Apologies for disappearing for a few days - it was mainly because I spent much of Monday composing my written submission in response to the so-called "disciplinary" action that Chris McEleny has taken against me, and that will at long last be heard by Alba's Disciplinary Committee next Thursday evening. It took me about five or six hours to write it, so I was still mentally exhausted yesterday! For months now, I've had to live with the very real possibility that Mr McEleny will succeed in persuading the Disciplinary Committee to expel me from the party - because if that is his aim (as I suspect it is), I know all too well that he'll be pushing at an open door due to the committee's rock-solid leadership-loyalist majority. Since the early part of this year, the committee has effectively functioned solely as a rubberstamp for Mr McEleny's deepest desires, which have had nothing to do with punishing genuine wrongdoing by Alba members, but have been almost exclusively about weaponising the party's disciplinary machinery against anyone who has irritated or angered the leadership. Those who have drawn attention to the disturbingly irregular nature of last year's internal Alba elections have been a particular target for the leadership's campaign of revenge. In my own case, I seem to be in the firing line mainly because of the strong stand I've been taking in favour of democratisation of the party. That suspicion is not allayed by the almost comically threadbare nature of the official charge sheet against me - I'm effectively facing trial-by-vagueness, or trial-by-please-someone-fill-in-the-blanks-because-we-can't-actually-think-of-a-plausible-official-reason-for-expelling-this-guy.
So I've had plenty of time to ponder which political party I would apply to join (or to try to help to set up) if Alba do expel me next week - I very much hope it doesn't come to that, but I want to have a contingency plan in place in case it does. Unfortunately it's not a straightforward decision - there are pros and cons attached to each option. But Kezia Dugdale's latest controversial column for the Courier, in which she argues for an SNP-Labour coalition government after 2026, may flag up one of the strongest arguments in favour of applying to rejoin the SNP. Although the SNP leadership would be under no obligation to consult party members on forming a new coalition, it would be very difficult for them not to do so, due to the precedent set by the 2021 consultation on entering into the ill-fated coalition with the Greens. OK, that consultation was an example of rule-by-managed-plebiscite, because from memory it produced an almost North Korean/Alba-style 80%+ vote in favour of coalition. But I suspect there would be a much more competitive vote if the proposition was coalition with a unionist party. It goes without saying that if I was an SNP member I would vote against coalition with Labour, except in the very unlikely circumstances that Labour made substantive concessions on progress towards independence.
I remain highly sceptical about whether such a coalition will even be seriously discussed after the 2026 election, let alone come into being. The only reason we have to treat Ms Dugdale's column with a touch of seriousness is that she's married to Jenny Gilruth, the SNP Government's Education Secretary, and it's therefore possible that Ms Gilruth may share her views. But not necessarily - if the two of them agreed about absolutely everything they would be members of the same party. And I certainly see no evidence that Ms Dugdale's views are shared by the Labour leadership - if anything her column seems to be a despairing plea for her own former party to change its attitude. The overwhelming likelihood is that Anas Sarwar will be looking for one of two outcomes in 2026 - either a) to form an exclusively unionist coalition government with himself as First Minister, or b) to become the hardline Brit Nat opposition to a significantly weakened SNP minority government.
I think 'b' is much more likely.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you believe would likely happen if the arithmetic after the next Holyrood election doesn't give the SNP + Greens a majority and neither does Labour + Greens + Lib Dems?
ReplyDeleteNo other Party will work with Reform UK and it's unlikely the Tories will matter either way.
The largest single party would form a minority government. It would be a similar scenario to 2007, when no coalition was really arithmetically viable (except maybe SNP + Lib Dem + Green, but the Lib Dems weren't remotely interested).
DeleteThere was considerable more good will in 2007 though. Things are a lot more partisan and divisive now.
DeleteDifficult to see certain parties willing to work together even if it's just supporting a budget.
Indeed. There has to be the numbers in Holyrood for a First Minister to be elected, in the first place. Just what would stop Labour from voting against (whoever leads) the SNP in that situation? Sarwar would be dancing on the SNP Scotgov's grave alongside Cole-Hamilton, peeing themselves in glee!
