The weekly TNS-BMRB poll is out, and has topline figures of CON 31%(nc), LAB 39%(-2), LD 11%(+2), UKIP 7%(-2). Changes are from their last poll a week ago.

Meanwhile the daily YouGov poll for the Sun this morning had topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 42%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 8%.

All appears to be pretty steady, as it has been for months. Coming up this week though we have the European budget meeting – last year Cameron’s European “veto” temporarily closed the Labour lead in the polls (I suspect largely becuase of the impact of perceptions of Cameron as a strong and effective leader, rather than the particular issues at stake). The media are building this week’s meeting up to a similar test of Cameron, so it will be interesting to see if there is an impact in the polls from it – clearly it can go either way, strong or weak, positive or negative… or indeed, no difference whatsoever, the impact that most things end up having on voting intention! We shall see.

Today there is also a new tranche of polling from Lord Ashcroft, which I hope to have time to look at later but which can meanwhile be viewed here.


145 Responses to “New TNS-BMRB and YouGov polls”

1 2 3
  1. MANINTHEMIDDLE

    “if Scotland is a net beneficiary”

    Since I doubt that your media gives much coverage of Scottish affairs, you may not have seen the report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

    http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn135.pdf

    Well worth a look, for a non-partisan assessment of the Scottish fiscal position.

  2. surely securing the falklands was an acievement and she did preside over a lot of economic growth

  3. Maninthemiddle.
    ‘she did preside over a lot of economic growth’
    The period 1979 – 1990 was NOT a period of rapid economic growth – including as it did – the deepest recession since World War 2.

  4. Alec @ RiN

    ” I have to side with @Martyn on the UK separation issue. As the UK has been formed and revised post Act of Union, Scottish independence would not be repealing this act, but would be leaving the UK. If it was simply repealing the A o U, presumably Scotland would still be linked to NI?”

    No. We would now regard Ireland as a colony belonging to England it had no government of its own. The AoU joined the English and Scottish parliaments.In reality it was “Bought and sold for English Gold” [like DDR] but not formally.

    “In practical terms also, the dominant position of England, Wales and NI would secure residual rights to UK matters I’m sure.”

    That’s the assumption of the UK governments who are only beginning to come to an understanding of the issues. The have a lot to catch up on.

    Lefty, Alec, Martyn

    At 11.10 RiN gave you a definative answer

  5. MANINTHEMIDDLE

    “surely securing the falklands was an acievement and she did preside over a lot of economic growth”

    He said “enduring” achievements.

  6. leftylampton @ John B

    “I’m genuinely bemused now. When did England become part of the discussion?”

    1707

  7. Looking at the headline in the DT I’m ready to make a polling prediction

    Ukip will poll in double figures all next week

  8. oldnat @ MANINTHEMIDDLE

    “if Scotland is a net beneficiary”

    I am getting irritated by the focus of both sides on that issue.

    Firstlyl , independence should be about something more than just money. If it is worth havng we should be willing to pay something (or give up something to get It.

    Also, it is for the long term and projections based on where we are now are of little value.

    I will vote for independence to get competent government and to escape from the Westminster culture and everything about it complained of here and about which I complained to Donald Dewar more than half a century ago.

    I would vote for independence to protect the NHS and free tertiary education.

    I would vote for independence to get rid of Trident.

    The potential for improvement in the economy and environmental objectives which indepenence will bring is hardly spoken of. John Swinney speaks of “economic levers” but that is only one aspect.

    The new thinking that will bring sustainable economic development to rural Scotland with almost unlimited resources in renewable power,water, clean air a better educated population and world class research far outweighs the arguments about whether we get more or less than our due share in our pocket money from the Treasury.

    Richard Lochhead is making a huge change in ambition in the part of Scotland where the UK government has an out of date map that says “Here be dragons” at the top. That’s the same bit that is coloured yellow isn’t it?

    Mike Mackenzie is thinking about other aspects of planning,economic development and related matters. He’s only thinking about it, but that’s what List MSP’s are for. There isn’t much of that done at Westminster and it isn’t welcome as Frank Field could tell you.

  9. JOHN B DICK

    People vote with different motivations.

    On the indy issue, some will vote because of deep-seated identity beliefs – British or Scottish – or other reasons which are overwhelming for them.

    Others will look for something better than scaremongering, or assertions.

    Non-partisan analysis is good, and finally this is starting to emerge.

