What way for UK politics, now

[Nearly Sane]

Add in to that a possible BREXIT, and the tea leaves cannae take it, Captain!

Thanks for that, NS.  I might even print it out as a succinct guide to Scottish politics.  With no disrespect to Jim or some others' passion - I always find your posts on the Scottish issue very interesting.

I think I may have posed this 'what if?' before, but if the final EU referendum showed a lower level of support for the EU in Scotland than in the rest of the UK, would that be an SNP trigger for a new independence referendum?  I've always assumed that Salmond and Sturgeon have always thought that any differential would be the other way round.

I think that the only trigger is if it is on one side or another i.e. it has to be Scotland voting Stay in and UK voting Out or vice versa.  It cannot be both sides voting the same way even were it to be say UK voting 55% to leave and Scotland only voting 51% to leave. 

If Scotland were to vote to leave and UK to stay in then I suspect you would hear very little from the SNP about it triggering another referendum BUT you might well hear a push from some other parts of the independence movement - such as some parts of the Greens and some of the Socialist parties. They might even attract a very few MSPs and councillors from the SNP to argue for it. There may be some in the Tories who would also add their voice but anti EU take in the Tories in Scotland is very low. It could prompt a sort of SIP wing of UKIP but I doubt it would be of any significance.

The only real game in town for a referendum is a UK out, Scotland In vote. I suspect that to really trigger it there needs to be more than a marginal difference in voting as well - so if UK voted out by 50.5% and Scotland In by a similar number, I think there would be so many problems across all parties that the referedum would be delayed while all parties had a bit of a dizzy spell. Note I think that would apply if there is a marginal vote either way and it is consistent across the UK. If it is 50.2 vs 49.8 in or out. we will be in for internecine strife in almost all parties.

[jakswan]

A vote for EU out is a proxy vote for Scotland out of the union. I'm up for that!

[Nearly Sane]

A vote for EU out is a proxy vote for Scotland out of the union. I'm up for that!

No, a vote for being out of the EU is precisely that - nothing else

[Outrider]

A vote for EU out is a proxy vote for Scotland out of the union. I'm up for that!

No, a vote for being out of the EU is precisely that - nothing else

For some. In exactly the same way that a vote for the Labour wasn't actually a vote for Scottish Nationalism during the last general election, except in all the ways that it might well have been...

O.

[Nearly Sane]

For some. In exactly the same way that a vote for the Labour wasn't actually a vote for Scottish Nationalism during the last general election, except in all the ways that it might well have been...

O.

It might be what some think but they would be wrong. In order for it to have the effect that Scotland might leave the Union, the UK out would have to win and Scotland would have to vote by a reasonable margin to stay in. In which case the 1st thing that would happen would be the UK leaving the EU. Any after effect in terms of Scotland is reliant on others votes and would be subsequent to achieving the UK out.

[jakswan]

A vote for EU out is a proxy vote for Scotland out of the union. I'm up for that!

No, a vote for being out of the EU is precisely that - nothing else

I disagree.

[Nearly Sane]

A vote for EU out is a proxy vote for Scotland out of the union. I'm up for that!

No, a vote for being out of the EU is precisely that - nothing else

I disagree.

You may well do, I have explained why I think you are wrong. If you want to progress the conversation I suggest rather than merely repeating your position you at least attempt an argument.

[Jack Knave]

Division, Hope - that's the way thimngs are going.
Labour will have serious issues trying to unite under Corbyn (many of whose policies with which I agree, btw).
He may have serious difficultties in commanding support, not only from his own MPs, but with the party in Scotland - the Scottish leader has expressed her opposition to him ion more than one occasion.
The days of the 'left' uniting are over.
SNP and Labour, while agreeing on many issues, may find the only way of burying the hatchet is by embedding it in each others' back.
Unless Corbyn is replaced by a 'soft' candidate, the Tories will win the next general election with an increased majority.
This will only fuel renewed campaigns for a second Scottish referendum, as, yet again Scots voted in one direction and were lumbered with a government they detest.

What effect will Corbyn have on the votes of the SNP? Will many return to Labour in May?

