If you want Home Rule...
Friday, 20 November 2009
Within the next few days Jim Murphy, (Scotland's man in the cabinet in case you forgot!) will publish a white paper implementing the proposals for the Calman Commission, probably to be enacted after the next General Election.
The big one is on taxation. If the Telegraph is to be believed the proposals for income tax will be implemented. This means that income tax set in the Budget at Westminster will be 10p lower than it is in England and Wales and the Scottish Parliament then have a choice regarding how much they raise income tax to fund public services devolved to Scotland.
Wendy Alexander spoke about moving away from the 'pocket money parliament' and moving towards a system with a strong parliament responsible for raising some of the money that it spends. It's not without it's logistical issues but it means that come the Scottish Parliamentary elections the electorate know exactly who to blame if they are not happy with the level of tax or state of their public services - it will not be possible to blame Westminster for everything and maintain any credibility.
In terms of the political case it destroys the SNP's election battle for the General Election. If you believe in greater home rule (yes voters who are sympathetic to Home Rule and switched to the SNP in 2007 I'm talking to you) there is only one choice : vote Labour.
We already know that there will be either a Labour or a Tory government and that the majority of SNP target seats are against Labour so voting SNP will bring a Conservative government but this takes it a step further.
The only thing that will deliver stronger powers for the Scottish Parliament is a vote for Scottish Labour. Let's look at the alternatives
Vote Tory: They don't see implementing these proposals as a priority for their first term: so no
Vote SNP: In SNP/Labour marginals unseating Labour MP's will simply deliver a Tory Government who will not implement Calman as said above.
Vote Lib Dem: Again they won't form the Government so will not be able to enact the Calman Commission
To really emphasize the argument lets look at what happens in an SNP heaven. Lets say the SNP win every single seat in the 59 constituencies they fight in. The net loss of 41 MP's will virtually guarantee a Tory Government which means more powers for Holyrood stop for the next 5 years if not longer.
Devolution will not be a process but a historic event.
It must be the message that terrifies Nats: Voting SNP does precisely nothing to advance Home Rule. Not that it is anything new. After all it was Labour that introduced devolution and created the Scottish Parliament after consistent lobbying from Scottish Labour.
It's a message that is totally positive as well. Scottish Labour: Scotland's original National Party delivering Home Rule for Scotland again.
Posts
22 comments:
Sorry Yousuf, but that doesn't make sense.
I have a sitting SNP MP, so we'll take my neighbouring constituency of Dundee West as an example, as it still has a Labour MP.
If the people of Dundee West chose to vote SNP, and get Jim Barrie as an SNP MP, that puts the SNP up 1, and Labour down one, yes. That does NOT in any way, shape, or form make Mr Murphy's recommendations any more or less likely. The net change to the number of MPs voting for these proposals would be zero. Jim B is just as likely to vote for them as Jim McGovern for the Labour Party.
I know that the Labour Party have shown scant regard for due electoral processes in recent times, but surely the point of democracy is that you vote for the man or the woman who you wish to represent you in Parliament?
I'm looking forward to the General Election - the first time in my life I'm allowed to vote* for the UK Government. And I'm casting my vote based on who I think will represent the people of Dundee East most effectively.
*(I'll not mention the stupidity of the fact that I was barred from voting previously, despite now having two degrees, and having paid a fair amount in taxes over the years.. And despite the fact that Gordon claims it's Labour party policy to lower the voting age to 16, but haven't quite found the time to get around to doing that in their 12 years of power.
And I certainly won't comment on the hypocrisy of him championing votes at 16 while your Scottish colleagues accuse the SNP of 'opportunism' for doing the same, despite it being our policy for as long as I can remember.)
The Problem with your scenario is that Vote Labour in Scotland and you will still get a Torie goverment as the seats they need to win are all down in England. England is the real battleground for westminster and Im sorry to say we a sideshow.
Jim Murphy who may be one of the most competent of that Browns cabinet, is going to struggle to get himself heard over all the headlines over the purely English bills. Just look at the furor over the free personal care of the Elderly. That it is an uncosted policy is letting itself be ripped to shreds by the Tories and Liberals and with even Labours own members against it.
Jim Murphy will get hit by the backsplash of how is the changeover to be funded, it will be costlier to collect, Will there have to be a Scottish Inland revenue etc.
In short Labour is going to have to field and answer some of those questions which they used to love to throw at the SNPs independence plans.
I'm confused. Why wouldn't a 100% SNP success in Scotland lead to immediate negotiation for independence?
I think you need to go away and re-think your argument. Seems to me in Scotland, the choices are:
Vote Labour - get a UK Tory Government elected by an English landslide. Expect to see Calman proposals swept under carpet.
Vote Tory - same outcome as vote Labour
Vote LibDem - same outcome as vote Labour
Vote SNP - possility of independence, given an adequate SNP vote.