DeleteNo, no. There will be a price.
Price or not, a government has to be formed, and if only the SNP have the numbers, Labour would either have to accept that, or pay their own price by angering voters with a needless re-run of the election.
DeleteLabour would go with dissolving the parliament for another election, if they aren't in first place. Their friends in the media will help it all appear to be the "petty, independence-mad" SNP's fault, and it may even work.
DeleteAn SNP minority government in those circumstances is really in for it from all sides. Labour can at least rely on their fellow unionists, including maybe even Reform, to abstain or support them when push comes to shove. All unionists have a shared interest in toppling the nationalist Scotgov. But not much more than that.
Anon at 6.03. Agree with you. MSM and BBC would go into overdrive to persuade people that the need for another election was the fault of SNP. And we know from recent election results that a good proportion of the Scottish electorate are susceptible to the lies and disinformation that is churned out on a daily basis. There is also no shortage of useful idiots that actively undermine the S G and SNP despite claiming to be pro Indy.
DeleteThe SG and SNP undermine themselves. They don’t need any help from anybody else. For example, Labour give them an open goal regarding the Winter Fuel Payment and they don’t even shoot. Or the SNP losing £600k. All their own fault.
DeleteAnon at 8.12. Do try to keep up. The S G is currently looking at ways of mitigating the impact of AWF having been removed by Westminster. And whether the S G and SNP undermine themselves or not, the useful idiots remain.
Delete8:12, Certainly the SNP relies on useful idiots like you to defend them no matter what blunders they make or lies they tell.
Delete“Ways of mitigating” - you just pay it as before. You keep up. It’s that simple. Why do you people keep making excuses for their wrong decisions. You are an idiot who is of no use.
DeleteAnon at 11.46 and 11.47. Same ad hominen attacks. Nothing else to offer. Clearly didn’t know what the S G were already doing behind the scene. Proving my point.
DeleteIt's a no brainer - a de facto referendum on independence is the answer.
ReplyDeleteYeah the way I see it the SNP need to either go all in with independence. Anything else they'll likely lose power.
DeleteThe day the SNP gets back to de facto indyref is the day they'll have my vote again.
DeleteSad to say, though, I just can't see it with this leadership. They'd prefer to go down to an "honourable" Devolutionist defeat than prosper with Indy.
Yes. In 1918 in Ireland.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Ireland
And probably loads of others too - parties elected on the basis they'll get Independence. Like the SNP of course ...
De facto is just how elections work. If independence is your manifesto, and you win outright, we have won our referendum.
DeleteBut KC knows that. He also knows who he is, when he next pops up to ask just that!
Mrs Mortimer agrees with yesindyref at 5.59 but is appalled by the words of Anonymous at 6.06.
DeleteMrs Mortimer always wants to say thar Anonymous has far too much to say for himself or herself as he or she seems to be posting up messages every 5 minutes and sometimes seems to disagree with himself or herself.
Mrs Mortimer can't understand how Anonymous finds the time to write these messages and wishes he or she would try to be consistent.
Message ends.
Continuation.
DeletePS. Mrs Mortimer is 'mad for it'.
Message ends.
No de facto referendum then the SNP will not get my vote. SNP trolls don't like it - tough. I voted SNP for independence nothing else. Under Sturgeon they have been a phoney party of independence and that is worse than any up front Britnat party.
DeleteSome SNP idiots are actually hoping Sturgeon comes back as leader - if it happens it will be probably be as transman Nicholas Sturgeon and he will claim to be a new person who has learned from his mistakes and will set a new date for Indyref2 - 19/10/33 - no ifs no buts this time - honest.
Mrs Mortimer wants to know if you're nuts.
DeleteKC has a fictitious wife who wears Union Jack knickers.
DeleteAs far as Alba are concerned, this thing of theirs with you is utter stupidity. The way the SNP are acting over this Winter Fuel Payment leaves an open door for Alba to take a wodge of votes - and with Salmond sadly departed he is no longer a factor for good or bad. But they're blowing it with utter lack of democracy and accountability with their own members. From the National:
ReplyDeletehttps://archive.is/dAddf
"In a new survey commissioned by the Alba Party and carried out by Find Out Now, 69.7% of people said that the Scottish Government was wrong to replicate the UK Government's decision [WFP]."
