Should Scottish Liberal Democrats back independence?
On a miserable night, the Scottish Liberal Democrats were particularly glum losing 12 of 17 seats in the Scottish Parliament and falling below 8% of the vote. The elected members can now fit in a McTaxi. One, the Leader Tavish Scott has just resigned and is likely to be replaced by super-campaigner Willie Rennie.
Most of this is down to the general trend against the party. Some of it is local. Like the Welsh party, who performed relatively less poorly, it is hard to see what is compelling and distinctive about the Scottish party. It is not clear that the gap in the market labelled liberal unionism, is much of a gap.
The party promotes itself largely as sound mangerialists. The 89 page 2011 manifesto is full of good technocratic stuff. It is a reasonable Chief Executive plan for running a large Council.
But I wonder how much differs, and does so decisively from the others? Better run public services, jobs and growth are hygiene factors in the centre-ground, not differentiators.
Where there is a gap is on the pro-independence centre-right.
The SNP, a party formed by a left-right merger, absorbing the old Scottish Party, is now an almost entirely centre-left and populist party. If they do blow their 2011 success, and do so quickly, it will be on the gap between their spending rhetoric and fiscal reality.
For those whose vision of Scotland is one of a free-trading nation, competing with England for world markets, rather than deficit expansion, the SNP is not a natural home. The Conservatives are wedded to unionism and reactionary on social matters. They, us, and Labour are too easily seen as adjuncts to their UK parties. Something right now, that is particularly damaging for us.
I’m not sure with the party’s current support, how strong opinions against independence actually are; or how nuanced. Support for either Home Rule or federal relations are certainly not a novelty in liberalism, and the Liberal Unionists merged with the Conservatives in 1912. Is it entirely implausible that the mood could shift again following this election?
Should it?
Generally liberals should also be fairly relaxed about national borders, or at least where change is the result of democratic will rather than coercion. It is not then clear to me, other than the accidents of history and local tribalism, why the Scottish Liberal Democrats should be staunch supporters of a No Campaign.
What they should certainly be is advocates of a democratic choice. There will be a referendum and the party’s previous flip-flopping, welcoming than against, now looks ridculous. Liberals should not appear to fear democracy, even when, like the AV referendum, the outcomes are disagreeable.
The Union it should be noted is the arbitrary result of the politics of a bank bailout following the collapse of the Darien scheme, an 18th century credit crisis. It is not obvious the end of Union would be a disaster for either Scotland or the rest of the UK. Nor indeed any devolution option between the status quo and full seperation. Electoral collapse and a leadership debate should give the Scottish Liberal Democrats room to consider those options.
It would give the party a chance to renew, provide a clear point of difference with the English Liberal Democrats, Tories and Labour, and might give them the narrative they currently lack.
Why not?
May 7th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
What you have outlined is, in fact, the *only* available solution for the Scottish Lid Dems if they want to detoxify themselves following their epoch-defining, disastrous result. Scotland doesn’t just vote against the Tories, it does so with tenfold vehemence against any party they have previously voted for who get into bed with them.
It would have another positive effect – they would be the first of the three unionist parties to reposition themselves in expectation of the post-UK scene. By adopting a centre-right position they would essentially give the Scottish Tories the excuse they’ve been looking for euthenase.
May 7th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Not quite as simple as historical campaigns for Home Rule, I think, or we would already have an independent Scotland.
Personally, I would support a robust Scottish federalism in the case of a NO vote to an independence referendum, which should certainly occur given the result of Thursday’s election.
I don’t want my party to take a line on it, it’s up to the Scottish people. We should allow them their choice without the sort of spiteful campaign that will surely occur.
That said, as someone born to English and Scottish parents, with no preferential loyalty to either, I’m not sure what I would do!
May 7th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
If I were a Scot then I am blowed that I would want the English telling me what to do. The converse is also true. There should be independent Scottish Parties run for their own population and having the ability to tweek policies to suit. This is no different from the Bavarian CSU who will normally go into partnership with the CDU in government. However they are a distinct and seperate party.
What I would advocate is National Liberal Parties. OOOps didn’t that come out of former co-operation between the Conservative and Liberal Parties.
May 7th, 2011 at 7:06 pm
To the extent that there might be a “gap in the market”, you might be right. But that isn’t a brilliant way to think. Nationalism is at heart a poisonous, reactionary, divisive force utterly at odds with the best precepts of liberalism. Supporting the break up of our country for narrow electoral advantage is beneath contempt.
