transcurrents

Scottish Nationalists Stymied in Quest for Independence

May 12th, 2007

By D.B.S. Jeyaraj

Stymie in golf is the situation where an opponent’s ball is between one’s own ball and the hole.Over a period of time the word has come to mean a difficult situation that blocks or thwarts one’s activities.

Stymied is how one would describe the predicament in which the Scottish Nationalist party (SNP) is in currently. The SNP led by Alex Salmond registered a historic success at the poll on a platform that had Independence for Scotland as its chief objective. Still , the lack of a working majority and perceived inability to form one, is now an obstacle to that independence quest.

The Scotland situation will impact on Sri Lanka where a debate rages about pros and cons of devolution. While those in favour argue that devolution would contain Tamil separatism those against say that greater devolution is a slow recipe for separation.

In the case of Scotland it appears that enhanced devolution in recent times has whetted appetite for secession rather than diluting the demand. In that context the anti – devolutionists in Sri Lanka are likely to cite Scotland as an example where devolution paved the way for independence / secession instead of strenghthening unity and territorial integrity.

[Alex Salmond of Scottish Nationalist party (SNP)]

Whatever Salmond’s thirst for Scottish independence he faces a tricky situation now due to lack of majority. If the SNP sticks firmly on its quest for independence any government formed by it has little chances of surviving. All major parties in Scotland are against separatism/ independence. If the SNP compromises on independence it would lose credibility leading to diminshed political clout in the future.

The May 3rd poll for Scottish Parliament saw the party win forty – seven seats out of one hundred and twenty – nine at Holyrood.. The Labour was one short with forty – six. The Conservatives with seventeen were one ahead of the Liberal Democrats’s sixteen. The Greens had two and an Independent was also elected.

[Sunrise at Lismore lighthouse, taken from the Calmac ferry MV 'Isle of Mull' - Photo By Dunard]

The election was marred by a spate of spoiled votes due to ill – designed ballot papers. 142, 000 votes or 7% of those cast were spoilt. Around one – sixths of the electorates returned candidates whose margins of victory were smaller than the amount of votes spoilt. Several legal challenges are to be mounted and a commission of inquiry to be appointed over this voting “debacle”.

This Labour party was undefeated in any general election in Scotland since 1959.This time it was pipped at the post by one. Its tally of 50 in the Scottish Parliament came down to 46 from 50.The SNP on the other hand made vast strides increasing their earlier 25 seats to 47. Yet the SNP victors however have no majority.

The two green members of Scottish Parliament (MSP) have been brought into the fold with one portfolio. The independent Margo Mcdonald is an ex – SNP member of Scottish Parliament. She too is likely to close ranks with SNP or become speaker. But the SNP needs support from the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats to form the required majority of 65.

[Bagpipe players, Highland Games, Kimelford - Photo: James Logan]

This support has not been forthcoming. The left – leaning SNP virtually ignored the right of centre Conservatives. There was little chance of winning support even if SNP had tried to do so. Instead Salmond focussed his energies on serenading the Liberal Democrats who had propped up the outgoing Labour administration in Parliament.

The key element in SNP election campaigning was the avowed goal of full independence for Scotland. The SNP intended to hold a referendum in 2010 . If successful Scotland would negotiate full Independence and break away from the United Kingdom.

Ironically May 1st this year marked the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union which formally joined England and Scotland together as constituents of the United Kingdom. Two days later Scotland went to polls on May 3rd , a situation where that “union ” was in dire straits with the Scottish Nationalist Party campaigning on a separatist platform.

An opinion poll held in November 2006 suggested that the SNP might well win majority support. Scots were asked in November 2006 how they would respond to the question the SNP intends to place on the ballot: for the referendum “Do you agree that the Scottish Parliament should negotiate a new settlement with the British government so that Scotland becomes a sovereign and independent state?” Fifty-two percent said yes in an all – time high.

Despite this optimism in 2006 support for independence declined gradually. The May 3rd elections failed to give SNP the landslide it hoped for. This left the party no choice other than to cobble together a working majority as its top priority.

[A pix of St Giles' Cathedral on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh, Photo Juan J]

The Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and Labour were firmly opposed to any break – up of the UK.The prospect of a referendum envisaged by SNP was anathema. Nevertheless the SNP set about its task spiritedly.

Instead of celebrating his wedding anniversary quietly as planned Alex Salmond used the May 5th – 6th week – end for hectic lobbying. A series of telephone calls were made to party leaders.

