Craig Murray has posted tonight to make two points, albeit one more volubly than the other. Firstly, he very admirably says that the Alba Party (of which both Craig and I are members) must not split the pro-independence vote at a genuine plebiscite election by standing against the SNP. But secondly, he says that if the next UK general election is not a genuine plebiscite election, Alba should challenge the SNP in every single constituency, in order to bring Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP down. With all due respect to Craig, that would be absolutely nuts, for about seven billion different reasons -
* It assumes we have the luxury of throwing away pro-indy seats to the unionist parties because we can somehow easily get them back when we've finished tearing ourselves apart as a movement. That's highly questionable. Westminster elections are away fixtures for pro-indy parties and we've been defying gravity by winning a majority of seats in the last three general elections. If Labour get their former heartland seats back, due in part to a split pro-indy vote, the likelihood is they'll keep them indefinitely. That alone could make the difference between winning independence and not winning it.
* It would send a message to the independence movement, which believe me would be heard loud and clear, that Alba's "supermajority" messaging in the 2021 Holyrood election was nothing more than a confidence trick. That 2021 campaign would be seen in retrospect as all about Alba's self-interest rather than about boosting pro-indy representation - because if you actually care about the latter, you obviously don't launch a destructive campaign in a first-past-the-post election only two or three years later that you know can only have the effect (as Craig freely admits) of reducing pro-indy representation at Westminster. That blatant contradiction would be remembered all too well when the 2026 Holyrood election comes around, and would make it infinitely harder for Alba to win list seats - any remaining goodwill from SNP voters would by then be long gone. The SNP would be able to point to the specific Westminster seats where Alba helped a unionist candidate to win, and would quite understandably never let us forget it. (Put it this way: Ralph Nader's vote share plummeted between 2000 and 2004 for one very simple reason.)
* Alba would almost certainly be humiliated at a UK general election. It's hard enough to get a look-in at a Holyrood election, but at Westminster it would be impossible. The vote share could end up being so derisory that many activists might subsequently lose all heart and throw in the towel. That could literally spell the end for the Alba Party. Much more sensible to choose your battles, and it's under proportional representation systems (ie. local council elections and the Holyrood list) that Alba actually has a chance of prospering and gaining some psychological momentum.
* For the above reason, an Alba intervention at the general election would not actually succeed in bringing Nicola Sturgeon down. She might even be strengthened. The mood music suggests she might resign voluntarily within a few years, but the process would not be hurried along in any way.
* Even if a small party thinks it can reasonably harbour hopes of avoiding humiliation at a general election, it certainly wouldn't go about attempting the trick by standing in dozens of constituencies and thus spreading its limited resources too thinly. It would do the total opposite and concentrate its fire in the most promising seats (which in Alba's case would mean the two where it has the incumbent MPs).
* Craig uses the example of Sinn Féin supplanting the Irish Parliamentary Party in 1918 to suggest that Alba replacing the SNP as the majority Scottish party at Westminster is perfectly possible. Frankly, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. We are just so many light-years from the circumstances that made that freakish event possible - where would I even start? We haven't just had a world war, or military conscription against the popular will, or an armed insurrection at home, or executions of pro-independence leaders by the British state, or a mass expansion of the electoral franchise. In addition, the Alba party leader is far less popular with the public than the current SNP leader - wholly unjustly, as it happens, but we have to live with that reality all the same. It's not an insurmountable hurdle in a proportional representation election, but it absolutely is an insurmountable hurdle in a first-past-the-post election. No, Alba will not be replacing the SNP as the largest party any time soon. We will not even be getting close to doing that. The reality is that Alba are still battling just for survival into the medium-term, and that battle will not be won with self-destructive pipe-dreams.
In a perverse way, Craig has done us a favour by going public on this, because I know only too well that some people have for months (or longer) been privately gagging to embark on a suicide mission to destroy the SNP at the next general election, no matter what the cost to independence or to the movement or to Alba itself. It's about time we had an open debate about that, rather than sleepwalking into catastrophe. Some Alba people will justify the idea of splitting the vote in a first-past-the-post election by saying they themselves would vote Tory rather than SNP if there was no Alba candidate. To some extent that's because of the erosion of women's sex-based rights under the SNP, and although I can sympathise with the reasons for their strength of feeling, it certainly isn't suggestive of independence as the number one priority - which it absolutely must be, both in word and deed, if we're ever to gain any traction with a significant proportion of Yes supporters.
