The Times tomorrow has a new YouGov poll of Scotland – full figures aren’t up yet (the tables will be on the YouGov website tomorrow as usual), but the Times front page has the topline Westminster voting intentions of LAB 27% (no change since YouGov’s last Scottish poll in December) and SNP 48%(up one since December). As with the Survation and Ipsos MORI polls last month there is no obvious sign of the post-referendum surge in SNP support falling away at all.

I’ll update tomorrow with the full voting intention figures and tables.

UPDATE: Full figures are CON 15%, LAB 27%, LDEM 4%, SNP 48%, UKIP 4%. Tabs are here.


310 Responses to “YouGov/Times Scottish poll has SNP 21 points ahead”

1 3 4 5 6 7
  1. “I simply point out that the result is proving messier than I thought”

    Well next time you offer us your thoughts I’ll remind you that you don’t always think things throught, besides like a said earlier people are getting all hot and bothered about this but the upshot will be just another Government.

    If the Anoraks ever seize power it will be all sorted, but as they can’t agree enough for that to happen, we’ll muddle through as always.

    Peter.

  2. It seems that the discussion about Transylvania is more neutral than this.

    There are actually British (not English) regions drawn for EU purposes. They aren’t very well drawn from a subsidy perspective (Kent could have got a lot), but politically sound.

    In certain scenarios the Conservatives don’t need SNP support only being absent. So the real question is not whether the SNP would support a Conservative government (highly unlikely), but would they bring one down.

    Otherwise I agree with those who say that it’s not the SNP’s job in an election to bring Labour to government. Labour doesn’t seem to be doing this, but there could be indications in local media that I don’t know.

  3. pc

    I neither understand nor appreciate your rudeness.

    I doubt many people have a 100% record when they think head to what future changes will bring about.

    Anyway, please yourself, I am done with such pettiness.

  4. COUPER2802
    USA manages it with California (38 million) & Wyoming (500K)

    And Switzerland with Zürich (1.4m) & Appenzell Innerrhoden (15.8k)

    JACK
    A federal UK is just so logical in my mind – anything else is just a mess…

    Personally, I’d have thought that was the logical starting point but if individual areas wanted to start/re-instate their own nation the Swiss system of direct democracy could be used, where, whenever asked by its citizens, each commune can choose by referendum whether to remain in the canton it is currently, to merge with other communes to form a new canton or to join a different canton [subject to the consent of the canton being joined].

  5. There is no possibility of the SNP not voting a Conservtive Goverment down in a confidence vote. In fact it’s likely SNP MPs would vote against the Tories at every opportunity. Doing anything else would be suicide for them.

  6. Again no canton in Switzerland has more than 25% of the country population so it does not dominate. An English Parliament would just be gigantic replication of the main UK parliament. It would need at least 450 members to have similar amounts as the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly. 10-20 regional parliaments would work better.

  7. bm11

    I agree and see the only rationale for an English parliament being that there was no longer a Uk – or even a rUK.

    That is not on the agenda.

  8. @OldNat

    I have long advocated both an English parliament with legislative devolution from Westminster and English regional devolution with administrative devolution over issues such as transport, health, care and education.

    I don’t think the current regions really work, (maybe NE, London and Yorkshire are OK). I’d go with something between current English regions and counties. Probably not far off current English police force areas.

    This would help resolve both the England being too big issue and the relative power of the UK PM and English FM.

  9. I would argue that if the SNP brought down a Conservative government, it would be suicidal for the SNP.

  10. BM11

    In your scenario, which level of government would legislate on the criminal law in England?

  11. Any Federal solution that requires hundreds more politicians is doomed to electoral failure!

    That’s why a proposed a Senate made up of existing politicians from local authorities.

    Every community is represented but no more politicians created!

    Peter.

  12. ole nat

    “BM11

    In your scenario, which level of government would legislate on the criminal law in England?

    Barnard Castle Town Council would be my choice.

  13. We could do Scotland as well while we’re at it – we are worryingly close.

  14. Many of the SNP candidates are from the independence campaign and are campaigners as opposed to politicians. Woman for Independence, Radical Independence Campaign (the ones Amber thinks are too left wing for Labour), Business for Scotand all have candidates selected to fight seats for the SNP, campaigner Chris Law who drove a blue Green Goddess, called the Spirit of Independence around Scotland has been selected to fight for Dundee West for the SNP.