Then again, to address the issue on your own terms, how much of a gap is there for a pro-independence centre-right party, actually? The total pro-independence electorate in Scotland fluctuates usually between 20-30% of the vote. Of that committed core, the great majority are of the social democratic tradition that is typical of celtic nationalism.
The SNP got their landslide today by downplaying independence in the campaign, reminding everybody of the referendum lock and asking to be rewarded for running a successful Holyrood administration. In doing so they attracted a lot of pro-union Labour voters and a lot of pro-union anti-labour voters from the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives.
The liberal electorate didn’t switch to the SNP over a Damascene conversion to the nationalist cause. Rather, some defected over the performance of the national party (which belies your assumption that they need to be won back from the centre-right) and the rest wanted to stop an utterly shambolic Labour getting anywhere near power.
May 7th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
I think we should support a referendum on the subject always have.
I think the only way for the union to exist is a federal state where the 4 home nations are seen as equal. Otherwise it won’t work and there will always be tension between England & Scotland.
If there is independence, i would expect tensions to arise as England will think Scotland is taking decisions to spite them and likewise the same about England.
I don’t think it was the Darien Scheme that created independence. That may have been a contributing factor but Scotland didn’t even consider a union until the 1705 Alien Act passed by Westminster which threatened cutting off half of Scotland’s trade unless Scotland entered into negotiations with England for a union.
May 7th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
“It is not then clear to me, other than the accidents of history and local tribalism, why the Scottish Liberal Democrats should be staunch supporters of a No Campaign.”
Do anything so tawdry as personal convictions make a difference on this point?
May 7th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
This is quite a good piece on the federal alternative http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2011/05/07/charles-hoare-asks-can-the-union-be-saved/
May 7th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
I blogged on this this morning as well. As a Scottish Lib Dem I am not actually opposed to the referendum and have castigated several senior members of our party for the stupid position we put ourselves in re an independence referendum.
I have never been enamoured by the idea of independence but I am now looking at it seriously with the key reason is that an independent Scotland would probably have PR as its voting system. I dont feel ‘British’ from Unionist perspective and do get annoyed at slights on Scotland (constant references during the royal wedding to the King of England for example). I am going to be looking at all the pros and cons of independence so I can make a considered choice when the referendum comes.
The party constitution allows the Scottish party to clearly develop its own policies and approaches. This election result was a disaster because be didn’t really do that.
May 8th, 2011 at 1:37 am
There’s nothing to indicate that this result would have been better if the Liberal Democrats were pro-independence, the SNP have the hard nationalist vote sewn up. Breaking up the country over a bad election is not edifying behaviour.
May 8th, 2011 at 7:27 am
I think its not just the pros and cons of independence but its what we would plan after the event.
I think we would have to have a plan in case we went independent and how economically we would get to a position where we are prospering.
There is of course historical evidence that says that the Union made no difference what so ever whether it is still the case is unknown.
I would be worried different tensions would come up.
May 8th, 2011 at 8:03 am
I have never voted Liberal Democrat and I could not vote Liberal Democrat precisely because of the anti-independence and, indeed, anti-referendum stance. I have great difficulty in comprehending how such a position can be termed either liberal or democratic. If that stance changes then it allows me to vote Liberal Democrat.
May 8th, 2011 at 11:59 am
I would like to ask anybody reading this, who lives in Scotland, what they think it is that encourages people to support the SNP?
Having lived in the heart of Scotland for the past nine years, and having been a member of the Liberal Party and the Liberal Democrats for the past 47 years, I am getting the distinct impression that most of the contributors so far are missing the point.
Oh and by the way Dilletante, the United Kingdom is not a country, it is a state. Scotland is a country, as is England and Wales. Just don’t ask me about Ireland!
May 8th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Dolan, I don’t think its independence. I think the SNP put forward a very strong positive campaign whereas Labour were attacking every other party & Iain Gray was shown as a very big flip-flopper. Tories have yet to banish the Thatcher image, i think.
I honestly thought Tavish didn’t come across very well. He didn’t have a vision really either, he came across managerial. It almost seemed like he came across as the local police force party.
If you think we are missing the point then what do you see as the point?
As to UK not being a country, I think that depends on what you define as a country?
May 8th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Characterising the current issue as being ‘nationalist’ or, ‘pro’ and ‘con’ independence misses the point because it does not explain a 10% swing to the SNP.
