Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale has a satisfaction rating of just 4 per cent
Listen carefully and you might just be able to hear corks popping in Bute House, Edinburgh.
It is now exactly a year since Nicola Sturgeon moved in to the official residence of the Scottish first minister, taking the reins of the SNP from Alex Salmond following the independence referendum. Meanwhile things are just getting worse for the Labour party north of the border.
According to new polling by Ipsos Mori for STV, the Scottish Conservative Party now trails Scottish Labour by just two percentage points, piling yet more pressure on Jeremy Corbyn.
Asked how they would vote in the constituency section of next year’s elections to Holyrood, of all those likely to vote 50 per cent opted for the SNP, down five points since August. Scottish Labour remains unchanged, backed by 20 per cent of those polled, with the Conservatives up a significant six percentage points to 18 per cent. The Scottish Lib Dems remain on just 7 per cent
A similar pattern emerges on the regional list vote, with 46 per cent supporting the SNP (down four points) and Labour down a point to 19 per cent. The Scottish Conservatives meanwhile are up four points to 16 per cent. The Scottish Lib Dems are on 8 per cent (down one point) with the Scottish Green Party down one point to 7 per cent.
According to the Scotland Votes website, such a result would see the SNP lose one seat in Scotland to take their total to 68, still enough to maintain a majority in the Scottish Parliament. Labour would lose 12 seats, falling from their current tally of 37 seats to 25.
The Conservatives would add three seats to the 15 they currently have whilst the Lib Dems would increase the number of MSPs they have from five to seven. The Scottish Green Party would also see their representation at Holyrood increase from two to eight.
Whilst Nicola Sturgeon remains the most popular party leader in Scotland, her personal ratings have, according to this poll, dropped a little since August. With 67 per cent indicating satisfaction with her performance and 28 per cent who are dissatisfied, she now has a net satisfaction rating of +39 per cent (down nine9 points).
Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has seen her net satisfaction rating increase from +9 per cent to +14 per cent, whilst Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale’s ratings have improved from +1 per cent to +4 per cent.
Patrick Harvie, co-convener of the Greens, remains the opposition leader with the highest approval rating.
The results top off a bad week for Jeremy Corbyn, following ill-timed comments opposing the police’s shoot-to-kill policy.
According to a ComRes poll for the Daily Mail, 72 per cent of people support the shoot to kill policy when a suicide bomber or other terrorist is thought to be about to launch an attack.
Ed Jacobs is a contributing editor at Left Foot Forward. Follow him on Twitter
15 Responses to “Scottish Tories just two points behind Labour”
John
Protect them how? Bomb them? I’m sure that’ll make them stop. I’m absolutely convinced that won’t boost their recruitment.
How about put more police on the streets? Except Cameron cut those numbers, so I’m not going to trust HIM with our police force if I can help it.
Enhance cybersecurity? Well sure, except that has proven woefully inaccurate in predicting attacks. Heck, france was forewarned by Anonymous that an attack was coming. Still happened.
So let’s see. If we bomb them, we boost their recruitment in the region (how could it not? We are literally destroying people’s livelihoods; I’d be miffed as well). If we target them domestically we re-inforce the Daesh narrative that Muslims and ‘everyone else’ cannot live together; come to IS! If we clamp down on cyber-secuirty, or general security for that matter, we remove many of the civil rights we fought so hard to acquire.
So while a ‘normal’ person may want to bomb a country because people snuck in and bombed France, that won’t solve anything. I doubt it would even help. It WILL boost the income of a load of Camerons mates. But I really couldn’t care LESS about their bottom line.
If ‘normal’ people want nothing more than to bomb other humans, I really do fear for the future.
If ‘normal’ people want to surrender their civil and human rights because of the actions of a few extremists I’ll go get my 1984 book to see what the next step by our government will be.
I really hope your definition of ‘normal’ isn’t true; it implies a lack of cognition for the majority.
As an aside, Mr Corbyn’s first response was ‘lets stop funding the terrorists’. Since most wars are started, and won, on ecnomic forces, not purely military ones, I think his reponse is likely to be more effective. If they can’t AFFORD guns, they won’t be ‘toting’ them.
madasafish
Where did I say bomb? I never mentioned bombing I agree it’s probably a waste of time unless there are ground troops..
Unarmed police on the streets against Kalashnikovs? That will work well.
You rant on and on about bombing – a subject I never mentioned.
Says it all really.
John
Well considering Camerons first response was ‘bomb them’ and Corbyn said ‘not bomb them’ and you launched an attack AGAISNT Corbyn forgive me for equating your view of ‘protection’ with the conservatives. So what WOULD you suggest?
madasafish
I meant protection as in police shooting armed terrorists or human bombs. I did say “gun toting ” terrorists which should give you some sort of clue. Mr Corbyn is on record he does not agree we should shoot gun toting terrorists..
I happen to think that anyone waving a gun around who shoots anyone should be shot on sight. And people who are human bombs should be exploded in a safe place.
Mr Corbyn disagrees.
I think bombing Syria is pointless without a land campaign. Ain’t going to happen.
Now you tell me what you would so..
John
Cut off their funding. As for gun-toting I think Carte Blanche for killing them is too far. Especially if you throw dead-men switches into the equation.