Friday, September 19
For literally anything you need to know about what to expect and when, Antony Green’s guide can’t be beat. Basically, we can’t expect any official results until about 3pm AEST, though presumably some manner of informal indication of how the count is going might emerge. There will not be any exit polls, but there is talk that a retrospective opinion poll might be conducted (how did you vote rather than how will you). The one final poll out was, as noted below, from Ipsos MORI, which was a phone poll of 980 respondents showing yes on 45% and no on 50%, rounding out to 53-47. I couldn’t be bothered running the poll tracker charts again because the result of the poll after bias adjustment was right on the trend, at 51.2% for no. My personal feeling is that no is likely to do it a little more easily than that, but only time will tell. The map to the right is derived from regional level polling data over the past few weeks from Survation and ICM, to give at least a broad-brush idea of where the independence cause is weakest and strongest. The actual results will emerge at the level of Scotland’s 32 local government authorities – at the link above, Antony Green maps their past voting behaviour, since support for the Scottish National Party is very likely a good proxy for how the referendum vote will go.
Thursday, September 18
9pm
A few hours after polls open, one final poll from Ipsos MORI – 53-47 to no. Ninety-five per cent report they will vote, which by early reports of turnout can almost be believed.
Overview
Okay, to tidy up the mess below: we’ve had 51-49 from the very authoritative Ipsos MORI, a phone poll with a sample of 1405; two online polls at 52-48, one from YouGov with a bumper sample of 3237, the other from Panelbase with 1004; and a phone poll from Survation, for which I assume the sample was about 1200 given such was the case in its only previous phone poll, at 53-47. The Survation survey in particular is very fresh, having been conducted entirely within the last 24 hours. Pumping all that into the poll aggregate is slightly better for yes than you might think, since Ipsos MORI and YouGov both get bias adjusted about 1.4% towards yes, and weighted heavily in the overall result. I’m a bit nervous about this – those bias adjustments seem excessive – but the current reading, which you may take or leave, is 51.2% no, 48.8% yes.
Earlier
UPDATE 4: Survation has it at 53-47.
UPDATE 3: YouGov has it at 52-48. And the fun’s not over, because Survation have just revealed they’re about to lay on a surprise phone poll.
UPDATE 2: Mike Smithson of Political Betting tweets: “So 4 pollsters have NO on 52% and 2 on 51%. Maybe they are wrong but at least they are all wrong together”. The implication, I believe, being that we may be seeing a little bit of herding going on.
UPDATE: The Ipsos MORI poll turns out to be a nailbiter – 51% no, 49% yes. This is important because it’s a phone poll rather than online, and Ipsos MORI did a particularly good job of calling the last Scottish parliamentary election. YouGov to come in a few more hours, and then I’ll give the poll aggregate another run.
A new poll from Panelbase does nothing to relieve the monotony, once again producing a result of 52-48 in favour of no. However, this is the best 52-48 so far for the no camp, as Panelbase has been the most yes-leaning of the regularly reporting pollsters. The full numbers are 49.5% no, 45.4% yes, 5.1% don’t know. Full results here. The eagerly awaited Ipsos MORI poll will be along at 3am EST, followed by the final YouGov poll at 5am.
Wednesday, September 17
Three new polls have come in overnight – from Survation, Opinium and ICM – and every one of them finds no with a lead of 52-48. My poll tracker (methodology explained in the entry below from Saturday) now has no leading 51.7% to 48.3%, slightly higher than the 51.4% to 48.6% recorded following Sunday’s polls. More tellingly, the trendlines provide a fairly clear indication that the momentum to yes which was evident over a period of weeks has tapered off:
Of the three pollsters to have reported new results, Survation has the no lead narrowing from its result on Sunday, which had it at 54-46; Opinium also narrows slightly from a poll on Sunday, which had it at 53-47; while ICM is much better for no this time around, its previous poll being a small-sample outlier with yes leading 54-46. All three polls were conducted online; Mike Smithson at Political Betting says that, based on past form, the one we should be hanging out on is tomorrow’s final phone poll from Ipsos MORI. I had a paywalled piece in Crikey yesterday considering the possibility that the polls might just have it all wrong.
