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 4 5 13
  1. I agree that capital gains tax is riiew capital gains tax is ridiculously low. In my view, capital gains should be treated just like any other income and taxed at the same rates, with no additional tax free allowance. CGT is normally only paid for by the wealthy, so why it should be so lightly taxed baffles me.

  2. Candy

    “Breaking Up Is Hard To Do”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbad22CKlB4

  3. Tancred

    “CGT is normally only paid for by the wealthy, so why it should be so lightly taxed baffles me.”

    Isn’t the explanation obvious within what you have posted?

  4. Prof Howard

    Re Pensions

    While the relative benefits/disadvantages of the pension “triple-lock” properly lie elsewhere than on this site, the effect of pension provision on potential polling is a relevant issue.

    We know that in the indyref, one of the strategies of the BT campaign was to suggest to pensioners that their pensions would disappear in an indy Scotland.

    Obviously rubbish, but not that much worse than some of the lines being pushed by some indy proponents either.

    However, my point was that the BT strategy seemed to be successful among the pensioner age group (though I doubt that it did more than what it was designed to do – confirm fear of change).

    If, out of a combination of Brexit possibilities, and UK policy alterations, the perceptions of the post-50 age groups in Scotland are altered – as to the best way of maintaining the remnants of the status quo, then attitudes might change in that critical demographic.

    As always, democratic political decisions are taken by individuals on the basis of their own circumstances – and their wider community (however they choose to define that concept).

  5. It’s not the ‘politics of envy’ to suggest that taxes on income from work and income from capital should be the same – it is the politics of reason and common sense.

    ‘Politics of envy’ is just a cheap soundbite designed to shut down proper debate.

    I’d love to see some informative polling on the subject: ‘which would you rather, 1% on VAT, x% on income tax or y% on capital gains’?

  6. BIGFATRON

    “‘Politics of envy’ is just a cheap soundbite designed to shut down proper debate.”

    Or an accurate description of one approach to politics. It just depends on your point of view.

  7. Bigfatron

    i suspect that any such polling would largely reflect people’s perceptions of how they would be personally affected – or how the MSM have persuaded them that they would.

    A lot of the polling on tax issues that I have seen, over the years, suggests that people want more tax to be paid to fund the things that they want – just not by them, obviously. :-)

  8. There are 12 million people aged over 65 in this country. Any government that plans measures to harm the interests of pensioners would be bound to pay the price at the ballot box. The triple lock was introduced as a sweetener to make for the loss of SERPS, so I don’t see why it should be removed. The government can easily afford it – after all, we spend less on pensions than almost every country.

  9. @ BFR

    Historically liberals and social democrats were against indirect taxation. Then there was not much need for polling as it was life or death really.

    Direct taxation is of course a liberal principle: common sharing of the burden of financing the common good.

    Th slogan of the politics of envy is 18th century, ever since repeated whenever it is expedient. My favourite one is when the hunger marchers were accused with this.

    Since I living in the era of food rationing for a sizeable proportion of the population of one of the leading countries in the world, I can’t find it amusing or describe it in any civil manner.

  10. CANDY

    Thanks for that link.

    Good questions!

    Good answers would be even more impressive. :-)

  11. Candy

    The Nature of the attempted coup against corbyn and the nature of the hostility towards the membership from the PLP has created lots of problems for the “thinking” left.

    Jeremy was supposed to be a stalking horse, he wasn’t supposed to win, to quote Clive Lewis “you were only supposed to blow the doors off”. His role was supposed to be opening up the party for a shift to the left, but things moved faster than the main actors anticipated.

    After the “wrong” left candidate won a plan needed to be drawn up to put a “correct” left leader in place. The idea among the movers and shakers including i suspect jeremy was for him to step down in 2018 and give his blessing to someone from the new crop, Clive Lewis being a likely candidate. That plan has been blown out of the water now, Corbyn does need to be replaced a lot sooner, but how to achieve that when the PLP have created a cult around Jeremy.

    Let me be clear, there is a corbyn cult, its not quite a personality cult but almost is. The PLP created that cult! The incorrect reporting, exsagerations and deceptions strengthened that cult. Big problem, the cult has a life of its own, Jeremy is not in control of it neither are his left wing backers. This leadership contest is a disaster for both wings of the party, Corbyn will win, for the right abject defeat for the left, we know he’s not electable but his position will be so strong it will be difficult to replace him even if he agrees to step down. A lot of people will see a plot if he steps down, of course it is a plot but its corbyns plot.

