The Ipsos poll published today has Public transport/roads 10th, with 18%, in the list of issues respondents say will affect their vote. Perhaps surprisingly, given the MSM obsession with them, no poll ever asks about ferries explicitly.
An AI estimate, based on media coverage, of the breakdown is Potholes up to 50% of the 18% or 9%; CalMac 25-35% or 6%, A9 dualing 10-20% or 4% and others 10-15% or 2%.
So, at worst, only 94% of voters will not consider the ferries when voting.
Footnote – OCD prof predicted to keep wasting his time, despite the above, defending CalMac, especially when the next Herald article claims that ‘islanders’ feel they ‘are living in a new Holocaust.’
Discover more from Talking-up Scotland
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Talking-up Scotland 
The main problem being that 10 out of 11 of those things are either out with our control or heavily affected by the approach of the westminster government.
E.G. if the minister for health at westminster decides to spend less or privatises a previous NHS service. SNHS is allocated a proportionally smaller amount or none for the equivalent service in Scotland, which means Holyrood must find the missing funds from it’s limited budget or cut the service accordingly.
There is no other option. Other than independence
LikeLiked by 3 people
Most people in Scotland have no idea about these things. Certainly in England most folks just believe they pay for everything in Scotland, free Uni tuition, better child support, better NHS, free bus passes etc etc…their belief in their pretendy English philanthropy is bizzarre.
LikeLike
Goes to show how much influence the Glasgow based media has. They are all at sea with the ferries 🤣
LikeLike
This article, in particular item 2,in the Guardian puts the ferries in the shade. At least it would if it had the same level of coverage as the ferries. Read item 2 about the military preparedness, or lack thereof, of UK forces especially the Royal Navy and add in the Reid story to the mix.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/08/conflict-iran-us-uk-geopolitical-standing-military-readiness-explainer
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s behind a paywall…the Guardian is a pretendy lefty anti SNP anti Scottish rag. No thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is not behind a paywall. I have just hit the link I posted and was connected to the article. As far as I am aware the Guardian does not have a paywall. The second item in the article relates primarily to the Royal Navy and it’s woeful state. Yet MSM up here it is ferries, ferries, ferries.
LikeLike
Certainly the latest IPSOS poll confirms ferries are not a “top five” issue for those surveyed.
“Healthcare/the NHS is again seen as the top issue helping voters decide which party they’ll vote for (56%, unchanged since March).
This is followed by inflation/the rising cost of living (returning to 41%, identical to December 2025, after a dip of 6 points in March) and immigration (27%). Energy policy is the 4th most important issue, with 27% saying this issue will be very important to how they vote – the first time energy policy has appeared in the top 5 issues for the public.
“A quarter of the public say Scottish independence/devolution will be very important to how they’ll vote (25%, rising to 57% among SNP supporters). The public remain divided on the constitutional question, with 50% of those likely to vote in an immediate referendum saying they would vote Yes and 50% that they would vote No.
“The SNP is the most trusted party to manage the NHS (27% trust) and tackle the cost of living crisis (25% trust), while Reform UK and the SNP are the parties most trusted to have the right stance on immigration (21% and 20% respectively). Around 1 in 5 of the public do not trust any of the parties on key issues.”
I’m personally disappointed that “immigration” features so prominently in third place (or, rather third equal, if energy also gets 27%), but other surveys (eg David Hume Institute) have been saying the same about immigration for some time.
I suppose if you give voters five or ten issues to choose from, and include “immigration”, that may explain some of it?
I’d prefer surveys which give voters a blank sheet. I would then expect (but I could be wrong) immigration to be lower, with “ferries” almost missing altogether.
What do others think?
LikeLiked by 1 person
” An effect on Holyrood election result” ?
Energy policy , including renewables, is at 27% as an issue.
Ironically , in the future, every issue on that list becomes somewhat meaningless if climate change gets to the critical stage , with impacts such as:
“Severe food & (drinking) water shortage, sea levels rising and catastrophic extreme weather with an increased intensity and frequency of heatwaves, floods, wildfires, and storms.”.