What a great many people in Scotland feel is that rule from Westminster does not fulfill their needs or aspirations. They, as does any mature democratic society, desire to make decisions for themselves. They do not want to tell anyone else what to do, but they also do not feel that a Westminster government enables their views, opinions or grievances to be represented in a way that makes them feel in control. Without a feeking of control they become insecure.
We Liberals have, as long as I have known, always supported the devolution of power to its lowest practical level. We supported the current devolution for Scotland. We are however in danger of not recognising the fact that the level of devolution is a decision for the people who’s power it truly is. It is up to the people living in Scotland to decide on how much of the power that currently resides at Westminster they wish to exercise for themselves. It is not up to other people, living in another country, to govern without consent, and right now Westminster does not have the consent of a huge proportion of the Scottish people.
To have a policy that effectively prevents the people of Scotland from determining their own future is contrary to the liberal principle of self determination.
It is also worth bearing in mind that a country, in a liberal world, is determined by the people living there and not by linguistic philosophers. If anyone believes that Scotland is not a country then they clearly haven’t lived here.
May 8th, 2011 at 12:48 pm
@Graham – I would agree that not asking the question was illiberal but being pro-unionist is definitely not.
@Dolan – As a Scottish voter I would say that people voted for the SNP due to:
1. Alex Salmond. Best politician & communicator in the country by a very considerable distance
2. Team SNP. Nicola Sturgeon is never bested in the parliament or in the media. Swinney has found is natural home in the Finance brief. Alex Neill’s bombast is good at dealing with difficult issues. No other party could touch them before and certainly not now.
3. Populist Policies. This will come back to haunt them. Their policies had a lot of uncosted spending.
4. Positive Campaign. Labours opening gambit and entire message – The Tories are Back!. Lib Dem Campaign – Police, Police, Police ad nauseam. Tories? Have their core vote that will take generations to grow. SNP – Scotland can be better, we can do it ourselves, we can have Scottish solutions to Scottish problems.
5. Trust (combined with point 4). 4 years of SNP government have created a high level of trust in the SNP and the voters can separate the idea of independence from competent governance. If there was a referendum tomorrow the SNP would lose.
May 8th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
@Douglas – You sound like a politician, most voters aren’t.
May 8th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
@Dolan
It was a political analysis of the voters actions.
I believe that my 5 points above do show why there was an epic swing to the SNP in every corner of Scotland. We Lib Dems dropped the ball badly in terms of both the campaign and the issue of a referendum. Plus Scotland still hates the Tories so we were on a very slippery slop anyway. And Labour offered nothing positive or even Scottish.
May 8th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
@Dolan I agree with what you said as well as Douglas. I think a lot of Scottish people want to make their own decisions and Westminster is certainly not living up to Scotland’s aspirations.
Your right, a country is determined by people living there not by linguistic philosophers. However i believe Scotland is a country but so is the UK. I don’t believe in national borders after all we are all human.
I believe the Scottish Liberal Democrats should be for a referendum on the issue but I’m not sure on which side i would fall. Yes, i believe the Scottish people should be able to make decisions on their behalf and Westminster isn’t very good at looking after our interests. I have issues with independence, one is economically – the other is to do with the tensions between Scotland and England. I don’t want them to become worse. I’m not sure either country is mature enough and the tensions run too deep. The union settlement certainly needs to change. The current settlement is just asking for independence.
May 8th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
@Douglas – point taken. Yes, the SNP ran a vastly better campaign than anyone else.
@Nicola – Coming as I do from Welsh grandmothers, Irish grandfathers, born in England and living in Scotland I too feel at home as much in Edinburgh as I do in Dublin, Cardiff or London, and I think of myself as British, and my country is the British Isles. I do however sympathise with all my fellow British in the way that they have had to fight to obtain the rights and privileges that rget have been denied.
I doubt very much if Scotland would vote for independance. After all what is it? They would presumably still be members of the EEC, NATO and the UN. They would also still be a part of the British Isles, and I’ll still be living here!
What I cannot accept is that anybody can deny them the right to decide for themselves.
What will happen is that Alec will get more of the powers from Westminster and then the SNP will disentegrate once they mess up.
That’s what Liberals need to start planning for.
May 8th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
@Dolan Very much British as am I, My mother is Irish, my father English, my great grandmother Welsh and i was of course born and raised in Scotland. My parents have said that if Scotland were to go independent they would leave Scotland.
I agree that there should be a referendum always have. After all we were denied a referendum when we joined the union. I think there has to be a deep discussion about our constitutional future not just Scotland but the UK does as well.