The first and best option was to continue to pursue a coalition with the Greens and the Liberal Democrats. If successful the SNP coalition would get 65 seats (47 + 16 + 2).

As far as the green party was concerned the deal has virtually been agreed upon.. . The two Green MSPs, Patrick Harvie and Robin Harper have said they had two “red line” issues – no more nuclear power stations and tough new targets for cutting emissions.The SNP leader agreed in principle. A ministry presumably relating to environment will be given the greens.

With the Liberal Democrats insisting that the SNP abandon plans of a referendum and the Scottish Nationalists unwilling and unable to jettison the cornerstone of its political agenda few were optimistic of an agreement between both . Salmond however was hopeful.

The SNP leader felt he could circumvent his way round this obstacle by offering a plebiscite in which the Scots have three options – independence, the status quo or continued membership of the United Kingdom under a Scottish Parliament whose powers have been enhanced. The third options happens to be Liberal Democrat policy.So Salmond was optimistic.

The Liberal Democrats were adamant that they will not allow a referendum on independence, despite this being the No1 priority for the SNP. Its leader Nicol Stephen has been markedly reluctant to do so, but Salmond was hoping he would relent as talks went on. Various ways of brokering a compromise were examined.

[Eilean Donan Castle, Loch Duich - Photo by James Logan]

One was dropping the referendum idea completely. This would be the only real way of being sure of forming a rainbow coalition. But, to do that, Salmond would have to axe the policy which lies at the heart of the SNP policy platform – something he is unlikely to do. So that was out.

Another idea, floated by the Lib Dems before the election, was for a second constitutional convention, set up to look at both more powers for the parliament (which the Lib Dems favour) and full independence (which the Lib Dems don’t).

This, it was felt, could be a way of “parking” the issue, allowing the Executive to get on with the business of running Scotland, but it was understood that the Lib Dems did not want this to be an excuse for a review into the referendum question.It was insisted that the SNP would have to agree to dropping the referendum issue from the convention’s remit to get a deal on this.

A third option was delaying the issue. It was suggested an SNP-Lib Dem Executive could simply shelve the referendum issue for two or three years, again allowing the Executive to function without becoming ensnared in the problem. This would almost inevitably lead to the dissolution of the Executive after two or three years. Again , this was not an ideal position for the SNP.

[Atlantic Puffins on the Isle of Lunga - Picture By Steve Deger]

Another option discussed was one whereby the Liberal Democrats would back the government on an issue-by-issue basis and defend it against no-confidence motions, in return for the Executive backing Liberal Democrat policies. The Liberal Democrats however expressed their reluctance for this approach, thus negating the only way of reaching any kind of agreement between the parties.

.It appeared that the Lib – dems were reluctant to join or even associate with any government at this juncture.The party felt it had lost support by its link to the previous labour government. It was felt that a stint in the opposition without attachments to the party in power would help the Lib – Dems to renew and revive flagging fortunes.

Against that backdrop the Liberal Democrats drove a hard bargain. The SNP had to unambiguously throw in the garbage bin its plan of a referendum on Scottish independence. This was too much to ask of a party just got elected using that very same proposal as mainstay of its election campaign. So a tie – up was not on the cards.

This leaves the SNP with a hobsons choice. It is to form a minority government of the SNP and the Greens with no external support. This is probably the worst option for Mr Salmond, but it is now the most likely. With the two Green MSPs now virtually on board, he has 49 seats – 16 short of a majority.

It would be very hard for him to get the Executive’s business through the parliamentary bureau, which decides these things, before he even tried to pass legislation.Still he has no choice. If Conservatives and Liberal democrats adopted an issue by issue approach and lent support the SNP could pull through. If these parties decided to give “time” for the new party to settle in the SNP chances of survival would be greater.

This means that the SNP will have to “moderate” itself. Its master plan of a referendum will have to be shelved if not abandoned. This may not be a bad thing altogether as the situation has changed drastically on this count in recent times. Support for full independence seems to have waned.

According to a news report in “The Scotsman” the SNP would lose a referendum on independence if it was held now – even if the Nationalists were able to set their own question. This was revealed in a Scotsman/ICM poll. The report further said -.

” With the debate over a referendum on independence at the centre of the political debate in Scotland, The Scotsman put the SNP’s preferred referendum question to the public . Voters were asked: “The Scottish Parliament should negotiate a new settlement with the British government so that Scotland becomes a sovereign and independent state. Do you agree, ‘yes’ or ‘no’?”