  10. @John B Dick

    A few months ago, HC643 got published, and me and OldNat read it independently. Although we disagree on many of the details (and will continue to do so, especially the inaccurate use of the phrase “successor state”), we agree with HC643 that an independent Scotland will be shoehorned into the EU, with hammers if necessary. In the end 5 million people are not going to be thrown out of the EU – an organization that can absorb Romania will absorb Scotland without too much difficulty. Realpolitik will rule in both directions, to the benefit and discomfiture of both parties.

    As tonight’s discussion cumulated in OldNat throwing HC643 at me yet again, I indulged in the timetravel shtick as we had arrived back to where we were two months ago and I wanted to highlight the Groundhog Day element of the discussion.

    Given this, there is no need to commend a definitive answer to me, as broadly we know the final outcome

    rgdsm

  11. The thing I don’t get about Scots and Catalonians, why seek independence from your Union with England/Wales and Spain respectively, only to try and argue to remain part of a Union, which includes England/Wales and Spain.

    The idea of Europe is to eventually become one Federal Country, if you want to be independent, more power to you, if you want to be part of a federal europe, more power to you, I’m fine with either. But I am just a bit baffled why you would dissolve a Union only to then go into Union with the same again but with a few others.

    Country Unions such as the EU are often referred to as a marriage, well in this case it’s a mormon marriage. Why would Scotty divorce Britney only to then decide to marry Britney, and Francis, and Gemma etc etc

  12. MANINTHEMIDDLE

    We’ll need to leave you to puzzle out these strange idea that so Many English and Castilians find incomprehensible! :-)

    Happy Thanksgiving to our American friends.

  13. MinM

    I don’t get why you don’t get it.

    Tis fairly obvious and its also up to Scotland to decide. I do see their point.

  14. Good early Morning to everyone.
    A very nice Radio 4 Prayer for Today, on the anniversary of the deaths of C.S.Lewis and President Kennedy.

    Mrs Thatcher fell today in 1990. John Major became PM. Who can remember his ‘Back to Basics’ campaign which was ‘spun’ into a morality campaign?

  15. I think that for Labour to be at 41% to 42% is poor for them, at this stage.

    The Ashcroft findings about worries among voters concerning the spending plans of the Labour Party may be playing their part.

  16. Con 33, Lab 41, Lib 9, UKIP 10
    Approval -31

    Local cuts:
    Central gov is responsible – 41 (+1)
    Local council is reponsible – 30 (-1)
    Neither, not aware of cuts – 20 (+1)
    No real change.

    “I think that for Labour to be at 41% to 42% is poor for them, at this stage.”
    This narrative keeps popping up – it depends what you mean by ‘at this stage’ – 2 years after having their worst election defeat in post-war history, being on 41% in the polls might not be so bad.
    But I assume you mean, ‘to have the sort of majority Blair had in 1997′ – which is a little bit of a lofty goal to have, from worst election defeat to greatest.

    If Labour come anywhere near 41 in, it’ll be one of the greatest electoral turn-arounds in British history.
    In 1979, Thatcher improved her party’s vote by 7.2% of the electorate.
    In 1997, Blair improved his party’s vote by 4.2% of the electorate.
    If Labour manage 41 in 2015 (assuming equal turn-out to 2010), Miliband would have improved his party’s vote by 7.5% of the electorate.
    IIRC, post-war there’s only been one greater victory, 1950 Churchill improved his party’s vote by 10.2% of the electorate (still got beaten by Labour on the popular vote).

    If Miliband improves the Labour vote (as % of electorate) as much as Blair did, we’re looking at Labour on about 35% of the votes in 2015.
    And when you put it like that, it doesn’t sound like such a bad job.

    Am I the only one who thinks that for Labour a 2015 win would be nice but 2020 should be the goal?

  17. TINGED FRINGE.
    Good Morning to you.
    I agree 2020 is more likely to be the year Labour forms a majority government.

    Normally, as you know, tory governments have three terms in office. (This is a tory administration, I think).
    Heath is the post 1945 exception, and he would have survived in an alliance with the Ulstermen if he had not ‘betrayed’ them over civil rights in Northern Ireland.

  18. “Normally, as you know, tory governments have three terms in office.”
    By “normally”, do you mean post-war, pre-war, before the rise of Labour?
    If you mean post-war, we have errr… 2 examples of this, out of 3.