The problem is that people can’t get excited about the constitution, they can’t see how it affects them but with independence and Europe they can. For most people up and down the country the important issues are the issues they can see, like the NHS, education, economy etc.
May 8th, 2011 at 2:08 pm
“Where there is a gap is on the pro-independence centre-right”
I would re-phrase this slightly. There is an anti-unionist or at least union-sceptic gap on the centre and centre-right.
As has been commented on above. The Scottish Tories are wedded to the Union. Some old school Scottish Tories (Lord Forsyth et al) still bemoan the introduction of the Scottish Parliament in the first place!
The rest of Scottish politics is dominated by the centre-left.
The interesting part is the Scottish Lib Dem members (and I think Douglas McLellan may be an example) who inhabit that union-sceptic gap on the centre and centre-right. The SNP want to frame the debate in terms of “independence or bust” but there are a whole host of other staging posts in between i.e. Federalism as outlined in the Charles Hoare article referenced above is one. Or the Calman Plus approach espoused by Reform Scotland here http://www.reformscotland.com/index.php/publication/view_details/999/
is another.
I am a Scottish Lib Dem member. Like Douglas and others I am taking stock but these are interesting times…
May 8th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
@Nicola – It’s the parents leaving that puzzles me. Is it that they feel ‘United Kingdomers’? As far as I am aware there is no suggestion that the Queen would cease to be head of state. Maybe one day there will be, but that will probably when the English want it.
What we need to do is ensure that the structures we need to manage our affairs are accesible and accountable to the people they serve. To me micro-managing a country of over sixty million people is better done by breaking up the decision making processes and allowing people to feel a part of the system that governs them.
I know I am able to sit around a table with John Swinney and discuss the problems my community faces whereas I can’t even imagine being in the same building as George Osborn.
Scotland wants to govern itself, and we should encourage it to do that, as we should encourage all parts of the British Isles to manage their affairs and create a true liberal democratic society.
May 8th, 2011 at 2:20 pm
The compromise option looks very interesting http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/08/scotland-independence-vote-financial-autonomy?CMP=twt_gu
May 8th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
’tis the purse strings that bind us that need untying, not the knot that keeps us together.
May 8th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
Independance was a word that went almost unuttered during the election. Scotland doesn’t want it according to Polls (the same polls which predicted the SNP landslide) and we will have a referendum now to settle the question.
The SNP won because Labour here fought a negative campaign, had a poor leader and arrogantly exepected to sweep to victory. Our vote transfered across the the Nats but Labour lost seats where there wasn’t a Lib Dem vote to transfer. Nobody in Scotland told the truth about how much they would have to cut back.
Salmond has played a canny game over the last few years but Jim Wallace bested him when he was Acting First Minister.
I don’t think we should abandon our Federalist principles becasue of an election defeat especially when polls tell us it is the option most Scots want. The Greens who favour Independance also flatlined. Why vote for a pale nationalist immitation when you can have the real McCoy? Also I don’t think that you can establish a sustainable nation state based on a personality cult.
No we take our beating gracefullty up here, elect Willie as leader and rebuild. The Scottish Public will grow weary of the SNP in time. All politicians have limited shelf lives (look at Ken Livingstone).
May 8th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
@Dolan My parents believe that Scotland will not survive on its own.
We do need to untie the purse strings. I don’t think we can justify the Barnett formula – i would scrap it.
May 8th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
@Roy – yes, that is about where I sit right now. I would prefer a true Federal state with a PR voting system but given the multitude of hurdles preventing that dream, Scottish independence is worth exploring.
@Paul – I am also going to back Willie for leader. Would have preferred Charles Kennedy for a number of reasons (mostly electoral) but party constitution says leader has to be an MSP.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Can someone tell me what ‘independance’ is?
Independance from what exactly?
The SNP want Scotland to have its own purse strings, that’s all. They want to decide on their own affairs.
Why is that a problem?
They call it independance, but the Scots have realised that what they actually mean is their own purse.
Stop frightening people with the idea that Scotland wants its own army and has plans to destroy England.
Ket them manage their own purse.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Bloody Saxons!
May 8th, 2011 at 3:19 pm
Sorry, that was more historical than personal.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
@Dolan Independence is being completely separate from the rest of the UK so completely removing Westminster from the equation which does mean having our own army whether we use it against England – I don’t know. Independence does not just mean control over our purse strings.
