There will be an independence referendum. Naysayers and legal boffins may claim that such considerations are outside the scope of the Scottish Parliament but I remain of the belief that where there is a will there is a way and anyone standing in the way of an SNP majority getting the referendum that it was in its manifesto will be knocked out of the way sooner or later. The referendum will apparently be during the second half of this parliamentary term but you’ll no doubt start to feel the gathering storm over the next few days as Cameron, Clegg and Miliband realise the enormity of what is ahead of them to convince Scotland to stay a part of the union. Forget current polls, as we should have done for much of this past four years, the independence bandwagon is coming to town and it’s going to be one hell of a ride.
Labour needs a new leader. For whatever reason, Iain Gray messed this election big time and cannot be rewarded with continuing in his post. In truth, his election victory speech did not sound like a man who was looking forward to challenging Salmond for another five years so a replacement won’t have to ‘oust’ the current incumbent. Jackie Baillie? Ken McIntosh? John Park? Hugh Henry? Sarah Boyack? The gubbing that Labour has faced does not leave them short of candidates for the job. I’d be happy with anyone but Ms Baillie in the post from the above arbitrary shortlist and I’d be confident that they’d succeed where Iain Gray failed, realising that they don’t have to be angry, indignant and negative to win elections in Scotland.
The Tories have steadied the ship, finally. Given the context of this election, the beginning of cuts that are emanating from a Tory-led coalition, Annabel Goldie has steered her party to a decent result that sets them up well for 2016. Osborne’s plan, for all that lefties including myself don’t like it, is working and by the time the next election comes around the Tories may enjoy a swell in support so great that it even crosses the border. With strong 2nd place and 3rd place showings this year, the Conservatives, whoever leads them, have put themselves in position to be a real force in domestic Scottish politics for the first time in decades.
The Greens are stuck in the mud. I’m aghast that the Greens have fared so badly, not even moving on from the 2 MSPs that they currently have if my predictions are correct. The party ran a slick campaign, they had an alternative, convincing manifesto, they had students seemingly onside and their main rivals, the Lib Dems, went into freefall. The election was in the end about SNP vs Labour so there simply wasn’t enough people really considering voting for what sadly remains Scotland’s fifth party. At least they have improved their gender balance.
The Lib Dems have a mountain to climb. The number of lost deposits that the Lib Dems suffered was a financial blow but it is the psychological and practical impact that will hurt the most. How do they go about winning seats from 4th in 2016? How do they retake Edinburgh Southern from 3rd? At the root of their problems is Westminster of course. How can the Lib Dems build the trust of the Scottish people while partaking in a coalition with the Tories? It’s quite simple, if you agree with Cameron’s approach you vote Tory, if you don’t then you vote Labour or SNP.
A Green/Lib Dem merger? There is probably a strong argument for the Greens and Lib Dems to merge as they cannot continue to splinter their vote as they have done in this election. With such a similar platform, they are really no different to the Socialists who can’t get it together and stand as a united front. The Greens were quite right to be annoyed that Lib Dems were claiming to be the only party standing on a platform of local policing but, in truth, they should have been supporting them rather than attacking them. A political joint venture or merger rather than acquisition could be pragmatic politics for two parties that believe in localism and are taking arguably the strongest stances on the fight against Climate Change. Are their shared issues too important to be divided over? I make it that between them they’d have an extra 4 MSPs in total if they had stood on a shared platform. Worth thinking about….
Politicians who chart their own path get rewarded at the ballot box. Malcolm Chisholm stood up for his beliefs over minimum pricing and is the last MSP standing in Edinburgh while Alex Fergusson has been his own man as Presiding Officer and bucked the otherwise overwhelming and unforgiving SNP swing. If a lesson can be learned from this past four years where MSPs loyally followed the party whip it is this – be your own person.
Scotland’s renewables revolution will continue. One of the reasons the Greens did so badly is arguably because the SNP manifesto was so, well, green. 100% renewable electrical power by 2020 is an awesome aim and regardless of how difficult or even achievable it will be, it is difficult for the Greens to exceed such an aim. It’s sad that Patrick Harvie does not lead a bigger bloc of MSPs but Scotland’s green credentials are, to a large extent, well and truly on track.
Parties trump personalities. The accuracy with which it was possible to predict which seats the SNP were and were not going to win suggests one thing, across Scotland people generally vote for parties and not individuals which is hugely disappointing. The conveyor belt from politics graduate through parliamentary researcher to Holyrood MSP is working nicely as the dull automation of Scottish Politics continues. Who are these regional MSPs that are standing in the Parliament? What public scrutiny have they come under? We at least need to move to open lists to prevent parties holding too much control over the makeup of our Parliament.
