The spin machines for both Yes Scotland and Better Together went into overdrive yesterday trying to display the results of the latest Social Attitudes Survey to best advantage and there are, indeed, aspects of this research that both sides can claim as positives.
A dispassionate observer, however, would have to conclude that, overall, it makes worrying reading for the pro-independence campaign.
This respected annual survey shows that, by autumn, a year into the campaign, there had been no major change in attitudes to independence compared to the average since 1999, with a clear and substantial majority supporting the UK. Those who thought Scotland would improve economically under independence were in the minority and their numbers had dropped on the year previously. It also showed that uncertainty about what independence would mean for Scotland was, if anything, deepening.
There were shifts in favour of independence in some respects: 29% agreed Scotland should be independent, up from a historic low of 23%, and the referendum debate had apparently had an effect in persuading increasing numbers (32%) that England benefited more from the Union than Scotland (though 41% thought the two countries did so equally). A clear majority also thought the gap between rich and poor would narrow in an independent Scotland and that the country would have a stronger voice in the world.
However, the campaign was failing to persuade people that the economy or their standard of living would improve. Only 9% thought they would be personally better off. This failure matters so much because, as psephologist John Curtice emphasises, what people think would happen to Scotland economically after independence is the issue most closely allied to how they will vote. The better they think the economy will fare, the more likely they are to tick the Yes box, but they need to be convinced more than ever. Issues such as the currency and EU membership appear to leave them unmoved.
The SNP can rightly point out that the surveying took place before the much-vaunted White Paper on independence was published. That event may arguably have helped tackle voters' uncertainty about how an independent Scotland might look, but it has not transformed their attitudes to independence. It is clear from polls conducted since its publication that it has had only a modest effect in turning public opinion in favour of a firm Yes vote. Professor Curtice concluded in mid-December after a flurry of polls that the SNP's blueprint for an independent Scotland had given the Yes side a modest boost of "some two points or so". Not enough to upset the long-term trends; not enough to change the game.
What is impossible even for the experts to predict is the extent to which last-minute emotional surges and voting booth changes of heart will affect this campaign. Even allowing for such factors boosting the Yes campaign, though, it appears it must find a way of persuading many more voters of the economic benefits of independence if it is to be successful.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article