Chaos and instability and so then survival being one option , but (just) surviving in a world that has changed considerably and not for the better.
So currently there is a conundrum for Labour HQ and it is not one that their branch office in Scotland will highlight as being significant.
Labour’s flagship policy in 2024 was GB Energy Ltd.
It was promoted to be a way to achieve it’s (supposed) main goal, which was (supposedly) to make the UK a “clean energy superpower” by 2030, reducing carbon emissions to meet net-zero targets by 2050.
However we have now seen and heard the Labour leader and many Labour politicians supporting and defending Netanyahu’s and Israel’s incessant bombing and their multiple missile launches towards Gaza, Lebanon and now also towards Iran with the aid of America (but also Israel has attacked other areas in the Middle East too).
So here is something I saw online from 2024 via Queen Mary |University of London:
“Bombs, missiles, and broader military operations in wars have a severe, multi-faceted, and often underreported negative impact on the climate, contributing significantly to global warming through massive carbon emissions, destruction of natural carbon sinks, and long-term environmental degradation. Global militaries are estimated to be responsible for approximately 5.5% of all global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a figure higher than the entire civil aviation or shipping industries”.
So surely then Keir Starmer’s supposed “Green revolution” ambition for his UK State would also be one where he would want other countries within the world to also follow and so adhere to for their countries.
So then would Starmer not feel it was crucial , for the sake of the planet and also his “Green revolution” , to denounce other world leaders, like say both Netanyahu and Trump, who are both negatively impacting the climate in a catastrophic way with their constant bombing in ‘wars’ that need not be fought.
(Also should Starmer have allowed America to use bases in the UK to launch strikes on Iranian sites targeting the Strait of Hormuz) ?
A “Green revolution” is surely one where the aim is “to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, fight climate change, and achieve net-zero carbon targets through sustainable, clean-tech solution”.
War mongers like America and Israel not only stop that happening but they are making it significantly worse .
This is why I and others see Labour’s flagship policy GB Energy Ltd as being nothing more than a private investment opportunity for the wealthy and also another excuse to plunder (even) more Scottish resources away from Scotland , as opposed to it being supposedly created because of a true commitment and a strong desire by Labour to make a rapid transition from fossil fuels to renewable sources.
Where is Labour’s voice as a UK government in condemning wars that not only kill men, women and children in the here and now but, as wars, they are also having a devastating impact on the climate and so then negatively impacting the future of the whole planet.
Labour seem to be in a precarious position in that they are compromised by their allegiance to Israel and also compromised by Brexit , so then that sees them having to try to maintain a relationship with Trump’s America………as the UK State is now out in the cold since leaving the EU.
The EU , as in safety in numbers ? (as in safety of countries together, the same EU that Trump is so desperate to try to divide and so then try to conquer for his kind of America to exploit ).
That’s why Starmer , as a world leader, is a lame duck and the UK State is now a broken and weak country all because of a succession of their terrible and selfish UK governments.
Liz S
LikeLike
Apologies if I seem to harp on about the LibDems but this is a LibDem stronghold WM-wise, and they’re desperate to get a LibDem into Holyrood from here (currently SNP held). Today’s fortnightly glossy from the LibDems through letter boxes (printed and published ‘on behalf of the ‘Scottish’ LibDems’ IN ENGLAND) tells us that the current cost of living crisis is not being addressed by the SNP (*) and by voting LibDem our worries will all be sorted, energy problems and prices will all be sorted and all life will soon be a bed of LibDem roses. These days it seems to be a case of tell these daft voters anything you like, blatant lies even, and hope they fall for it – and, sadly many do.
(*) Frankly I’m surprised they didn’t add that the cost of living crisis was caused by the SNP. That’ll be in the next glossy likely.
Message to the LibDems and the rest of the English Parties masquerading as ‘Scottish’ – we’re not all as daft as you think.
J & J
LikeLike
I think that the current “overload” of ferry articles is now seen by a lot of Scots for what it is, just desperation from Unionists as to try and avoid what might happen on 7th May.
