When will it go all wrong for the SNP?

[westv]

What is a native Scot of Scottish descent? How many Scottish grannies do I need? Given that population growth in Scotland depends on net immigration, they must be a diminishing share of the population. According to the dear ex-leader: 'it doesn't matter where you come from, if Scotland is your home and you live here and you feel you have a stake in the country, you are Scottish' (2017), but for many blood-and-soil nationalists that is not enough.

I see it this way.
If you aren't born in one of the home countries you can become 100% British (because there is a British passport) but you can't officially become English, Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish. If any of the home countries gained independence and issued their own passport then you would become, say, Welsh if if you gained a Welsh passport.
As it stands, if I ever moved to Scotland there is no way I would ever consider myself Scottish. I would be an Englishman in Scotland.

 

[oldman]

I embrace people’s pride in their linage, whatever that may be.

The point is that as more and more people have multiple lineages there are fewer with exclusively Scottish lineage.

What right would I, or anyone have, to say they are not Scottish?

None, if that is what they feel they are. I think though that some nationalists are a bit quick to claim recent arrivals for Scots, as with the Ukrainian refugees. When people move to another country they may gradually adopt a new sense of national identity, but not always and not as suddenly as your nationalist propaganda says.

Ugh. Abhorrent.

If your previous paragraph is a sly attempt to imply that I am a racist, that is indeed abhorrent.

 

[Wynd]

The point is that as more and more people have multiple lineages there are fewer with exclusively Scottish lineage.

None, if that is what they feel they are. I think though that some nationalists are a bit quick to claim recent arrivals for Scots, as with the Ukrainian refugees. When people move to another country they may gradually adopt a new sense of national identity, but not always and not as suddenly as your nationalist propaganda says.


If your previous paragraph is a sly attempt to imply that I am a racist, that is indeed abhorrent.

What exactly is your point? That Scotland is becoming less Scottish, or is it some Slytherin-esque pureblood style argument around who is truly Scottish?
I can't help but feel that you are the blood and soil type in this discussion.
Even if Scotland is becoming more "diluted" as you so disgracefully put it, what is your conjecture? That Scotlands culture and identity are somehow less relevant, or valid as a result? That we should be less respectful of the culture and languages of Scotlands people?
What exactly are you driving at here?

My nationalist propaganda? Are you ok? Do you want to be taken seriously in this discussion, or not?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Embracing people who want to settle and put their efforts in to building the nation has been a one way bet for the last 200 years.

Nothing wrong with embracing people who want to settle. But there's a distinction between doing that and using people who may or may not want to settle for propaganda purposes, Describing Ukrainian refugees (who presumably came here with the intention of returning to Ukraine after the war there ends) as 'New Scots' at a political rally aimed at promoting independence does give the feel to me of the latter.

Raises that awful cliche that is doing the rounds, the one about people with certain complexions, being repeatedly asked, "...yes, you said you were born in London, but where are you really from?"

Has that actually happened on a regular basis? That question is clearly self-contradictory, which makes it an unlikely thing to ask - and I for one have never heard of it actually happening. So my suspicion is that it's a cliche of something that actually doesn't happen (or maybe happened once when someone's words came out wrong or something and keyboard warriors then jumped on it)

Ugh. Abhorrent.

Whether it's abhorrent depends on the motivations. It would be abhorrent if someone said that as a deliberate attempt at racism or to belittle someone. It would not be if (plausibly) someone simply said it by mistake, meaning to say something different.

 

[Wynd]

Nothing wrong with embracing people who want to settle. But there's a distinction between doing that and using people who may or may not want to settle for propaganda purposes, Describing Ukrainian refugees (who presumably came here with the intention of returning to Ukraine after the war there ends) as 'New Scots' at a political rally aimed at promoting independence does give the feel to me of the latter.

Ah, so we are supposed to be calling them "New Brits" and having them sing GSTK and pleage alliegenace, or is it feilty, to Charles 3rd.

Got it! Glad we finally got there.

