An excellent first post David. Surely, rebuilding a power base in the Scottish parliament must be the first realistic step towards seeing power in Westminster. But how far backwards will any new leader likely have to go in next year's election before that process can start? Surely, that new leader is going to start their tenure with the prospect of a further bloody beating in 2016? Will they survive to 2020?
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
Labour will get tactical voting in some constituency seats to stop the SNP winning another majority from Tories and LDs in the likes of Edinburgh and Aberdeen, unlike Westminster a vote for Labour next year will not make Ed PM
Thank you to David for that post. Can I ask a technical question regarding Scotland and Wales? Do they now by default have five year terms? With fixed term parliaments at Westminster here to stay, are we now at a point where the Scottish and Welsh elections will have to be every five years to avoid a clash with a Westminster election? Or could we get a three year term at some point?
An excellent first post David. Surely, rebuilding a power base in the Scottish parliament must be the first realistic step towards seeing power in Westminster. But how far backwards will any new leader likely have to go in next year's election before that process can start? Surely, that new leader is going to start their tenure with the prospect of a further bloody beating in 2016? Will they survive to 2020?
Gosh, this is exciting.
In my opinion Scottish Labour are 2 elections away from oblivion. The Holyrood and local elections both risk almost total wipe out for them at the moment. They need to find something interesting and distinctly Scottish to say and fast.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
If SLAB hold on to 5 of their 19 constituencies they will be doing better than it looks at the moment. If Ken Macintosh wins he surely goes top of the list even as a constituency MSP.
Thank you to David for that post. Can I ask a technical question regarding Scotland and Wales? Do they now by default have five year terms? With fixed term parliaments at Westminster here to stay, are we now at a point where the Scottish and Welsh elections will have to be every five years to avoid a clash with a Westminster election? Or could we get a three year term at some point?
Are not the Welsh and Scottish Assemblies consitutionally fixed-term? Secondly I note that the Tories have not suggested anywhere that they will (try to) repeal the FTPA.
Secondly, we are where we are, not where we were, so as HYUFD suggests, surely there will be, at constituency level a greater amount of tactical voting, possibly even tacitly encouraged by the party organisations.
Thank you to David for that post. Can I ask a technical question regarding Scotland and Wales? Do they now by default have five year terms? With fixed term parliaments at Westminster here to stay, are we now at a point where the Scottish and Welsh elections will have to be every five years to avoid a clash with a Westminster election? Or could we get a three year term at some point?
My recollection is that it is possible to trigger an election in the Scottish Parliament if it is not possible to form an administration but the process is complex. Other than that it would need fairly minor legislation to change the date of the Scottish and Welsh elections. After the fiasco of 2007 I think politicians of all stripes will be keen to avoid a clash again.
With regard to elections, I think it would be more sensible to have five-year terms for the devolved assemblies (to bring them into line with Westminster) two years after a General Election. However, whether Cameron will actually be interested in making that change given the comparatively little attention he has paid to the constitutional implications of federalism is another question entirely.
It might therefore be as @tlg86 says, that we end up with five year terms ending twelve months after those at Westminster more or less by default. This is, however, the way we ended up with most of our constitutional arrangements (e.g. the semi-reformed House of Lords) so it would hardly be unusual.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
If SLAB hold on to 5 of their 19 constituencies they will be doing better than it looks at the moment. If Ken Macintosh wins he surely goes top of the list even as a constituency MSP.
Which means that 4 current Constituency MSPs and three List MPSs for the West of Scotland will all vote against Ken McIntosh to ensure they do not lost a list chance to him.
That's 7 out of 44+1+2 or 15% of the "elected members" college. Kezia can only lose 4 votes but in reality as she is already a second slot list member, she is probably safe from this loss (maybe Chisholm will act in self interest and vote against her).
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
There has to be a reasonable chance of the Tories becoming the Shadow Government at Holyrood. The infighting over the next year will damage them further, the Tories have to fancy their chance of a 20% list vote and being ahead of Labour who could easily slip below 20%.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
Both are donkeys , with McIntosh being by far the best which means he will come second again. There is not even a chink of light for SLAB yet, they continue to circle the drain.
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
LOL, yes her handful of List MSP's will be a real opposition. Tories will be hoping the Panda's don't run.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
Both are donkeys , with McIntosh being by far the best which means he will come second again. There is not even a chink of light for SLAB yet, they continue to circle the drain.
Your 56 goons will go the same way as the Labour rubbish they replaced, in God's time.
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
There has to be a reasonable chance of the Tories becoming the Shadow Government at Holyrood. The infighting over the next year will damage them further, the Tories have to fancy their chance of a 20% list vote and being ahead of Labour who could easily slip below 20%.
What a joke , second raters fighting to be the best of the also rans
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
Both are donkeys , with McIntosh being by far the best which means he will come second again. There is not even a chink of light for SLAB yet, they continue to circle the drain.
Your 56 goons will go the same way as the Labour rubbish they replaced, in God's time.
I was rather hoping that for some of them at least it would be quicker than that!
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
The reason to exist is the key. For 40 years at least it was to stop the Tories. That is no longer a USP.
The SNP are a left of centre social democratic party, much more so under Sturgeon than under Salmond. Do we need another one? Why?
As a Unionist I am alarmed about the collapse of this bulwark of Unionism but in the Scottish domestic scene what do Labour offer? The arrogance, placemen and complacency did not stop at the Westminster MPs, it riddles the entire party. The new leader needs to find a distinctive voice.