    Pre-war you have to go to before the “National” government as it was made up of a coalition.

    Before that, Conservatives “always had four terms in office” [1], so applying your logic to it, Labour should have lost 1997.

    Of course, these were largely before the rise of Labour or the implementation of universal suffrage so were in completely different contexts to what we have now.

    Also when the Conservatives won three terms in the past, they largely won due to support in the North and Scotland. Something that they lack now.

    Etc, etc

    Perhaps you’re taking a small amount of data and finding patterns that aren’t really there?

    [1] Except when you go back to when they faced the Whigs, when they often had one-term governments.

  19. “they largely won due to support in the North and Scotland”
    I should point out that the ‘Scotland’ part doesn’t really apply that well to the Thatcher era – but before that, it surely does.
    Ah – context of a series of complex factors.

  20. TF – you are not the only one.
    The goal for me is to force another hung parliament in 2015 and go for a win in 2020.
    41% in VI is only poor if you think that an OM in 2015 is a realistic target, as you imply with a more realistic aim 41% now is staisfactory may be slightly better.

    Given a wedge of 2010 LD ABT’s coming home (maybe Lab first time for some) I would be disappointed with less that 35% and delighted with over 37%.
    The discussion about positioning and who to appeal to is affected by this. I agree with those who argue that Lab need some Tory 2010 voters to get an OM (1 in 20 or 15 net is enough). My worry is that if we aim for these now we will put off too many LD defectors plus former Lab voters who abstained in 2010 (some 2005 as well).

    Of course not aiming for some soft Tory vote in 2015 means we are starting from further away from these voters in 2015 which I accept but still feel that securing a higher base is the priority.

    IMO, whether fair or not, the party will not be able to convince sufficient swing voters who went Cons in 2010 of our Economic credibility in time for 2015.

    Last thought, on current boundaries Lab may just become the largest party at the 2015 GE; we have to be ready just in case.

  21. hmmm

    I think that Labour has not begun to seriously take votes from the Tories.

    If they fail, they win with the ex-LDs.

    If they succeed it’s going to be very big indeed. If Con lose votes to UKIP, ditto.

    Even if Lab lose votes back to UKIP in Con/LD marginals, that doesn’t hurt Lab.

    In short, if Lab hover about 40% and Con don’t increase their 2010 vote, Lab have a comfortable majority. Any conceivable changes to that favour Lab.

    Can Con take votes from 2010 Lab and LD? Yes, especially LD. But can they do it without leaking votes to UKIP?

  22. @ Old Nat

    “Happy Thanksgiving to our American friends.”

    Thanks! Already baked some cookies and brownies today for tommorow. It’s my favorite holiday of the year. Even Scottish expats can (and should) celebrate the day.

    Might go see Lincoln tommorrow.

  23. @John B Dick – “I would vote for independence to protect the NHS and free tertiary education.”

    I can appreciate this, but the difficulty is that money matters, and matters absolutely.

    We already now have some of the more honest SNP MSP’s admitting that the current spending levels on elderly care and free university education will be unsustainable in the medium term, and if the IFS is correct and there will be a small reduction in the budget balance due to depleting oil reserves, Scotland has to face a potential future whereby independence makes it more difficult to protect these things you hold dear.

    On currency – I know full well that Scottish banks print pounds, but if rUK didn’t accept you into sterling, these wouldn’t be sterling. They become your own currency, with floating exchange rates etc. Again, you can keep the cash machines running, but you would have a paper currency with no central bank. In terms of sterling, Scotland remains entirely at the whim of rUK.

  24. I’m gutted, nadine has survived her jungle excursion and is winging her way back to the crocodile tank of Westminster. Can only hope she gets ripped to peices by Tory backbenchers once she makes the jump to Ukip.

  25. RiN

    “That’s the whole point of this discussion is an independent Scotland a break away state or is it merely dissolving an unsatisfactory union”

    Of course.

    We appear to have established that there IS a discussion to be had. I fully accept that the SNP had a negotiating position based on the claim that the Tartan Divorce will be similar in effect to the Velvet Divorce, with two, more or less equal states being formed from the dissolution of a union. But it is just a negotiating position.

    John B

    I have no problem with the viability of a small Scotland. Clearly and demonstrably, small countries may be viable. That us not the question at issue.

    The first question is whether a small section of a current state taking the unilateral decision to secede should retain all the rights and privileges of the parent state.

