YouGov released a new Scottish poll last night, their first poll on Scottish Independence since the EU referendum. Voting intention in another Independence referendum stands at YES 47%(+1), NO 53%(-1). Changes are from May and don’t suggest any significant difference from before the EU referendum (tabs here).

There were several polls before the European referendum suggesting that a Brexit vote would push a majority of Scots towards supporting independence, but people are not necessarily good judges of how they would respond to hypothetical situations.

On the weekend straight after after the EU referendum there were snap Scottish polls from Panelbase and Survation that had suggested a majority in favour of independence. That may be down to methodological differences, or may simply be down to timing – one can easily imagine that a poll taken in the immediate aftermath of the unexpected EU result would produce different results to one taken a month later when the news has sunk in (and indeed, that we might well see different results once British exit has been negotiated and its full impact is clear to the Scottish electorate)

610 Responses to “YouGov Scottish Independence poll”

1 2 3 13
  1. Anthony

    This is just the latest release from your 20-25 July poll.

    Other than the Scotland in Union ones, none of the questions seem to have been created outwith YouGov.

    Can you explain, please, why the different questions were drip-fed, and not simply published as a single poll?

    Secondly, what was the order in which the different questions were asked?

  2. As at present we want to leave the EU, the Scots want to stay with the EU and (on the last poll) stay with us, and the EU doesn’t officially want to talk to either of us until our negotiating position is clear and we have said we are on our way. Anybody got a bright way out of this impasse?

  3. Charles

    “Anybody got a bright way out of this impasse?”

    That’s precisely what the Standing Council on Europe has been set up to find!

    The “reverse Greenland” and “Hong Kong” options have been aired, but need much detailed examination to look at the implications.

    Additionally, the Scottish Government and the Government of Gibraltar are in bilateral discussions on how the situation might be resolved.

    Given their current derogations from EU Treaties (no VAT due to not being in the Customs Union, excluded from CAP and CFP etc), and the threat by Spain to block Article 50 negotiations if the UK includes Gibraltar, the Gibraltarian position is very different in detail from Scotland, though the principles are similar.

  4. Forgive me, but “Scotland” did not vote to stay in the EU.
    The United Kingdom voted to leave the EU.
    Some parts of the U.K. – London, Brighton, Scotland for example – had a majority in favour of remaining in the EU.
    The question was put to the people of the Kingdom – each vote, wherever cast – carried the same weight…..
    And Leave won.

  5. “Changes are from May and don’t suggest any significant difference from before the EU referendum ”

    Absolutely fascinating result, and will reassure those people who were worried that the EU referendum might result in a significant shift of opinion north of the border.

  6. Prof Howard

    But, if I may pun, we don’t yet know what the “changes from May” are going to be!

    So we might well yet see significant shifts of opinion from those north of the border on both of the largest of “These Islands”.

    We don’t even have an inkling of which direction any such shifts would take.

  7. Anthony

    One of the obvious “funnies” on the new poll is the weighting to the Westminster franchise rather than the Holyrood one.[1] Was it just a question of weightings not yet having been prepared for Holyrood polls or was it a specific requirement of the client?

    Either way, the absence of 16 & 17 year-olds and EU residents over 16 [which will include many University students] is bound to skew the result somewhat.

    On YouGov’s Majority of Scots still favour staying in the UK after Brexit vote, the Stay v Leave response to the EU v UK question was broadly similar to the UK v Single market question, but DKs jumped from 17% to 26%, rather indicating significant ignorance of what the single market is.

    The media are bound to be interested in polling on the topic, but until we know Westminster’s Brexit plan, we cannot know what the electorate needs more information about.

    [1] You’ll see that issue being raised from about p16 onwards of the previous thread.

  8. I’m really sorry, I know that it is a Scottish topic, but as we discuss Scotland in every topic (which is good) – can I just call the attention of the moderate Labour (and Alec) who deride the Corbyn argument about the media.

    Don’t miss what was the original headline (up on the website about 15 minutes ago. Read the article. Then listen to the interview of the G. If you find the slightest similarity… And the Independent is supposed to be the most pro-Corbyn media outlet.

    Back to Scotland.

