Nicola Sturgeon - A matter of careful what you wish for?

(82 Posts)
BrillBrilloPads Fri 08-May-15 14:30:37

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MoreBeta Fri 08-May-15 14:41:56

Cameron said today Scotland would have the most devolved assembly in the world and that he wanted fairness for England.

If that means Barnett formula scrapped, Scottish MPs cant vote on English issues and Scotland sinks or swims on its own with far less assistance from England then SNP will indeed have come away with something far worse than they have now.

SNP have no power in Westminster. Tory party will dictate what Scotland gets in terms of spending and indeed may carry out electoral reform to reduce number of Scots MPs to properly take account of size of population.

BakewellSlice Fri 08-May-15 14:50:36

For nationalists it was always a win-win situation. The Tory government might well speed up the journey to full Scottish independence; that's what their political life revolves around.

Eigg Fri 08-May-15 14:53:32

Bear in mind though that the Tory majority isn't that big. All you need is a handful of rebellious Tory backbenchers on a controversial issue and suddenly the high number of opposition MPs becomes key.

CaptainHolt Fri 08-May-15 14:58:40

Labours vote collapsed in England too, not as catastrophically as Scotland but even if every person in Scotland had voted Labour, Con would still have a majority.

FenellaFellorick Fri 08-May-15 15:03:08

how could it be said that the snp let the tories in?

I'm hearing that a lot. I don't understand how it is.

It certainly isn't on the numbers.

Labour got 232, snp got 56. 232 + 56 = 288
tories got 330

even if labour had got all the seats that the snp got, the tories would still have won.

Miltonmaid Fri 08-May-15 15:08:49

I think the rise of the SNP probably did have an effect on votes on England too. Tories were very good at spreading fear of Labour/SNP coalition.
The Tories may well devolve more powers but they'll do it on their terms. Today's result isn't good news for Scotland.

MoreBeta Fri 08-May-15 15:13:16

Boundary reforms were mooted before the 2010 election and surely will be pushed through now.

tribpot Fri 08-May-15 15:35:47

She clearly expected Labour to be neck and neck or within a few votes

So did everyone. This was a shock result. Certainly the SNP in Westminster is not the force it could have been had it carried the balance of power. But that's the risk if you're a minority party (within the UK context). Any or all of them could have been playing a role in horse trading today and instead will need to focus on how to push their agenda forward from a more marginal position.

niceguy2 Fri 08-May-15 16:22:29

Shit a brick. The amount of people whose basic arithmetic skills seem to be lacking today is staggering. My Facebook feed and groups are also full of people who can't count.

As per above, even if SNP didn't exist at all and Labour had taken every single seat then Labour would still lose and unable to form a coalition even if every non-Tory MP was willing to join.

Today's result wasn't the SNP's fault but Labour's inability to convince voters that they can be trusted.

Let's be honest their message was far better to sell than the Tories. Yet the electorate for whatever reason did not vote for Labour in sufficient numbers.

ElBurroSinNombre Fri 08-May-15 16:33:44

The SNP was always going to be popular standing on a platform of tax in England, spend in Scotland. Sturgeon came over very well during the campaign and seems remarkably grounded and normal - she has far more appeal than Salmond to ordinary people.

I am not sure where the SNP go from here - Scotland is still being ruled by a Tory government, they have had their referendum (supposedly once in a generation event) and now have almost all Scottish MPs in London who are in a parliament they don't really want to be in. I am sure Sturgeon will use this result to try to force another referendum on the Scots although she cannot use the SNP block vote in parliament as the blunt instrument she would have hoped.

ElBurroSinNombre Fri 08-May-15 16:36:35

I should add that although I am not a Tory at all, I am very relieved that the UK government's majority does not depend on SNP votes to pass legislation.

Election Fri 08-May-15 17:10:55

"niceguy2" no it wasn't, it was a result of scaremongering by the Tories (which worked) about the power of the SNP if you don't vote conservative. All external polling and internal party polling showed that we were on course for a hung parliament up until the last few days when on the doorsteps, the comments in England were "I'd like to vote for you but I don't want the SNP to have a say in the UK government". hence the swing back from UKIP to Tories and a swing from LibDem to Tories.

It wasn't just the loss of the Scottish seats it was the failure to take previously identified realistic targets by the Labour party as the Scottish fear factor set it.

To parody you: shit a brick, the amount of people whose basic skills and knowledge of campaigning, media, electioneering and the psyche of the voters seems to be lacking today - the ignorance is staggering!

Ubik1 Fri 08-May-15 17:14:33

More people voted fir UKIP than the SNP.

tiggytape Fri 08-May-15 18:08:03

The SNP message scared English voters - there is no doubt about that.
It wasn’t just the simple worry that the SNP could wield huge power over the rest of the UK if Labour won (played down by Miliband but not convincingly enough) but the idea that the SNP hated the Tories so much, that they would cobble together any deals with anyone else to oust Cameron even if the Tories ended up as the largest party. Nobody at that time predicted a Tory majority of course. Voters don't like that kind of thing – British people are keen on fairness and moral legitimacy not shady deals boasted about in advance. A lot of people definitely aren't keen on the Tories but setting out to oust a party at any cost without knowing how many have voted for them is a bit militant or even non democratic for many voter's tastes.