That is not to say that Calmac is wonderful and the two big ferries procurement and build will be its finest hour, but in the scheme of things that require to be addressed in Scotland, its not a current top priority.
The “Scottish Media”, can pump out all the made up / exaggerated / pop-up group protests it wants regarding ferries if it thinks it was save Sarwar. It wont.
Stephen McKenzie
LikeLike
BBC website top story on Scottish politics page:
“CalMac ferries problems dominate election campaigning”
Let’s change that to make it more accurate shall we……
‘CalMac ferries dominates BBC Scotland news‘.
Meanwhile further down that Scottish politics page under ‘Latest updates’ I note that:
“SNP candidate ditched over handling of Linden complaints” is noted.
Also underneath that:
“Labour drops election candidate after fraud charge” article is also noted.
However the Joani Reid article, added on the same date as the above two articles, as in “Navy investigated links between nuclear sub commander and MP” is not noted??
Yet previously, as an article, it was next to them when it was one of the main articles on that same Scottish Politics page ?
Instead just below both of these articles on the SNP and Labour candidates is this story/article from the 31 March:
“Former SNP candidate accused of sex offences”.
Further down on the ‘Latest updates’ (page 1) section there is still this article from the 29 March:
“First Minister apologises to victims of ex-council leader” .
So where the Hell is the1 April Joani Reid article ?
So I then went on to page two of the ‘Latest updates’ on the Scottish Politics page and the Joani Reid article from 1 April is also not on that second page either ?
However on the fifth page of the ‘Latest updates’ there is still the older article connected to Reid , as in the one that has a headline:
“MP investigated by Labour after husband accused of spying” that was added onto their website on the 5 March ?
The 1 April article about Joani Reid has disappeared, in that it is no longer noted as a previous article on the ‘Latest updates ‘ section.
In a previous comment on a different post that I made on this site about the 1 April Joani Reid article I had noted this:
“That Joani Reid story was added after the SNP story on the BBC website, yet today that article on Joani Reid article is now the 9th article on the main Scotland page and the 2nd article on the Scottish politics page“.
So who has now decided to completely remove that 1 April article on Joani Reid, as in excluding it from the ‘Latest updates’ section at the bottom of the Scottish politics page.
Yet also has decided to still include the other two articles about the SNP and Labour candidates, that as stories, were all added on the same day as the Joani Reid article , that is 1 April ?
More BBC shenanigans to try to protect and save Labour yet again.
I’m thinking now that perhaps she, Reid, is beyond protecting and saving , but then again she is a pro UK politician so you never know, sweep sweep another one (scandal) swept under the carpet.
Liz S
LikeLike
Again a comment by me that is way too long, but then no one need read it need they , Ha Ha.
Talking of Labour I checked out the Labour MP for my area ,Chris Murray, who is the son of Dame Margaret Curran.
According to the UK parliament register of interests he has received donations from some organisation who are called the ‘Refugee, Asylum and Migration Policy Project (RAMP)’, they have a website online , check them out as it is interesting to see who is involved as part of their ‘team’.
Donations received from them to Chris Murray.
“Date received 7 April and registered on 9 May 2025 – Estimated value £6,500.00 – description of donation – Services of a policy adviser for one day per week from 7 April 2025 to 7th July 2025”
“Date received 1 September 2025 and registered on 18 September 2025 – Estimated value £13,000.00 – description of donation – Services of a policy adviser for one day per week”
“Date received 1 January 2026 and registered on 6 January 2026 – Estimated value £6,500.00 – description of donation – Services of a policy adviser for two days per week”
So donations from Refugee, Asylum and Migration Policy Project (RAMP) to him yet on the 23 March 2026 in a HOC debate on “Asylum Seekers: Recorded Crime” Murray said this:
“The way to deal with any asylum seeker—or, indeed, any migrant—who commits a crime, is to remove them from the country. That is why it is good to see that removals of foreign national offenders have gone up 40% from what was left under the previous Government. The way we deal with crime in communities is by reinvigorating neighbourhood policing and supporting our police. Does the Home Secretary agree that those are two areas where this Home Office is clearing up the mess left behind by the previous Government “?