    A second problem is that a lot of the cultists will believe that corbyn and labour can win without help, the “thinking” left don’t believe that. Neither wing of the labour party can win an outright victory on their own. The right can never win back scotland and risk losing the North and inner cities. The left can’t win in the south and affluent suburbs. The only viable path is an electoral alliance and for that we need a different leader.

    I think that the Clive Lewis article and the Owen Jones article point to a desire on the left to replace corbyn sooner, I suspect 2017 and that although they had hoped to have more choices they have decided to go with Clive Lewis. I like Clive Lewis a lot, he’s media friendly and hits a lot of the right demographic buttons, I can see my family going nuts for him but I have a nagging feeling that he lacks gravitas

    Of course this might be completely wrong on all counts, but I think the ground is being prepared for 2017

  12. @CR – “I think that the Clive Lewis article and the Owen Jones article point to a desire on the left to replace corbyn sooner, I suspect 2017”

    What’s the point of electing Corbyn this year, only to go through another leadership election next year, wasting another three months fighting? Makes no sense. If there was really a plan to replace Corbyn, he’d have stepped down now and let his chosen follower contest the race against Owen Smith in the current leadership election.

    That hasn’t happened – I rather think Corbyn means to be leader for life, like that Scargill bloke, and won’t even step down if he is reduced to 10 MPs at the next election – he’ll just blame the media or the weather or something for his failure.

  13. @ CambridgeRachel

    “The left can’t win in the south and affluent suburbs.”

    It could be true, but by all evidence (Yougov) the most of the new members are actually them …

    Lewis’s is not an article but a chat with Jones. It is a pretty good one, but it really just skims on the surface.

    Most of Jones’s points are irrelevant, out of contexts, and ignorant (his proving his leftist mantra was particularly hurtful). I’m really tired of this post-modernist stuff mixed with 1960s activism. These points of critique don’t make Corbyn electable (having said that, there is no evidence that he is unelectable), or that he would be capable of creating a coherent set of prerequisites for his liking type of a society.

    It wouldn’t be too difficult to develop a policy package in which Labour has a chance, but I’m afraid it would require firing the entire HQ staff, and deselect about 50 MPs. As these won’t happen, the narrative will remain the same – which narrative has barely anything to do with the reality (and locks Corbyn in an unwinnable narrative too).

  14. Cambridge Rachel

    That seems a sensible analysis – and, therefore, likely to be howled down by partisans on both sides of your civil war. :-)

    If I can comment on the bit of it that relates to Scottish politics – “The right can never win back scotland “?

    I’d suggest that such a statement is potentially somewhat anglo-centric. Who is going to “win back Scotland” – and for what purpose? The governance of England perhaps?

    What seems more likely is that, if England is going to have governance other than from the Tories, it needs to either alter the UK constitution to a federal/condeferal model, and/or for ELab to ignore Scotland in its planning, and campaign on issues that will attract English votes.

    It seems to me that the conventional assumptions (useful as they are to particular parties at some points) that “Scotland is left-wing” and “England is right wing” are probably nonsense.

    People everywhere vote on the basis of their self-interest, the propaganda they are fed by the media, and the social influences that affect them.

    I suspect (though I have no certainty about it) that ELab and SLab are locked in an internal struggle about attitudes that were central to politics in the mid 20th century, but are largely irrelevant to most voters now.

  15. If the relevant bits of , the electorate in England are “UKish” (or at least “British*) then they wouldn’t object to a Welsh MP (with a Welsh accent) becoming PM. despite not being able to vote on EVEL legislation.

    Such an electorate would be wholly unconcerned about such matters.

    I haven’t seen any polling on this, so it seems to be an unknown.

  16. I believe that I’m right in saying that the number of Scottish MPs backing either Labour or Conservative were only significant in determining the governing party, three times since 1945 (or in 17 GE). Labour has been far more dependent on the LDs taking seats which would otherwise be Conservative, or on the LDs splitting the vote.

    In 2015, a Tory majority was achieved because of the implosion of the LD vote.

  17. @Oldnat: “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.”

    The odd thing about Article 50, is that the negotiations are by qualified majority voting. That is what it says.

    Everything I have read since 23 June suggests otherwise. But if you actually read it…

    But I would expect Spain to cut up rough. Assuming they have a government.