I’m with you James, independence is the number one priority. If you don’t like the SNP approach to women’s sex-based rights, guess what? You can campaign to change the law in an independent Scotland. If you don’t like the SNP approach to the monarchy, guess what? You can campaign to change the law in an independent Scotland. If you don’t like the SNP approach to NATO, guess what? You can campaign to change the law in an independent Scotland. Etc., etc.
ReplyDeleteThe whole point of independence is the people of Scotland making laws for themselves. If there are any you don’t like, you can campaign to have them changed. If you are confident that the people agree with you, then there is no reason to stand in the way of independence. And if the people don’t agree with you, well, that’s democracy for you.
In any case, the gender recognition reform bill is happening now, within the union. So why would you put that particular issue above independence? Stopping independence clearly won’t stop it happening.
The quickest and easiest way to destroy the SNP is to get independence. Soon thereafter the broad church will have a fair few schisms to contend with. In all likelihood there will be no SNP within a few years of independence.
" The quickest and easiest way to destroy the SNP is to get independence."
DeleteAnonymous you just destroyed your argument with that sentence. Do you think the SNP leadership do not think that is highly likely. Do turkeys vote for Xmas. Where is the SNP going to get all the 'short' money they get from Westminster after independence. Where are all the SNP MPs going to get the same salaries/expense budgets/pensions and London lifestyles from after independence?
Quite frankly James,if the post above this one is anything to go by..your plea for sanity is destined to fail I'm afraid.
DeleteYou sir ...... are a numpty. Well numpty where will the SNP get their money in future.
DeleteAs usual a very sensible and well written contribution…. stand by for the tin foil hat brigade
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm one of the "scunnered middle" these days. Finally left the SNP a few months ago, signed up for SALVO, active with my local YES group and lending a listening ear to Alba - until the self defeating and destructive standing against the SNP, on a wide front, in FPtP elections came up.
ReplyDeleteBy whatever means the present leadership of the SNP has been neutered as an effective force for independence. We have to start thinking of the party as many people of progressive mind in England think of the Labour party. It aint going to take us where we want to go but when FPtP elections come around it can be used as a block against the tories.
Seems to me that, if Alba is to have a future, it should be operating a 'united front' approach with YES activists in the localities, showing itself to be the best on the ground, and building it's base that way. Candidates in appropriate elections at appropriate times can be part of this strategy. Not rocket science and not a quick fix but it offers a way forward without an anger driven 'Kamikazi' that would maim our already limping independence movement.
That's very well put. I think what some people overlook is that it would be open to Alba to *campaign for independence* during a first-past-the-post election without actually *standing*. That would be the win-win situation. It would keep the party visible with the next Holyrood election in mind, it would build support for independence, but without splitting the vote.
Delete" .... any remaining goodwill from SNP voters .......
ReplyDeleteMust have missed this James - where are they hiding? Sturgeon has them in her pocket and she says Alba is evil and they say how evil - is it really really evil. Sturgeon says Salmond is the devil and they say too true. The British establishment have done a number on the yes movement and people in the SNP have either deliberately facilitated
it or conveniently went along with it to keep them nicely positioned on the devolution gravy train. The SNP leadership are as much the enemy of Scottish independence as any of the British parties.
Great topic James (and Craig Murray), It is my current favourite. You say splitting the indy vote in a UKGE will sink ALBA vote at Holyrood list. The Greens stood ( Alison Johnstone) in Edin Central constituency at Holyrood and split the Anti Troy vote to allow Ruth Davison to win. Did the electorate take revenge for this by destroying the Greens at the next election on the list? No they increased their seats from 6 to 8. Seems voters reward parties that campaign to win their votes . I stand with Craig Murray on this one.
