Obviously this is music to my ears, so I've been trying to work it through and see if it stacks up. One obvious complication is that power in Scotland is not determined solely or even primarily by what happens in Westminster elections. When the Holyrood election comes around in 2026, it won't be Labour trying to hold its vote at the end of a full term, it'll be the SNP trying to hold on after four full terms, which is a very different dynamic. In a worst case scenario where the wheels really come off for the SNP, it might destroy their credibility as the main opposition to Labour in the run-up to the next Westminster election.
However, if the SNP can at least remain competitive in 2026, it's true that they would be extremely well placed to benefit from any Labour slippage in 2028 or 2029. They are second in the vast majority of seats in Scotland. I would question, though, how confident we can be that Labour will drop back, because although they may not have increased their vote share at the end of any previous full term, they certainly more or less held their ground in 2001 when Tony Blair was re-elected, and in Scotland their vote actually increased in 2010 after three consecutive terms in office - albeit that may have been partly down to a personal vote for Gordon Brown. Luckily, in spite of the hype, there aren't many Scots at the beating heart of the new Labour government.
This is one of the reasons we need another independence party such as ALBA or ISP to be successful and by success I mean picking up about 8pc and one or two seats. The more we become like NI where UK politics becomes more irrelevant the better. This is why I think the SNP meltdown might turn out to be a good thing long term. On top of that they deserved it.
ReplyDeleteBut the SNP meltdown made us less like NI, not more like it.
DeleteThe SNP meltdown will continue for as long as Swinney and his merry band of Nicophytes are still in power. They are the problem. Their record in government is poor and only getting worse. And since Nicola bungled Indy with the UK "supreme" court ruling, everyone and their ginger dug knows the constitution's off the table.
DeleteIf any of this was going to change, we would have seen Kate on manoeuvres for a leadership challenge and recognisable faces calling directly for Swinney to step aside. The morning after the election and the weekend was the time to strike. Clearly, that's not happening, Swinney will tough it out, and so this clueless Scotgov is doomed to a bad defeat in 2026. That matters far more than bums on green leather London seats. Scotgov is Indy's best instrument—independent Scotland's government in waiting—and once the Brits have it back, we're humped until they're out again.
The optimist in me looks over at Biden in America. He's their tired old Swinney, doomed to a looming defeat that everyone can see. Will the Dems man up to shift him? Or will they death march right on into Trump's sweeping November victory? That's their problem, frankly, but either path offers a lesson for the SNP back here.
Make a change or go with the loser you know: you decide.
There really is a story beyond the obvious as I know screeds of pro indy people in their 30s and 40s who voted Labour but may come back to the snp in time. They didn't vote Labour in enthusiasm
ReplyDeleteTime is a healer and it may swing back.
Christ the venom against Labour in 2015 was more than the disappointment with the snp in 2024 and they came back.
In some ways it could be a blessing as it reminds everyone labour are not much better than the tories when they (inevitably) become unpopular.
ReplyDeleteI am convinced half of the battle is simply time makes the heart grow less fonder with political governments.
"In some ways it could be a blessing as it reminds everyone labour are not much better than the tories when they (inevitably) become unpopular."
DeleteI think the issue for SNP supporters though is that will take time and in the meantime there is a sentiment for 'change'. That we've replaced one Government who's been in power for 14 years, it's time to also replace the one who's been in power for 17.
That feeling for change will be difficult to combat against as the change via independence isn't on the horizon and without that it only leaves the change by removing the SNP from power.
Anon@5:02,
DeleteLabour will no doubt become less popular through time.
Whether they become as unpopular as the SNP though, I very much doubt it.
3 policies that will see that.
DeleteNhs privatisation (streeting & starmer have links to hedge fund owner, that owns a very private healthcare company)
Gaza
Seeing nothing improve overvnext 2 years. (Labour has said no new taxes to pay for service improvements)
Also worth keeping in mind though that it's perfectly possible for the SNP to do things over the next 2 years that are unpopular with the public adding onto the current sentiment that exists from the chaos over the last 2.
DeleteThere's also still things looming over the SNP, for example Operation Branchform hasn't yet concluded. It would take a lot for Labour to make themselves more unpopular than the SNP are atm.