    There is a secondary question that emerged during the discussion: if you retain the monetary policy of the parent country, by extension have no real fiscal sovereignty, and retain the same head of state, what exactly does independence mean?

  26. re the Scottish Debate; I fully agree that there are many uncertainties around this, but my view is that this is a problem for the nationalists, not the No campaign.

    To promote a radical change, such as independence, you really need to be able to know with reasonable certainty what you are proposing. for the No campaign, we know exactly what the landscape looks like, for better or worse.

    This is why the certainty game has been played most fiercely by the SNP, and why, if it becomes generally accepted that there are doubts and uncertainties, it will hit the Yes campaign much harder.

  27. @Alec

    Re: Currency.

    Some Scottish banks print “promissory notes” denominated in pounds sterling under the authority of HM Treasury. It is important to note, that these are explicitly not legal tender. They may be refused as payment at will, and banking and exchange systems outside the UK tend not to accept them because of this. They are not backed by the UK’s central bank, the Bank of England. The notes are printed by multiple retail banks, with the banks lodging funds with the Bank of England as a reserve fund on which they receive some interest.

    This situation is a rather unusual one in a modern economy.

    One condition of remaining in the EU will almost certainly be to cease printing of retail bank promissory notes and the formation of a central bank at the very least, possibly adoption of the Euro instead.

    There may well be interesting economic consequences of dismantling the arrangement. It would perhaps be unwise to use them as the basis for a new currency. Scotland would be compelled to either create a new central bank, join the euro, or continue to use sterling and have no control over monetary policy.

  28. Alec

    Very good point and one which I hadn’t really taken on board.

    That fully explains Wishart’s intellectual contortions, which can be summarised as “There is no precedent for a section of an EU member state seceding from that state. So we will argue strongly that the consequence of such a seccession will be identical to an entirely different case of the division of a state.”

    Useful negotiating position, but I’m not sure it will survive contact with the real world.

  29. John Vine, Chief Inspector of Borders & Immigration finally produces his report on the shambles at UKBA, first discovered in 2006 , when John Reid unearthed a backlog of 500,000 case files.

    Amongst the damning detail is evidence that the former CEO of UKBR-one Lin Homer-misled Keith Vaz’ Home Affairs Committee in 2010 about the progress in clearing this backlog.

    It now appears that thousands of illegal immigrant amnesties were granted without the relevant files being examined at all.

    Mr Vaz says he intends to recall Ms Homer to explain.

    I hope he doesn’t detain her too long from her current job of unearthing billions in unpaid taxes.

    Lin Homer is now CEO of HMRC-in which role she has had interesting conversations with Margaret Hodge , Chair of PAC.

    It’s a grand life at the top of our Civil Service .

  30. Interesting :-

    http://www.ifau.se/Upload/pdf/se/2012/wp12-19-Independent-schools-and-long-run-educational-outcomes.pdf

    From the abstract :-

    “However, for most outcomes, we do not detect positive and statistically significant effects until approximately a decade after the reform.”

    Gove was right to be in a hurry-it takes more time than he may have available.

  31. Interesting article

    http://gu.com/p/3c29h

    What do you think Anthony?

  32. “Gove was right to be in a hurry-it takes more time than he may have available.”

    Thank god for that. Might not take so long to fix it back.

  33. As the whole of Europe slips into recession (including us) and stays there next year I reckon it will be the middle of next year before it dawns on everybody that cuts are making things worse.

    Over here we have everybody seeking to freeze or cut EU contributions. More austerity.

    It can only end with a massive change in policy across Europe towards stimulation and growth or sadly into the collapse of Europe and maybe widespread unrest and even war.

  34. @ Colin

    I suppose for a top civil servant, they have to advise ministers and select committees of the information that they know at the time. I don’t think they would deliberately provide any false or misleading information, as they would be found out.

    The problem I suspect is that the state machine is not very good at collecting accurate data and they are bogged down in bureaucracy. Decisions get made on particular case loads and it is not brought together, so don’t have a complete picture of what is going on.

    You can criticise the Civil Servce, but it is not just public sector. Remember the recent case of the investment banker with the hidden £1.4 billion debt.

    There has been some recent studies into how data is being handled in the world generally. We have all the sophisticated IT in place, but then it often just gets muddled. You have to have enough people that organise what data is collected, how it is collected, how the data is verified for accuracy, how it is input/organised, how it can be arranged to provide useful information and how it is provided to analysts/key decision makers. If you don’t do all of this, then you are in danger of getting into a mess.