Some further findings from Opinium: 50% do not trust that new devolution powers in the event of a no vote will be delivered as promised; 47% think Scotland will keep the pound against 37% who don’t; 44% think Alex Salmond should resign as First Minister if no wins (which I find very odd); and 45% think independence will damage the Scottish economy.
Sunday, September 13
No less than four new polls have reported overnight, of which two have “no” with reasonable solid leads of six or eight points, one is lineball, and one is the best poll yet to emerge for yes. These are reviewed in detail below, but first we take an updated look at the poll tracker. This puts the current result at 51.4% for no and 48.6% for yes, all but unchanged on the 51.2% and 48.8% recorded yesterday (based on like-for-like methodological comparison). An outline of the methodology was provided yesterday, in the bottom half of this post.
The polls in turn:
• The good news for the independence camp first: ICM has produced the second poll to show the yes vote in front, following on from the first of last week’s surveys by YouGov, and by a not inconsiderable margin – 49% to 42%, rounding out 54-46 after exclusion of the undecided. Unlike yesterday’s ICM poll, this one uses its usual online methodology. The caveat here is the unusually small sample of 705. Also, as noted below, ICM has been one of the more yes-friendly pollsters, such that the poll tracker adjusts it downwards by 2.0%.
• An online panel poll by Survation, which has tended to come in at the middle of the range, has no at 47.0% and yes at 40.8%, for a rounded result of 54-46 to no. The poll was commissioned by the pro-union Better Together campaign. Whereas the bulk of the polling for the referendum has been online, this one was conducted by telephone, from Wednesday to Friday, with a sample of 1044. As was the case with TNS yesterday, this is a first phone poll from an outfit whose previous polling was conducted online.
• Opinium is an established online pollster which has made its first entry on the referendum, this being a survey of 1055 respondents. Its result is a lot closer to Survation’s than ICM’s, with 45% for yes and 49%, rounding out to 53-47.
• Panelbase in the Sunday Times has no on 50.6% and yes on 49.4%, but given its relative “yes” lean in the past, it’s comes out similarly to Survation and Opinium so far as the poll tracker is concerned.
Saturday, September 12
It’s now less than a week until Scotland’s independence referendum, which will be held on Thursday with polling stations to close at 10pm local time, or 7am Friday on the east coast of Australia. An official result won’t be expected until mid-afternoon our time. Before that time, the 32 local authorities that will be taking care of the business end of proceedings will report their results, which I guess we can expect to be done more promptly in the cities than the country.
The latest poll out this evening is an ICM poll for The Guardian which confirms the recent trend of being too close to call – 42% no, 40% yes and 17% don’t know, panning out to a headline figure of 51-49 with the exclusion of the undecided. According to Anthony Wells at UK Polling Report, we can expect a result reasonably soon from Panelbase, which I have determined to be one of the more “yes”-friendly pollsters. We might then see a relative lull before heavy-hitters YouGov and Ipsos MORI hold off until their final results nearer the big day, although there will surely be other results around the place between now and then.
My own polling tracker, which is laid out below, currently has “no” in the lead with 51.6%, but there is no sign that the trend to “yes” is levelling off. As I shall discuss, it would have been more like 51.3% if I had treated the latest poll differently, as maybe I should have.
A few things that have caught my eye:
• For those of you who know your way around Scotland, The Guardian offers mapped results of a year’s worth of Ipsos MORI polling in eye-watering detail.
• John Curtice, a political scientist of some renown, considers the contention popular in the “yes” camp that pollsters are under-representing respondents who don’t normally vote, whom they expect will give their cause a boost. However, Curtice finds that past non-voters who have been polled are leaning quite strongly towards no.
• Stephen Fisher at Elections Etc observes polling before 16 constitutional referenda in Austria, Ireland, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Quebec, Scotland, Sweden, Britain and Wales (not us, alas), and notes there “does not seem to be a precedent for a close referendum at which final polls underestimated the Yes vote” (he in fact said “overestimated” but if you read the sentence in context, this was clearly erroneous).
Now to my own poll tracker. The methodology runs roughly as follows: 1) Calculate accuracy ratings for each pollster based on the performance of their polls in the last week of the campaigns for the 2014 European, 2011 Scottish and 2010 Westminster elections; 2) Run a local area regression on the results with each poll weighted as per the relevant pollsters’ accuracy rating multiplied by the sample size; 3) Use the trend result thus produced to derive bias measures for each pollster, by averaging the deviation of their poll results from the trend; 4) Correct the pollsters’ results accordingly and run the regression again.
