Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Herdson looks at what happens next if it’s a Yes?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Herdson looks at what happens next if it’s a Yes?
The best odds on Yes winning the Scottish referendum a week on Thursday are 11/4 with bookies, or 3.3/1 on Betfair. Considering that not a single poll has shown Yes ahead and precious few have shown that side within touching distance, those offerings don’t look particularly attractive. A Yes, however, would be far from the end of the process:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
But after then, Scottish MPs are removed from the tally of Westminster, long before 2020. That could be enough to push Prime Minister Milliband into a minority, and force another general election.
The SNP make a lot of claims about things not within their gift (currency union, EU or NATO membership, student fees, to name but a few) - Westminster will set the date if independence - unless Salmond goes UDI. With that in mind, the date it chooses should reflect the needs of all of the UK, not just the 8% that wants to leave.
A "Yes" vote would imo mean firstly that the SNP would have a near-clean sweep of the Scottish seats, because even most "No" voters will probably come to terms with the referendum result and will want to elect the people who'll get the best deal for Scotland in the negotiations (while the diehard unionists will probably either be too depressed to turn out or perhaps will have already moved south of the border). Meanwhile, in England the Tories would probably be strengthened because we'd probably descend into jingoism quite quickly and people would want someone who'd be "tough" on Scotland. (I think some kind of crisis, either with the Scottish referendum or an international economic crisis, is the only thing that can save the Tories' bacon next year.)
To be appointed the PM of a country and then to preside over the disappearance of one-third of its land mass is a pretty big deal. The loss of Ireland - always seen as catholic, over the sea, separate and forever in turmoil - was nothing in comparison. Should he stay on Cameron will be attending international meetings as a hugely diminished figure - as will any rUK PM for a very long time. And whether he resigns or not, the forthcoming Yes vote will be what Cameron will be remembered for - he will be the man who lost the Union. Whether that is fair is another matter. I happen to think that this is the culmination of 30 years of alienation combined with a UK-wide disgust at the Westminster elite. If we all had a chance to stick two fingers up at all three major parties many of us would. The Scots have that chance and will take it.
In terms of the next GE a lot will depend on how the rUK negotiating team is put together. There is a strong case for a cross-party approach as this is an unprecedented constitutional situation and one that will need a definitive settlement with buy-in form all sides of Parliament. Lack of certainty in what will be a volatile situation could be very dangerous: financial markets and the international community generally will be looking for a united approach. The Welsh and Northern Irish may also want to be represented. All the parties seem to agree on the main parameters and all may be keen to remove it as a subject of debate in the GE.
Putting that to one side, I can see why many people believe the Tories will benefit in England, at least, from a Yes vote. That may turn out to be the case, but it is also possible that exactly this scenario may concentrate anti-Tory minds and bring out more such voters than otherwise might have been the case. It may be much harder for the Tories to win back UKIPers. I think it is a very hard one to predict.
The other scenario to consider is what happens in Scotland when it becomes clear that the SNP were, indeed, telling huge porkies about oil reserves, EU membership, the currency, pensions, the NHS, the economy and so on. Presumably by May next year the possibilities of a currency union and automatic EU membership by the time of independence will be a lot clearer because there will have been close to seven months of negotiation already. If, as I expect, the SNP are exposed as shameless fibbers, what we may end up seeing is a collapse in their vote. I would not be at all surprised to see what will be by then be a separate Scottish Labour do very well in the final UK GE in Scotland.
Betting wise it has to be an Alistair Carmichael and Danny Alexander double on next cabinet minister to resign. That will happen before the end of this month. I'd also expect all Scottish-based shadow cabinet ministers to stand down.
Not in any circumstances will Mebyon Kernow win a seat in 2015. Not even if SeanT were to stand for them.
Ultimately, the advisor Adam Tomkins believes, Sturgeon could change the face of politics after the referendum. "There are two divisions in Scottish politics: unionist/nationalist and left/right, which don't run in parallel at the moment. She will pull the political centre of gravity of the SNP to the centre left, and the geographical centre away from Aberdeen and Perth, to Glasgow. This will make life very difficult indeed for the Scottish Labour party. If she is successful as leader for some time then those two big divisions will begin to overlap, and the centre right will emerge as the main force for the union."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/05/nicola-sturgeon-salmond-deputy-brink-power
(Tho not sure who the "advisor" Adam Tomkins is - if he's Prof Adam Tomkins I doubt he's advising the SNP!)