A Labour supporter would find this easier but a starting point might be the centralising obsession of the SNP gathering power and budgets to Holyrood. The change to a single police force has not been popular and major bureaucracies such as SCSWIS (a regulator of social services, homes and nurseries) can be guaranteed to produce heavy handed interference and local stories.
The 1984ish idea of having a State official responsible for the welfare of every child is also running into predictable chaos. There are chances there but they need someone as media savvy as Ruth Davidson to take them.
And they are starting a long way behind against the most motivated, best financed and best organised party in UK politics today which has strong, established leadership. You begin to see why there was no great rush to the front amongst potential candidates.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
Both are donkeys , with McIntosh being by far the best which means he will come second again. There is not even a chink of light for SLAB yet, they continue to circle the drain.
Your 56 goons will go the same way as the Labour rubbish they replaced, in God's time.
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
The reason to exist is the key. For 40 years at least it was to stop the Tories. That is no longer a USP.
The SNP are a left of centre social democratic party, much more so under Sturgeon than under Salmond. Do we need another one? Why?
As a Unionist I am alarmed about the collapse of this bulwark of Unionism but in the Scottish domestic scene what do Labour offer? The arrogance, placemen and complacency did not stop at the Westminster MPs, it riddles the entire party. The new leader needs to find a distinctive voice.
A Labour supporter would find this easier but a starting point might be the centralising obsession of the SNP gathering power and budgets to Holyrood. The change to a single police force has not been popular and major bureaucracies such as SCSWIS (a regulator of social services, homes and nurseries) can be guaranteed to produce heavy handed interference and local stories.
The 1984ish idea of having a State official responsible for the welfare of every child is also running into predictable chaos. There are chances there but they need someone as media savvy as Ruth Davidson to take them.
And they are starting a long way behind against the most motivated, best financed and best organised party in UK politics today which has strong, established leadership. You begin to see why there was no great rush to the front amongst potential candidates.
David, Fact that the Tories , as well as being useless and policy free are London sockpuppets does not help them.
The one thing that Labour need to do is get a SLAB leader and a Labour Leader that actually get along and can work together. Unlike the Milliband / Murphy scenario. Only then can they start thinking about rebuilding anything in Scotland let alone the UK.
To be honest I think it's already too late for them and as DavidL points out up thread... They are 2 elections from oblivion.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Just what we would expect from you Monica, no clue whatsoever.
@DavidL. Many thanks for writing this article. I don't know as much about the Scottish political scene as I would like, and I learned useful knowledge from it.
I've read posts in previous threads about the SNP being a broad church which is only united by the shared aim for independence. (Very strongly united by it, mind). Presuming that they achieve their aim, then this unity will inevitably weaken - though its a moot point whether it weakens to the point where splits may occur.
Regardless, surely a post-independence Scotland would take on the same basic political structure as the vast majority of other western european countries - or is Scotland really a massively left of centre country?
Maybe SLAB will have to wait for independence before they can make a comeback?
Don't the impression that NS is "dull". Might be turn out to be more style than substance and I don't get the impression that she's a very original thinker; better at the operations of politics than the ideas.
Which rather bears out the comments here that the SNP government is a centralising one!
It appears the nationalists in the Commons are going to be voting against the European Union (Referendum) Bill. A reasoned amendment to the order for the second reading of the bill in the name of Alex Salmond, some of his Scottish colleagues, Ms Margaret Ritchie (SDLP-South Down) and Mr Hywell Williams (PC-Arfon) has been tabled. It is as follows:
That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the ... Bill because it fails to meet the gold standard set by the Scottish independence referendum in terms of inclusivity and democratic participation, in particular because the Bill does not give the right to vote to 16 and 17 year olds or most EU nationals living in the UK, the Bill does not include a double majority provision to ensure that no nation or jurisdiction of the UK can be taken out of the EU against its will, and the legislation does not include provision to ensure that the referendum vote cannot be held on the same day as the Scottish, Welsh or Northern Ireland elections.
Unlike the Scots nationalists' farcical amendment (which was not selected) to the order for the second reading of the Scotland Bill yesterday, there is a good chance that this amendment will be selected, debated and voted on.
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
There has to be a reasonable chance of the Tories becoming the Shadow Government at Holyrood. The infighting over the next year will damage them further, the Tories have to fancy their chance of a 20% list vote and being ahead of Labour who could easily slip below 20%.
The chances of the Tories polling 20%+ in Scotland, when there's a Conservative government in Westminster, has to be a slim one. The Tories haven't polled 20% in Scotland since 1992 and it's not a propitious time to do so now given the likely cuts over the next year. This is one reason why I think the Scottish Tories should go their own way (the logic holds for Scottish Labour too but I don't care about them). For the time being, the fact of government in Whitehall trumps any differentiation that might be attempted but that won't last forever. Indeed, for Labour, that time to differentiate would be now.
However, Labour still doesn't seem to get it. marqueemark's post (while not Scottish Labour) inadvertently puts his finger on it: for Labour, Holyrood remains a stepping-stone to bigger things. While that mindset remains, they will continue to struggle north of the border.
As for the Tories, whether they can hit 20% or more probably depends on the SNP. While they continue to be as popular as they are, it's not on. However, now that Sturgeon is actively placing her tanks all over Labour's lawn, should her party's popularity falter, it'll be the centre-right in her electoral coalition which is likely to peel off first.
The rule last time was that you can stand on both constituency and list only if the constituency you are standing in is not Labour held. Boyack, Eleine Murray (Dumfries) and McIntosh had their seats becoming notionally SNP/Con after boundary changes. Therefore they were allowed to stand also on the list. McIntosh turned down the offer.