  9. JASPER22

    Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations states that the purpose of the UN is:

    To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

  10. Laszlo

    No problem – we also discuss Corbyn on every thread, and we need something to do while we wait for Anthony to reply to the questions about this YG poll. :-)

  11. @ OldNat


  12. There’s another detailed account today of internal Labour party issues, with Sharon Hodgeson, former Shadow Children and Families Office, recounting a fairly devastating account of a complete breakdown of communication and management of policy development. This time it involves McDonnell announcing support for a policy in her brief which she found out about on twitter.

    The issue revolved around having a Shadow Neurodiversity Minister and an autism manifesto, which McDonnell announced his support for via Twitter on May 13th. This was a response to a campaign letter sent to MPs, so it’s possibly stretching things to claim this was a new policy announcement, rather than a move to support a campaign by McDonnell, but is was reported in the press as a new Labour policy until 2nd June, when reports emerged showing Labour was cool on the idea. During this time, Hodgeson claims she could not get a response from McDonnell’s office to discuss this, and while she did have conversation with Corbyn, who admitted it wasn’t a good situation, nothing came from that.

    It’s not an earth shattering issue or a big headline issue, but it’s another example, from another source (ex union rep, no sign that Hodgeson is an arch Blairite) that Corbyn struggles to manage an effective team. Whatever the rights and wrongs of it, it’s clear that this was at the very least a media messaging mess, as well as a breakdown of internal communications.

    This is such a regular theme that I really don’t think Lab members can afford to ignore it. He genuinely does seem to have issues with basic management, and opposition is a whole lot easier than government.

  13. Old Nat

    I agree that the type of Brexit could be highly relevant so all of this is subject to change. That said, do think my original observation stands.

  14. @Lazslo – of course the media is against Corbyn.

    Well whoop de doo!, as the Americans say. If Smith wins, they’ll be against him too.

    The question is, what do you do about it?

    The answer is not to have a policy and media management operations so poor that your shadow ministers find out about their policies on twitter –

    I don’t think I’ve heard a single Labour person claim that the media isn’t anti Corbyn. What they say is that Corbyn has special superpowers of uselessness that make the media’s job so easy.

  15. Prof Howard

    I wasn’t thinking just of the Brexit details, but any other things that the UK Government might do – for example, on pensions –

    “The future is a foreign country”, to use the hackneyed phrase, but it might turn out to be apposite, or self-contradictory (depending on your point of view) if, for example those north of the border re-joined those south of it in Ireland, as a consequence.

  16. @Laszlo – reading that article, it was quite surprising to see Lewis admitting Corbyn’s team have struggled and that there wasn’t the experience to manage things.

    This is exactly what his critics have been saying, but when they say it they are ‘betraying’ the membership, or whatever.

    When even your friends are saying things aren’t working, I think that says quite a lot.

  17. @Barbazenzero
    I don’t understand why you refer to UN Charter re Jasper’s post.
    Scotland is not a member of the United Nations.
    Article 2.1 states
    “Article 2 The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”
    Scotland is not “the sovereign equal” of the UN Member States.
    The relevant Member is the United Kingdom – that United Kingdom which Scotland agreed to remain a part of, in a referendum; – that United Kingdom which decided in a referendum to leave the EU; – that United Kingdom which Scots sought to persuade to remain in the EU by voting Remain in large but insufficient numbers.

  18. @Jasper22
    Just because the poll was conducted simultaneously does not mean it was a ‘UK’ poll. It is perfectly reasonable to view it as four separate polls.

    The poll does however show that their is a large divergence of opinion between the peoples of these islands and that opinion needs to be considered with regard to any post brexit solution. Hence the need to consider all options. It may for example be preferable for NI to become independent from UK, remain in EU and be administered separately from Stormont. Thismwould be a HK solution. One country two systems. As for Scotland well that seems to be up in the air at the momenr, no reasonable solution is apparent.

  19. @Oldnat – I would agree with you. At present, there appears to be no real change in independence opinion following the Brexit vote, but that is really not a valid point from which to take a firm view, and we know not what Brexit actually is.

    The possibilities raise opportunities and difficulties for proponents of Scottish independence, with no clarity as yet. I’ve long held that Brexit wouldn’t necessarily herald and open goal for the SNP, but it all depends on the deal.

    The other critical point is whether we actually get to Brexit. My personal suspicion is that the Brexit vote has quickened the pace of changes in the most contentious areas of EU policy, which may bring us to the point where some leave voters could think that they can get enough of what they wanted without have to leave.