Fiscal automony is one thing but independence is another.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:29 pm
So how about a structure where the army isn’t under either of our control?
The question still remains,what is independance?
We all have independance. We can each and everyone of us choose to do as we see fit. But we are also able to figure out the best way to do it.
In today’s world the idea of an ‘independant country’ is ill defined. The only one I think that comes close is North Korea.
I know that not even Alec Salmond has plans in that direction.
I just don’t see what you mean by independance?
May 8th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
It’s this idea of ‘being completely seperate from the rest of the UK’
Scotland can’t be
Scotland knows this
Scotland doesn’t want this
Scotland wants someone to listen and give them back a feeling that they are in control of their own destiny.
Self Determination!
May 8th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Ireland wants it too, and look at the mess that’s left behind.
Wales is up for it in a lesser way.
Even in Cumbria you can hear the grumbles.
Time we learnt to govern ourselves.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
@Dolan That would be a federal state so the army would be controlled by both countries.
An independent country is one that has full control over all of its affairs and does not answer to any other parliament or country.
You say Scotland doesn’t want to be completely separate – i agree. Scotland doesn’t but the SNP does. We do need self-determination but Westminster won’t allow it due to fear over Scotland leaving the UK
May 8th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
What the SNP want is irrelevant. The Scottish people want self determination.
Alec Salmond wants that too.
The SNP is a loose coalition of the Liberals, Labour and Conservatives that have got dteadily more pissed off with the UK parties dictating to them.
It is after all, a federalist world we live in.
May 8th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
How about a referendum:
1. Would you like to set your own tax rates and spending plans?
2. Would you like to pay for and control your own army?
3. Would you like to elect your own head of state?
For me that would be a Yes, a No and a Maybe
We could ask all of the British!
May 8th, 2011 at 6:17 pm
@ Dolan
Your question is a bit loaded, how about:
1) Would you like to set your own tax rates and spending plans at a:
Personal Level?
Street/community level?
Town level?
County level?
Regional level?
Scotland national level?
UK state level?
EU supra-national level?
Abolish Taxation and public spending?
2) Would you like cost and control of the military at:
See above list?
3) Would you like a system that would give you a President Blair followed by a President Brown then a President Cameron (Following a President Thatcher and President Major)?
There are a number of levels at which decisions can be taken, Holyrood is closer than Westminister but still far further than most decisions need to be taken.
There is no justification for refusing the choice but to restrict it in the way questions have been asked have not been ideal in the past.
May 8th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
That’s what I like to see. Someone after my own heart.
Why ask three questions when twenty threr will do!
Aye right is the obvious answer.
May 8th, 2011 at 6:48 pm
In my life I learnt to always ask the question of everyone and accept no for an answer.
Then again I can’t avoid the obvious.
May 8th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
I think the questions aren’t right.
I think the question should be (to all of UK) along the lines of:
Would you like the structure of governance in the UK:
a) stay the same
b) greater devolution to the home nations
c) a federal state with parliaments in each of the home nations
d) independence for all home nations (i.e. the break-up of the UK)
May 8th, 2011 at 7:28 pm
And what do you think the answers should be?
May 8th, 2011 at 7:33 pm
the options are the answers. votes cast & counted by range or approval voting.
May 8th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
a) Stay the same.
The same as the PR system we have in Scotland and Northern Ireland and Wales, or the same as the first past the post that England prefers?
b) Greater devolution to the home nations.
What is a ‘home nation’ and how would we ever decide on what ‘devolution’ is?
c) A federal state
Do you seriously beleive that anything more than about 5% of the population have any idea what a federal state is?
d) Independance for all ho,e nations.
There you go with that word again. What is ‘independance’, you don’t seriously beleive that any western nation is ‘independant’ do you? Come on, get real here. Independance is what we do in our private lives. Publically we haven’t been independant for a thousand years or more!
Stop misleading people.
We can all be independant for a day or so, then we get on with life. Same in politics. Don’t use these ridiculous descriptors, it only ebcourages the electorate into beleiving that you have no idea what life is actually about.
Don’t treat the electorate by bamboozling them with terminology that even could not justify to me.
It is nonsense.
It is not about labels, or even policies, it is about realising why people don’t want to know. After all, the abstainers won every vote!
May 8th, 2011 at 7:47 pm
Sorry for the spelling.
It’ll be the Jamesons keyboard’s fault.
I’m sure you get the message.
I hope you do
May 8th, 2011 at 7:57 pm
Your asking questions about linguistics.
