The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Interview with Tom Harris MP

Posted on December 02, 2011 by

As regular readers will know, as a supporter of independence this blog fervently hopes that Tom Harris wins the contest for the leadership of Scottish Labour. Not only because Comical Tom – a fervent pro-Unionist who has already proclaimed that "I don't want Scotland to run her own affairs" – would be a massive recruiting sergeant for the Yes campaign, but also because he's simply the most entertaining.

It recently dawned on us that by joining Youth Labour for just £1, we could actually help to make such a thing happen by having a vote in the leadership election. We duly filled out the form with some enthusiasm, but were sad to realise that we lived far too far away from any of the hustings to quiz Tom directly. Until, that is, he sportingly hosted a live Q&A session on his website…

Under our new guise as a Labour member (and using a pseudonym, because Tom doesn't tend to answer when we ask him things in person on Twitter, as he prefers to dodge tricky questions where possible), we joined in a few moments after the start, just as Tom opined that "As a democrat, I don't believe one nation should impose a form of government on another." Given that the people of England in practice always – through huge imbalance of numbers – impose their choice and form of government on Scotland (and Wales and Northern Ireland), an obvious opening presented itself.

 

WOS: Do you consider Scotland to be a nation?

 

TOM: Of course. Do you?

 

WOS: Absolutely. How many nations don't get to decide their own government?

 

TOM: Very few. Fortunately, we live in a nation (Scotland) that has chosen repeatedly to remain within the UK. That's how sensible Scots are!

 

WOS: It has? When was Scotland offered the opportunity to leave the UK?

 

TOM: At every general election ever held. Scots could have voted for the separatists at any point.

 

WOS: That's an odd one, Tom. In 2007 and 2011 Labour was at pains to point out that a vote for the SNP *wasn't* the same as a vote for independence. Were they lying?

 

TOM: Actually, as I recall, we were saying that a vote for the SNP was a vote for separatism.

 

WOS: So your position is that if the people of Scotland elect the SNP to government, they are in fact voting for independence? I'm sure you see where that's going…

 

TOM: Good grief, no! I'm saying that we told the Scottish people that a vote for the Nats was a vote for separatism. They just didn't believe us!

 

WOS: Sorry, Tom, I'm finding this hard to follow. Your view is that if the people want independence, they'll vote SNP. But when they actually *did* vote the SNP into power, they *weren't* voting for independence?

 

TOM: I agree: you're finding this hard to follow.

 

WOS: So help me out. How have the Scottish electorate consistently voted to stay in the Union, even when giving the SNP a landslide victory and majority?

 

TOM: By supporting unionist parties at every general election. Even in 2011 a majority didn't support the SNP. And a big percentage of even SNP supporters oppose separatism.

 

WOS: So your position is that Scottish Parliament elections are meaningless as an expression of the will of the Scottish people, and only Westminster elections count, even though the SNP can never get a majority at Westminster?

 

TOM: No. Next?

 

WOS: So if that's NOT your position, why was the Scottish electorate's landslide vote for the SNP not a vote to leave the Union? Are you saying that all votes for Unionist parties are effectively the same?

 

TOM: Don't know if you've read the SNP manifesto (don't blame you!) but voters knew before polling day that a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence because the Nats promised a referendum. If someone really, really wants separation, they'll vote SNP. Most voters have got other priorities – you know, like real life and stuff.

 

WOS: Make your mind up, Tom. The Scottish electorate voted overwhelmingly SNP in May. So do they want separation or not?

 

TOM: It's true, isn't it? Those who really, really want separation and think Alex is fab voted SNP in May. They were joined by many more who don't really care or who oppose separation.

 

WOS: And under the terms of the election, the SNP won a convincing majority. So by your logic, that's a vote for independence. If it isn't, then no other election has been a vote for the Union. You can't have it both ways, can you?

 

TOM: Not a vote for independence because it was only 46 per cent -and if the SNP themselves had announced that a vote for them was the same as a vote for independence, they wouldn't have won.

 

WOS: 46% is irrelevant. When Unionist parties won Scottish elections they didn't get 50% either, so those weren't votes to stay in the Union. So when did Scotland ever actually vote to stay in the Union?

 

 

With Tom having slammed the door on that line of questioning, the debate moved on. Another poster asked Tom whether he was certain that 100% of non-SNP voters opposed independence, and we decided to helpfully answer.

 

 

WOS: Not all Labour members oppose independence, as I'm sure Tom will tell you.

 

TOM: True – only the vast, overwhelming majority. Far fewer than the number of SNP members who oppose separatism.

 

WOS: According to Ipsos/MORI, almost 20% of [Scottish] Labour supporters AREN'T opposed to independence.

