In the previous post Malc suggested the “utter madness†of a grand coalition between bitter foes, the SNP and Labour, but pointed out reasons why it may be beneficial for both sides. To my mind, it is simply impossible. There is no love lost between the two parties and the visceral hatred that does exist is an insurmountable barrier, a barrier all the more strange as the two parties are not really so dissimilar. Perhaps opposites attract after all.
With that in mind, I’m going to go one better than Malc’s ‘crazy concept’ of an SNP/Labour coalition and that is to suggest an SNP/Conservative coalition. Yes, that’s right, thinking the unthinkable but you can call me names and throw things at the end but please hear me out.
For a start, the cuts are on their way, there’s no avoiding that so, if you can’t beat them, join them. The SNP could even use the Tories as a shield in the same way that the Tories are using the Lib Dems as a shield down south. Imagine putting Annabel Goldie up to bat to defend health cuts against a baying media scrum.
And hey, let’s be honest, the two parties get on very well indeed, arguably the best relationship among the four main parties. At the top, Annabel Goldie and Alex Salmond do not enjoy a working relationship, which could be a problem, but I envisage Annabel calling it a day at the next election, if the electorate do not decide to call it a day for her. Whichever of the young Tory turks were to take over, I would imagine there would be enough personal chemistry between the two parties for a stable Government to be formed, something along the following lines:
Alex Salmond – First Minister
Murdo Fraser/Derek Brownlee – Deputy First Minister & Education Secretary
John Swinney – Finance Secretary
Nicola Sturgeon – Health Secretary
Kenny MacAskill – Justice Secretary
Derek Brownlee/Murdo Fraser – Business Secretary
and so on and so forth…
Furthermore, the numbers make this prospect all the more possible if the Lib Dems haemorrhage seats, as current polling and knowledgable talking heads suggests they will do.
Let’s say the election result was:
Labour – 47 seats
SNP – 45 seats
Conservatives – 20 seats
Lib Dems – 10 seats
Greens – 6
BNP – 1
Labour, being the biggest party, unofficially receives the first chance to form a coalition. The Grand Coalition fails to take off (sorry Malc), a coalition with the Conservatives isn’t even entertained and the Lib Dems and Greens don’t offer enough seats. The Conservatives see their ‘Scottish Tory moment’ and let it be known that the SNP can have their referendum if a deal can be reached.
This is where timing would come into it.
An election has just been held so there isn’t another one for four long years, an election that will be taking place at the same time as (perhaps even on the same date as) the Westminster election in May 2015. The SNP will probably suffer in that election for the same reasons as why they suffered this May due to the TV leader debates and being squeezed out of the national spotlight. So, why not go for the ‘all-in’ strategy of an unholy alliance and take the only independence referendum that is open to them?
Sure, many Scots would go absolutely mental, I mean heads would explode kind of thing (not least of which would be Iain Gray himself) but the SNP/Tory administration would have four years to win them round, a philosophy that Nick Clegg has clearly adopted down South.
Ok, there’s the minor issue of the SNP having a clause in its statute book saying that it will not form coalitions with the Conservatives. I admit that would be a problem. However, if that could be erased in a Blair-esque ‘Clause IV moment’ or even an informal deal could be reached on a confidence-and-supply basis, some sort of deal is doable.
The Conservatives need some way back into Scotland’s hearts and the SNP needs some way past the Unionist blockade in order to achieve independence.
Perhaps this unholy alliance could act as divine intervention for both parties.
#1 by Malc on September 7, 2010 - 1:24 pm
Minor amendment. In your scenario, Lab + LD + Green = 64. Its true this is less than 65 needed for absolute majority but you are forgetting that a Presiding Officer has to come from somewhere…
#2 by Jeff on September 7, 2010 - 1:33 pm
Thanks Malc, fair point I suppose. I would expect a Labour presiding officer next time but there’s no way to know at this stage.
I’ve changed the numbers to nullify your point. I’m confident there’ll be no comeback…
(I am also aware that I have rather casually removed Patrick Harvie from Parliament and replaced him with a Glasgow racist so I maintain that this is an arbitrary breakdown to make a point and in no way a preference!)
#3 by Anon on September 7, 2010 - 1:49 pm
Ok, there’s the minor issue of the SNP having a clause in its statute book saying that it will not form coalitions with the Conservatives.
Didn’t they remove this clause?