Then another debate on the 9 February 2026 in the HOC on “Asylum Seekers: Hotels” Murray said this:
“While we are on the issue of immigration statistics, when the previous Conservative Government signed the contracts that led to those hotels opening, the average cost per asylum seeker was £17,000 a year. By the time of the election, that cost had risen to almost £50,000 per asylum seeker per year. This Government have been locked into the contracts signed by the previous Government. What is the Minister doing to drive down this appalling waste of public money? What is his view on the break clause that created these hotels in the first place “?
So I left wondering what exactly is the purpose and mission of this organisation called the “Refugee, Asylum and Migration Policy Project (RAMP)” that sees them donate to Chris Murray and yet he seems somewhat hostile , dismissive and intolerant towards Asylum seekers ?
Also Chris Murray responded to a post in October 2025 by one of his Labour colleagues, the MP Zubir Ahmed, when Chris posted this:
“I’ve worked on asylum issues for 15 yrs. Zubir and Joani are right: the SNP created a housing crisis, slashed council budgets and turned to gestures (when reform and investment were needed). The vulnerable lose out and community tensions rise as the SNP duck their responsibility”
So what was Chris responding to that was written by Ahmed:
“I deal with the most asylum casework in Scotland. The SNP homeless policy kettles asylum seekers to the poorest parts of Glasgow, looks the other way and leaves communities in the lurch. Not fair on New or Old Scots. @ JoaniReid is right, the SNP are the fuel in Reform’s tank”.
(I wonder of they are both still backing Joani Reid now, I doubt it).
Also Susan Aitken , SNP leader of Glasgow City Council, responded to this in posting this:
“More Labour distortion about asylum seekers. Neither @scotgov nor @GlasgowCC has any say over asylum accommodation, it’s entirely in the hands of Home Office private contractors. And @GlasgowCC built more social rented homes than Manchester & Liverpool combined in last 5 years”
Also Chris Murray may not want to note that his other Labour colleague, as in the Labour UK Home secretary, Shabana Mahmood where it is reported that “As of April 2026, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has introduced significant restrictions to the UK asylum system, including reducing refugee protection to 30-month renewable periods. Key policies include doubling the time required for settlement to 10 years, cutting support for those working illegally, and offering up to £40k to failed asylum seekers to return”.
BTW if you go into the RAMP website you will see that Chris Murray is noted as being part of their ‘team’ under ‘Politicians’ so then how can he also be getting donations from them ?
Mind you so are other politicians , who are noted as being a part of their ‘team’ under ‘Politicians’ , as in they are also being given donations by them, as noted in their respective UK parliament register of interests.
That is Tim Farron a Lib Dem, David Simmonds a Tory MP, Olivia Blake a Labour MP, Tony Vaughan Labour MP and also I se that Labour Mayor Andy Burnham is also noted as being a part of their ‘team’ under ‘Politicians’.
Also on their board of Directors is former Tory MP Simon Fell , James Hedgeland who was a former adviser to a previous Tory UK government ( he is most prominently known as a long-term adviser to Sajid Javid) and also as a Director we have Aminah Mehboob who was a policy adviser in the Dept of Transport for a former Tory UK government and she is married to current Conservative MP Saqib Bhatti.
You know I am thinking there are far too many organisations being set up that then just all end up donating money to individual MP’s, so I am also thinking if that is the case then should these MP’s also be involved with some of these organisations as part of their ‘team’ .
Then the Q also is what are all of these donations really for ?
I mean look at how much money via donations Labour Together have donated to specific Labour MP’s, but what was the original source of all of that money (thousand of pounds per candidate and MP) that they managed to donate to some of their Labour candidates and also to some of their established Labour MP’s ?
Politics is a dirty business is it not , especially when money comes into it via large political donations.
Excessive and larger donations was what prompted the Peter Geoghegan book “Democracy for Sale: Dark Money and Dirty Politics”.
Liz S
LikeLike