  35. MANINTHEMIDDLE

    “The thing I don’t get about Scots and Catalonians, why seek independence from your Union with England/Wales and Spain respectively, only to try and argue to remain part of a Union, which includes England/Wales and Spain.”

    We are just not staying in the same house as an inconsiderate partner, but we have no reason to leave the village. You are drawing paralells with the UKIP mindset. They are nationalists too, but the Scots and the SNP are internationalist nationalists.

    The fact that you and others do not understand this is both the cause and the effect of the lack of understanding and consideration of the metropolitan elite.

  36. Ok let’s leave the Scottish issue alone for a bit, sometimes you can have too much of a good thing

  37. @MiM

    I suppose one financial incentive for independence is the 15% GDP oil tax take versus 8.5% of 1.6% (or 8.5% of 15%) GDP of the UK oil tax take.

    Twelve times the tax take if the numbers can be taken that simply. Assuming Scotland got 8.5% of the debt, it would deal with it faster than helping to pay for 12 times the debt.

    After that, there’s all sorts of things, such as the Jedburgh to Thurso HS2 line. ;)

  38. alec
    @John B Dick – “I would vote for independence to protect the NHS and free tertiary education.”

    I can appreciate this, but the difficulty is that money matters, and matters absolutely.

    We already now have some of the more honest SNP MSP’s admitting that the current spending levels on elderly care and free university education will be unsustainable in the medium term, and if the IFS is correct and there will be a small reduction in the budget balance due to depleting oil reserves, Scotland has to face a potential future whereby independence makes it more difficult to protect these things you hold dear.

    I don’t know what these MSP’s have said but they are wrong about Education. Education a high level for the whole population benefits everyone and is an investment.

    In England, secondary education is sufficient for plebs to service the elite in lower paid jobs. There is no need to educate them to a higher level.

    In Scotland, higher education was in the past (largely due to a misinterpretation of Matthew 25) about a duty to make the most of the talents God had given you.

    I have remonstrated with my MSP, the Education Minister, about his acceptance of his opponents term “Universal benefits”. There is no such thing in Scotland. A free NHS and tertiary education are not benefits.

    A benefit is something given or withheld by the grace and favour of a ruler, landowner, factor, bishop.

    In Scotland, so the FM tells us, soverignty comes from the people. There is no such thing as a “benefit”

    If your boss takes his staff to the pub and buys them a seasonal pint to mark the end of the years work, that’s a benefit. If a group of colleagues go for a night out and put money in a kitty, that’s a co-operative purchasing arrangement.

  39. “They are nationalists too, but the Scots and the SNP are internationalist nationalists.”

    I’m afraid I don’t buy that argument. Another explanation for EU enthusiasm from some elements of nationalists is enemy-based nationalism. In short, I suspect a lot of hard-line nationalists don’t care who calls the shots in Scotland as long as it’s not the English. (I suspect a similar mentality contributed to Ireland joining the euro, and it’s only recently they’re starting to realise that maybe this wasn’t such a good idea after all.)

    If I was Scottish, I would be far more worried about the way that Ireland and other small countries have been shafted by Paris, Brussels and Berlin. In independent Scotland in the EU doesn’t have to come to that, but I am really concerned that with the wrong people in charge, they would slavishly agree with everything France and Germany says and declare it a success for Scotland.

  40. Safe Tory seats lean right, safe Labour seats lean left. Left-leaning LD defectors could no doubt make safe Labour seats more secure.

    To have a realistic chance of a majority Labour needs to gain a good third of the 2010 LD vote in Con/Lab marginals. The problem is gauging the political spectrum LD voters in those specific seats: are enough of them really left-leaning, how many will stay put or choose UKIP/Green… or will one in ten or more turn Tory instead? To be sure of making significant gains Labour also needs to be able to win over a proportion of the floating voters who voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005, but Conservative in 2010.

    In every election there will be a number of marginal seats which either change hands or are retained by under a hundred votes.

    A score or more of Con/Lab, LD/Con and LD/Lab marginal seats unexpectedly dipping one way or the other by a handful of votes could make all the difference.

  41. Chris Neville-Smith
    “They are nationalists too, but the Scots and the SNP are internationalist nationalists.”

    Another explanation for EU enthusiasm from some elements of nationalists is enemy-based nationalism.”