None of the choices are without problems. A Labour or Tory voter encourages both parties in theit insane foreign policies of war and mindless subservience to the US. I'm not clear what purpose a vote for the Lib-Dems would serve. The SNP need to be dissuaded from daft plans to build a new Forth Road Bridge.
Perhaps you need to descend from the NuLab mothership and spend some time on Earth with the rest of us.
The reason that Dundee West going SNP would prevent further devolution is that it would help bring in a Tory Government.
It's not about losing or gaining a vote, if there is a Tory government there won't be a vote on Calman at all!
Also I think people vote not just for a representative but a potential government and if they believe in Home Rule then only one potential government can deliver their ideas: Labour.
Lost Highlander, when you look at the volatility of polls and how soft (if large) Camerons lead it I don't think anything is decided yet.
It's very simple Richard. With SNP success and a Tory victory they have no mandate to offer a referendum on independence and have said they will not prioritise Calman so it will achieve precisely nothing.
Yousuf
As usual your Labour party electioneering seeks to distort rather than inform.
The elephant in the room is that it is far more likely that what voters do in Scotland will be utterly irrelevant, no matter how many Labour opposition MPs are elected, rather than that their actions will be decisive.
What did the "feeble fifty" Labour MPs ever do to prevent Thatcher riding roughshod over Scotland?
Without SNP presure Home Rule would never have happened.
Labour were in power many times but it still took that pressure for them to enact the current limited form of Home Rule after about 100 years.
If Labour win the election they will at best action a watered down version of Calman.
This whole approach of Murphy is a clear signal that Labour expect to lose the GE and are positioning themselves for opposition-but this trick by Labour played on generations of Scots will not be so effective this time and Labour will not win in 2011 at Holyrood.
They will not look so powerful and useful to Scotland when they are outside of a room (in power nowhere) when Salmond and Cameron are discussing Scotland's future in the latter half of 2010 will they?
Your delusion is amusing.
If there is an pro-devolution SNP MP or a pro-devolution Labour MP, there is no difference, neither are Tories, and thus neither effectively brings in a Tory Government, as they are non-Tory MPs. The only reason Labour are pushing this psephologically inaccurate campaign is because Mr Murphy is one of the few MPs where an upsurge in SNP support from Labour may unfortunately result in a Tory MP.
The Tory majority will be greater than the number of Scottish MPs. It doesn't matter if Scotland voted Labour or Tory. I just hope enough Scots and Welsh vote for the SNP/PC so that we have a large enough bloc of votes to stand up for our nations if on the off chance, Parliament is closely balanced.
"In terms of the political case it destroys the SNP's election battle for the General Election. If you believe in greater home rule (yes voters who are sympathetic to Home Rule and switched to the SNP in 2007 I'm talking to you) there is only one choice : vote Labour."
Yousuf – do you actually believe a word of this piffle? :-)
Forgive me for summarising this so pithily. However, the history of your party when it comes to Home Rule has been at every turn to stall, prevaricate, then deliver as little as you think you can get away with in response to electoral threat, before insisting thereafter that the issue is settled and that only your own self-defined ‘real issues’ matter from that point onwards.
Calman wouldn’t exist were it not for the SNP winning the 2007 election. The proposals only got chucked into the final draft of the Queen’s Speech as an afterthought. Given that even Labour expect Cameron to win the next election, and he has refused to implement Calman if elected, it’s pretty clear that the only reason this has been done is to create one of those spurious ‘dividing lines’ which your leader is so fond of.
If the Labour Government in Westminster wants to implement Calman, it could do so next week. The Scottish Government has already published the draft orders necessary. Why kick it beyond an election that you’re probably going to lose, unless the intention is to try and shore up votes in Scotland while slowing the process of devolution by as much as you possibly can?
Incidentally, if Cameron does make it to Downing Street, it will be because Labour has lost heavily in England. Not even the most partisan of Scottish Labour supporters could blame that on the SNP…
This has got to be your worst post to date Yousuf.
Your all over the place here.
Why the desperation to claim some form of 'home rule' for Labour?
I thought you had faith in the 'union'?
Do you seriously think 50% income tax given over to the Scottish parliament will strengthen the union?
Why hasn't the 3p been used by anyone?
"probably to be enacted after the next General Election"
...
Not good enough for my liking, to late because the Tory Gov will have none of it when they win.
On the voting front, I would urge Tory voters to vote SNP to keep Labour out. Seriously Yousuf, they are bad news. They tried to kill my cat, hisss hisss :)..
Anyway how is wee Willie? Settling in okay?
Lost Highlander 20 November 2009 09:10
The Problem with your scenario is that Vote Labour in Scotland and you will still get a Torie goverment as the seats they need to win are all down in England. England is the real battleground for westminster and Im sorry to say we a sideshow.
....
Your spot on btw. Labour are polling around 20% in England, clearly they are fed up with them and the Tory party is almost on 50%.
So game over..