The rule has now been changed and they can stand in both regardless of the constituency previous result. What they have to decided is what to do with sitting list MSPs. Previous rule had them automatically at the top if re-selected by trigger ballot. They wanted to change this but they haven't done so yet. But it seems almost everyone (apart from the list MSPs) is in favour of changing this.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
That's 7 out of 44+1+2 or 15% of the "elected members" college. Kezia can only lose 4 votes but in reality as she is already a second slot list member, she is probably safe from this loss (maybe Chisholm will act in self interest and vote against her).
I should say, a really good first thread leader from DavidL.
The quote “If you don’t know where you are going any road can take you here” is apt. Scottish Labour doesn't appear to know where it is going. Indeed, it doesn't appear to even know what it is for. In theory, it was the unionist social democratic party; in practice, it was primarily the dominant Scottish political machine. Hence the reason that internal party machinations came before either good governance or taking the battle to the opposition. When so many of its elected members didn't need to worry about the opposition, either in their own seats or in taking away power at a national level, not just your enemies but your opponents too lie on your side.
You would think that Labour might have twigged after 2007, or 2010, or 2011 that something in that analysis was amiss but each of these seems to have been written off as an aberration that would come right, or a phenomenon that could not be challenged, and they've carried on as before. Indeed, from the reports of this Scottish leadership election, they're *still* carrying on as before.
Whoever takes over from Murphy needs to decide not what their party is against but what it is there for. Because unless they first of all ask that question and secondly answer it correctly, the electorate may do it for them. That would require an alternative unionist social democratic party to be on offer. How fortunate for Labour that the Lib Dems are in such a state and that the Greens are so far left.
Scottish Labour needs to become a stand-alone party, with an ambivalent position with regard to independence. Lost Labour voters (and indeed many remaining Labour voters) are not idealogically wedded to the Union, and there is no reason for the party to hold that position either.
Nationally, I think that Nicola Sturgeon did what Nick Clegg did in the 2010 GE debates. She was the new face and attracted the most interest by her feisty style. Of course, the direct effect was localised in Scotland, but I am sure that quite a few SNP MPs in Westminster owe their seats to her.
Over the UK as a whole, I think that one of the unintended effects was that these debates demonstrated that the LDs were no longer the party of protest and I think that some of their defeated MPs owe their defeat indirectly to Nicola too!
Which was not good news for a Labour Party reeling from being wiped out in Scotland.
I should say, a really good first thread leader from DavidL.
The quote “If you don’t know where you are going any road can take you here” is apt. Scottish Labour doesn't appear to know where it is going. Indeed, it doesn't appear to even know what it is for. In theory, it was the unionist social democratic party; in practice, it was primarily the dominant Scottish political machine. Hence the reason that internal party machinations came before either good governance or taking the battle to the opposition. When so many of its elected members didn't need to worry about the opposition, either in their own seats or in taking away power at a national level, not just your enemies but your opponents too lie on your side.
You would think that Labour might have twigged after 2007, or 2010, or 2011 that something in that analysis was amiss but each of these seems to have been written off as an aberration that would come right, or a phenomenon that could not be challenged, and they've carried on as before. Indeed, from the reports of this Scottish leadership election, they're *still* carrying on as before.
Whoever takes over from Murphy needs to decide not what their party is against but what it is there for. Because unless they first of all ask that question and secondly answer it correctly, the electorate may do it for them. That would require an alternative unionist social democratic party to be on offer. How fortunate for Labour that the Lib Dems are in such a state and that the Greens are so far left.
Any chance of the LD's pulling themselves together, even if patchily? I have a (sort of) relation who is an LD councillor; sadly will not be seeing him to talk to for some considerable while but before the GE he was quite bullish!
David Tredinnick, Conservative MP, wants to become Chairman of the Health Select Committee. He believes in astrology and homeopathy. Daft sod: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33056425
I should say, a really good first thread leader from DavidL.
The quote “If you don’t know where you are going any road can take you here” is apt. Scottish Labour doesn't appear to know where it is going. Indeed, it doesn't appear to even know what it is for. In theory, it was the unionist social democratic party; in practice, it was primarily the dominant Scottish political machine. Hence the reason that internal party machinations came before either good governance or taking the battle to the opposition. When so many of its elected members didn't need to worry about the opposition, either in their own seats or in taking away power at a national level, not just your enemies but your opponents too lie on your side.
You would think that Labour might have twigged after 2007, or 2010, or 2011 that something in that analysis was amiss but each of these seems to have been written off as an aberration that would come right, or a phenomenon that could not be challenged, and they've carried on as before. Indeed, from the reports of this Scottish leadership election, they're *still* carrying on as before.
Whoever takes over from Murphy needs to decide not what their party is against but what it is there for. Because unless they first of all ask that question and secondly answer it correctly, the electorate may do it for them. That would require an alternative unionist social democratic party to be on offer. How fortunate for Labour that the Lib Dems are in such a state and that the Greens are so far left.
Any chance of the LD's pulling themselves together, even if patchily? I have a (sort of) relation who is an LD councillor; sadly will not be seeing him to talk to for some considerable while but before the GE he was quite bullish!
Unfortunately the space for protest parties is now quite crowded. I'm unsure what their offer is that would attract many voters. They seem unusually outside the loop right now.