    In such a scenario, we’re back to a straight re-run of 2014, or, if the EU offers such sweetners to the UK only, Scotland might prefer to keep the deal within the UK.

    This last point is highly questionable, as it seems unlikely, but the point remains that no one knows what the future will look like, so I suspect there is an element of voters biding their time in Scotland.

  20. DAVE
    I don’t understand why you refer to UN Charter re Jasper’s post.

    The quote imposes a duty on all UN member states to accept self-determination of peoples they control. See the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples if you need more evidence.

    Whether the UK is Greater England or a real union was commented upon by English academics prior to the 2014 referendum but whichever of them was right the UK accepted the right of the self-determination of Scotland and will do so again if needs be.

  21. Alec

    From that YG poll, 77% of those who voted in the 2014 referendum haven’t changed their mind on independence.

    While some might, I doubt that it will be a significant group. Perfectly valid opinions are held by both groups.

    As always, in political debates, it’s the (roughly) quarter of the voting population who will make the decision (if they are offered that option).

    7% were No, but now Yes
    6% were Yes but now No
    6% were No, but now DK or WNV
    4% were Yes, but now DK or WNV

    Who these people are, why they think the way they do, and what might attract them to a particular stance is likely to be the critical area for both sides, if we do end up in indyref2.

    (Percentages are approximate, as I had to work them out from YG’s number free table! :-) )

  22. I may be wrong, and stand to be corrected, but I don’t believe the Scotland Act 1998, or the 2012 and 2016 versions, devolves any powers to the Scottish Parliament to make changes to the constitution of the United Kingdom.

    Therefore, any second referendum on Scottish independence can only happen if the relevant legislation is passed by Westminster.

    The chances of any further referendums taking place, on any subject whatsoever, are zero during the lifetime of any of the current MPs (or MSPs).

  23. @David Carrod

    No referendums for at least 50 years


  24. @Alec
    The question in the referendum was whether the UK should Leave, or Remain, a member of the EU.
    That must have meant on the day, for each voter, “the EU as you understand it to be at present constituted.” (There would be in that definition, I suggest, a pretty wide set of understandings.)
    What you seem to be suggesting is that if the EU, during negotiations with a leaving UK, or over the same period for its own purposes, changes its appearance to such an extent that the referendum vote might have gone the other way, then we should test that with another referendum. But why should that referendum be “a rerun of 2014” – which I take to mean another Scottish Independence referendum – and not a rerun of 2016, the EU membership referendum? Why do you deny the whole of the UK the opportunity to consider remaining a member of such a “reformed EU”? In any event, by the time such changes could be made,it would probably be simplest to leave and then reapply for membership (after another UK referendum? Or after another Scottish independence referendum so that we could apply separately for fresh membership?)
    I notice that you refer to EU changes as “”sweeteners”.
    If made at all such changes would presumably be made chiefly to benefit the remaining EU states, who would have to agree that renewed membership for UK? Scotland? RUK? would be in EU interests? Suppose RUK was accepted, and Scotland not? Spain might veto?
    As you say, “no one knows what the future will look like”, but it is as well to consider the worst case. If we do that, there may be no EU to rejoin – though even then, some would not regard that as the worst case.

  25. David Carrod

    “Scotland Act 1998, or the 2012 and 2016 versions, devolves any powers to the Scottish Parliament to make changes to the constitution of the United Kingdom.”

    You are quite correct.

    Whether the Scottish Parliament has the right to conduct a referendum which refers to the constitution of the UK is less clear.

    Whether the UK Government wants, or feels it has sufficient political strength, to oppose such a referendum would depend on the circumstances at the time.

    While it would put us in a potentially Gibraltarian position vis a vis Spain, it also remains open to the representatives of the Yes movement to precipitate, simultaneously, a Scottish General Election for Holyrood and a virtual Scottish General Election for Westminster – fought on the issue of independence.

    Real power isn’t always in the hands of those who imagine that they control all the levers. :-)

  26. Alec

    One problem we have in politics is that everyone has to be so certain all the time, theres no room to show any weakness or express doubt or admit mistakes. Any attempt to do so will be jumped upon, Its really quite sad. What Clive Lewis said was conciliatory and was necessary if theres to be any hope of uniting the party after the leadership election but instead of welcoming it in that spirit, its been seen as a sign of weakness.

