Some may be delighted by this possibility and others may be determined to stop it happening but Scots Tory leader, Annabel Goldie has today opened the lid of a political Pandora’s box in a way open only to so non-dogmatic a politician.
The Scottish Mail on Sunday is carrying, on its inside cover a feature headlined: Scottish Tories ready to get into bed with Labour’.
Now that is blue skies thinking.
The text of the piece shows Scots Tory leader Annabel Goldie openly prepared to consider alliances with whichever of the two major parties – the SNP or Labour – emerges with most seats from the Scottish Election 2011, on 5th May. The Scottish voting system means that no party is likely to get an overall majority.
The trouble with considering a Tory-Labour (TorRed?) coalition is that, if the core political philosophy of either party means anything at all, it coudn’t possibly work.
It would attempt to lash together two diametrically opposed ways of seeing the nature of society, the role and management of the economy and the responsibilities of government.
Both parties may have softened their respective lines over time, with one nation Conservatism and Blairite inculcation of the capitalist ethos, but at heart they remain very different political entities.
The simplest way of expressing their essentially distinction is that:
- the Tories are the energetic proponents of the demand economy – market driven, offering choice to consumers with private sector provision based on profitability;
- Labour are the traditional upholder of the command economy, where the state controls the economy for the common good.
An alliance between two such utterly opposed philosophies is nonsensical. How could the nanny state keep workable company with the wolf that hunts alone, even if dressed up as Red Riding Hood’s granny.
And if they were saying they’re not so different after all, it doesn’t really matter which you vote for. And who would believe that?
The only way such a partnership could possibly work would be in a situation where every single party and politician elected to Holyrood worked together in a consensus government.
There would be some logic and much justice in this. It would though start a process which would eventually see the end of Britain’s traditional adversarial politics based on political dogma, replacing it by fluid issue-based alliances.
This is potentially interesting – and if post-devolution Scotland had had some genuinely innovative political thinkers in charge of it, rather than likeable but essentially traditionalist redecorators, who knows what it might have chosen and how far ahead it might be by now.
But here we are – faced with the previously unthinkable.
So – is Goldie a power-hungry madwoman, a visionary or a woman fighting to keep her position as leader of her party and prepared to do whatever it takes?
The electorate will decide in May, of course, but this is a major new issue for debate. Interesting times ahead.
No. It is really quite simple.
The emasculated and non socialist Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament is now a perfectly suitable and safe bed-fellow for what is left of Tory votes
This is not awfully importantant in the grand scheme of things as the polarisation of Scottish politics is no longer between Left and Right but between the union and independence. But the fact is that the only way the SNP would have any kind of liaison with the Tories would be if Annabelle and her crew abandoned their disgraceful opposition to a Scottish Constitutional Referendum.
I see from other sources today that the Scottish Tories have been ordered to send all the funds they raise to London where the Tory leadership has assumed all decision making about their Scottish operation.
They appear to be completely unaware that prescriptive London Toryism is the actual reason for their Scottish demise and are proposing application of more of the same destructive factor as a solution to their Scottish problem.
Rather like setting fire to someone with third degree burns.
Do the Scottish Tories have the balls to say no to their London controllers?
Or isn’t it about time that a party who proclaims sturdy self-relaince as the core of its very being decided that that is a perfectly valid ambition for Scotland?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
That, of course, should read “a party which…..” in the final sentence of the above response
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Senior insiders told the Daily Telegraph that money raised by the Scottish Tories is being passed to the UK party along with ultimate oversight over a radical restructuring of their operations.”
Ahead of the Holyrood elections Scottish party chiefs are to be sidelined according to Johnson and applicants for three new regional campaign manager posts in Scotland must apply to the Conservatives’ Millbank headquarters in London.
The London party is not happy that the party in Scotland managed to secure only a single MP in Scotland in the Westminster election last year. After a review by Lord Sanderson of Bowden senior party insiders, who have expressed the view that the party in Scotland is not trusted to deliver desired changes in terms of leadership, financing and membership recruitment, are quoted as saying that London has “taken control” and, “Every penny we raise now has to go to London
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If Goldie is so desperate for power why doesn’t she join the LibDems.
