Scottish Parliament Election, 6th May 2021

[ElectionObserver]

So, what now for Scottish Labour?

The good news is that their historic decline seems to have finally bottomed out (this election will have seen the last of the "legacy" vote from when they were Scotland's hegemonic party dissipating)

The bad is that despite the rave reviews Sarwar has been getting they didn't actually make progress (and of course some on the party's left are drawing the predictable "conclusions" about that)

I have to say I disagree with this.

Labour benefited a lot from tactical unionist voting this time around. They could still go lower and certainly haven't 'bottomed out'. A lot of the ancestral Labour vote they still have, they will retain for decades to come as it's unlikely the SNP/ others will take much more if they haven't already unless there's another/ a further realignment of Scottish politics.

[CumbrianLefty]

So, what now for Scottish Labour?

The good news is that their historic decline seems to have finally bottomed out (this election will have seen the last of the "legacy" vote from when they were Scotland's hegemonic party dissipating)

The bad is that despite the rave reviews Sarwar has been getting they didn't actually make progress (and of course some on the party's left are drawing the predictable "conclusions" about that)

I have to say I disagree with this.

Labour benefited a lot from tactical unionist voting this time around. They could still go lower and certainly haven't 'bottomed out'. A lot of the ancestral Labour vote they still have, they will retain for decades to come as it's unlikely the SNP/ others will take much more if they haven't already unless there's another/ a further realignment of Scottish politics.

In some places, in others their remaining vote went "tactically" Tory in big numbers.

Overall it looks about right for their "underlying" support.

The question, though, is what Sarwar can do after his promising start to increase that.

[Agafin]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

The last election was a couple of months prior to the EU referendum, so the SNP didn’t have the fig leaf of a ‘material change in circumstances’ to cover the demand for a second referendum. Once the country voted to leave, the SNP began trotting that line out, only to go silent on the subject after the 2017 general election given the massive reverse they suffered that year, falling from 50 to 37 percent of the vote and losing 21 seats.

Brexit, and the so called hard brexit in particular, handed the SNP the argument for a second referendum on a silver platter. And of course Sturgeon accepted the gift (who would not have done so?) and frankly Johnson and the Tory rightwing hardly have a valid argument to deny them a second referendum now.

The fact that they were allowed a referendum less than a decade ago seems like a good enough reason to me. Can you name me any country which routinely allows an integral and important part of it to hold an independence referendum every few years (or even  a single one at all)?

Québec held independence referendums in 1980 and 1995, the latter having been promised by the Parti Québecois as early as 1988; they lost the 1989 election so had to wait until after they won in 1994 to put it into effect.

By the time the SNP/Greens get around to holding the next referendum it'll have been at least 7-8 years since the last one. Also worth noting that the latter referendum in Québec followed from the eventually-unsuccessful but massive effort at constitutional reform (the Meech Lake Accords) initiated by the federal PC party in 1987, a nice parallel to Brexit. Point being, if you're looking for a precedent, you've got one.

On a different note, if the objection to holding another referendum on independence so soon after the last is that there's a kind of moral hazard in doing so, I'd counter that it's far more dangerous to a country's democratic integrity if it denies such requests than if it grants them.

I knew that someone would bring Quebec but it is a bad example because the Canadian government did not approve the referendum which is why Parizeau explicitly stated that he would have tried a unilateral declaration of Independence had the result been a Yes. The supreme court of Canada later ruled that such an action would have been unconstitutional.

In fact, even the 1980 referendum was not done with the approval of the federal government and Trudeau stated that he would have simply disregarded the result were the Quebecois to choose "Yes".

By all means you can believe that the Scottish people deserve to have a second referendum on their status. But donot act like the UK is being undemocratic or something by refusing one. Westminster gave its full blessing to Scottish referendum in 2014 and the people voted to stay. Scotland is 8% or 9% of the UK's population and a third of its surface area. France would never grant such a favour to Corsica or Brittany, nor America to Texas or California, nor Germany to Bavaria, nor Italy to Venetia, nor Spain to Catalonia (duh!) and as it turns out, Canada to Quebec. What the UK did in my opinion is highly underappreciated for some reason.
 
