That rather over-simplifies the Labour position?
Within Labour there are the one-world/no border Socialists to whom any border is an anathema. Then there are the British Nationalists, to whom the UK is indivisible and want no truck with anything that differentiates each of the four nations. There are those who hold "Labour" values and see how they might be implemented in Scotland under an extended devolution and then those who believe that this can only happen through independence. It gives the Labour leadership a bit of a problem when trying to keep them all on board. Even supporting a referendum will lose them some support from three of those four groups.
Oh yes its an over simplification. Otherwise it becomes a PHD thesis 🙂
My point is that because of the tight control from London and the shift to the right then labour is limiting the parts of the electorate it will appeal to. Those that are not tribal labour supporters but those who labour need to make significant inroads electorally
also the shift to the right alienates some of those groups as well
There is also a part of the current labour voters who are independence supporters although my guess is more and more have abandoned labour and the part of the SNP voter who voted against independence
Yeah, that's the fourth group. As you say, probably now only a rump, though there are many for whom their tribal hatred of the SNP is greater than their desire for independence. A second (significant) Indy party might be attractive to them, even if only on the List vote.
Rather than a second indy party a lefty party that is open to independence? the various lefty groupings have gained traction in holyrood elections only to disappear in a bunch of splinters. There is definitely room in Scots politics for a real lefty grouping based in Scotland with policies that suit Scotland
The obvious position for a scottish lefty grouping and one that labour could adopt but will not is " constitutional convention to look at the relationship with England and the EU with a referendum on the outcome / independence once certain conditions are met"
I think something along those lines would gain electoral traction
Intheborders
I'd have preferred something else such as
https://eastlochabercommunity.scot/about/
Meantime I'm not convinced the deal with GFG was wise. Their problems are widely documented, but this article might ring a few familiar alarm bells.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/deputy-first-minister-claims-it-is-difficult-to-outline-total-government-liability-to-gfg-alliance-3860121
Here’s some sensible writing from a previous die-hard Unionist as to the problem:
It also transpires that whilst the Unionist press is Scotland talk about a ‘free fall’ in SNP membership numbers (it hasn’t), analysis suggests that Labour have about 8,000 members (many being TU reps getting their subs paid) and Tory membership being somewhat less.
I think what I'm most amazed by is that some folk in the SNP really believed that Humza Yousaf had any intention of "fighting for an independence referendum".
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-65425495
An interesting aside - my parents - staunchly unionist and firmly against the GRA are outraged at the section 35 order to veto the GRA
An interesting aside – my parents – staunchly unionist and firmly against the GRA are outraged at the section 35 order to veto the GRA
Why? It is quite clear in the Scotland Act that the power is there. You can debate what effect the act would have had outside Scotland but it is quite clear that Holyrood can't pass acts that affect rUK>
Because its a clear democratic affront to do this.
Because its a clear democratic affront to do this.
I don't think you understand democracy. The Scotland Act clearly states that Holyrood can be overruled when an act affects rUK. This is what has happened. Perfectly legal and democratic. Democracy means obeying existing laws.
In other news the Scottish taxpayer has a £1.6M bill for crew for the ferries being built at Port Glasgow which don't yet have a confirmed date for entering service. Most of the 14 staff have been employed for a year.
I do understand democracy. the government we voted for makes a decision that gets vetoed by a government we didn't vote for an that is a result of an undemocratic electoral system
the tories have no legitimacy in Scotland
Its undemocratic and I don't know how you can pretend otherwise
Do you understand what devolution means? Some power is devolved, not all of it. If you don't like it then indy is the answer. Until then we have devolution and Holyrood can not pass laws that affect rUK. Simple.
Doesn't the supreme court have to rule before we can say the GRR bill(passed in Holyrood) affects the rest of the UK?
If so the legislation affected would be the GRA 2004 (passed in Westminster)
I think they will but technically it's not yet decided.
analysis suggests that Labour have about 8,000 members (many being TU reps getting their subs paid) and Tory membership being somewhat less.