Stay the same – as is the current settlement of the UK i.e. Act of Union, Laws In Wales Acts & whatever law keeps NI to the UK + the Scotland Act 98 + law of devolution to Wales & NI as well as the law +referendum giving Wales powers for primary legislation + the Scotland bill going through parliament at the moment.
the devolution option – home nations defined as Wales, NI, England & Scotland. Devolution simply more powers to the devolved legislatures
federal state – I do think people will know what it is after all the US is a federal state and people know its a federal state – that might make them biased or think we’ll use that model which is not necessarily true.
Independence – not sure why you don’t get this. You can question whether any nation is independent these days as we there are so many unions but independence is simply that we as a nation can decide all policies or independent within the EU. We decide pretty much all policies but abide by EU law & discuss/debate their EU court decisions
May 8th, 2011 at 8:15 pm
OK let’s narrow this down.
Federal State:
You think people in Scotland know what a federal state is because Americans do? I don’t think most Americans have any idea what sort of political institution they live in. Indeed experience tells me they have no concept whatsoever of the ‘Federal State’ since they brought in the Civil Rights Act in the mid sixties. That is one of the reasons that it has a greater problem than we do with its ‘minorities’. The entire concept of federalism is borne out of an intellectual discussion that desperately tries to develop a system of government that excludes religion. A worthy exercise, but definitely not one that most of the people can understand most of the time. Excuse the pun.
Independance:
Would you care to tell me which particular country it is that you believe is ‘independant’. Then tell me what they are ‘independant’ of? I have asked before, but to be honest I have never ever got a straight answer to this question. What is ‘independance’ in a world where we are obliged to agree exactly? I don’t see independance, what I see id inter-dependance, which I love with a fierce respect.
May 8th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Wow!
Although not quite as out of touch as the labour mob (who could be) you lib-demers really just don’t get it. Douglas Mc excepted, although the referendum will be lost by the SNP? Wishfull thinking all round methinks Dougie, some may not have voted for independence as their main reason, but if they were so against it, why hand the SNP such a powerful hand to achieve exactly what they don’t want………..allegedly?
When and only when lib-dem’s frame the responses to your many and meandering-sometimes utterly meaningles questions from a Scottish perspective. Then you will pehaps begin to understand what has happened in Scotland of late, answers from a unionist or British perspective, or indeed answers that over state the import of this perspective in relation to a Scottish one need not apply.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the winds of change and any other cliche that cannot truly catch the enormity of what has occured of late, has changed everything. Time to be on the side of the angels, or become as irrelevant as the other unionist parties. I don’t truly expect labour to remain the same, sure those still riding the Westminster gravy train will fight hard to keep the same level of pro-union stance but again realities must supercede selfish aggrandismement. Labour’s only coherent strategy for the election was that they were not Tories, which incredibly worked in 2010. I’m not sure how stupid the electorate felt after falling for that nonsense, although one crum of comfort is that they may not get any worse yet they have a base of 30 odd percent which is only slowly eroding.
@Dolan……..Coming from a Welsh and Irish perspective I cannot understand your need to frame everything from an English/British perspective. I’m not sure how articulating what is best for the UK best represents Scotland, what is more the electorate now get that.
@ Nicola. Sounds like your parents believe in all that discredited ‘too stupid too wee and too skint’ myth. There is plenty of information now availlable to assuage their fears and allow them to make an informed coice, the message you give of them is that they may not really be that commited to Scotland anyway. I hope I am wrong.
May 8th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
Wow!
There are as many arseholes as there are people, whereas only about half of us have dicks, the rest are a bunch of c***s presumably?
May 8th, 2011 at 9:22 pm
@Tony There are many other reasons to vote for SNP other than independence. a significant portion of Scotland think the SNP have done a good job over the past 4 years.
All the opinion polls show support for independence at around 20-30% but much more around the early 20%. Some of them apparently don’t vote for the SNP.
May 8th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Let me explain.
You think the people of Scotland will vote for independance when not one of you can tell them what independance is.
You think that what happened last week is enormous, whereas we know it is a ‘flash in the pan’.
You think attacking our ethnic origins in some way benefits your beleifs.
We know different.
We have been here a long time.
We have learnt patience, understanding and the ability to ignore bullies.
We are liberals.
Been there, heard that, still here.
Don’t worry Tony. You can still have a meal at my table.
