Potential Scottish Parliamentary Election (earlier than scheduled)

[Harry Hayfield]

Following the collapse of the Bute House Agreement last week, this week the Scottish Parliament is likely to vote on two no confidence motions

1) This Parliament does not have confidence in the First Minister (tabled by Douglas Ross MSP)
2) This Parliament does not have confidence in the Scottish Government (tabled by Anas Sarwar MSP)

If the first motion passes (that the Parliament does not have confidence) then nothing will happen as the vote is non binding, but will place the First Minister in a very diffcult position. If the second motion passes, then the King will announce a Scottish Parliamentary election to held in 35 days after the passing of the vote.

Also, if the First Minister resigns, the Parliament will have 28 days in which to nominate a new First Minister who has the confidence of the House, and following the dissoultion of the Bute House Agreement, the SNP are two seats short of an overall majority, meaning that without a coalition to supply those two extra votes, the confidence of the Parliament cannot be guaranteed.

Therefore it is no wonder that the betting odds on a snap Scottish Parliamentary election have increased from a 1% chance this time last week to a 35% chance today.

[Zinneke]

[DL]

From what I've seen in polls - a snap Scottish election now would likely result in some sort of Labour minority government

[Torrain]

From what I've seen in polls - a snap Scottish election now would likely result in some sort of Labour minority government

That’s the median outcome for a snap election at the minute - Labour a few seats behind the SNP, but with a narrow unionist majority at Holyrood that picks Anas Sarwar over Humza Yousaf in the formal vote for First Minister.

I say Humza Yousaf - word on the street is that he’s standing down on Monday morning, so who knows where things go next…

Presumably SNP high command pushes for a progressive in the Sturgeon-Yousaf mould, who can attempt to re-establish relations with the Greens, to get them through to 2026 without an early dissolution.

[Dan the Roman]

From what I've seen in polls - a snap Scottish election now would likely result in some sort of Labour minority government

That’s the median outcome for a snap election at the minute - Labour a few seats behind the SNP, but with a narrow unionist majority at Holyrood that picks Anas Sarwar over Humza Yousaf in the formal vote for First Minister.

I say Humza Yousaf - word on the street is that he’s standing down on Monday morning, so who knows where things go next…

Presumably SNP high command pushes for a progressive in the Sturgeon-Yousaf mould, who can attempt to re-establish relations with the Greens, to get them through to 2026 without an early dissolution.

Labour's embrace of the Cass report may be cynical but in the Scottish context it was brilliant. It means there is a nationalist majority and a progressive one, but no progressive nationalist majority as long as Labour votes with the Tories and SNP social cons on that issue. So any new leader will have that problem if Labour continues to follow the London line on the topic.

[Oryxslayer]

From what I've seen in polls - a snap Scottish election now would likely result in some sort of Labour minority government

I say Humza Yousaf - word on the street is that he’s standing down on Monday morning, so who knows where things go next…

Things very well could spiral out of control if Sunak confirms the rumors and somehow announces a GE date within the week. The pressure to get a coinciding election from the opposition could be too hard to defuse, but it's the last thing the SNP would want since they would fighting both battles with a untested/temporary leader.

[Torrain]

Things very well could spiral out of control if Sunak confirms the rumors and somehow announces a GE date within the week. The pressure to get a coinciding election from the opposition could be too hard to defuse, but it's the last thing the SNP would want since they would fighting both battles with a untested/temporary leader.

I don’t think there’s *too* much risk of both going at once, but that’s just because I’m skeptical Sunak ever had any intention of triggering a GE this week. It would be genuinely unprecedented, and genuinely chaotic. Especially given the Holyrood seats have different boundaries, and similar-but-different names to their Westminster counterparts, so the whole thing would be a recipe for voter confusion and people voting straight-ticket to try and make sense of it all.

The SNP having to face a Westminster election with an interim leader (Swinney, surely) would be ugly, and I’m sure they’d make a point about Sunak either being scared or purposefully undermining him (certainly, I’d have people on social media messaging me about it for years afterwards, sending bizarre conspiracies over Facebook etc).

