Wednesday, 11 March 2015

Isn't this what they wanted?

Some of the leader writers and columnists in the London-based newspapers are getting increasingly worked up about the possibility that ‘Scottish MPs’ will determine which of the two major UK parties leads the next UK Government.  ‘Demonisation’ is an inadquate word to describe some of their output. Some prominent Tories are singing a similar tune, demanding that the Labour Party rules out any sort of deal with the SNP after the forthcoming election; with others going so far as to propose a ‘grand coalition’ between the two biggest parties in order to prevent the Scots from having too much influence on the results.
There is, however, an element of dishonesty involved.  Looking at what they’re saying in detail, actually, few of those so busy getting themselves worked up really seems to object to the idea that Scottish MPs per se should determine which party leads the government.  They’d all be quite happy – and even the Tories seem to be happy with this – for an English Tory majority to be outvoted by a Labour Party whose seat total only exceeds that of the Tories as a result of Scottish Labour MPs.  It’s only if the MPs come from the SNP that the result would be, apparently, outrageous.
Whilst I can see why they’d prefer that the Scots were a bit better behaved (from their perspective at least), and did the decent thing by voting for one of the parties which ‘won’ the referendum, I cannot see whay 50 extra MPs supporting a Labour Government in key votes is acceptable if they’re members of the Labour Party but some sort of affront to democracy if they’re from the SNP.  The outcome is exactly the same.  As it would be if the extra 50 votes came from Green MPs in England.  Or, dare I say it, Lib Dems.
An even bigger assault on logic is that the people fulminating now are, in many cases, exactly the same people who wanted, pleaded with, threatened and begged the Scots to vote to remain a part of the UK, and send their MPs to be a ‘strong voice’ in the UK Parliament.  When they were saying that they wanted the Scots to continue to participate in the affairs of the UK, I don’t remember any of their entreaties including a caveat that the Scots should not be able to vote for a party of their choice, or that Scots MPs should only be allowed to participate in the Government of the UK if they came from a UK-wide party. 
The bed in which the complainers are now lying is the bed they chose to make; the fact that the result of their efforts isn’t quite as they planned is hardly a valid basis for complaint.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

"I cannot see whay 50 extra MPs supporting a Labour Government in key votes is acceptable if they’re members of the Labour Party but some sort of affront to democracy if they’re from the SNP. The outcome is exactly the same".
One would hope that one difference is that those key votes would be on measures of a rather more robust and, dare I say it, socialist nature.

John Dixon said...

Indeed one would. But such a difference in the nature of the issues upon which they are voting isn't a great difference in principle which makes the one acceptable and the other an affront.