The bias adjustments made to the various pollsters’ “yes” results are as follows: Ipsos Mori +1.6%; YouGov +1.6%; TNS +0.6%; Survation -0.7%; ICM -1.5%; Panelbase -2.5%; Angus Reid -4.4%. The complication I mentioned earlier is that the latest ICM poll was conducted by telephone, whereas the nine previous polls from which I have derived its bias adjustment were online polls. I have nonetheless decided to apply their existing adjustment to the latest result. Since this poll is, together with the most recent YouGov, the very latest result in the model, and the bias adjustment used is a not inconsiderable penalty to “yes”, the effect is non-trivial. If no bias adjustment is applied to this poll, the “no” result comes down to 51.2%. If the poll is removed altogether, it is 51.3%.
A couple of further points to be noted. YouGov’s stunning poll result on Monday showing yes in the lead was a real outlier from a normally no-leaning pollster, and it shows up in the charts as the only data point with yes above 50%. Another poll from YouGov a few days later had no back in front. This was inevitably reported in terms of the momentum for yes having stalled, but that’s not the picture that emerges when the polling is aggregated. Panelbase’s polling before the start of this year had an enormous lean in favour of yes which has since been corrected, so the earlier results have been excluded. Angus Reid is, or has been, a fairly major pollster in Britain, but there has been no Scottish independence polling from it since August last year. Should it re-emerge in the next few days, I will have to think twice about applying the 4.4% correction noted above.
swamprat@50
That would be enough to make me vote Yes. At least until I saw a Trotskyite case for Yes, which would probably be enough to make me vote No.
It’s all very People’s Front of Judea that the UK has so many Trotskyite groups in the first place.
Index on Censorship @IndexCensorship 2h
#UK: Threats and intimidation of journalists reporting on the referendum in Scotland http://mediafreedom.ushahidi.com/reports/view/334 … #ECPM #mediafreedom
“The National Union of Journalists issued a statement to express “concern at the increase in intimidation and bullying of journalists covering the independence referendum and calls for people on both sides of the campaign to rein in the abuse being directed at our members.””
Kind of sickening on both sides I think.
Those who compare Scotland independence with North Qld or WA, just do no understand that 1000 years of hatred and warfare cannot be wiped out in 300 years or probably 3000.
The hostilities run deep and long. The fact that people still sing and play “Flowers of the forest” or the “Sky Boat song” keep memories alive of past atrocities/battles.
The fact that many of us read “Kidnapped” as a child or that many young girls studying history mourn for Mary “Queen of Scots” tells us that the emotive call for Scots independence is very strong, even after almost half a millenium.
For the many of us who read or watch “Game of Thrones” it is extremely clear that the North is Scotland and therefore if you are a Stark fan you are for Scottish independence but if you are a Lannister lover you are for uniting with Southron (aka English) control. So George Martin 300 years after union has written a novel about Scottish loss of independence that resonates today.
Now in Australia we have no history of war between North Queensland and NSW. There is not any sense of deliberate repression of people from North Queensland. Economic advantage is broadly similar. There is no separate language, dialect or literature. Oh and NQ does not have GAS.
Now under Abbott South Australia is becoming the Scotland of the South, depressed and marginalised. Perhaps in 300 years we will have a SA independence movement. 🙂
William
[No less than four new polls have reported overnight, ]
So four polls then?
I have wondered for some time why people use this formulation. Sometimes it’s an attempt at emphasis, but I doubt you’re doing that here. Why would you?
Genuinely curious.
[Sometimes it’s an attempt at emphasis, but I doubt you’re doing that here.]
I’m not sure why. It’s emphasis. And not just an attempt.
[Gifted amateurism is no foundation for a united kingdom
Irreversible promises to do with governing are being thrown around as campaign bait by desperate men ]
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c81d8298-39c1-11e4-93da-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DTszIeuL
CTar1 @ 56
Not a bad article. Though it does use the uncritical distinction between nationalism and unionism as if they are not the same thing.
