Metropol

WillPS wrote:
Gavin Scott wrote:"I think that's a little cynical."
It definitely isn't, it's realistic.

Of course. Its the same pragmatism that dictates whether the retention of the Union is desirable or not to the Exchequer.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom ... eat-debate

As the referendum approaches in Scotland, both BBC Scotland and STV are failing to facilitate the national debate as well as is needed

Its kinda true.

I don't think that's a particularly fair article, but then I should point out I don't agree with Mr. Hassan much anyway.

I think the desire for wider "debate" programmes like the Scottish 500 are being viewed through rose-tinted spectacles, and I'm sure there will be debates in a Question Time format as 18th Sept approaches. I don't see why they are needed all year round as the nightly news and the analysis programmes provide useful 'taking the temperature' of both public opinion and also fact from analysts and commentators.

As a bit of a geek, I'm a bit disappointed that a lot of party conference coverage is pushed into online only interviews on the BBC and it's a shame STV don't cover them live or through dedicated highlights at all. I also thought that the BBC's Politics Scotland on Friday evenings was a good recap of the week in parliament - though I understand this is more procedural and dry than debate and discussion.

I think Scotland Tonight, Newsnight Scotland (and the upcoming replacement for this) along with the various specials on both channels do give enough scope for an ongoing commentary. The fact is that this whole decision is a judgement for people to make and both sides will want to push the lines they have prepared and force their point so 'moderated discussion' will only get you so far. The broadcasters can't be blamed for the answers they get from the campaigns no matter what questions are asked or formats facilitated.

Maybe Mr Hassan's written this cos no-one's asking him on the telly these days. I wouldn't really blame them given his recent rants about London Scots. Also, how he seems to think you need to have lived here for at least the last 10-15 years before you can express a view on Scotland's future or present a radio programme about it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... referendum

Seems like this PQ are more a bit UKIPpy.

Its getting rather interesting...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/ ... 1398070214

People in Scotland are more likely to vote for independence if they think the Conservatives will win the next UK general election, a poll suggests. But the prospect of a Labour government would see a surge in support for the union, with more voters rejecting independence, the ICM poll found.

ICM recorded the highest overall support for independence since last August at 48% excluding "don't knows", results reported in the Scotland on Sunday revealed. If the Tories look like winning the 2015 general election the Yes campaign could be on the cusp of victory at 49% excluding undecided voters, according to further ICM results published today by sister paper The Scotsman.

The party, which has one MP in Scotland, could also lose its only Scottish MEP to Eurosceptic party Ukip at the European elections next month, the poll suggests.

Overall, ICM found 39% in support of independence with 42% against and 19% undecided.

The prospect of a Tory government would see a two per cent swing from undecided to boost Yes to 41% while the No vote remains unchanged.

The prospect of a Labour government would see support for independence fall to 36%, support for the union surge to 44% and leave 20% undecided.

Support for Ukip is on the rise and they are on the verge of becoming Scotland's third most popular party in the European Parliament, according to ICM voting intentions.

The SNP remains the most popular party at 37%, although support is down 4% on last month, with Labour holding fairly steady in second place at 28%.

Tory support has dropped two points to 11% while support for Ukip is up four points to 10%.

Lib Dem support was two points up at 7% while the Greens remained unchanged at 4%.

ICM interviewed an online sample of 1,004 Scottish adults aged 16+ on 14-16 April 2014.

Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said: "With just one MP in Scotland, the Tories have no mandate here. And yet people across Scotland are paying a huge price at the hands of a Tory-Lib Dem government that they did not elect.

"Only a Yes vote in September will put an end to the democratic deficit we face under Westminster rule. Only independence can ensure that Scotland gets the government it votes for - every time. "With recent polls showing support for Yes at new highs, more and more people are realising that Scotland's future is an independent one."

Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, the third placed candidate on the SNP's list for the European Parliament, said: "Coming on the back of a significant boost in support for Yes, this is extremely welcome news for the SNP.

"This very encouraging poll - after nearly seven years in government - underlines the hard work undertaken by the SNP in representing the interests of Scotland at home and in Europe.

"There is a long way to go and we take nothing for granted, but the European elections are a fantastic opportunity to stand on the SNP's positive message of an independent Scotland playing a constructive role at the heart of Europe - in contrast to Westminster threatening isolation through an in/out referendum."

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04 ... 81745.html

And what are the prospects of the Conservatives returning to government in May 2015? Pretty low...

...unless Scotland leaves, when we're all fucked.

It depends on a number of factors, Where are the lib dem voters going to turn to? Can Toris keep hold off all the seats its holds? Can UKIP erode tory votes? Can Ed be a good prime minsters? I think he prat.

barcode wrote:It depends on a number of factors, Where are the lib dem voters going to turn to? Can Toris keep hold off all the seats its holds? Can UKIP erode tory votes? Can Ed be a good prime minsters? I think he prat.

No, Labour mostly, no (obviously at least seats like Broxtowe are goners), yes and I think the circumstances render the last one irrelevant (and I think the case against him is weak personally).

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3382125

Interesting poll - should be taken with the caveat that its a relatively small sample size of 1004 people - but hasn't been commissioned by either side. Particularly interesting analysis about English born residents tending to vote no. Perhaps not that surprising.

Today's newspaper cover shows the shocking bias demonstrated by the media.

The copy on the left is the English version - the one on the right is Scotland's.

Can't both be true, surely? Even BBC Scotland's James Cook was tweeting about the "striking contrast" today.

Shameful.

I think, if @glinner is right, the first is about people not having private pensions to supplement their £10k p.a. state pension, and the second is about Gordon Brown's speech that pension and administration costs in an independent Scotland would be crippling and therefore remaining part of the union would be less of a risk.

Full stories here http://www.express.co.uk/news/retiremen ... nimum-wage

and here http://www.express.co.uk/news/retiremen ... hin-the-UK

So, without wishing to defend Express "Newspapers", technically the two stories do sort-of marry up in a convoluted sense. If you believe what you read, people will experience a Pension shock in terms of the individual amount they get, but at the same time GB says in terms of the state delivering that amount, he sees it as less of a problem within the Union than it would be in an independent Scotland.

I think the Scottish Express has significant editorial independence, as seen by the now notorious Dunblane front page.

From a completely neutral POV, I've found a few things interesting recently.

One of them being the CBI issue where they registered as a supporter of the No side and then there was a significant number of companies that promptly quit. The Herald reported this as a massive shock but the great majority of them were organisations such as STV or public bodies like Universities that have to maintain a neutral stance. I don' doubt for a moment that the CBI failed to properly consult its members before barging to the front of the no queue but I'm not sure if its as big a story as some would make out.

The second, is the sheer oddness of the endless "calls for labour big guns" to be used in Better Together. I wonder whether this is due to the bubble that main politicians live in that they think people give a monkeys toss what Douglas Alexander thinks rather than say, businesses or normos.

Third: is it usual practice to ignore the don't knows as seems to keep occurring in the past fortnight or so? I don't seem to remember it being done in the past with things.

Someone said the other day - during a report on the CBI thing - that they were registering because "the actual campaign period was due to begin".

Oh also - George Roberston. Seriously what the hell was that about?

Metropol

Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence

Re: Scottish independence