There's a very curious article on Reuters, which has a perfectly sound basic premise (that the UK is fast becoming Europe's most politically unstable country), but which is ruined by details that just don't make any sense. The author keeps using phrases like "almost certain" to refer to specific future scenarios that in reality are either highly unlikely or in some cases virtually impossible. For example...
"A Tory government supported by Scottish Nationalists and UKIP is a more plausible option. But the glue holding together such a coalition would be an EU referendum on membership terms that the rest of Europe would be extremely unlikely to accept."
Hmmm. 'Plausible' is not the first word that springs to mind, given that the SNP have explicitly ruled out any sort of deal with the Tories under any circumstances. And as for an in/out EU referendum being the "glue" of this impossible coalition, I'm not sure how we're supposed to square that notion with the SNP's absolute opposition to an in/out EU referendum.
"The Scottish National Party is sure to demand another Scottish independence referendum as its price for supporting a coalition"
That's not quite right - the real price would be a huge transfer of powers to the Scottish Parliament, including the unambiguous power to call a constitutional referendum at any time. That isn't the same thing as demanding that Westminster calls an independence referendum itself.
Nevertheless, this is a useful reminder of the multiple options that the SNP have at their disposal in the longer term. It's sometimes supposed that the biggest obstacle to a second referendum taking place (even well into the future) is that the PR voting system makes it murderously hard to cobble together an outright pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament. But if all else fails, there'll always be the Plan B of using coalition negotiations to seek a Westminster-initiated referendum, which in theory could even take place at a time when the SNP are not in power at Holyrood.
Not quite "heads I win, tails you lose", but it does mean that a second referendum will be much harder to thwart than certain unionists think.
Reuters' man fails to consider a "national unity" Tory-Labour coalition. No two parties are idealogically closer in Westminster.
ReplyDeleteAll his nonsense about the SNP joining in with the extreme right wingers shows his complete lack of understanding. It's never going to happen and if it did it would be the death of the SNP.
"Reuters' man fails to consider a "national unity" Tory-Labour coalition. No two parties are idealogically closer in Westminster."
DeleteYou may be correct Holebender, yet I don't see that outcome personally; not at state level anyway. True they are already in coalition in local authorities, but Ms Goldie; correctly and wisely, rejected out of hand that being an option at Holyrood as I remember. If that ever came to pass, I can see the possibility of a UKIP landslide at Westminster in a following GE. If all that remains for the electorate is the protest vote, IMO, they will use it.
"Reuters' man fails to consider a "national unity" Tory-Labour coalition. No two parties are idealogically closer in Westminster."
DeleteWon't happen, at least not formally. It would be too blatant. Though that's not to say there couldn't be a discreet "under the table" deal between the two if it came to it.
This discreet "under the table" deal, is it not already happening?
DeleteThe article would be hysterically funny if were not for the fact that it will skew the perception of those who read it and do not have access to other more realistic information.
ReplyDeleteFortunately for us, looks like there is a new pro indy paper starting.out on monday
ReplyDeleteThe problem with democracy is the electorate, who'd have thought it? The electoral system of FPTP returns to bite those elected on their elbows. Stability becomes instability, only because stability in an essentially two party system is a myth and it's been rumbled as such because voting for change, really, brings no change.
ReplyDeletePolitics in Scotland is only going in one direction: towards independence.
ReplyDeletedid the SNP not rely on the Tories at holyrood when they had a minority administration? :-)
ReplyDeleteNo. At various times during that Parliament, SNP budgets were supported by Labour, the Lib Dems, the Tories and the Greens.
DeleteHope that helps.
I doubt the Lab/Tory coalition is as far fetched as it seems.
ReplyDeleteThe National Goverment of 1931 springs to mind.
Do you really see wee Douglas going all ILP on us.
Ach if yaed tellt me it wis Kaletsky I widnae hae klicked thon link.
ReplyDelete