Alex Salmond is already a living legend. Today’s result and the sheer longevity of the man will cement the SNP leader’s position not just in modern history but beyond that. Even if the SNP do not go onto win the referendum, Salmond is now up with the greatest Scottish politicians, the greatest Scots, that have ever been. He has now outlasted Thatcher, Blair and Ashdown will surely go on to be the longest serving modern-day UK leader of any party. With a Holyrood majority as a legacy, at least. Simply wow.
#1 by aonghas on May 6, 2011 - 1:07 pm
I’ll drink to that (before they stick up the prices of booze).
What a night. Something that is surprising is how almost ominous an absolute majority feels, given that absolute majorities for a minority of the vote are so commonplace under FPTP. If they get one, will the SNP wreak havoc? How has it affected the centre of gravity of the party I wonder.
#2 by aonghas on May 6, 2011 - 1:10 pm
By the way, obviously not a commonly held view, but I feel a bit sorry for the LibDems. Doing the ‘grown-up’ thing and entering a coalition. Being part of a government that is implementing spending plans a tiny bit different from Labours’ plans (1% difference?), and getting absolutely humped for it. Ah well, them’s politics.
#3 by Dan on May 6, 2011 - 1:14 pm
With the inevitable disarray Labour will be in as they search for a leader I think you’re right that this could be the moment for the Tories. Especially if the SNP’s pledges on Higher Education are as uncosted as the commentators suggest.
A Green-LibDem merger? It might salvage something from the ashes but I just cannot see it, and even an electoral pact I think would cause huge internal frictions. That doesn’t, however, deny your logic.
#4 by aonghas on May 6, 2011 - 2:03 pm
You should see the Daily Record front page BTW. 60% Princess Kate, 35% Rangers, and a tiny wee Eck in the corner. Fan. Tastic.
#5 by Colin on May 6, 2011 - 2:09 pm
Seems that the royal wedding did nothing to hurt the SNP. If anything it may even have annoyed so many Scots they leant further towards the SNP? Particularly references to ‘future king of England’ and the singing of Jerusalem, or even people who didn’t watch it at all and were fed up by all the coverage.
#6 by Douglas McLellan on May 6, 2011 - 2:11 pm
The merger/pact idea is an interesting one but I think that both parties have some distance to travel to get there. I have blogged at my own site that the Scottish Lib Dems need to rediscover their Scottishness and develop a clear Scottish persona again.
I wonder if the Greens need to do some analysis of their position. You said they had the students on board but I wonder if issues around the LVT where Patrick didnt realise that students were exempt and perhaps even using the SVR meant that the students went to the SNP instead?
That said, LVT is seen by both parties as a good replacement on business rates and I cant help but think a steady alignment of policies would benefit both parties in some respects. Certainly the Lib Dems would benefit from someone of Patrick Harvies communication & parliamentary abilities and the Greens could benefit from more media exposure as Scotland’s joint 4th largest party rather than the hidden 5th.
Pingback: The Morning After… | dorkymum
#7 by Rev. S. Campbell on May 6, 2011 - 2:19 pm
The cruellest cut of all, I think, is Iain Gray holding his seat. Labour can’t get a new leader in place before Parliament reconvenes (surely), so he’s going to have to endure at least one FMQs in front of his pitiful rump of MSPs, after his boastful crowing at the last one that Salmond’s time was up.
I wonder how much I’d have to bribe someone to guarantee a seat in the gallery at that one?
#8 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 2:42 pm
I think Iain will be genuinely content being a constituency MSP in East Lothian which, I quite agree with him, is one of the most beautiful constituencies in Scotland.
#9 by Rev. S. Campbell on May 6, 2011 - 2:53 pm
Maybe so, but he sure as hell won’t enjoy FMQs until Labour get a new leader.
Also, HOW sweet was it to get over the finish line by taking Gordon Brown’s constituency?
#10 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 3:00 pm
Well, now I think you’re moving away from the winning gracefully space….
#11 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 4:16 pm
Oh the SNP moved away from the winning gratefully space some time ago…
I’d like to think Labour would have been better, and maybe we would, maybe we wouldnt – but I can tell you that I would certainly be a better more gracious winner than some of the SNP MSPs I saw elected in the early hours of the morning.
#12 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 2:50 pm
Yes, because enjoying someones personal humiliation is the SNP way.
#13 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 3:01 pm
Just as being a bad loser is the Labour way perhaps? Incidentally Jeff, I believe the answer to my question yesterday (i.e. who will give the spit-the-dummy speech) was: Cathy Peattie, former MSP for Falkirk East.
#14 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 3:41 pm
Well, going on how the local SNP acted after the last local elections, there is no monopoly on being a bad loser.
I think the mark of a person, or a party, is how it acts in victory. Wanting to rub someones nose in it because you can is undignified.
