The Sunday Times had a Panelbase Scottish poll yesterday, with tables out today here – from memory I think it’s the first Scottish poll of the year. There are no voting intentions (or at least, none that have been published so far), instead it concentrates in Brexit and the potential for a second referendum on Scottish independence.

On independence voting intention remains little changed from the 2014 referendum – 46% would vote YES, 54% would vote NO. Opinion on whether there should be another referendum soon is pretty evenly split. Half want a referendum in the relatively near future (27% in the next year or two, 23% in “about two years, when the UK has finished negotiating to leave the EU”), half don’t want a second indyref in the next few years.

There is also little sign of any change of opinion on Europe since the referendum. Last year people in Scotland voted by 62% to 38% to remain in the EU, in a referendum tomorrow they say they would vote 61% to 39% to stay in the EU. Asking about some of the specifics on Brexit the poll asked about free trade and immigration, albeit in a slightly odd way (the question focused on just EU companies having access to Scottish markets, rather than vice-versa). By 65% to 11% people thought EU companies should still have free trade with Scotland, by just 40% to 36% they thought EU citizens should still have a right to live and work in Scotland.

Finally Panelbase asked if Britain left the EU, and then Scotland became independent, would people want an independent Scotland to join the European Union – an interesting question I don’t think I’ve seen asked before. 48% would support an independent Scotland joining the EU, 31% would be opposed.


167 Responses to “Panelbase Scottish poll”

1 2 3 4
  1. Laszlo

    “The FT is reporting that a Trump aid accused Germany with using the “undervalued euro” to gain unfair advantages. ”

    well it is – you can find hundreds of articles saying the same thing

    from the German perspective the Euro is an undervalued DM – which is net good for them (as long as they avoid the transfer payment side of the deal when it would become net bad)

    (you may have just meant the diplomatic angle in which case fair enough)

  2. @Somerjohn

    English is a wonderful thing. I count my blessings every day to have been born in this country, enjoying these benefits and speaking this language.

    On Trump, I suppose the key question is “what’s the alternative?” Yes he’s mercurial. Yes you can’t guarantee that good favour today will convert to reciprocal consideration tomorrow.

    But we have to have some sort of relationship with the US, and it’s not up to us who they have as their Head of State. Currying favour with him appears to me to be very much in the interests of the UK, however queasy it makes us feel and however uncertain we can be of the outcome.

    What else do we do? Replace the red telephone with an answer message that says “You’re a horrible person and I don’t want to talk to you. Get Hillary to call”.

  3. @ Turk

    ‘The only observation I have is that the US is a country of millions of voters many of whom a few weeks ago elected Trump president and very few of which would have been demonstrating against Trump in the last few days.’

    I can absolutely see that, and the parallel with the MSM’s reporting of Corbyn. My concern is what are the bits of bad news that the brouhaha is intended to bury.

  4. @Somerjohn

    “With a massive trade surplus with the USA*, and a currency that has fallen 20% against the dollar, we should be prime candidates for hostile trade action. But maybe May’s invisible shield will protect us.”

    ————–

    How much of that trade surplus is down to our financial sector. ‘Cos, like, if it is significant now, it might not be quite as surplus-inducing post-Brexit…

  5. @Syzygy

    Well I suppose its pushed the Brexit debate out of the limelight. Which may be equally in the interests of the Tories and Labour.

  6. @ Neil

    ‘On Trump, I suppose the key question is “what’s the alternative?”

    Unfortunately, VP Mike Pence who is vehemently anti-abortion, LGBT rights, minimum wages, a long-term advocate of trade deals like TPP/TTIP/TiSA, opposes closing Guantanomo… and smoking doesn’t kill plus doesn’t believe in global warming. Not really so much an alternative …

  7. “First Poll released on the temporary immigration ban
    57% Agree
    33% Disagree
    10% Undecided”

    For people who don’t get what Trump is doing he’s provoking an argument around the principle of should a country always put its own citizens first.

    Countering the globalist argument that has flared up since the neocons decided to bomb the middle east into Europe that people having a hard time *have a right* to immigrate to America.

