And thanks to the SNP, (depending on who you ask)
Now, now, surely you mean "and thanks to all the voters who voted them in as a Holyrood majority in a system designed not to give them a majority". It's not as if the SNP have every tried to hide their nationalist bent, it is in their name after all! ;)
I do agree with Steveo's sentiment that politicians (or to be honest, most persons in a job) will behave according to the accepted cultural norms of that workplace and according to the letter but probably not the spirit of whatever regulations are in place. And yes it's very true that there were plenty of Scottish MPs scraping at the trough as readily as their English and Welsh colleagues. It's not like there's something more inately saintly and honourable of Scottish politicians than of any of the other home nations. So either Westminster attracts a different sort of candidate to begin with, or its rotten culture spoils the barrel.
A Holyrood with a weak grasp on accountability and expenses and a strong claiming culture could easily have ended up as another Westminster. But the system was fairly well designed and it's worked out fairly well, with the occassional trumpet of outrage from the Scotchman when somone claims £15 for a desk fan for their constituency office or similar...
And who knows what political balance might come of a YES vote? It will undoubtedly be vastly more representative of the electorate's will than any UK election usually is. Surely a government that is more representative of the political views of the people is more likely to deliver for their benefit. There's more of a vested interest in doing so.
I know a lot of people might prefer a more federal UK v.s. an independent Scotland, but realistically it's never going to happen driven from Scotland alone. And if it's not happened in the last 310 years it's probably not about to happen in my lifetime.
Constitutional reform of the Lords? Labour had many years with big majorities and public will behind them and achieved only a fraction of what they should have. There's no real thirst for that from the commons and why should there be? Why would a majority vote to abolish your own shot at an all-expenses paid, no-obligation emeritus retirement home?
Electoral reform? Well, the AV referendum was poisoned enough by misinformation and scaremongering that it became clear that a majority of the 42.2% in the UK who could be bothered to vote had no real appeptite for change and were happy to be governed by the politicians they didn't vote for. Maybe people really are happy with that system in the wider UK or just don't care enough?
Nuclear disarmament? I think we're quite clear where that stands. Not going to happen, even if it's blatantly clear that the UK can't really afford the costs, they daren't lose their seat with the other big boys in the Security Council.
The Westminster democratic system can on very rare occasions deliver a big and positive reform i.e. the NHS, but it seems one of the things it is best at is preserving the established status quo, at all costs, for the sake of preserving the established status quo.
I think one of the most refreshing / invigorating things of the referendum campaign is going to be the slow realisation amongs the campaigns that the usual Westminster technique of getting enough of the papers on side and slandering your opponents and drowning the electorate in misinformation just isn't going to guaruntee it this time round. Given that the Sunday Herald alone is in the YES camp with a few fence sitters and everyone else is with a No stance to varying extents and for one reason or another (looking at their ownership it's not hard to work out why for most), it might mean the biggest struggle with this will be for the No campaign. If having nearly all the papers on side and getting big names like Obama, Hilary and the Pope making noises in support of you isn't driving you up in the polls, there's something a bit wrong with your approach. I think they've really miscalculated that it's only Westminster politicians and bankers that keep journalists off many people's "Top 2 least trusted professions" list, so getting Number 3 to big up Number 1 is going probably be very counter productive.
Give me a realistic chance to change some/all that and more, and I'll put my X in the box every time, yes please.
(I think this is a record long post for me!)
closed
posts