May 8th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
It takes a patron to be really patronising
May 8th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
52 comments and when taken as a whole they show exactly why your party is finished.
You lost your deposit in more than a third of constituency seats. You lost areas which have been solidly liberal now for centuries – not years or decades, but centuries. And you didn’t just lose – you were hammered, beaten to a pulp. Your vote plunged to depths unseen since the days of the Monster Raving Loonies.
And yet you whine about philosophical questions – ‘What is independence?’ – If you look at Denmark or Norway and don’t know the answer then you’re either obfuscating or truly beyond hope.
You confidently proclaim that independence is not what ‘Scotland’ wants. Not the 5 million+ individuals who live there, but that vague, abstract concept of singularly minded ‘Scotland’. Presumably you made similar proclamations of having such unique insight when preparing your manifesto…remind me: how did that work out for you?
You’re dead, it’s over. All you’re missing is the sense to lie down.
May 8th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
@Alex The vote share was 17% which is the lowest share since the Liberal Democrats was formed in 88 but not the lowest share the liberal party have had.
We were hammered in the number of seats but not necessarily the vote share.
1 member was asking the philosophical question on what is Independence but they are sometimes the important questions. If you don’t know why or what something is then you can’t fight or oppose it. We have to have a philosophical centre so that people know what they voting for and why we are in politics.
I said Scotland doesn’t want independence and not as an abstract concept of Scotland but as the majority of people living in Scotland don’t want independence.
I have to say never right off the Liberal Democrats, we will rise from the ashes just as strong if not stronger than we were before.
May 8th, 2011 at 11:48 pm
@NIcola Prigg
Your vote share was nowhere near 17%. Between the constituency and regional vote you managed all of 6.5%.
The time for philosophical questions has passed for serious people. As I said, if you look at Denmark or Norway and still don’t know what independence means then kindly step back and allow those who are likely to play a part in Scotland’s future to get on with things.
Again, you pontificate on what ‘Scotland’ wants, yet conspired to ensure the population not be asked the very question you claim to know the answer to. Perhaps your party’s shabbiness in 2007 was the result of some psychic omniscience?
Incidentally, the figure of 20-30% is always bandied around, yet the last Mori poll which addressed such an issue gave the following result:
Yes:36%
No:39%
Don’t Know:25%
Strip out the DK’s and you have a 48:52 split. Or a 2% swing away. Just because you don’t want something to be the case, doesn’t make it unlikely.
BTW – you won’t come back from this in Scotland. You got into bed with Tories. You attacked the North Sea Oil industry and claimed the idea as your own. If there’s one thing the Scottish electorate despise more than a Tory, it’s a party which does the dirty work of the Tories for them.
Stick a fork in yourselves. In Scotland at least,you’re done.
May 9th, 2011 at 12:05 am
The UK national share was 17% and our share in Scotland was 7% which was down 8% on 2007.
Philosophical questions evolve. I do understand independence it was more Dolan that doesn’t understand independence.
If you look at my comments on here and I have always said before that I am for a referendum. I actually think it was disgraceful that in Scotland & in England we have never had a referendum on the UK.
The 20-30% is of the hardcore supporters. I take that from the polls in straight-shoot outs and of those that include a third option like devolution or a federal state.
Also the phrasing of the question is also important. There was one poll that had showed majority support for independence then the following month it was down to about 26% – a month where there wasn’t much campaigning on the issue would have such a big difference. There have also been polls weekend apart that had a widely differing result so i would say you can’t rely on the polls on this issue. The only thing you can take away from the polls is that there is a hardcore support of around 20-30%.
I honestly think you need to have a referendum with more than just a yes or no, in which case support for independence falls dramatically.
May 9th, 2011 at 12:30 am
Ah. I wonder if the cyber gnats would turn up.
@Tony – I would wager my house that if a referendum were held tomorrow the answer would be no. That is why Alex Salmond is not using is commanding majority to hold one until the latter half of the parliament. He is being sensible even if other Nats are not. Now, it is possible he may win in the future. Ask me to wager my house on a referendum in 2014/15 and I would decline.
@Alex – I can see you went to the Christine Grahame school of gracious victory statements. It was a sad day to watch my new MSP and think “you could actually take lessons from Andy Kerr and Tom McCabe”. We Lib Dems were hammered. But proclamations of our total demise are exceptionally premature.
May 9th, 2011 at 2:28 am
I have no strong view on independence. What I can’t and never could understand was why Lib Dems North of the Border never backed the opportunity for the Scottish people to have a say in a referendum on their constitutional future.