    When he wins the argument over that principle – which he will as a majority never agreed with the liberal argument they were just bullied by the media into keeping their mouth shut – i wouldn’t be surprised if he removes the US from the refugee treaty.

    The muslim angle is just cos current terrorism is the easiest ground to fight the battle over the principle.

  8. @ Neil A

    ‘Well I suppose its pushed the Brexit debate out of the limelight. Which may be equally in the interests of the Tories and Labour.’

    The thought had occurred to me too..

    The other ‘good’ thing about the mass demonstrations is that they must go a little way to mitigate anti-Western feelings in the 7 affected countries.

  9. Neil A

    “The UK government is not run by “English Nationalists”. “British Nationalists” perhaps”

    “English is a wonderful thing. I count my blessings every day to have been born in this country, enjoying these benefits and speaking this language.”

    True. English is a very flexible language, and allows nuanced differences between its different forms in different areas.

    Re Slugger’s article – “British Nationalism” has a very different connotation in Ireland, where it refers to the hard-line Unionist position of some in the Six Counties. Using that term in the context of the UK Government would give totally the wrong impression, in that polity.

    That politicians from the largest part of the UK still use “England”, “Britain” and “UK” as interchangeable terms, and talk of the interests of “the” or “our” country, when referring to wholly English matters as well as those which include the other polities, does little to help.

    Language use does matter in many areas of life, though frequently, those in the dominant community take a long time to understand that.

  10. @ Neil A

    Neil

    I think this sentence of Mr O’Toole’s is at the centre of what he says. ” The EU underpinned the willingness of much of the population to settle down within the current borders for the foreseeable future.”

  11. The Lucid Talk NI poll details are now with the Belfast Telegraph and other clients.

    Publication expected tomorrow or Thursday (but nothing up on the BT site yet).

  12. @Mrjones – “For people who don’t get what Trump is doing he’s provoking an argument around the principle of should a country always put its own citizens first.”

    I think that is an interesting point, that is rather lost in the current wave of protest.

    However, the counter to the point made, which is being made in the US by a number of senior security people, and also now thankfully by our own Home Secretary in Parliament, is the view that Trumps actions have made the US and the west in general more dangerous.

    This is the complexity that unforetunately many trumpites (and indeed, many Brexiteers) struggle to get. Negating the Islamist terror threat really isn’t so much about which people come into our countries, but what ideas cross the borders. Radicalisation happens online, and across borders, and actions that can be used to promote radicalisation can be counter productive.

    I have no idea whether Trumps policies will lead down this path, but many UK security experts seem to think they will. In this sense, the notion that Trump is putting US citizens first is debatable.

    However, that gets us into AW’s forbidden debate about rights and wrongs of a specific policy. The point is whether the public accepts or rejects it. So far, polls seem pretty strongly to support it, but again, that doesn’t help decide whether Trump is really putting US citizens first – it may only tell us that many are seduced by simplistic arguments and don’t appreciate the complexities of an interconnected world.

  13. @Oldnat

    I don’t really disagree with any of that, except that the fact that one wouldn’t expect Mr O’Toole to use the term “British Nationalist” (because he’d take different connotations from it than us) doesn’t excuse him from talking about “English Nationlists” when that is essentially his own prejudice and is not really true.

    The underlying point, which is that the politicians in Westminster won’t care what happens to the people of Northern Ireland, because most of those politicians are English, is not in my opinion an academic one and is purely polemical – borne out of a Nationalist mentality that puts the blame for all ills at the feet of the English.

    Speaking of which the second half of your post reads to me like a fairly repititious example of that ad anglicus way of looking at the world.

  14. Neil A

    My final phrase was deliberately much wider –

    “Language use does matter in many areas of life, though frequently, those in the dominant community take a long time to understand that.”

    Valerie will take the point, I’m sure, as will RAF.

  15. Somerjohn,
    “If there were any logic to Trump’s positions, you would have to add the UK to that list. With a massive trade surplus with the USA*, and a currency that has fallen 20% against the dollar, we should be prime candidates for hostile trade action.”