I'm not saying it would happen; far from it. But a Yes vote would set be the biggest shake up of the system for generations. In those circumstances, with a nationalist tide running, with the Westminster parties discredited, I don't think 100/1 is unreasonable. What's more, I suspect that unlike most of the odds quoted, those are ones which will last much longer, giving punters the chance to assess how the land lies in the aftermath of the big vote.
A resignation would mean the Conservatives going into the 2015 General Election with a fresh new leader, and the extensive coverage of the Conservative leadership campaign would crowd Labour politicians off the airwaves for the vital months leading up to the election, two factors that would hurt the Labour vote.
I don't know if these factors would be enough to swing the election, but I suspect Labour would rather not take the risk.
The Conservatives, of course, can make the same calculations of the potential benefits of a Cameron resignation, but I don't think Cameron would resign for that reason alone. The benefits aren't certain enough.
Well, I'll keep my eye on that one....maybe.
But I do agree the shock waves of a Yes vote would be substantial and the consequences unpredictable. Yes, there is the distinct possibility that Politics would veer to the extreme.
Whatever UKIP or some of the Tory back bench think, Cameron is still an asset to his party and regularly outpolls it..l
Ed Miliband orders English and Welsh Labour MPs up to Scotland
The Labour leader tells his MPs to "get up there" as the SNP suffers a major public relations disaster after only two of its MPs turn up for a vote on the Bedroom Tax.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11078231/Ed-Miliband-orders-English-and-Welsh-Labour-MPs-up-to-Scotland.html
And why was the SNP’s absence a “major PR disaster”? IIRC the proposal went through with a reasonable majority and a good SNP argument would be that when we’re “free” it’s going anyway.
The reality is that Labour MPs in Westminster could stop it, which is why the SNP are embarrassed. There was a major twitter spat from Pete Wishart yesterday desperate to prove that he actually tried to get on a plane, that would have arrived too late for him to vote...
Mr Miliband said the SNP no-show demonstrated how the Nationalists were trying to “con” Labour voters into believing separation would create a fairer society, pointing out that every one of his Scottish MPs was present for the vote.
And George Galloway poked fun at them - and we know how thick skinned the Nats are:
Inverting a well-worn joke about the number of Scottish Tory MPs, George Galloway tweeted: “Scotland has as many pandas as SNP MPs who voted to defeat the Bedroom Tax today.”
Too early to say he was wrong
The one that attracts me is 66/1 on Lab most votes, Con most seats.
Apart from the Scottish factor as per DH, there also are red liberals returning to Labour in the South, and potentially lots of kipper voting in Tory safe seats. This could give Tory gains from LD (with Lab in second) and a fair number of kipper second places in the blue shires.
The additive effect of this could be Con most seats Lab most votes. Not likely, but not 66/1...
The unionist parties will have a choice. Do they immediately endorse independence as suggested down thread or do they argue that this result has been obtained on a tissue of lies that is already unravelling? If the former then I do not expect any Scottish MPs to be elected in 2015, there really would be no point. If the latter is it possible that 2015 will be treated as a rerun of the referendum with unionists clearly saying a vote for them is a chance of second thoughts now that the reality is apparent?
I think this unlikely and too high a risk for parties that would want a role in the new country but do not doubt there will be a couple of million enraged unionists which is a major potential constituency.
Be interesting to see what comes out of the ashes of the Labour party mind you.
Even if its a "no" vote,with Max devo the English will be unable to vote on an even wider range of Scottish matters,whilst the Scots retain the ability to vote on English matters.
To avoid either of the above its time to sort out before the 2015 GE the West Lothian question and have English votes only on English matters.
There are two other reasons why that hung parliament situation would give them as much power as might be thought. Firstly, the Westminster parties will be extremely wary of taking actions that could easily be reversed after independence and the removal of the Scottish MPs. There's no point forming a government that's dependent on a bunch of people who won't be there in not much more than a few months and for whom the only hold can be negotiation discussions that you'll subsequently have to justify to a wholly non-Scottish electorate. Secondly, if the SNP do have objections of detail to policy, they can vote them down issue-by-issue; they don't need to make or break governments.