[LabourJersey]

From what I've seen in polls - a snap Scottish election now would likely result in some sort of Labour minority government

That’s the median outcome for a snap election at the minute - Labour a few seats behind the SNP, but with a narrow unionist majority at Holyrood that picks Anas Sarwar over Humza Yousaf in the formal vote for First Minister.

I say Humza Yousaf - word on the street is that he’s standing down on Monday morning, so who knows where things go next…

Presumably SNP high command pushes for a progressive in the Sturgeon-Yousaf mould, who can attempt to re-establish relations with the Greens, to get them through to 2026 without an early dissolution.

Question about the bolded part - if Yousaf resigns tomorrow, how quickly could the SNP get a new leader in to re-establish an agreement with the Greens? Could it happen within the week?

[Torrain]

Question about the bolded part - if Yousaf resigns tomorrow, how quickly could the SNP get a new leader in to re-establish an agreement with the Greens? Could it happen within the week?

Really depends on who’s running, and whether the leadership is contested.

The most plausible way (to my mind) that they resolve this within the week is that Sturgeon’s deputy, John Swinney lets himself be drafted and nominated unopposed, and makes it clear he’ll bring the left and right together in a sort of unity cabinet, while also making  overtures to the Greens.

This is sped up if Yousaf resigns as FM as well as SNP leader - which would start the 28 period to elect a new FM (if none is found by the deadline, we go to a snap election), injecting even more urgency into proceedings.

The risk, of course, is that the two candidates gearing up for a race (Jenny Gilruth and Kate Forbes) both go for it, and we get a contested leadership race that runs and runs.

[Harlow]

Just learned that Gilruth is married to Kezia Dugdale. Huh. No wonder Dugdale's been coming around on Scottish independence.

[Harry Hayfield]

Both the BBC and Sky News are reporting that the idea of the First Minister resigning are on "on the table" but that no decision has been taken yet

Update as of 0933 BST: The consideration, according to the BBC, is now a determination https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68918781

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think this is unlikely to occur as I'm fairly certain they'll have to hold an election next year even if they have a snap election now (unless I'm misunderstanding Scottish electoral law).

[Torrain]

I think this is unlikely to occur as I'm fairly certain they'll have to hold an election next year even if they have a snap election now (unless I'm misunderstanding Scottish electoral law).

Aye - if Holyrood dissolves this year, it would be an "extraordinary general election", with the regularly scheduled election still held in spring 2026.

That being said - Westminster and Holyrood have coordinated to move election dates before (see the agreement to extend Holyrood from 4 to 5 year terms), so it's not impossible that a one-off decision, or broader reform could be agreed if political will existed - that just doesn't seem to be the case right now.

[IceAgeComing]

I think there is a strong argument to amend the laws on this - the shift from 4 to 5 year terms for the devolved administrations was all about avoiding clashes and aligning them with the Fixed Term Parliament Act which has since been repealed: the initial four year timing was because most parliaments in previous years went four years unless the government thought they might lose so it made sense. The Local elections in Scotland are on the same timing to avoid clashes there following the disaster than was 2007 (when they tried to bring in both STV for local elections and having both Parliament votes on the same paper: which resulted in mass spoiled ballots because of overvotes and undervotes due to confusion: I remember having to tell my Mum in the polling booth how she needed to vote). It is worth noting that the Northern Ireland Assembly is distinct on this: they had an early election in 2017 because the Executive fell apart and then the next election was on the new cycle in 2022 (although moved back to May and not March).

It feels like fairly uncontenious legislation although realistically I don't think you'd be able to get it through before an early election if one happened; and I'm immediately slightly more sceptical about lengthening the term of a legislature after people have voted (same reason I think there should have been a May 2024 election in any case now).

[EastAnglianLefty]

I think the shift to elections every 5 years is particularly bad for local authorities, especially ones which are all elected in one go, because it decreases democratic engagement significantly. It also doesn't help that Scottish local authorities hold by-elections by AV and ordinary elections by STV, so too many by-elections can warp the partisan balance somewhat.

Honestly the simplest solution is probably four year terms, but postpone the election by a month if it would otherwise clash with a general election.