    Having this group holding the balance of power should be different.

  15. @R&D 3.55 p.m.

    Got it in one!

    :-)

    Though I think some of us do care about what happens south of the Border. I for one – with my father having to pay for personal care, for example….

    Perhaps we need to bring him north to a civilised country which thinks people in need, who have paid taxes all their working lives, should be treated with dignity…….

  16. @Couper2802

    I’m rather hoping Tommy Sheppard gets elected in Edinburgh East. He’ll certainly be a different presence in the Commons.

  17. JB

    Glad of some approval at least.

    Whilst being – previously – in favour of the Union I have also said that I would have had greater respect for the independence movement if they had focused more on the opportunity for Scotland to make her own choices for her own people. You really can’t argue with that desire.

    What I didn’t like was the Harry Enfield like “And we’ll be considerably richer than yow” attitude, which managed to be both probably wrong and rather selfish at the same time.

    It wasn’t something I would choose for a mantra if I was a leading part of the “Independence for Barney” movement.

  18. BM11
    Again no canton in Switzerland has more than 25% of the country population so it does not dominate.

    But with each canton having FFA, there’s very little to dominate. And federal referenda need majorities of both voters and cantons.

    An English Parliament would just be gigantic replication of the main UK parliament. It would need at least 450 members to have similar amounts as the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly.

    It would certainly need some hundreds, but wouldn’t most of the then current English MPs initially be redeployed there as EMPs? With FFA all around, the new senate would only need to control defence and Foreign Affairs, presumably needing many fewer than the 100 US senators, some of whom might be ex-MPs.

  19. If you read the messages from Ms Couper and others you may find room for doubt that the SNP MPs will “support Labour”. The relations the individuals have often had with Labour have been sulphourous. Some may also doubt they will be the unified group often imagined. It would rather obviously damage Labour in the eyes of its own potential voters to be associated with the wild eyed.
    Labour faces a very tough fight in Scotland that may pre-figure what may yet come to other parts of the UK but it must continue to give out the moderate inclusive message which J Murpy and K Dugdale are doing.

  20. R&D

    ‘Whilst being – previously – in favour of the Union I have also said that I would have had greater respect for the independence movement if they had focused more on the opportunity for Scotland to make her own choices for her own people. You really can’t argue with that desire.’

    For many of us, all that was a given. It didn’t need to be stated as it was understood by everyone as being the principal reason for the Movement.
    The question remains, of course, as to whether Scotland would be ‘better off’ financially as independent; personally I doubt it. But finance is not the only consideration: for example, Rabbie Burns’ famous poem begins

    Is there for honest poverty that hangs hi head, an a’ that?

    I’d rather be a bit poorer and hold my head up than be constantly told I’m living off the rather uncharitable charity of a neighbour!

  21. @R&D

    Could BCTC look after the nuclear deterrent as well? It could solve a lot of problems.

  22. If you read the messages from Ms Couper and others you may find room for doubt that the SNP MPs will “support Labour”.

    The SNP are playing a clever game convincing the Scottish electorate that they will back Labour in Westminster is obviously a good way of reassuring labour switchers that they won’t support the evil, hated tories.

    What the SNP MPs do when they get to the house of commons could be an entirely different affair. They won’t back the tories fully. This would be suicidal for them, but they won’t necessarily play ball with labour.

    Labour will have had their Scottish base eroded, and the long term beneficiaries of this will be the right and centre-right. No doubt. It’s chaos on the left again, leading to right wing hegemony…sound familiar?

  23. If you read the messages from Ms Couper and others you may find room for doubt that the SNP MPs will “support Labour”.
    The SNP are playing a clever game convincing the Scottish electorate that they will back Labour in Westminster is obviously a good way of reassuring labour switchers that they won’t support the tories.

    What the SNP MPs do when they get to the house of commons could be an entirely different affair. They won’t back the tories fully. This would be suicidal for them, but they won’t necessarily play ball with labour

    It’s the old story of a split on the left benefitting the political righ.

  24. JBD

    Yes, I think we see it the same way. The prob was that Salmond responded to any perceived concerns about

    “will we be wealthy enough on our own” [to do the best for Scots] by going nap on

    “We’ll be a lot richer once we are on our own.”