ReplyDeleteThat line of thinking is what might be described as a "category error". The Greens were hammered in pro-indy circles for helping Ruth Davidson gain a constituency seat from the SNP, but the reason their vote didn't take a big hit is that Green voters are not primarily motivated by independence. Most are in favour of it, but their real priorities are climate change, social justice, identity politics issues, and in some cases (sadly) suppression of free speech on the trans debate. For Alba, the situation couldn't be more different. Alba's support, with very few exceptions, can and will only come from people who care passionately about independence. Without those people, Alba will quite simply have no base.
DeleteAll this happy family stuff within the independence movement is long gone and the SNP leadership is to blame. Do they care about the Scottish Greens standing against SNP politicians - no they do not - that is not because of some logic that it is best for Scottish independence but because Sturgeon says so. Did Sturgeon dictate SNP policy to be Both Votes SNP because it was best for Scottish independence. No it was because it was best for the SNP and she was probably laughing at how much she controls SNP voters that she got them voting in Unionist MSPs to Holyrood. The very people like Murdo Fraser (Tory) the WGD numpties love to moan about never winning an election and is only a 'list' MSP.
ReplyDeleteWe are stuck in a Groundhog Day scenario in a shithouse of a UK with shitty politicians in Westminster and Holyrood. More and smellier shit is on its way ( and it won't be trickling down) to pay for the corruption of these shitty politicians. Meanwhile Blowhard Blackford coses up to Penny Mordaunt. You have to admire the in your face braziness of it as Blowhard knows he can get away with it.
In this case, the translation of "all this happy family stuff" appears to be "not actually destroying ourselves pointlessly".
DeleteSorry, but the logic here seems to be - the SNP leadership behaved badly (which is true) so that justifies 'us' behaving badly. Like it or not the Sturgeon gang has managed to reach across it's own activists to appeal directly to a large body of voters. Those pro independence people are not interested in disputes within the activist bubble. They will not understand or reward those whom they perceive as splitters.
DeleteSorry Anonymous -" behaving badly" - do you think this is a nursery or something. I have no loyalty to any political party. I voted SNP last May in the constituency to let people see how the SNP would react with another mandate. What have we got - asking a U.K. court for permission, more time wasting and promises by the SNP that they will not deliver on. The splitter type argument was exactly why Scotland kept voting Labour for so long. Just how long do you keep voting for a party that is a fraud led by despicable people. Anonymous your approach is the exact recipe that will repeat the many decades of voting for the fraudulent Labour Party.
DeleteYou sir... are a unionist troll...."I voted SNP last May".... dont make me laugh!
DeleteAnonymous not to confuse you with the original anonymous on this thread or are you same person. Who knows - so many anonymous posters.
DeleteNo argument against my points just the same sad old refrain from a numpty. I voted SNP Constituency and Alba Regional list just as I said I would and I said at the time there would be no referendum in 2021 or 2022 even if they got a mandate. Numpties like you said there would be a referendum in 2021 or 2022. I won't be voting SNP again.
Only a Britnat party asks permission from the British for a referendum. Sturgeon says she wanted permission from the people of Scotland. She never mentioned a London court of law. She goes back on yet another promise but still Numpties go on worshipping Sturgeon.
You sir ........are a numpty.
Whilst there is some merit to Craig's argument (especially if you believe the SNP are no longer a pro-indy party), it is written with the view that this week we can punish the SNP and next week we'll get indy with real pro-indy MPs.
DeleteCraig's plan is long term (really long term). A quicker solution would be to influence the SNP from the inside.
James, I see Craig Murray has posted a reply to your article.
ReplyDeleteYes, I saw it earlier, I'm going to reply when I have a spare couple of hours.
DeleteI have now read it and the key point I took from it is that he says your argument stands if you believe the SNP want independence. The same point as I posted on a previous article.
DeleteNow perhaps someone can argue that the SNP may change in the future and actually want to deliver independence so we should keep the vote up until then. That to me is the same old Scottish Labour approach that they will deliver socialism or even some sort of social justice in the future if we just keep voting for them ( as they line up to enter the House of Lords).
I no longer believe the SNP leadership, and a lot of the politicians in the SNP, want independence. In my opinion the situation has moved on so much it is up to people who still believe in the SNP to explain why we should believe that the SNP want independence. For example, explain why the SNP keep on producing the GERS report every year, which in turn facilitates all the newspaper headings that Scotland has a massive financial deficit and could not possibly be independent etc etc.