2026 election is still 22 months away, lots of water to go under the bridge before then. We must concentrate on labour's failings in government in the next 2 years to trying and convince anyone who voted for them in 2024. I'm very confident with 2 years under his belt that John Swinney will not only win in 2026 but win with ease.
ReplyDeleteAre we going to need to put up with two years of "I'm confident John Swinney will win with ease" nonsense like we had to put up with "The SNP will not only win the election, I'm confident they'll gain seats!"?
DeleteBut but but ... what do the artistic licence ski slopes show?
DeleteAway and punch the air you headcase!
DeleteThe clown Declan is back.
DeleteDeclan isn't Skier. I know Skier's MO and indiosyncrasies well. It ain't him.
DeleteAnybody that thought there was even a remote chance of the SNP gaining seats at the GE flies with the birds.
DeleteDeclan is obviously a parody account. You'd have to be severely internet autistic to think it's Skier.
DeleteIf he was skier, there'd be charts.
DeleteLabour ran a campaign against the Tories that normally the SNP would have run, except they included the SNP in it
ReplyDeleteAll three governments were voted against, Wales Labour vote went down as people voted against them blaming them for the cost of living
Same in Scotland and England, SNP government blamed, Tory government blamed
The Labour vote was I think the second lowest in history making it appear that nobody actually really wanted Labour, it was just a case of punishing everybody or anybody for the cost of living
In no universe can the SNP come back in 2026, it doesn't matter what they do, the British and their Scottish allies have already combined to destroy the SNP
Trades unions in Scotland are set to strike for the next two years playing their part in efforts to take out the SNP
The Scottish voters being what they are will buy it and the SNP and all thoughts of independence will be gone for a very long time
Why do you want Scotland to be independent if you think its people are such thickos
DeleteAgree
DeleteBecause all humans the world over are just as "thick."
DeleteDemocracy's in a bad way right now because the only choices on offer on the ballot are those the political parties put there. Political parties have staffed up with spads, lobbyists and policy consultants, who all consider the general public to be a bunch of easily manipulated sheep best kept as far from policy as possible. They have weaponised focus groups, identified wedge issues, and penned us into convenient herds for their support. And you know what we can do about it? Spoil our ballot? Baa!
Government needs a lot of change, worldwide. We would do well to hold Citizen's Assemblies and write our constitution to require a referendum on major policy changes. Either we voters have the power, or they do.
With the right leader and a much more confrontational style that consistently highlights the significant benefits of Indy, and a unit dedicated to directly tackling the lies and disinformation of the BBC, it can be turned round.
ReplyDeleteYou'll see Alex Salmond on TV every week from now on in criticising the SNP even though he was completely wiped out in the GE
DeleteThis is OT but this headline from the National if correct:
ReplyDelete"Alba use Holyrood motion to pressure SNP to mitigate Labour's two-child benefit cap "
is sheer stupidity by Alba. THAT is a Unionist tactic for one, and secondly shows an absolute ignorance of the budgetary constraint of the ScotGov - any ScotGov - with devolution.
Salmond at it again
DeleteWith votes at 16 and the fact the Tory/Brexit vote is ageing. And if the divided vote on the right persists...the future is hard to predict!
ReplyDeleteAll of Scotland's public services are set to strike without end till 2026
ReplyDeleteWho will the voters blame? it won't be Westminster, and when it is you won't hear it on the news
Just Scotland?
DeleteIf anybody can do it John Swinney can.
ReplyDeleteJohn Swinney has hit the ground running.
Nicola Sturgeon has pointed out that Swinney is best placed to unite the party and progress independence.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
DeleteThat's like Tony Blair saying that Keir Starmer has hit the ground running.
DeleteSwinney hit the ground with his face. That counts too, right?
DeleteThe UKGE was a vote against the Tories. Noe the job is done, 2026 will not be a vote against the SNP.
ReplyDeleteThat would be a good argument to make except for the fact that in England Labour's vote share decreased from 2019, whereas in Scotland it increased significantly. In fact, Scotland is probably the only part of the UK where you can say that Labour won the election rather than the Tories losing it.