#4 by Jeff on September 7, 2010 - 4:11 pm
Not that I know of Anon.
I’m pretty sure all hell would have broken loose in the media if they had.
#5 by Indy on September 7, 2010 - 1:50 pm
A coalition between Labour and the SNP is I agree most unlikely and in my view unnecessary.
A coalition between the Tories and the SNP is however impossible.
For a start we have specific policy against any parliamentary coalition with the Tories, re-affirmed in 2007 as I recall. Nicola Sturgeon moved the motion.
There is no conceivable, imaginable or even unimaginable way in which the SNP will ever enter into a coalition with the Conservative and Unionist Party.
They say never say never but I’ll say it anyway.
Never,
In a million years.
Doesn’t mean we can’t cooperate with them where we agree on policy of course.
#6 by Jeff on September 7, 2010 - 2:10 pm
I guess I know the answer to this…. but not even if it was the only route to an independence referendum?
I thought you enjoyed high risk strategies? 😉
#7 by Indy on September 7, 2010 - 2:25 pm
Jeff the point of getting an independence referendum is to win it.
So no.
There’s high risk and then there’s suicide!
#8 by anon on September 7, 2010 - 6:12 pm
A scenario with some evidence.
2007 – Salmond asks LibDems for coalition. Not whilst there’s a referendum bill in the offing, they respond.
A few weeks ago, same response.
Now, the referendum is ‘in play’, and the SNP floats idea of ‘green’ environmental policies. Are we seeing an overture to Libs and Greens cunningly disguised here?
If so, a coalition with 61 seats, and Lab and Tories not talking to each other, and totally isolated.
#9 by Alexander Belic on September 8, 2010 - 1:18 am
I don’t really see how the SNP could lose seats, and the Tories could gain seats, yet Salmond would stay as leader and Annabelle Goldie would be replaced. Surely if Goldie secured the most seats the Tories ever held in Holyrood she’d be safe.
#10 by Jeff on September 8, 2010 - 8:10 am
Absolutely fair assumption Alexander, I admit Goldie staying on would make it even more of a highwire act.
In terms of seats, I don’t see the SNP scooping up 5 out of 7 regional MSPs this time and they are already under threat from boundary changes (Nicola Sturgeon for example). The Tories have had a good 4 years and I guess I just can’t see them
doing much worse in terms of numbers as they are now.
Another point – the SNP and Tories have worked together impressively smoothly to deliver the past 3 budgets and the Parliament walls didn’t come tumbling down. Is it really such a leap to have some sort of coalition together? Goldie or no Goldie?
Perhaps keeping the Tories in a box north of the border makes political sense but it looks pretty unseemly if you step far enough back from the situation.
#11 by redcthulhu on September 8, 2010 - 3:10 am
Great idea! You should actively campaign for this to happen!
Then rename your blog “work as if you live in the early days of the | WORST NATION HUMANLY POSSIBLE”
#12 by James on September 8, 2010 - 7:57 am
Love it. That might be my favourite comment of Week One here.
#13 by Malc on September 8, 2010 - 9:14 am
Seconded. Outstanding cynicism.
#14 by Indy on September 8, 2010 - 9:57 am
The Tories may have had a good 4 years in Scotland but they’ll still pay a price for the Coalition policies, as will the Lib Dems. Both parties will lose votes.
And rightly so – unless they break free and set up as independent parties the “Scottish” Tories and Lib Dems are still part of the UK parties and responsible for UK-wide policies.
#15 by Bella Caledonia on September 8, 2010 - 6:49 pm
In what sense have the ‘Tories had a good 4 years in Scotland’? Can someone explain? What metric are we using here? Malc I dont think its ‘Outstanding cynicism’. Its just this is sort of all made up stuff that wont ever happen.
Just because there is an opportunist coalition at Westminster of power-hungry politicians doesnt mean that it is in any way feasible to consider an SNP/Tory alliance. This is just a parlour game.
#16 by Malc on September 8, 2010 - 8:18 pm
Fine – cynicism, wit, whatever. Do I have to explain why I thought it was funny?
But of course this is just a parlour game. Speculation is the business we’re in – it’s a “what if” game! But I draw the line at “made up stuff that wont ever happen”. Would you have taken on the idea of a Lib Dem-Tory coalition 5 years ago? How about an SNP minority government pre-April 2007? The point isn’t that it will happen, or even that its likely to happen, its the fact that it is a possibility (albeit a remote one) and we wanted to talk about what might happen in that situation and the problems arising – or, indeed, the reasons it might not happen.
