Social media is alive today with tales of people being refused a vote in the Labour leadership election on the grounds that they don’t support Labour values (if anyone even knows what those are any more). We suspect you’ll be hearing quite a bit about it in the press over the coming days.
The prevailing reaction seems to be slack-jawed astonishment at the planetary-scale car-crash the party has allowed to develop around the issue, with another “coup” story thrown in for good measure in the Telegraph.
We can only think of one way the farce could become even worse.
There’s a comment piece by Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson in today’s Sunday Times, comprising 846 words which could be condensed into two: “SNP BAD”.
As such it could have been easily turned into a speech by any Scottish Labour leader of the last five years with nothing more than a quick search-and-replace of the words “Conservative” and “Labour”. It puts forward nothing remotely resembling a policy, just paragraphs of boilerplate waffle and a call for a debate.
Davidson professes to offer “a practical and pro-UK alternative to the SNP”, a programme which she boils down to two key components. It seems to have entirely escaped her notice that they contradict each other on the most fundamental level.
There’s much noisy chat at the moment about Jeremy Corbyn being 20 points ahead of his Labour leadership rivals on first-preference votes. His rivals seem to agree; they’ve turned their main efforts to competing amongst themselves for second and third preference “stop Corbyn” votes.
But could any of them really close such a huge gap? And what if they don’t?
Alert readers will recall that this site has expended some energy on debunking the lazy myth – which suits the media and Labour alike – that a significant factor in the unexpected Conservative majority in May’s general election was voters being scared back to the Tories by a fear campaign about the prospect of the SNP influencing a minority Labour government.
Having failed over the course of several years to label the SNP “Nazis” and “fascists” (or, depending on which sort of newspaper you were reading,“Tartan Stalinists”), the party’s political and media opponents have a new(ish) meme to punt: that the SNP is a religious cult made up of credulous, fanatical zealots impervious to logic or facts.
The leader of this new front is right-wing columnist Alex Massie, who by our count has managed to flog someone this diatribe at least four times already this year – the most recent being in yesterday’s Times:
With David Mundell and Ian Murray both having appeared on today’s “Good Morning Scotland” singing the praises of the wonderful Scotland Bill and how it would deliver all a nation could ever dream of, it seems a good time to publish the results of our recent Panelbase poll on the subject.
The nation, it seems, has rather more ambitious dreams.
Alert readers may recall a few weeks ago, when this was a thing:
The SNP standing for seats in England, of course, is an idea that’s been put forward before by some of the nation’s sharper and more insightful political commentators, but the party has for obvious and understandable reasons shown no inclination thus far to undertake the experiment.
But as we realised after chatting to a left-wing English chum this week (a successful creative and businessman), such a party actually already exists, and has dozens of MPs. It’s just that it’s currently trapped inside a corpse.
Alert readers may have noticed something of a glut of articles in the press recently by right-wing commentators angrily challenging the SNP to prove its left-wing credentials if and when the new Scotland Bill ever becomes law and grants Holyrood more powers over taxation, some minor aspects of welfare and – of course – road signs.
The zenith of the phenomenon must surely be today’s eye-rubbingly bizarre Scotsman story in which the Scottish Tories urge the SNP to increase tax in order to reverse, er, Tory cuts. But there’s method behind the seeming madness.
The battle-cry of right-wing Labour apologists all this week has been “realism”. It’s all very well people like Jeremy Corbyn having crazy old principles about what Labour is supposed to stand for, runs the argument, but you can’t argue with public opinion and public opinion is desperate for Labour to become Tories with a slightly softer edge.
We’re sorry to keep going on about this, readers, but we’ve been going over and over it in our heads and we just can’t get it to make sense.
Below is the failed Labour amendment to the Welfare Reform And Work Bill:
As you can see, its sole intended purpose was to refuse a second reading to the Bill. Labour voted for their own amendment (an achievement, we suppose), which means they didn’t want to see the bill get a second reading.
Alert readers will have noticed that for the last week or so we’ve been challenging some of the conventional wisdom about Labour’s election victories from 1997-2005. While the right wing of the party and commentariat regularly insists that Tony Blair was its most successful leader ever, we demonstrated that over the course of his leadership he lost Labour over two million votes, whereas Neil Kinnock’s reign had resulted in a GAIN of three million.
In short, New Labour’s victories were primarily the result of the Conservatives being in a catastrophic state during Blair’s rule, exhausted by almost 20 years of power and scandal and infighting about Europe. With William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard at the head of a shattered opposition, Labour could have won those elections with Piers Morgan or a Teletubby in charge.
What our research also found was that the most striking thing about the period since Blair became Labour leader in 1994 was a staggering and almost overnight increase in the number of British voters turned off politics altogether.
