Wednesday, May 1, 2024

Yes, the parliamentary arithmetic would work for Kate Forbes, whether Kenny Farquharson likes it or not

Kenny "Devo or Death" Farquharson, aka "Jurassic Farq", has a really nasty piece in The Times which is ultimately a bigoted rant about why a committed member of a particular religious denomination he personally dislikes should never be allowed to hold high office, but which tarts itself up in progressive-sounding language about how our leaders must reflect the diversity of modern Scotland.  On that note, incidentally, wouldn't it be rather a good idea to at last have a First Minister who is a fluent Gaelic speaker?  Given the dire predictions that Gaelic could cease to be a fully-functioning community language within as little as a decade, isn't this the perfect moment to have in Kate Forbes a national leader who is authentically committed to taking the necessary steps to protect the language, because she embodies what stands to be lost if that doesn't happen?

Farquharson switches from bigotry to innumeracy with this section - 

"There is good reason for the “anyone but Kate” campaign gaining strength within the SNP this week. I am sure any parliamentary vote to install Forbes as first minister would lead to a number of abstentions from the SNP benches. For Forbes to win the prize she would need the Tories to abstain en masse.

SNP folk should ask themselves if this is how they really want to see their new leader take power."

He might as well just have "I don't understand the rules" tattooed on his forehead.  One of the oddities of the Scotland Act is that the votes of a majority of MSPs are not required to be elected First Minister.  A candidate simply needs to have more votes in the final ballot than the other remaining candidate.  That's why Alex Salmond was able to become First Minister in 2007 with the votes of just 49 of the 129 MSPs.  

In Kate Forbes' case, her opponent in the final ballot (if it even got that far) would be Douglas Ross, so there would be no question of Labour and the Greens playing silly buggers by actively voting against her at that stage.  In all probability, she would win by 63 votes to 31.  SNP MSPs would not abstain for exactly the same reason that Forbes and her backers did not abstain on Yousaf becoming FM.  Refusing to vote to sustain an SNP government is inconsistent with membership of the SNP parliamentary party, and anyone who went down that road would inevitably lose the whip.

But even assuming Farquharson is right that there are SNP MSPs ready and willing to throw their careers away to stop Forbes, her 32-vote cushion over Ross means there would need to be at least 32 SNP abstentions to stop her - more than half the entire parliamentary party.  Who precisely are these thirty-two martyrs, Kenny?

Once Forbes is actually in office, the first thing she would probably try to do is mend relations with the Greens, and she might have a chance of succeeding on a sort of "Nixon in China" basis - ie. any agreements with her would be so toughly-negotiated and businesslike that the Greens would trust her to stick to her word.  But even if the Greens continue to dislike her so much that they try to bring down the government she leads, they quite simply wouldn't have the numbers to do that.  Kate Forbes and Ash Regan are old friends, and it thus seems inconceivable that Alba would ever help bring down a Forbes-led government.  At worst, then, a confidence vote would result in a 64-64 tie, with the Presiding Officer voting to save the government with her casting vote in line with convention.

Again, SNP MSPs cannot abstain or vote against the government on a confidence vote without effectively excluding themselves from the party.  So what it really boils down to is whether you think SNP MSPs will defect outright to the Greens.  And while that's not totally impossible, defections among MSPs are rare enough that I'd want specifics about who these people actually are before taking the idea remotely seriously.

*  *  *

It's getting close to the last-chance saloon, but there's still time to help Scot Goes Pop continue through this general election year.  Donations can be made via the fundraiser page HERE, although if you have a Paypal account, a better way to donate is by direct Paypal payment, because the funds are usually transferred instantly and fees can be eliminated altogether depending on the option you select from the menu.  My Paypal email address is:  jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk

58 comments:

  1. It is a good point about the personal bond between Forbes and Regan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe a pathway back to SNP for Ash if Kate leads?

      Delete
    2. Would it be better if Ash agreed to work to restore Alba to its original form and purpose, namely list seat only at the next Holyrood election, and agreement to give support to the SG in the interim. it would involve a clear out in Alba and an element within SNP would have to be reined in, in no uncertain terms. That, at present, is the only way to progress towards decisive action on Independence.

      Delete
  2. I hear you but is it true you need a majority to pass budgets?

    Do you also need a majority to pass laws?

    Genuine question as this seems be being touted.

    Abhainn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, of course, but the experience of the 2007-11 parliament is that it's much harder for opposition parties to vote to block Budgets, because it looks destructive to the public. The bottom line is that the Tories don't want an early election for very obvious reasons. It's hard for them not to vote for a no confidence motion, but I don't find it at all hard to imagine them abstaining on a Budget.

      Delete
    2. Also to add, my nous is anything Kenny Farquarsson doesn't like is almost certainly good for the SNP and independence.