#15 by rullko on May 7, 2011 - 1:39 am
Eh? The SNP won the last local elections too.
#16 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 4:11 pm
In Angus, the SNP were kicked out after ruling the local authority with total arrogance for the other parties for virtually decades.
Whilst I dont agree with the Angus Alliance for being a coalition whose only common theme was that they all hated the SNP – the way the SNP have acted since has been nothing short of amazing. Toys out of the pram, voting against anything and everything the Alliance propose, regardless of its merits etc, etc. Not to say the constant references of Alliance councillors to the commisioner for public standards on the flimisiest of pretexts.
Like I said, no party has a monopoly on being a bad loser.
#17 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 2:59 pm
You’re quite right about Big Eck being a living legend Jeff, in fact the line I’ve put at the end of my impending blog post (in which I’m going to try to keep gloating to an absolute minimum) is: “where will we put the statue of Alex Salmond?”
I’m glad this result has happened today, because I now feel justified to say out loud (well, type in public) something which I have had in my head for the past four years:
William Wallace. Robert the Bruce. Alex Salmond.
And I’ll make the prediction now: Alex Salmond will be the first President of the independent Republic of Scotland.
#18 by aonghas on May 6, 2011 - 3:13 pm
Top of Buchanan street, with each foot on a plinth positioned to the left and right of Donald?
#19 by DougtheDug on May 6, 2011 - 3:03 pm
Jeff:
Labour in Scotland don’t need a new leader because Labour has a leader and his name is Ed Milliband. What Labour will be electing in Scotland if Iain Gray stands down is the leader of the Labour MSP’s in the Scottish parliament which is a minor post even in Labour’s Scottish region. One of your group leadership possibles has already gone. Sarah Boyack lost her seat to Marco Biagi.
I could see a candidate standing on a Green/Lib-Dem joint ticket as Labour and the Co-operative party have been doing that for years across the UK but I’ve no idea if one ticket would be more successful than two.
The idea of a Scottish Green Party and Scottish Lib-Dem merger has one fatal flaw. There is no Scottish Lib-Dem party and any merger would be with the British Lib-Dems. Therefore there could be no Scottish Green-Lib-Dem party and the Scottish Greens would simply disappear into the Lib-Dems and if the electorate still has no time for the Lib-Dems and their Westminster dalliance the support for the Greens as a separate entity would disappear too.
#20 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 3:06 pm
Sarah Boyack will get in on the list so is still a contender. I think most people accept the interchangeability of LOLITSP and Scottish Labour leader but you make a good point Doug, they should make the dividing line clearer.
I agree that an alliance is better than a merger and Labour/Co-op is a great example. The strength of feeling against on twitter suggests it’s a non-starter though!
#21 by DougtheDug on May 6, 2011 - 3:14 pm
I stand corrected on Sarah Boyack as I thought that the rule of constituency only for Labour was common across all the candidates.
#22 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 3:45 pm
The rule was changed for those MSPs who were affected by substantial boundary changes which made their seat less safe.
#23 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 3:06 pm
Nah, Boyack will get in on the Lothians list because she was one of the exceptions to their self-imposed constituency-or-list rule. Let’s hope so too, as she’s one of the few Labour candidates worthy of a seat in Holyrood.
#24 by DougtheDug on May 6, 2011 - 3:45 pm
I just checked Labour’s candidate list and there are 10 Labour constituency candidates who are also on the regional lists.
Sarah Boyack
Kevin Hutchens
Lewis Macdonald
John MacKay
Gordon McKenzie
Elaine Murray
Richard Simpson
David Stewart
Linda Stewart
Greg Williams
#25 by Dubbieside on May 6, 2011 - 8:33 pm
Doug
You missed Clair Baker, she was defeated at Glenrothes and Mid Fife, but was returned to Holyrood on the list. Pity!!!
#26 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 3:44 pm
One of the things I am sure the party will be looking at after this defeat is the way the party is organised. One thing is to change organisation from westminster boundaries to Holyrood boundaries. Another would be to strengthen the role of Scottish Labour leader – perhaps in ways which would have been unthinkable only a short while ago.
On the subject of a merger, there could be an electoral pact, where the parties share candidates/activists etc – in the manner of the old Liberal/SDP alliance.
#27 by Aidan Skinner on May 6, 2011 - 4:14 pm
the Refounding Labour process was already looking at this a bit, it’s been talked about a *lot* on the ground round my way. I got off my bum for this one for the first time, think I might stick around.