The truth of the matter is that in no country, (yes even among western liberal democracies) would a government voluntary allow such a thing as an independence referendum on a significant portion of its territory to become a regular occurrence. And they are right because putting even all the sovereignty concerns aside and the potential of foreign interference by adversaries like China or Russia, there is the obvious fact that if 10 independence referenda fail, the independentists will keep asking for one until they get their way but you can damn well bet that they would never allow a reunification referendum even if the polling were to support one.

[cp]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

The last election was a couple of months prior to the EU referendum, so the SNP didn’t have the fig leaf of a ‘material change in circumstances’ to cover the demand for a second referendum. Once the country voted to leave, the SNP began trotting that line out, only to go silent on the subject after the 2017 general election given the massive reverse they suffered that year, falling from 50 to 37 percent of the vote and losing 21 seats.

Brexit, and the so called hard brexit in particular, handed the SNP the argument for a second referendum on a silver platter. And of course Sturgeon accepted the gift (who would not have done so?) and frankly Johnson and the Tory rightwing hardly have a valid argument to deny them a second referendum now.

The fact that they were allowed a referendum less than a decade ago seems like a good enough reason to me. Can you name me any country which routinely allows an integral and important part of it to hold an independence referendum every few years (or even  a single one at all)?

Québec held independence referendums in 1980 and 1995, the latter having been promised by the Parti Québecois as early as 1988; they lost the 1989 election so had to wait until after they won in 1994 to put it into effect.

By the time the SNP/Greens get around to holding the next referendum it'll have been at least 7-8 years since the last one. Also worth noting that the latter referendum in Québec followed from the eventually-unsuccessful but massive effort at constitutional reform (the Meech Lake Accords) initiated by the federal PC party in 1987, a nice parallel to Brexit. Point being, if you're looking for a precedent, you've got one.

On a different note, if the objection to holding another referendum on independence so soon after the last is that there's a kind of moral hazard in doing so, I'd counter that it's far more dangerous to a country's democratic integrity if it denies such requests than if it grants them.

I knew that someone would bring Quebec but it is a bad example because the Canadian government did not approve the referendum which is why Parizeau explicitly stated that he would have tried a unilateral declaration of Independence had the result been a Yes. The supreme court of Canada later ruled that such an action would have been unconstitutional.

In fact, even the 1980 referendum was not done with the approval of the federal government and Trudeau stated that he would have simply disregarded the result were the Quebecois to choose "Yes".

By all means you can believe that the Scottish people deserve to have a second referendum on their status. But donot act like the UK is being undemocratic or something by refusing one. Westminster gave its full blessing to Scottish referendum in 2014 and the people voted to stay. Scotland is 8% or 9% of the UK's population and a third of its surface area. France would never grant such a favour to Corsica or Brittany, nor America to Texas or California, nor Germany to Bavaria, nor Italy to Venetia, nor Spain to Catalonia (duh!) and as it turns out, Canada to Quebec. What the UK did in my opinion is highly underappreciated for some reason.
 
The truth of the matter is that in no country, (yes even among western liberal democracies) would a government voluntary allow such a thing as an independence referendum on a significant portion of its territory to become a regular occurrence. And they are right because putting even all the sovereignty concerns aside and the potential of foreign interference by adversaries like China or Russia, there is the obvious fact that if 10 independence referenda fail, the independentists will keep asking for one until they get their way but you can damn well bet that they would never allow a reunification referendum even if the polling were to support one.