Dear Yousuf
Tory Government in England next election.
European election in Murphy's seat Labour came third.
The Wendy Commission is dying.
Just to let you know the situation in case you are busy.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Richard I've not said that the SNP would be exclusively to blame for a Tory victory, rather that a vote for the SNP helps bring about a Tory Government and that means that the Calman resommendations will not be implemented.
Oh, and I would advise against anyone counting their chickens about the next election either.
"Voting SNP does precisely nothing to advance Home Rule. Not that it is anything new. After all it was Labour that introduced devolution and created the Scottish Parliament after consistent lobbying from Scottish Labour."
Yup, they sure did my dear Yousuf, thanks to your Labour pals the SNP went from 6 MPs at Westmister in 1992 to having only 7 MPs in 2005, but thanks to the generous boys at Labour, they got a bounty of 47 MSPs despite the party having gained less than 35,000 votes between 1992 and 2007!
Not only that, they got to form the Scottish government!
I can't understand why SNPy people hate the Labour party so much, look how generous they were to you! If it wasn't for the Labour Party the SNP would be nothing!
Calman has been dropped on the Bass Rock by Labour, they have no intention to implement it none!
Why do I say that because they have had the opportunity and the means and have failed to do so.
Calman himself said you could implement parts now, so why haven't they?
If Labour are so keen on devolution those would have happened by know.
Once again the rhetoric is clear the lack of action is telling.
This is a none too subtle tactic to try and defend themselves from the SNP.
Not big or clever.
Again you cannot change the Scotland act without a referendum.
The precedent was set in 1997.
Labour signed up to SCC which proclaimed soverignty belongs to the people not parliament.
Also please don't try this vote SNP get Tory nonesense.
The UK election will be decided in the English swing seats, not in the central belt of Scotland.
You have a degree, interested in politics? Surely this isn't something you don't know about.
Vote SNP the only party who truly believe in SCottish democracy.
This is ludricous. How can you possibly conclude SNP winning Scotland would mean Tory win? It is the same number of seats up for grab.
Surely if Scotland returns all SNP and it is a hung parliament it would be up to Labour to work with the SNP rather than thinking they have a divine right to rule Scotland.
So you have two basic arguments.
1. Voting SNP will help bring in a Tory Government.
2. Voting Labour rather than SNP is a vote for Home Rule.
Both arguments are poor.
1. Voting SNP will not help to bring in a Tory Government as the SNP does not stand candidates in England and it is English votes that will decide the outcome of the UK election. That is not an anti-English comment, merely a statement of fact. There are over ten times as many voters in England as there are in Scotland so they will decide who wins.
2. The ability to vary income tax by 10p is not Home Rule. In any case I hate to break this to you but the likelihood is that Gordon Brown has only allowed Jim Murphy to publish this paper in the certainty that it will never be implemented.
You should also consider the fact that the only reason the white paper is being published is an attempt steal a march on the publication of the Scottish Government's Referendum Bill.
Do you seriously believe that there would even have been a Calman Commission, never mind a white paper, if the SNP were not in power?
So the lessson is clear. If you don't believe in independence but you do support Home Rule you should vote SNP because both currently and historically that is the best means to enlarge Scotland's powers.
“Richard I've not said that the SNP would be exclusively to blame for a Tory victory, rather that a vote for the SNP helps bring about a Tory Government and that means that the Calman resommendations will not be implemented.”
Yousuf - a vote for the SNP is a vote for the SNP and nothing else. Only Tory voters – specifically Labour voters defecting to the Tories south of the border – will bring about a Tory government.
Anyway, like I say, if Gordon Brown is remotely interested in delivering Calman, he could do it next week. If the Labour Government now has such enthusiasm for Calman, why was it such an afterthought for the Queen’s Speech, and why won’t they make use of the draft orders published by the Scottish Government which would allow the powers transfer to proceed directly?
“Oh, and I would advise against anyone counting their chickens about the next election either.”
Counting chickens? If you’re referring to my suggesting that the Tories might win the next election, I’m simply looking at the polls rather than saying it with any relish.
In any case, spend some time with Labour MPs, and it won’t take long before you’ll find a few who would prefer to see the Tories back in Government rather than concede another inch to the devolutionists and the ‘separatists’. Perhaps we see more than a hint of this strand of thought in Labour’s decision not to proceed this side of an election?
jpj2
>>As usual your Labour party electioneering seeks to distort rather than inform.<<
Aye and if this is the best he can do then blog on something else, quick!
>>This whole approach of Murphy is a clear signal that Labour expect to lose the GE and are positioning themselves for opposition-but this trick by Labour played on generations of Scots will not be so effective this time and Labour will not win in 2011 at Holyrood.<<
This is the essence of it which encapsulates the utter dishonesty(apologies for the veritas Yousef) of the bloggers approach. Hopefully the old adage will out, that you can fool some of the people sometime...........
Post a Comment