I look forward to reading your reply.
Interesting and relevant topic. I'm pretty close to ind for Scotland's position on this. Like him I voted SNP 1 Alba 2 (although many others did here too) and like him I don't have faith in the SNP to deliver independence..
DeleteHowever, I do find James's argument about gaining credibility with the wider yes movement by not standing directly against the SNP to have merit. For many we may need to grit our teeth and stand on the list and on the councils. But I know this could take ages then.
Is there any way we could get some survey questions on this? Voting intentions, attitudes to alba standing at wm as while many may not like alba standing at wm, some might and we only need 5.5% for a list seat breakthrough.
James if Alba do not stand candidates in a future UK GE ( de facto referendum or not) except for Hanvey and MacAskill do you expect the SNP to reciprocate and not stand candidates against Hanley/MacAskill. A poster on Murray's site says Hanvey has been told Sturgeon has already hand picked her candidate.
ReplyDeleteI think everything in the James response is premised on the SNP being the leader or at least part of the independence movement. If they renege on their promise to contest a plebiscite election that premise is highly questionable. Why is Blowhard Blackford calling for a GE now if he wants independence, surely that would delay it by years if he planned on using the GE as a plebescite.
ReplyDeleteIf the SNP renege on their commitment to contest a plebiscite election the goalposts will have moved since 2021 and Alba would be more than entitled to say back then they thought the SNP wanted to deliver independence so didn't stand against them in the constituencies, but now things are different and declare themselves as the true party of independence and stand in every seat.
If the SNP don't want to deliver independence then there is no point helping them get into power. They become a roadblock and not a facilitator. The Brexit party usurped UKIP only recently.
Vote Alba Declare UDI
Good to see you sticking to your guns on this one, James, especially in light of the predictable Twitter pile-on you've had in response. I've been increasingly concerned in recent months that a number of people are trying to paint factional squabbles and spite as part of a broader pro-indy strategy. Some individuals have really gone down the rabbit hole on this matter. And as you've rightly said elsewhere, they don't genuinely believe that reducing the number of pro-indy MPs would help the independence cause, yet they will tie themselves in knots to avoid admitting that independence is no longer their priority.
ReplyDeleteTo ape Geoffrey Howe a little, it's the equivalent of breaking our own team's bats before the first balls are bowled, in order to spite the team captain.
No good can come of this. All it would achieve would be to set off an even deeper spiral of acrimony, finger-pointing, factionalism, and grudges. Once we turn inwards as a movement, we'll collapse inwards too. Let's not divide and conquer ourselves on Westminster's behalf.
Totally agree with this.
DeleteThere's so much rancour, it's not helping anyone.
We need to get behind the strategy as it is. Factionalism will not win this.
That said I hae ma doots about an SNP only ticket working.
If the next GE isn't a plebiscite then the movement is finished anyway. It's that simple.
ReplyDeleteNo-one believes indyref2 is coming as announced by Sturgeon, no-one believes the SNP will deliberately collapse Holyrood to fight a Scottish election on a plebiscite basis, and plenty folk are already highly suspicious that the SNP will make the next UK GE a plebiscite. By the time of the next naturally occurring UK GE after or ScotParl election the whole movement will have wandered off out of sheer damn frustration.
So Murray is right. If the next UK general election is not a genuine plebiscite election, Alba should challenge the SNP in every single constituency. It probably won't bring down Sturgeon and the SNP, it probably will humiliate Alba. But it will (a) at least show the SNP that they are not the sole voice and party of independence and (b) it will begin the long and slow process of replacing them as such, as opposed to continuing the long and slow process of the SNP not doing very much at all other than ossifying its power base.
The issue in all of this is that these last eight years the SNP has been no independence party.
ReplyDeleteIt has squandered mandate after mandate and has pursued a line actually hostile to Independence.
Moreover it is a party where its democratic function has been utterly hollowed out. Rotten and corrupt I think it would be fair to suspect that from a high of around 130,000 members there are now only about 25,000 left.
The party Conference with circa 700 delegates is testimony to that. And where the members go tje electorate follow.