    Trump has acted against the Uk. He has been making noises about a trade deal and thereby encouraging the Uk to go for hard Brexit. Once the Uk is irreversibly committed to no deal with the EU, he will be in a far better position to dictate whatever terms he wants in this new deal of his.

  16. Danny: “Once the Uk is irreversibly committed to no deal with the EU, he will be in a far better position to dictate whatever terms he wants in this new deal of his.”

    Wow. That is a very dark view of the entanglement the UK is sleepwalking into.

  17. neil A,
    “So May is simultaneously too close to Trump and not close enough”

    Seems to be so. This is starting to turn into rather a mess.

  18. Quentin Letts is on my train home. Anyone want to put a question to Quentin?

  19. Somerjohn @ Danny:

    “Once the Uk is irreversibly committed to no deal with the EU, he will be in a far better position to dictate whatever terms he wants in this new deal of his.”

    Wow. That is a very dark view of the entanglement the UK is sleepwalking into.

    While my personal opinion is that Scotland would be better off if the UK remained in the EU (or at least the Single Market) that obviously isn’t going to happen, so making beneficial trade deals elsewhere (as many on here hoped for) would be essential.

    While May said (in relation to the EU) “no deal is better than a bad deal”, the question is whether a good deal can now be made with anyone.

    If May is seen by other countries (and I don’t know if that is the case or not) to be desperate to conclude trade deals for domestic political reasons, then they must fancy their chances of signing deals which favour them as opposed to the UK.

  20. I don’t think May is desperate to do trade deals. We have no trade deal with the USA now and yet it is our biggest single export market.

  21. Test

  22. We don’t have a trade desl with the US now and it is still our biggest single export market.

  23. @Jasper

    Yes, after the EU.

  24. @Somerjohn: I don’t think the UK has a massive trade surplus with the US. On the contrary, the Wikipedia figures for 2015 show that theUK’s bilateral trade surplus with the US was merely 569 million US dollars, which means almost statistically zero. By contrast, Germany had a 74 billion dollar surplus with the US and China, 343 billion dollar surplus.

    It is pretty clear to me who the targets of Trump’s protectionist policies will be and I doubt the UK will be among them.

  25. @ Oldnat

    ‘so making beneficial trade deals elsewhere (as many on here hoped for) would be essential.’

    As Jasper22 says we don’t have one with the US now … so why do we need one? IIRC external US tariffs are very low and the usual translation of ‘removing barriers to trade’ is the removal of employment and environmental protections plus further privatisation of public services.

  26. Syzygy

    Somewhat dangerous, I’d have thought, to assume that the situation before Trump’s inauguration would continue!

    As I understand it, and like 99.9% of the population, it isn’t one of my areas of expertise!, the critical factor is quotas, not tariffs, and quotas are determined in such deals.

    For domestic political reasons, however, all the Brexit rhetoric has been about how the UK will find other countries queuing up to sign trade deals with UK (that part, at least, may turn out to be true!), so not signing them would be politically damaging.

    Is a bad deal better than no deal? From the Government’s point of view – probably yes – since so much political capital has been invested in that rhetoric.

  27. Somerjohn,
    “Wow. That is a very dark view of the entanglement the UK is sleepwalking into.

    Time will tell what Trump does. He has demonstrated a total willingness to completely reverse his position twice daily in furtherance of his main aims, whatever those might be. I think everyone here who suggests his strategy is to make a big splash and see what results, is correct. Especialy when he defies convention in the process. There seems to be a huge tendency to underestimate him because he contradicts himself and seems to bumble along somewhat. It was utterly dismissed that he could possibly become president. I ask myself why anyone, rich, getting on a bit, would want to take one of the most difficult jobs in the world unless he wanted to achieve something as president. Iconoclastic, wants to really change the US for what he would view as the better. Principally this means revese US economic decline, stated to be by repatriating industry. Despite his German ancestry, he doesnt seem too fond of Germany, so why would his Scottish ancestry mean he would favour the UK?

  28. MrJones

    While exchange rates are used for manipulating export competitiveness, I struggled with the point as the 1$ = 4 DM (until 1973) was actually an American invention.

