The Prime Minister's was a good speech. He pointed to the Welfare State and to the public ownership of the banks as the glue binding the Union. He listed the BBC among the Union's greatest achievements. He flagged up the enormous global reach that the Scottish tradition of emphasis on overseas aid enjoys through the Union. And he invoked the memory of Campbell-Bannerman and Grimond, Dewar and Smith.

Cameron is in an unenviable position, of course. He will be shot down if he says nothing. He will be shot down if he says anything. He cannot possibly appear to be leading or directing the campaign for the Union once the referendum starts to approach in earnest. Based on today, he should instead quietly write the speeches for Johan Lamont.

39% is "stubbornly low"? I take it he thinks the 43%-45% who claim to vote against independence is, then?

George Eaton is laughable.

I can add two more opinion polls to the ones I posted earlier.

Sunday Express
January 2012
51% Yes to independence

and guess what

New Statesman/ICD
25 January 2012
44% Yes to independence

The NS poll was announced in an article that day.And who wrote it you ask?
Why,Mr George Eaton no less.But the NS obviously prefers to cite the polls that put support for independence in the 37% to 39% bracket,rather than one of it's own commissioned polls.Now why is that?

@GeorgeE

In that case George,why did you state that "support for independence remains stubbornly low" when you are aware of other polls giving decidedly higher percentages for independence?Including the 44% Yes to independence of the NS on 25 January.

The Scots NHS is separate from that of the rest of the U.K. as indeed is the education system.
The Welfare State is in safer hands in Scotland than in it is in Cameron/Clegg hands.
Also why on earth should they stop listening or administering the B.B.C. in Scotland?
I have no objection to Scottish independence but I do see some problems.
I was living in Prague at the time of the"velvet divorce"and the main reasons that went so smoothly were I think as follows.
First an overwhelming majority of Slovaks wanted independence.
Once this was clear neither the Czech government nor the people raised much objection.
Ater this the two goverments co-operated to make the separation as smooth as possible.
None of the above is true in the UK which means that the "divorce if it happens in the near future is likely to be messy and painful for everybody and especially for the large minority of Scots who would vote for the Union.Would a near fifty fifty split make for a happy independence?
For what it's worth I think that a gradual devolving of more and more power will eventually lead to a (large) majority on both sides of the border accepting independence as a logical final step.