HSBC cutting 7-8,000 jobs in UK. No job losses in Hong Kong. Will re-brand name of retail bank in UK. Closing down entirely in Brazil and Turkey. Say it will take 2 years to move HQ from London, once the decision is made.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
The quote “If you don’t know where you are going any road can take you there” is apt. Scottish Labour doesn't appear to know where it is going. Indeed, it doesn't appear to even know what it is for.
Not a problem restricted to SLAB. The wider Labour Party seems to be undergoing an existential crisis right now. Their greater risk is that as long as the current Westminster Govt. keeps the country on a steady course and is able to demonstrate it really is "One Nation", then it becomes ever more difficult to confront the fundamental competency issue:
HSBC cutting 7-8,000 jobs in UK. No job losses in Hong Kong. Will re-brand name of retail bank in UK. Closing down entirely in Brazil and Turkey. Say it will take 2 years to move HQ from London, once the decision is made.
It was a known risk that HSBC would leave London if EICIPM.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
She provides a clear and unequivocal positive message to her constituency (the people of Scotland.) She has taken a defeat and turned it into as close to a victory as it can be and has not retreated into recrimination after the referendum but rather has looked at the positives and used that to build success.
Personally I think she is one of the most talented politicians in the UK at the moment and is only let down by the rather childish behaviour of some of her party at Westminster.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
HSBC cutting 7-8,000 jobs in UK. No job losses in Hong Kong. Will re-brand name of retail bank in UK. Closing down entirely in Brazil and Turkey. Say it will take 2 years to move HQ from London, once the decision is made.
Interesting discussion on this on R4 this morning. HSBC do get badly hit - unfairly, it seems - by the bank levy in the UK, given that so much of their business is in Asia. But they are vast - and would dwarf the ability of Hong Kong to stand behind them as lender of last resort. So that role would have to fall to the smiling dragon of China... So pulling out of the UK is a risky call.
I suspect that a bit of easing off the pain of the Bank Levy in the July Budget might be enough to keep them here a few years longer.
"JOHN Swinney has admitted he is “considering” increasing income tax in Scotland next year to fill the gap in public spending from cuts by the Tory UK government."
SNP worried Scottish unemployment isn't rising fast enough ?
Andy Burnham stuck to issues he’s already spoken about during his campaign, focusing on the economy, business and Europe. .......
Jess Phillips, who is backing Yvette Cooper, said she “was very impressive” and that she “set out how Labour needs to change to win again in 2020 – but without moving away from our values”.....
Meanwhile, Liz Kendall also said that she realised the party need to change, saying “if we stick with the politics of the last election we will lose the next.”
However, she said Labour didn’t lack policies at the last election but rather they “lacked a clear vision.” She went on to argue “that’s the job of a strong leader – to set the direction and build a strong team. That’s what I will do. Through this leadership contest, we should debate, decide, unite – in that order.”
Kendall at PLP hustings: “We won’t help the weak simply by railing against the strong”. — George Eaton (@georgeeaton) June 8, 2015
On the question of the EU referendum, Kendall said “”we need a distinctive Labour Yes campaign” but that it would be a “profound mistake” to boycott a wider, cross-party ‘Yes’ campaign.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
You should holiday in the South West then! If you'd followed my reporting back on here during the election campaign, you would have heard me relating my first-hand accounts of just how toxic Sturgeon was on the doorstep. Unprompted.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
Update on nominations for Select Committe Chairs....
Work and Pension: Frank Field, Kate Green Wales: David TC Davies Treasury: Andrew Tyre Transport: Louise Ellman Standards: Kevin Barron Sciene and Technology: Nicola Blackwood, Philip Lee, Stephen McPartland PAC: Helen Goodman, Gisela Stuart Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs: Bernard Jenkins Procedure: Charles Walker Petitions: Helen Jones Northern Ireland: Lawrence Robertson Justice: David Burrowes, Bob Neill, Ed Leigh, John Howell, Jonathan Djanogly International Development: Albert Owen, Stephen Twigg Health: Sarah Wollaston, David Tredinnick Foreign Affairs: John Baron, Crispin Blunt, Daniel Kawczynski, Nadhim Zahawi Environmental Audit: Huw Irranca Davies Environment Food Rural Affairs: Neil Parish Energy: Angus McNeil Education: Neil Carmichael Defence: Richard Benyon, Julian Lewis, Bob Stewart Culture Media Sport: Damien Green, Jason McCartney Local Government: Clive Betts Business, Innovation and Skills: Adrian Bayley, Roberta Blackman Woods, Ian Wrightr Backbench Business: Sarah Champion, Ian Mearns, Barry Sheerman Scotland: no-one yet
HSBC cutting 7-8,000 jobs in UK. No job losses in Hong Kong. Will re-brand name of retail bank in UK. Closing down entirely in Brazil and Turkey. Say it will take 2 years to move HQ from London, once the decision is made.
Interesting discussion on this on R4 this morning. HSBC do get badly hit - unfairly, it seems - by the bank levy in the UK, given that so much of their business is in Asia. But they are vast - and would dwarf the ability of Hong Kong to stand behind them as lender of last resort. So that role would have to fall to the smiling dragon of China... So pulling out of the UK is a risky call. I suspect that a bit of easing off the pain of the Bank Levy in the July Budget might be enough to keep them here a few years longer.
6 things that affect the decision. 1. As you righty state the Bank Levy. 2. The cost of regulations from the UK and EC. 3. The economic future of Europe vs the Far East. 4. The political questioning and slagging off of its top people in the UK. 5. The restriction on bonuses that the EC has started vs the open nature of the Far East. 6. Down side of being within China.