    I didn’t find that edifying, moving – or even likely.

  25. It may be worth those outside Scotland to look up some of the snp candidates mentioned. Chris Law (of the blue Green Godess) “Thanks bloody goodness that someone has spilled the bileand anger I feel at the bloody useless Labour lackeys that served the British establishment so well” There’s plenty of that. So I think I would be justified in raising an eyebrow at the suggestion that he and others like him will be supporting Labour.

  26. @Hireton and R&D

    Trident at Barnard Castle is an interesting idea.
    We might need a slightly bigger lock in the Tees Barrage and then some new locks at Worsall and Darlington.

    There may need to be a little dredging as well. Otherwise it’s an entirely practical and sensible plan ;-)

    If the new dock were just under High Force it could be a joint military base and tourist attraction.

  27. @R&D

    It was equally annoying to be told by the unionist politicians that Scotland was incapable of Independence. The Sunday Herald editorial put it ‘ The prize is a better country’: as in the motto of the Common Weal group ‘All of us, First’. Unfortunately it was not to be (yet) but it was the vision of social justice and the sort of country that we could create that energised the Yes campaign and still does.

  28. @BC

    What you are missing is SNP is to the left of Labour so they will have no problem supporting any left wing policies Labour introduce & Labour will have Tory support for their right wing policies.

  29. Good Evening All.
    A new subject of education.
    Head teachers have sent letters this week asking for parental contributions owing to new financial constraints, especially the cut in sixth form funding, per capita, which is quite sharp.
    I wonder whether the reception that the PM has had about the freeze in cash to schools, in face of inflation, and crucially increased Employers’ National Insurance contributions and superannuation contributions for the employees, will have a negative effect on the Tories.

  30. @Barbarzenzero – “Arithmetically it makes no difference at all to the prospect of a Lab government as you must well know by now.”

    But it really does – or might. If Lab get fewer seats than Con, Lib Dems will more likely opt for a Con coalition. If Lab score a clear seats victory, it’s extremely hard to see Lib Dems propping up a Con PM.

    You need to get this – it is important.

  31. @Couper

    Here’s the problem. The SNP can’t achieve what they want for Scotland without Independence, which won’t be on the table for at least another two parliaments. Second prize is DevoMax. DM may happen with a Lab minority government but won’t be on the table until an English constitutional convention which will take at least a couple of years to set up and conclude, and another 6 months or so for an referendum campaign and vote. So you are looking at the best part of 3 Yeats for DM. Third prize is a Labour minority with SNP C&S which drags Labour leftwards. The trouble with this is it makes Labour more electable in Scotland.

    Be careful what you wish for.

  32. Alec

    “might”, “more likely”, “if”, “hard to see”

    Well, with that degree of certainty, you have convinced me.

  33. @Alec

    It makes no difference it is who can command a majority that matters. Plus David Cameron as PM gets first chance of forming a government. With the collapse of the LDs Scotland is likely to return 50+ LOC MPs is does not matter the relative sizes of the Labour or SNP contingent.

  34. @RAF

    Yes I know a few of terms of a left wing Labour UK government may be the only thing that does ‘kill nationalism stone dead’.

  35. RAF

    “The trouble with this is it makes Labour more electable in Scotland. ”

    You could be right – or you could be dramatically wrong.

    Equally it could reinforce to many Scots voters that the only way to return GB Lab to the right (ie left) path is to vote SNP.

    With only polling evidence like today’s YG poll to go on, the latter may be more likely.

  36. @RAF
    Neither Scotland nor the SNP has any real influence on the GE result so the SNP will have to cope with the way the chips fall – that’s why post May they will be in dangerous territory and will have to be very careful.

    Ashcroft poll tomorrow and he has tweeted it’s a ‘humdinger’ – what could he mean?

  37. Test

  38. “It makes no difference it is who can command a majority that matters.”

    Absolutely. The point being that Lib Dems have said repeatedly that they will try to forma coalition with the ‘winners’ in the first instance.

    If Lab get fewer seats than Con, that means Cameron.

    As with the indyref, oil prices etc, I remain staggered by the inability of some Scots to get the most basic of logical thoughts. It’s very, very simple.

