Monday, December 18, 2023

The fallout from the Alba internal elections

Just a final thought about the Alba internal elections a few weeks ago.  This is difficult to write, because to a large extent I don't actually know what's been going on, it's like looking a jigsaw puzzle with a lot of the pieces missing.  I've asked questions where I could, but answers haven't always been forthcoming.  However, it's clearly not a healthy situation when people who were standing for election have actually left the party in the short period since.  It's not healthy that people who were successfully elected felt unable to take up their positions, in at least two cases on matters of principle. It's not healthy that others who were initially standing for election withdrew after the vote was nullified and restarted.  It's not healthy that we don't know whether those who made the decision to nullify the vote were aware of the original outcome before making their decision. It's not healthy that results have been kept secret, which frankly should be considered obviously unacceptable in any electoral process anywhere in the world.

One thing I do know is that I attracted some very unexpected supporters in the re-run version of the Membership Support Convener election - I can't and won't name them publicly because the support came in private messages, but I got the distinct impression that they were people who felt very, very badly let down and that I was considered the best bet for them to register that dissatisfaction.  I very nearly won the election, and I would guess that's a non-trivial part of the explanation why, because in the general NEC ballot I was quite a way short of being elected (although with eighteen candidates on the ballot, there's no shame in that).

On the secrecy issue, I was confidentially sent the results of the Membership Support Convener election before the official announcement.  It didn't contain raw vote numbers but it did contain percentages.  Before posting the percentages on this blog, I waited to check that there was an announcement of the winners on social media so that I didn't jump the gun (as I accidentally did once in the past), but it occurred to me later that I wasn't actually sure whether the percentages had been revealed in the official announcement at Natonal Council - it would be interesting to find that out from anyone who was there.  As we now know, the results of the NEC ballot ended up being completely withheld, apart from the names of those successfully elected.  Even candidates were not told the result unless they requested it by email, and even if they did, they were only given a partial result that excluded everything that happened after they were eliminated.  (This means I know who finished behind me but not who finished ahead of me.)

There were suggestions that the secrecy might be explained by a desire to spare the blushes of those who polled poorly, but I actually get the impression that's not the case, and that the source of embarrassment might be the very large number of votes received by someone who did far, far better than would have been expected, with the concern being that people would start pondering what the real explanation for that was.

All of this is really bizarre in a small party that is now going places due to two recent high-profile defections and the alliance with Angus MacNeil.  The excitement of that ought to be enough to pull everyone together in a common endeavour, but instead the in-fighting (and despair in some quarters) seems to be worsening.  I'm not sure whether I should be heartened by the really good result I had in the office bearer elections or disheartened by my disappointing result in the NEC ballot, but either way my intention is to keep standing in these internal elections and to do so with the aim of increasing democracy and transparency, and to dispense with destructive factionalism.

UPDATE: Just by coincidence, not long after this blogpost was published, an email went out to Alba members offering an explanation for the issues that beset the internal elections.  It's stated that the office bearer elections had to be re-run because of rumours of problems with the voting process.  However, my recollection is that at the time it was made clear that those rumours would not have been enough to scupper the vote and that the reason for the re-run was the targetting of individuals on secret groups.

The reasons given for the secrecy over the NEC ballot are that a) candidates polling very low numbers of first preference votes would have been vulnerable to attack from Alba's political opponents if they subsequently stood for parliament, and b) the candidates hadn't given their consent for their election data to be shared.  The latter reason seems odd - I've stood in the NEC elections for the last three years in a row, and there was never previously any problen with sharing election data.  I would have thought standing as a candidate ought to constitute tacit acceptance that the result can be published.  I mean, in what sense does a candidate "own" the votes they receive?  They're not copyrighted, surely?  As for the first reason, the priority of democratic transparency ought to very easily trump any inconvenience that may be caused.  Also, I'd just note that STV is not the reason for candidates receiving very few first preference votes - the same thing would have happened under first-past-the-post.  The real reason may be that one of the eighteen candidates in the male ballot somehow managed to take roughly half the votes, if the information I've been given is correct.

*  *  *

I am currently fundraising in the hope of running a new Scot Goes Pop opinion poll in the New Year - details can be found HERE, and the fundraiser page itself is HERE.

11 comments:

  1. I've not commented in a while, it's always a shame to see political parties fall short of full transparency. I've been feeling quite despondent towards Indy lately

    The Unionists (and quite a lot of Indy supporters) cheered when Nicola was brought down, I didn't quite realise at the time how much she personally seems to have been holding the party together. I do feel our best hope for Indy went with her.

    This latest news from Alba doesn't fill me with confidence, neither do the other SNP leadership contenders

    So I guess I really want to know is - what's next?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you think Sturgeon was holding the SNP together and was our best hope for Indy any discussion would be pointless.

      Delete
  2. "a small party that is now going places", unfortunately ALBA is going nowhere fast - mind boggling that we are making the SNP look open and honest!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. " Nicola was brought down" - Mike Lothian this reminds me of the mad liar Irish Skier saying " Sturgeon was taken out". So care to expand on who, why, how, where Nicola was brought down. I thought she just decided to voluntarily resign after 8 years of faking she was going to hold Indyref2 while at the same time raising funds on the back of multiple promises to hold a referendum but if you know differently please explain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No reply from Mike or Irish Skier. The levels of cognitive dissonance are high in the numpty nicophants.

      Delete
  4. The SNP got rid of Alex Salmond so maybe its time for the Alba party to get rid as well, a complete new start. I shall not be renewing as I know Salmond is never going to be electable in any century.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Please, please Alba get your act together. There is an enormous gap in the electoral market for Yessers who are about done with the SNP.
    If all you can offer them is infighting and shambolic internal elections they won't take you seriously enough to consider voting for you.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The membership convenor percentages were indeed announced at Alba Nat Council James in response to your question

    ReplyDelete
  7. James firstly let me say I voted for you for membership officer sadly I couldn’t make the conference or the National Council. Have you had Alec’s letter to members explaining the vote issues, it seemed to me a reasonable explanation and I’m sceptical of all political leaders! Finally I’m happy to publish my name Hugh Kerr

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ireland had De Valera and Michael Collins, while we just have this infighting in the pro independence parties that doesn't get us an inch closer to Independence

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well Ireland did get its independence and seems to be doing rather well ! Hugh Kerr

    ReplyDelete