#28 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 3:13 pm
Incidentally, Labour activists and supporters on Twitter and people in the media are already doing the ground work for the independence referendum by insisting that this result doesn’t mean Scotland wants independence. They lost due to a relentlessly negative campaign, and yet they’re already reverting back to type by trying to remind/warn everyone that this doesn’t mean we want independence. “Okay, okay, you want the SNP in government. But just remember, you still want to stay in the union, where it’s cuddly and warm… unless you’re an OAP who is having their winter heating allowance cut…”
I think one thing this result should be showing the parties is this: if Scotland wants something, it will decide for itself. If there is momentum for independence, it won’t stop just because a few people tell us to be cautious. The more people try to talk it down, the more likely it is Scotland will vote for it.
#29 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 3:59 pm
What is it with the sweeping generalisations? I think you’ll find that there are a substantial number of Labour activists and supporters who called for a referendum asap – the fact that the leadership didnt agree with this (apart for a brief period under Wendy Alexander) is unfortunate, but unlike the SNP, not all Labour members are expected to agree with everything our Leader says.
#30 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 8:59 pm
No generalisations – I omitted the word “all” before “Labour activists and supporters”. You maybe weren’t watching the #sp11 Twitter feed as intently as I was, or watching the TV coverage, but a large number of the blatantly unionist activists/supporters were strangely quick to remind people that this wasn’t a vote on independence, as if anyone in the SNP had ever suggested – or even thought – that it was.
#31 by Tormod on May 6, 2011 - 3:30 pm
Were do I sign up to help with the referendum campaign?
The 24th of June 2014 is the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn.
#32 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 3:33 pm
Link the referendum to Bannockburn and you’ll have lost before the battle has even begun.
The Nat movement needs to do better than jingoism.
#33 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 3:56 pm
Oh I expect there will be constant showings of “Braveheart” – with precious little details on what an independant Scotland will actually mean.
#34 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 4:02 pm
Good film though…
#35 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 4:18 pm
The previous SNP council here in Angus stipulated it should be shown in history classes… whatever you think about it as a film, and entertainment, historical accuracy is not something it could be accused of.
#36 by Scott on May 7, 2011 - 5:12 pm
Good film?
I used to respect your judgment 😉
#37 by DougtheDug on May 6, 2011 - 4:14 pm
Braveheart? Why are unionists obsessed with Braveheart?
I think they’ve all got a copy under the bed.
#38 by aonghas on May 6, 2011 - 4:20 pm
I expect there will be constant mentionings of Braveheart, and not by the Yes camp.
In fact I believe we have a first sighting 😉
#39 by Glasgow Bob on May 6, 2011 - 3:32 pm
how does longevity make someone a legend?
#40 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 3:40 pm
On its own it doesn’t but it can help contribute to remarkable individual success, particularly in the dangerous, fickle world of Politics.
#41 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 9:03 pm
What about becoming the first:
a) Leader to win back-to-back Holyrood elections
b) First Minister to be re-elected
c) SNP leader to get the SNP in government
d) SNP leader to bring a referendum on independence to Scotland (okay, not quite yet…)
e) Well, who knows what will happen next?
On a related note, I do hope this will finally put a stop to the biannual “when will Salmond stand down?” debates. He’s going nowhere.
#42 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 9:04 pm
I of course forgot first leader to get a majority in Holyrood.
Major fail. I’ve been up since 3:45am though.
#43 by Douglas McLellan on May 6, 2011 - 10:54 pm
Salmond will be there until the result of the independence referendum. If yes, he will lead Scotland to independence and maybe even lead its 1st government for a while, and then stand down. If no, he will step down prior to the 2016 election to give Nicola a solid chance of leading a third-term SNP government.
Pingback: First Thoughts |
#44 by Tormod on May 6, 2011 - 3:48 pm
Fair enough.
#45 by dcomerf on May 6, 2011 - 4:03 pm
Where’s Charlie Kennedy? He’s the one talking head we’ve not seen
#46 by Allan on May 6, 2011 - 4:18 pm
Hmmm, not quite sure Osborne’s plan is working (yet). Bearing in mind that the worst of the cuts are still to come, and we are going to see a lot of money taken out of the economy to plug the deficit.
Labour need a new strategy as well as a new leader. In the same way the SNP haven’t quite been able to pitch Westminster Elections (post devolution) correctly, Labour have lost the knack of being able to pitch themselves as a Scottish Government. Interestingly enough the Labour vote is down for the third Holyrood election on the spin, they need to arrest that decline before thinking about government.
I suppose the punishment meated out to the Lib Dems means no more “Only the Lib Dems…” style leaflets?
#47 by Richard Gadsden on May 6, 2011 - 4:51 pm
Since the Greens only run on the regional lists already, perhaps the Scottish Lib Dems could run only in the constituencies and they endorse each other for the elections?
That would also mean that winning a constituency seat doesn’t cost you anything on the lists, and is a hack on the AMS process that has been much talked-about, if never actually seriously attempted.