So yes, an alternative is needed and will, and is in fact happening. This is the legacy of Sturgeon, her clique, and frankly too many elected troughers.
There's at least an arguable point that
ReplyDeleteno. of votes in a defacto referendum is equivalent or more important than no. of seats
for example, SNP winning 43 seats instead of 48 but on 51% of the vote (SNP, Green, Alba, anyone other pro-indy party)
is better than
SNP winning 56 seats on 49% of the vote (only SNP)
I honestly believe that it's number of pro-indy votes that will matter more in the end. The SNP will win a big number of votes and will win most seats in a Defacto referendum scenario. But every time you look at independence and election polls, you can see the correlation between the total indy vote and adding up the SNP, Green and Alba ones.
If independence is to be taken seriously, we have to win most seats (that's a given) but the more difficult part may be more votes than the unionist parties. That's where Alba and the Greens come in. They won't win any seats but you'll need the 1, 2, 3, 4 percent to take the pro-indy electorate figure over the line. I can't imagine a scenario where those percentages don't play a part in a tight vote. Even if it will be derisory, it could still be crucial.
I'm not sure if they should stand myself but there is an argument for it.
There's another way. A Yes Scotland party might be a good idea. Not sure but it would bring all together. Indy is more popular than the SNP.
For months, people have been tying themselves up in knots trying to come up with elaborate reasons why vote-splitting in a Westminster election is somehow actually a great idea. It really isn't.
DeleteThe UK media and Westminster parties scarcely even acknowledge the Greens as pro-indy. The idea that they would in good faith diligently tally the votes of small pro-indy parties alongside the SNP is for the birds. Of course there is a viable argument for voting for smaller pro-indy alternatives to the SNP, where those alternatives are potentially viable (ie, the list vote in Holyrood elections and council elections).
DeleteWe've already seen what happens when pro-indy voters vote for parties other than the SNP at Westminster elections. I remember many friends and family earnestly telling me that they were voting Labour in 2017 because they saw a genuine alternative to two-party austerity politics at Westminster. But they also insisted it would do no damage to the indy cause, because they themselves were personally pro-independence.
Did the media or main Westminster parties care? Absolutely not. The narrative wasn't that pro-indy voters lent their vote to Corbynism as the next best alternative while we waited for another indy vote. They tallied those pro-indy Labour votes as passionate votes for No Surrender. As a result, the SNP totally lost their nerve on independence and had to be coaxed over multiple years to even adopt the tepid position they currently have.
Any scheme involving Westminster elections that requires a) the media to acknowledge nuanced voter behaviour, or b) that involves 'spooking' the SNP into a bolder indy stance, is just as liable to backfire on us as it did in 2017.
Totally agree.
DeleteYou're absolutely correct about Labour in 2017 but I'm not sure your point correlates over properly.
DeleteScottish Labour are a unionist party. Of course they couldnt be counted as pro indy. And nor should they have been.
The Greens and other pro-indy parties are and it's upto the indy side to make their case for all votes counting in a defacto referendum.
The media won't help in any case. I just feel we're in danger of missing out on a small but crucial amount of voters that don't like the SNP.
The more I think about it widening the net is the best course of action. Either by having a Yes Scotland party or a list of parties with the same manifesto.
A list of parties with the same manifesto all standing against each other in a first past the post election? As Sir Humphrey Appleby might put it, that would be a rather "courageous" plan...
DeleteThe FPTP system is a mug’s game that is about as anti-democratic as they come. As a minority party, there is very little point in wasting resources and goodwill in contesting an election under such a system. In fact you are just legitimising this unfair system by doing so.
ReplyDeleteIn non-marginal seats where there is no chance of shooting yourself in the foot, or (obviously) where there is a sitting Alba candidate, it’s worth it, but certainly not across the board.
He is wrong becasue the SNP is no longer a party of Scottish Independence. Voting SNP since 2014 hasn't got us any closer to Independence. Heck the SNP hasn't even been promoting it. I I dont have an Alba cabdidate to vote fro then i will be abstaining. The SNP has double crossed this Independence supporter for the last time. Sic a parcel of rogues in anation, sic a parcel of traitors in a nation, that is the SNP leadership right now.
ReplyDelete