SNP ends power sharing with the Scottish Greens - Humza Yousaf resigns as SNP leader

[sannox]

Well said to both. PR is a totally moronic basket case of a system and when it delivers quality like this I cannot see anybody finding an even vaguely valid argument otherwise

Of course FPTP delivers complete quality and competence. Oh wait.

 

[Purple Train]

I feel a wee bit sorry for Yousaf. Having to follow two extremely charismatic leaders is hard, and when standing to lead the SNP he was seen as the continuity candidate, just when a lot of the SNP were looking for change; result: a narrow victory (52-48%). Then he inherits impossible climate commitments and difficult gender issues while in an alliance with the Greens. No wonder he's struggling.

He's come a long way by being very close to the leaders, now he's on his own.

I feel sorry for him on those grounds, but, having inherited a poisoned chalice, he hasn't exactly helped himself by burning his bridges, then managing to mock and annoy pretty much all those who have the power to oust him in the space of one day. He doesn't exactly come across as a politically savvy individual - even I know that, if you want to win over someone for the sake of your whole career, you don't call one group of them "deserving of electoral oblivion", say another group has been displaying "political cowardice and hypocrisy", mock the third for only having a small number of parliamentarians, and leave your survival in the hands of someone you had described as "no great loss".

I don't like the Greens - not, I hasten to add, on climate grounds - but ditching them now in such a fashion is naïve to say the least.

 

[jfollows]

Labour wants to force an election; a projection gives it 41 seats in place of its existing 22 seats if so. SNP 63->46, Conservative 31->22. So Conservatives don’t want an election, they just want to cause trouble with as much noise as possible.
EDIT LibDem also want an election to go from 4 to 10 seats.
See https://ballotbox.scot/

 

[Blindtraveler]

Of course FPTP delivers complete quality and competence. Oh wait.

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

 

[sannox]

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

It's simple in how you vote, but it has significant shortcomings which lead to complexity in use.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Well said to both. PR is a totally moronic basket case of a system and when it delivers quality like this I cannot see anybody finding an even vaguely valid argument otherwise

I'm not sure the quality of the Government at Westminster is much of an advert for FPTP.

But in the end, the argument for PR isn't really about quality of politicians - in any electoral system, that's down to things like party organisation and structure, how engaged the electorate are, and how much the electorate value skills and competence in the people they vote for. The argument for PR is that it is much more likely to at least deliver a Government that broadly matches what most people want, and also means that people can vote for the person/party they most want rather than under FPTP being forced to vote for whichever of the top 2 parties in their constituency they least dislike (Although as @oldman pointed out, the particular PR system used in Scotland is a bit defective in that regard)

Whatever the incompetence etc. of the Scottish Government (and I'm certainly no supporter of the SNP), I don't think you can deny that the Scottish Parliament is at least broadly representative of how people actually voted at the last elections, which is a good thing (and is sadly not true of the Westminster Parliament).

 

[nw1]

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

Or alternatively, FPTP is a simplistic naive system (almost something that a child would design) that misrepresents the desires of the electorate as a whole and makes no attempt to deliver compromise.

As for voters "trusting in it", well I don't, for starters, and neither do quite a few other people here, by the looks of things.

 

[brad465]

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

"Do what is right, not what is easy or popular." - Roy T. Bennett

All my other points about the FPTP issues and the Scottish system have been answered in other posts above.

Meanwhile Yousaf has said he won't resign, so I'm expecting him to resign next week at the latest:

Humza Yousaf under fire from opponents as SNP-Green Scottish government power-sharing deal collapses

Scotland's first minister faces a vote of no-confidence next week with the Scottish Greens planning to vote against him.

www.bbc.co.uk

First minister says he won't resign
​

Yousaf says he will not resign as first minister of Scotland.

He says he will write to all party leaders later today asking them to meet him.

 

[sannox]

I think he'll try to get the Greens onside and frame them as 'voting with Tories and unionists to bring down an independence government'

Don't know if it will work- Alba probably see this as their big moment to get influence.

 

[jfollows]

I think he'll try to get the Greens onside and frame them as 'voting with Tories and unionists to bring down an independence government'

Don't know if it will work- Alba probably see this as their big moment to get influence.

Indeed - yesterday he cuts the Greens out of power, but today - now there's a no-confidence motion against him - he begs them to vote for him, because "we have so much in common" or somesuch.

The one Alba MSP looks likely to get something out of this in return for supporting Yousaf.

For the Greens - do they prefer the status quo or a Labour majority following an election? I could understand if they give two fingers to Yousaf today.