Your account of the two referendums in Canada is highly misleading. It's neither the prerogative nor in the gift of the Canadian federal government to approve or deny a referendum on independence held legally in a province; it's entirely the province's business how it wishes to conduct - or sever - its relations with the federal government, and should one choose the latter the federal government has no right to deny the province the freedom to do so. (It's a bit of legal fiction to say unilateral secession was deemed unconstitutional; it was, technically, but the obligation to negotiate de facto independence renders unilateral declarations unnecessary to begin with).

In any case, the relevant point is that in both cases the Canadian federal government did not and could not refuse the right of Québec to hold a referendum. What might have come after a 'Yes' vote is moot insofar as it pertains to the UK and Scotland's second referendum.

The real underlying issue in both cases is the matter of consent. Canada and the UK are both a federation/union based on the idea that all the constituent jurisdictions choose to be a part of it. As soon as a central government denies a request for secession, the federation/union by definition is no longer a consensual one.

[Vosem]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

The simple version of the logic here is that in 2016 the SNP/Greens didn't campaign on holding a second referendum over the course of their next term, while this time they did.

[Oryxslayer]

So there's this other point of view which builds its case from the fact that the United Kingdom is not a federation, it is a unitary state with federal systems grafted on when necessary. The competing and conflicting prerogatives of the thrown together local government should have been well on display this week after all. Unlike in a federal system, which derives legitimacy from the continuing consent of the local legislatures alongside the popular will, the unitary state only responds to the people. English domination of Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland in such as system is therefore a feature, not a bug - insomuch any other part of a unitary  government has prerogative over another.

This may no longer be a view accurate to the UK, but the limited scope of devolution allows it to persist. Its the one held by Johnson and Westminster who view their mandate in 2019 and continuing support from the voters to led them support for opposing any attempts at separatism. It's why we are more likely to have escalation than agreement in the future because the two governments have entirely different perspectives on the nature of the UK.

[Frodo]

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1391121713484685312

SNP 40.3, Greens 8.1 and Alba 1.7 = 50.1%, a majority for the pro-independence parties.

Barely.  To all intents and purposes, the Scottish electorate is split down the middle regarding independence, which is hardly a mandate for another referendum.  That said, there was no mandate for Brexit either in the polling or in the referendum results, and yet here we are....  

[Lord Halifax]

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1391121713484685312

SNP 40.3, Greens 8.1 and Alba 1.7 = 50.1%, a majority for the pro-independence parties.

Barely. To all intents and purposes, the Scottish electorate is split down the middle regarding independence, which is hardly a mandate for another referendum. That said, there was no mandate for Brexit either, and yet here we are....  

A majority is a majority. It doesn't really matter in this context how small it is since it eliminates the unionist argument that the pro-independence parties "only" won a majority of seats but not votes.

[Frodo]

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1391121713484685312

SNP 40.3, Greens 8.1 and Alba 1.7 = 50.1%, a majority for the pro-independence parties.

Barely. To all intents and purposes, the Scottish electorate is split down the middle regarding independence, which is hardly a mandate for another referendum. That said, there was no mandate for Brexit either, and yet here we are....  

A majority is a majority. It doesn't really matter in this context how small it is since it eliminates the unionist argument that the SNP "only" won a majority of seats but not votes.

You're probably right.  Still, I feel like it is grasping at straws to claim that 50.1% is a majority even if it is technically correct.

There should be legislation passed in which when it comes down to independence referendums, or any similar referendums calling for entering or leaving supranational bodies like the European Union, there should be at least a two-thirds majority consistently shown in polling calling for that change before such a referendum is held so that there is truly a mandate for it.  Something that calls for that magnitude of change demands such a commanding mandate.  And that there should be at least a two-thirds majority for the referendum to be considered as having officially passed.   

[Frodo]

https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1391109074138411009?s=19

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England? 

[Cassius]

https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1391109074138411009?s=19

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England? 

