So, have you decided who you are voting for yet? Iain Gray or Alex Salmond?
You do realise that they are your only options? Kenny Farquharson said so, and the Scotland on Sunday Deputy Editor has “been a Scottish political journalist for 20 years” so no quibbling with the experts y’hear, although Kenny is voting for Margo MacDonald which seems to contradict these points;
“anyone who backs their favourite party with their constituency vote rather than their regional vote is effectively depriving themselves of a say on who becomes First Minister.”
“I’ve seen the leaflet that’s being sent out to every home in Scotland in advance of 5 May, and it does nothing to spell out that it’s the all-important regional vote that will ultimately determine who makes it into Bute House.”
Kenny, and the assembled throng at the Scotsman leader debates, were apparently told by Alex Salmond that the second vote was for choosing who leads the Scottish Government. How this becomes SNP vs Labour rather than just selecting the party you like best of all the parties is beyond me. Those that argue that realistically it will only be the SNP and Labour who form the next Government and votes should be directed their way would, presumably, be voting SNP or Labour anyway.
Taking the unlikely duo of Kenny and Alex’s logic to the extreme, the next Scottish Parliament will consist of solely Nats and Labour MSPs. As strong a contribution as both parties have made to devolved Scotland over the past 12 years, I find that a horrifying prospect and a realisation of the nightmare Americanization of Britain. Yes, get used to those z’s, they be coming down those Appalachians soon boy, you do realize that…?
Anyway, surely the second vote is in fact our primary vote. We have a ballot slip that will include numerous independents and parties and, whatever our view of Scotland, there will be somewhere to place our X on there to make our voice heard whether you’re a lentil-munching Greenie or a borders-closing UKIP. The limited field of four or five candidates in the constituency vote restricts our opportunity to reflect our political beliefs on the ballot slip. This is all happily irrespective of who may or may not be First Minister.
Indeed, an oddity that Kenny seems to overlook in his study of the Holyrood voting system is that, while voters should apparently concern themselves with who will be at Bute House, they should not be concerned with who will provide the votes to allow SNP/Labour policies to pass and what concessions may be extracted. Working on the safe assumption that neither the SNP nor Labour will win a majority, the regional vote is as important for deciding who ends up holding the balance of power over the next four years as it is for deciding who gets to be First Minister.
Were past Holyrood successes borne out of who was in Bute House or the makeup of Holyrood at large? Fees were abolished thanks to SNP, Greens and Lib Dems, police numbers remain higher thanks to the Conservatives and SNP and we have free care for the eldery thanks to Labour and the Lib Dems. Granted, sometimes the First Minister drives on a policy that is a personal objective, Jack McConnell and the smoking ban for example, but let’s not kid ourselves that the Scottish Parliament is a one-man band just because it makes for a decent headline in the Sundays.
Only the voters of East Lothian and Gordon get to vote for Iain Gray and Alex Salmond, the rest of us should stick to the names on our constituency and regional ballot, if we truly believe in a parliamentary democracy as opposed to a presidential autocracy that is.
If the big two of the SNP and Labour are going to be joined by journalists in the myopic mantra of ‘Salmond vs Gray’ at the expense of the other parties that make Holyrood a richer place, then the further narrowing of the already strangled debate in this nation will continue and we may well be done for.
At the start of Kenny’s article the following is stated:
“the election result is just an accidental accumulation of a dozen different misunderstandings on the part of a confused electorate.”
I celebrate that fact rather than lament it. Is a varied interpretation of how to vote and who to vote for, tactically, historically, impulsively or otherwise not a celebration of democracy itself?
#1 by cynicalHighlander on April 3, 2011 - 10:56 am
At least having two major parties is better than just the one which Scotland has been stuck with for decades.
Holyrood race: SNP overtakes Labour
#2 by James on April 3, 2011 - 11:34 am
Absolutely, Jeff – and whether you prefer Alex or Iain, neither of them will get a majority by themselves. So the question then is who do you want them to be dependent on in the Chamber? Given their mutual animosity, the answer is either one of the Westminster coalition parties or the Greens.