  27. Dave

    As to a Spanish veto, you should be looking at the position of Gibraltar rather than Scotland.

  28. CambridgeRachel @ Alec

    “One problem we have in politics is that everyone has to be so certain all the time, theres no room to show any weakness or express doubt or admit mistakes.”

    Spot on! It’s why I regularly say that I dislike all political parties (including all the ones I have been a member of) – but also why I particularly dislike so many “political commentators” (paid hacks) in the MSM!

  29. Interesting comment here from the ‘Torygraph on the Brexit farce’:

    I wonder how long it will take our ‘pompously principled’ government to understand the lunacy of haggling on the terms of Brexit when the obvious thing is simply to accept the EEA solution and just get on with it.

  30. @ Alec


    The point was the blatant misrepresentation what was said in the interview.

    There is an interesting thing going on in the LP – and quite clearly the bureaucratic hierarchy (especially LP HQ) being unaware of. It will be interesting. I think there are going to be surprises.


    Now, on the Scottish poll. Thank you, for all who have knowledge and understanding. I probably would have accepted the poll as presented.


    “The chances of any further referendums taking place, on any subject whatsoever, are zero during the lifetime of any of the current MPs (or MSPs).”

    Nonsense – what is your evidence for this statement?

  32. @Tancred
    “…the obvious thing is simply to accept the EEA solution and just get on with it.”

    Wouldn’t that allow unlimited Freedom of Movement? If so, it would be political suicide for whoever agreed it from the UK. I would argue that we should concentrate on bilateral agreements with other countries around the world who are apparently keen to arrange them. These include USA, China, India, Canada, Australia etc. Then why worry about the EU at all? OK, so they might put up tariff barriers, but if we can get rid of tariff barriers with everyone else, we’ll be better off won’t we?

  33. @JASPER22

    Leave did not ‘win’ – it was not a sports contest. Leave obtained the most votes, but just because they did so does not mean that the leave side should be able to dictate the terms and process of leaving the EU. This referendum was not legally binding and only has value politically, not constitutionally.

  34. I would like to go back to the point I made in the previous thread about a question on whether a new indy referendum was/is justified. I think this is important because if a new vote was to result in yes then I would hope that the no’s were prepared to accept that result without rancor.

    I think if I was an SNP leader I would want to see about 75% saying a new indy poll was justified before going ahead. I would want to be certain that there wasn’t a substantial minority that felt a new vote had been foisted upon them unreasonably. I can quite imagine myself being a yes supporter thinking a new vote was unjustified or a no supporter feeling a new vote was justified, the question should there be a new vote is not precise enough, as a yes supporter I’m likely to say yes even though I don’t feel enough has changed to justify a new vote, as a no supporter I’m likely to say no even though I feel enough has changed to justify a new vote. Perhaps I’m being too picky here or giving voters credit for subtlety that they don’t have.

    I wonder how our Scottish contingent see this

  35. Rachel

    I think that’s fairly accurate – most of my friends (non political activists) voted yes in Indyref1 and most aren’t gagging for another referendum just yet. I think there’s a general acceptance that we need to see what’s on offer from the Brexit negotiations first.

    For clarification i am Scottish living in London but a regular visitor to Scotland – every two or three weeks

  36. @PETE B

    It’s not that simple. We can’t just start making trade deals with lots of other countries without agreeing our exit with the EU in legally valid terms that are acceptable to all the other EU members. Doing so would be a breach of international law and put us on the same level as Putin’s Russia. Of course, there are many on the UKIP supporting side who would welcome that, but these are a minority I believe.

  37. Barbazenzero – right now we’ve got Westminster recalled vote for the overwhelming majority of panellists, but haven’t got recalled Holyrood for everyone. Might change over at some point if it makes a difference, but that will require some proper thought and testing. Now that the old pre-2015 gap between how people vote at Holyrood and how people vote in Westminster elections has largely vanished, it may not make much difference (and, possible referendums aside, the next election in Scotland will be the 2020 Westminster election, not a Holyrood election.

    EU citizens aren’t excluded from polls – not sure where you’ve got that idea. Some polls exclude people who aren’t eligible to vote from their voting intention questions just before elections, but not from the whole poll (and most of the time, not at all). Most of the time we just trust people who couldn’t vote to say they wouldn’t vote (and in practice, most do)

    Oldnat – more bites of the cherry! When there’s space on an omnibus and we run questions off our own back it’s to provide content for the YouGov website and get publicity, so when it’s possible to squeeze more than one story out the press team chop it up into bits. And like voting intention and EU ref, the indy ref question always goes first to make sure nothing else influences it.