    Upsetting the three (Japan will probably be the next) largest exporters of goods in the world is rather telling (especially as each has its unique competitive edge).

  29. Mbruno: ” I don’t think the UK has a massive trade surplus with the US.”

    I think you’re looking at the trade in goods. It’s in services that we have the big surplus. See the ONS report I quoted (go to section 3):

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/theuktradeandinvestmentrelationshipwiththeunitedstatesofamerica/2016

  30. oldnat,
    “If May is seen by other countries (and I don’t know if that is the case or not) to be desperate to conclude trade deals for domestic political reasons, then they must fancy their chances of signing deals which favour them as opposed to the UK.”

    This is rather the conclusion I have reached. The big problem with May’s position is the lack of any clear alternative to EU membership. Being an honest sort, all she has promised is to do her best, but being conscientious she must be preparing for the worst.

  31. Somerjohn

    “It’s in services that we have the big surplus”

    Irish Times reporting that most of the big financial companies planning to move their European HQ to Frankfurt or Dublin, while some of the big US ones are considering repatriating jobs to the USA.

    Obviously, that still leaves service jobs in the UK (mainly London, I presume) since a computer terminal can be accessed from anywhere, but the “trade” with the USA won’t be recorded in the UK figures, but the German or Irish ones.

  32. 87% of farm incomes do not come from EU subsidies, despite what Sam said earlier for Northern Ireland.

    I do agree with Sam`s basic thinking that managing UKexit without causing farmers enormous damage, will be very difficult.

    The 87%, I believe, refers to the profit that farms make after their owners have taken a fair wage.

  33. That Irish Times report on finance businesses is here btw. Forgot to include the link.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/what-the-world-s-biggest-banks-say-about-fleeing-brexit-britain-1.2957908

  34. Hireton

    I suspect that Davidson’s stances are based more on political calculation of where she might expect to pick up votes than anything else.

    With the 2015 UK GE producing (at less than 15%) for SCon since the party was created in its present form, by merging with the E&W Tories, the number of committed Tory loyalists was obviously very limited.

    The only available votes were from SNP, SLab and SLD voters.

    Pitching SCon as the only true British Nationalist party, obviously produced a degree of transfers from former SLab voters.

    In practice, the SLD and SCon are fishing in the same pool. In some strong LD places, it doesn’t help them to take LD votes, as it advantages the SNP.

    Post Euroref, it made sense to try to be the only true British Nationalist party on that issue again, to try to grab some of the anti-EU vote.

    Since there appear to be few SCon policy proposals on anything, she does seem to be basing her whole strategy on being anti-indy and anti-Europe.

    It’s a somewhat UKIP strategy, I think. Whether ever more extreme language will improve SCon VI beyond its current 20-25% remains to be seen.

  35. Good evening all from an extraordinary wet Itchen Valley.

    On the Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson… She has always been more of an opposition leader than the wee lassie in charge of the Scottish bit of Labour,…. even when Labour were the main opposition the Tories under Ruth Davidson were still more of an effective opposition than Doogtails Labour party.

    However Ruth Davidson can give the impression at times that she and her party are on the up and up after booting Labour into second spot.

    A few pointers…..The gulf between the party in power (in terms of seats/votes) and the opposition is at its greatest since devolution. Ruth heads the smallest principle opposition party in the history of Scottish devolution.

    Ruth Davidson has made great strides to let everyone know she won Edinburgh central on FPTP,.. Her winning share of the vote was 30.4% so almost 70% of the electorate snubbed her and many will have woken up and said to themselves…”How the hell did that happen” ?

    Ruth….tone it doon hen.. Yer no as popular as you think.

  36. Allan Christie

    Also Davidson has turned SCon into the most constitutionally obsessed party in Scotland – a polity not known for being uninterested in constitutional issues! :-)

    Whatever side of both constitutional issues we are on, there are lots of other things in politics, and there are probably quite low boundaries on what you can achieve, in VI gain, just by being a protest party on constitutional matters.