  18. Oldnat

    Im sorry for my English arrogance or is it objectification of Scotland. Of course I’m a heretic and dont think it makes much difference if Scottish MPs are labour or SNP, its the politics of MPs that matter and SNP MPs seem to be more labour than Labour MPs

  19. Info suggests that Jeremy has a huge following amongst SLab members and goes down well on the doorsteps north of Hadrians Wall.
    Ironically, methinks with the ScotNats having reached their high watermark of support, Jeremy is probably best placed to start the Labour revival up there.

  20. @jasper22

    Is this info ‘re Corbyn in Scotland, the polling information which shows that Ruth Davidson is far more highly regarded as doing a good job by Labour voters than Corbyn?

  21. Joseph1832

    “The odd thing about Article 50, is that the negotiations are by qualified majority voting”

    That’s my understanding too – but the Spanish claim (I haven’t checked it ) is that the broad outline of the negotiating positions requires unanimity.

  22. Hire ton

    obviously not, but then, not surprising to us guys on here!

  23. And , I have to say, Davidson is seen as the acceptable face of Scotch politics by lots of people south of the border, regardless of their politics.

  24. Cambridge Rachel

    Being anglo-centric isn’t the same as “arrogance”. It just means centred on England. :-)

    That’s a perfectly reasonable position from someone in England

    It does, of course, matter enormously to the Lab leadership whether the Scots MPs are SNP or Labour. SNP ones will generally vote for what you see as “labour ideas”, and/or Scottish interests while SLab MPs will do as they are told. :-)

  25. @CR

    “I think that the Clive Lewis article and the Owen Jones article point to a desire on the left to replace corbyn sooner”

    Presumably Corbyn isn’t in on the plan. Because the obvious approach was for him to stand down and make way for someone else to take his place in the leadership election (requiring only nominations from 15% not 20%).

  26. Jasper22

    “And , I have to say, Davidson is seen as the acceptable face of Scotch politics by lots of people south of the border, regardless of their politics.”

    I am sure that you are right in that.

    Those people who choose to say “Scotch” rather than “Scots” (it’s a small point but indicative of attitude) probably do support a conservative stance on the status of the UK.

    I agree that there are lots of such conservatives in all the English political parties (though the Greens are probably an exception to that norm).

  27. As it happened the same, segmented, YouGov also contained a question about the desire for IndyRef2 (in the paid-for Scotland in Union bit)[1]:

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/lbzcm2uume/ScotlandintheUnionResults_160725_ScottishIndependence_W.pdf

    Thinking about Scotland holding another independence referendum, which of the following statements, if any, best reflects your view?[2]

    Scotland should have another independence referendum as soon as possible. 16%

    Scotland should wait until the UK’s deal with the EU is clear, and then decide whether to have a referendum. 32%

    Scotland should not have an independence referendum until at least 2030, a generation from 2014. 25%

    Scotland should never have another independence
    referendum. 17%

    None of the above 2%

    Don’t know 9%

    This suggests that there is about 40% who are opposed in practically any circumstances, but probably a majority in favour of a new referendum once and if Brexit is sorted out.

    And unfortunately the problem with referendums is that you either believe in them or you don’t. If 52% or 55% is good enough one time, then it has to be good enough the next time, even if it goes the other way. By definition a referendum doesn’t settle anything for ever – no moment in history or particular group of people is in any way superior[3]. So once you’ve accepted the principle, it only takes a substantial number of people to want a referendum for one to be justified[4]. Those claiming that a referendum settles things for ever, or even for an arbitrary period, are simply missing the point.

    [1] Question order is a bit dubious here, as this appears to have come after one asking whether another referendum would have an impact on the economy and business.

    [2] The options are probably a bit skewed by the choice of wording – presumably requested by the commissioner – rather than the neutral ‘next 5 years / 5-10 years etc’ approach we normally get. This ‘once in a generation’ obsession has always struck be as a bit odd – though as for unionists a generation only seems to last 16 years, maybe they are trying to out-breed the Nats.

    [3] Obviously the boomers believe otherwise but tough.

    [4] In many states only the signatures of a required number or percentage of the electorate is required – usually nowhere near a majority.

  28. Haven’t posted for a while, primarily because I’ve been on wonderful two-week holiday touring the Balkans but also because my enthusiasm for politics has been sapped of late, firstly by the recent appalling EU Referendum campaign and secondly by the dire state of, and prospects for, the Labour Party. Seldom have I been so close to despair.

