Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Scotsnet

Welcome to Scotsnet - discuss all aspects of life in Scotland, including relocating, schools and local areas.

Is it democratic to exclude Reform from Scottish political talks?

58 replies

Thankyounextnext · 10/05/2026 09:11

FWIW I voted SNP. But I don't understand how John Swinney can be allowed to exclude a party from talks just because he doesn't agree with their politics?

As shown by the results, a not insignificant number of Scots voted Reform - how is it democratic to exclude them but not Labour, who gained the same number of seats? In my opinion this will make Reform voters feel further alienated. I never thought I'd agree with anything Farage said but honestly what is the point in having a vote then excluding a large proportion of voters from having a voice?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cddpevvv97jo

John Swinney, who is bald with glasses, poses in front of a cohort of SNP MSPs

SNP leader John Swinney rules out Holyrood talks with Reform UK

The nationalists secured 58 seats in their fifth consecutive election win, but that is short of an overall majority.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cddpevvv97jo

OP posts:
SirChenjins · 10/05/2026 20:38

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 10/05/2026 20:34

You're really taking the election result well, eh? 😊

As well as you 😊

IDasIX · 11/05/2026 13:31

I think it shows that Swinney is much better at politics than Starmer, though of course that’s a low bar. He knows he’s not going to gain any votes by moving into Reform territory, and would lose a lot of supporters by doing so.

It also forces the other parties to decide if they will have anything to do with Reform, and be tainted (or made electorally irrelevant) in the process.

I just don’t think it’s a bad thing to want nothing to do with a party led by a racist homophobe, full of racist, sexist, homophobic people.

SirChenjins · 11/05/2026 13:34

IDasIX · 11/05/2026 13:31

I think it shows that Swinney is much better at politics than Starmer, though of course that’s a low bar. He knows he’s not going to gain any votes by moving into Reform territory, and would lose a lot of supporters by doing so.

It also forces the other parties to decide if they will have anything to do with Reform, and be tainted (or made electorally irrelevant) in the process.

I just don’t think it’s a bad thing to want nothing to do with a party led by a racist homophobe, full of racist, sexist, homophobic people.

The Greens and SNP are incredibly sexist - remember what they think of women and their sex-based rights. They do not have the moral high ground there.

The other points I agree with.

MyDenimBird · 12/05/2026 20:23

Thankyounextnext · 10/05/2026 09:11

FWIW I voted SNP. But I don't understand how John Swinney can be allowed to exclude a party from talks just because he doesn't agree with their politics?

As shown by the results, a not insignificant number of Scots voted Reform - how is it democratic to exclude them but not Labour, who gained the same number of seats? In my opinion this will make Reform voters feel further alienated. I never thought I'd agree with anything Farage said but honestly what is the point in having a vote then excluding a large proportion of voters from having a voice?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cddpevvv97jo

Reform don't think the Scottish Parliament should exist, don't support devolution and say the government isn't legitimate - notwithstanding their very proud racism, that's a very clear reason to not involve them in Parliamentary discussions. Over half of voters want Reform to have no participation in deals with the parties they voted for, including 60+% of SNP voters.

Plus the SNP won 41 more seats than their closest opposition, in a system designed to deliver minority governments. Ball's in Swinney's court.

EvelynBeatrice · 17/05/2026 20:07

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 10/05/2026 13:51

I don't understand the objection?

I can't stand the SNP, but why would anyone expect any political party to be willing to form a coalition with a party where the values are completely misaligned?

Is it really antidemocratic not to want to work in partnership with people who you consider to be morally bankrupt?

The hypocrisy is astounding. It’s not as though the SNP can claim moral purity or superiority . Those who have been most closely involved in the SNP’s own finances are to appear in court shortly. Embezzlers, sex offenders and those who appear to lack any respect for the rule of law form part of their ranks. Who are the SNP to look down on any other party?!

EvelynBeatrice · 17/05/2026 20:08

In a democracy you must speak to everyone, even if you find their views objectionable. That’s what democracy is!

Gillydoller · 17/05/2026 22:19

EvelynBeatrice · 17/05/2026 20:07

The hypocrisy is astounding. It’s not as though the SNP can claim moral purity or superiority . Those who have been most closely involved in the SNP’s own finances are to appear in court shortly. Embezzlers, sex offenders and those who appear to lack any respect for the rule of law form part of their ranks. Who are the SNP to look down on any other party?!

The SNP gave £250k to Hamas to release Humzas in-laws a couple of years back. If that’s not corruption what is?

Gwenhwyfar · 17/05/2026 22:35

Cordon sanitaire against the extreme right is common all over Europe. It gets broken only when necessary and apparently it's not necessary in this case.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page