Maybe nationalism, in its broadest sense, is going through that right now, as a response to the challenges of globalisation...
And as for Facebook..
However, as Ed seems to best when the cameras are not on him, being off the news may favour Ed particularly if the Con contest becomes open warfare over europe.
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/sep/05/barack-obama-stonehenge-meets-british-family
A small elected British second would cover defense foreign affairs and majot transport infrastucture.
The 800+ anachronism of the House of Lords would be redundant and abolished.
It looks as though YES is winning the battle of the WWC hence the reason that SLAB are running around like headless chickens.
Assuming YES wins, there is no reason why the SNP should win a landslide next year. Winston Churchill led the country to victory in Europe and was promptly turfed out in 1945.
If Salmond had any sense he would do a deal with David Cameron whereby in return for the 59 Westminster constituencies in Scotland being suspended from the GE next year, Scotland's 56 Regional MSPs would spend time at Westminster representing Scotland when votes are required on pan-UK issues.
I would expect the Scottish Tories to adopt the Murdo Fraser plan if we vote YES and fairly quickly. We would then look to consolidate the Scottish centre-right behind our leadership. Ruth Davidson has been a revelation during the IndyRef campaign. She has been engaging, energetic and everywhere. There appears to be a new pragmatism within the leadership of the Scottish Tory Party and we have attracted lots of young people who have been campaigning strongly for the NO side.
There must be a chance that other than at the fringes, the Scottish Liberals would simply disappear. We Tories would look to draw many of their supporters back into our camp.
I would expect the Scottish Labour party to dissolve into a bitter civil war of recriminations as big beasts like Douglas Alexander and Jim Murphy realise their political careers are essentially finished and simply don't hold back on their withering dismissal of Lamont's Lightweights who will have let their vote continue to slip since 2011 leading to the YES vote.
What happens within the SNP will be interesting. There are many people like Malcolm and Stuart Dickson on here who are in effect Tories. With the YES vote being achieved, would they then move back to the new Scottish Tory Party and become part of the new centre-right movement in Scotland?
If we do vote YES then what you folks down in Englandshire is up to you. We will have enough to do sorting everything out up here to ensure that in 2016 we have a sensible government to take Scotland forward.
It's Trident, and the prospective move to the Fal estuary. Even the local Tory MP is up in arms at the idea. That 100/1 odds might not look so bad, unless the LDs revert to being the protest vote. Or UKIP.
Ten - or even five - years into independence, and with an economy collapsing faster each month, a Reunion Party riding high in the polls, the Scottish government faces a request to extradite some bonny lads who made a hit-and-run raid on Carlisle city centre, which is now a smouldering ruin. Will the Scottish PM extradite them? What will the Scots want him/her to do? Remember - a "yes" means that we know this a folk who let their hearts rule their heads.
PS: I agree there does seem to be big change in the air now, the differences are very obvious now.
As someone said the fields are for NO and the towns are for YES.
What a disaster New Labour's devolution policy has proved to be, how ridiculous the preening self-congratulatory rhetoric now seems.
Those 40 Scottish Labour MPs should have been on the streets of Scottish towns and cities yesterday campaigning to save the UK (perhaps with the exception of Gordon Brown who does more damage than good every time he opens his mouth).
Does that imply that if the former happens the latter is a shoo-in?
I think it's pretty likely - I don't see the alternatives being viable. Hammond is a fixer/safe pair of hands, Osborne is still widely disliked and no one else really has the seniority, but am I reading too much into the odds?
I agree that NO will probably win, but the above statement is rubbish.
The euphoric carnival would be over. Labour would get most Scottish seats.
Remember that those seats would suddenly disappear the following year.
Work out the big issues really quickly, and then agree that lots of the practically important but not constitutionally significant things (e.g. DVLA, HMRC or Faslane) support to continue - on a cost basis - for a period of, say, 3 years post independence to give them time to be figured out in a sensible time frame.