I mean marching Orange Men, union jacks, calls to British greatness, unelected Lords in pink cloaks, royal babies etc etc are the emotional symbolism of British nationalism. It’s just that many people in Scotland do not identify with that idea of a nation.
And those numbers are growing.
Parts of Glasgow have 50% of their populations living below the poverty line! Great Britain is one of the most unequal western societies yet the Scots see their oil revenues wasted on nuclear weapons and foreign invasions, English high speed trains, London sewers etc etc and keeping Westminster MPs in tax payer funded luxury, safe behind the Victorian electoral system designed to prevent change.
It has more to do with the desire for self determination than nationalism.
The hollow panicked promises for devo-max are not worth anything.
A large number of Tory back bench and UKIP want the Scots ‘punished’ not ‘rewarded’.
Westminster will never give the Scots control of their resources.
If No narrowly ‘wins’ this referendum it will resolve nothing.
Wonderful work, William Bowe. Incisive and rigorous.
I have a mild case of an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder request: in your headlines for your Saturday and Sunday updates, from this past week, could you please change November to September?
…and a narrow ‘Yes’ win would be the worst possible outcome. Alright a narrow ‘No’ will mean the issue isn’t dead. But a narrow ‘Yes’ for such a significant change? Seems far far more problematic. Plus, Parliament is still supreme in this scenario, so will require a lot of work to actually make things happen… and you’d have to ask if 50%+1 will give the process enough oomph.
That’s part of the reason I’ve always argued ‘Yes’ needs to win in a landslide or not at all.
The other issue is that the SNP has promised the Scottish people a lot and the oil revenues are not that great and the tax base definitely isn’t… it’ll be interesting to see what happens when the rubber hits the road in the unlikely event of Yes getting up.
G’day William,
It seems like all the polls use some form of weighting based on UK, Scottish or EU elections, considering that this is a one off poll it would be interesting to know how this changes the raw numbers. Any ideas on the effect?
Cheers,
Pete.
I disagree. There is hardly ever a time when a major political change with long term positive impacts is achieved without controversy, contestation, and short to medium term problems. If the test for such changes were: “It must be endorsed by a landside majority and followed by plain sailing” then slavery would still be in place, the southern states of the USA would still prevent blacks from voting and from attending schools and universities with whites, the American revolution would have been postponed indefinitely, France would still be run by aristocrats who appropriate all the wealth while paying no tax, etc.
The history of these big changes is that they nearly always face fierce resistance, enjoy slim majority or sometimes even minority support initially, and require years or decades to settle in.
The Scots should weigh the risks of remaining within the UK (which are considerable) with the risks of independence (which are also considerable but come with increased power to manage them).
The risks of staying within a UK which is growing increasing unequal, increasingly prone to financial crises, and on track for many years if not decades of economic stagnation are pretty damn big. Within the UK the Scots, a mere eight percent of the UK population, have very limited capacity to manage those risks.
The currency and economic risks of independence are significant but they are tempered by an increased capacity to manage those risks and to build an economy and a political system which accords with the values of the Scots. Those values – which fall broadly within a framework of social democracy – contrast sharply with the market liberalism pursued by Tory and Labour UK governments with bad economic and social results over the past 35 years.
John Curtice has the Poll of Polls at 51% to 49%, favouring No.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/poll-polls-16-september/
[I’ve always argued ‘Yes’ needs to win in a landslide or not at all.]
What an extraordinary statement.
So if the Unionists get 40% of the vote they still get to win?
I am sure its a widespread belief in Westminster – so predictable and delusional.
We’ll just have to see.
Also, the scenarios of the truly momentous moments you’re highlighting were very very different. Mostly because they didn’t take on public views. Civil Rights was a slow bubble that started with the Courts and then Congress. Slavery was through executive action and backed up by Constitutional amendments. The American Revolution (despite being mythologised to an extreme) wasn’t exactly a democratic progress, nor initially something supported by the majority. And the French revolution didn’t have a clue what it wanted and also included the Terrors.
No one is denying that self-determination is important. My argument isn’t that it needs to win by a significant margin because that somehow reflect the ‘need’. I’m saying the margin matters because in the end, the referendum is basically a glorified plebiscite. The FINAL decision on process and progress will happen in Westminster and Edinburgh. And a tiny win, would divide the country, perhaps more than it is and place a lot less pressure on Westminster to act in a way it wouldn’t be able to if it won a 10%+ majority.