"The change to a single police force has not been popular"
There is some truth in this, mainly because the soon to retire Stephen House has proved an unsatisfactory leader.
However, neither Labour nor the Tories can attack the SNP on the principle, as both supported the move to a single police force-in fact, SLAB may have been first to suggest it.
@DavidL. Many thanks for writing this article. I don't know as much about the Scottish political scene as I would like, and I learned useful knowledge from it.
I've read posts in previous threads about the SNP being a broad church which is only united by the shared aim for independence. (Very strongly united by it, mind). Presuming that they achieve their aim, then this unity will inevitably weaken - though its a moot point whether it weakens to the point where splits may occur.
Regardless, surely a post-independence Scotland would take on the same basic political structure as the vast majority of other western european countries - or is Scotland really a massively left of centre country?
Maybe SLAB will have to wait for independence before they can make a comeback?
SNP would split within seconds of Scotland being independent, far too many different political ideologies in the party.
Very interesting article - thanks DavidL. The key, as in other parts of the UK, is having a distinctive message. We've just seen that it's not enough to be against - the Conservatives are not actually popular, but they were seen as the less risky option in May. Whether that message is a centre-left social democratic one is a separate issue, and what we think is right and what works electorally may unfortunately be two separate subquestions - objectively, rabble-rousing populist parties are doing well in many countries.
Speaking of which, the Left Party in Germany is at a fork in the road as their popular leader Gregor Gysi is retiring. They have a steady 9-10% of the vote, and have become sufficiently accepted to provide a state leader in one state: they remain the choice of a quarter of the ex-GDR electorate, as they have for most of the time since reunification: as in other East European countries, the former governments were neither as generally popular as they hoped nor as generally hated as westerners thought. Gysi, who is intelligent and witty, has done a good job of bringing them over to the unified country, with 5%ish in most Western states.
The party is evenly divided between people who see their future as a leftish coalition partner with the Social Democrats and Greens, and people who see it more like Syriza. Gysi will be succeeded by a joint leadership with one person from each faction, not a very promising approach for the longer term. Again, the former route is probably the right one in terms of achieving anything positive and the latter route would probably get more votes.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
You should holiday in the South West then! If you'd followed my reporting back on here during the election campaign, you would have heard me relating my first-hand accounts of just how toxic Sturgeon was on the doorstep. Unprompted.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
I recall you reporting that, now prompted. However, my personal experience, although drawn from a much smaller base than yours is the opposite. And I'm in the East! And not in an area where the Tories were, apparently running a coach and horses through the financial provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
I do have a relative in the Torbay area and theyr're not Mail readers either. Telegraph, IIRC! Whose headline, though was "the most dangerous woman in Britain"? Or something like that.
Update on nominations for Select Committe Chairs....
Work and Pension: Frank Field, Kate Green Wales: David TC Davies Treasury: Andrew Tyre Transport: Louise Ellman Standards: Kevin Barron Sciene and Technology: Nicola Blackwood, Philip Lee, Stephen McPartland PAC: Helen Goodman, Gisela Stuart Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs: Bernard Jenkins Procedure: Charles Walker Petitions: Helen Jones Northern Ireland: Lawrence Robertson Justice: David Burrowes, Bob Neill, Ed Leigh, John Howell, Jonathan Djanogly International Development: Albert Owen, Stephen Twigg Health: Sarah Wollaston, David Tredinnick Foreign Affairs: John Baron, Crispin Blunt, Daniel Kawczynski, Nadhim Zahawi Environmental Audit: Huw Irranca Davies Environment Food Rural Affairs: Neil Parish Energy: Angus McNeil Education: Neil Carmichael Defence: Richard Benyon, Julian Lewis, Bob Stewart Culture Media Sport: Damien Green, Jason McCartney Local Government: Clive Betts Business, Innovation and Skills: Adrian Bayley, Roberta Blackman Woods, Ian Wrightr Backbench Business: Sarah Champion, Ian Mearns, Barry Sheerman Scotland: no-one yet
Nominations close tomorrow.
Hi Andrea
I notice the European Scrutiny Select Committee is not on that list. Is that selected in a different way from the others?
Welcome to DavidL, who has posted some excellent stuff in the PB comments.
He is right about the importance of the SLAB leadership contest - I think this, and the general condition of Labour in Scotland, are amongst the most important issues likely to shape UK politics over the next few years. The effect of the Scottish disaster on Labour as a whole, and on the stability of the Union, are crucial.
One important correction to the article: the paragraph beginning "I believe holding open primaries throughout Scotland" should be in italics - it's a continuation of the Ken Macintosh quote:
Welcome to DavidL, who has posted some excellent stuff in the PB comments.
He is right about the importance of the SLAB leadership contest - I think this, and the general condition of Labour in Scotland, are amongst the most important issues likely to shape UK politics over the next few years. The effect of the Scottish disaster on Labour as a whole, and on the stability of the Union, are crucial.
One important correction to the article: the paragraph beginning "I believe holding open primaries throughout Scotland" should be in italics - it's a continuation of the Ken Macintosh quote:
If, in the unlikely event that is actually the Holyrood vote and the SNP had put IndyRef 2 interior manifesto then I lol at those people who say Westminster would block a second indyref.
I'm guessing SCons trailing well behind SLab then? The shame...
Behind but not well behind. Still flatlining in the mid-teens. Which in the face of the SNP surge is actually quite reasonable. I'd still hope that as and when the Nattophilia wears off - and all parties who achieve such heights inevitably fall back from them sooner or later - it'll be the centre-right wing of the SNP electoral coalition that will go first. And that will push the Tories into second.