    I havn’t seen an evidence of that.

    “In short, I suspect a lot of hard-line nationalists don’t care who calls the shots in Scotland as long as it’s not the English.”

    Have you considered that just maybe, Scotland is fed up with government by and for London interests which knows and understands little of Scotish sensibilities and values and isn’t even aware that a problem exists? “”

    If I was Scottish, I would be far more worried,…… they would slavishly agree with everything France and Germany says and declare it a success for Scotland”

    An independent Scotland would be entitled to make its own decision on any issue. You are saying in effect that the loss of Scottish population would make the r-UK vote in the EU less than the current UK vote. So losing Scotland would be bad for r-UK.

    That’s r-UK’s problem, not a reason why Scotland should not be independent.

    In fact it’s the opposite. An independent Scotland should stay in the Union so that the anti-EU tories can pretend to speak for more people than they really represent.

    I can see why you want to do that, I just dont see why you think Scotland should accept it as a good idea that it should cede its voting power to people who have in the past ignored Scotland’s interests the better to pursue their own.

    That’s colonialism. You need to grasp the concept that independence for Scotland means that it isn’t part of England any more than RoI. The whole point of independence (and devolution) is that things might be done differently from the way things are done by Westminster parliaments because people think it could be done differently and better.

    Maybe they won’t always be right. Sometimes you just have to accept that the children are grown up and entitled to make their own choices.

  42. R HUCKLE

    @” I don’t think they would deliberately provide any false or misleading information, as they would be found out.”

    And Mr Vaz is the man to do it.

    NICKP

    @”Might not take so long to fix it back.”

    I think that nice Mr Twigg is going to disappoint you.
    He isn’t an idealogue.

  43. @Johyn B Dick – “I don’t know what these MSP’s have said but they are wrong about Education.”

    Fully agree with your sentiments regarding education, but for one thing the SNP needs to address the fact that leaving the UK and staying in the EU means a £40m black hole in Scottish university funding, as they wouldn’t be able to charge English students any more.

    That’s a big hit, and just one of the issues that some SNP folk are beginning to look at and worry about.

  44. free You aren’t seriously suggesting that £40m on education should be an important factor in whether or not Scotland should be independent?

    Some bright people in the Scottish government are trying to find a way out of the difficulty. An easy solution would be for r-UK to leave the EU.

    It is a pity that the extreme English Right are not represented on this thread because this is the point where I could wind them up by pointing out that while in England white English have to pay university fees, in Scotland it should be next year that the first children of failed asylum seekers finish their free further education at Scottish institutions.

    Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    Primary and secondary education is mostly free in England. Who is the customer?The state pays because we need the plebs educated to the standard where they can service the elite in low paid jobs.

    University is for the supposed elite who have the funds to buy it. This reduces social mobility between generations through education.

    Independence is about values, not money.

  45. MitM
    “The idea of Europe is to eventually become one Federal Country”
    I am sure you believe this, but it is in fact not either the intention of most EU member countries or a treaty provision. Support for an independent Scotland’s position in Europe would, in my case, relate rather to the cultural benefits andeducational prospects that this might open up, including for my grandchildren (as an Englishman living in Scotland (when I do) and with children born in the Simpson Memorial Maternaty Pavilion at the Royal. The essence, for me, of membership of the EU would be for Scottish, or any present UK, children to freely go for their secondary or university education in France, Italy or Germany, or all three, and i quite naively believed that was going to be the case back in the ’90s. What an intellectual and moral infusion it would be to have Scotland realise its full and traditional role as an ally of continental Europe.

    JOHN B DICK

    “.. in Scotland it should be next year that the first children of failed asylum seekers finish their free further education at Scottish institutions……….
    Primary and secondary education is mostly free in England. Who is the customer?The state pays because we need the plebs educated to the standard where they can service the elite in low paid jobs.
    University is for the supposed elite who have the funds to buy it. This reduces social mobility between generations through education.”

    I assume this is all part of the wind-up you wish the extreme right-wing to be reading, but I also that you are well aware of the mix of economic, scientific and cultural aims which go into the UK higher educational funding. There isn’t a class conspiracy, unless it was one that was fought out in the fifties.

    OK, your point is that “Independence is about values, not money”. What’s the change you want to see in the fiscal basis of educational, including research funding, both in the UK and in Scotland: or is Scotland now the model for trhe rest of the UK?

1 2 3