 

[GusB]

I feel sorry for him on those grounds, but, having inherited a poisoned chalice, he hasn't exactly helped himself by burning his bridges, then managing to mock and annoy pretty much all those who have the power to oust him in the space of one day. He doesn't exactly come across as a politically savvy individual - even I know that, if you want to win over someone for the sake of your whole career, you don't call one group of them "deserving of electoral oblivion", say another group has been displaying "political cowardice and hypocrisy", mock the third for only having a small number of parliamentarians, and leave your survival in the hands of someone you had described as "no great loss".

Yousaf certainly had big shoes (heels?!) to fill. Whatever people think about Sturgeon, it was never going to be easy for him to follow. Do I feel sorry for him? Well, no, not really. The Greens would probably have withdrawn from the Bute House Agreement anyway - there is an extraordinary general meeting coming up soon - but, by terminating the Bute House Agreement the way he did, he has cut off his nose to spite his face.

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

The system we have is easy enough to understand. You vote for a local candidate on one paper and a regional candidate on the other. You don't have to understand the maths behind it. The number of MSPs will roughly be proportional with the number of votes cast. As I said earlier, it's not perfect but it's better than FPTP.

Meanwhile Yousaf has said he won't resign, so I'm expecting him to resign next week at the latest:

I don't think he can survive this; the sooner he goes, the better.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Meanwhile Yousaf has said he won't resign, so I'm expecting him to resign next week at the latest:

That's if he's not forced out before then.

 

[ainsworth74]

No it does not, but it is at least a sane easy to use and easy to understand system that voters trust in.

Eh? Do voters in Germany not trust in their system? Voters in Ireland? Or New Zealand? To name but a few? As for "sane" a system which gives a party a majority of 66 seats on the basis of 35.2% of the popular vote (Labour in 2005) cannot in any way, in my opinion, be considered "sane". A system which awards 56 seats to one party securing 4.7% of the vote but only one seat to another party securing 12.6% of the vote (SNP and UKIP respectively in 2015) is not a "sane" system. It's a system which is broken and delivers incredibly damaging results. Is it any wonder people feel disenfranchised when the electoral system produces absurd results like that?

 

[Ianigsy]

First past the post works fine in a two party system because it’s a relic of the Victorian political system, but Scotland has at least four in play.

The SNP seems to have peaked for this electoral cycle and finds itself mired in all sorts of allegations of skulduggery. They could do with letting a new generation come through and working out a simple grassroots message which reflects 2024 and beyond.

 

[jfollows]

A minority government only works if the majority doesn’t unite against you, and although the SNP might squeak through thanks to the Alba MSP this time, it doesn’t look like it’s a recipe for long-term success.

 

[Falcon1200]

Would you prefer the Scottish Parliament to have an overwhelming majority of SNP MSPs, with very little representation from any other party, despite the SNP only getting a minority of the vote? That is after all what FPTP would have delivered

It won't be a surprise that I would prefer not to have SNP MSPs at all, but at least with FPTP they would not have had to bribe the Greens with Ministerial posts, to which they were utterly unsuited, in order to govern.

Unless the leaflet was published by the Greens, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

The leaflet was not published by the Greens, but by an independence-supporting organisation, as are they.

But to be fair my comment would still apply even if it was the Greens.

Being opposed to economic growth and believing the Cass report should be ignored, among other things, are why I class the Greens as extremist. I note my view of them as such has been disputed (and fair enough), but my comment regarding their Ministerial competence has not!

 

[GusB]

The leaflet was not published by the Greens, but by an independence-supporting organisation, as are they.

Labour, Conservative and Libdem parties all support the union, but you wouldn't expect them all to hace the same policies, would you? Why then should all independence-supporting parties do the same?

Being opposed to economic growth and believing the Cass report should be ignored, among other things, are why I class the Greens as extremist. I note my view of them as such has been disputed (and fair enough), but my comment regarding their Ministerial competence has not!

You're within your rights to disagree with the Greens' policies, but to class them as extremist comes across as being slightly hysterical! Oh, and where does it say that they're opposed to economic growth?

 

[nw1]

First past the post works fine in a two party system because it’s a relic of the Victorian political system, but Scotland has at least four in play.

I think that's a good point in many ways. You can see that in the USA in which the Republicans do not dominate the Presidency in quite the same way that the Tories dominate here, because if you don't like the Republican candidate, you will almost certainly vote Democrat. Of course they also have the electoral college, but that's another discussion...

Here (in the UK as a whole, rather than Scotland) the non-Tory vote is split amongst (primarily) Labour and Lib Dem.

