I've made this point before, I think, but the Wikipedia article on the Alba Party is an abomination, obviously written by people who are extremely hostile. The first paragraph concludes with the words "No Alba Party candidate has been elected at any election", which is a reasonable point to make, but not with such pejorative wording and with such gratuitously prominent placement. There's a section about criticism of the party, which again is totally reasonably and normal, but the length of it and the proportion of the article that it takes up is absurd - it's an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach. There's also a potentially catty reference to Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh being a right-of-centre politician, which I'm not sure is an accurate characterisation, notwithstanding the different political allegiance she had in her youth.
But in one particular way the article has just improved tremendously, because the graphic box at the top now displays the fact that Alba for the first time have representation at all three tiers of government - local councils, Holyrood and Westminster. Three days ago, it was only one. People who were looking forward to Alba's demise will now have to start to accept that it isn't going to happen any time soon. Of course they'll continue making the point that none of Alba's representatives were elected under Alba colours, and that's a hurdle the party will have to get over sooner or later, but what all of this has done is buy Alba some time. Ash Regan will be in office until at least 2026, and Chris Cullen will be there until 2027.
* * *
What puzzles me about Lorna Slater's now-notorious comment about independence not being a red line for any deal between the Greens and Labour is the vehemence with which she said "absolutely not". Why not "never say never" or "who knows what might happen"? It's like she thinks it's still pre-indyref days when Green supporters used to actively reward their leaders for blasting the presumptuousness of anyone who thought the SNP should be regarded as the only game in town due to independence. I remember James Mackenzie back in the early 2010s openly preaching the gospel of equidistance between the SNP and Labour, and not running into any trouble for it. But the world has moved on - many, many Green supporters see their party as every bit as much an independence party, every bit as much a vehicle-for-delivering-independence, as the SNP itself. To hear such enthusiastic talk about parking independence for five years to install a Labour government is going to make some supporters wonder if their perception of what the Greens are quite matches the reality.
For ignorance or hypocrisy about defections perhaps Yousaf should check out Dick Douglas MP. There may have been others, perhaps councillors.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Lorna Slater is concerned it is possible she was answering some question that had been asked a minute or two before. Though there has been no denial and no statement from the Greens to that effect, so it stands - Independence is not a red line for the Greens. Which might dismay some of their previous supporters and voters.
Some voters think the Greens are incompetent. Some think they are weirdos. Some think they are dangerous to women and children. Some think they are a danger to the economy. Most thought they were for Scottish independence.
ReplyDeleteSlater has now given independence supporters massive doubts about their honesty about supporting independence when she answered a question on The Sunday Show, without any hesitation or misunderstanding, that the Scottish Greens would support a Labour government in Scotland and that independence is NOT a red line.
Slater may not be as big a bampot as her fellow Green MSP Chapman but she proved she is no use as a politician in that interview with Martin Guizler of the BBC.
Of course, James, or anyone can edit Wikipedia to their heart's content, but any editor needs to take into account Wikipedia's core NPV policy - the Neutral Point of View, plus the requirement that authors with a Conflict of Interest [COI] do not contribute directly to affected articles. James, having been on the National Executive, cannot avoid conflict of interest. If there is a clear factul error, he can probably correct it, but must declare the COI, but even if the tone is somewhat negative, he probably should leave it alone.
DeleteShe did us all a favour by saying the quiet part loud. When there's a Lab + Lib + Green coalition someday, no one has to be surprised. It's just not about indy for them.
DeleteHi James, I may be wrong but I think anyone can now sign into Wikipedia and edit it.
ReplyDeleteThat's always been the case - I was a (relatively) prolific Wikipedia editor before I became a blogger. But good luck trying to get edits to stay up if certain people dislike them.
DeleteSlater’s comment is far more important to Alba’s prospects than any defections. Much of the Green list vote depends on the belief that independence IS a red line for them. As an established party they had an advantage over Alba for those who are pro independence but not SNP both votes. This revelation is an opportunity for Alba to switch Green votes to Alba, but only if their campaign focuses on pro independence and anti unionist, not attacks on the SNP
ReplyDeleteQuite right.
DeleteI voted Green on the list from 1999 to 2021, when I gave Alba a chance. Indy might not be a red line for the Greens now, but it remains *the* defining red line for me.
John REDACTOR MAN Swinney has been very quiet recently. Has he been busy behind the scenes ensuring whattsapp messages re Covid are deleted. Will he have to be renamed as John DELETER MAN Swinney?
ReplyDeleteBased on the way Sturgeon's gang behaved re documentation during the Salmond persecution I would not trust a word any of them utter re assurances about messages/information being made available. Remember they even deliberately held back documentation from their own lawyers and The Court of Session Judge during the judicial review which Sturgeon's gang then had to throw in the towel because their own lawyers threatened to walk out and denounce them as liars. As it was the Judge gave his verdict and denounced Sturgeon's gang as having operated a process that was unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias against Salmond.
Trustworthy and honest they most certainly are not.
Latest poll isn't good news for anyone suggesting 2nd vote not for the SNP in 2026, as the SNP could go from 2 list seats to 17 because of their poor showing on the constituency vote.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2021s&cSNP=34&cCON=14&cLAB=31&cLD=8&rSNP=34&rCON=14&rLAB=31&rGRN=11&rLD=8&rALBA=1&rAFU=1#Scotland
But the SNP aren't going to boast about this right now! It also only has 4 parties for the constituency which is a bit daft.
In 2011 the Greens got 4.4% on the list, and after Slater's dropped clanger it's well possible that the opinion poll 11% could drop down as Indy supporters drop the greens. In which case it's open season on 7%.
ReplyDeleteOpportunity knocks for the bold.
Play as much as we like of course, but of the Greens dropped, Labour dropped, the SNP picked up Labour vote and Alba the Green:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2021s&cSNP=40&cCON=14&cLAB=25&cLD=8&rSNP=40&rCON=14&rLAB=25&rGRN=5&rLD=8&rALBA=7&rAFU=1#Scotland
SNP 63, Alba 8, Greens 2, and cry havoc and unleash the dogs of war.
Owooooooo!