Being 80% of the way through the current term of the Scottish Parliament, many minds will soon be focussing on next year’s Holyrood elections and the Scottish press and blogs will ratchet up to fever pitch with comment and speculation, the big question inevitably being whether the SNP can win a second term by remaining the largest party.
Strictly on current polling evidence, that won’t happen and we can look forward to First Minister Iain Gray running a minority administration or a coalition with the Lib Dems and/or Greens.
The latest poll showed voting intentions of:
Constituency Vote
Labour – 45%
SNP – 29%
Conservatives – 13%
Lib Dems – 12%
Regional Vote
Labour – 41%
SNP – 28%
Conservatives – 13%
Lib Dems – 12%
Greens – ?%
Many of a Nationalist bent will lament the supposed unthinking behaviour of fellow Scots in falling behind Labour in considerable numbers again. I would personally warn against such complacency.
The simple fact that Scots have voted in an SNP Government means that the old adage that 'parts of Scotland would vote for a donkey in a red rosette' no longer rings true. The SNP is being weighed, it is being tested and, for now at least, it is being found wanting. The silver lining is that, as yet, the Labour Shadow Cabinet has not even been weighed in the public’s mind, let alone tested or wanted.
So why are, if this latest poll is to be believed, Scots coming 'home' to Labour? Particularly when the SNP enjoyed such enormous poll leads only a year ago?
The main reason stems from the unavoidable notion that, in Scotland at least, an anti-Tory vote is a Labour vote. We’ve seen it over the decades and we saw it decisively in the last election when Labour increased their vote without any particular message to sell to the population.
Now, the Conservatives are not competing to be the largest party at Holyrood and nor are they even competing to be a coalition partner, reluctantly accepting their position as Parliament pariahs, so what difference should an anti-Tory vote make in devolved Scotland?
Well, for the first time since the Scottish Parliament took its first tentative steps into the world of national democracy, we are holding elections against the backdrop of a Conservative administration at Westminster. Puritans can wish all they like that Scots will vote with only devolved matters in mind but the reality will be far from the case and for many voters wishing to protest at Prime Minister Cameron being in Number 10, a Labour vote will be the automatic choice.
This was meant to be the perfect storm: the Tories at Westminster, the SNP in Holyrood, constitutional change on the table as an issue. Far from the population falling behind the Nats, it is Labour who seem to be reaping the rewards.
Another factor in the charge of Labour in the Holyrood polling stakes is the demise of the Liberal Democrats as a credible force in Scottish Politics. They may have the Deputy Prime Minister and the Scottish Secretary but there’s no discernible message coming out of the Scottish Lib Dem camp and their poll ratings are derisory at a lowly 12%. While all of that remains, Labour will be the primary benefactors.
Indeed, if the Liberal Democrats are the first to move on ‘Calman plus’ and push for a more aggressive transfer of powers from Westminster to Holyrood, it may be would-be SNP votes rather than would-be Labour votes that Tavish Scott ends up taking in 2011, thus widening the gap between Labour and the SNP even further, making Salmond’s challenge to stay on as FM al the more difficult.
The final reason that I shall proffer for the SNP’s recent fall from grace (sadly I could go on) is the man at the top himself. Alex Salmond is one of the longest serving leaders in the UK’s recent history and far and away the longest serving Scottish leader. The First Minister may boast of the experience that such tenure brings but the other side of the coin is that people are more than a little bit fed up of him. Yes, there is a grudging acceptance from most that Alex is a tremendous communicator and a formidable political operator but a tipping point will inevitably be reached where such strengths are actually seen as weaknesses and the very sound of his voice may be beginning to grate for some, if it isn’t already.
Some performances at FMQs have been too loud, too abrasive and ultimately too cringeworthy, though one could argue that the quality of the answers can only be as good as the quality of the questions. However, with Salmond already having a particular problem in attracting female support amongst the electorate, a hectoring tone that sees no let up and a long period at the forefront of Scottish Politics that can’t be reversed, the FM’s personal attributes and longevity may all end up counting against the SNP this time around.
I believe the SNP would stand a better chance of winning a second term with Nicola Sturgeon as leader and I just wonder if Alex resigned from the correct chamber. Would the SNP’s aims be better served with Sturgeon at Holyrood and Salmond at Westminster? I guess we’ll never know.