Depends on which part of ‘Northern England’ (which is an ill-defined region with a lot of stereotypes attached that don’t always correlate well with the particularities of various areas in ‘the north’). Historically there was a lot of cross-over between the Scottish Borders and the two most northerly historic counties of Northumberland (from whence Northumbrian small-pipes, which look and sound rather like bagpipes, originate) and Cumberland, with local families holding lands on both sides of the border and that border being ill-defined and prone to shifting historically. I don’t know enough about the area to be sure, but I’d imagine that today there’s some cross-border commuting/use of services as there is between the border areas of Wales and England. Also the borders is very rural which typically augurs well for the Tories, even in Scotland.

[beesley]

https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1391109074138411009?s=19

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England?  

Depends on which part of ‘Northern England’ (which is an ill-defined region with a lot of stereotypes attached that don’t always correlate well with the particularities of various areas in ‘the north’). Historically there was a lot of cross-over between the Scottish Borders and the two most northerly historic counties of Northumberland (from whence Northumbrian small-pipes, which look and sound rather like bagpipes, originate) and Cumberland, with local families holding lands on both sides of the border and that border being ill-defined and prone to shifting historically. I don’t know enough about the area to be sure, but I’d imagine that today there’s some cross-border commuting/use of services as there is between the border areas of Wales and England. Also the borders is very rural which typically augurs well for the Tories, even in Scotland.

Agreed. Probably only the region covered by the strange channel that is 'ITV Border' plus non-Blyth and Morpeth Northumberland. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITV_Border)

[Just the facts]

https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1391109074138411009?s=19

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England?  

There is a rhoticity hard border, for a start.

[Flyersfan232]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

To be fair they did say they would have a referendum if they won the election this time, and then won the election. However there is a serious risk of an extremely narrow Yes vote, which could be extremely divisive and cause massive disruption (Scittish independence is worse economically than Brexit, Brexit should be a warning not a boost for independence)

If a second vote ends up with yes no matter how narrow I think that harms the snp in the long term and the Scottish independence movement look at Quebec independence movement

[cp]

https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1391109074138411009?s=19

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England?  

There is a rhoticity hard border, for a start.

And a geological one (look it up)!

[beesley]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

To be fair they did say they would have a referendum if they won the election this time, and then won the election. However there is a serious risk of an extremely narrow Yes vote, which could be extremely divisive and cause massive disruption (Scittish independence is worse economically than Brexit, Brexit should be a warning not a boost for independence)

If a second vote ends up with yes no matter how narrow I think that harms the snp in the long term and the Scottish independence movement look at Quebec independence movement

Not sure what you mean...? How would a vote for Scottish Independence harm the movement? Have you got them the wrong way round. Scotland and Quebec aren't that similar anyway.

[CumbrianLefty]

Is it fair to say that southern/lowland Scotland is essentially an extension of northern England? 

To state the not very exciting truth, there are similarities but also very real differences.

Some local people at the Scottish border areas (eg in the "Gretna corner" and parts of Berwickshire) do speak in accents that are notably more English than Scottish.

[Flyersfan232]

I am not sure I get the SNP logic on mandate for referendum.    In 2016 SNP+Greens also had a majority yet I did not see SNP claim back then there was a need for a second referendum yet this time SNP+Greens having a majority justifies a referendum ?

i mean if it was a no vote

To be fair they did say they would have a referendum if they won the election this time, and then won the election. However there is a serious risk of an extremely narrow Yes vote, which could be extremely divisive and cause massive disruption (Scittish independence is worse economically than Brexit, Brexit should be a warning not a boost for independence)

If a second vote ends up with yes no matter how narrow I think that harms the snp in the long term and the Scottish independence movement look at Quebec independence movement

Not sure what you mean...? How would a vote for Scottish Independence harm the movement? Have you got them the wrong way round. Scotland and Quebec aren't that similar anyway.

[Torrain]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.

It's the university voters in St Andrews, and the memory of Menzies Campbell in the more prosperous fishing villages of the East Neuk that generally keep the seat Lib Dem.