    Accordingly, I will only comment on the subject of this thread and then, more than likely, retreat into the lurkers undergrowth once again, maybe to sporadically reappear nearer the Labour leadership election result. So, to Scottish independence then. I’ve felt for a long time that it’s difficult to think of a set of circumstances where a majority of Scots would vote for independence and this poll rather reinforces that view. I never bought the argument that Blair’s devolution plans would be a precursor for full blown independence and, as some of Blair’s admirers argued at the time, it may well be that devolution has in fact headed off the likelihood of Scotland leaving the Union. It could be that Scots rather like their halfway house and are quite prepared to have a nakedly pro-independence and nationalist party presiding over their devolved affairs, and cocking a snoop at England in Westminster too, but don’t really ever fancy going that tantalising one step further.

    Too early to be sure, I concede, but I wonder if Scottish Independence is a boat that might just have sailed. In the immediate aftermath of Brexit when the circumstances were felt to be at their most propitious for the independence lobby and still a majority to stay in the Union?

    Could 2014-15 have been a high watermark for the SNP too? They turned what should have been an existential defeat in 2014 into an unlikely victory but I wonder if they breathed too heady a mix of false euphoria from all that. The losers lap of honour coming to an end perhaps?

  29. Roger Mexico

    As you will, no doubt, have noted Anthony only confirmed that the indyref question came first, but gave no indication of the order of subsequent questions.

    While one appreciates the need to maximise YG’s income stream. such somewhat shoddy display of a poll’s data does little to enhance the view of the industry (or perhaps just YG),

  30. Robin and candy

    Im pretty sure that corbyn would have stood down if it had been possible for someone acceptable to nominated in his place. At the moment while the left has support in the membership it doesn’t have enough support in the PLP. Rules need to be changed so that its possible for someone like Lewis or Raynor to be nominated. Personally I think nominations from CLPs should have the same weight as nominations from MPs or MEPs.

    Alternatively if the PLP come to their senses a deal could be done where enough nominations were available to a candidate acceptable to the membership

  31. I like the idea of a Personality cult created by ones opponents.

  32. CB11

    “It could be that Scots rather like their halfway house and are quite prepared to have a nakedly pro-independence and nationalist party presiding over their devolved affairs, and cocking a snoop at England in Westminster too,”

    Your final comment in that section suggests that you have little understanding of Scottish politics, and are just miffed at Scotland choosing a different electoral path from that you would have preferred us to continue to do.

    I quite understand that you would prefer Scotland to continue to send a compliant group of SLab MPs to Westminster to do as they were instructed to do on English governance.

    Tough. Those days are gone, and unlikely to reappear any time soon.

    Those of us who have been observing Scottish polls for the last 30 years or so, have been very well aware that the solution that most Scots would coalesce around isn’t a “halfway house”, but Devo Max as defined in successive ScotCen surveys.

    Such a scenario could be created via the putative “reverse Greenland” or “Hong Kong” scenarios as well as an internally created UK Confederal constitution.

    Many in Scotland are sceptical of the UK’s capacity to adopt such solutions, so it could be that the UK ends up pushing potential supporters into an indy stance.

    Such are the perils of having such definite positions, in circumstances which are inherently unstable.

    Unless the polling is widely out, then 35-40% of Scots are strongly committed to the UK Union, and 35-40% of Scots are strongly committed to independence.

    As always, the matter will be decided by those who have no strong opinions either way, and will be guided by the circumstances.

  33. Colin

    What do you think thatcher was? It always made me cringe when folk were shouting “Maggie maggie maggie, out out out” I never liked demonizing individuals and its counter productive, the supporters of the demonized person react with similar passion. The left played a large part in creating the cult of Margret.

  34. Back to Brexit, if permissible.

    I don’t recall either side giving much warning of the consequences which might ensue for the remaining EU countries should we vote leave?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/27/italy-eyes-40bn-bank-rescue-as-first-brexit-domino-falls/

    Italy is preparing a €40bn rescue of its financial system as bank shares collapse on the Milan bourse and the powerful after-shocks of Brexit shake European markets.

    “This is the moment of truth we have all been waiting for a long time. We just didn’t know it would be Brexit that set the elephant loose,” said a top Italian banker.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/imf-admits-disastrous-love-affair-with-euro-apologises-for-the-i/

    The International Monetary Fund’s top staff misled their own board, made a series of calamitous misjudgments in Greece, became euphoric cheerleaders for the euro project, ignored warning signs of impending crisis, and collectively failed to grasp an elemental concept of currency theory.