 

TOM: Yippee for them. Doesn't mean they actually *support* separatism. They're probably pretty sensible – not getting obsessed with our constitutional status.

 

WOS: [comment pointing out that according to page 11 of the Ipsos/Mori poll, in fact 19% of Labour supporters do actively support independence, with only 1% claiming to be undecided, not published]

 

WOS [trying again]: The issue is that 19% of Labour members support independence. Who do we vote for as leader? Who speaks for us?

 

TOM: Oh dear, WOS – you have evidence that one in five Labour *members* support separatism? Hardly!

 

WOS: Yes, Tom, I do have evidence for that, as I already told you. Page 11 of the Ipsos/Mori poll already linked to states it clearly. The poll was conducted at the Scottish Labour Party Conference 2011, so it seems fair to assume those polled were members.

 

TOM: I have now attended and spoken at a very large number of Labour hustings, at which not a single person has been anything other than hostile to separatism. Labour is opposed to separatism as much as the Nats are in favour.

 

WOS: Hardly surprising – they'd likely be lynched. Do you think it's democratic and healthy that nobody speaks for almost a fifth of the Scottish Labour membership with regard to independence?

 

TOM: No, I think it's a shame that Nats have to cling to a lie that a fifth of Labour members support separatism.

 

WOS: A lie? Who's lying – Ipsos/Mori, or the Labour members they polled at the Scottish Labour Conference? [comment not published]

 

WOS: But I do agree with you that "Labour is opposed to separatism as much as the Nats are in favour", rather than your previous statement that it was "the vast, overwhelming majority. Far fewer than the number of SNP members who oppose separatism". That sort of intimidatory misrepresentation is probably why people don't speak up at hustings. [comment not published]

 

TOM: Signing off now – thanks for the chat!

 

WOS: But we don't know who you think is lying yet!

 

WOS: Tom? Hello?

 

TOM: […]

 

And then there was only silence. So what have we learned?

 

1. The Scottish people have clearly and overwhelmingly rejected independence on numerous occasions, by not voting for the SNP at general elections.

 

2. But when the Scottish people DO vote for the SNP at general elections, that DOESN'T count as voting FOR independence, because they've failed to understand that the SNP stand for independence. This is important.

 

3. The reason, in part, is that you need over 50% to vote for independence, but less than 50% to vote for the Union.

 

4. It's also because whether you vote for Labour, the Conservatives or the Lib Dems, you're actually voting for the Union, rather than on the basis of any other policies. (Logically, it therefore follows that the three parties should merge into one, since they stand for the same thing.)

 

5. So this is where we get a bit confused. Tom insists that the electorate can vote for independence any time they like, by voting SNP. If they vote for anyone but the SNP, they've voted for the Union. But when they do vote SNP he asserts that they've misunderstood what they're voting for, and still aren't voting for independence. So we're not quite sure what circumstances could ever exist under which Tom would accept that the Scottish people really had voted for independence.

 

Even in a referendum which dealt ONLY with the subject of independence, Tom has already laid plentiful advance groundwork to discredit the result by claiming that the vote was "rigged", dishonest or undemocratic. It does rather seem as if there's nothing the electorate could possibly do to convince Tom that they wanted independence, up to and including all five million of them turning up at his house in kilts and Jimmy hats and marching up and down outside playing "Scotland The Brave" on bagpipes.

 

6. A poll conducted by the respected polling organisation Ipsos/Mori at the Scottish Labour Party Conference in October 2011 apparently massively exaggerates the number of Labour members who support independence. However, we don't know if this is because the Labour members who responsed to the poll were lying, or if Ipsos/Mori are lying about what they said for some bewildering, unspecified reason.

 

7. The number of Labour members who support independence is either much, much smaller than the number of SNP supporters who oppose it, or it's about the same.

 

Tom Harris is still ranked as 5th-favourite to win the Scottish Labour leadership election, a contest which has three runners. We need to do more, and it's not too late. Join Youth Labour! Vote Harris! Vote early! Vote often!

 

7 to “Interview with Tom Harris MP”

  1. rodmac says:

    NIceOne!!! 🙂

    Reply
  2. Ross says:

    "Make your mind up, Tom" – Ha!

    Any chance of talking to the other leadership candidates? 

    Reply
  3. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    If they do webchats, I'll certainly have a go…

    Reply
  4. Jen says:

    Best article I have read in a while.  I roared with laughter at the mans stupidity. 
     
    Hail alba and free us from idiots like him. 
     
     

    Reply
  5. Jona says:

    This guy used to be my MP.  He's your typical empty-headed drone MP.

    Reply
  6. Jock MacSporran says:

    When the absurd contradictions in the unionists' arguments are pointed out they go in the huff and clam up. It's like five-year-olds stomping their feet because they lost at "snap". Pathetic.