Of course it is win-win for the SNP long game. If Labour had won, they would have the voice at Westminster they had wanted and power beyond their numbers no matter what Miliband said. Now, being ruled by a Tory government, their ultimate aim of independence is strengthened. The idea that a Tory majority government can effectively ignore them if it chooses (not that it will) and even drag them kicking and screaming out of Europe against their will might just shift the call for complete independence in their favour and bring the doubters in Scotland round to their cause. No matter what Nicola Sturgeon said in the lead up to May 7th, her party only exists for one ultimate aim and that is total independence for Scotland. She has potentially made a bigger step to achieving that with this outcome than with a Labour-SNP pact.

Ubik1 Fri 08-May-15 19:04:20

Poor lambs

Frightened into voting UKIP and Conservative.

hmm

iHAVEtogetoutofhere Fri 08-May-15 19:16:33

The hated Tories being in is a PERFECT result for SNP and the 2nd call for IndyRef will not be long coming and this time it will be a 'Yes'.

It's a bloody disaster sad

nobodyknowswheremyjonnyhasgone Fri 08-May-15 19:24:10

Leave the 'Scots' alone for Gods sake.

Despite the huge growth in seats, the actual SNP vote only increased minimally (less than 4%). They didn't mobilise anything like the numbers it appears from the seats. It is the system which gave them a disproportionate number of seats. They got less than half the votes of UKIP but 59 x the seats!

However, even these dodgy stats aren't going to make me vote for PR whilst UKIP are on the scene.

STIDW Fri 08-May-15 21:49:19

In a recent poll conducted for The Economist 48% to 34%, more Britons (including Scots) believe that Scotland will be independent in 20 years’ time than think it will remain in the Uk. 49% thought Scottish independence would be bad for England, Northern Ireland and Wales.

"We asked Britons whether they would pay to keep Scotland in the union, suggesting less than £250 ($385) a year, £250 to £500 a year and more than £500 a year as hypothetical sums. It turns out that 23% of Scots would pay something to stay in, and 26% would pay to leave. In England and Wales, though, only 10% would pay for Scotland to stay and 6% would pay to see the back of it. A colossal 70% would pay nothing at all to secure either outcome. That hints at trouble for the union."

www.economist.com/news/britain/21650117-what-english-really-think-about-their-northern-neighbours-scotland-another-country

The Tories majority makes breaking up the union more likely so that suits the SNP. Tom Devine (Edinburgh University) was on the radio today saying he thought the last straw behind increased support for the SNP since devolution and Labour's wipeout was the Better Together Campaign's threats, in particular George Osbourne's opposition to currency union. That was toxic to many people Scotland given that the British Government had helped the colonies and Ireland gain independence by maintaining currency union.

Next May is the Scottish Parliamentary Election and if the Smith Commission doesn't deliver (which it probably won't) there is every chance support for the SNP will increase further. MSPs are voted by a form of PR and in 2011 the SNP had 45% & 44% respectively for constituency and list votes. IF there is support the SNP could include another independence referendum in their manifesto. 60% of the votes would give them a mandate for another referendum sooner rather than later.

Millymollymama Fri 08-May-15 21:59:52

Scotland - one party state?! Nationalism is never good. I agree with what Paddy Ashdown has said about the dangers of it.

twiggytape - your analysis is spot on. SNP got the Tory voters out but they won't get power at Westminster. The Tories have it.

STIDW Fri 08-May-15 23:37:46

But the Tories are civic nationalists too, they advocate British Unionism???

PiratePanda Fri 08-May-15 23:39:54

Even if Labour had own every single one of the seats the SNP took last night, they still would have been well short of a majority. I hate the bastards, but the Conservatives won outright fair and square.

STIDW Sat 09-May-15 10:17:48

The problem is the Conservative majority is relative small and governing with a small majority is difficult. Most government defeats occur in periods of minority government or where the government has a small majority. Callaghan’s government suffered 34 defeats.

Government defeats have been caused by backbench rebellions together with opposition parties voting against a government. Although the Tories won 376 seats in 1992 the majority shrank due to a series of by-elections, scandals, defections and Tory back bench rebellions (in particular over Europe.) Backbench rebellions together with opposition parties voting against John Major’s government was behind several defeats.

STIDW Sat 09-May-15 10:30:54

Millymolymama, Scotland isn't a one party state. There are 64 SNP MSPs and 63 others in the current Scottish parliament. PR rarely produces an absolute majority for one party. There are disadvantages to PR however, it could be said that PR ensures greater continuity of government and requires greater consensus in policy-making.

Coffeethrowtrampbitch Sat 09-May-15 10:40:39

I don't think it is too much of a problem for the SNP. It would have been better had they been in a coalition with Labour as they would have participated in WM government and proved they could take part and influence policy, which is what they promised voters, to be a 'strong voice for Scotland' in Westminster.

But even if they are not governing, their strong majority means the Conservatives can't afford to have them constantly disagreeing in case they start questioning the Tories right to govern in Scotland, given that they have only one Scottish MP.

That could start a row that would lead to another referendum, and if the SNP could make a good case that the Union is unfair, Scotland could get independence and that would be a disaster for the Conservatives, especially if it happened when they had a majority.

So I think they will offer a number of devolved powers so that if there is any conflict, they can appease the Scottish electorate and persuade them not to support calls for more autonomy.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now