And to be lazy, taking the caption from the photo rather than another reference:
"Shirley-Anne Somerville said the Scottish Government had no choice but to end the universal benefit after Westminster took an axe to it"
YES they have a choice - it's why I voted YES in 1979 and again in 1997 for DEVOLUTION since Independence wasn't on the agenda. It's devolved you utter incompetent moron or liar, you have a choice because of my YES vote in 1997, and that of the other 1,775,044 voters who also voted YES. For devolution to give Ministers of the Scottish Government the choice - the choice you say doesn't exist.
And no, for the inevitable troll, I'm not paid to decide what else gets cut instead - that's why a moron like Somerville is paid eye-watering amounts of money.
The SNP will not get my vote in 2026 unless they explain that they:
a) lied when they said they had no choice, or
b) were wrong, they have the choice but prefer to blame Westminster which fools absolutely nobody outside their moronic ivory tower of incompetent dishonest mendacity.
And also pay the dam thing - it's the only way you won't sink below 20% of the vote in 2026 and become the "rump" party you act like.
Mmm, I enjoyed that.
When there's a political will the money can be found.
DeleteAnyone who says "what would you cut instead" is just offering excuses. We can't have our cake and eat it where whenever something good happens it's down to the excellent SNP led Scottish Government and whenever something bad happens it's purely down to the money not being available for it/Westminster.
That mentality means failure can never happen which is ridiculous.
Somerville is an excellent example of everything that's wrong with the SNP. Tin-eared and purposefully ignorant, yet permanently in government, we thought we'd seen the back of her kind when we threw Labour out in 2007!
DeleteHello. HELLO! You aren't the Minister for Scowls and Northern Britain. Pull your fingers out your ears and listen to the creative thinking Scotland is famous for!
"Mmm, I enjoyed that" .... well at least somebody did.
DeleteOh Francis, you're terrible
DeleteGood post yesindyref2.
DeleteSomerville is only in government because she is Sturgeon's pal. The fact that this person was actually in charge of the education of Scotland's children was a disgrace. A person with low values and limited ability.
Not sure I would agree. Shirley-Anne Somerville has a good reputation as a hard working and effective person who gets on with the job. Nicola liked her for good reasons.
DeleteAt last some self reflection from ifs. A person with low values and limited ability.
DeleteNicola liked her but it wasn’t for good reasons.
DeleteCan you switch off your brain and haud yer wheesht when tellt? Will ye sign off the accounts without reading them? Can you say Yes Boss a thousand times with the lights out?
DeleteThen Nicola likes you.
Anas addresses this on Ponsonby Massie.
ReplyDeleteNice try. Nobody's going to listen to it.
DeleteWhat did he say? What's the price for a ride on Labour?
DeleteSAS is one of many in the SNP who seem to have lost interest completely. When their rainbow purge of Scotland was in full stride they were everywhere enthusiastically spouting their nonsense. Now most of their daft ideas have been kicked into the long grass and they have to concentrate on boring stuff like the economy, housing, health (not just for ladyboys) and education (not just teaching five year olds about ladyboys) they seem lost, detached and without purpose.
ReplyDeleteThe whole party is lost, detached and without purpose, as the whole point of the SNP is independence. Without that—we all know they are now 100% without that—they are a bland, decrepit, top-down copy of the Labour Party.
DeleteAll that structure, process (leadership says "no") and careerism was a necessary sin when they first came into power in Holyrood. You can't run a Scotgov—or even a Scottish Executive—without a lot of suits. But it has gradually taken over the soul of the party. Once Salmond was forced out, there was no one with sufficient will and passion for Indy to replace them.
So Scotland is blessed with two Labour Parties now. Twa borin' soulless cheeks.
Vote SNLP. Anas Flynn for leader!
DeleteSometimes, nuclear holocaust or climate apocalypse don't seem so bad.
That reminds me. The YES flag is blue and white like the Saltire. Not a multi-coloured swap shop. The YES movement should take back our flag.
ReplyDelete