Indeed, with Salmond, Goldie and Scott fairly well kent faces in the Parliament, perhaps 'Gray-mania' could be the unlikely story of 2011, following in the footsteps of Nick Clegg as an appetite for new voices whets itself.
The silver lining, for those wishing to see the SNP returned for another four years, is that Iain Gray has not yet been considered by most of the Scottish population as the next First Minister. A general dislike for Salmond does not necessarily equate to a preference for Gray.
Going into the 2007 Holyrood election, the SNP enjoyed a significant poll lead over Labour which was caused by a country not convinced with Jack McConnell as First Minister. That lead narrowed to a single percentage point as many realised that they were even less convinced by an SNP Government.
The same dashing of an early lead happened for Cameron leading up to the General Election, it happened for the Democrats leading up to the 2004 Presidential election and it probably happens in the vast majority of elections where a challenger is up against an incumbent.
There is more than just poll results counting against the SNP going into the 2011 election and the party has less to sell than in 2007. Consequently, I suspect that the party’s slogan will have to be even better than the perfectly encapsulated “It’s time” of 2007 if the Nats want to swing the current depressing poll figures back in their favour in time for a second Holyrood win.
SNP Tax
1 minute ago
25 comments:
The biggest factor in the last election was revulsion at the Iraq war. Many previous Labour voters voted SNP, but most just stayed at home and certainly the Labour Party was thoroughly demoralised and ran a lacklustre campaign. Labour's core support has recovered since then.
As you, amongst everyone else, underestimated the resilience of the Labour vote in working class areas, you would be correct not to repeat the same mistake again. The opinions of the Blogeratti are not representative of the swathes of people whose first concerns are the state of schools, hospitals, the streets and crime.
I largely agree Anon but I would counter that you don't underestimate how strong a consideration the anti-Tory vote was last month.
You suggest the Labour vote went up cos of concern for schools/hospitals/crime but I would say it went up due to more constituencies simply having Labour incumbents.
It was a very policy-light election in Scotland due to left-right considerations and devolution.
The SNP is being weighed, it is being tested and, for now at least, it is being found wanting.
Doesn't this contradict your diagnosis that "for many voters wishing to protest at Prime Minister Cameron being in Number 10, a Labour vote will be the automatic choice"? That sounds like a call for "complacency", too - you seem to be saying that if the UK votes Tory, Scots will vote Labour, and there's nothing we can do about it.
That said, this poll would give Labour the best result they've ever achieved at Holyrood, which I find a bit hard to believe. I suspect the most dangerous thing for the SNP is that Labour have really mastered their postal GOTV operation. Postal votes on demand should be abolished anyway because of the potential (frequently realised) for fraud. Sadly the UK government don't seem to have any plans to do this.
"I largely agree Anon but I would counter that you don't underestimate how strong a consideration the anti-Tory vote was last month."
But was it though? I think it was more a pro Labour vote in the sense that the Scots voted for the status quo in Westminster politically, and economically.
There were distinct dividing lines between the two parties, and now we have a Tory/Libdem coalition instead of either a Labour or Tory government. That means its not going to be so clear cut come the Holyrood elections next year.
What if all those Labour lies and threats about Tory policies don't materialise? What if Cameron proves to be a strong and statesmanlike PM? What if the economy starts to improve and confidence returns?
How can Labour or the SNP make a pitch to govern in Holyrood but try to blame the other Parliament for all their mistakes when the Tories have never been or are likely to be in power in Westminster or Edinburgh over the last 13 years?
Could this coalition be the final step in the five year Tory detox strategy?
As for the SNP election campaign, I think less on Independence referedem's and Calman in particular, it excites the political and the media, but it doesn't do it for the voters right now. Concentrate on the economy and sorting out the Scottish finances over the next few years. The politicians might think they are ready for fiscal autonomy, but I am yet to be convinced the public up here are as confident of their abilities.
And they won't be until some in the Labour party or the SNP start being more honest and talk the truth. The reason that Scotland goes socialist is because of the level of state dependence up here in all its forms from welfare to job security. It suits the left leaning parties for that to continue, but it screws the SNP on independence. And that has got to be the biggest failure of Salmond and his team while in government.
