Scottish Politics / Independence - Vol 11

[alangla]

sherman said:

Edinburgh Council -SNP out

Labour minority control with Lib dem and conservative backing.
Lib dem Lord provost too.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-ou...

That article reads as “could” not “has”, did Sarwar not say he wouldn’t go into coalition with the Tories & didn’t a load of Aberdeen labour councillors not lose the whip for doing so last time round?

[Hill92]

Roderick Spode said:

It would be a brave gamble to resign as First Minister and not appoint a successor, thus collapsing Holyrood. The resulting election may not go quite as they planned, especially if it is framed as a proxy for an independence vote. If the SNP fail to secure 50% +1 of the vote - what then? They may be the largest party, but there will be no 'democratic mandate' for independence. If they do secure 50% +1 of the vote - what then? Make a UDI Catalan style declaration? The British Government and other interested global powers may take a very dim view indeed of such an approach. Enter into a protracted negotiation process with the British Government? They would refuse to recognise any such approach, as Constitutional matters are outwith the competence of the devolved Holyrood assembly.

It's hard to see what they would meaningfully gain as a result of such a dramatic approach. In the meantime, individuals with the skills and financial capabilities to do so would be rushing south at dramatic speed, as too would businesses and investment. As Sir Humphrey Appleby would have said - the most courageous policy you have ever proposed, Minister...

How would they go about not appointing a successor?

I know that at the beginning of each parliamentary term following an election, the Parliament does officially vote on the appointment of the First Minister. The parties either vote for their own leader, support a coalition candidate or abstain. I don't think a majority vote of all MSPs is required - it's simply whoever gets the most votes in the chamber.

This how would they go about ensuring that the opposition don't band together to vote in a First Minister or trick the SNP into winning a vote (by planning to band together they voting for different candidates/abstaining at the last moment?

Seems more likely that it would fail

[Evercross]

hidetheelephants said:

Pastor Of Muppets said:

Oh FFS, salty?, that would be putting it very mild, some of the 'brains' in the SNat movement are absolutely addled, take a read of this trash...

https://archive.ph/DS14Z

Hagiographic balderdash.

Desperate stuff. Trying to turn a Scottish Election into a proxy indy referendum on the back of deliberately collapsing the result of a previous election - I can see that going down well with the voters.

There is so much straw clutching in that piece it beggars belief. Plus this would only work if the SNP were absolutely united in their stance and could guarantee an overall majority of MSPs in both the to-be-collapsed and subsequent elections. Something as simple as an opportunist rival from within the ranks of the SNP deciding to stand as replacement FM would kill this off at the first stage (especially if it only required a few SNP members to break ranks, and the rival got the cheeky support of the unionist parties).

That's just two of the things that make it highly unlikely, before you even think of how this would play out for Sturgeon. She would only do this if she thought she was jumping before she was pushed, in which case it would be bound to failure as the electoral trajectory for nationalism would already be downward and/or party unity would no longer be a given.

Edited by Evercross on Wednesday 25th May 12:30

[alangla]

Evercross said:

Desperate stuff. Trying to turn a Scottish Election into a proxy indy referendum on the back of deliberately collapsing the result of a previous election - I can see that going down well with the voters.

Is that not pretty much what happened with the 2017 & 2019 UK general elections, albeit the subject was (loosely) Brexit and the Government’s handling of it?

[Evercross]

alangla said:

Is that not pretty much what happened with the 2017 & 2019 UK general elections, albeit the subject was (loosely) Brexit and the Government’s handling of it?

At first glance it would seem the same, but (at the risk of re-running tired arguments) the crucial difference was 2017/2019 was a minority group trying to frustrate/reverse a democratic decision that had already been taken by the electorate, whereas the theoretical scenario being presented by the desperate nationalists is the opposite ie. to manufacture a democratic mandate on the back of frustrating a process.

Plus, the UK doesn't function without a working parliament, whereas a FM throwing a strop and refusing to form an assembly in Holyrood because they think Scotland should be independent just means that the emergency clauses in the Scotland Act temporarily returning power to Westminster can be enacted on the basis that the winning party refuses to engage with the process.

For such a thing to be democratically valid the SNP would have to stand on a manifesto pledge to 'fk the election result', which again I think would not go down well with the electorate, plus even if the stars aligned and the nationalists won their pseudo-referendum it would still not be a legal route to independence, and any attempt to make 'the next step' unilaterally would put the nationalists on the wrong side of international law.

The bottom line remains (and I am certain that everyone within the SNP knows and accepts this - Mike Russell has admitted it to political correspondents in the US) that there is no way under current legislation for Scotland to become an independent state, and for that to change would require either the SNP to stand in and win enough seats in a UK General Election to either become the party of government or enter into a coalition or confidence-and-supply agreement with a governing party that would would then table and pass the required legislation.

2014 was an anomaly. An idiotic move by a hubristic and naïve Prime Minister that none of his successors will be under any obligation or hurry to repeat.

Edited by Evercross on Wednesday 25th May 13:46

[hidetheelephants]

Tommy Sheppard is fighting for your right to know pointless poll stats; he's put in a FOI request for polling data on independence from 2014 and earlier. Give him the information and he loses this justification for getting column inches for his nonsense grievance.

[irc]

Surely if the SNP abstained in any post election vote for a FM the other parties would just vote one in and have a minority govt. As pper pre 2007.

[sherman]

irc said:

Surely if the SNP abstained in any post election vote for a FM the other parties would just vote one in and have a minority govt. As pper pre 2007.

Is it not the same situation as Northern Ireland find themselves in after most elections?
Stalemate and no government.

[Roderick Spode]

sherman said:

irc said:

Surely if the SNP abstained in any post election vote for a FM the other parties would just vote one in and have a minority govt. As pper pre 2007.