@62 – I have no skin in the game. Nothing you or I say is going to affect the outcome.
But when Parliament is supreme, the margin will matter.
Fair enough William. Normally you stand back and let the data speak for itself.
I gathered you were leaning towards no, but it’s surprising nonetheless.
Classic! Hahah! What happened when 100 UK Labour MPs turned up in Glasgow….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bGuCGdLxW0&app=desktop
Well, what the hell.
I’m going to go public with a wee prediction: YES to win tomorrow on the back on a massive turnout, including a substantial % of voters who’ve haven’t voted in years, and who haven’t been captured adequately by polling methodologies; aided and abetted by the kind of anti-politics that further south has seen the rise of the UKIP.
I further predict in the event of a close ‘no’, the issue will not actually be resolved; the UK will reneg on devo max, causing rather a lot of ill-will.
I’m sticking with my 54-46 No – with undecideds breaking heavily for retaining the union.
Monbiot has a spray on media coverage of the #indyref
http://gu.com/p/4xjx8/tw
Apparently there is only one paper in the UK backing the Yes case, and it’s not owned by Murdoch.
I remain neutral, like my erstwhile political colleagues but it’s hard to avoid discomfort when the media is plainly pulling out all stops for one side of what is at best a quite marginal case for preservation of the British union.
Lefty @ 66
Thanks for that. You have cleared up the mysterious comments I saw on blogs about the Labour Party being chased by a rickshaw.
Very good welcome to the Imperial Masters.
I hope the Labour Party is returned at the next general election with the same number of seats as the Tories, ie 1.
Lefty @ 67
Certainly the RIC has spent massive energy door knocking and trying to enrolled in the poorest areas. Areas represented and suitably neglected by the Imperial Labour Party.
Thier canvassing of over 18,000 …. Showed a high don’t knows 31%, 44% yes and 25% nos.
http://radicalindependence.org/2014/08/19/radical-independence-campaign-18k-canvass-sample-released/
This may explain the latest Labour advice: if in doubt vote NO! Charming bastards!
[Fair enough William. Normally you stand back and let the data speak for itself.
I gathered you were leaning towards no, but it’s surprising nonetheless.]
The emphasis was meant to be on the number of polls, four being rather a lot, rather than anything to do with the likely result.
WB
[The emphasis was meant to be on the number of polls, four being rather a lot, rather than anything to do with the likely result.]
That makes sense. Given the interest and proximity though one would expect a lot of polling of course.
Interesting data there Swamprat.
So, it seems YES may need fewer undecideds to break for it. And of course, as the anti-status quo position, thats exactly what they’re going to get: fewer undecideds.
Looks close. Im going 51.5-48.5 to YES.
[This may explain the latest Labour advice: if in doubt vote NO! Charming bastards!]
Wow! Team NO finally thought of a half-decent campaign idea, the day before the vote.
Media bias, and yes the guardian runs everything against independence it can.
Guardian report:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/16/ed-miliband-branded-serial-murderer-scottish-independence-edinburgh-walkabout?commentpage=1
Report from someone present:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
FACT: The UK media has been appalling throughout, including the Guardian and BBC.
Lefty
This is an interesting observation by Craig Murray
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/09/referendum-conundrum/
@78 – interesting… up until this comment from the author…
“There undoubtedly will be a certain amount of rigging – I am particularly worried about the strong Labour areas in Fife. The incredible rule from the electoral commission that postal ballots must be mixed in with other ballots before counting can have no other aim that I can see than to promote rigging. The great weakness in the system is that the Returning Officer is the chief executive of the Council – in very many cases a professional Labour hack. Fortunately there will be some very clued up and good quality observers on the Yes side.”
Really? allegations of vote-rigging already?
J341983
There is an wakeful lot at stake for some people in power.
Nuclear security, oil wealth and UK great power pretensions, not to say Cameron’s and many Labour troughers careers to name a few.
I don’t doubt that… but you don’t actually buy that nonsense do you?
On a more serious note Ladbrokes is giving odds of 25 to 1 on Cameron appearing in a kilt.