DeleteIf you want the SNP to retain power in 2026, it doesn't help to put your head in the sand and delude yourself into believing that the only reason the SNP lost so badly was just because Labour was seen as being the only way to get the Tories out. Labour's gains in Scotland were a direct result of shifting voter support from the SNP to Labour..
Nope, that is incorrect, half a million votes not cast tells a different story
Delete2019: SNP 1,242,380 votes LAB 511,838 votes = + 731,000
Delete2024 SNP 724,758 votes LAB 851,897 votes = - 127,000
2024 - LAB have a small majority in votes, large one in seats.
Not a lot in it.
AND in a PR system votes are much more important than for Westminster. A Labour lead of 5% for Westminster is well within striking range for the SNP to surpass. The real risk is that the SNP is the largest party but other unionist parties, or even the Greens, may ally with a second placed Labour Party to make Starwar FM. I believe Sarwar has been allying himself with the Tories in councils to make people accepting of the Tories voting with Labour to stop Swinney being FM and appointing Sarwar FM
DeleteYI2:
DeleteAs your numbers also show: Labour UP 300k votes, SNP DOWN 500k votes.
Turnout was higher in 2019—that election, if you recall, felt like a direct assault on Boris Johnson's Tory government, and I voted SNP once again to arm Nicola to demand our referendum. But it's also true that Labour gained votes while everyone else (bar Reform) sank. People shifted TO them.
Many of those votes were direct SNP to Labour switchers. It's exactly as Rutherglen showed us all those months ago. They are the group that should terrify the SNP: Labour voters tired of the SNP and returning home. They will be the story of the 2026 election, too. Win them back or kiss Scotgov goodbye.
Interesting. I presently don't have a clear opinion on how the mess created by our politicians will fall out.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime I urge activists to keep a watchful eye on the parties, of course, but to put as much effort as possible into building the strength of the, non party political, independence movement and to keep that movement under the political control of it's active supporters.
There is no independence movement though, there's only a bunch of do nothing moaners
DeleteAunt Val says the same and I agree with her and you.
Delete"There is no independence movement though, there's only a bunch of do nothing moaners"
DeleteWho have been vindicated.
You an disregard criticisms of the SNP as just being "moaners" all you like but if you're still doing it after the disastrous election results you'll just reap what you sow.
Stu Campbell agrees, too:
Delete"the grassroots Yes movement doesn’t really even exist any more in any tangible sense. (If you doubt that, try getting it to go on a march.)"
Here's my view: the indy movement only ever exists when there's an event for us to participate in. 2014 was the mother of all events: we spent the year talking up indy and hitting the streets, because Indy was palpably in sight. When we lost indyref, we were reduced to campaigning in elections—which the SNP of course made all about mandates for indy, but didn't warn us they never meant it. Throw in a dwindling calendar of ever-less-attended marches and that's where we are: a movement without a practical purpose. We are rebels with a cause: INDEPENDENCE! But where's our leadership? We ourselves are just regular Scots like everyone else, we have no electoral mandate like the politicians who have so poorly led us. So you see us losing enthusiasm and patience.
Like it or not, Scottish independence won't be brought about by a popular revolution. We will do it by peaceful democratic means. That, alas, means we need inspirational political leadership. We can't just do it by brute force and enthusiasm for ourselves.
Ah but we don't need leadership apparently, any criticism regarding our elected leaders and their strategy is just you moaning!
DeleteWe just all need to get out there, chap some doors and er... tell people on the doorstep that independence might happen one day or might not. Who knows. But they should care about it regardless!
It's almost mythic, isn't it? The Yes Movement is the greatest weapon in Scottish politics, but we can only be wielded by a leader of true spirit! Otherwise, there's nothing we can do, without our story's fated hero…
Delete+1,000,000 Yessers don't vote SNP so unless and until the SNP addresses that fact, or leaves the field, we're not going anywhere soon where Indy is concerned.
ReplyDeleteMore's the pity.
Well, if in 2026 the SNP got 50.1% for constituencies and 50.1% for the list, in a de facto referendum, which could actually happen with some courage, here's a possible scenario:
Deletehttps://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2021s&cSNP=50.1&cCON=12.89&cLAB=27.19&cLD=6.94&rSNP=50.1&rCON=12.46&rLAB=19.2&rGRN=8.11&rLD=5.05&rALBA=1.65&rAFU=0.86#Scotland
SNP Win 21 seat majority with 75 seats. 65 Constituency and 10 on the list.
