THE GREAT DIVIDE

A colleague of mine has just had an interesting communication from the SNP delivered to his family at home.

By Tasmina Ahmed Sheikh

It said they were asking “friends and family” to vote 1 and 2 for SNP candidates and “for no other party”. This perplexed my friend, largely because the SNP has only one single candidate standing in his four member ward in the North East of Scotland; a ward where not so long ago the party were totally dominant!

He was also somewhat puzzled to get the mail, because no-one at all in his household is still an SNP supporter. However, I was able to tell him that this is not necessarily unusual. There is even the pawky suggestion that the SNP is now the Hotel California of Scottish politics – long after you attempt to leave, the voting instructions and, more commonly, incessant financial appeals are direct-mailed in from Jackson’s Entry in Edinburgh! Indeed my colleagues “friends and family” voting instruction is accompanied by just such a letter from Nicola Sturgeon.

However, my friend’s real consternation was more to understand what possible political strategy would consider it sensible to attempt to instruct independence supporters, in an STV preference system, NOT to vote for other available independence supporting candidates. 

If everyone followed this madness, then the only possible consequence is to ensure unionists elected to a majority in every Council Chamber across the country. After all not one of Scotland’s 32 Councils have single party majority control at present, and there is virtually no chance of even one of them being in sole SNP control after this year’s election. It seems that unionists have a “sleeper” running the election strategy of the SNP.

Does this really matter to the future of Scotland? Well it just might. If (and it is a big IF) the Scottish Government is serious about holding a referendum, one tactic to avoid a Westminster veto over the right of people to choose, would be to hold, or threaten to hold, our own home grown plebiscite in the absence of Section 30 go-ahead from London. This would only be credible, or at least a credible threat, if local government are prepared to cooperate. The very last thing you would need in these circumstances is a range of Tory/Labour coalitions (like the present one in Aberdeen) attacking the Government from below while Westminster attacks from on-high. 

Now let’s ask ourselves. Who is more likely to democratically cooperate with such a Scottish plebiscite? Would it be Council Chambers all run by some sort of Better Together reunion, the “Three Amigos” 2014 boy band of Labour, Tory and Liberals reincarnated, or would it be independence supporting majorities of whatever party political hue?

This Indy poison pill prescribed by SNP HQ is hard to swallow. SNP voters giving preference support to ALBA, Greens or ISP, under Single Transferable Vote cannot possibly damage the prospects of SNP candidates. It would however increase the number of independence supporters elected.  However, the Edinburgh Edict of downing voting tools after the SNP, will instead boost the chances of unionists everywhere. 

That’s why ALBA have made it clear that, after voting 1 for their own local ALBA candidate, we hope that supporters will allocate their preferences to other Indy candidates on the ballot paper. Regardless of political rivalries we have to keep our eyes firmly on the prize of independence.

That is only common sense and will be backed by all genuine Yes adherents but it leads to the question of why all this hubris from the SNP – a dog in a manger attitude which even extends to their coalition partners in the Greens! It is quite something when you think about it. The SNP are prepared to go into coalition with a party (and thus take joint and several liability for Lorna Slater) but not even give them preferences down a ballot paper!

It certainly suggests that co-operation from local government is no part of the Indyref2 planning or that there is no real Indy planning at all. This suspicion would be re-enforced by the SNP election broadcast (and the Green Conference!) where the cause of independence was not even mentioned. 

It also fails to take account of the great divide in Scottish politics which is right down the independence fault line. The aim might be just to strangle ALBA (and the ISP) at birth, in which case it depends on the recipients of the voting instructions robotically toeing the official line, regardless of independence common sense.

As far as my friend in Aberdeenshire is concerned this is unlikely. Despite having voted SNP first choice in every election since 1974 he tells me he shall be voting ALBA 1. And despite his strong disproval of the SNP tactics their sole candidate will still get his second preference, as the only other Indy candidate on his ballot paper. 

The name of my friend – Alex Salmond.

Ends.

BEAT THE CENSORS

Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.

FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS

Are available easily by clicking on the links in the Home and Blog sections of this website. by doing so you will be joining thousands of other readers who enjoy being notified by email when new articles are published. You will be most welcome.

Ends.