Could newly registered voters swing it? Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Will the "missing million" vote Yes or No in the Scottish referendum?

With 97 per cent of the Scottish population registered to vote, a record turnout could swing the pendulum in favour of the Yes or No camp.

With a record turnout expected at the Scottish Independence referendum, today looks set to be the busiest day in the electoral history of Scotland. A total of 97 per cent of the Scottish adult populace have registered to vote, making this the most sizeable electorate to be remembered. What’s more, over 120,000 voters have registered in the last month alone. Salmond says he expects a turnout of 80 per cent, which is radically higher than the 64 per cent turnout in Scotland in the 2010 Westminster election or the 50 per cent turnout in the Scottish parliament election the year before. With unprecedented numbers of citizens queuing up to place their vote, it is even harder than usual to predict how today will pan out.

It is unclear whether the huge increase in new voters or those who haven’t voted in a very long time will benefit the Yes camp or No camp. These new voters have been dubbed the "missing million" - a phrase which refers to those who are not registered to vote yet but are eligible, those who don’t generally vote, and those who are newly on the register. Many of these are 16 and 17- year-olds who will be exercising their right to vote for the first time in history. As the stakes have risen throughout this lengthy and momentous campaign, the "missing million" could swing the referendum result in either direction. As a result, both sides of the campaign have focused their final weeks of frenzied campaigning on newly-registered voters. To complicate matters further, the transient nature of this particular cohort means it can be difficult to assess their voting patterns. They are often omitted from polls because they are hard to track down.

Throughout the campaign, the Yes camp has placed its confidence in the "missing million". In its view, the fight for independence has sparked the attention of Scots who previously felt disillusioned with party politics but are now keen to see radical change. What's more, Yes campaigners argue that the polls fail to accurately represent newly registered voters because this part of the populace are less accessible by the phone and less likely to respond to online surveys or social media. In addition to this, they may be less inclined to take part in a political survey. Polls analyse previous voting patterns in order to fine-tune their predictions, but if the "missing million" haven’t voted before, it can be difficult to forecast accurately how they will vote today.

Jonathon Shafi, the co-founder of the Radical Independence Campaign says: “the opinion polls can’t possibly account for all those people who are voting for the first time and aren’t on the polling books”. The Radical Independence Campaign has focused its grassroots efforts on this so-called "missing million". “We’ve put lots of work into areas with low voter turnout. As we’ve campaigned all the way from Easterhouse to Castlemilk, Seaton and Aberdeen, we’ve come across thousands of people who will be voting for the first time in a long while”. Shafi says he has “absolute faith” in these newly registered voters to vote Yes: “these people are not apathetic, they are alienated by a Westminster politics which simply ignores them.”

Despite this, there are a number of political commentators and analysts who believe that while non-voters might be less likely to be represented in the polls, they are in fact unlikely to vote Yes. Polling expert Professor John Curtice’s comprehensive analysis of the "missing million" found that newly registered voters were in fact more likely to vote No today. Curtis argues that although “some polls may have too few of the ‘missing million’ in their sample, the effect may be to lead them to over rather than under-estimate Yes support”. If the pro-Yes tendency is over-exaggerated, those voters who the pollsters haven’t been able to reach will not necessarily be voting Yes today.

To sum up, support for the Yes vote is stronger in poorer, deprived areas of Scotland where voter turnout is far lower to begin with. Nevertheless, the "missing million" is a loose term which doesn’t refer to an ideologically homogenous group, therefore it is speculative to assume that newly registered voters will definitely be voting Yes. What is clear is that large numbers of formerly disenfranchised and newly registered voters will be voting today. With democracy looking healthier than it has for a long time, the unprecedented voter registration and lively debates will hopefully continue in future elections. As Scots rush to the ballot boxes to make the most significant political decision of their lifetime, it seems that the "missing million" may be the wildcard in today’s referendum.


More referendum coverage:

“Should Scotland be an independent country?” Referendum voting is under way
Scotland: What do the final polls suggest?
How will women, men, the young and old vote today?

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

No, IDS, welfare isn't a path to wealth. Quite the opposite, in fact

Far from being a lifestyle choice, welfare is all too often a struggle for survival.

Iain Duncan Smith really is the gift that keeps on giving. You get one bile-filled giftbag of small-minded, hypocritical nastiness and, just when you think it has no more pain to inflict, off comes another ghastly layer of wrapping paper and out oozes some more. He is a game of Pass the Parcel for people who hate humanity.
For reasons beyond current understanding, the Conservative party not only let him have his own department but set him loose on a stage at their conference, despite the fact that there was both a microphone and an audience and that people might hear and report on what he was going to say. It’s almost like they don’t care that the man in charge of the benefits system displays a fundamental - and, dare I say, deliberate - misunderstanding of what that system is for.
IDS took to the stage to tell the disabled people of Britain - or as he likes to think of us, the not “normal” people of Britain -  “We won’t lift you out of poverty by simply transferring taxpayers’ money to you. With our help, you’ll work your way out of poverty.” It really is fascinating that he was allowed to make such an important speech on Opposite Day.
Iain Duncan Smith is a man possessed by the concept of work. That’s why he put in so many hours and Universal Credit was such a roaring success. Work, when available and suitable and accessible, is a wonderful thing, but for those unable to access it, the welfare system is a crucial safety net that keeps them from becoming totally impoverished.
Benefits absolutely should be the route out of poverty. They are the essential buffer between people and penury. Iain Duncan Smith speaks as though there is a weekly rollover on them, building and building until claimants can skip into the kind of mansion he lives in. They are not that. They are a small stipend to keep body and soul together.
Benefits shouldn’t be a route to wealth and DWP cuts have ensured that, but the notion that we should leave people in poverty astounds me. The people who rely on benefits don’t see it as a quick buck, an easy income. We cannot be the kind of society who is content to leave people destitute because they are unable to work, through long-term illness or short-term job-seeking. Without benefits, people are literally starving. People don’t go to food banks because Waitrose are out of asparagus. They go because the government has snipped away at their benefits until they have become too poor to feed themselves.
The utter hypocrisy of telling disabled people to work themselves out of poverty while cutting Access to Work is so audacious as to be almost impressive. IDS suggests that suitable jobs for disabled workers are constantly popping out of the ground like daisies, despite the fact that his own government closed 36 Remploy factories. If he wants people to work their way out of poverty, he has make it very easy to find that work.
His speech was riddled with odious little snippets digging at those who rely on his department. No one is “simply transferring taxpayers’ money” to claimants, as though every Friday he sits down with his card reader to do some online banking, sneaking into people’s accounts and spiriting their cash away to the scrounging masses. Anyone who has come within ten feet of claiming benefits knows it is far from a simple process.
He is incredulous that if a doctor says you are too sick to work, you get signed off work, as though doctors are untrained apes that somehow gained access to a pen. This is only the latest absurd episode in DWP’s ongoing deep mistrust of the medical profession, whose knowledge of their own patients is often ignored in favour of a brief assessment by an outside agency. IDS implies it is yes-no question that GPs ask; you’re either well enough to work or signed off indefinitely to leech from the state. This is simply not true. GPs can recommend their patients for differing approaches for remaining in work, be it a phased return or adapted circumstances and they do tend to have the advantage over the DWP’s agency of having actually met their patient before.
I have read enough stories of the callous ineptitude of sanctions and cuts starving the people we are meant to be protecting. A robust welfare system is the sign of a society that cares for those in need. We need to provide accessible, suitable jobs for those who can work and accessible, suitable benefits for those who can’t. That truly would be a gift that keeps giving.