“A total of 35 per cent said they agreed with the statement and backed an independent Scotland, while 55 per cent said they disagreed and 10 per cent said they did not know. The result is significant because it shows how people could vote when presented with the question the SNP wish to put to Scots in a referendum in 2010.

This change of heart would explain the poll results where support for SNP dropped from earlier predictions. This was attributed mainly to an all out campaign by other political leaders against full independence for Scotland.Many Scots wanting Independence had apparently second thoughts when it came to voting.

Uncertainty over the economic costs of independence was a major factor. Forces opposing independence played on those fears. Tony Blair in particular warned that there could be no turning the clock back. Moreover with Blair stepping down his likely successor will be a Scotsman Gordon Brown.

Earlier analysts had warned of a backlash against Blair and Labour over issues such as Iraq would result in a huge protest vote favouring SNP. Yet the final results showed that Labour fared much better than expected losing by only one seat. This again reflected the reverse change in the opinion of many voters .

In such a situation the SNP itself may be doubtful of its chances at a referendum . If the party had a majority and was able to implement certain measures it could have enhanced support in the next three years for a referendum. But with a minority government its scope for independent action will be severely restricted.

Alex Salmond was the first to take oaths as MP in the new Parliament.Before swearing allegiance to the Queen he declared his party’s primary loyalty was to the “Scottish people”. It is very likely that Salmond will soon become first minister for Scotland as head of a minority government.

Outgoing Jack Mcconnell remains first minister still. The Labour leader turned up at Holyrood in a kilt. There is an unlikely chance that Labour could also form a government if Lib dems or Tories pledge support. This however seems a far – fetched idea given the current political realities.

It appears from media interviews that Salmond is now accepting reality of a minority government while not giving up hope of a deal with the Liberal Democrats.

About two months before the May 3rd poll, Salmond released a document detailing what he would do exactly in his first 100 days of office as first minister. But now he was admitting that he would have to change many of those plans if sworn in as first minister of a minority government.

Some policies will remain the same, particularly those that do not need primary legislation – such as announcing the go-ahead of a new Forth crossing or negotiating with Westminster for money Mr Salmond believes is being withheld – but others will change.

“If we have a minority administration, quite clearly what you try to implement, not just in the first 100 days, but in the first year, you have to look at areas which will command widespread parliamentary support,” Salmond told the media.

“If there is legislation involved, you have to look at the areas which command more broad consensus in the parliament.”

Salmond did not say which issues would be postponed and which less contentious ones would be brought forward, but he did say his controversial plans to introduce a local income tax were always designed to be introduced towards the end of the parliament, not at the beginning.

“You would have to take from the programme those things which you think have a good chance of going through.”

According to Scottish journalists like Hamish Mcdonnell ” Nobody has tried to run a minority government in Scotland before and no-one has wanted to. Mr Salmond knows it will be incredibly difficult, not least because his party will not command a majority on the parliamentary bureau, which decides how parliamentary time is allocated. If the SNP cannot timetable its business and legislation when it wants, it will be at the mercy of the other parties. ”

Mcdonnell goes on to say ” Mr Salmond also cannot have Executive majorities on the parliamentary committees. This will leave any legislation open to radical change and even defeat in committee, before it gets to the floor of the parliament, where, once again, the SNP will not be able to control enough votes to get legislation through.”

” It will be uncharted territory for the SNP and for the other parties in the parliament. It is likely that Mr Salmond’s opponents will be keen to inflict defeats on him and he will endeavour to secure as much cross-party support as possible – sometimes from the Greens and the Liberal Democrats and sometimes even from the Conservatives. “observes Mcdonnell.

“But Mr Salmond knows that this experiment in minority government has to work and the SNP has to be seen to be making achievements for the good of Scotland. Otherwise, his dreams of building credibility in government will be finished.” he says.

[Scotland Flags - Picture By Euan Fraser]

Hamish Mcdonnell has also written a brief analysis of what may be possible for Salmond to implement during his first 100 days in office notwithstanding the fact that he would be heading a minority govt. Here are some excerpts –

INDEPENDENCE

MR Salmond has promised to publish a white paper on an independence referendum within his first 100 days in office. There is no reason why this cannot be done. In fact, civil servants are probably preparing it already.

TRANSPORT

MR Salmond wants to cancel the Edinburgh Airport rail link. He can do this without legislation simply by not providing the money for it. He also intends to give the go-ahead for a new Forth crossing, probably a tunnel, as soon as possible. This may need parliamentary approval but that should not be a problem. This is likely to be the first issue where the SNP meets major opposition from the Greens.