North Sea oil and gas etc won't be able to replace the sugar coated State dummy or the removal of nanny from the scene altogether. Wean the voters of the State and the Labour party, or except that the Union is here to stay.
I don't think Iraq was really a factor in 2007. I do think that people vote mainly on the basis of the state of schools, hospitals, the streets and crime. Holyrood has control of all of these things.
That's why the SNP are best placed to win because they have a good record. Yeah Labour will bang on about not having class sizes of 18 but we still have the lowest class sizes ever. And we have the 1000 more police and crime is falling. Plus a good record on health - HAIs cut, more frontline staff, waiting times reduced, longer openiong hours for GPs etc. Then there's the other good things like housing and of course the council tax freeze.
Labour in contrast don't have much to say and have made some pretty rash and unaffordable spending commitments which they have no way to fund (other than by increasing taxes by a very large amount.)
But then Labour do not really want to win. They don't want to be in charge when the spending cuts kick in.
The SNP needs to think about that too. I don't think a formal coalition is an option but we may need to consider a government-of-all-the-talents kind of approach. That could be the only way to get thru the next few years with any degree of political stability and is also probably the best way to move the devolution settlement forward as well.
"The opinions of the Blogeratti are not representative of the swathes of people whose first concerns are the state of schools, hospitals, the streets and crime"
Yes, Labour did really well with those.
WTF?
I find this a pretty contradictory post Jeff, it seems more than a bit muddled and as Colin has pointed out, quite frankly contrary in areas.
The truth is Labour have not put any policies up fro scrutiny, the 2010 General election was fought on a popularity context, not policies as neither side expanded on any.
Devolution for Scots will be very different.
Parties will be asked to define what they will be doing and Labour won't get away with simply saying that they\'ll fight 'tory cuts', how will they do it.
The public apathy to 'blaming westminister' works both ways, Labour can't reap any rewards from that after slamming the SNP for it.
In the end greater devolution with a growing thrist for fill autonomy is growing as people start to realise that we are infact two very different nations with different values and different needs.
The bigger question is whether minority government can ever work again in Scotland.
Jeff
Remember that this polling was in the aftermath of a Westminster election where the media effectively excluded the SNP from the campaign.
The Holyrood election will be very different - when people are forced to choose between Grey and Salmond, then I reckon they'll chose Salmond again. I also think that their reprehensible politicking over minimum alcohol pricing will hurt Labour amongst ABC1 voters.
However, Salmond would do well to change his tune over cuts. His line should be:-
"We have to cut because our block grant has been cut due to Labour wrecking the UK economy".
Easy to understand (even for Labour voters!), consistent with what the Tories and Libs are saying (thus, isolating Labour) and TRUE. Denying that cuts are being made is the wrong way to play it, because it isn't convincing and it isn't true.
Having said that, the next election will be a good one to lose. The next Scottish govt. are going to have some painful medicine to hand out.
CC
"The biggest factor in the last election was revulsion at the Iraq war." - Don't think so. The biggest factor was a tired looking New Labour government witn no ambition - don't you remember "Do less, better"?
In any case, it's not the "resilience of the Labour vote in working class area's" which is being underestimated, but the spin eminating from New Labour polititians which the SNP are having serious problems combating. The "Ripped Off Glasgow" slogan & campaign comes to mind, and of course the current campaign "More Nats - More NHS Cuts".
I would also say that Salmond hasn't been at the top of his game this year. He took his eye off the ball with the Independence referendum, and I would say he hasn't recovered yet. This is despite the worst set of New Labour candidates ever being fielded.
Your just another
anti SNP campaigner
disguised as pro SNP .
You live in London
you don't even vote for the party .
Hindrance not a help .
Colin,
I don't see the contradiction but you don't seem to be alone in thinking there is one.
The SNP has been found wanting in so much that it is down in the polls. Part of that lowly position is due to it not being Labour and, as was pointed out by Cassius, the poll was conducted very soon after the GE, so a recent Labour vote may have been at the forefront of the sampled minds.
This however is only part of the reason the SNP is doing so badly but nonetheless I don't think it is powerless to combat 'not being Labour'. To an extent, the SNP may have to out-Labour Labour at this election.
