federal system would be better, but there is as much chance of that as there is of the Tories being the largest party in the Scottish Parliament in May.

  13. John Dick

    I suspect the Bavarianisation of the Tories won’t come about due to demands from the party in Scotland – but from Cameron deciding to sever the link.

    With few LD MPs from Scotland next time round, he may decide that his best bet for some MPs from Scotland willing to vote for Tory policies in England might be a Scots CDU.

  14. Following earlier discussion on Falkirk West I note that former MSP Denis Canavan has given his endorsement to the SNP candidate Michael Mathieson.

    Looks to be a shoo-in for the Nats now.

1 2 3 4