OIL AND GAS

Alex Salmond promised to ask Westminster for Scotland’s share of oil and gas revenues within his first 100 days. There is nothing to stop him doing that, but his chances of success are slim and he might find his time is better spent in the daily battle to get votes in Holyrood than arguing with ministers in London. He also wants to start formal discussions with the Norwegian government for a North Sea Super Grid. He could do it without legislation, but it would cause problems with London.

REBATE

Alex Salmond also promised to go to Westminster and demand the return of £40 million in attendance allowances which, he claims, should be coming to Scotland. This is money that was coming north before the Executive introduced free care for the elderly.

Mr Salmond claims it should still come to Scotland. He can argue his case, but his chances of success are slim given that the Labour-led Executive already tried asking for the money back, without success.

EFFICIENCY

MR Salmond wants to slim down the Scottish Executive as his first act in government and there does not seem to be any reason why he should not be able to do this.

The current nine departments will be slimmed down to six: the Office of the First Minister, Finance and Sustainable Growth, Health and Wellbeing, Education and Skills, Justice and Rural Affairs.

This does not require legislation so should not prove a problem.

JUSTICE

Alex Salmond wants to introduce a Criminal Justice Bill for tougher community sentencing, which should get the backing of the Liberal Democrats, and he wants a full judicial inquiry into the Shirley McKie case, which he could do without parliamentary support. The Criminal Justice Bill is the sort of legislation the Conservatives might support. Annabel Goldie (conservative leader) made it clear she would back the government on an “issue-by-issue” basis and policies such as sentencing will test this.

SPORT AND LEISURE

Mr Salmond has promised to publish plans for a full St Andrew’s Day holiday and to convene meetings with stakeholders to see if Scotland can put out its own Olympic team. Neither of these will need legislation so he should be able to start the process on both. But both are likely to be hugely contentious and Mr Salmond runs the risk of the opposition parties using their time in the parliament to debate, and vote, on these issues. Defeat would not be binding but it would be embarrassing.

HEALTH

THE SNP promised to introduce a local healthcare bill, including direct elections for health boards, to phase out public private partnerships and abolish prescription charges. Mr Salmond will be able to publish these plans but he will have some trouble getting them through.

Everything depends on the Liberal Democrats, who might support the community health proposals but who will oppose the scrapping of the PPP scheme. This part might be delayed until later in the parliament.

BUDGET

THE administration’s first real job will be to produce a budget, setting out where the money is going to come from for its spending plans, how much will come from efficiency savings and re-allocations.

The stakes on the budget are high. If it is voted down, the Executive will have no money – a move which would be tantamount to a no-confidence motion. But the other parties might agree to allow the SNP budget to go through, giving it the time to start to govern.

EDUCATION

THE SNP has pledged to introduce a bill abolishing tuition fees. This should get the support of the Liberal Democrats, which would give it the backing it needs to go through parliament.

The SNP also wants to increase free nursery provision by 50 per cent and reduce class sizes to 18 in P1 to P3. Neither of these measures would be controversial and might even generate cross-parliamentary support, if they were seen to be improving Scotland generally.

Whatever the immediate fate of Salmond and the SNP some analysts have opined that the Scottish nationalist quest for independence will impact on situations where separatism is a major feature. Ian Bremmer , president of Eurasia Group, a political-risk consultancy and the author of “the J curve: A new way to understand why nations rise and fall” wrote thus in a recent essay before polls –

” The implications of a nationalist-led Scottish parliament, with or without an independence referendum, could extend well beyond the borders of the UK. An SNP victory and talk of the break-up of the United Kingdom could embolden separatists among the Catalans and Basques of Spain, Flemish-speakers in Belgium, and even those in northern Italy who favor a break from that country’s less prosperous south. These movements have developed over many years under different historical circumstances. But progress toward Scottish independence could help generate separatist momentum within any of these states”.

“An immediate European domino effect following Scotland’s elections is extremely unlikely. But large-scale political movements — toward democratization, decolonization, socialism, free-market capitalism or nationalism, for example — tend to develop in waves. Break-up of the United Kingdom, a prosperous liberal democracy, would send shockwaves across European borders — and might one day create new ones.”

transCurrents feedback : editor@transcurrents.com

transCurrents feedback :Contact DBS Jeyaraj : djeyaraj2005@yahoo.com

Entry Filed under: transCurrents