To get back to reality, if said citizens want to declare themselves a Scottish, becasue they feel they have been embraced and supporrted in coming to Scotland, whats the issue?

That they see their loyalty first to Scotland and not England, or Britain? I can imagine a number of Unionsits taking umbrige at that, among other oddities like their opposition to Gaelic, but it doenst make it any more robust, or sane, or even credible as an argument.

Its an argument resting on a shoogly peg, and thats being nice about it.

The other part of this is, political party takes advantage of citizens saying things it wants to promote. A line that can be applied to all parties, across the political spectrum and constitutional aisle.

Is it only an objectionable thing when its the Yes side that does it?

The word propganda keeps coming up. I just want to check that its being applied equally.

Vote No to stay in the EU.
Vote No for lower food, energy and mortgage bills.
Vote No because the oil is running out.
Vote No for the broad shoulders of the UK supporing Scotland.
Vote No for AAA Credit Ratings and lower debt interest bills.
Vote No to keep your UK pensions safe.
Vote No for the stability and security of the Pound. (Which is now 25% lower than where it was in 2014, $1.64 vs $1.22)
Vote No for better safter, faster change.
Vote No to be an equal and valued partner in the Union. (No laughing at the back...)
Vote No beasue we are Better Together, despite Ireland, Norway, Finland, Sweeden, Denmark, and even Iceland getting ahead of you economically and financially despite you possessing significanlty more welath than a number of them?

Is this also propoganda?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Ah, so we are supposed to be calling them "New Brits" and having them sing GSTK and pleage alliegenace, or is it feilty, to Charles 3rd.

Got it! Glad we finally got there.

Actually, I fear you've completely missed the point of what I was saying. It's not about Scots vs. Brits or anything like that: It would be equally unacceptable if - say, hypothetically - Rishi Sunak grabbed some Ukrainian refugees and used them in a some patriotic British propaganda, declaring them as 'New Brits'. The point is that it seems wrong to be using refugees to score political points like that. And in the particular case of Ukrainians, it seems particularly inappropriate because those refugees came to the UK on the assumption that the UK is a temporary refuge until it becomes safe to return to Ukraine - where most of them will likely have families, or maybe husbands etc. fighting in the army. So it seems unlikely that many Ukrainians arrived here wishing to view themselves first and foremost as citizens of any part of the UK (although it's possible after a couple of years some may subsequently come to feel they want to settle here).

The one thing I would notice particularly about the Scottish Independence campaign is that it seems rather unlikely that a Ukrainian refugee would arrive in the UK fully dedicated to Scottish Independence and determined to see themselves as a citizen of Scotland rather than of the UK - as seems to be being implied by Humza Yousaf's declaration.

 

[Wynd]

If its a point centred around political opportunism, youll get no argument from me. Its what politicians do, a fact of life. Its not great.

It hasnt always looked like that however, with some using it as another opportunity to tarnish half of Scotlands citizens with a big black brush.

More nuance, and accuracy, required, I think.

 

[renegademaster]

If we examine the 2014 result carefully we see native Scots of Scottish decent were in favour by a majority, with those born elsewhere against, which given EU membership was at risk, tipped the balance somewhat.
?

I always find this argument quite silly , SNP are far from a nativist ethnonationalist party, they want to expand the eligibility of non-citizens for local elections, you shouldn't turn suddenly into the BNP just because you think it will tip the vote your way

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Ash Regan MSP (former candidate for the SNP leadership) has defected to the Alba Party

Former SNP leadership candidate Ash Regan has resigned from the party to join Alex Salmond's Alba party.
Alba said her decision came after increasing disillusionment with the SNP's leadership and its "wavering commitment" to Scottish independence.
Ms Regan, 49, was elected as SNP MSP for Edinburgh Eastern at the last election and becomes the Alba party's first representative at Holyrood.