#48 by John Ruddy on May 6, 2011 - 5:24 pm
That could work, but there would need to be some more policy alignment between the two parties – the analogy I gave earlier is the Liberal/SDP alliance of the 1980s.
#49 by mav on May 6, 2011 - 5:08 pm
i slightly disagree with your parties trump personalities line, especially after an election where the decisive factor was, I think, the SNP were lead by a personality last night, and Labour, er, weren’t.
On Iain Gray, I was speaking to Labour activists last night at the my local count and they felt he should go today. I actually disagree – they need a 6 month breathing space to let the new MSPs find their feet. They also need to stop sending their talent south – they may have done better last night with Cathy Jamieson and Margarat Curran fighting their corner over the last 6 months.
On your winning gracefully comment above, I agree with the sentiment, but add that Christine Grahame doesn’t. jeremy Purvis showed great grace last night and it was not reciprocated.
On the Greens, they need to consider why they are not picking up seats or votes in rural areas. I’ll tell them why it is in Lauderdale – with 4 or 5 wind farms in planning, and a tourist industry to protect, they haven’t got a prayer. Nimbyism maybe, but that is the challenge.
Finally, we Tories face challenges too. I’m disappointed to see Derek Brownlee go. We need to get more people other than just Annabel in front of the cameras and he would have done well. That’s not an anti (aunty) annabel point, just an observation that you can’t be a one man band.
#50 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 5:15 pm
I think you misunderstand the slight difference I was making. People weren’t voting for Alex Salmond except in Aberdeen; and if they were voting for Salmond’s personality in every constituency then they were equating Alex Salmond with the SNP and, I would argue, voting for the party over the individual personality of the person actually standing in that seat. The issue is exacerbated on the list where I bet you 80%-90% don’t even know the name of the person they are effectively voting for.
And yes, gutted for Derek Brownlee. The private sector will snap him up in a jiffy.
#51 by Doug Daniel on May 6, 2011 - 8:51 pm
Derek Brownlee should never have been second on the Tory list. If there is one Tory MSP I would have liked to have seen back in Holyrood, it’s him. The opposition will be weaker without him, and I don’t think anyone has a desire for the SNP to face weak opposition, not even our most ardent supporters.
#52 by Jeff on May 6, 2011 - 10:46 pm
I thought Derek was top of the South list. There does seem to be a bizarre ongoing saga as to where this chap was on the list….!
#53 by Doug Daniel on May 7, 2011 - 8:58 am
No saga, Jeff – just me being wrong!
I forgot that what I had previously found incredible was that he hadn’t been given a safe seat to contest, since their chances of getting any lists MSPs in South of Scotland were between “slim” and “none”. It might have helped matters if East Lothian hadn’t bizarrely been in the South of Scotland region, rather than the more obvious Lothians one.
#54 by douglas clark on May 6, 2011 - 5:51 pm
I am over the moon. This has probably been the best day of my life – well at least since the day I lost my virginity 🙂
#55 by NoOffenceAlan on May 6, 2011 - 8:56 pm
“The Tories have steadied the ship, finally. ”
Que? It is their lowest % vote share in any Scottish election, ever. The previous record low was in the 1994 Euro elections.
#56 by Stuart Winton on May 7, 2011 - 12:16 am
Type your comment here
Indeed, Jeff, and exacerbated by the ‘Alex Salmond for first minister’ ruse?
Incidentally, as regards your other points I suspect the issue of an independence referendum could tarnish AS’s legacy slightly, and I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t happen this term.
After all, as Kenny Gibson said, it’ll take place when the SNP thinks they can win it, and clearly that’s not in the next couple of years – hence the flannel over the Scotland Bill – and who knows what will have happened by the latter part of the five year term?
#57 by Doug Daniel on May 7, 2011 - 9:15 am
“and I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t happen this term.”
Believe me mate, there is absolutely NO chance of the SNP completing this five-year term without an independence referendum taking place.
This result will surely never happen again. Holyrood was not set up for majorities. With this result, Scotland has effectively said “okay, we liked how you performed last time round – here’s your chance to do it without being hindered by petty opposition opportunism… And without having to rely on sops to the Tories to get the good stuff through.” The SNP would be fools not to take this chance to put their referendum to the people, and if there is one thing Alex Salmond could never be accused of, it’s being a fool.
Anyone who thinks an independence referendum will not happen between now and 2016 is kidding themselves. The party faithful just would not allow it.
#58 by DougtheDug on May 7, 2011 - 10:32 am
I’m puzzled why the Labour party didn’t also register a party description of, “Iain Gray for First Minister”, and stick that on the list ballot paper instead of whining that the SNP had done it.