I find DMH’s assertion that the main polarisation of Scottish politics is now between unionists and independents a tad depressing, especially at this time with the state of the economy. After four years of a nationalist government there has been no referendum on independence, why not? If there had been I think it is far from certain the the result would have been in favour of independence. And if the result had been in favour, then as far as I know the Scottish Government doesn’t have the political authority to implement it anyway, which actually makes me wonder what is the point of the SNP at Holyrood. So DMH are you saying that if the Tories suddenly came out as closet nationalists tomorrow you’d be happy getting into bed with them?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I find it pretty odd that you appear to have ignored the fact that the three unioinist parties pledged to vote down any attempt to have referendum.
In fact referendums have been held in several places in which there was no worked out constitutional ability to do so (Catalonia curently is going through this process).
The notion that a UK Goverment woud ignore a properly run and honest referendum surprises me but perhaps you have less faith in those who govern UK than I have.
The United Nations Charter enshrines the inalienable right of any community to independent existence if it is conclusively established that that is the will of a majority.
THe soveignty of the Scottish people is also enshrined in law and they can choose independence if they so decide and I would suggest their legitimately elected parliament also has this right. The views of London government might be interesting on this matter but they have prescriptive validity on it, no matter what they try to imply
The Scottish National Party is a very broad based party with many Tories in it (though not me, it has to be said) and I respect the right of any person to hold political views with which I do not agree. The only thing that holds the SNP together is a shared vision of independence.
Anyway this is a distraction from the issue I raised which was that all authority has been stripped from the Scottish Tories by their London leaders.
Am I to take it that as a Tory you are trying to lead us astray?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So there will never be a referendum until the SNP have a majority at Holyrood then, not much chance of that. Have the referendums in those other countries lead to independence? I am in no doubt that if a referendum returned an outcome in favour of independence (which I don’t think it would) then the Westminster government would find some way of fobbing it off. Yes the United Nations Charter does state that, although it has never done the Palestinians much good. And how far do you go, if there was an independent Scotland how long would it take for the word Edinburgh to replace London as a pejorative statement, how long before the people of the Western Isles, or Orkney want a referendum on independence.
Frankly I don’t care what the Tories do with their money, I hope they invest it with their mates in the investment banks and lose the lot. As for the name calling I’m a socialist.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The cringe strikes back, indeed.
In the last decade over a dozen countries, either by referendum or parliamentary vote, have attained independece. I’m sure Sudan, Catalonia will join them this decade and Belgium will split into two.
At the end of the WW2 there was 45 nations in the UN. There is now 195.
I remain shocked that you imply the UK will use force to prevent Scottish Independence.
Is this what you think of our English neighbours?
As a matter of interest if the people of the Western Isles or the Northern Isles want independence they are fully entitled to that and I would support them fully.
After all the Faroese with similar population are independent. Of course they are much cleverer and much more able than us daft Scots.
It would be likelier I think if he Northern Isles petitioned to join Norway however. There would be a good case to be made for that and they would be a lot better off than being a part of UK. SNP policy is for powerful devolved assemblies for these areas if they want them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A desperate Labour Party has reacted quickly to this and this story appears in The Herald today (Monday)
LABOUR has accused Tory leader Annabel Goldie of “desperate stuff” after she hinted sh would welcome a coalition deal with them.
John Park, Labour’s election co-ordinator, said a Labour-Tory coalition was “as likely as m getting into th Scotland squad”.
Mr Park spoke afer Ms Goldi said she was willing to negotiate an alliance with the largest parties after May’s Holyrood l election.
Th SNP already has an explicit bar on any deal with her party.
Mr Park said: “This is desperate stuff from Annab l Goldie who knows that her party is doomed in Scotland by th actions of th UK Tory-led Coalition.
“With almost 100 days to go until the people of Scotland go to the polls, Labour will be focused on forming th next government at Holyrood. W will be fighting hard to win the trust of Scots again in order that we can implement SNP spokesman Jo Fitzpatrick said: “There is no possibility whatsoever of a coalition deal al between th SNP and th Tori s at Holyrood now or in th future .”
