Intriguing news on the SNP website stating that the Lib Dems have 'signalled' that they will include a referendum in their 2011 manifesto.
Even though Stephen Glenn has already flatly denied it on behalf of the Policy Committee, I reckon it would be a very clever move from Scotland's 4th (and if it's not careful 5th) biggest party. The SNP would promise a referendum of course but the Lib Dem could quite reasonably campaign on delivering it. A crucial difference and one that could concentrate nationalist minds when they have a ballot slip in front of them.
The tactical voting would be intriguing if there was a cast-iron promise from Tavish Scott that his party would back SNP plans for a referendum as part of a coalition deal. If you were an SNP voter, who would you cast your vote for in Shetland, Orkney, the Border and parts of the North East where the SNP aren't the main challengers? Even in the regional vote there could be a crucial extra 2-3% on the back of such a promise which could deliver a few more MSPs.
And if the SNP are, as expected, the largest party after May 2011 then a coalition is surely in the Lib Dems' best interests. It's not like the last 2,5 years have been a rip-roaring success for them being on the outside looking in. Furthermore, if Labour end up being the largest party then the Lib Dems will have benefitted electorally from its offer without actually having to deliver on it.
It is in Tavish Scott's best interests to risk being the handmaiden to independence in order to capitalise on increased support and a strong policy to campaign on at the next election.
However, it doesn't look like the party faithful, either at the top or the bottom, are interested in being flexible and improving their dwindling fortunes...
Salmond vs Trump
14 minutes ago
13 comments:
They've shown themselves to be clueless and up to their necks in Labour back-room deal type politics. That's why they're getting trounced in Aberdeen..
We could put pressure on them but we can't really argue for a referendum unless we make the case for independence.
This is the problem with underplaying your key policy - it changes everything..
It would seem to be a no-brainer for the LDs to support a "cumulative" (not a multi-option) referendum. I use the term because most independence supporters would back the LD's constitutional preference as better than what we have.
The first question could be the LD proposal Yes/No followed by the SNP question on Independence something like "in addition to the powers stated above, do you want all other powers exercised at Westminster to be transferred to Holyrood Yes/No".
All the polling evidence that the majority of Scots would vote Yes and No to these questions.
Interestingly, if Labour were returned to power but the Lib Dems and SNP vote together gave a parliamentary majority for a referendum on Scotland's future, would the Liberals be compelled to deliver it?
I can't seem them offering it as a 'coalition' only promise.
It all reeks of a desperation from Tavish's Yarl Squad of a Party.
Up helly 'Aa I say!
PS I wouldn't rule out Labour having a very similar promise in their 2011 manifesto, post 2010 defeat at the hands of Cameron.
Due to the wonderful world of short-term accommodation, I have my vote registered in West Aberdeenshire despite living in Edinburgh South.
I think I'll probably be sticking to my guns and voting SNP, although it would require a swing of 15,000 votes to change the seat. Probably better odds then trying to knock Darling out.
Jeff I was pointing out that nothing has thus far been put into a Lib Dem manifesto for 2011 yet. The SNP make a news release that it is a fait acompli. At this time that document has not started to take a final shape. But the issue of the definite inclusion has not been discussed in the only place where it matters (ie conference) nor has the policy committee been considering it.
The headline on the SNP website is quite plainly therefore an untruth at this time. Not that it may not be a prophecy but it is misleading, setting the SNPs own agenda and fresh on the heels of Salmonds attempts to clean up the internet. If he truly wants to win the debate for Independence through the internet he shuldn't use his own party website in an attempt to dictate manifesto pledges to other parties.
I think this was a point that I made before conference, the more Salmond and the SNP seem to want the dictate to the Lib Dems what their stance on this will be, the more they will alienate people within the Lib Dems. So keep going the way you are, that way the neverendum will end up leading to there never being one.
I'm pleased that oldnat has realises that there should be yes/no questions on both more powers and also then on full independence.
Stephen Glenn
I haven't just "realised" that. As an "old Liberal" and a supporter of Independence, I'll argue my case but accept the democratic decision of the Scottish people. I am both Liberal and Democratic.
If your party lived up to its name, instead of Tavish Scott's posturing as a substitute for policy, then there would be a mechanism for progressing further down the road of Scottish autonomy.
I don't see that many differences between the political strategies of the 4 main parties in Scotland (see - I'm being nice to you!) - most of the difference is exaggerated for the benefit of party politicians, as opposed to the people.
The constitutional issue, of course, is different. The SNP and the LDs share a measure of common ground on that. It seems stupid for you not to co-operate on that and achieve your constitutional aims (and go some way towards mine).
Fair points Stephen, I don't know where the story came from any more than you do.
And an interesting angle to suggest the more the snp pushes for you to include it the less likely you are to do so. Maybe the Nats are worried the Lib Dems will steal their thunder and are deliberately talking the policy out the LD manifesto!
I mean this in the nicest possible way, Tavish still needs a big idea...
'English families lose £4.5bn a year to Scotland'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234305/English-families-lose-4-5bn-year-Scotland.html#ixzz0ZBlSaa8e
*if* (big IF) it's true, this could well bugger up our 2011 campaign. That being said, it could also kill the Lib-dems or make them support the Bill in January….
If they suddenly change their minds after they vote the bill down, it could very much screw them into 5th place and push us into a guaranteed government :D
Oh well, I'm tremendously relaxed at the prospect...
"Hand maidens to independance" in suporting a referensdum or as "Liberal Autocrats" in denying one, one cant help feel that the Lib Dems are being seriously outflanked by the SNP.
Jeff
A big flaw in this argument, if the Lib Dems include a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum, just why would anyone believe them?
They were very quick to cover themselves with Labours fig leaf against a referendum now, recession etc, even though one of the options outlined is their preferred option.
The question I would ask them if they came looking for my vote, why promise a referendum now when you had the chance to vote for one, and as usual you followed Labour like sheep.
They have shown themselves to be even worse in opposition than they were in coalition, no policies no ideas no vision, just juvenile sniping from the sidelines.
The SNP government have shown that for all its faults minority government can work. Better a minority government than having a total non entity like Tavish in your cabinet.
I think if they do put that in their manifesto then they realise that they made a very big tactical mistake in 2007 and are now in electoral no mans land. They want to join a coalition with the SNP. That is my take on the matter.
Today in the Parliament is presumably the source of the SNP claim.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8404905.stm
Post a Comment