The gap between those who support Scottish independence and those who oppose it has narrowed, according to a new poll.
The gap between those who support Scottish independence and those who oppose it has narrowed, according to a new poll.
The findings, collected by Survation on behalf of the Scottish Daily Mail, show that 38 per cent support independence compared to 47 per cent who oppose it. Earlier this month, similar polling by the same organisation had given the No camp a 20 per cent lead.
The poll is the first to be undertaken since the recent exchanges over a currency union, with the chancellor, together with the Liberal Democrats and Labour, having made it clear that they will not let an independent Scotland remain part of sterling.
Asked about their attitudes to the currency union, both those supporting and opposing independence have a strong preference for a currency union that would enable them to keep the pound (41 per cent for Yes voters and even more, 52 per cent, for No voters).
However, when asked what they expected to actually happen, only 23 per cent of No voters expected a currency union to come about. In contrast, 45 per cent of Yes voters believed that a currency union would come about.
No voters were more likely than Yes voters to take the pessimistic view that Scotland would end up using the pound with no currency union and no control over monetary policy (20 per cent held this view), and 23 per cent said they did not know what currency Scotland would end up with.
Yes voters were more confident, with just 9 per cent expressing uncertainty about the future of Scotland’s currency.
Interestingly, the intervention of the three main UK wide parties seems to have had little effect. The pollsters explain:
“Looking specifically at the intervention by the ‘three chancellors’ announcing they would not be willing to enter a currency union, the effects have simply been to harden the stance of supporters on both sides of the independence debate. Only 4 per cent of No voters and 3 per cent of Yes voters suggested it would make them at all more likely to consider the alternative option, though the reaction of solidifying support was stronger on the Yes side, due probably to a visceral reaction amongst nationalists against any suggestion of being threatened by English politicians.”
Responding to the results, Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University observed that “when one looks at this poll, one has, at minimum, to conclude that it offers no evidence that the currency intervention has delivered the No side any immediate boost.”
Declaring the findings to be “exceptionally encouraging” for the Yes campaign, the SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon declared:
“It is clear that there has been a severe backlash to George Osborne’s bluster and threats on the pound – with more than half of the No campaign’s lead wiped out in just three weeks, and far more people more likely to vote Yes on the back of the Westminster establishment’s attempted bullying rather than No.”
Calling however on Alex Salmond to provide a plan B on the currency, Alistair Darling, head of the Better Together campaign, responded:
“We know that if we leave the UK, we are leaving behind the security of the pound.
“Scots are clearly saying to Alex Salmond that he cannot keep us in the dark.”
21 Responses to “Yes to independence campaign gains significant ground”
Bill Cruickshank
Bookies odds show where the money is going and at the moment the odds have shortened dramatically in favour of YES. Polls in Scotland are notoriously useless. Only one spotted the SNP landslide in 2011 and that was in the last 10 days. Point I was making is that the trend is towards YES. Activists like me are well pleased with reception we are receiving on the ground. I have canvassed etc. for the SNP for over 40 years and never seen anything like it. This is partly because people are realising that we are not in an election, it is a referendum and that we are voting for the future of our country. I suppose many on here will choose to ignore or disbelieve what I am saying and that is their choice. All I am doing is reporting what I am hearing and seeing every day.
Alec
It adds more to the discussion than you are offering, because it’s a response to your being a fraud.
You must be a delight on the doorsteps:
Member of the Public: I don’t believe you. I am going to vote NO.
Platitudinous Fraud: It makes no odds to me whether you believe what I am saying or not, Goodbye, I’m off to find someone else to speak to me in my echo chamber.
Of course, if you do have a pretty good idea of which way the debate is running, you’d be able to cite verifiable reports and reproducible results instead of vague anecdote about what someone you know told you.
You haven’t. In fact, you’ve explicitly refused to. My guess is that this is because you are a fraud.
And, why should I listen to anything Tommy “King Louie” Sheridan says? The man is more of a fraud that you… he’s a lying liar who singlehandedly derailed a genuine popular socialist movement which had a real chance of involvement in Government.
Frauds citing frauds.
~alec
Alec
Oh good, now you’re being specific. Which bookies?
~alec
Matthew Blott
To be fair to Alec, you’ve repeatedly been asked to provide evidence that amounts to more than people you’ve spoken to and haven’t come up with anything.
Alec
Oh, that’s the nicest thing anyone’s ever said to me!
~alec