For the SNP to get 2/3 of the seats at Holyrood, you'd need the SNP to get 59% on constituency and 59% on the list. 70 Constituency, 17 on the list.
Bye bye Union, and good riddance.
Yep. And pigs might fly given last week's performance.
DeleteYou said "+1,000,000 Yessers don't vote SNP"
Deletewhich is about correct compared to the 50% YES support with a large turnout. And then you said: "so unless and until the SNP addresses that fact"
As I said: "in a de facto referendum". If that is why 1,000,000 YESsers didn't vote SNP last week, then a de facto ref in 2026 may be the answer.
Great to see Flynn reelected as Westminster leader. He commands respect in the House.
ReplyDeleteWhich benefits Scotland how, exactly?
DeleteFlynn is there to settle in, not settle up. His ambition is probably to be Speaker in 2046.
DeleteGreat turn of phrase. So original. Any proposals for progressing the Indy cause? Thought not.
DeleteAnonymouse squeak squeak at 12.42. I already suggested whaty to do about progressing the Indy cause, here it is again:
DeleteIf in 2026 the SNP got 50.1% for constituencies and 50.1% for the list, in a de facto referendum, which could actually happen with some courage, here's a possible scenario:
https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2021s&cSNP=50.1&cCON=12.89&cLAB=27.19&cLD=6.94&rSNP=50.1&rCON=12.46&rLAB=19.2&rGRN=8.11&rLD=5.05&rALBA=1.65&rAFU=0.86#Scotland
SNP Win 21 seat majority with 75 seats. 65 Constituency and 10 on the list.
No worries, don't mention it, glad to help.
As you clearly do not even understand the question it’s no surprise you can’t provide an answer. Squeak squeak? What age are you? No need to try to o answer this question. Dismissed.
DeleteAnonymouse squeak squeak at 5.35. You said "Thought not."
DeleteThought made a fool of you.
So you are actually infantile. Away out and play in the fresh air. You’re one of the widely recognised half wits on this blog. Stop embarrassing yourself.
DeleteGreat to see Flynn reelected as Westminster leader. He won't be SNP leader as long as he's stuck in the wrong parly!
DeleteNow that Stewart McDonald's out the way—HA HA! GIRFUY!—Flynn's the one who's making all the wrong noises about independence strategy. He'd be well positioned to take the Gradualist baton after Swinney if he weren't stuck in the wrong place to take the leadership. I'd much rather he was a roadblock down the road than in Holyrood.
Anonymouse squeak squeak at 11.33.
DeleteI realise you're rightly very lonely and need social intercourse, but I'm sorry, I'm not a counsellor. Ask the penguin nicely!
Many have lost heart that it's possible. Sturgeon took us up a blind alley and then ran away. Now moans we can't get a legal referendum. Tactics to pressure were all wrong and she should take responsibility.
ReplyDeleteGoing to court without a plan b she was willing to pursue was frankly a disgrace to the thousands of Scots who have carried this cause for centuries.
Nicola Sturgeon put her all into independence. She does not deserve criticism.
DeleteI was a fan but the reply to this comment is complete nonsense. She deserves criticism for taking us up a blind alley without a plan b. Whatever else she did, this is unforgivable in my opinion.
DeleteWe are where we are though and need to move on. How we do that from her needless cul de sac though, which has taken the teeth out of the movement is anyone's guess.
I'm a positive person by nature and surely there is a way but it's difficult to see. Scots don't see Independence path themselves now, which is a problem in itself. We can go hard on it, we probably should, but our people need to believe in the path too. Without the belief, we look farcical banging on about it.
Nicola Sturgeon was very clear on ITV that the way forward is a de facto.
DeleteWhich it obviously is! But they way she's gone about it, and her cronies not enough people believe in it. You don't go to supreme court and then run away from the only route left. You go to the court when you're prepared to take it. The delay means people lose faith in it and the weapon is stunted. Poorest tactics from an intelligent person I've seen in a long long time and, frankly, a disgrace to the cause.
Delete"Nicola Sturgeon was very clear on ITV that the way forward is a de facto"
DeleteWhy didn't she pursue that when she was First Minister though?