    Not looking good for the EU post Brexit

  35. @OLDNAT

    “I quite understand that you would prefer Scotland to continue to send a compliant group of SLab MPs to Westminster to do as they were instructed to do on English governance.
    Tough. Those days are gone, and unlikely to reappear any time soon.”

    What makes you so sure? The rise of the SNP is a relatively recent phenomenon.

    “Unless the polling is widely out, then 35-40% of Scots are strongly committed to the UK Union, and 35-40% of Scots are strongly committed to independence.”

    Erm….no. I would say 55-60% of Scots committed to the union and 40-45% committed to independence, more like.

  36. @Oldnat – “We know that in the indyref, one of the strategies of the BT campaign was to suggest to pensioners that their pensions would disappear in an indy Scotland.

    Obviously rubbish……”

    Well, not so obviously. Scotland has a major differential with rUK in terms of it’s aging population, and the SNP never answered the issue of how it could afford better pensions than at present, given the demographics. In polling terms, I suspect many Scots pensioner voters saw through this deceit.

    @Tancred – “The triple lock was introduced as a sweetener to make for the loss of SERPS…”

    Point of order – it wasn’t. The triple lock predated the flat rate pension, which was the thing that accounted for the loss of SERPs, technically.

    It actually doesn’t, but AW will not take kindly to me reminding posters again that the new flat rate pension represents something like a 30% cut in future pension rights for low income workers.

  37. ROGER MEXICO
    [4] In many states only the signatures of a required number or percentage of the electorate is required – usually nowhere near a majority.

    In Switzerland [pop. similar to Scotland], for a Federal referendum 50,000 physical signatures need to be harvested with addresses within 100 days. They are verified locally by the cantons/communes.

  38. Tancred

    “55-60% of Scots committed to the union”

    That suggestion isn’t supported by the polling.

    Unless you have data unavailable to the rest of us, those figures seem odd.

    How do you square them with this poll, (or the others pre and post EU referendum)?

    You may want to refer to this list of polls.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence

  39. Tancred

    We can even examine your figures in more detail

    In the 2014 referendum, 45% voted Yes, while 55% voted No.

    Only the most extreme partisan would suggest that all those voting their way were “committed” to that position. Many, obviously, were, while others voted the way they did on their perception of the balance of advantage.

    Since then, polling has shown a slight movement from supporting the UK Union, to supporting independence.

    This YG poll shows 13% of both Yes and No 2014 voters moving to the opposite position since then. None of them can be described as “committed” to one position or the other.

    Like you, some on my side of the argument, want the evidence to be different from what it is but, sadly, for both sets of advocates, they have to take account of what the actual evidence is.

  40. ALEC
    Well, not so obviously. Scotland has a major differential with rUK in terms of it’s aging population, and the SNP never answered the issue of how it could afford better pensions than at present, given the demographics.

    That whole issue is likely to be a serious matter in the Brexit, whether Scotland leaves with it or not. State pension contributions by non-locals are currently translated into pensions payable irrespective of the retirement location and usually paid by the local pension agency who collect from the other state. Those payments will need to continue for the lifetimes of the EU workers concerned.

    As I understand the rules, all existing pensions paid in Scotland all come from the DWP, all the contributions having been collected by HMRC, which will remain a DWP responsibility for the lifetimes of the individuals receiving them.

  41. Alec

    “the SNP never answered the issue of how it could afford better pensions than at present, given the demographics. In polling terms, I suspect many Scots pensioner voters saw through this deceit. ”

    In all the hurly-burly of the indyrtef, I may have missed the SNP suggestion that an indy Scotland “could afford better pensions than at present” [1]

    If they did, then I’d agree that such a prospect was unlikely. However, the BT/SLab campaign wasn’t to suggest that the pension wouldn’t be enhanced by indy, but that pensions would no longer be paid.

    However, the point of my raising the issue was within a polling context. If pensioners thought they were being given a guarantee on their pensions by staying within the UK, and that doesn’t happen, it may shift some attitudes.

    As always, it is perception that counts in politics – not what activists claim was (or should have been) the case.

    [1] Happy to be corrected, but my memory was that the triple-lock on pensions would continue. Now we can debate whether any side was being wholly honest with such a suggestion, since future policies can never be guaranteed, but the recent suggestions on its abandonment would suggest actual deceit by the UK, as opposed to surmised deceit by the Yes campaign.

  42. @CR Your analysis of Labour;s current mess seems to me spot on. Thank you. Can you plot the way forward?

