FarmallMTA
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 746
Give me a party headed by an alcoholic every time. Ever been to a party led by a sober politician interested in policy? All the hot chicks leave and the beer goes flat. Screw that.
Scottish independence how likely is it?
- Thread starter andyandy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- independence scotland scottish
Give me a party headed by an alcoholic every time. Ever been to a party led by a sober politician interested in policy? All the hot chicks leave and the beer goes flat. Screw that.
Dr Adequate
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2004
- Messages
- 17,766
I think you want a "per capita" in there somewhere.
richardm
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2001
- Messages
- 9,248
The latest polls are apparently indicating that the SNP's lead is declining. Of course there's many a slip twixt opinion polls and the real thing.
My MSP is SNP at the moment, or he was until parliament was dissolved, but only just. There were about 1000 votes between him and the Labour candidate. It will be interesting to see how things play out this time.
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
The quote is slightly out of context as it referred to the impact during a referendum campaign rather than the parliamentary elections, however it would appear to have been a pretty good prediction of what is happening so I will claim the £1m anyway!
If you have an existing constituency SNP MSP then it is highly likely he will win - in 2003 the SNP got 23.8% of the constituency votes to Labour's 34.9%. Today's Scotsman poll shows SNP on 34% and Labour 32%, so unless there are specific local factors it appears unlikely that any existing SNP constituency MSP's will lose their seats as there is a sizeable swing towards them compared to the last election.
The real possibility now is that it will not be possible for any two party coalition to have a majority other than the impossible Labour / SNP combination. Things could be about to get very interesting - grand coalition of the Unionist parties?, minority government?
Didn't notice this until Richard quoted it - isn't that just a reflection of the Scottish view on "independence" i.e. the majority are opposed to it?
Any links to the constitutional position on all this? Is there a set time to form a government, can there be a minority government and so on?
richardm
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2001
- Messages
- 9,248
You're right - sorry about that.
It was a very small majority though, and in fact both Labour and the SNP were down on vote percentage last time. Still, I think you're probably right.
Could be. I expect that there is going to be an awful lot of bickering over the next few years...
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
Not really. Support for independence (as opposed to the SNP) is normally estimated at about 1 in 3, support for the Labour party is also about 1 in 3, therefore you would expect the level of media support for independence to be approximately equal to that for the Labour party. No sane person would suggest it is remotely similar.
I don't think you can draw any meaningfully comparison between coverage in favour of independence and for coverage of Labour, they are quite different things.
But your answer does seem to support what I said. If 2 thirds of the Scottish population are opposed or not supportive of independence I would expect media coverage to be more "biased" towards not being supportive of independence since this would be a reflection of their customers' views.
Yeah, then we can take our place alongside all the other soon-forgotten and pointless but amusing accessories.
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
From a quick (IANAL) reading of the Scotland Act 1998, section 46 the situation appears to be:
Parliament has a period of 28 days to nominate one of its members for appointment as First Minister; if it does so, then the Presiding Officer recommends that appointment to Queen Liz and she appoints him.
If the 28 day period passes without anyone being nominated, the Presiding Officer proposes the dissolution of the current parliament and an Extraordinary General Election takes place (subject to Queen Liz so proclaiming) (section 3)
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
Then you would equally expect there to be no papers in England which supported the Tories or held anti-European views? After all these are minority positions with far less support in percentage terms than independence has in Scotland.
The initial post was a statement of fact, not an opinion on whether this was right or wrong. Of course whether the fact that media coverage is overwhelmingly anti-independence might lead to a position where opinion is anti-independence therefore explaining why media coverage is anti-independence is somewhat of a chicken and egg question.
Of course when you have supposedly "independent" BBC journalists going on holiday with the First Minister, it does seem reasonable to ask if this just might have some influence on their reporting. Imagine if John Humphries went on holiday with Blair?
Again you are comparing apples and pears - a one issue question compared to multi-issues concerns.
A good point.
Why shouldn't your First Minister be mates with a journalist?
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
The Europe issue is about as close an example as I can imagine - should decisions be taken within Scotland/the UK or only at a UK/European level. To suggest that independence for Scotland is in no way comparable to the UK's independence from Europe is bizarre.
The BBC claims to be a non-biased organisation - this is somewhat important as it receives public funds. Do you think that having the most senior BBC political journalist in Scotland going on holiday with the First Minister is consistent with that claim?
richardm
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2001
- Messages
- 9,248
In fairness it does sound a bit iffy - and I believe that the BBC did suspend her briefly and then keep a close eye on her broadcasts subsequently, but it was all cleared by the parliamentary standards committee thing. It is still one of those things that make you go "hmm".
Meanwhile, independence. It looks like it's been a good night for the SNP. At the time of typing, Labour have 32 seats in the Scottish Parliament and the SNP have 31, with 48 still to declare. Close stuff.
Opinion polls aside, I wonder if it would be fair to say that a vote for the SNP is synonymous with wanting independence? It is, after all, their major tenet.
Edited after misreading the poll sheet
Edited again - the BBC have dropped the SNP a couple of seats. I suppose the total won't make sense until all the proportional stuff is figured out.
Last edited:
andyandy
anthropomorphic ape
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,377
and let the political wranglings begin....
if
a SDP core issue is over a referendum on independence, and they can't compromise on that without seriously weakening their party
a core Liberal and labour policy is no coalition with a party supporting a referendum
then surely it's just going to be a Lib-dem/labour coalition.....?
if
a SDP core issue is over a referendum on independence, and they can't compromise on that without seriously weakening their party
a core Liberal and labour policy is no coalition with a party supporting a referendum
then surely it's just going to be a Lib-dem/labour coalition.....?
Jaggy Bunnet
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 16, 2003
- Messages
- 6,241
Lib Dem / Labour coalition does not give them enough seats (62 out of 129) - even if they could do a deal with the two Greens they would stll be short. Only others with seats are Margo McDonald (Independent) who is ex SNP and the Tories.
Interestingly the position is little different for the SNP - they would need to have the support of Margo, the Lib Dems & the Greens to give them a majority.
Chances of this parliament running its four year term are remote. It is possible that they will fail to agree a first minister within 28 days and the whole thing is dissolved for new elections.