I think I’d marginally prefer a proper UK-wide federalism with more powers being devolved not just to “national” parliaments/assemblies but more importantly to local councils, including full responsibility for raising the cash in their own budgets, to some sort of separation, but I’m increasingly coming to the view that there’s not the appetite in “the Union” for such radical localism. For the Scottish Lib Dems, if recovery from Thursday’s nose-dive is to be anything more than cosmetic, it might mean having to embrace independence as a means to an end.
May 9th, 2011 at 8:02 am
Alex
“”….then kindly step back and allow those who are likely to play a part in Scotland’s future to get on with things.”"
Sage advice, however the electorate has pretty much decided that for them.
@ Dougie
“Cyber-gnats” – What have either of us said that deserves a silly personal attack like that?
Hurting much?
Salmond is not having the referendum the morra because he has consistantly stated that it will be in the latter half of the parly. Even if he felt railroaded into going for it now by the combined childish responses of tory reactionaries and their lib-dem offsiders it then it opens up all manner of potential problems.
Primarily it would be too rushed and not allow enough consultative time for people to get their heads around amongst a host of other important-to varying degree’s points.
A period to pause and reflect as well as room for informed debate to allow people access to information that will counter the long held anti-Scottish lies/myths that has passed for fact is badly needed. Our people have not been well served in the past in this respect, I personally encounter opinions-as exibited on here regularly that we cannot afford, or are too wee for independence etc. on a regular basis, that are mostly built on ignorance.
May 9th, 2011 at 8:30 am
@Alex – I only hurt when people get my name wrong. On purpose. And what is wrong with people having a more philosophical approach to understanding what a nation, country and independence actually is or is not? There was nothing critical being said about the SNP or the win or the need for a referendum but you and Alex arrived and felt the need to change the tone.
I have no problem in Alex Salmond waiting and the debate does need need to be based on truth rather than myth.
May 9th, 2011 at 10:21 am
“Should Scottish Liberal Democrats back independence?”
No, the Union is the most successful political union in history, and it has a great deal more to give both parties.
Doing thus would be rank idiocy.
May 9th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
I am, by inclination, a Liberal but will continue to vote SNP until the LD’s start acting like the federalists they are supposed to be.
What did the LD’s do in coalition at Holyrood that advanced their vision of federalism? Sweet f.a. I’m afraid. Since the advent of the first Holyrood LD/Lab coalition, the LD’s seem to have been infected by Labour’s knee-jerk hatred of the SNP and this has undermined their principles.
Remember the Steele Commission? It seemed to me to be a solid exposition of Liberal ideas applied to the constitutional question. It certainly attracted support among Scottish LD’s. So where did it go? Dropped to pursue bigger prizes it seems. Ming’s cosying up to Brown and Tavish’s oppositionalism have been unworthy of the party and have led to a LD party in Scotland that seems neither Liberal nor Democratic.
May 18th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Maybe it is we English who should be encouraging Scotland to leave the UK. We would derive many benefits from this: http://www.bruceonpolitics.com/2011/05/17/should-we-kick-the-whingeing-jocks-out-of-the-uk/
The fact is that it is inevitable, you can’t give one sector of a nation completely different treatment to other sectors of that nation. Tony Blair has started the chain of events that will lead to the break up of the UK.
May 18th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Well I went and talked to me neighbours and asked the why they voted for the SNP.
The overwhelming reason was that they don’t want a bunch of Englishmen down in London telling them to charge their kids £9,000 a year for an education. They didn’t much like the idea of spending £10 Billion on a Trident replacement, a privatised NHS. A nuclear power programme on their doorstep, a tax on the sick by re-introducing prescription charges or the way the English and the royal family have forgotten that it was a Scottish king that inherited the English throne.
Still as long as people think “Nationalism is at heart a poisonous, reactionary, divisive force utterly at odds with the best precepts of liberalism.” Then you ain’t likely to appreciate the finer points of self determination. Check out the history of Ireland over the past 100 years if you want to know how not to do it.
And once again I ask people, plead even, that if they are to use the word “Independence”, please explain what you think you mean. I can’t think of a single country that is “Independent”. North Korea is about as close as it gets! I don’t think anyone in Scotland wants to be another North Korea. What they do want is ability to manage their own house. Just like me and you.
May 18th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
I hope nobody on here thinks that someone living without Scotland is entitled to vote on their independence?
If so, you have a problem. The rest of the world!