Talking of ruses, the biggest ruse of all was allowing the Labour party, Conservative party and the Lib-Dem party to use the word, “Scottish”, as a prefix on the candidate ballot paper. This loophole in the ban on the use of party descriptions on the candidate ballot paper was explicitly allowed by the The Scottish Parliament (Elections etc.) Order 2010. Neither the Labour, Conservative or Lib-Dem parties used their primary or true names on that ballot paper.
The independence referendum will be in this parliament because the SNP have a majority and an independence referendum is the whole reason for the SNP. Just asking the question is dangerous to the Union which is why the other three parties are happy to have referendums on anything but independence.
#59 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 4:17 pm
I dont think we should have registered a description of “Iain Gray for first Minister”, because of course, it wouldnt be true – the list vote is not a vote for first Minister. Its a blatant deception, and should be banned.
However, we should have used some description, and a slogan that we used at the start of the campaign was “because Scotland deserves better” and we could have used that on the regional list ballot paper.
I think that the independance referendum will only take place when the SNP think they can win it – and that may not be in this term.
#60 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 6:59 pm
What about “Iain Gray’s Party for Biggest Party thus Making Iain Gray First Minister”?
#61 by Mark McDonald on May 7, 2011 - 7:31 am
Jeff
Your somewhat withering condemnation of my abilities as a politician (who are all these list MSPs…) is somewhat disconcerting.
The pouring of scorn on individuals based on their career paths is a sad piece of Telegraph/Mail mindset which assumes that an individual’s ability to empathise with, and connect with, the electorate somehow demands that you need to have held a specific job for a specific length of time.
It’s nonsense, and both I and the other list MSPs will doubtlessly enjoy proving you wrong!
#62 by Doug Daniel on May 7, 2011 - 9:00 am
Big congratulations to you, mate – 10 constituency MSPs and you still managed to get elected from the list? That was just about my favourite moment of the whole election.
#63 by Jeff on May 7, 2011 - 11:15 am
Hi Mark, I obviously wasn’t having a go at you specifically and, for what it’s worth, I’m delighted that you made the cut as my take is that you have something that most people don’t have with their jobs, politicians included, and is very important for an MSP and that’s passion so don’t take my words too much to heart. I’m the first to admit that I don’t know how qualified any of the MSPs are to take their roles but I am still entitled to an opinion, which I’m sure you’ll agree.
However, there is no getting away from what I would prefer an ideal parliament to be – experienced lawyers, doctors, accountants, architects, scientists; leaders in their field at the forefront of debate about a nation and in which direction it is best for it to travel in. I am sure I am not alone in occasionally seeing Holyrood as an extension of student politics and I think the Parliament can be poorer for it. A lot of that is the opposition for opposition’s sake that we’ve seen in the last term and I’m not shy in admitting that I’m laying much of the fault there at a party that you are not a part of.
That said, I am perhaps ignoring the growing acceptance that to be a politician is a career in itself, particularly given the often ridiculous demands that the public puts on one individual.
Bottom line is, it can’t be right that the public doesn’t know who the 129 people are that they are sending to Parliament apart from Salmond, Annabel and that funny Gray fella. I don’t think I’m being too harsh on Scotland by suggesting that that is the case for most people. I know most of my mates don’t know their constituency MSP and generally have no chance in terms of any of the regional MSPs.
Anyway, jings, I hope this doesn’t in any way spoil what must be an utterly tremendous moment for you and your family in your lives and I’m not complaining if you’re looking to the next 5 years intent to prove your worth, along with your 128 colleagues. Best of luck!
#64 by Gryff on May 7, 2011 - 12:21 pm
Surely the probelm is not withthe list MSPs but withthe quality of candidateparties choose? With the added probelm that paper candidates have been unexpectedly elected?
#65 by thenippysweetie on May 7, 2011 - 10:50 am
You can add to that, the sight of a visibly rattled David Cameron on the news last night proclaiming to fight against independence in any referendum. 2015 is a good year to hold it imho.
I’m gutted that Bella is a Tory. It’s ludicrous that the Tories were even considering Derek Brownlee as a potential successor to her. He’s the archetypal Tory boy and straight out of the Viz. Bella’s the best asset they have.
#66 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 11:59 am
‘visibly rattled David Cameron’. Oh, I don’t know. My Scottish pessimism makes me predict that any indyref Yes campaign will be squashed like a bug by the relatively gigantic No campaign. It’ll be a wall of negativity, miles deep, raining down on us like an unstoppable mixed metaphor.
#67 by Doug Daniel on May 7, 2011 - 2:10 pm
After the campaign the SNP have just fought, I wouldn’t bet against an indyref Yes campaign being just as slick, if not slicker. A No campaign would obviously have a lot of money behind it from the Tory party and their backers, as well as Labour’s unions, but there are rich people who believe Scotland should be independent as well. Also, people like me who gave the SNP money for this campaign would probably give far more to an independence campaign. I know I’d be willing to donate a month’s wages. Plus, if there is anything people should learn from this campaign, it’s that positivity is far more powerful than a negative campaign.