 

[JamesT]

You're within your rights to disagree with the Greens' policies, but to class them as extremist comes across as being slightly hysterical! Oh, and where does it say that they're opposed to economic growth?

A greener economic strategy for Scotland

A greener economic strategy for Scotland -

greens.scot

The NSET does take some significant steps forward, and the positive impact of Greens in government is clear for all to see, but that doesn’t make it a green economic strategy. This is most obvious when looking at the aims of the NSET, which include continued economic growth as a key objective.
Economic growth is an excluded area in the Scottish Greens cooperation agreement with the Scottish Government. This means we have agreed to disagree over its role, which we consider to be a relic of outdated economic thinking that is driving the destruction of the planet.

 

[gingerheid]

Labour wants to force an election; a projection gives it 41 seats in place of its existing 22 seats if so. SNP 63->46, Conservative 31->22. So Conservatives don’t want an election, they just want to cause trouble with as much noise as possible.
EDIT LibDem also want an election to go from 4 to 10 seats.
See https://ballotbox.scot/

And this is before we find out if Nicola Sturgeon is getting charged, and before we find out what all the funny goings on in Dundee with people falling out windows and so on were, either of which could turn into a something very negative for them!

 

[Purple Train]

believing the Cass report should be ignored, among other things, are why I class the Greens as extremist. I note my view of them as such has been disputed (and fair enough), but my comment regarding their Ministerial competence has not!

Believing the Cass report should be ignored because it doesn't say what they want it to say reminds me of a certain other Scottish political party...

 

[Falcon1200]

Oh, and where does it say that they're opposed to economic growth?

As per JamesT's post #49 (thanks!). And I would say that a party whose views on one key area are completely opposite to those of every other party, despite those other party's huge differences on other policies, does indeed warrant them being described as extremists.

 

[GusB]

As per JamesT's post #49 (thanks!). And I would say that a party whose views on one key area are completely opposite to those of every other party, despite those other party's huge differences on other policies, does indeed warrant them being described as extremists.

Okay, fair enough - the party wants to "move away from an outdated focus on growth", but i don't think this comes across as extremist:

One of the key stated aims of the NSET is to “reorient our economy towards wellbeing and fair work, to deliver the higher rates of employment and wage growth, and to significantly reduce structural poverty, particularly child poverty, and improve health, cultural and social outcomes for disadvantaged families and communities.”

The same article does say:

This means we have agreed to disagree over its role

So the SNP was well aware that there wouldn't be wholehearted agreement on every single policy, and that's to be expected. Did the LibDems and Cons agree on every policy when those parties were in coalition?
,

 

[317 forever]

Words I never thought I would say;

Thank you First Minister Yousaf!

Two incompetent extremists finally ousted from positions of power they should never, ever have occupied; Proponents of Proportional Representation please take note.

Come back Kate Forbes, all is forgiven

Labour wants to force an election; a projection gives it 41 seats in place of its existing 22 seats if so. SNP 63->46, Conservative 31->22. So Conservatives don’t want an election, they just want to cause trouble with as much noise as possible.
EDIT LibDem also want an election to go from 4 to 10 seats.
See https://ballotbox.scot/

Even this would leave the SNP as remaining the largest party at Holyrood - Alex Salmond's legacy. Even polls pointing to the SNP retaining just 18 MPs at Westminster is more than they ever had pre-2015 - Nicola Sturgeon's legacy.

 

[HullRailMan]

The SNPs fall from grace was inevitable as any political party can only govern for so long. What’s going to be interesting is the after effect. The SNP dangling the carrot of independence can only work for so long before people see that’s it’s not happening anytime soon, and it can’t cover up for their significant failings when it comes to the day job of running Scotland - nor can they sustain the blaming of Westminster for things under their own control. Sturgeon is the second dominant leader of the SNP to leave under a cloud of scandal, and these things stick in people’s minds. The hands that appear to have been in the financial cookie jar won’t help either.

As for the current FM, he was always a dreadful choice. His whole ministerial career is one of complete failure. He can now be a perfect fall guy to blame the impending electoral losses on. I just hope he doesn’t seek to blame his demise on his race, but it really wouldn’t surprise me.

The discussion about electoral systems is interesting, but the truth is they all have pros and cons. FPTP generally delivered a clear result which allows for a government to last a full term, but the ‘winner takes all’ nature of the system leaves many feeling they don’t have a voice. Even at constituency level, many MPs don’t even have the support of a majority of voters. PR is clearly fairer, but often ends in coalition where a small party with limited support can end up with a disproportionately loud voice - aka the greens in Scotland. The political reality is that no government is likely to rip up the system that they just won an election under.