-
Possibly, yes.
However, the leader up here is one Keiza Dugdale....probably unknown in England (and to most of Scotland as well)
She has already put on record her opposition to many Corbyn policies, and, since she herself has only just been elected (the eighth Scottish Labour leader since devolution) she can't afford to be seen in a u-turn after standing on  her election promises.
Scottish Labour is in a torment - return to the 'old' Corbynite policies and ditch nearly all the policies which elected their new leader last month, or change them all in a flash and lose what credibility they may still have.

Looks like Scottish Labour don't know if they are coming or going. Actually now this seems to be a possibility for Westminster Labour too.

[Jack Knave]

Add in to that a possible BREXIT, and the tea leaves cannae take it, Captain!

Thanks for that, NS.  I might even print it out as a succinct guide to Scottish politics.  With no disrespect to Jim or some others' passion - I always find your posts on the Scottish issue very interesting.

I think I may have posed this 'what if?' before, but if the final EU referendum showed a lower level of support for the EU in Scotland than in the rest of the UK, would that be an SNP trigger for a new independence referendum?  I've always assumed that Salmond and Sturgeon have always thought that any differential would be the other way round.

For the last referendum, didn't the SNP have to get permission for it from the UK government? If so, how can they go around demanding or declaring that they are going to set a new date for one at some point in the future?

[Nearly Sane]

They can't not will they demand a binding one but a UK govt needs a reason to refuse it as well. If the SNP were to tie it to a different result on the EU referendum, given that and the 56 MPs it will be quite difficult for a UK govt to refuse. Especially one in the midst of quite possibly internal splits.


They can declare that they are holding a referendum at any time, it just isn't necessarily binding.

[wigginhall]

It is the same old story. The ruling class have lost touch with the peoples' lives. They have become the modern aristocrats who say, "Let them eat cake." - "Let them eat austerity."

Haven't people found it profoundly odd that the Labour elites didn't know what their grass root lot felt and thought? That they have been hit blindside by this and had no idea of this was coming, in their cosy Labour Party bubble.

Basically, the Neo-Liberal project has failed and is in its last gasps.

I'm not sure about that, but it was the vote for Liz Kendall which had me cheering - I think it was 4% roughly.  I think she was the heir apparent to Blairism. 

Blairism has failed, and these are its funeral rites. 

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

[Jack Knave]

Jim, a quick 'what if ...?'.

If (and I suspect it'll be a big 'if') Corbyn's election manages to draw back enough Scottish Labour voters for Labour to win the Holyrood election next autumn, how do you see the political landscape of Scotland developing, since the 58 SNP MPs would no longer have the 'support' of Holyrood?

-
The first thing you need to realise is that Johann Lamont, the last Scottish Labour leader but one, left the leadership with a poison chalice - she compared her own party to a 'Scottish branch office'.
That has dooged her sucessors, Jim Murphy, and, now, Keizai Dugdale, niether of whom show any signs of decalaring any autonomy from London Labour.
That's a millstone round the Scottish leadership's collective necks.
Combine that with the 'Brownite' faction within the Scottish Labour parliamentary faction, and they will have a very hard time ajusting to 'Corbynism'....and if they DO change their policies, they simply offer more ammo for the other left-leaning parties here to hit them with.
They are caught between a rock and a hard place.
I've no doubt that Scottish Labour WILL revive at some point in the future, but such a revival will be slow in coming - too slow to regain any real power at the Hollyrood elections next year.
An excellent result for Labour in Scotland will be to retain any constituency seats at all - they will probably have to rely on the 'list' seats to have any presence in parliament, with the resultant diminution in moral authority that may bring.

The impression I've got is that many of the Scottish voters don't trust or like Westminster so even if Corbyn appeals to them they will think things will revert back to the usual at some point so they might as well vote SNP, or in that vane, relying on the extra powers Scotland will or should get...?

[Anchorman]

That's the $10,000 question:
The Tories are caught in a trap....they are trying to water down the provisos in the Smith Commission in the new Scotland Bill - wheras SNP are claiming that they have the electoral mandate to try for powers above and BEYOND Smith.
Gordon Brown hamstrung Labour this time last year with an infamous 'vow' to seek the greatest possible powers....Scottish Labour has desperately tried to backtrack on Brown's 'vow' while still trying to be 'Scottish' enough for their core voters.
 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/devolution-will-be-delivered-vows-gordon-brown-1-3547823

[Jack Knave]

It is the same old story. The ruling class have lost touch with the peoples' lives. They have become the modern aristocrats who say, "Let them eat cake." - "Let them eat austerity."