    Reply
    • Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      That does seem to be my experience. Even with the more reasonable activists, they very quickly clam up when you start putting the tricky questions to them. (Such as the classic “Why does Labour want Scotland to have more Tory governments than it votes for?”) Whereas I don’t think I’ve ever failed to give any of them a straight answer to anything.

      Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,984 Posts, 1,252,131 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • Northcode on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Judicial review is often misunderstood and I think it’s important that folk understand what it can actually do so they…” Oct 3, 10:27
    • sam on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Bullshit from you. As usual you never check anything, you just say whatever shit comes into the brain cell. This…” Oct 3, 09:47
    • Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Sure, Alf. It’s not enough just to be independent. Year Zero has to be enacted too. Mass re-education for those…” Oct 3, 08:41
    • Colin Alexander on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Roddy Dunlop KC is very highly respected for his legal acumen, intellect and professional integrity. So, if Roddy Dunlop KC…” Oct 3, 08:29
    • James on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Tried to depose German Geordie and replace him with the rightful heir to the throne. There, fixed that for ye.…” Oct 3, 00:02
    • willie on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Great support for this absolutely essential court action. It is an outrage that £700k can be solicited to be ring…” Oct 2, 22:58
    • daibloandco on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Donated and keep ’em worried!” Oct 2, 21:43
    • Frank Gillougley on In The Eyes Of The Law: “50 in with pleasure and appreciation.” Oct 2, 21:11
    • Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Yes Hatey, dealing effectively with the colonial ‘condition’ requires difficult treatment; liberation is the only remedy and takes effect through…” Oct 2, 20:38
    • Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Sell some of your tea towels and you could donate more.” Oct 2, 20:07
    • Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “How come you’re immune to the pathology then, Alf? The vaccinations aren’t available on the SNHS. Did you pay to…” Oct 2, 19:50
    • Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: ““Those of us with an open, questioning and independent mind” That’s perhaps a rather theoretical assumption, Spartan, especially for a…” Oct 2, 18:50
    • Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “BS, sam. 1715 and 1745 were dynastic and sectarian uprisings. Attempts to depose the Protestant Hanoverian royal line and replace…” Oct 2, 18:50
    • sam on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Not so sure about this claim, Alf. There were many armed uprisings in colonial Ireland against English rule. The 1715…” Oct 2, 17:21
    • Dave on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Wow, the fund is filling up fast, excellent news! I, for one, cannot wait to see the miscreants sweating on…” Oct 2, 17:18
    • agentx on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Why it is considered secure • Direct Lawyer Payouts: Funds do not go to the individual starting the page. Money…” Oct 2, 17:16
    • Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “@Alf – No, those of us who learn read the theory then use it to put it into practice and…” Oct 2, 16:54
    • James on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Keep ’em coming, ‘Confused’. Larry, curly and Moe bite every time. Speaking of stooges I wonder when the fragrant ‘Adrian’…” Oct 2, 16:53
    • Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Who had Freire on their Bingo card?” Oct 2, 16:39
    • Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “I’m assuming “sparky” refers to “Spartan”, if I can read correctly through your blurry alcohol-fuelled stupor, 8 Ace. “tell (sic…” Oct 2, 16:30
    • Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: ““uses the quotes of others” This is nothing new for academics who logically base their research first on the available…” Oct 2, 16:17
    • Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “You are right Confused! Your unhinged idiocy is truly legendary., even here. Very conversation-worthy, personally I find it incredible. Always…” Oct 2, 16:04
    • sarah on In The Eyes Of The Law: “@ douglas – you can reduce the tip, even to zero.” Oct 2, 16:01
    • douglas on In The Eyes Of The Law: “happy to contribute, not happy with crowdjustice. Imposing an extra 20% and calling it a tip is taking the p.…” Oct 2, 15:44
    • lothianlad on The Turning Point: “The SNP leadership have actively working FOR the british state. Sturgeon is the greatest traitor to Scotland in the modern…” Oct 2, 15:22
    • lothianlad on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Well done Stu! They are rattled! Only those with integrity should be allowed power.” Oct 2, 15:20
    • Confused on In The Eyes Of The Law: “The only thing worse than being talked about, is NOT being talked about … I seem to have the WORST…” Oct 2, 15:13
    • Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “James likes to label anyone he disagrees with as “Unionist” or “Yoon”. A bit like Confused’s rantings when its necked…” Oct 2, 14:44
    • Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Cesaire wrote about “goitrous academics”. I don’t think he was being complimentary, although I do recommend that anybody interested should…” Oct 2, 13:57
    • Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “I’m not going anywhere, Fatty. Enjoy.” Oct 2, 13:34
  • A tall tale



↑ Top