Yousless could use early snap election to secure independence

[SirChenjins]

How does that work - and how does he prove that the majority of us want independence from a general Scottish election, given that people vote on lots of different issues? Or if the turnout is low?

Is this just more posturing from the maddies in Govt at Holyrood?

???? I thought the Supreme Court had said no referendum?

Since when did he want indy?

Presumably when he was told to by the stalwarts @HirplesWithHaggis

This wouldn’t be a referendum from what I can see @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g - but it doesn’t make sense (plus ça change..) www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64931626

Ah, looks like he's scared of Ash, who does want indy. But there's a ton of back pedalling in that article, nothing to worry about.

Let’s hope not - but if this is honestly the best he can come up with it’s going to be more of the same old shite from the SNP but with a different face at the helm.

He's the continuity candidate, yes. Do SNP members want more of the same? Time will tell.

If he does call a snap Scottish election, the results will be very interesting. I doubt they'd get the same number of seats as before.

I agree - they could easily lose seats. I'm just curious as to why he thinks that winning a snap election automatically gives them the indy mandate or that it would stand up in court.

Please do call an early snap election - let the public express what they think of the SNP.

it won’t secure independence because who you want to govern Scotland in the devolved parliament is a different question. But I think the SNP deserve to see what the electorate think.

They increasingly seem to claim that the results of entirely different elections are really pseudo independence ballots.

It’s nonsense and is looking increasingly tattered as a strategy, since the results of these things don’t create a mandate for independence over and over again.

I can see the logic though - isn’t it the same sort of strategy Cameron played to appease brexiteers? Worked out so well. Give them what they want and they’ll lose and then we’ll win the long game?

SNP probably thinking they’re facing 10 years of a labour govt in the UK soon if we’re lucky so perhaps that’s why these gambles are looking more appealing. Interesting that the SNP social security secretary said it would take decades to separate - bet he’s been reprimanded over that reality sandwich.

I don't see that it's appropriate that c75k individuals, many of whom don't even live in Scotland are deciding who the first minister should be. So any new leader should call an election in order to have a mandate surely? Just like the SNP called for in the Tory leadership race?

This isn’t a mandate to rule though, if I’ve understood correctly - this is an election (once the leader has been appointed by a tiny number of people) fought solely on the basis of Indy which the SNP will use (should they win the single largest vote) to show that they have the right to claim independence.

It can’t be a pseudo referendum though because it would have to be a Scottish parliament election. Just because the SNP want to campaign solely on independence doesn’t mean the other parties would do so. Nor does it change the fact that the purpose and outcome of the only kind of election they can legally call is a determination of who sits in the Scottish parliament.

The SNP need to stop trying to subvert important electoral processes like this. Westminster elections matter in their own right. They’re important for the people of Scotland (and the UK) to ensure they have representation in the UK Parliament for reserved issues. Scottish parliament elections matter enormously. Scottish people deserve proper focus on the issues of governing in relation to devolved matters in these elections. Local elections matter to the day to day lives of people in the areas they’re being carried out.

It’s unacceptable to try to use these as independence referenda by proxy. Or to pretend that the results of people voting for these very different purposes tell us anything meaningful about views on independence.

The SNP should decide whether they want to be a weird, single issue independence campaign or whether they’d like to actually get on with governing a Scotland within the UK. They seem incapable of doing the latter while distracted by the former.

A different face publically, not sure if it is a different face at the helm though...

One reason the SNP would be keen to call a Scottish election a referendum on independence is because that is the only way they may get independence supporters despairing at the state of the SNP Scottish government and their years of failures to actually vote SNP.

But it still wouldn’t prove anything - because it’s not a referendum with one single, focused question, it’s an election where the electorate vote on a number of issues - they can’t separate out the two.

I think the face at the helm will be different @Shelefttheweb but it’ll be the same old arms doing the actual steering.

Agreed, but my point was it is a way to get people to vote SNP who would otherwise vote for another party - not done to get independence but simply to keep the SNP in power.

I can well imagine the SNP want to steer people’s voting decision making to anything other than their record in governing Scotland.

Exactly

Ahh, I see what you mean. Unless they decide to vote Alba?!

Agree that steering the attention away from their dismal record is probably behind a lot of this.

Alba is not off the starting blocks yet and I have serious concerns. But in theory I think a second, properly separate, independence supporting party would be a good thing to challenge the SNP and split their dominance which results from being the only Independence Party. But it would need to be a properly separate party prepared to support the other parties on other issues and not just ignore everything else to join with the snp to fight for independence. I don’t think I could trust another Indy party not to do that though.

I agree - but I'm not sure that will happen. I was listening to Ash Regan on the Jeremy Vine show talking about getting support for independence from the other indy supporting parties and it just felt like more of the same single issue focus, while all the other really important stuff like health, education and the economy could all come <vague wave of hand> later.

I look at local services being cut due to cuts in council funding, then look at the money wasted on incompetent management of contracts for two ferries which could have funded those services and more beside. But they just squabble over independence...

It costs the taxpayer £600 million per year to run Holyrood and the Scottish assembly, including MSPs’ salaries, support staff, maintenance etc.
If we’d never had this ridiculous pretend parliament inflicted on us, the whole £600 million would be available for essential services.
Ponder that, next time you vote…