 

[nw1]

The discussion about electoral systems is interesting, but the truth is they all have pros and cons. FPTP generally delivered a clear result which allows for a government to last a full term, but the ‘winner takes all’ nature of the system leaves many feeling they don’t have a voice. Even at constituency level, many MPs don’t even have the support of a majority of voters. PR is clearly fairer, but often ends in coalition where a small party with limited support can end up with a disproportionately loud voice - aka the greens in Scotland. The political reality is that no government is likely to rip up the system that they just won an election under.

Labour however need to realise that under FPTP, they have zero power for the majority of the time and FPTP heavily favours the Tories (as the main divide in England, at least, is between the Tories and the non-Tory parties, meaning the Tory vote is often united while the non-Tory vote is split).

Under some form of more intelligent voting system, I suspect Labour would have partial power for a much greater proportion of time. Under FPTP, they have been in power for just 13 of the past 45 years, not even one third of this period. By contrast, we have had Tory majority governments for 25 of the past 45 years, 56% of the time. If they win outright (seems likely) they would do well to reflect on that as otherwise, they may be out of power for 32 years of the next 45 (with Tory majority governments for 25 of the next 45 years).

 

[YorkRailFan]

Mr Salmond suggested Alba could support Humza Yousaf in a confidence vote if the SNP co-operated to maximise the number of pro-independence parliamentarians.

A source close to Mr Yousaf said the SNP leader would not agree to such a deal at Westminster or Holyrood.

"An electoral pact with Alba is a fantasy," said the source.

An Alba party source later suggested such a pact was only one of a range of options that might be acceptable to win its support.

But the SNP MP for Glasgow South, Stewart McDonald, said a deal with Mr Salmond "would go down like a bucket of cold sick with voters and be met with horror in European capitals" because the former first minister used to host a show on a TV channel funded by Vladimir Putin's Russia.The current first minister is fighting for his political future after ejecting the Scottish Greens from his government.

He faces confidence votes in his government and his leadership, which could come as soon as Wednesday.

The SNP has 63 seats in the Scottish Parliament while the opposition parties have 65, meaning Mr Yousaf would be defeated if the Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, and the sole Alba MSP, Ash Regan, all voted against him.

There is no constitutional requirement for Mr Yousaf to resign if he loses a personal confidence vote but the political pressure to do so would almost certainly be irresistible.

Yousaf rules out pact with Salmond's Alba party - BBC News

Alex Salmond is said to want a deal to maximise pro-independence MPs and MSPs in return for support in a no confidence vote.

www.bbc.co.uk

Well Yousaf is toast in that case.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Former SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford apologises to the Scottish Greens
“I apologise for what has happened this week, it could have happened in a different way”

https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1784502549250183675?t=cawKTP4zqm_nxlU3iabLhw&s=19

Would it have though? The Greens would've gone ahead with a vote on whether or not to ditch the agreement and who knows what the outcome would've been.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1784502549250183675?t=cawKTP4zqm_nxlU3iabLhw&s=19

Would it have though? The Greens would've gone ahead with a vote on whether or not to ditch the agreement and who knows what the outcome would've been.

As you say, who knows! But one obvious possibility is that, if the Greens had been the ones who ditched the agreement, then perhaps they wouldn't be feeling aggrieved about being ditched and so would have found it easier to support Yousaf in a vote of confidence.

I'm not sure if we'll ever know what was going through Yousaf's head when he decided to ditch the Greens before they did it for him, but my best guess is that maybe he thought he'd come out looking more powerful if he was the one who did the ditching. Trouble is, it seems by doing that, he's needlessly made enemies of the leadership of the Greens at a time when he needs them to be friends.

 

[Falcon1200]

Hunza Yousaf's time for looking powerful and decisive has long since passed, if it ever existed at all; He could, and should, for example have sacked Michael Matheson as soon as the wrongness of the latter's conduct became evident. And now the FM is expecting opposition politicians, who he has spent his entire political career insulting and disparaging, to help him remain in power!

Humza Yousaf reaches out to opponents ahead of no confidence votes

The first minister's appeal to find "common ground" is rejected by the Scottish Conservatives as "humiliating and embarrassing".

www.bbc.co.uk

Humza Yousaf has written to Scotland’s opposition parties asking them to find “common ground” ahead of confidence votes in his leadership.

The FM's jacket is not just on a shoogly nail, as we say up here, the nail has come out of the wall and his jacket is being trampled underfoot.