  38. @ CambridgeRachel

    People who are better versed in the Scottish matters will correct me if I’m wrong.

    One of the problems with the Scottish polls that it misunderstands the underlying conflict between independence (Scottish nationalism that for the time being comprises a huge coalition from centre right to quite far left) and unionists where the party boundaries are being blurred, so we have another coalition there. The only thing that makes me doubtful about my own argument is the existence, and strong showing of the Scottish Greens, even if it has some overlapping membership with the SNP.

    So, class differences (apologies for the outdated terminology) that would normally be reflected in party choices (inadequately, but hey!) are essentially invisible and are played out within the SNP.

    The SNP is also clever enough (and learnt from the firat referendum) not to put hypothetical questions to the electorate. So, the current poll is pretty good for them, because it says that irrespective of the non-existence of a question, there is a very sizeable opinion that would consider independence as a superior goal to anything else. As the question does not exist, the no (to independence) is actually a split between definite no and conditional no.

    One of the things that could happen is that the timeframe would allow the SNP coalition to break up, but I don’t think it is a real threat (again the Scottish Green Party is a question mark to this).

  39. Laszlo

    Interestingly I took one of those political ID tests this evening, even though there were no specific Scottish questions I still managed to come out as SNP. I might need to move! Anyone got a sofa I could borrow?

  40. CambridgeRachel

    There are reasonable people, on both sides of the indy argument, who would agree with your position – but then would calculate the chances of their winning such a referendum.

    Your 75% is an interesting choice, because it seems to be much the same as the % of Scots voters in 2014 who haven’t shifted their view on indy since our referendum.

    Do I think anything other than a remarkably soft Brexit would be sufficient reason for another referendum? Yes.

    Do I want an indyref2 regardless, if there isn’t a strong likelihood of winning? No.

    Those supporting the status quo (whatever the hell that is!) are unlikely to want there to be any risk of their losing what they won 2 years ago.

    Revisiting the indy question won’t take place in a vacuum. Where the 25% of Scots voters decide to position themselves over the developing political situation will be decisive.

    As to the SNP leadership, they are playing a canny game. If it is possible to keep Scotland in the EU, while staying within a UK where E&W have left, that is a win.

    Unlike many of the more extreme Brexiteers and Nationalists (of all nations), the SNP embarked on a course which rejected 19th/early 20th century nationalism for a “post-modern” civic version, which is much more nuanced and capable of incorporating unions with other nations.

    Not all within the SNP understand that, and certainly few of those outwith the Yes movement, that I have seen commenting on it here and elsewhere.

    But to fail to understand that motivation and strategy from both the SNP and SGP is to misunderstand what the whole debate is about.


    Many thanks for the info. If you don’t have the data for Holyrood then you should consider making some adjustment to capture 16 & 17 year olds.

    I don’t quite follow you re EU citizens not being excluded from polls. The EC’s Who is eligible to vote at a UK general election? lists under Additionally, the following cannot vote in a UK general election:
    EU citizens resident in the UK (although they can vote at elections to local authorities, devolved legislatures and the European Parliament)

    They are presumably not there in any Westminster VI polls you conduct, but were there in the 2014 referendum. I’d hazard a guess that few of them would have voted Leave given the chance to do so.

    The same applies to members of the HoL, but their numbers are too tiny to worry about!

  42. Anthony

    Thanks for the answers!

    I can understand the need for commercial exploitation of your polls – after all you are filthy capitalists! :-)

    Glad to hear that the indy question came first, but your commercial side should really understand that releasing that question last just increases confusion, unless they can be bothered to put understanding above cash – some hope!

    Sad that you are unable to ask about the distribution of votes on the Holyrood Electoral Register, and just the Westminster one, though,

    Perhaps a consequence of abandoning your former distinctive party ID strategy?

  43. CambridgeRachel

    You would always be welcome here! (all the bedroom doors have locks since we decided to ensure the privacy of our now-departed adult children):-)

    Bring your own wet weather gear, of course.