Is it not the same situation as Northern Ireland find themselves in after most elections?
Stalemate and no government.

Not directly. The situation in Stormont mandates that one party from either side of the political divide forms the government on a power sharing basis. Holyrood has no such requirement, although that may have been worth including had Blair and his idiotic government foresaw such things when they legislated for the Scottish Assembly back in 1998/99.

[irc]

sherman said:

Is it not the same situation as Northern Ireland find themselves in after most elections?
Stalemate and no government.

No the NI assembly requires a joint leader and deputy.

The loons appear to be suggesting a fresh election under section 3 of the Scotland Act.

"(1)The Presiding Officer shall propose a day for the holding of a poll if—

(a)the Parliament resolves that it should be dissolved and, if the resolution is passed on a division, the number of members voting in favour of it is not less than two-thirds of the total number of seats for members of the Parliament, or

(b)any period during which the Parliament is required under section 46 to nominate one of its members for appointment as First Minister ends without such a nomination being made.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/secti...

So to hold a fresh election the parlament must either vote 2/3rds for it (not going to happen) or fail to nominate a member for First Minister. Why would the Labour/LibDems/Tories not nominate candidates for FM?

The SNP loons are suggesting they can say it's my baw and you are no' playin.

Not going to happen.

[alangla]

irc said:

So to hold a fresh election the parlament must either vote 2/3rds for it (not going to happen)

Is that not exactly the same rules as Westminster under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act (now repealed) - May got a 2/3rds vote in 2017 and Johnson circumvented it by passing the Early Parliamentary General Election act in 2019. The latter route may not be open to Holyrood, but one would suggest that given the opportunity, neither Sarwar nor Ross would pass up the chance of an early election in the same way as Corbyn supported May's vote for an early election.

[irc]

alangla said:

Is that not exactly the same rules as Westminster under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act (now repealed) - May got a 2/3rds vote in 2017 and Johnson circumvented it by passing the Early Parliamentary General Election act in 2019. The latter route may not be open to Holyrood, but one would suggest that given the opportunity, neither Sarwar nor Ross would pass up the chance of an early election in the same way as Corbyn supported May's vote for an early election.

Not when the SNP were only doing it for a proxy referendum.

Better to be the adult in the room and run a minority govt if the SNP didn't want to govern.

[alangla]

irc said:

alangla said:

Is that not exactly the same rules as Westminster under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act (now repealed) - May got a 2/3rds vote in 2017 and Johnson circumvented it by passing the Early Parliamentary General Election act in 2019. The latter route may not be open to Holyrood, but one would suggest that given the opportunity, neither Sarwar nor Ross would pass up the chance of an early election in the same way as Corbyn supported May's vote for an early election.

Not when the SNP were only doing it for a proxy referendum.

Better to be the adult in the room and run a minority govt if the SNP didn't want to govern.

I hope so, but I fear your confidence in the decisions of Sarwar & Ross may be misplaced...

[sherman]

alangla said:

sherman said:

Edinburgh Council -SNP out

Labour minority control with Lib dem and conservative backing.
Lib dem Lord provost too.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-ou...

That article reads as “could” not “has”, did Sarw

ar not say he wouldn’t go into coalition with the Tories & didn’t a load of Aberdeen labour councillors not lose the whip for doing so last time round?

Confirmed !

Edinburgh Council to be run by a Labour Minority with lib dem and conservative backing (coalition)
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour...

SNP have lost the Capital.

[A.J.M]

Oh the nats will be fuming with this.

Good.

[sherman]

A.J.M said:

Oh the nats will be fuming with this.

Good.

John Swinney already brought it up in FMQs.
'Vote Labour get tory'

[stevensdrs]

Just watching First Ministers Questions on the BBC, well actually Deputy First Ministers Questions given that the poor FM has a black eye
Covid.
You would hardly know the difference were it not for John Swinney having a different voice. The rhetoric and issue swerving remains the same.
When asked about the SNP's performance the answer is always Toaaries or Labour did this or that, nothing to answer the actual question.
Meantime the rest of the SNP cabal are clapping like seals at the end of every point not actually made.

It's embarrassing, even more so than the fat crofters rantings in the HOC.

[Roderick Spode]

sherman said:

Confirmed !

Edinburgh Council to be run by a Labour Minority with lib dem and conservative backing (coalition)
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour...

SNP have lost the Capital.

I've noticed that their odious delightful supporters have taken to love bombing all the Fife Council Faceache posts, in response to The Cult failing to secure control of the council. The most recent one was a lack of staff at one of the local recycling facilities, due to illness, and various posters saying things like "typical Tories have started the cuts already" or "best not take a day off, you might get the bullet" - despite the fact that it isn't a Conservative controlled council. Nationalist brainlets aren't blessed with an abundance of cognitive faculties.

[Pastor Of Muppets]

sherman said:

Confirmed !

Edinburgh Council to be run by a Labour Minority with lib dem and conservative backing (coalition)
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour...

SNP have lost the Capital.

A well deserved kick in the erse for the SNP in auld reekie then, superb result, not the best but it could have been stupendously worse. So
overall in the council elections there is not very much for them to crow about, looks like reality is starting to dawn on many of the hoodwinked,
that the SNP are far from what they have been led to believe, and as time passes that reality is surfacing more and more, the stench of
rancid failure is emanating from every SNP orifice.

See those pesky opinion polls are irrelevant now they are showing bad news for the SNats, now I wonder if that would still be the case if they
were in favour of their cause, somehow I don't think so.
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scotti...

[sherman]

Sturgeon in power for 7.5 years and snp in power for 14 or 15years and latest Yougov polling puts the Independence poll at still 55% No 45% Yes.
Indyref 2 is deader than Waverley.train station after 10pm.