Willie Rennie has been a high-quality MSP over the last five years. He's turned up all over the place, and been good at replying to constituents. I even ran into him at a 50th birthday party of a local SNP activist (parent of a friend) - the man is just eager to engage with the community. (Whether that's political or genuine is immaterial if he's providing a decent public service0.

[beesley]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.
 

I wonder how Sutherland voted - if it is SNP that means all the communities in Letter to America voted SNP (Lochaber, Sutherland, Lewis, Skye, Bathgate, Linwood, Methil, Irvine). I'd guess it likely did.

[Torrain]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.
 

I wonder how Sutherland voted - if it is SNP that means all the communities in Letter to America voted SNP (Lochaber, Sutherland, Lewis, Skye, Bathgate, Linwood, Methil, Irvine). I'd guess it likely did.

Sutherland is part of a marginal SNP-Lib Dem swing district (LibDem MP, and SNP MSP) so it could have gone either way...

[beesley]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.
 

I wonder how Sutherland voted - if it is SNP that means all the communities in Letter to America voted SNP (Lochaber, Sutherland, Lewis, Skye, Bathgate, Linwood, Methil, Irvine). I'd guess it likely did.

Sutherland is part of a marginal SNP-Lib Dem swing district (LibDem MP, and SNP MSP) so it could have gone either way...

Yeah, my reasoning was that I seem to recall the Sutherland portion of the seat voted for Jamie Stone both times (though I'd have to check) so it could've been close with the SNP this time.

[Torrain]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.
 

I wonder how Sutherland voted - if it is SNP that means all the communities in Letter to America voted SNP (Lochaber, Sutherland, Lewis, Skye, Bathgate, Linwood, Methil, Irvine). I'd guess it likely did.

Sutherland is part of a marginal SNP-Lib Dem swing district (LibDem MP, and SNP MSP) so it could have gone either way...

Yeah, my reasoning was that I seem to recall the Sutherland portion of the seat voted for Jamie Stone both times (though I'd have to check) so it could've been close with the SNP this time.

That tracks. How did you get regional data for the seat results? Would be genuinely curious. Are you going off of recent council election results, or was there county data reported?

[Geoffrey Howe]

Fwiw, electoralcalculus always has the western bit of Caithness and Sutherland (Lairg, Lochinver) as more Lib Dem than the seat as a whole.

[beesley]

Lib Dems hold Shetland on a 19 point swing to the SNP.

And then on the other side of the coin Rennie won East Fife with a large personal vote that consolidated the unionist behind him.

Wow, Methil is not a place you'd expect the lib dems to do well in.

As a North East Fife voter, I have to tell you that Methil is actually just over the constituency border in the Kirkcaldy constituency.

If Methil was in the seat, we'd be as safe SNP as Glasgow Kelvin.
 

I wonder how Sutherland voted - if it is SNP that means all the communities in Letter to America voted SNP (Lochaber, Sutherland, Lewis, Skye, Bathgate, Linwood, Methil, Irvine). I'd guess it likely did.

Sutherland is part of a marginal SNP-Lib Dem swing district (LibDem MP, and SNP MSP) so it could have gone either way...

Yeah, my reasoning was that I seem to recall the Sutherland portion of the seat voted for Jamie Stone both times (though I'd have to check) so it could've been close with the SNP this time.

Fwiw, electoralcalculus always has the western bit of Caithness and Sutherland (Lairg, Lochinver) as more Lib Dem than the seat as a whole.

Someone had calculated notionals somewhere (I don't have the figures to hand) - I think local election results came into it though obviously it being Highland Council that wouldn't be accurate on its own. Just had a look at Electoral Calculus and they have the Sutherland wards going for Jamie Stone too, so it matches up with that. The SNP strength seems to be mostly round the Black Isle and Invergordon plus patches in villages like Durness (the latter I haven't heard any anecdotal evidence for).

I think there may have been some Scottish results released by ward though I'm not certain for when.