Haven't people found it profoundly odd that the Labour elites didn't know what their grass root lot felt and thought? That they have been hit blindside by this and had no idea of this was coming, in their cosy Labour Party bubble.

Basically, the Neo-Liberal project has failed and is in its last gasps.

I'm not sure about that, but it was the vote for Liz Kendall which had me cheering - I think it was 4% roughly.  I think she was the heir apparent to Blairism. 

Blairism has failed, and these are its funeral rites. 

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

Neo-Liberalism is about the politicisation of economics and this was sold to the politicians by the bankers or financial institutions. So they, the politicians, don't really understand or know about it as such and keep up the tricks like some well trained dogs. What it amounts to is allowing the bankers to gamble on our money (note: the central banks are in on this game and so are basically stabbing us in the back). It is on its last gasps because the debts (derivatives, bond market etc) are so huge that no amount of QE can help it and all this money is flooding into the economy as housing bubbles etc because there are no safe places in the financial markets anymore - the usual price indicators that guide investments have all been rigged, like Libor, Forex, the commodities market so telling buyers nothing.

The Tories come across like boys trying to play a man's game; in this case their mummy's Maggie game!!! Look at that stupid paper on changing strike rules, it is so amateurish.

[jakswan]

It is the same old story. The ruling class have lost touch with the peoples' lives. They have become the modern aristocrats who say, "Let them eat cake." - "Let them eat austerity."

Haven't people found it profoundly odd that the Labour elites didn't know what their grass root lot felt and thought? That they have been hit blindside by this and had no idea of this was coming, in their cosy Labour Party bubble.

Basically, the Neo-Liberal project has failed and is in its last gasps.

I'm not sure about that, but it was the vote for Liz Kendall which had me cheering - I think it was 4% roughly.  I think she was the heir apparent to Blairism. 

Blairism has failed, and these are its funeral rites. 

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

Liberalism is not an absolute term what do you mean by neo-liberalism?

Do you want all industries back in public hands or just those that that were, energy, travel (train and bus), car building, phones?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It is the same old story. The ruling class have lost touch with the peoples' lives. They have become the modern aristocrats who say, "Let them eat cake." - "Let them eat austerity."

Haven't people found it profoundly odd that the Labour elites didn't know what their grass root lot felt and thought? That they have been hit blindside by this and had no idea of this was coming, in their cosy Labour Party bubble.

Basically, the Neo-Liberal project has failed and is in its last gasps.

I'm not sure about that, but it was the vote for Liz Kendall which had me cheering - I think it was 4% roughly.  I think she was the heir apparent to Blairism. 

Blairism has failed, and these are its funeral rites. 

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

Liberalism is not an absolute term what do you mean by neo-liberalism?

Do you want all industries back in public hands or just those that that were, energy, travel (train and bus), car building, phones?

That;s a strange reaction from the Conservatives. An unelectable left wing labour and the tories go Francoist.

[Hope]

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

Just a quick thought, neo-liberalism came to the fore in the 1960s.  Under whose auspices? 

Can a party that is based on support for the owners and business (though not automatically for the wealthy - there are some businesses that survive but without raking in the money) even be said to be a neo-liberal party or that neo-liberalism 'continues' in it?

[jakswan]

It is the same old story. The ruling class have lost touch with the peoples' lives. They have become the modern aristocrats who say, "Let them eat cake." - "Let them eat austerity."

Haven't people found it profoundly odd that the Labour elites didn't know what their grass root lot felt and thought? That they have been hit blindside by this and had no idea of this was coming, in their cosy Labour Party bubble.

Basically, the Neo-Liberal project has failed and is in its last gasps.

I'm not sure about that, but it was the vote for Liz Kendall which had me cheering - I think it was 4% roughly.  I think she was the heir apparent to Blairism. 

Blairism has failed, and these are its funeral rites. 

