INDEPENDENCE support would rise to 66% from 54% if it meant Scotland would implement a wellbeing approach to the economy and pensions, a new poll shows.
Support for independence was found to have risen to 54% when undecided voters are excluded earlier this month in a poll commissioned by The Times following the Scottish Budget.
Campaign group Believe in Scotland (BiS) commissioned pollsters Norstat to ask the same panel if Scotland implementing a wellbeing economy approach would affect how they would vote.
A wellbeing economy approach is one in which quality of life, equality, fairness, sustainability, happiness and health are given equal weighting to the standard measure of economic growth.
Support then went from 54% in the same poll to 61%.
And when asked if they would vote for independence if this approach also included a commitment to increase the basic state pension from £169.20 to a wellbeing pension of £241.50 per week – the response then rose to a stark 66% in support.
Within the framework of this question, the single biggest jump in support came with women over the age of 55 – from 36% to 56%.
Women aged 16-35 also saw an increase in support from an already high 71% to 83%.
English-born voters also saw an increase in support with this added question, going from 39% to 56%.
Interestingly, a majority of Labour voters and Reform voters would move to supporting independence according to this polling question – both rising to 52%.
The founder of BiS, Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp (above), said: "Make no mistake, this is a breakthrough result for Scottish independence. It demonstrates that, with the right message, there is a path to a 66% supermajority for Scottish independence. Two-thirds of Scottish voters would support independence if independence were predicated on a wellbeing economic approach with a wellbeing pension
"More than that, the poll found that of the groups that are least likely to support independence, all of them moved to majority support in answer to this poll question. Meaning a Yes majority amongst demographics known for showing lower support for independence; Females aged over 55, Labour voters and English born voters, is possible if we make the right case for independence.
"This is not a suggestion for changing the Yes/No question. It is a suggestion for changing the story we tell about our future as an independent country. If we change the way we talk about what Yes means, if we move away from tribalistic political discourse towards evangelising about the better nation we plan to create, if we give independence a purpose, we will win our independence."
MacIntyre-Kempnoted that the SNP are already committed to paying the wellbeing pension in an independent Scotland – an approach that was already passed at the party’s conference and was in the small print of their 2024 General Election manifesto.
“Maybe it should have been a headline,” he told The National.
He also highlighted the results of a separate Believe in Scotland poll question last week which found that 59% of people would back an independent Scotland if it would be a republic rather than a monarchy.
“The biggest statement of disagreement though was don't confuse things, leave it at a simple Yes/No question, and that confuses me a little,” he said.
“Firstly do people think we are getting a referendum? Nothing is impossible but the odds overwhelmingly favour a de facto referendum at the next appropriate national election.
“We have to use that to demonstrate that independence is the settled will of the people and trigger our sovereign right to end the Union and that requires a manifesto with wider policy and direction implications.
“To win a de facto referendum, indeed to even convince the SNP to call one (they don't need permission for a de facto referendum) we must first build sustained support for independence.
MacIntyre-Kemp then asked: “My question for the independence movement to consider is: What if we can't sustain independence support at over 50% unless the nation generates a shared creative and cultural vision of the type of nation we are trying to create with independence?
“What if the message that we will 'Get independence first and then sort everything out after independence' means we will never get independence"? Will an academic argument about the location of powers win independence? Or is telling a better story about what independence will do for people the way to go? Powers for a purpose, not powers for one set of politicians rather than another.”
He added: “I believe that half the people who would vote No are not unionists, they are potential Yes voters that our messaging just hasn't engaged or emotionally connected with yet.
“What if we change the way we talk about what independence means, if we move away from tribalistic political discourse towards evangelising about the better nation we plan to create, if we give independence a purpose, what if that's the only way to win independence, especially given the little de facto route we must follow?
“If you took a person that knew nothing about independence and gave them the Scottish Government’s policy documents they would most likely not decide to support independence. Independence is exciting and radical but we've made it really boring, process-led and politically tribal.
“I have my own more radical vision of what is possible, I think most indy supporters do. In any campaign the unionist politicians will try make people fear change - they will present independence as a risk and undecided and soft No voters will ask “OK is independence worth the risk?”
“If all we’ve got for them is saying 'it depends on who we elect after independence'. Or 'let’s get independence first and agree how to make Scotland better afterwards,' then the risk doesn't have such an obvious reward to those we need to convince.
“So let's talk about this, you know like adults who are part of the same Indy family. I'll start 66% Yes, come on! Don't tell me you are not tempted!”