(link)

 

[Blindtraveler]

Interesting how recently when anyone leaves the SNP they yell very loudly for a bi-election, has this ever happened in any other major political party in living memory? Comes across to me as a case of bad loser sour grapes but then again I'm biased as people know my views on the SNP

 

[GusB]

Interesting how recently when anyone leaves the SNP they yell very loudly for a bi-election, has this ever happened in any other major political party in living memory? Comes across to me as a case of bad loser sour grapes but then again I'm biased as people know my views on the SNP

There are always calls for a bye-election any time that a politician defects from one party to another. In this case it's a defection to another pro-independence party, rather than to the Tories. I can understand Regan's motives for doing so; the SNP is dithering by constantly trying to obtain permission for another referendum and people are becoming impatient. Independence is never granted by politely asking.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Interesting how recently when anyone leaves the SNP they yell very loudly for a bi-election, has this ever happened in any other major political party in living memory?

Actually, yes. In 2014, when Mark Reckless (Rochester and Strood) and Douglas Carswell (Clacton) defected from the Tories to UKIP, they both resigned and fought by-elections, which they both won.

Dick Taverne did something similar in 1973: He had been Labour MP for Lincoln but was deselected by his local party because of his pro-EEC views. He resigned and fought a by-election as 'independent Labour' which he also won.

But your point is good, to the extent that it is quite rare that defecting MPs do seek a by-election.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2023 ==

Comes across to me as a case of bad loser sour grapes but then again I'm biased as people know my views on the SNP

As I understand it, Ash Regan does have somewhat conservative social views which seem to sit quite badly with the direction the SNP has gone in. I can't help wondering if that was a factor in her defection, even though she has stated that it was over support for independence.

 

[Blindtraveler]

There are always calls for a bye-election any time that a politician defects from one party to another. In this case it's a defection to another pro-independence party, rather than to the Tories. I can understand Regan's motives for doing so; the SNP is dithering by constantly trying to obtain permission for another referendum and people are becoming impatient. Independence is never granted by politely asking.

Where I in her position or indeed the position of some others then chances are I might well have done the same, as you quite rightly point out the level of procrastination plus the ever shifting quicksand when it comes to future indi strategy is unhelpful to say the least, I am not pro-independence and never will be even if you held me at gunpoint but if I was then I'd want to clear path forward with a consistent mission statement and plan of how it could be achieved and the SNP are certainly not delivering this at the moment

 

[renegademaster]

There are always calls for a bye-election any time that a politician defects from one party to another. In this case it's a defection to another pro-independence party, rather than to the Tories. I can understand Regan's motives for doing so; the SNP is dithering by constantly trying to obtain permission for another referendum and people are becoming impatient. Independence is never granted by politely asking.

Unless ALBA are suddenly going to go full IRA I don't know exactly what you expect SNP to do?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Unless ALBA are suddenly going to go full IRA I don't know exactly what you expect SNP to do?

Yep, I think that's really the problem. If you've had a referendum and lost it, then the only democratic/ethical to way to try to achieve whatever you want is to try to campaign to convince more people to support you, in the hope that you'll fare better in a future referendum, after a suitable period time has elapsed. The SNP's problem is that - in the view of a great many people, including those who would have to give authorization for another referendum, a sufficient period of time has not yet elapsed. Which all means there's nothing the SNP can legitimately do except continue to campaign, while knowing that another referendum is almost certainly not going to happen for another 10 years or so.

 

[Gloster]

Yep, I think that's really the problem. If you've had a referendum and lost it, then the only democratic/ethical to way to try to achieve whatever you want is to try to campaign to convince more people to support you, in the hope that you'll fare better in a future referendum, after a suitable period time has elapsed. The SNP's problem is that - in the view of a great many people, including those who would have to give authorization for another referendum, a sufficient period of time has not yet elapsed. Which all means there's nothing the SNP can legitimately do except continue to campaign, while knowing that another referendum is almost certainly not going to happen for another 10 years or so.

There is a legitimate counter argument that Brexit changed the constitutional situation so much that a new vote is justified. The vote in Scotland was 62% for Remain and they can claim that what the Scots voted to remain part of in 2014 no longer exists.

 

[Blindtraveler]

There is a legitimate counter argument that Brexit changed the constitutional situation so much that a new vote is justified. The vote in Scotland was 62% for Remain and they can claim that what the Scots voted to remain part of in 2014 no longer exists.