But I think neo-liberalism continues in the Tories, and I suppose the Lib Dems, not sure about that.   One of my great hopes is that Corbyn will actually open up a debate about it, as nobody in Labour has wanted to do this, and instead, have sort of waved play on.   I mean, they have taken it for granted, so that starving the poor has come to seem normal politics.

Liberalism is not an absolute term what do you mean by neo-liberalism?

Do you want all industries back in public hands or just those that that were, energy, travel (train and bus), car building, phones?

That;s a strange reaction from the Conservatives. An unelectable left wing labour and the tories go Francoist.

I'm not a conservative but a member of the LibDems.

[Nearly Sane]

interesting article from Nick Cohen. While not in agreement with him on all of it, I think it underlines that Labour may well be completely screwed now. I also think that what may split the party is Israel. The view by groupings in the party that the other lit are Zionists/antisemitic dependent on their own position has been bubbling for a while but is becoming ever more the defining policy.


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/will-labour-move-corbyn/

[Rhiannon]

Which will appear myopic and self-indulgent to the vast majority of the electorate.

[wigginhall]

interesting article from Nick Cohen. While not in agreement with him on all of it, I think it underlines that Labour may well be completely screwed now. I also think that what may split the party is Israel. The view by groupings in the party that the other lit are Zionists/antisemitic dependent on their own position has been bubbling for a while but is becoming ever more the defining policy.


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/will-labour-move-corbyn/

I think Labour had got close to extinction under the Blairites.   You could see that in the leadership contest - for example, Yvette Cooper seemed bereft of ideas, Burnham was trying to work out what he should think.   Well, I guess if people really want Tory-lite, then we end up with two right-wing parties, as in the US.

The shift under Corbyn was inevitable in that sense, I mean, that a lot of people were disheartened by the Blairites, and recognized something else in Corbyn.  My hope is that his team can open up a wide debate about social democracy, neo-liberalism, Keynesian economics and so on.   I guess this stuff is pretty uninteresting to most people, yet Labour is doomed otherwise to become Tory Story 2. 

[Jack Knave]

interesting article from Nick Cohen. While not in agreement with him on all of it, I think it underlines that Labour may well be completely screwed now. I also think that what may split the party is Israel. The view by groupings in the party that the other lit are Zionists/antisemitic dependent on their own position has been bubbling for a while but is becoming ever more the defining policy.


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/will-labour-move-corbyn/

It seems to me they are close to being screwed. I don't think Corbyn can find some common ground because he seems so surprised about how life is conducted in the 21st century he comes a cross to me as a Mr Bean type.

He could end up as a "Being There" character...?

[jakswan]

It occurs to me its a pity this move to the left has come too late for Ken Livingstone.

[Jack Knave]

It occurs to me its a pity this move to the left has come too late for Ken Livingstone.

Actually, Corbyn is in a similar place as Livingstone was in the sense of the abuse of calling him the loony left and all that. People said at the time Livingstone wouldn't last long with his far left ideas etc., but he did. Whether Corbyn can make it work as Labour leader is probably a bigger ask.

[Outrider]

interesting article from Nick Cohen. While not in agreement with him on all of it, I think it underlines that Labour may well be completely screwed now. I also think that what may split the party is Israel. The view by groupings in the party that the other lit are Zionists/antisemitic dependent on their own position has been bubbling for a while but is becoming ever more the defining policy.


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/will-labour-move-corbyn/

It seems to me they are close to being screwed. I don't think Corbyn can find some common ground because he seems so surprised about how life is conducted in the 21st century he comes a cross to me as a Mr Bean type.

He could end up as a "Being There" character...?

I don't think he's surprised, I think he's disappointed. Whilst this move leftwards will almost certainly lose the Labour party some supporters, I suspect it has the potential to (re)gain them many more - previous Labour voters who defected to SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens as they abandoned any pretense of left wing economics, as well as previously unengaged voters who didn't see the smaller or nationalist parties but sought a working-man's supporter they could believe in.

At the same time, those centrists that Labour sheds could turn towards, depending on their authoritarian/libertarian bent, UKIP or the Lib Dems - that potential boost for UKIP is probably the most worrying thing about all of this.

O.