  37. I know the vote is a foregone conclusion but some of the speeches tonight have been impassioned and impressive(on both sides).

    David Lammy’s in particular was one of the finest I have ever heard (video and text on his Twitter page if you are so inclined).

  38. Really worrying events in the US. It’s being reported that federal marshalls are refusing to enforce court orders concerning detained muslims, and are instead taking orders from the Attonrey General not to intervene. This seems to be potentially the start of a de facto coup, in which the executive simply ignores the courts and enfrces its will through orgnised armed groups (don’t forget that Bannon has effectively taken control of the armed forces). The US could very easily be slipping rather fast into a police state.

    One hopes it’s exaggeration, and that the US constitution will survive. But if it happens, what might be the implications for Brexit?

  39. @carfrew

    I refer you to my original “bit-part over no-part” post. No strawmen. Simple logic.

  40. @statty

    nope, your logic is wrong. Which is why you can’t actually challenge my post. You cite the number of MPs in Westminster as meaning you have no say but you have a say beyond that because of devolution etc. and indeed secured devolution itself with far fewer MPs.

    Blatantly misleading claims about having no say may not sway peeps over to Independence. May have escaped your attention but it’s likely others in Scotland noticed you had devolution…

  41. @statty

    anyway never mind that, but onto important things. Looks like Spaceport’s being delayed by Brexit!!!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38768483

    Summat else Brexiters didn’t warn us about…

  42. Carfrew

    I hope someone gives Theresa May a rocket about this!

  43. Hireton
    “As our constantly factually challenged poster’s”
    “I think our constantly factually challenged poster’s latest contribution can be filed under “ooh look, there’s a squirrel!”.

    The first comment is unpleasant regardless of it’s truth or otherwise. The second is the same but worse.

    You quite rightly pulled me up the other day because I went slightly too far in a reply to you and equally rightly I apologised.

    This is a site which by and large is well mannered and polite and we don’t sneer at other posters and their opinions. Could you please desist from such comments in future so that we can all continue to enjoy this site.

  44. “Also Davidson has turned SCon into the most constitutionally obsessed party in Scotland – a polity not known for being uninterested in constitutional issues! :-)”

    Obsessed with not having another referendum?

    After the divisiveness but eventual success of the three Cameron – Osborne referendums, we may not see such reckless punts for a long while!

  45. Polling by YouGov for the Times shows 49% support President Trump’s vit and 36% oppose it.

    So much for petitions where the latest fihgures are 1.8 m for the anti visit petition and 200,000 for the pro visit petion.

  46. TOH

    The facebook/petition generation. Too busy tweeting to go out and vote.
    When will the media learn that the people who tweet are representative.of….. those that tweet. it is equivalent of a voodoo poll.

  47. S THOMAS

    I’m not sure I would go as far as saying they are like voodoo polls but certainly as yet they don’t seem to reflect the population at large.

    Looking at my last post I really must find my glasses.

  48. @ALANCHRISTIE

    “Ruth Davidson has made great strides to let everyone know she won Edinburgh central on FPTP,.. Her winning share of the vote was 30.4% so almost 70% of the electorate snubbed her”

    Well that is the same in most seats in this country – we had a referendum on FPTP so lets move on – I lost the vote on remain I move on.

    David Lamy made a good point yesterday which I regularly remind the SNP – the Scottish electorate did not vote to remain only 41% did and yes you can spin it the other way.

  49. @TOH

    “Polling by YouGov for the Times shows 49% support President Trump’s vit and 36% oppose it.”

    But polling by SkyData shows the reverse. As I posted earlier, Matt Singh at NumberCrunchPolitics reports:

    ” Sky Data found that the public oppose a British replication of the ban 49-34, and by a slightly narrower margin of 49-38 they support cancelling the US President’s state visit.”

    https://www.ncpolitics.uk/2017/01/first-polling-on-trump-and-my-thoughts-on-stoke-and-copeland.html/

  50. SAFFER

    Interesting, but I have a number of questions. Who did the polling for Skydata and when was it done and what was the sample size?

    I know and respect YouGov as a polling company I have not heard of SkyData.

1 2 3 4