True enough, but we've also had 10 years so effectively the thick end of a generation. I know the SNP and indie supporters in general don't like being pulled up on this but as I said here and elsewhere before sound bytes like once in a generation really probably good idea at times like this as they will come back to bite you and in this situation they have. For what it's worth yes another survey might not be a bad idea but the goal posts need moving to something really decisive like 65% in favor of one decision or another or at the very least 60% and as I remain confident at this stage anyway that another vote will simply have the same outcome then there's nothing to fear, I was scared in 2014 in case it went yes

 

[renegademaster]

There is a legitimate counter argument that Brexit changed the constitutional situation so much that a new vote is justified. The vote in Scotland was 62% for Remain and they can claim that what the Scots voted to remain part of in 2014 no longer exists.

Regardless, SNP or Alba aren't going to suddenly found physical force indyism, all they can do is whine their respective arguments and hope the next election produces a hung parliament they can capitalize on

 

[Blindtraveler]

Regardless, SNP or Alba aren't going to suddenly found physical force indyism, all they can do is whine their respective arguments and hope the next election produces a hung parliament they can capitalize on

For a labor majority so weak that it requires SNP shaped scaffolding poles to prop it up on a medium to long-term basis which point they roll over and basically promise anything for the sake of getting the keys to downing Street

 

[Falcon1200]

There is a legitimate counter argument that Brexit changed the constitutional situation so much that a new vote is justified.

The problem there is that despite Brexit, and other advantages handed on a plate to the Nationalists, eg Johnson and Truss as PMs, and with consummate politicians leading the SNP in Salmond and Sturgeon, support at elections for all the independence-supporting parties combined still barely reaches 50% of votes cast: If they cannot make their case in such circumstances, when will they ever?

 

[Merle Haggard]

The problem there is that despite Brexit, and other advantages handed on a plate to the Nationalists, eg Johnson and Truss as PMs, and with consummate politicians leading the SNP in Salmond and Sturgeon, support at elections for all the independence-supporting parties combined still barely reaches 50% of votes cast: If they cannot make their case in such circumstances, when will they ever?

Doesn't even that depends upon the assumption that everyone who votes for SNP etc supports independence? Is it not possible that some Unionists vote SNP because they support their other policies, which they see as preferable to their parties? Aren't there other considerations about voting choice than only independence?
I don't know, and don't have an opinion about Scottish independence, I'm just puzzled.

 

[Busaholic]

Actually, yes. In 2014, when Mark Reckless (Rochester and Strood) and Douglas Carswell (Clacton) defected from the Tories to UKIP, they both resigned and fought by-elections, which they both won.

Dick Taverne did something similar in 1973: He had been Labour MP for Lincoln but was deselected by his local party because of his pro-EEC views. He resigned and fought a by-election as 'independent Labour' which he also won.

But your point is good, to the extent that it is quite rare that defecting MPs do seek a by-election.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2023 ==



As I understand it, Ash Regan does have somewhat conservative social views which seem to sit quite badly with the direction the SNP has gone in. I can't help wondering if that was a factor in her defection, even though she has stated that it was over support for independence.

You omitted to mention Bruce Douglas-Mann, who was a late defector from Labour to SDP in 1982 and resigned as Mitcham MP to stand for his new party in the subsequent bye-election. He lost to Angela Rumbold, a Tory, and no other MP followed his example until Carswell.

Regarding Ash Regan's supposedly somewhat conservative social views, if you are referring to her opposition to someone transitioning in official terms to another sex on the basis of a self-declaration alone, then you will find in any public opinion poll that the majority are opposed to it, even amongst SNP supporters. I wouldn't describe that as socially conservative, merely commonsense to avoid devious criminals taking advantage.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You omitted to mention Bruce Douglas-Mann, who was a late defector from Labour to SDP in 1982 and resigned as Mitcham MP to stand for his new party in the subsequent bye-election. He lost to Angela Rumbold, a Tory, and no other MP followed his example until Carswell.