The SNP has had an abnormally large, and probably unsustainably large membership since the referedum - its a shame it got themselves into a pickle over trying to mask the numbers falling as even a modest small percentage fall was a fall by more members than other parties have in total. They fell to a level 10 times the amount of members other parties have in scotland. No shame it that really and it should have been perfectly easy to be open and honest about it.
The membership increased five fold just after the referendum result - it seemed like the near miss meant people felt like that had to find something to pin their enthusiasm too and paying for a party membership was one of the things they could do that felt optimistic. The problem though is they are sort of members in name only. 'Members' of other parties although comparatively smaller in number, tend to be more actively engaged in the running of the party at national and local level - they're not just an income stream but but a source of support for the party in its day to day activities.
The folk who ponied up for SNP memberships in 2015 for large part were really 'subscribers' rather than 'members' - the SNP hasn't had a 100,000 strong army of actively engaged foot solders organising for and assisting the party. They have a few of those and a lot of people who pay subs and maybe read a newsletter and really its that latter group that has been dwindling. I guess after 7-8 years of paying in money and not really being all that interested in what you get back people will have not been too fussed about letting their DDs lapse.
To perhaps give an indication of how unengaged some of those 'members' are - of the 70,000 remaining after the fall from 100,000, only 50,000 managed to cast a vote in what was quite a long running ballot for the leadership campaign
indy is the answer.
Glad we agree.
To perhaps give an indication of how unengaged some of those ‘members’ are – of the 70,000 remaining after the fall from 100,000, only 50,000 managed to cast a vote in what was quite a long running ballot for the leadership campaign
I think a significant number of members simply had no one to vote for. You had a choice between a continuity candidate and two candidates whose positions made them unsupportable to many people.
If you wanted significant changes and couldn't vote for the two change candidates then who were you going to vote for?
Should have said above that I think the supreme court will agree with the UK government
let’s put aside iraq please
There's lots of people that would like to put aside the Iraq invasion - the families of 100,000 dead Iraqis, for a start.
Labour have made it totally clear they have no understanding or consideration for the people of Scotland. they are merely fighting over the unionist vote
This is a bizarro position that puts independence as the threshold issue and then all other policies as secondary considerations. It's weird to keep asking "why can't Labour just support independence?" - because independence is irreconcilable with their policy platform and if its members wanted independence, they'd have joined the SNP!
You have described yourself as a pragmatic nationalist but your treatment of independence at the primary question suggests otherwise.
the 70,000 remaining after the fall from 100,000, only 50,000 managed to cast a vote
That's a pretty high turnout, I think.
Point missed
1) on the constitution Labour could produce a compromise position - constitutional convention/ Federalism / Devo max / Second referendum if the polls show it likely to pass ( the NI position)
2) Policies that suit Scotland outside of the constitution ie like on minimal alcohol pricing when at one point it was london labour policy but labour opposed it at holyrood or other policies that would play well in Scotland. Lots of opportunity to do this but labours only policy in Scotland is SNP baaaad NO no no no. Nothing positive at all. We have seen labour voting against anti poverty measures. Even " thats a good policy but does not go far enough" Sarwar tried this on a couple of issues and was immediatly slapped down by London
3) constructive engagement at holyrood not continual wrecking attempts
4) Repudiate the tory / labour anti SNP pact especially on councils when the constitution is not an issue
labour in alliance with the tories is not a good look and does not go down well here. It allows the SNP an easy attack line "vote labour get Tory"
Next Holyrood election I think a labour / Tory coalition is the likely outcome and that will kill labour in Scotland for ever.
Edit: The point is a more radical more scottish based labour party in Scotland could peel off a lot of the soft SNP vote but merely fighting for the unionist vote will not do this. It gives labour a ceiling of only 30ish % of the vote
Name me a single labour party policy aimed at peeling away SNP voters?
Name me a single Scottish labour policy ( clue - they are not allowed any in the branch office)?