#3 by Keith Roberts on April 3, 2011 - 11:42 am
Two is certainly better than one, however we also have the Anyone But Elmer aspect. There is no doubt that Iain Gray as First Minister would be an utter disaster and an embarrassment to Scotland. To ensure that does not happen the regional vote is crucial and much as I endorse the need for additional voices in the chamber, the need for a FM with gravitas, statesmanship and policies is of greater importance. I know where my votes are going.
#4 by Keith Roberts on April 3, 2011 - 11:47 am
And another thing…….
Joan McAlpine sits 4th on the regional list for the South. I think she is an asset we want to have in our parliament. Does that mean that to get at least 4 in from the least we need to make sure that the SNP don’t take all the constituency seats? Hmmm…..
#5 by Indy on April 3, 2011 - 11:53 am
I didn’t really understand the article, it seemed to be going round in circles. He gave the example of people who would vote for Margo or George Galloway or the Greens on the list as though that is somehow not using the system correctly. I just don’t get that. People pretty much know what they will get there in terms of electing the First Minister. Margo will vote for an SNP First Minister, Galloway will vote for a Labour First Minister, the Greens will wait and see who is the biggest party and then decide what their conditions are for supporting them. Voters are perfectly capable of working that out and making their own decisions about how to vote.
#6 by Top Tory Aide on April 3, 2011 - 12:20 pm
Type your comment here
Well, I imagine the SNP will lose Kilmarnock – which is now in the South – but will win Pervis’ seat. I imagine McAlpine will be an MSP
#7 by danny1995 on April 3, 2011 - 12:34 pm
Speaking of bloggers, what are the odds on Kezia Dugdale getting in? One of the few Labour candidates I like and respect.
#8 by Ezio on April 3, 2011 - 2:32 pm
Indy seems sure Margo would for for Salmond as FM. Has Margo stated this? Did she for for Salmond in 2007? Isn’t there some bad blood there?
#9 by Doug Daniel on April 3, 2011 - 7:44 pm
Just checked back to the BBC article from 2007- seems Margo abstained, along with the Lib Dems and the Tories. I dare say, however, that if push came to shove, Margo would put her nationalism ahead of personal grudges, as Indy suggests.
It’ll be interesting to see how things pan out this time round, especially if the SNP and Labour receive the same number of seats.
#10 by Indy on April 3, 2011 - 3:17 pm
As far as I know they can’t stand each other. But Margo is a nationalist, just as Galloway is a unionist.
#11 by NConway on April 3, 2011 - 3:22 pm
“At least having two major parties is better than just the one which Scotland has been stuck with for decades.”
have to agree with cynicalHighlander Scotland for too long has been under bad Labour management and it will take at least another few wins by the SNP to break that habit,there is bad blood between Margo and the SNP however she still believes that Scotland should be independent.
#12 by NConway on April 3, 2011 - 3:47 pm
I see that newsnetscotland have an article on a new poll that has the Green party up to 3 MSPs http://www.newsnetscotland.com/scottish-politics/1973-scottish-election.html
#13 by The Burd on April 3, 2011 - 8:04 pm
Great article Jeff (says the souky up guest member of the BN team) but no really! But I think I understood the point Kenny Farquharson was trying to make which is underlined by the findings of this poll and which I alluded to in a post on it elsewhere today.
Salmond has said vote SNP on the regional vote to choose your government but the voters are not indicating that is what they are going to do. A clear preference want Eck as FM and if forced to choose would have SNP over Labour in government, and appear to think that by voting SNP on the constituency vote that might achieve what they are aiming for.
But we anoraks all know the SNP cannot win that way so needs people to vote for it on the regional vote.
At least I think that was kind of what he was saying?
Margo would abstain again – the bad blood is between her hubbie and Eck – but she has her own issues with him too. Ironically, it wasn’t Salmond who had her removed from the party – forget how it was done – but that nice man Swinney…
#6 I don’t think the SNP will lose Kilmarnock but let’s wait and see what Jeff or Malc reckon when they come to predict South of Scotland…
#14 by Jeff on April 3, 2011 - 8:21 pm
Thanks Burd (says the member of the BN team hoping to ingratiate himself to The Burd) but no really!
