Are Scots truly that Left Wing?

[ragged]

The SNP seems to have a very left-of-centre political agenda and set of policies. Separate from their aim of independence.

If every party campaigning in Scotland was equally pro-independence, would as many Scots still vote SNP because they still liked their left wing policies best?

I've sometimes wondered if SNP would plummet in popularity post independence, because maybe most Scots don't truly support their other priorities & policies (or do they?)

What's so wrong with wanting to be a bit further left than new labour which frankly is almost centre-right these days?
That there are few alternatives to the SNP is not the fault of those seeking a left-wing party. The Greens are doing well right now and more power to them. The SSP is maybe a bit too far left for my liking. The SNP pitch their right/left balance at a point that appeals to many people in Scotland, this has nothing to do with their stance on independence.

What I can't understand is the Westminster/BBC obsession with the issue. If we are truly 'better together' then Westminster needs to accept and work with whoever the Scottish constituencies send to Westminster to represent them.

Why include this thread in your analysis Stacey, when it doesn't do those things you say it does? This isn't 'other threads'.

Museumum - nothing wrong with wanting to be more Left than Labour. Is that the impression people are giving?

But how can you uncouple the SNP from the quest for Independence? It's like uncoupling UKIP from the quest to leave Europe. A person might like lots of UKIP policies but not want to leave Europe - they would be mad to vote UKIP if that was the case. It's the same with the SNP. At a push, you could make an exception for Holyrood elections, but in a GE, it is a big issue. Yes, Westminster needs to accept the representatives who are voted in, but that would be very difficult given the SNP stance on the Union. Whoever gets in will need to try, but it's going to be difficult.

seeker33 you misunderstand the 'free personal care' policy in Scotland.

People in Scotland do still have to sell their homes to pay for the 'hotel' and other costs of residential care.

If there is lots of English resentment at the SNP vote in the General Election that will suit some MSP's very well.

It will be divisive and stir up nationalist sentiment.

It has been made clear that Independence is still very much an aim of the SNP, despite a clear NO vote by the Scottish people.

And, what Niceguy2 says:

"I wonder how sentiment may have been different if Scotland had voted for independence based on the fairy tales of Scottish oil revenues which have since collapsed. With no Westminster to blame, I wonder how popular they would be then?"

If you think DC and DM's monetary plans are sketchy/scary you only have to ponder the SNP's 'back of an envelope based on Oil prices' economic model prior to the IndyRef. I know Oil prices will go back up over time, but, thank Christ we didn't go down that route...

and, some of the 'free' stuff aint so great.
My dd got her 'free' school lunch (dint of being a P3).
She had: a sprout (just the one!), a small tinned potato and 1/2 a 'burger'.
I have been waiting over a year for a simple operation - my hospital evaded the waiting list targets by taking me off the list -simples.
My children's school is falling apart - there are no supplies.

I know none of this is life-or-death and will be the same in England, but SNP Scotland aint the land of milk and honey that Eck and Nick would like you to think.

And the divisions in my village re the IndyRef will take a long time to heal.

If we had voted Yes, we would still be negotiating with rUK, and our economic position would be exactly the same as it is right now, whatever happens to oil prices in the future.

No, Hirples, as a lot of the money SNP intended to use for funding was based on Oil revenues which are not looking too great atm.

"I wonder how sentiment may have been different if Scotland had voted for independence based on the fairy tales of Scottish oil revenues which have since collapsed."

Scotland would not currently be independent just now if it had been a Yes majority last September. It would have happened in 2016....a lot can change with oil prices in that time!

"The SNP and UKIP are like chalk and cheese on every issue."

Yep, not a shock.

That is not true regarding the oil money paying for everything. It was always an extra.

iHAVE, blowin has picked up on my point that you missed; if we had voted Yes, then right now - while oil prices are low - we would still be part of the UK, and hence "protected" by those broad shoulders pooling and sharing our resources, so no different whatsoever to how we are now. Indy wasn't planned for another year, who knows where oil prices will be by then?

And who says we'd have had an SNP gvt in an indy Scotland anyway?

We would have for about a month if I remember rightly then we'd be at the polls.

That would have been exciting, a brand new political landscape, New parties and movements emerging.

It still makes me sad and angry we're not going to see all that but onwards and upwards!

"It was always an extra."

This was highlighted about the oil revenues throughout the referendum campaign.

"It still makes me sad and angry we're not going to see all that but onwards and upwards!"

Who knows, Nicola Sturgeon may be able to argue a case for a unilateral declaration of independence at some point in the future....

"And who says we'd have had an SNP gvt in an indy Scotland anyway? "

Fair point, many have just taken it purely for granted that SNP would have got in first had we had the Yes majority last September, but we would have had to go back the polls to vote in which party we wanted, not necessarily SNP would have governed an iScotland.

Yes, we'd have had the same gvt we have now upon actually gaining indy, but as you say ScotsWhaHae, we'd have been at the polls within weeks. I suspect another SNP majority gvt might well have been returned the first time, but thereafter we'd have seen a lot more from the Greens and SSP, maybe new parties too. Yes, it's a loss, but we must look to the future now.

So, rUK would have propped up iScotland whilst Oil prices are low...
so that's okay ... take about having your cake and eating it.

I don't accept Oil revenue was 'always an extra' by any means.

And as for the likelihood of iScotland NOT being ruled by SNP
(at least for the foreseeable).

Yes, and the moon is made of green cheese...

I am sure Nicola will argue the case for unilateral Independence just as soon as she can.
Cos the SNP really HAVE listened to Scotland re the Referendum, haven't they?

'everyone knows there's no coaltion on offer between Labour and SNP'

Surely Miliband would go for a coalition if it were the only way into power?

Cos the SNP really HAVE listened to Scotland re the Referendum, haven't they

The SNP will do/say whatever wins the most votes. I doubt UDI would be a vote winner though.

iHAVE, we would still have been part of the UK, so yes, "propped up" if necessary; and still sending our taxes etc to WM, and still having some allocated back, and still have been voting in the General Election. We would not have been indy since September, as you seem to imagine, there would have been about 18 months of negotiations to sort out first, during which time we would still be governed by WM, and still be part of the UK, with everything that entails.

OnlyLovers, no coalition has been offered to Milliband by the SNP, whether he might want one or not.

Hirples - I live in Scotland - I know how it would have worked.
Only Scotland voted not to go Indy, thank goodness.

Oil revenue was always treated as an extra. What you choose to accept isn't really relevant.

Can you link to that, Scots?

BBC Link

See also the white paper, 'oil is a bonus,not the basis' was a bit of a mantra.

hirples
An alternative view might be,
'No coalition has been offered to Sturgeon by Labour, whether she might want one or not'
?