*Checks wikipedia* Oh yes! I didn't know about that one (or more correctly, I must have long forgotten it: I'm sure I would have been aware of it at the time). That was a shame after he was the only SDP defector to seek a democratic mandate. Looking at the timing of the by-election, I guess he lost out because of the Tories' Falklands war bounce. I wonder if it would have been different if the byelection had happened a couple of months earlier.

 

[gg1]

*Checks wikipedia* Oh yes! I didn't know about that one (or more correctly, I must have long forgotten it: I'm sure I would have been aware of it at the time). That was a shame after he was the only SDP defector to seek a democratic mandate. Looking at the timing of the by-election, I guess he lost out because of the Tories' Falklands war bounce. I wonder if it would have been different if the byelection had happened a couple of months earlier.

On checking the wikipedia stats it's a textbook example of the risks of splitting the anti Tory vote.

In 1979, the combined Labour/Liberal vote was 54.1% (but with most of that going to Labour), Conservatives 43.9%
In 1982 the Liberals stood aside, combined Labour/SDP vote was 53.8% (roughly equally split between Labour and SDP), Conservative was 43.4%

 

[Busaholic]

*Checks wikipedia* Oh yes! I didn't know about that one (or more correctly, I must have long forgotten it: I'm sure I would have been aware of it at the time). That was a shame after he was the only SDP defector to seek a democratic mandate. Looking at the timing of the by-election, I guess he lost out because of the Tories' Falklands war bounce. I wonder if it would have been different if the byelection had happened a couple of months earlier.

It's a little off topic, but I won't 'labour' it. The SDP leadership hated what he did and were furious the local party sanctioned it so refused most financial backing, which can't have helped.

 

[uglymonkey]

I never understood why they didn't just declare UDI and have done with it frankly.

 

[Speed43125]

I never understood why they didn't just declare UDI and have done with it frankly.

See the Catalan declaration in 2017.... and specifically the international reaction.

I am glad that those in the Scottish Government have understood why its advisable to not 'just declare' independence.

 

[Falcon1200]

I never understood why they didn't just declare UDI and have done with it frankly.

Because it would have been illegal and unsupported by at least 50% of the population! And also, although they have not and never will accept the result and concede, a referendum said unequivocally No.

 

[317 forever]

I'm going to come in here with something very controversial but I think a lesson that we have learned very much the hard way with brexit, any referendum result should be 65% in favor or nothing, just getting it over the line to even 50% is not decisive enough for me and I think if you asked a lot of the voting public they would say something similar.

Admittedly, in the event of an 85% turnout voting say 64% for change, this would by this measure fail despite being 54.5% of the electorate voting Yes for the change.

A democratically more valid Yes vote would be not just 50% of the vote + 1 but at least 50% of the electorate. By this measure, at 37% Brexit would fail to have passed that threshold.

 

[jfollows]

The Scottish Health Secretary, Michael Matheson, who originally was going to have his £11,000 bill for use of his iPad abroad paid by taxpayers, has firstly paid it himself and secondly admitted that £8,666 of the bill was incurred by his sons watching Celtic play Rangers on 2 January, using nearly 3.8GB of data. Originally he said that the charges were "legitimately incurred on parliamentary business".
From https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ly-rwanda-policy-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live:

During first minister’s questions on Thursday, Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, called on Matheson to quit and came as close as parliamentary rules allowed to accuse him of lying to MSPs. Ross said Matheson had misled Holyrood: “It wasn’t just a mistake; it was dishonest.”

I know I've got a background in IT but I find it hard to believe that someone supposedly competent could run up such a bill by accident and believe it was legitimate.

Surely most of us would have responded along the lines of:

1. That doesn't sound right
2. I'll look into it
3. Sorry, I've discovered the reason behind it
4. I'll pay for it myself

rather than try to get someone else to pay for it?
At least, given that the likely penalty for trying to blag the money from the taxpayer is going to be losing his job. I may not always be perfectly honest myself either, but I didn't fiddle my expenses when I was working.