I was a staunch labour supporter and voter for 35 years. Once they started alliances with the tories I could no longer vote for them
It gives labour a ceiling of only 30ish % of the vote
Again - saying that Labour can only compete for a third of the electorate unless it supports independence is just reflecting your approach that anyone who doesn't support independence is an ideological unionist and not a pragmatic person who wants to make Scotland better. Remember in your model:
I believe the Scots electorate splits roughly into thirds on independence
1/3 for whom self determination is the only thing that matters – for richer or poorer – call them the ideological independence folk
1/3 for whom the union is the only thing that counts – call them the ideological unionists
1/3 that are looking for what will make Scotland a better place to live – call them the pragmatics
You see everything from the starting point of independence = good and good = independence. It's a syllogism for you.
The same goes for your weird suggestion that Labour is being unreasonable if it doesn't support the SNP in parliamentary votes. Why should it when it believes the SNP's platform ia bobbins? Is the SNP unreasonable when it doesn't vote with the Tories in Westminster?
Just out of interest: I haven't been keeping score on this thread, but have any SNP supporters got to the point where they're willing to recognise these financial shenanigans as humiliating and improper? Or are we still clinging to the "storm in a teacup, everyone has little bookkeeping whoopsies, this is just the prejudiced unionist media" line?
a more radical more scottish based labour party in Scotland could peel off a lot of the soft SNP vote
The Scottish Socialist Party has 0 MSPs and 0 MPs.
Trying to steal independence supporters' votes from a dominant centre left independence party by being more left wing is a wildly unpopular position.
Again – saying that Labour can only compete for a third of the electorate unless it supports independence
That is not what I am saying at all - try reading my post.
on the constitution Labour could produce a compromise position – constitutional convention/ Federalism / Devo max / Second referendum if the polls show it likely to pass ( the NI position)
The same goes for your weird suggestion that Labour is being unreasonable if it doesn’t support the SNP in parliamentary votes. Why should it when it believes the SNP’s platform ia bobbins?
So when London labour has a policy like minimal alcohol pricing and the labour party in Scotland oppose it in Scotland thats because the SnP platform is bobbins? It was labour policy for Westminster but at Holyrood labour voted against
Or when labour vote down free school meals for all kids
Or when labour have a pact with the tories?
So go on - name me one labour policy intended to peel off soft SNP votes?
Just pondering this in reverse. What policy could Labour adopt that would attract the SNP voter - constitution excepted - that the SNP wouldn't/don't already support?
I haven’t been keeping score on this thread, but have any SNP supporters got to the point where they’re willing to recognise these financial shenanigans as humiliating and improper? Or are we still clinging to the “storm in a teacup, everyone has little bookkeeping whoopsies, this is just the prejudiced unionist media” line?
As an ex-SNP member (way before 2014) I'm seeing a lot of the latter, mostly with a big dose of whataboutery.
Just pondering this in reverse. What policy could Labour adopt that would attract the SNP voter – constitution excepted – that the SNP wouldn’t/don’t already support?
An interesting point. I shall ponder further
this is why I believe the labour line could be on some things " thats a halfway decent policy but you need to do more" ie " a roll and a cup of soup for every pupil? make it a proper hot lunch" ( I am not sure if this one was holyrood or a council but whichever it was the labour group voting against)
So push the scots government to do more
Of course pushing for greater transparency would be good as well
Edit: Sarwar did try this line on a couple of issues - child support payments IIRC but soon went very quiet. I beleve told to shut up by london
I haven’t been keeping score on this thread, but have any SNP supporters got to the point where they’re willing to recognise these financial shenanigans as humiliating and improper? Or are we still clinging to the “storm in a teacup, everyone has little bookkeeping whoopsies, this is just the prejudiced unionist media” line?
For me neither
Highly embarrassing and clear improper doings but I really very much doubt any significant or even any at all criminal charges will be leveled at individuals. I think the outcome will be fines for the SNP
No doubt the media feeding frenzy has been huge. 'twas always going to be such with a hostile media.
Again, as stated earlier, all political parties are useless, including with their finances, they're not run like companies, they're run like clubs.
As for the independence argument, again, as always, for me, it's down to the evidence, will independence benefit the people of Scotland, or will it cause more issues, there's lots of hypothesis, but little actual confidence in them either way, which i would expect with no vote upcoming.