It was clear multiple elections ago that a Section 30 referendum wasn't going to happen and she had the capability to change the strategy but didn't.
Not only that but she didn't even consult, unite and three line whip the defacto among her own party,.never mind the movement more widely.
DeleteYou had people like Stewart Mcdonald and Mcpherson briefing against it and the greens and alba unaware.
Complete disgrace.
You absolutely do not take the movement to an unfriendly court without the movement ready to take on the ultimate step if required. Even worse to then run away afterwards. A folly.
We now have people in our own cause, never mind the Scottish people, finding the defacto route difficult. The narrative around it could have been developed so much better. I'm seething.
DeleteThe S C case was to ensure the unionists didn’t have control of time frame, but events then overtook N S. I have explained this before and cannot be arsed doing so again.
DeleteWouldn't it have been wiser to press ahead with holding a referendum via the Scottish Parliament and forcing the UK Government to challenge it in the Supreme Court?
DeleteThat perception alone of the UK Government being the ones to go to court to prevent democracy from taking place would have worked more in our favour.
That court case, which she undermined as we all complained by choosing a unionist lord advocate to make it, and her response to it: "CHARRRRRGE!" then tumbleweed, that's when I lost my faith in her.
DeleteI can understand poor judgement. Maybe she just had bad taste in friends? Maybe she couldn't see the obvious problems in them, blinded by personal loyalty? Maybe she thought, for whatever fanciful reason, the court would say Yes?
But when their NO! response came, and she announced a plebiscite election, THEN DID NOT DO IT, that's when I got angry and scunnered with her. When she quit some months later and installed a stooge as the next leader, I was done with the lot of them.
Nicola is as much an ally of independence now as George Fawkes. Mark my words, they're two trolls in a pod.
"The S C case was to ensure the unionists didn’t have control of time frame, but events then overtook N S. I have explained this before and cannot be arsed doing so again. "
DeletePlease explain to this me as I don't get it.
The timing matters not if you go through to supreme court and are not prepared to follow through come what may.
Also, within minutes (pre isla bryson, arrests and general calamnity).you had supposed close allies briefing against and the rest of the movement caught unawares. How NOT do it.
I liked the women but get your head straight. She took us there for her own electibility in a certain time, not for the greater good of the cause. Shocking doesn't cover it.
This concentration on the past and what Sturgeon did or didn't do or whether
ReplyDeleteshe supported a defacto or no is interesting as history. Maybe history can help us decide how to go forward or not .
However , we do need to move on. Using an election as a defacto referendum seems to be the only way forward.
Let's do it.
Have a wee word with John Swinney in that case.
DeleteThe wider movement, Alba etc have been onboard with a defacto referendum for quite some time. It's the SNP who need convincing.
John Swinney has been very clear that we should not focus on mechanisms. Rather, we should focus on building up support.
DeleteSo after we build up support what happens then?
DeleteHumza stated that the union would melt away when support for independence was built up.
Delete"So after we build up support what happens then?"
DeleteJohn Swinney has been clear that to focus on mechanisms is the wrong approach.
Okay.
DeleteStage 1: Build up support.
Stage 2: ???
It's an important question to answer.
Once support is built up the mechanism will come. Don't put the mechanism cart before the support horse.
DeletePeople have to *believe* in something to support it. Without a route, no one's buying it.
DeleteI’ve been asking for days what the mechanism is. No one can give a specific answers.
Delete"Once support is built up the mechanism will come"
DeleteHow?
Does a magic genie appear to grant us three wishes when we reach a certain level of support?
Anon@11:29, am a wee bit concerned support hasnae built up since 2014, despite years o the tories an Brexit!
DeleteYou can't separate mechanism from support. People won't support a fanciful notion they can't believe in.
DeleteAnother example is Universal Basic Income. Remember that idea? It's a lovely notion for a quality of life based economy, but the very notion of "the state pays you to live your life however you want" begs the question "HOW do they afford that!?" and puts people off.
Back in 2014, we had to sell people on the vision of independence.
Now, we have to sell them on the ROUTE as well.
It doesn't get easier with time.
Without a mechanism we might as well be campaigning to replace the House of Lords with an elected chamber.