Having said all that, they really would have millions, wouldn’t they? The UK cabinet ministers could probably fund the campaign on their own.
#68 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 4:22 pm
Money was the difference in this campaign – the SNP had it in spades, while Labour (and the other parties to a certain extent, but especially the Lib Dems) didnt.
Big billboards with Alex Salmond on them echoed the Ashcroft-funded ones with David Cameron on from 12 months ago – that doesnt come cheap.
As for a positive campaign, I would like to remind you of the various comments nationalists have made about a) the Labour Party b) Iain Gray c) Labour voters d) anyone who doesnt support them. No party conducted an entirely positive campaign (even the Greens attacked people, but they probably were the most positive) – its just one campaign APPEARED positive.
#69 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 7:04 pm
I can’t counter your statements on funding but interestingly I was inundated with lots of personally addressed custom-printed stuff from Labour (“Your Name Here, David Cameron wants the SNP to win” and other such uplifting stuff) and only got a couple of pieces of material from the other parties.
It is refreshing to not be outspent for a change though.
#70 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 9:50 pm
In our better funded areas, we sent much targetted direct mail shots – you probably have a targetted demographic, which is why you received those letters. It works out much cheaper than sending out stuff to every elector in the contituency,
#71 by Lindsay on May 7, 2011 - 1:24 pm
Hi Jeff,
Green/Lib Dem coalition? In a word – No.
Remember clean isn’t always green.
but yes, East Lothian one of the most beautiful constituencies! In a selfish way I’m glad Iain is standing down, I’m hoping it might allow him to be a better constituency MSP…!
#72 by Steve on May 7, 2011 - 1:39 pm
I wonder if there’s an opportunity for the Scottish Labour party to rise phoenix-like from the ashes of what has been a total disaster for them?
They were lulled into a false sense of security after the UK election, maybe now they’ll snap out of it and find a constructive voice to add to the conversation we’ll all be having about the future of Scotland?
#73 by Malc on May 7, 2011 - 1:57 pm
Here’s hoping.
#74 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 4:29 pm
Maybe its just the despondancy one experiences after such a major defeat, but I know how the tories felt in 1997, looking at the seats which have fallen to the other party, and thinking “how did we loose that!?” and “how are we going to get it back”.
Even if we were to overhaul all our party structures in 6 months, get our policy review done in another 6-12 months and then get our candidates chosen so they can have 18-24 months campaigning to build up recognition against sitting MSPs, I cant imagine a Labour victory in 2016. Which leaves us until 2020, by which time we might be independant.
And in 2020 I wont have time to campaign, as I’ll be too busy learning the bagpipes and Scottish country dancing to try and fit in.
#75 by thenippysweetie on May 7, 2011 - 4:26 pm
Let’s not forget the (c)zelebs who would be crawling out from their rocks to align themselves with a side. In the yes corner, Shir Shaun, Sheena Easton and Lulu. Possibly him fae Wet Wet Wet and her that used to be in Altered Images. And Kelvin Mackenzie.
In the no corner, leaders of the main UK parties. Probably Eddie Izzard. And maybe Colin Firth and Bonham Carter might poke their noses in again.
A lot depends on what the SNP deliver over the next few years in the run up to any referendum. With regards to campaigning, they have proved twice now that they can run a slick, effective and positive campaign focussing on they will improve Scotland -those PPBs they ran in 2007 with the ‘It’s Time’ slogan were fantastic. Contrast that with a Conservative government of old Etonians, running an entirely negative campaign, against a backdrop of a still faltering economy and their cuts making inroads into people’s lives. I wouldn’t bet against the Nats.
A successful Commonwealth Games in 2014 will further boost the case for independence.
#76 by Scott on May 7, 2011 - 5:25 pm
The referendum bill is probably not competent at Holyrood. The SNP leadership know this. Given the level of SNP support this means one of 3 things: (a) the SNP are hoping for the bill to be bounced by the presiding officer (or by any individual applying to the court if the presiding officer acts contrary to his or her legal advice and lets the bill in) and will use synthetic shock and astonishment at this astonishingingly unforeseen action to boost their next campaign – particularly if the plan is (as seems to be the case) to introduce the bill within the second half of the parliamentary session, and the likely time any litigation would take – and stoke anti-union sentiment (“we were blocked by the Union”) maximising support for independence – however, only a cynic would believe that obviously; (b) As part of the argument over increased powers for Holyrood the SNP ask for explicit power to hold a referendum under the Scotland Bill – not doing so may incline a cynic to imagine that (a) is the option they prefer; or (c) Westminster does what Westminster has power to do and legislate for a referendum determining not only the date but the question asked.