  39. ALEC
    But it really does – or might. If Lab get fewer seats than Con, Lib Dems will more likely opt for a Con coalition. If Lab score a clear seats victory, it’s extremely hard to see Lib Dems propping up a Con PM.

    You have an idée fixe on this topic. As COUPER2802 wrote: It makes no difference it is who can command a majority that matters.

    41 Lab + 6 SNP would have precisely the same effect in voting down a Con-led government or securing a Lab-led government as 6 Lab + 41 SNP voting the same way.

    The big difference would be that if it is Lab in government then the 41 SNP MPs have some chance of exerting influence to the benefit of Scotland. It really isn’t rocket science.

    RAF
    Third prize is a Labour minority with SNP C&S which drags Labour leftwards. The trouble with this is it makes Labour more electable in Scotland.

    Should Lab move leftwards then good for them. Why should anyone on the left be concerned at that eventuality? Wouldn’t it be good for democracy?

    COUPER2802

    I agree with your responses to ALEC & RAF, but please don’t change the numbers. The mathematically challenged are having enough difficulty already with 41+6. :<}

  40. @Couper

    I’m not sure what Ashcroft might mean. If it’s consistent with other Scotland polls it will show the SNP likely to take 30-45 seats. To be a “humdinger” it would have to show a result outside this range, or at lest towards the extremes of the range.

  41. The point that lots of people seem to miss is this – the Scotch, no matter how many times they vote- will not have the nerve to leave the most successful country the world has ever seen. That said, it will be us English and Welsh who will decide, if we so wish, to jettison the Scotch. And that time may well be with us sooner than many may imagine.

  42. @BZ
    “Should Lab move leftwards then good for them. Why should anyone on the left be concerned at that eventuality? Wouldn’t it be good for democracy?”

    If your goal is Independence, not necessarily.

  43. Alec

    You put “winners” in as a direct quotation. Was that intentional, and if so, what is the source?

    I presume that it is based on an official change from the previous LD stated position that they would seek coalition with the “largest party” – while carefully avoiding how they would define “largest”.

    How are they defining “winners”?

  44. Jasper

    Both the English and Welsh now make their own whisky, so I suppose consumers are free to reject Scotch, in favour of their local produce.

  45. @OldNat

    NC defines it as whichever probability is most likely to show the Tories ahead. In 2010, a general “most seats and most votes” proviso was stated. A couple of months ago he changed this to “most votes”.

  46. RAF

    I’ll see if I can find the quote (your first sentence might indicate a slight bias! :-) )

    But he didn’t say “winners”?

  47. @OldNat

    I got away with National Liberals earlier. Sorry AW!

    Actually, I’m not anti LD at all. Just the leadership of this LD party. Like, as it happens, many others (as per the polls).

  48. RAF

    I certainly didn’t accuse you of being anti-LD, it’s just the normal historian behaviour of looking for possible indicators of bias in any text.

    However, my research skills seem to be a bit rusty, and all I can find on the topic are references to comments at their Glasgow conference (and they still haven’t paid their security bill to Police Scotland!)

    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/uks-liberal-democrats-weigh-future-coalition-options-ahead-111955290.html#cv1KrG3

    Some quotes of the opinions of some folk – but I can’t find an official statement.

    Can you help?

  49. couper

    Re your what un-named “Unionist politicians” may have said: I was actually discussing one of the main arguments of the entire SNP leadership – we will be BETTER off financially without the rUK.

    I stand by my reactions to that sentiment.

    Re this:

    ” David Cameron as PM gets first chance of forming a government.”

    Eh????

    Not if Labour have an overall majority he doesn’t and, even if they don’t there are many result variants which would make that impossible for him – whether he has the legal right or not.

    There is little point in him saying:

    “Bags I first dibs”

    if the arithmetic doesn’t add up.

  50. ALEC
    If Lab get fewer seats than Con, that means Cameron.

    Only if he can command more votes than Lab + SNP + PC + Greens + SDLP.

    If he can, then that’s democracy, plurality style. If he cannot then Lab will be back in government.

    As with the indyref, oil prices etc, I remain staggered by the inability of some Scots to get the most basic of logical thoughts. It’s very, very simple.

    It is indeed very, very simple.

1 3 4 5 6 7