Oops
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/david-cameron-in-a-kilt-it-it-worth-a-bet-at-251-180369n.25315115
J
No I do not necessarily ‘ buy’ it but it is not inconceivable.
In the name of security…….anything can happen.
Yes camp wins crucial support of Cory Bernardi, who sees “an opportunity for it to pursue a different path than perhaps the many other Western European nations which have been hamstrung by bureaucracy and high taxation”.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-17/bernardi-backs-scottish-independence-despite-abbotts-stance/5751198
@William/85
Interesting that the main issues is “bureaucracy” and “high taxation” is focused on by Bernardi.
But nothing about debt, health, welfare or others.
Does the good senator not know that most Scots want higher public spending meaning higher taxes and bureaucracy?
Newsflash… Cory Bernardi knows f***-all about pretty much everything.
But the level of LOLZ is pretty high, even for him.
The editorial in the Sun (Murdoch’s).
The attack on the banks is not something one would see here in a Murdoch rag.
http://munguinsrepublic.blogspot.co.uk/
Well the Murdochracy has been behind the Yes camp for a while.
I was not aware the Sun has yet supported yes. It is the only Murdoch paper in Scotland that I am aware of.
OK: Ive just worked out that RIC sample is from “working class areas” of Scotland. So, the numbers dont tell us a lot, other than that the no campaign and UK Labour have lost the support of the Scottish lower socio-economic groups. That in itself is pretty significant – though not overly instructive about the likely result.
Still… there’s one Labour ‘no’ bulwark that has well and truly fallen.
THE ENGLISH ESTABLISHMENT FULL ON
___________________________________
I doubt that we have ever seen the “English” establishment (and their Quislings like Brown) out in such full cry in a long time
From the Queen down,to the Tory-Labour alliance(there is now no real difference in the two parties…and the doomed Lib-Dems…to the banks,and the brokers(I even saw Deutsche Bank making a statement…I doubt that there has been much German interest in Scotland since the Luffwaffe in 1942 bombed Glasgow)
and all the fear and loathing they have tried to arouse for the mad idea that Scots couldn’t run their own affairs as efficently as say the Danes or Slovenia or Finland,or a host of small well-off countries…and ignoring the poverty which is so much a part of the Scottish scene…caused in tha main by the doiminance of London and Home Counties of the wealth of the UK
A century ago the Irish ,after much loss of blood and treasure broke from London’s grip .and that act resonated around th world ,even here in Oz where pro-Irish people were vilified by the Enpire-loving militarists like Hughes an co, and Ireland was vilified and denounced…so other celts have traversed this path before
Hopefully the Scots will not go backwards…as the slogan says,,”Stand Up Scotland and be a Nation once again “
Deblonay
Well said.
The once great Labour Party, funded by the Tories, now bases it’s arguments on if you have doubts vote No, for no particular reason. Ignorance is the new Labour desired state.
They have betrayed the loyal voters of Scotland.
More despicable than the Tories who are at least open in their elitism.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/dont-vote-in-ignorance/
Deblonay
Well said.
The once great Labour Party, funded by the Tories, now bases it’s arguments on if you have doubts vote No, for no particular reason. Ignorance is the new Labour desired state.
They have betrayed the loyal voters of Scotland.
More despicable than the Tories who are at least open in their elitism.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/dont-vote-in-ignorance/
Sorry, ipad and me, are bad combinations.
Lefty @ 92
Sorry if I mislead you. I meant in saying they only canvassed the poorest areas that it was not a universal poll.
But it is interesting.
Addressing these areas of poverty will never happen under neo-liberal Tory/Labour/LibDem rule, ie Westminster.
Deblonay @92
It’s not the English, it’s Westminster. Many English outside the City suffer under the current economic ideology.
Sadly many think salvation lies in UKIP and independence from EU. (Though the Scots desire for independence from UK within EU is somehow very bad!!)
[“No less than four new polls have reported overnight,”
So four polls then?
I have wondered for some time why people use this formulation. Sometimes it’s an attempt at emphasis, but I doubt you’re doing that here. Why would you?
Genuinely curious.]
Looks like you distracted Fran from a less/fewer quibble at least. 😉
Martin
If Fran quibbles about less/fewer misuse, I support her 100%.
I also loath the lazy use of ‘bunch’ to describe a group which is not a bunch!!