"JOHN Swinney has admitted he is “considering” increasing income tax in Scotland next year to fill the gap in public spending from cuts by the Tory UK government."
SNP worried Scottish unemployment isn't rising fast enough ?
Absolutely nothing in the entire article backs up the claim made by the headline.
No wonder the Hootsman can barely sell 10k copies in the whole of Scotland. It is a dead duck.
Update on nominations for Select Committe Chairs....
Work and Pension: Frank Field, Kate Green Wales: David TC Davies Treasury: Andrew Tyre Transport: Louise Ellman Standards: Kevin Barron Sciene and Technology: Nicola Blackwood, Philip Lee, Stephen McPartland PAC: Helen Goodman, Gisela Stuart Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs: Bernard Jenkins Procedure: Charles Walker Petitions: Helen Jones Northern Ireland: Lawrence Robertson Justice: David Burrowes, Bob Neill, Ed Leigh, John Howell, Jonathan Djanogly International Development: Albert Owen, Stephen Twigg Health: Sarah Wollaston, David Tredinnick Foreign Affairs: John Baron, Crispin Blunt, Daniel Kawczynski, Nadhim Zahawi Environmental Audit: Huw Irranca Davies Environment Food Rural Affairs: Neil Parish Energy: Angus McNeil Education: Neil Carmichael Defence: Richard Benyon, Julian Lewis, Bob Stewart Culture Media Sport: Damien Green, Jason McCartney Local Government: Clive Betts Business, Innovation and Skills: Adrian Bayley, Roberta Blackman Woods, Ian Wrightr Backbench Business: Sarah Champion, Ian Mearns, Barry Sheerman Scotland: no-one yet
Nominations close tomorrow.
Hi Andrea
I notice the European Scrutiny Select Committee is not on that list. Is that selected in a different way from the others?
If, in the unlikely event that is actually the Holyrood vote and the SNP had put IndyRef 2 interior manifesto then I lol at those people who say Westminster would block a second indyref.
Is there betting on which backbencher adds a clause -- echoing SNP demands on the EU referendum -- requiring unanimity across all parts of Scotland ?
@DavidL. Many thanks for writing this article. I don't know as much about the Scottish political scene as I would like, and I learned useful knowledge from it.
I've read posts in previous threads about the SNP being a broad church which is only united by the shared aim for independence. (Very strongly united by it, mind). Presuming that they achieve their aim, then this unity will inevitably weaken - though its a moot point whether it weakens to the point where splits may occur.
Regardless, surely a post-independence Scotland would take on the same basic political structure as the vast majority of other western european countries - or is Scotland really a massively left of centre country?
Maybe SLAB will have to wait for independence before they can make a comeback?
SNP would split within seconds of Scotland being independent, far too many different political ideologies in the party.
Ireland's political parties have lasted the best part of a century based on a division that objectively hasn't made any sense at all for a long time.
If Scotland did become independent then the SNP would have a future for at least as long as the Independence generation remained active in politics. It may not keep its support base, its activists or even all its elected members together but I suspect that 'building a new country' would be enough for a good few years. To the extent that there might be split, it'd be far likely to develop and remain within the party than to formally split it, in the first instance. Almost all divisions will first develop as a battle for control of a party rather than as a walkout.
I suspect a true figure will be high 50s rather than 60 as the Labour bubble has now completely broken, they no longer offer anything to anyone so the remainder of their soft vote (which if people remember, appeared to take them just south of 20%) has now moved over to the SNP after their final votes for Labour in the GE.
The Scottish Libs and Scottish Cons have no option but to merge into the Scottish Progressive Party (reflecting their old civic electoral alliance) and Labour... they may as well just shut the shop. They're done.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 UK Labour leadership hopefuls discussing whether Scottish Lab should be separate party missing point. Election was an extinction event.
Comments
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
The big problem Labour face is the infighting that's going to take place until the lists are selected. There is a very strong possibility that SLAB will not have a single Constituency MSP after 2016 so every one of their MSPs will be from the list. They also face the possibility of only the top list name being elected in at least 3 or 4 of the regions. The backstabbing and name-calling as individuals try to engineer a good list position will further damage their brand.
What this means for the leader, is that unless they have a very strong and cohesive leader the factional infighting will destroy their brand even further. I don't see Kezia Dugdale as this sort of leader, not sure Ken McIntosh is either. Arguably there isn't anyone that could actually hold the party together over the next 12 months.
Overall, you have to think SLAB have a lot further still to fall, 2011 and 2015 were claimed to be their nadir. I think that could be yet to come.
In my opinion Scottish Labour are 2 elections away from oblivion. The Holyrood and local elections both risk almost total wipe out for them at the moment. They need to find something interesting and distinctly Scottish to say and fast.
Secondly, we are where we are, not where we were, so as HYUFD suggests, surely there will be, at constituency level a greater amount of tactical voting, possibly even tacitly encouraged by the party organisations.
I deeply sympathize.
It might therefore be as @tlg86 says, that we end up with five year terms ending twelve months after those at Westminster more or less by default. This is, however, the way we ended up with most of our constitutional arrangements (e.g. the semi-reformed House of Lords) so it would hardly be unusual.
That's 7 out of 44+1+2 or 15% of the "elected members" college. Kezia can only lose 4 votes but in reality as she is already a second slot list member, she is probably safe from this loss (maybe Chisholm will act in self interest and vote against her).