I still don’t think that explains Kenny’s article. A clear preference may well want Alex Salmond to be First Minister, heck I want Alex Salmond to be First Minister, but I’d still be voting Green with my second vote (and SNP with my first one).
Asking who the public wants as FM is surely not a question that encompasses all factors of the election, not even close, so to define the voting system against that benchmark is flawed as a consequence.
I can understand what you’re saying of course but I just think it’s still too much within the SNP vs Labour prism to be an appropriate take on the election as a whole. As I said in the post, and I guess this is my fundamental point, the UK is still run by a parliamentary democracy and not a Presidential system of ‘sofa Government’. Parliament is supreme, not a First Minister or any minority party.
#15 by Colin on April 3, 2011 - 8:51 pm
You’re right when you say you forget how Margo was “removed from the party”! It wasn’t anything to do with Swinney. She was voted too far down the Lothians list by local SNP members to get back in, so decided to resign.
#16 by The Burd on April 3, 2011 - 8:38 pm
And I agree with your fundamental point. I too am not overly impressed at everyone trying to treat the election as a presidential thing rather than parliamentary one. But looking at all the polls from late summer 2010 it does seem as if who do we want to govern is focusing voters’ minds rather than who do we want in our Parly.
My post probably didn’t elucidate properly – suffering the after effects of comment wars – but the SNP could find itself hoist by its own petard. It, more than anyone else, has tried to turn this election into an FM beauty contest and it may well backfire on them as voters use their constituency vote to make this clear and use their second vote for other purposes, when they need the list votes to be in with a shout at government.
The more all of us emphasise that this is a parliamentary election not a presidential one, the better.
#17 by Jeff on April 3, 2011 - 9:56 pm
I reckon you might be right. I’m not in Scotland right now so don’t know how fed up the back teeth voters are of the campaign already but it’s possible that there’s a swing out to ‘other parties’ if they are. Currently it does look like votes are being sucked into the Lab/SNP vortex however…
#18 by Doug Daniel on April 3, 2011 - 11:09 pm
The problem is the Iain Gray factor. I think a lot of people (most likely SNP supporters, and I’m one of them) find the idea of Iain Gray becoming FM to be unbearable, especially when backed up by politicians of the “calibre” of Richard Baker, Andy Kerr, Jackie Baillie and Johann Lamont. It certainly fills me with horror, and it’s difficult not to counter that by promoting the idea that the main reason the SNP need to win is to make sure we have Salmond, Sturgeon, Swinney, Russell and MacAskill in charge instead.
To be honest, the fact that Iain Gray could become FM has even made me wonder if a directly-elected FM would be a good idea. Patently ridiculous, but that’s what Iain Gray does to me.
#19 by Stuart Winton on April 3, 2011 - 9:52 pm
What’s the blogging equivalent of “get a room”?!?
#20 by Doug Daniel on April 3, 2011 - 10:51 pm
I think it’s “start a collaborative blog and set the privacy status to ‘invited members only'” or something like that.
#21 by The Burd on April 3, 2011 - 10:38 pm
#15 That’s right she did resign but things had been very ropey in the run up to 2003 and did Margo not blame the party hierarchy for orchestrating her low placing? It all seemed so important at the time…. looking back it seems like such a waste of folk’s energy but I suppose this is what happens when you grow overnight from 5 to 35 MSPs ie that you get lots of square pegs in round holes. To be honest, I think Margo is great as an independent and it suits her and everyone else fine.
#22 by Stuart Winton on April 4, 2011 - 8:52 am
LOL.
And apologies for my inability to use the comment function properly, but for the avoidance of doubt my earlier comment was alluding to Jeff and the Burd ;0)
#23 by Kate on April 4, 2011 - 9:14 pm
#20 and #22
I’m only being nice to Jeff to lull him into a false sense of security, and so he’ll let me back next week…. Lol
#24 by Chris on April 5, 2011 - 10:28 am
Doug,
Any party in government finds it hard to believe that the opposition spokesmen are any good. Consider 4 years ago with Kenny MacAskill most famous for getting lifted at a Scotland vs England match, John Swinney’s hapless time as SNP leader, Mike Russell’s outrageous spin doctoring and Nicola Sturgeon the serial loser in Govan. That shower to run a country – what a preposterous idea!