  44. I’ve always wanted Catalunya, rather than Scotland, to be the “test case” for the EU, in dealing with an intransigent state that clings to its own definition of “the nation”

    That might still come about

  45. @Bill Patrick

    “A few myths there-

    (1) Inflation didn’t rise to about 25% until after 12 months of Labour gaining power in early 1974”


    What? How is that correcting a myth?? I didn’t suggest otherwise now did I!!

    Some might try and highlight it peaking under Labour to try and blame them but it won’t wash. Inflation peaked early in Labour’s first term but clearly was the culmination of a trend that began rising before they took office not just here but in many countries in response to the action of Opec following the Yom Kippur war.

    Takes a little while to feed through. But we got an extra dollop because the coal strike exacerbated the energy shortage.

    Here’s a graph of WORLD inflation to highlight it was an issue afflicting many countries in the mid-seventies. Rather than it being Labour policy…

    (The graph runs up to the present day but can effectively zoom in by selecting 1987 in the right hand of the two drop down boxes underneath the graph)

    And you can clearly see the second inflation spike corresponding to the second oil price spike in the late seventies…

  46. @Bill Patrick

    “(2) Inflation fell below 10% on the RPI measure of inflation in 1978 and started to rise from mid-1978 onwards, before the second oil crisis began. On the GDP deflator measure, inflation was persistently over 10% from mid-1974 onwards, until 1981.”


    Nope. The oil crisis began earlier with the Iranian revolution earlier in ’78 which progressively hit their oil production.

    Look at this graph of oil prices. Clearly begin to rise early in 78 but they do accelerate in ’79.

  47. @alec

    ‘re hard and soft brexit and a possible reformed EU, this paper is an interesting analysis.


  48. @Bill Patrick

    “(3) The fall in inflation in the UK preceded the collapse in the oil prices, which didn’t really hit until 1985/1986. In fact, during the early Thatcher years, which was when inflation came down to about 5%, oil prices (at least on some measures) were well above what they had been during the Callaghan years.”


    Dear God. The collapse in oil price was pretty much done by 86/87!!!!

    Look at this graph. Where you can clearly see the price falling quickly from around 81/82 in Thatcher’s first term. It’s a massive collapse eclipsing attempts to muddy the waters with currency fluctuations etc

    Note that World inflation falls in tandem, as you’d expect and we get a world boom in consequence…

  49. @Bill P

    From memory, didn’t the economy return to growth in ’78? In which case that too might cause some inflation. But that would not exactly be rubbish economic policy to get us back to growth…

    Also, Wiki has plenty references and sources if you wanna check out the oil glut of the ear!y eighties that collapsed the price, here’s a taster…

    “The glut began in the early 1980s as a result of slowed economic activity in industrial countries (due to the crises of the 1970s, especially in 1973 and 1979) and the energy conservation spurred by high fuel prices.[4] The inflation-adjusted real 2004 dollar value of oil fell from an average of $78.2 in 1981 to an average of $26.8 per barrel in 1986.[5]

    In June 1981, The New York Times stated an “Oil glut! … is here”[6] and Time Magazine stated: “the world temporarily floats in a glut of oil,”[7] though the next week an article in The New York Times warned that the word “glut” was misleading, and that in reality, while temporary surpluses had brought down prices somewhat, prices were still well above pre-energy crisis levels.[8] This sentiment was echoed in November 1981, when the CEO of Exxon Corp also characterized the glut as a temporary surplus, and that the word “glut” was an example of “our American penchant for exaggerated language.” He wrote that the main cause of the glut was declining consumption. In the United States, Europe and Japan, oil consumption had fallen 13% from 1979 to 1981, due to “in part, in reaction to the very large increases in oil prices by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other oil exporters,” continuing a trend begun during the 1973 price increases.[9]

    After 1980, reduced demand and increased production produced a glut on the world market. The result was a six-year decline in the price of oil, which culminated by plunging more than half in 1986 alone.[2]”

  50. @TANCRED
    “Nonsense – what is your evidence for this statement?”

    David Cameron, making an emotional resignation speech outside Downing Street, and then declaring his sudden and unexpected availability for opening supermarkets, and making after dinner speeches at weddings and bar mitzvahs.

    And having to ask someone how to get into the Commons when not delivered to the main entrance in the Prime Ministerial Jag.

    if the electorate can’t be trusted to give the ‘right’ result, they won’t risk another referendum.

1 2 3 13