I think it's fair to say that the Scottish election wasn't kind to the Scottish Greens. However it was a lot kinder to us than the LibDems and Labour.
To all intents and purposes we seem to have stood still. We went into the election with 2 MSPs, and we have come out the other side with 2 MSPs.
But that's to dismiss just how close we came to having more - we were only 378 votes shy in the Highlands and Islands, for example. And we increased our share of the vote in several regions. That's against a backdrop of the SNP sweeping all before it, and everyone else losing voting share.
That SNP surge is unfortunate for us in other ways, though. They no longer need to horse-trade at every budget, at every vote. The 2 MSPs we had from 2007 had much more influence than the 2 MSPs we'll have from next week.
So where does that leave accountability for a green Scotland?
It is perhaps fortunate that the winning party were also the one with the greenest manifesto, and the one that seems to "get" the fact that the green economy is also an industrial one, and one which Scotland is well-placed to exploit.
Unfortunately it's also the party which let Donald Trump have his way in carving up the countryside, and won't look at bus re-regulation in case it angers its biggest donor, Stagecoach owner Brian Souter.
If we get anything from the government over the next 5 years, then the Scottish Greens are going to have to tone down the anger and rhetoric, and increase the complicity. That's not going to come easy, particularly when the SNP can swat us aside when it needs to.
And what of the future? A quick regroup is needed before next year's local council elections, a far different fight from the parliament election. We're also going to have to look at how we fight the elections. Is it wise not to stand any constituency candidates? When the LibDems were there for the taking this year, the Labour party were a shambles and the Tories were still toxic, the SNP were the only safe harbour for all those disaffected LibDem voters. Could we have given them another choice? Was that our big moment, and we let it pass?
Or is our strategy of only targeting Regional Lists the only one which a small party with little money can realistically afford? I'm sure internal dialogue will be robust on both sides, and we now have 5 years to plan strategy. And here's a thing - this parliament being for 5 years means we have 1 extra year to raise funds. Could that give us enough money to stand candidates in the constituencies as a trial?
Whatever that future, I intend to be there and be part of it, cheering on Patrick Harvie and our newest MSP, Alison Johnstone. Who is, incidentally, an awfy nice woman to whom I owe a drink!
And what of this blog? I'll continue to hold the government - both the Scottish and UK - to account on their decisions. I'll continue to look at all the green things that happen not just in our wee corner of the world, but beyond our shores.
And, I'm sure, I'll continue to despair!
5 comments:
The worry I would have is that the SNP could just put up silly flat line reductions in the carbon budget and not be forced to actually reduce it - like they did when they were a minority.
Or they could not be held to account for decimating the frieght facilities grant - like they were when a minority.
Etc, etc. The SNP really only pay lip-service to green issues, as it has been shown time and again when they have had to be forced to concede.
And how much fuss do we kick up when they do? Do we create merry hell and get labelled by the media and the SNP as troublemakers, or do we have a quiet word behind the scenes?
I guess it all depends on just how arrogant the SNP get, or whether they actually get a bit consensual just to appease the press
Our constituency vote was the four usual suspects: SNP, Labour, Lib-Dem and Tory. None appeal to me. Or the OH. While the SNP has some policies with which I agree, as an immigrant I don't like the way some nationalists see the SNP as legitimising their bigoted Scotland for the Scots mindset. And that view has been been reinforced by the SNP's new majority: I've already been told by several people that the day is coming when the incomers will have to leave, freeing up jobs and houses for true Scots.
I'm surprised at that, Stonehead. I've always felt that the SNP were one of the few Nationalist parties in the world who didn't go in for that sort of rhetoric, and therefore their supporters didn't.
Perhaps that is rose-tinted spectacles. As a non-immigrant, I'm hardly going to be subjected to the abuse.
Still, I'm sorry and embarrassed that some people feel the need to say those kind of things to you. Especially from a country that needs immigrants. Can I blame the English media rubbing off on those sort of idiots who are swayed by that kind of thing?
Yes Stonehead, Scotland for the Scots.
But the SNP defintion of a 'Scot' is anyone who chooses or is forced to make Scotland their home.
Your comment is either borne of ignorance or grudge and as someone who has been a member of the SNP for nearly 30 years and never encountered a shred of racism in the party in all that time it angers me greatly.
The SNP is very clear that Scotland needs an influx of migrants to grow our economy.
Are you confusing Scottish National Party with Scottish National Front?
Post a Comment