Opinion
Henry McLeish
henrymcleish@holyrood.com
Bleak backdrop to election THE cuts agenda has dominated domestic politics in Scotland in
recent months – and will provide the grim backdrop to the Holyrood election campaign, helping determine the result on polling day, now only 35 days away. Recent opinion polls suggest Labour is ahead and will win the highest number of seats, a reverse of the position four years ago when the SNP were ahead but still only won the election by one seat. Are we heading for another close encounter between the SNP and Labour? What are some of the factors that will influence the outcome? And
to what extent will the Holyrood elections continue to diverge from the pattern of Westminster elections and confirm the trend towards a very distinctive political culture north of the border? Te most disappointing aspect of devolution so far has been the low turn-out of those eligible to vote for Holyrood: 58.16 per cent in 1999; 49.42 per cent in 2003; and 51.72 per cent in 2007. Tese figures fall far short of the Scotland figures for Westminster for comparable years: 71.3 per cent in 1997; 58.2 per cent in 2001; 60.8 per cent in 2005; and 63.8 per cent in 2010. Just for the record and to raise the issue of whether Scotland and
Britain are losing interest in politics and/or voting, 80 per cent was the turn-out in the 1974 February general election! Turn-out could make a real difference, especially when the figures for 2007 show only a third of eligible electors voting in some of the Glasgow seats. Low turn-out, sharper regional variations, a tendency to vote differently in Scottish elections and the deep scepticism and mistrust of politics, politicians and political parties held by the public, are factors which could make a difference to the result. One thing is certain: getting out the vote will make a real difference. Another issue – which party is best placed to defend Scotland’s
interests – will be important in the battle to win over the hearts and minds of the Scottish voters. Tis was powerfully demonstrated in 2007 when the SNP made a real mark at a time when it was the Labour Government at Westminster that was deeply unpopular as Blair’s popularity plummeted with Labour’s, shortly before he stepped down as Prime Minister. Last year, the awful prospect of a Conservative victory in the general election resulted in a huge victory for Labour in Scotland as the electors voted Labour in significant (some would say excessive) numbers. Te fear factor worked to Labour’s advantage as the SNP and, to a lesser extent, the Lib Dems were seen as marginal to this bigger Westminster battle between the political equivalent of the “Old Firm”. For the Holyrood election, will this dynamic
change as the battle-lines are redrawn. Saving Scotland from Westminster and, by implication, London becomes the spin line, especially from the SNP, rather than saving Scotland from the Tories! Scottish Labour,
freed from defending an unpopular Labour Government, should find it easier both criticising the Coalition and Westminster. Te fortunes of the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats will undoubtedly influence the election, especially if the predictions of a Lib-Dem collapse are correct. Te Conservatives in Scotland, despite some of the clever concessions won from the SNP Government over the past four years, are still in deep political trouble. Te Scottish Conservatives have never recovered from the Tatcher
years, etched so indelibly on the minds of the Scottish people. Tey seem incapable of ending their ambivalence to devolution, ditching their Conservative and Unionist baggage, telling David Cameron that they want a fresh start, cutting loose from London and confirming they want a new and modern party in Scotland. Surely, there must be a role for a modern right-of-centre party in Scotland. Te recent spectacle of Michael Forsyth ranting at a Conservative fringe meeting suggests they do need energised and transported to the 21st century. For this Holyrood election, the Conservative Party will pose few
Turnout for Holyrood elections is traditionally poorer than for Westminster polls
threats. Tis cannot be said about the Lib Dems, whose Scottish voters may wish to demonstrate their concerns about the Conservative-run Coalition at Westminster and the damage their policies are doing to any self-respecting Lib-Dem supporter. Te Lib Dems in the Conservative Coalition are acting as pallbearers at the funeral of the health service and the public sector in England. Te implications of this political fall-out could be considerable. Te balance of advantage in a number of Holyrood constituency and list seats could be altered and, while the Lib Dems could lose seats, this may be less important to the final overall result than a movement of votes to either the SNP or Labour in key battleground seats. Te mood and morale of the voters should not be underestimated: there is a great deal of uncertainty around. People feel anxious and fearful of a future where job cuts, unemployment, especially among young people, threats to pay and pensions, cuts in services and living standards and a sense of powerlessness in relation to global developments are destroying personal and national confidence. Te stakes are high for all the Scottish parties but in particular for Labour and the SNP. Maybe reassurance will be the theme for this campaign. Electors, concerned about the future, have some tough choices to make and may support the party that more instinctively empathises with their real concerns, reflects their aspirations and is able to effectively respond to their fears and anxieties: politics is about trust. For the two major parties there are two simple questions to be answered. How will you make a difference? And what do you stand for at a very troubling time for families, communities and country? Put simply, do the electors want change or continuity?
28 March 2011 Holyrood 71
“The mood and morale of the voters
should not be underestimated: there is a great deal of uncertainty around”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80