The legal point has never been that there cannot be a referendum. The legal point is, and remains, that there is a very powerful argument that within the current settlement Holyrood cannot pass such a bill. Even the estimable LPW – one of the few SNP supporters to engage actively with the question – accepts the position is arguable (contrary to the stream of people who lined up on twitter last night to direct abuse at John McTernan for stating this rather obvious point about the legisltaive framework for devolution).
If the SNP is serious about a referendum at Holyrood then option (b) can put the legal question beyond doubt – at a time when they have already indicated that they are seeking amendment on other issues.
#77 by James on May 7, 2011 - 5:37 pm
If the PO rules it’s competent, Westminster won’t challenge it, according to Michael Moore:
#78 by Scott on May 7, 2011 - 5:58 pm
ANy individual can challenge it. Including mr McTernan.
#79 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 7:12 pm
Scott, what’s your principled position on a group of people exercising their right of self-determination? I don’t want to get all Braveheart here – might kick John Ruddy over the edge – but is there a means by which a nation can be allowed to express their will if they are part of a larger state that doesn’t deign to grant them the opportunity? Genuinely interested.
#80 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 8:32 pm
I am not a lawyer, but I think that Holyrood could pass a bill for a non-binding referendum – Westminster cant be bound by a result from such a referndum, although it would be daft to refuse.
Westminster cant be bound by a referendum called by a bill passed at Holyrood.
#81 by Malc on May 7, 2011 - 9:29 pm
Westminster isn’t even bound by a referendum which it ITSELF calls. Sovereignty lies with the crown in parliament – and not with the people. Westminster isn’t bound by the result of ANY referendum.
Though from a practical point of view, it would be difficult to ignore the outcome of a consultative referendum, whether it was Holyrood or Westminster that called it.
#82 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 9:51 pm
I agree – but the SNP cant just go and call a referendum without sounding out westminster etc… and I dont for one minute think that Alex Salmond is going to do anything as daft as some of his supporters suggest.
#83 by Doug Daniel on May 7, 2011 - 10:07 pm
Wow, unionists really are going to drag their heels over this referendum, aren’t they? Not content with making it clear they would block the bill (and then slagging off the SNP for not wasting time introducing a bill that was destined to fail), we’re now getting all this legal gubbins to try and urinate on the SNP’s chips.
Whether unionists like it or not, the SNP will hold a referendum during this term, and the Scottish people will vote for what they want to vote for, and if that results in a vote for independence, then Scotland will become independent. Nothing is going to stand in the way of that, and any attempt to do so would be completely undemocratic.
The way people are so dead against the Scottish people even being asked what they want, you just wonder what it is they are so scared of. After all, isn’t there supposed to be “no appetite” for independence?
#84 by Brian Nicholson on May 7, 2011 - 7:52 pm
Unionsits challenging the legitimacy of the referenendum will lead to an outraged electorate. At that point, the Scottish Parliament should cancel the Treaty of Union and dare Westminister to challenge them.
#85 by John Ruddy on May 7, 2011 - 8:37 pm
And then Westminster could just repeal the Scotland Act (1998) so there!
What is this? Children taking their ball away when they dont get their way, or sensible adults trying to achieve a policy? Of course a referendum needs to be legitimate to be acceptable, otherwise whats the point of a legal system?
#86 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 9:43 pm
There was a time* when it used to be said the only way Scotland could get independence would be if the SNP got the majority of Scottish constituencies – a referendum didn’t even get mentioned. Of course, there was no chance of that happening, so the goal posts were safely positioned at that time.
*it was the time when there were 50 Labour MPs in Scotland, sitting tight, doing sweet eff ay, while the Conservatives ran the place.
#87 by aonghas on May 7, 2011 - 10:52 pm
By the way I’ve still got me own teeth.
#88 by Stuart Winton on May 7, 2011 - 10:55 pm
Type your comment here
Personallly I support the right to have a referendum if Holyrood decides to – whatever the legal niceties – but you make Scotland sound like the Western world’s Tibet.
Let’s get real – less than 1 in 4 of Scots voted SNP on Thursday, and many of those only on the basis of continuing the Union.
And there’s never been anything to indicate majority support for independence.
That’s why the SNP don’t want a referendum at present and are hoping a couple of years of Nationalist government will bring people round.
Of course, that was what was said last time round, and it never happened, so if things don’t go as planned then what price it not happening yet again
#89 by aonghas on May 8, 2011 - 8:36 am
“you make Scotland sound like the Western world’s Tibet.”
Oh give over. I tried to express a theoretical question in a fairly dispassionate way. No answer, it seems.