      It's been that way for years.

      His toys out the pram when Sturgeon announced Defact indyref was glorious to see. The greeting was extraordinary, really let his guard down. I recall tweets calling us all Tories because we weren't voting for Keir Starmer.

      Abhainn

      Delete
    3. I'd like to see it happen that way. Otherwise, how does ANY party govern in future?

      Labour, Tories, SNP are unlikely to get a majority in any election so what do we do anytime there is a contentious issue? Never get anything done?

      I suppose Lab and Tories would say they will work with SNP if they drop independence. And SNP will say they will work with Lab, Tories if they drop opposition to a referendum route.

      Strange situation this Parliament. We end up with numbers reflecting the Scottish people but then how do we get things done?

      Abhainn

      Delete
  3. does it matter if she believes in science?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you honestly think anyone is impressed by stupid insults like that?

      Delete
    2. Did it matter that Humza believes, either?

      Delete
  4. Farquharson is hardly an honest broker with regards the SNP. One has to distil his words to determine what he he is trying to spin. Then do the opposite :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Farquarsson is against the SNP in every conceivable way.

    Any Scottish independence supporter taking their view from him has lost the plot.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I do expect that a few SNP MSPs are thinking about defecting, yes. Not to the Greens, though.

    To Labour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who could blame them.

      Delete
    2. And who would miss them.

      Delete
    3. Surely Labour being against "Scotland's right to decide" , not independence per se, should be a red line for anyone who was invested enough to be an SNP member?

      If so, they were carpet baggers the whole time.

      Deflect if you want, even to a unionist party... but to one which doesn't even ALLOW the people of Scotland to decide it's future... nah.. that's a step too far.

      Abhainn

      Delete
    4. Go on Jenny, you can do it. Let Kezia guide you…

      Delete
    5. Well, a route to independence without a SNP-led government exists: They just have to be the only viable single partner for a Labour-led government. "You hold the referendum and we'll let you govern."

      Considering that Yes support has decoupled from the SNP vote, that'd be one way to go.

      Delete
    6. Pass the yoon-repellent please ... thank you.

      Delete
    7. Well, a route to independence without a SNP-led government exists: They just have to be the only viable single partner for a Labour-led government. "You hold the referendum and we'll let you govern."

      Considering that Yes support has decoupled from the SNP vote, that'd be one way to go.


      One of many reasons this would never happen is that, if the arithmetic was that tight, Scotland becoming independent would result in Labour losing their Westminster majority.

      Delete
  7. It would be a grave error of judgment for Kate Forbes to stand now. She needs to keep her powder dry til 2026. John Swinney is the ideal person to see us through to the Holyrood election.
    Why sacrifice Forbes at this point, before the GE, which isn’t going to go well regardless? By 2026 Operation Branchform will surely be over and clearer waters should lie ahead, and the real rebuilding can begin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry but that's completely bonkers. By 2026 there won't be much left for her to inherit. As I pointed out the other day, this isn't about "wouldn't it be lovely for Kate if she becomes leader one day, let's try to find the optimum moment for her". This is about the SNP choosing the best available leader for themselves right now so that they don't suffer avoidable election defeats.

      In any case, even if just looking at it from her own point of view, if she doesn't stand up to be counted now the narrative may move on without her.

      Delete
    2. Surely if Operation Branchform is a concern, Anon, the SNP should be looking to distance themselves as much as possible from the leadership who are implicated in it, not turning to somebody who was a senior part of that leadership.

      Delete
    3. It's imperative that the next SNP leader call a snap election - quickly. Not to do so could be fatal in the longer term, after the Westminster election happens and an exhausted zombie government limps into 2026, then is knocked out until 2031.

      Win or lose, a snap election is the only credible step forwards. If we win, well, that's another mandate for the pile and unionist momentum blunted. If we lose, it's only until 2026 because snap elections don't reset the term.

      I realise it's not an attractive proposition to Alba. Unfortunately, a HUGE Yes win in 2026 is the only way we're going to achieve independence before the 2030s.

      Neither Swinney nor Forbes can deliver that as the incumbent government. One of them could deliver it as the leader of the opposition.

      Delete
    4. Re: Kate’s timing. Until a few days ago I was arguing that she should wait. Something has tipped the balance since Humza’s resignation, though. I agree with James now that it could be now or never for her. The continuity faction have lost the plot and crossed into kamikaze country.


      @12;46. The SNP’s in no shape for fighting two elections this year, either.

      Delete
    5. @1:46, Its campaign machine is on stand-by for a Westminster election which is not important and during which it will be punished for not calling a Holyrood snap election.