Wow. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Needs some proper organisation and campaigning in order to keep losses to a minimum, but most of all a reason to exist. Do SLAB have the fight in them? Doesn't sound like it!
I can see Ruth Davidson consolidating her position as defacto leader of the opposition.
The SNP are a left of centre social democratic party, much more so under Sturgeon than under Salmond. Do we need another one? Why?
As a Unionist I am alarmed about the collapse of this bulwark of Unionism but in the Scottish domestic scene what do Labour offer? The arrogance, placemen and complacency did not stop at the Westminster MPs, it riddles the entire party. The new leader needs to find a distinctive voice.
A Labour supporter would find this easier but a starting point might be the centralising obsession of the SNP gathering power and budgets to Holyrood. The change to a single police force has not been popular and major bureaucracies such as SCSWIS (a regulator of social services, homes and nurseries) can be guaranteed to produce heavy handed interference and local stories.
The 1984ish idea of having a State official responsible for the welfare of every child is also running into predictable chaos. There are chances there but they need someone as media savvy as Ruth Davidson to take them.
And they are starting a long way behind against the most motivated, best financed and best organised party in UK politics today which has strong, established leadership. You begin to see why there was no great rush to the front amongst potential candidates.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
The one thing that Labour need to do is get a SLAB leader and a Labour Leader that actually get along and can work together. Unlike the Milliband / Murphy scenario. Only then can they start thinking about rebuilding anything in Scotland let alone the UK.
To be honest I think it's already too late for them and as DavidL points out up thread... They are 2 elections from oblivion.
Wow - that's the definition of screwed.
vv overrated.
2 elections from oblivion seems rather optomistic to me.
Good first article, Mr. L
I've read posts in previous threads about the SNP being a broad church which is only united by the shared aim for independence. (Very strongly united by it, mind). Presuming that they achieve their aim, then this unity will inevitably weaken - though its a moot point whether it weakens to the point where splits may occur.
Regardless, surely a post-independence Scotland would take on the same basic political structure as the vast majority of other western european countries - or is Scotland really a massively left of centre country?
Maybe SLAB will have to wait for independence before they can make a comeback?
Which rather bears out the comments here that the SNP government is a centralising one!
However, Labour still doesn't seem to get it. marqueemark's post (while not Scottish Labour) inadvertently puts his finger on it: for Labour, Holyrood remains a stepping-stone to bigger things. While that mindset remains, they will continue to struggle north of the border.
As for the Tories, whether they can hit 20% or more probably depends on the SNP. While they continue to be as popular as they are, it's not on. However, now that Sturgeon is actively placing her tanks all over Labour's lawn, should her party's popularity falter, it'll be the centre-right in her electoral coalition which is likely to peel off first.
Boyack, Eleine Murray (Dumfries) and McIntosh had their seats becoming notionally SNP/Con after boundary changes. Therefore they were allowed to stand also on the list. McIntosh turned down the offer.
The rule has now been changed and they can stand in both regardless of the constituency previous result. What they have to decided is what to do with sitting list MSPs. Previous rule had them automatically at the top if re-selected by trigger ballot. They wanted to change this but they haven't done so yet. But it seems almost everyone (apart from the list MSPs) is in favour of changing this.
The quote “If you don’t know where you are going any road can take you here” is apt. Scottish Labour doesn't appear to know where it is going. Indeed, it doesn't appear to even know what it is for. In theory, it was the unionist social democratic party; in practice, it was primarily the dominant Scottish political machine. Hence the reason that internal party machinations came before either good governance or taking the battle to the opposition. When so many of its elected members didn't need to worry about the opposition, either in their own seats or in taking away power at a national level, not just your enemies but your opponents too lie on your side.
You would think that Labour might have twigged after 2007, or 2010, or 2011 that something in that analysis was amiss but each of these seems to have been written off as an aberration that would come right, or a phenomenon that could not be challenged, and they've carried on as before. Indeed, from the reports of this Scottish leadership election, they're *still* carrying on as before.
Whoever takes over from Murphy needs to decide not what their party is against but what it is there for. Because unless they first of all ask that question and secondly answer it correctly, the electorate may do it for them. That would require an alternative unionist social democratic party to be on offer. How fortunate for Labour that the Lib Dems are in such a state and that the Greens are so far left.
Over the UK as a whole, I think that one of the unintended effects was that these debates demonstrated that the LDs were no longer the party of protest and I think that some of their defeated MPs owe their defeat indirectly to Nicola too!
Which was not good news for a Labour Party reeling from being wiped out in Scotland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33056425
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
"Labour: why would you take the risk?"
Personally I think she is one of the most talented politicians in the UK at the moment and is only let down by the rather childish behaviour of some of her party at Westminster.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
I suspect that a bit of easing off the pain of the Bank Levy in the July Budget might be enough to keep them here a few years longer.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-to-consider-raising-scots-income-tax-next-year-1-3795822
"JOHN Swinney has admitted he is “considering” increasing income tax in Scotland next year to fill the gap in public spending from cuts by the Tory UK government."
SNP worried Scottish unemployment isn't rising fast enough ?
That remains my view today, so you can guess what I think of the prospects for the British Labour Party in Scotland.
http://labourlist.org/2015/06/what-happened-at-the-plp-leadership-hustings-today/
Andy Burnham stuck to issues he’s already spoken about during his campaign, focusing on the economy, business and Europe. .......
Jess Phillips, who is backing Yvette Cooper, said she “was very impressive” and that she “set out how Labour needs to change to win again in 2020 – but without moving away from our values”.....