Despite lagging well be hind Labour and th SNP in th polls, Ms Goldie claimed: “From th fringe of Scottish politics, we are back in the mainstream. For the first tim since 1997 we are central to how Scotland is run
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Annabel Goldie’s comments are the last gasps of a dying leader.
An excellent article by Professor Michell, again in the Herald today [ Monday ], in which he speculates that she would make a good Presiding Officer. Wether the other parties would want other Tory in that postion remains to be seen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For DMH, cringe?
I could only find Timor, Kosovo, Montenegro and Serbia in the last decade, I’d be interested to know the other six.
England using force, try not to put words into peoples mouths.
Faroese not quite independent.
On a more philosophical note I often wonder what the SNP would do if they achieved their desire of holding a referendum and the Scottish population voted in favour of staying in the union. This is a serious question, is it something that the SNP have a position on?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Many snp are quietly relieved that the referendum has been put out to grass.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Time marches on . I should have said the last two decades.
Then we have Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, the Czech republic, the Ukraine, Belarus, Bosnia, Khazakstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Croatia, Georgia,Kiribati,Naura, Palau, and Tuvalu.
The SNP of course is unlikely to try to mount a referendum unless it is confident it can win it and, of course, if they don’t win it they will immediately start preparing for the next one. The SNP only has to win this once. The unionists have to win every time.
Actually I have never supported the referendum as the only route. The previous SNP position that a majority of Scottish MPs elected supporting independence or a Holyrood majority for independence are also perfectly legitimate measures to trigger independence negotiations and this will be put before ther parties national executive soon.
It would be very unwise to presume that all Labour, Tory and LibDem elected representatives will remain unionist
The bottom line is that despite the most concerted and co-ordinated assault across all the media, printed and brpadcast, on the SNP and Independence that I have ever experienced in my 50 years at this the support for independence continues to creep up and all the recent polls show significantly less than 50% opting for status quo.
The next five years will completely change the political landscape in UK.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There are very many good and effective Nationalist Councillors and MSPs, doing a fine job for their electorate. For me where they fall down is (on a party machinery level) the wee chip on the shoulder that they think everyone is against them (press etc).
Also they suggest directly and indirectly that they are more passionate about the country of their birth than those who are happy to remain in the United Kingdom. It is that immaturity that drives many not take them serious as far as the ‘home rule’ issue is concerned.
A referendum will sort it out, but calls for that seem to have died a death.
There are far more pressing issues to be addressed at this time, as we see daily on this excellent website.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
David McH says, refering to the SNP position on a referendum on Scottish separation “if they don’t win it they will immediately start preparing for the next one” . By this statement he has shown the futility of Scotland’s Unionist parties supporting a referendum being held . He has given the game away ie the SNP will not accept the result if it goes against them and will continue to agitate and waste the nation’s time, energy and money when as Phill so rightly says there are so many far more pressing issues .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Aye thats true ‘Kintyre1′.
‘Dave mac h’ must comprehend that if a referendum were to be held, and the nationalist plea for ‘home rule’ was rejected, then that is that. To perpetuate the issue would be childish, expensive, and not the way i suspect his senior party members would wish him to be suggesting in public.
Whatever the constutional result it would have to be adhered to, and should his party fail to persuade the electorate, then it could be a downward spiral. I feel Salmond etc at Holyrood have ‘recognised’ this, and sensibly (and perhaps conveniently) realised this is not the time for any such motion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There’s a clear case for repeat referenda if conditions change to make that course of action desirable.
Thirty years ago the UK voted in a referendum to remain in what was then a trading block, the Common Market.
Since then it has been completely transformed via the EEC, the EC and now the EU, into a being which is totally different from that voted on.
I would argue that there is a clear case for a further referendum, since what now exists is far removed from the original concept.
But you can bet that’s not going to happen. Governments only allow the people to voice opinions if that opinion coincides with the governments own ideas.
And if a referendum on Scottish independence would be a waste of the nation’s time and money (and I’m not arguing that it isn’t) then why is the UK government planning to run a referendum on a change to the voting system which no-one – not even the LibDems, whom it it is supposed to appease – supports?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0