In 2007 the Nats positioned themselves as something different to the ruling Lab/Lib coalition. Perhaps their best bet this time around is to paint themselves as similar to what people have in mind when they think of what the Labour party should be in theory; so getting more on the side of the workers, more on the side of unions, more on the side of poorer schools etc.
And with opposition to Trident and any lingering anti-Iraq War sentiment out there, perhaps that'll be enough to scrape home.
Fully agree about postal voting. The idea that a significant tranche of voters could have already voted before the date of the election and the ballot slip (or whatever it is) can be held by a political party just seems plain wrong.
Fitalass,
I don't think one can fully call it a pro-Labour election given that SNP MPs increased their majorities similar to Labour MPs, there was just more of the latter which disguised what was really going on. Scots voted for the lefty incumbent to keep the righties out.
I really don't think that Cameron is about to detoxify the Tory brand in Scotland either. It's not like David Cameron is new on the scene and I would argue that if Scotland was ever going to warm to him then it would've been when he was in Opposition and not when he was raining cuts down on the public sector.
I'll give you one thing though, if Labour vote in Ed Balls (which they'd be mad to), Scotland will vote for Tories more next time around and maybe even in 2011.
Failing that, I only see Conservatives stuck on the ~15% mark, same for the Lib Dems who continue to give out mixed signals and still miss that one big policy for Scots to rally around.
For the SNP, you say less on Calman and referenda (and I agree with you) but the vast majority of SNP members are only interested in independence so there's a difficult balance to be struck. I think they missed a trick in not going in full throttle on independence as their main issue in 2010. The SNP could have quite successfully linked the flailing economy to their independence arguments but, well, what's been has been.
As if to prove my earlier point, tonight's Newsnicht commentators are Labour veteran Pat Watters, Brian Ashcroft aka Mr Wendy Alexander and CBI uber-unionist Ian McMillan....as usual, no nationalist voices to be heard.
About time Eck took the gloves off with the media, starting with the BBC.
CC
I'm not sure if the Iraq War didn't play an indirect role in the 2007 election Indy.
I only really have anecdotal evidence but I know several people who vowed back in 2004/2005 never to vote Labour again over the mess of Iraq and I know some of them stuck to that in 2007. (I don't know how the other few voted)
I daresay many of them went back to Labour in May 2010 though, to be fair.
And how does one distinguish between Labour and the SNP on hospitals and crime and schools anyway? You are right that the SNP has done very well with class sizes and waiting times but there really isn't any ideological difference between the two main parties and I can't imagine that Sturgeon saving a few A&Es and Baker promising the 'carry a knife, go to jail' mantra will make too much difference for most.
All in all, I think this election will be about Council Tax (again) so Labour's move on this area will be key.
Can the SNP win with the same message of Local Income Tax, same as four years ago and undelivered in the intervening period? I don't get the impression it's a sufficiently popular or understood policy to pull off twice.
Jeff, one of your best posts ever in my view.
It made painful reading for a life-long nationalist like myself, but it was objective and well-reasoned.
The SNP have come from behind before and I don't rule out that they will do so again.
What would really change matters is if the Scottish Labour Party could be persuaded to embrace Scottish independence. Pigs might fly, you will say. But Labour claims to be the the party of principle, and they accept this principle elsewhere in the world. So why not in their own back yard.
Stranger things have happened.
I never thought the Berlin Wall would come down. But it did.
Thanks Hamish, very kind of you.
As you'll probably know already, I do like to rub against the grain a little which I of course knew I'd be doing here. Not for ornery's sake but just to challenge firmly held viewpoints with an honest take of the situation.
Maybe the SNP will ultimately sail through as you hope they will, there's certainly plenty of twists, turns and polls to come. I do think that some SNP supporters believe the party will win simply because they think they should. I guess that was the 'complacency' I was talking about.
Jeff
I have a great council tax policy -progressively scrap it and replace it with....nothing.
Councils get 80% of their funding from Holyrood anyway - that can stay. The other 20%, they can find over a sensible period, say a decade, by sharing 'back office' services and not filling vacated positions.
Most private sector businesses have had to cut pay, make redundancies cancel bonuses, clamp down on expenses/perks/travel and so on. I can't see why our public sector should be immune from change.
CC
Sadly many voters are not very political, they will get their voting intentions and ideas via the Daily Record or the Beeb.