      Fire it up and call that snap election. Win or lose, It'll put us in a better position to fight for those Westminster seats.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. I'm sorry but that's completely bonkers. By 2026 there won't be much left for her to inherit. As I pointed out the other day, this isn't about "wouldn't it be lovely for Kate if she becomes leader one day, let's try to find the optimum moment for her". This is about the SNP choosing the best available leader for themselves right now so that they don't suffer avoidable election defeats.

      I don't think people much care about what would be nice for KF personally, or at least I don't. The argument is that she's one of the few possible candidates who has some potential as party leader, and that if an electoral disaster happens at the start of her tenure it will give her opponents within and outwith the party ammunition against her and weaken her effectiveness from the off. That electoral disaster may or may not be avoidable - we'll never know - but it at least looks pretty likely. And if it happens and fatally wounds her we're stuck with Neil Gray or Jamie Hepburn.

      Delete
  8. I've had a few run ins wi Free Kirkers over the years - particularly on creationalism v evolution by natural selection. However , as far as I ken , Kate hasnae mentioned this. I'm inclined to trust to her common sense and hope that she will avoid makin a souch aboot sic matters.

    If it is Swinney v Forbes , I will vote fae Kate. Continuity won't cut it. Agus tha e math gu bheil Gaighlig aice.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why has Swinney not announced yet that he's standing?

    ReplyDelete
  10. If Kate Forbes believes she will ascend to heaven and remain there for the rest of eternity, it basically means she sees herself as immortal.

    That’s a pretty deluded state of mind for a potential leader of our country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I ask again: who do you think these pathetic insults are impressing?

      Delete
    2. When has Forbes ever stated that? It is not her state of mind that is deluded but that of the writer.

      Delete
    3. Because it’s all they’ve got. She’s demonstrably superior unless you clutch your pearls and insist that Muslims are atheist.

      Delete
    4. @Green

      Glè mhath. Feumaidh Alba Gàidhlig agus femuaidh sinn Ceitidh.

      Delete
    5. If Kate Forbes believes she will ascend to heaven and remain there for the rest of eternity, it basically means she sees herself as immortal.

      That’s a pretty deluded state of mind for a potential leader of our country.


      Well John Swinney is a member of the Kirk so it looks like whatever happens we're getting someone who believes that. So we should probably look at their other qualities

      Delete
    6. This is what all Christians believe.

      Delete
    7. Party leader: white!
      First Minister: white!

      Judging people by one single attribute is downright daft, as we have seen played out before us.

      Delete
    8. Party leader: white!
      First Minister: white!

      Judging people by one single attribute is downright daft, as we have seen played out before us.


      Then why is Anas Sarwar still leader of SLAB?

      Delete
  11. Apparently, Kenny Farquharson is descended from Edward Lear though, as you'd expect, the bloodlines naturally aren't legally registered!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kenny has a sureness of touch and is settling into the rôle. 😉

      Delete
    2. K F is a grade one vanker. Let’s leave it at that.

      Delete
  12. Local elections tomorrow, England. So what? Well, if Cons do better than expected, threat of an early election (I’m not buying… but threat) with Sunak in a positive of relative strength. Of it all goes wrong for them, threat of him calling one to forestall a leadership election.

    Will SNP close ranks and anoint a new leader (no prizes who) just to be on the safe side? Two obvious candidates could do a cosy deal. Going into a WM GE whilst having an internal
    Leadership contest would be best avoided.

    Brian

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's looking like Regan voted no confidence. Tsk tsk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Evidence please?

      Delete
    2. BBC reported the vote as 70-58.

      Tories, Lab and Libs have 57 between them. The SNP and Greens have 70.

      It'll be clear when the vote is added to the parliament website.

      Delete
    3. Ta for that. She and Alba are toast.

      Delete
  14. What would happen if Alison Johnstone resigned as Presiding Officer?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The SNP and Greens could vote Regan in. lol

      Delete
    2. Ronnie died years ago

      Delete
  15. I must say it wasn't pleasing to see Regan vote with the unionists

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If she did Alba are finished and so is she. She had a real opportunity. Have to conclude she is too stupid to see it and someone that stupid should be in a unionist party.

      Delete
    2. The website has been updated. Yes, Regan voted along with the unionists.

      Delete
    3. Maybe, you know, she had no confidence in the SNP to deliver independence

      Delete
    4. Abstain. Unless you are saying she has more confidence in the unionists. AH, right.

      Delete
  16. Okey-doke I’m going to go for this:

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/24292321.kate-forbes-john-swinney-hold-secret-talks-snp-leadership/

    Swinney as leader and FM, to stabilise the whole thing until after the GE, and Forbes as Finance Secretary again – where she did deal with anyone basically over the budget, including the pouter, errr, green party over the likes of council tax (they got another couple of hundred million).

    Forbes then perhaps coronated after the GE to take us all the way to Indy. Tout sweet Rodders.

    Make it so number 1.

    ReplyDelete