Independence day being the day of the next UK GE seems a logical date for separation.
I suppose there is some chance of a contest being in 2015 rather than 2014 so explaining the odds.
Don't be silly (and, btw, the vote yesterday was a PMB, so means the square root of bugger all. It's just a bit of political nonsense)
The people who are in for a shock are the sad, deluded lefties who thought they were voting for a socialist utopia. Scotland is the country of Adam Smith and Robert the Bruce, of James Watt, Alexander Graham Bell, John Boyd Dunlop and many many more. We will simply re-invent ourselves as we have done so often.
I would expect some Edinburgh financial institutions to move south to London and then return when the economy settles.
I also doubt we will see the nuclear subs leave the Clyde. It is the policy of the Scottish Greens, both of them and the Nippy Sweetie wing of the SNP. It is not the policy of SLAB, SLD or the Scottish Tories. Post independence I very much doubt the hard left would be able to muster sufficient support to get Trident removal on to the statute book, especially since keeping it will be the quid pro quo for substantial inward investment from rUK and the USA.
I'm not sure, though, it would be sufficient to just move your registered office
What you'd probably need is a Scheme of Arrangement in order to switch from a Scottish company to a company registered in England & Wales. That would need approval at an EGM.
" ...(and, btw, the vote yesterday was a PMB, so means the square root of bugger all."
The majority can vote as they wish, but only the "executive" holds any real power?
British democracy.
:-)
He even failed to create a "fixed" electoral system to prevent the SNP taking power. The hybrid system we have for Holyrood was said by the experts to be impossible for one party to win, even Scottish Labour. Well as we know, Scottish Labour didn't win but the SNP did and the rest will be history.
David Cameron should not resign. DevoMax would not have been a solution. Like the 1998 Scottish Parliament proposal, it would only have been a half-way house to full independence. The only party with a sensible policy which might have saved the UK in the long run was the Liberals (not LibDems) and their long held Federal system within the UK.
Even if Scotland votes NO in 12 days time, it will be a very narrow win and we Scots will be back voting again in 5 years in a 2nd referendum.
Like a runaway train which has been shunted on to the Tony Blair siding, there is no other conclusion than hitting the buffers with a mighty bang, either in 12 days time or in a few years time. Scotland is no Quebec.
I'm on record as not being a fan of the current set up - I'd rather separate the executive and the legislature.
Little boy abducted?- loads of spontaneous comments, (mostly very anti-authorities).
Country about to possibly split asunder? Nothing. Zilch. When mentioned by me in the context that I am taking the Friday as leave so I can stay up to watch the results, there was incomprehension and shouder shrugs. Basically it has not impinged on TBOGs awareness at all. They simply do not care if Scotland goes or stays. Neither a feeling of mild regret nor of good riddence. Not interested. It might as well be the moon.
Interesting contrast with our northen friends getting all het up. Scottish Unionists would find it very dispiriting
Mr. Easterross, I entirely agree. Blair's needless devolution to try and build a perpetual Labour fiefdom is the root cause of the potential separation of the UK. One more thing to add to Blair's list of shame.
Third practice starts in under an hour. Mercedes should be fastest over one lap, but if Williams can get close the race could be tasty between the two teams.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2014/09/iain-dale-why-we-may-have-entered-the-last-two-weeks-of-camerons-premiership.html
I may sell up and buy back in when the dust settles.
'Will Leveson be implemented by January and, if so, in which year?"
Are there any 'clever puntahs' available to advise...?
DevoMax would've required changes for England and perhaps Wales as well. You can't have 10% of the country gain such powers whilst treating the rest as second class (ie West Lothian Question on steroids).
A three question referendum could've seen a 'winning' option have 34% of the vote. For a decision about the potential end of a country you need a bare minimum of 50%+1. Imagine if no change or separation had won with 66% voting for other things. That'd be ridiculous.
Labour's short-sighted constitutional meddling and complacent arrogance has led us to this fork in the road.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-snp-and-ukip-separated-at-birth/15730#.VAq-Q4FwbqA
The die is cast as you say it is now only a question of when.
Reading cochers in Telegraph today was fun, he just cannot believe that his fantasies were wrong.