Vote for labour as a protest against Cameron and his cuts will resonate with those who have no idea who even runs the hospitals and schools. Sad but true.
How many of those people would even know what a block grant was? Not the majority, that is for sure.
Agree about Salmond, he has become a liability. It's time the SNP switched tack.
Most people I know are turned off scottish independence by the dominance of this arrogant bully in the debate. The whole 'westminster cuts' thing really grates too, what happened to pushing a positive case for independence? So many missed opportunities for reasoned political arguments, too much flag-waving for my liking.
I hope the polls wake the party up and they actually bother to work on policy again.
I see from today's Sun that McAveety's object of desire was, in fact, a schoolgirl.
Oh dear.
Progressive Labour voters cared about Iraq and many moved away from the party even pripr to 2007 to a range of parties - SNP, Lib Dem and Green.
However my experience is that the working class vote does not particularly care about Iraq.They are more concerned about bread and butter issues like schools, hospitals, crime and so on.
I think the SNP do have a good position on those issues. I agree it is ideologically the same as Labour's - but their record is better. They have delivered a more visible police presence - people see more police out and about particularly in high crime areas and it is making a difference. In hospitals they have ended the privatisation of cleaning services which is symbolically important. They have not used PFI either - Labour see that as a weak spot but it's going to be an SNP strong point as they will be able to publish PFI repayments in every area so that people can see exactly what proportion of local budgets are going to Labour's private financier pals. And so on.
So I think the SNP has a strong record - what remains to be decided is the key policies that we will campaign on in terms of future delivery.
The SNP should ditch the anti-London agenda and work with Unionist parties in a more constructive way. Ruling out altogether (as seen on Grahams website) a coalition with the Conservatives is wrong.
Less of the 'cuts' and get on with the job of governance.
And let me also note this:
If Scotland were to become both Socialist and Independent, I would flock faster to England/USA/Capitalist Utopia before you could shout any word with three letters in it.
Dangerous thinking, that Socialism.
The sharpest reductions in Scotland's budget will come after 2011. The worst of the public sector cutting will happen then. Scotland will more than likely plummet back into recession. Unemployment will continue to rise. There won't be any money around for Unionists to bribe the Scots to stay in the Union with - which is been Unionist economic policy since the 1960s.
Calman is an exercise in economic illiteracy that will only serve to have a grievous effect on Scotland's economy and finances. Anyone with half a brain acknowledges that.
Would it really, really be that bad to see First Minister Iain Gray and Prime Minister David Cameron being made to account for themselves in such a horrendous set of economic and political circumstances?
If I were an SNP'er, I think I'd probably be happy to give Government a miss for the next 5 years or so.
'Plucky Belgium is leading the way. Today Flanders, tomorrow Scotland'
- However much Euro-enthusiasts wish it were otherwise, the craving for lower-tier self-rule refuses to die
... The party leader, Bart de Wever, favours "evolutionary evaporation" of the Belgian state and the emergence of Flanders as a freestanding member of the European Union. Sooner or later, he will get his way.
However much Euro-enthusiasts wish it were otherwise, the craving for lower tier self-government refuses to die. Indeed, it is booming. In Scandinavia, Italy, Spain, even the UK, concession after concession is made to devolutionary sentiment. It is made with a patronising nod at the parish-pump quaintness of separatist leaders, dubbed populist, extremist or right-wing, never just democratic.
To the Economist, de Wever is a "populist bruiser". To the Times, his success has "potentially disastrous implications" for Europe. Similar language is used of the Italians' Northern League, Scotland's nationalists and Spain's Catalans. No one says why. To modern Eurocrats, localists are merely below the salt.
Countries dissolve when the political logic that held them together dissolves.
The European movement now mimics the Roman Catholic church in the 16th century. Its popes and cardinals, in perpetual conclave, fear Protestant dissent on all sides yet do nothing but reassert the dogma of ever-closer union and demand that everyone works for a "better Europe".
When a country – let alone a continent – lacks the bonds of a collective nationhood it is no longer a country, merely a state. Nations forged in war do not necessarily survive peace.
Devolution everywhere is a political one-way ticket. After Flanders, Scotland.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/17/plucky-belgium-leading-the-way
Post a Comment