DeleteWe probably could get a lot of people to agree that an elected second chamber is a good idea... but how would we turn that into a reality afterwards?
In order to win people over on an idea you need to also be able to convince them that it's actually possible to put into practice.
Lords reform is easy for the WM government to do. They can force it through by the Parliament Act. It would be a battle, but they have the numbers and ultimately the legal supremacy to do it.
DeleteWe have none of those things re: independence. So, actually, ours is the harder argument to make, by far.
Britnat alert at 10.09 . The colonial masters will keep encouraging the likes of him/ her to try to undermine us but we're no that daft.
ReplyDeleteAm no daft enough to think independence is a gid idea a Ken that.
DeleteKC's been watching Rab C. Nesbitt for research. Good on him!
DeleteIf labour gets power in holyrood
ReplyDeleteSay goodbye to ..
free prescriptions
eye tests,
bus pass for over 60s and under 22 year olds
Scottish water remaining publicly owned
No tuition fees
Scotrail remaining publicly owned
Say hello to
privatisation of NHS Scotland services
More Privatisation of council services
In other words take away everything that shows Scotland does better than England. And make everything as shite as England.
Why would that happen?
DeleteIn Wales for example Labour have maintained free prescriptions, protected NHS services from privatisation, and supported public ownership of essential services.
They would also want to make themselves look good and by being in power at Westminster as well they could leverage their position there to implement policies and allocate resources that make their governance at Holyrood more successful.
By all means campaign for the SNP but don't use the unionist tactic of project fear, that's not how you'll give them a chance of retaining power. If Labour use the positive campaign of "change" and you try and combat that with a negative campaign they'll win easily.
If—and it's a big if—the likely future Labour Scotgov really proves so friendly and effective here, they will be a mortal threat to the SNP, whichever way it chooses to campaign. A great many folk care more about effective government than independence, as proven consistently in polling.
DeleteWhat got the SNP into Bute House in the first place was Labour's ineffectiveness in government. What lost us indyref was our inability to persuade the people that independence would lead to good, effective government. We lost on the details, just as Labour had done before us.
Back to that big If, then. When I look at Anas and his team, what comes to mind isn't good governance, it's "good luck!"
Should rich people get free university tuition?
DeleteAnon 11.22. Yet another Tory/ britnat argument. YES they should and they should pay mair tax.
DeleteExactly right. 11:29. Means testing is a wasteful nuisance. All benefits should be automatic and for all. We solve the wealth iniquity in taxes, which can go a hell of a lot higher than just child benefit, prescription charges and tuition fees!
DeleteLabour will come for the remaining oil , our renewables , build nuclear power stations and pipe oor water doon tae England in dry periods . That and pump hydro will ruin the ecology of oor lochs- including Ness that has mair watter than all the lakes doon sooth.
DeleteAnon at 11.22. Completely the wrong question.
DeleteAnon@11:29,
DeleteHere in Scotland we kan a aboot payin mair tax. We pay mair income tax than England already.
Anon@10:34,
DeleteLOL🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
People need to stop gabbling in Latin (because they think it looks clever? It doesn't if you know what the words mean), and call it a single issue election campaign, because that's what the opponents would call it, and they would have a point. And it really would have to be a single-issue campaign (about holding a referendum) - if it included anything about the NHS or housing it would just be a normal election campaign. Whether or not that would prove to be overwhelmingly more popular than anything else is disputable.
ReplyDeleteDear me - for a start referendum is Greek , dinnae ken aboot defacto.
DeleteEverybody kens fine it needs to be single issue they're no daft. Perhaps you think we are? Another Britnat are you?
A didnae Ken a boot “de facto” either. Never heard the expression afore til Scot nats started usin it.
DeleteI think that 'referendum' is a Latin derivative, but everyone knows what it means. If ya dinnae ken fit 'de facto' means either look it up or don't use it and ask other people notto baffle you. Ditto for 'plebiscite'.
DeleteLatin expressions are embedded in our language. No reason to stop using them if they are used Correctly. And a de facto referendum would be used to highlight the significant improvement across a whole range if issues that Indy will bring. Energy costs and NHS for starters. It’s not difficult unless you are actually opposed to it.
ReplyDelete