As for the “4 good years for the Tories”, maybe Jeff will want to explain that himself, but I’d tend to agree – the party have actually tried to be constructive, they’ve gotten stuff included in the SNP’s government programmes, they’ve engaged with the process, their younger generation of MSPs (Brownlee, Brown, Liz Smith) have been impressive… even Annabel Goldie has comfortably been the best of the main opposition leaders I’d wager. I think by any yardstick, you could define that as successful – Jeff?
#17 by Jeff on September 8, 2010 - 9:33 pm
Well, everything’s relative Mike. I’ll give you two points of comparison…
Labour have indulged in opposition for opposition’s sake through the four years, bordering on the downright childish more often than most people would surely like. Fair enough, they are ahead of the polls but I would argue that’s just out of default right now. The Lib Dems haven’t offered much in the past four years though have at least been civil. The Conservatives have calmly, maturely stated their case on many an occasion, the Scottish Water debate being the latest example. Goldie has also obtained the most concessions from the Scottish Government which will serve as campaigning fodder next May when their performance is held up to scrutiny. Basically, the Tories have outperformed Labour and the Lib Dems, individually (Brownlee/Goldie) and as a group.
The other point of comparison I would make is in terms of time. In the past 20 years or so the Conservatives have barely had a look in north of the border. You may point to the election we have just had but in terms of devolved Politics specifically, I don’t think the party’s stock has been much higher.
And finally, it is the first election in Scotland when the Tories have been in power in London. That will put a spring in many an activist and Tory councillor’s step, not to mention provide plenty of talking points. Granted, much of it will fall on deaf ears but the Tories don’t need every vote to advance, particularly when it’s coming from relatively far back.
Furthermore Mike, I don’t think you’ve followed my logic very closely when you say “just because there is an opportunist coalition at Westminster of power-hungry politicians doesnt mean that it is in any way feasible to consider an SNP/Tory alliance”.
My logic was more that (1) the SNP desperately wants a referendum and have a lack of coalition partners and (2) the Tories desperately want a way back into the mainstream. It doesn’t seem unlikely, if the numbers fall a certain way, that a deal could be reached.
Nowt to do with London.
#18 by Dougthedug on September 9, 2010 - 12:40 am
Jeff,
“Nowt to do with London.”
Since there is only one Conservative party in the UK and it’s run by David Cameron I don’t understand this statement. Are you saying that Conservative Regional Manager Goldie is going to make a decision on the constitutional future of the UK with no input from her boss, Mr. Cameron?
#19 by Jeff on September 9, 2010 - 8:10 am
No Doug, I mean that my envisaged SNP-Tory coalition would be based on parliamentary arithmetic and a strong desire from the Nats to have a referendum. It would be incidental to the coalition down in London. That’s what I mean (and what I said).
#20 by Bella Caledonia on September 9, 2010 - 2:07 pm
I still dont see how you can credit the Tories as having four good years since Annabel Goldie’s widely seen to be on a ‘shoogley peg’.
Also you say: “And finally, it is the first election in Scotland when the Tories have been in power in London. That will put a spring in many an activist and Tory councillor’s step, not to mention provide plenty of talking points. ” Except that one of the notable phenomena of the last 9UK) election was Scotland being immune to the Cameron bounce. They flat-lined. Anyway these are petty quibbles. It’s a good parlour game but I’m not holding my breath for an SNP/Tory alliance.
Both would completely alienate their core support and as such the idea is without credibility (IMHO).
#21 by Jeff on September 9, 2010 - 2:39 pm
“Parlour game” is a bit unfair I’d say but I get what you’re saying about the pointlessness of speculation, enjoyable as it may be.
You’d probably know better than I if the core vote would be alienated but I still think it would be respected as a pragmatic move and not too much different to how business is conducted and progressed in 2007-2011 anyway. (witness Iain Gray’s moronic reaction to the Bill announcement’s yesterday and distinct lack of proposals on how to get through the next Budget. The Goldie/Swinney/Harvie dream team will win through once more it seems)
Anyway, happy to agree to disagree on it. Unlikely the numbers will fall that anyway but I want to see some humble pie being eaten if this unholy alliance does come to pass!
Pingback: What will the “PM Cameron effect†be for the Tories in Scotland? « Better Nation
Pingback: Prospecting for Goldie « Better Nation