Meanwhile, Liz Kendall also said that she realised the party need to change, saying “if we stick with the politics of the last election we will lose the next.”
However, she said Labour didn’t lack policies at the last election but rather they “lacked a clear vision.” She went on to argue “that’s the job of a strong leader – to set the direction and build a strong team. That’s what I will do. Through this leadership contest, we should debate, decide, unite – in that order.”
Kendall at PLP hustings: “We won’t help the weak simply by railing against the strong”. — George Eaton (@georgeeaton) June 8, 2015
On the question of the EU referendum, Kendall said “”we need a distinctive Labour Yes campaign” but that it would be a “profound mistake” to boycott a wider, cross-party ‘Yes’ campaign.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
Work and Pension: Frank Field, Kate Green
Wales: David TC Davies
Treasury: Andrew Tyre
Transport: Louise Ellman
Standards: Kevin Barron
Sciene and Technology: Nicola Blackwood, Philip Lee, Stephen McPartland
PAC: Helen Goodman, Gisela Stuart
Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs: Bernard Jenkins
Procedure: Charles Walker
Petitions: Helen Jones
Northern Ireland: Lawrence Robertson
Justice: David Burrowes, Bob Neill, Ed Leigh, John Howell, Jonathan Djanogly
International Development: Albert Owen, Stephen Twigg
Health: Sarah Wollaston, David Tredinnick
Foreign Affairs: John Baron, Crispin Blunt, Daniel Kawczynski, Nadhim Zahawi
Environmental Audit: Huw Irranca Davies
Environment Food Rural Affairs: Neil Parish
Energy: Angus McNeil
Education: Neil Carmichael
Defence: Richard Benyon, Julian Lewis, Bob Stewart
Culture Media Sport: Damien Green, Jason McCartney
Local Government: Clive Betts
Business, Innovation and Skills: Adrian Bayley, Roberta Blackman Woods, Ian Wrightr
Backbench Business: Sarah Champion, Ian Mearns, Barry Sheerman
Scotland: no-one yet
Nominations close tomorrow.
1. As you righty state the Bank Levy.
2. The cost of regulations from the UK and EC.
3. The economic future of Europe vs the Far East.
4. The political questioning and slagging off of its top people in the UK.
5. The restriction on bonuses that the EC has started vs the open nature of the Far East.
6. Down side of being within China.
Only point 6 works in our favour.
"The change to a single police force has not been popular"
There is some truth in this, mainly because the soon to retire Stephen House has proved an unsatisfactory leader.
However, neither Labour nor the Tories can attack the SNP on the principle, as both supported the move to a single police force-in fact, SLAB may have been first to suggest it.
Are these all the nominations so far or just new ones added to ones earlier?
Speaking of which, the Left Party in Germany is at a fork in the road as their popular leader Gregor Gysi is retiring. They have a steady 9-10% of the vote, and have become sufficiently accepted to provide a state leader in one state: they remain the choice of a quarter of the ex-GDR electorate, as they have for most of the time since reunification: as in other East European countries, the former governments were neither as generally popular as they hoped nor as generally hated as westerners thought. Gysi, who is intelligent and witty, has done a good job of bringing them over to the unified country, with 5%ish in most Western states.
The party is evenly divided between people who see their future as a leftish coalition partner with the Social Democrats and Greens, and people who see it more like Syriza. Gysi will be succeeded by a joint leadership with one person from each faction, not a very promising approach for the longer term. Again, the former route is probably the right one in terms of achieving anything positive and the latter route would probably get more votes.
I do have a relative in the Torbay area and theyr're not Mail readers either. Telegraph, IIRC! Whose headline, though was "the most dangerous woman in Britain"? Or something like that.
New TNS poll has SNP on 60%, Lab on 19%
I notice the European Scrutiny Select Committee is not on that list. Is that selected in a different way from the others?
SNP 60% (!), Lab 19%, Con 15%, Lib Dems 3%.
via @georgeeaton
The buggers.
"New TNS poll has SNP on 60%, Lab on 19%"
I expect the true SNP peak is 70% :-) :-) :-)
SNP 50%
LAB 19%
CON 14%
GRN 10%
LD 5%
UKIP 2%
He is right about the importance of the SLAB leadership contest - I think this, and the general condition of Labour in Scotland, are amongst the most important issues likely to shape UK politics over the next few years. The effect of the Scottish disaster on Labour as a whole, and on the stability of the Union, are crucial.
One important correction to the article: the paragraph beginning "I believe holding open primaries throughout Scotland" should be in italics - it's a continuation of the Ken Macintosh quote:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/macintosh-in-call-radical-overhaul-of-scottish-labour-leadership-election.127205552
Thanks for the comments.
No wonder the Hootsman can barely sell 10k copies in the whole of Scotland. It is a dead duck.
If Scotland did become independent then the SNP would have a future for at least as long as the Independence generation remained active in politics. It may not keep its support base, its activists or even all its elected members together but I suspect that 'building a new country' would be enough for a good few years. To the extent that there might be split, it'd be far likely to develop and remain within the party than to formally split it, in the first instance. Almost all divisions will first develop as a battle for control of a party rather than as a walkout.
One does begin to wonder how the LD’s can get out of the mess they are in.
The Scottish Libs and Scottish Cons have no option but to merge into the Scottish Progressive Party (reflecting their old civic electoral alliance) and Labour... they may as well just shut the shop. They're done.
UK Labour leadership hopefuls discussing whether Scottish Lab should be separate party missing point. Election was an extinction event.
I'm so proud I got Ajockalypse Now into a thread header headline on election night