In 1992 just eight million people entitled to vote stayed at home. By 2001 that number had rocketed to EIGHTEEN million, a 125% increase in nine years, and in May it was still at almost 16 million.
Since Blair, eight million UK citizens who used to vote have simply walked away and washed their hands of the entire political process. That’s quite a legacy, but it’s also an opportunity, because it’s a lot of people waiting for a reason to vote for someone. (Most of them young and/or poor, two traditionally Labour-friendly demographics.)
Bizarrely, it’s an opportunity Labour and its allies seem utterly determined to shun.
twathater on Faces In Sand: “There is a very interesting post on Mark Collets blog if anyone is interested” Oct 29, 02:38
WhoRattledYourCage on Vibecoding A Better World: “Do Fairlight or Manic Miner, only without the fucking bugs in them that made them crash when you got near…” Oct 28, 23:39
Southernbystander on Faces In Sand: “I’m afraid the moon is merely made of cheddar so I think you might have been had.” Oct 28, 23:14
Alf Baird on Faces In Sand: ““as part of that study did ask any shipping or freight operators whether they’d be interested in shipping their goods…” Oct 28, 22:06
Spartan 117 on Faces In Sand: “You’ll get no argument from me Dan regarding any of your points raised. The closure of Grangemouth was an utterly…” Oct 28, 21:56
Dave on Vibecoding A Better World: “I’m glad to see you back and posting, Stu. I was a bit concerned by the silence and thought that…” Oct 28, 21:36
Aidan on Faces In Sand: “It’s not a question of NO aircraft flying. If; – independence significantly reduces demand on the rUK – Scotland routes;…” Oct 28, 19:51
Dan on Faces In Sand: “Ach, who knew in a self-governing Scotland so many folk would lose their jobs because we wouldn’t have any aircraft…” Oct 28, 19:12
Hatey McHateface on Vibecoding A Better World: “Northy, I concluded long ago that loopholes are designed into laws on purpose. Why else does it take years to…” Oct 28, 19:01
Aunty Flo on Vibecoding A Better World: “Great idea, Grant! Don’t forget the baby wipes. (Though not exactly sure what they are supposed to be for)….” Oct 28, 17:59
SystemUser1 on Vibecoding A Better World: “My own experience with that software showed a severe glitch under high load. I found that the interface becomes completely…” Oct 28, 17:57
Northcode on Vibecoding A Better World: “AI isn’t just good at coding because coding is “simple” for AI engines — it’s good at coding because coding…” Oct 28, 17:42
Frank Gillougley on Vibecoding A Better World: “Just relieved that the private conversation BTL is now over! However, I am a fully paid up member of the…” Oct 28, 17:18
Mervyn Flange on Vibecoding A Better World: “It’s not just in the area of Scottish politics that you have made a great contribution. Many readers may be…” Oct 28, 17:01
Aidan on Faces In Sand: “@Alf – as part of that study did ask any shipping or freight operators whether they’d be interested in shipping…” Oct 28, 16:54
Grant on Vibecoding A Better World: “Genuinely curious, do you actually think AI is gonna be the end of us all imminently? Shall I order a…” Oct 28, 16:52
Craig on Vibecoding A Better World: “I did think about using AI to create a new political party that has an AI generated manifesto designed to…” Oct 28, 16:50
Alf Baird on Faces In Sand: “Lorncal: Scotland’s unelected elites never had the constitutional authority to sell the nation in the first place, even under extreme…” Oct 28, 16:21
sarah on Vibecoding A Better World: “Nice to see that you’ve had some fun for a change, Rev.” Oct 28, 15:41
Stephen Welsh on Vibecoding A Better World: “Fantastic!, you need to give Grok Bot a play too, not as smart as Claude (at the moment) but really…” Oct 28, 15:24
Chas on Faces In Sand: “Baird-Do you trawl through the comments section on Wings solely to say the same crap time after time AND ESPECIALLY…” Oct 28, 15:21
Lorncal on Faces In Sand: “Alf: even where they have signed a treaty and where they have acquiesced in their own subsumption for over 300…” Oct 28, 15:04
sam on Faces In Sand: “Northcode, Just in case you missed it ( I have been elsewhere) I asked today upthread what you think would…” Oct 28, 15:01
sam on Faces In Sand: “Northcode, What constitutes a mandate?” Oct 28, 14:56
Alf Baird on Faces In Sand: ““I consider it rather self evident that if a regional hub was needed anywhere near here, then Oslo and/or Dublin…” Oct 28, 14:54
Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: “@Spartan CEng? Respect and kudos 🙂” Oct 28, 14:37
Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “Put even more simply, Alf, you become a regional hub by being in a suitable location for lots of places…” Oct 28, 14:29
Spartan 117 on Faces In Sand: “@Aidan – sadly its the response I’ve come to expect from political types on comment sections on various websites in…” Oct 28, 14:23