From my own recent branch meeting I would say there are still some who believe the whole thing is a unionist conspiracy, most believe that party admin and internal democracy needs a major overhaul andthat this is being handled much more aggressively by the media than scandals in other (unionist) parties. The membership is up over the last month. The general mood amongst this entirely un -scientific poll of activists has gone from dejected and embarassed , to somewhat defiant
Just pondering this in reverse. What policy could Labour adopt that would attract the SNP voter – constitution excepted – that the SNP wouldn’t/don’t already support?
I could have sworn I would be able to think of half a dozen - but actually any I could come up with that were reasonable / affordable I guess the SNP would adopt without issue.
Perhaps something on ferries? More frequent / subsidised for locals more? One complaint about the SNP/ Green government is they ignore the highlands so better policy for rural communities?
So the "good policy but does not go far enough" attitude would be better for labour IMO
However I still think the SNPs tribal hatred of the SNP has let Scotland down as apart from anything else its robbed scotland of a credible opposition and the various labour / tory pacts just stink. apart from anything else it saved May's government and led indirectly to brexit
Just pondering this in reverse. What policy could Labour adopt that would attract the SNP voter – constitution excepted – that the SNP wouldn’t/don’t already support?
the big issues in any political campaign are always:
health
education
justice (which includes drugs)
taxation / economy (which now includes energy - and is probably where environment & transport belongs as it’s a trade off)
(and foreign policy / immigration but that is not at all devolved - although Scottish Labour should be arguing it is not acceptable for NI to have a better relationship with the EU than Scotland does but Labour is confused over what it believes and what if thinks it can get away with saying about BrexShit)
If there is really nothing in health/education/justice/finance that the Labour Party think they could do better than the SNP then I wonder why they are in politics! Effectively you are suggesting they have become a single issue party who’s only purpose in Scotland is to oppose independence (ironic given people used to say the snp were a single issue party!).
the problem with asking what would attract an snp voter is that snp voters are not homogenous; if the Indy question was resolved some would be much more in the Tory team than the Labour one.
(TJ - ferries is easier to use to criticise the gov without actually saying how you would screw it up differently - it being a waste of money wins points with the central belt voter who never uses them or only goes on holiday on them unless of course you are throwing good money after bad at fergussons on the clyde!)
If there is really nothing in health/education/justice/finance that the Labour Party think they could do better than the SNP then I wonder why they are in politics! Effectively you are suggesting they have become a single issue party who’s only purpose in Scotland is to oppose independence
I think thats pretty much what they have become. I cannot think of a single positive policy put forward by labour in Scotland. Partly because the SNP stole their social democratic clothes and partly from the tribal hatred labour have for the SNP leading them to automatically oppose anything the SNP propose
There are umpteen important issues that could all be ameliorated with a bit/lot more funding. As always, an opposition party will simply be asked where the money will come from. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything (major) the current government are spending that Labour would want to cut. That leaves the option of growing the budget through taxes - step up the Tory party - or gaining control of all the income and resources through independence. I just don't see where the Labour party can go with this.
Labour could start by providing competent government. How much has been wasted on ferries? A government party not under police investigation or where the former leader was on trial at the High Court. A govt that can manage to get it's own accounts in order could be trusted with the nation's accounts. A party which wasn't happy to have a married couple running it for 8 years.
Just because, aside from indy, many SNP and Labour policies might be similar doesn't mean we don't need a change of govt
As someone who pays some attention to politics, I'd have to search to see who the current labour leader is.
They just seem like a lost cause, with no real goal or ideas, but then they are only the third largest party.
At least I can tell you who the Tory leader is, not that I think he's much use. He's a damp squib compared to his predecessors, who could at least put across good arguments, and get Sturgeon frustrated during questions.
It wouldn't surprise me if Ross was a SNP agent, given his apparent incompetence at holding them to account on anything.
Scottish politics has pretty much become a single issue vote.
People make fun of Tory supporters by saying you could stick a blue rosette on a pig and they'd vote for it, but there are a lot of voters the same could be said about yellow rosettes.