  43. Quite a fantastic article from Owen Jones, that completely deconstructs the Corbyn period. There are so many excellent points in what he is saying, but the most entertaining thing is that all of this has been aired to exhaustion on UKPR.

    It will be very interesting to see whether this has any impact on Labour opinion. Owen Jones is a big name in the shrinking Labour tent, and to see him write such a devastating critique of the man hero of twitter is already causing a huge online backlash. However, as Jones points out, twitter is an extremely minority sport, and if the big beasts of the left start making noises like this, then perhaps the leadership isn’t such a done deal.

    It is, however, heartening to see a left wing thinker with extremely close connections to Corbyn reiterating the exact same points as I have been making on here for some time.

  44. Barbazenzero

    “As I understand the rules, all existing pensions paid in Scotland all come from the DWP, all the contributions having been collected by HMRC, which will remain a DWP responsibility for the lifetimes of the individuals receiving them.”

    That’s mostly my understanding too, with the following points

    1. It matters not whether the recipient is physically in the area for which the DWP is currently responsible – they can be in Patagonia, and still get their pension.

    2. I am unsure whether a pension recipient who leaves British citizenship for another citizenship can be adversely affected, though I think not. However, even in that case, all a Scottish pensioner would need to do would be to retain their British citizenship. It is illegal to deprive someone of their citizenship, and leave them stateless.

    3. The UK pensions system was, and remains, a PONZI scheme. Those who want the UK have to accept the consequences. :-)

  45. Alec

    I’m not sure that your latest lauding of your favoured faction within Labour quite matches with your earlier apology to Anthony, and your promise to do better. :-)

  46. @ Colin

    “The Corbyn Twitterati are very cross”

    Well, it is really boring from both sides (though I didn’t particularly like Jones’s double defence that called for a particular type of attack, and as the defence was ready, it really took any edge away of these twitters (not because they had an edge in the first place – the selection of twitters shows really understanding by these people).

    I know that being an out of party Bolshevik is a comfortable position, but still, it is really weak from the LP.

    Right, as far as we know – judging from the polls and polls done for academic studies, as well as the sorrowful mass rallies of mr Smith, Corby will win. He may not though.

    Once elected, he should terminate all managerial employment contracts at the HQ, and fill the position with his own people. Although these did not show much competence in the past – well, who knows. They would still do less damage than the current lot.

    Select those plotters – about 20 where the Corbynista are sure to succeed – and start the deselection once the NEC elections are over as then there should be enough power. Choose about 20 MPs arbitrarily (with the condition that It would succeed) and start the deselection against them too.

    These two measures should do the trick.

    Then do something, because then Corbyn cannot blame anyone else for very little achievements.

  47. @Oldnat – “In all the hurly-burly of the indyrtef, I may have missed the SNP suggestion that an indy Scotland “could afford better pensions than at present””

    Nicola Sturgeon, September 23rd, 2013;

    “”For those approaching retirement, the paper [Pensions in an Independent Scotland] provides clarity about their future state pension terms and sets out how they would be better off with independence.”

    Previous plans meant the state pension age would not be increased to 67 until 2035, Ms Sturgeon said, adding that SNP ministers were “not persuaded that the increase to 2026 is the right pace of change”.

    John Swinney 23rd Sept. 2013 – “”Although our population is aging, our population is not aging as fast as is happening in the rest of the UK.” –

    That is completely untrue.

    This took me about 20 second to find, but there are hundreds of quotes. I recall quite a lot of talk from the SNP about making pensions better, which proves I wasn’t one of the many Scots listening to the Indyref debate with my fingers in my ears singing ‘la la la la…”.

    Who knows – you might also have missed the bit about oil at $90 a barrel?

  48. @Oldnat – “I’m not sure that your latest lauding of your favoured faction within Labour quite matches with your earlier apology to Anthony, and your promise to do better. :-)”

    In my defence, it was, at heart, a polling point. Tonight we have had two members of Corbyn’s economic advisory team (including Blanchflower) coming out for Smith and saying Corbyn has been poor and is unelectable. Now Jones is saying the same thing.

    These are all friends of the Corbyn leadership, and people who were working closely with him. The question really is how many of these people have to come out and speak honestly about the complete disaster that has befallen Labour this last year before the penny drops amongst the Labour party electorate?

  49. @ Alec

    I think Owen Jones seriously undermined his own credibility with his performance on Question Time. However, I agree that Corbyn is losing his “known” supporters a bit too quickly.

    If I’m right there should be an LP membership poll next week – it would be a good indication.

1 2 3 4 5 13