[Duke of York]

if there is an early election what are the odds its held with the general election?

[IceAgeComing]

Basically none - General election will be in October; none of the parties would want that (especially the Greens who would be heavily squeezed in that scenario I suspect; simply because there are two FPTP elections happening and they'd have to run less constituency candidates in areas) plus the crunch point for a new election will be when the new leader is elected which is now. After that you get to the point where fresh elections are a bit of a waste of time because of the extraordinary election thing.

I think the shift to elections every 5 years is particularly bad for local authorities, especially ones which are all elected in one go, because it decreases democratic engagement significantly. It also doesn't help that Scottish local authorities hold by-elections by AV and ordinary elections by STV, so too many by-elections can warp the partisan balance somewhat.

Honestly the simplest solution is probably four year terms, but postpone the election by a month if it would otherwise clash with a general election.

I think this is right - and would also do the same with clashes to a Scottish election as well. I guess the challenge is that elections are planned fairly far in advance and needing to have the contingency to have counting staff/venues etc in June just in case might also put some people off. Not unprecedented though - in 1983, 1987 and 2017 we had June elections called after locals and in 1992 the General election was the month before the locals (and in 2001 all elections were delayed a month because of Foot and Mouth).

I would shift to 4 years and either fill vacancies via count back (which would result in more candidates standing and possibly a bit of intra-party competition plus also reflect who the next choice would have been) or co-option for party vacancies to try and mitigate the issues when minority parties stand down. Neither option is perfect but I think its better than the status quo.

[Harry Hayfield]

On May 1st at 2.00pm BST (9.00am EDT / 6.00am PDT) the Scottish Parliament will debate a motion in the name of the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar MSP, stating that this Parliament does not have confidence in the Scottish Government (the motion tabled by Douglas Ross MSP having been pulled)

The Scottish Parliament website states that the Government (SNP) has 63 members, the opposition have 65 members and that one member (the Presiding Officer) does not vote.

Ash Regan MSP (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern) posted this on social media two days ago

https://twitter.com/AshReganALBA/status/1784649793802846239?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

This is me indicates she intends to vote no confidence and thus trigger a Scottish Parliamentary election

[Torrain]

I wouldn’t get too excited, alas. Regan has said she’ll probably abstain.

The Greens, for their part, threw a bit of a wobbly this evening, accusing Labour of “playing political games” in not dropping this motion. They’re in a bit of a tight spot because their membership is pretty p***ed off with the SNP, and they’d vowed to vote Yousaf down. Now they’ll end up abstaining in order to prevent the caretaker Yousaf government resigning and maintaining their position as kingmakers.

All in all - 90% chance the motion will fail, with Labour, SNP and the Tories cheerily spinning the outcome afterwards and the Greens a little more jumpy. If by some miracle it passes, expect the SNP to close ranks, and immediately propose a new FM candidate. The office would hardly be vacant one day, let alone the 28 required for an election.

The only way for the opposition to block a new SNP First Minister is to not present an alternative candidate, (which switches the victory threshold from a plurality to an absolute majority affirmative vote) and then repeatedly vote down the SNP candidate. This is a scenario that would probably only ever be a risk for Kate Forbes in this Parliament.

[Torrain]

Debate on the confidence motion has just started.

Live coverage here: https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-may-1-2024

Edit - we’ve have the results:

• Yes - 58
• No - 70

Greens vote with government, Regan voted with the opposition.

[Harry Hayfield]

The government survives, until the next vote where confidence is required (such as the vote for the next First Minister)

[Harry Hayfield]

The government survives, until the next vote where confidence is required (such as the vote for the next First Minister)

The Scottish Parliament website states that it only takes a simple majority to elect a First Minister, that means that abstained votes are not counted in the tally, therefore the Greens have to actively vote NO for the First Minister clock to start again.

[CumbrianLefty]

Anyway, an "earlier than scheduled" election not looking so likely now.

[Harry Hayfield]

Anyway, an "earlier than scheduled" election not looking so likely now.

Indeed, so long as the Greens keep on abstaining in any vote of no confidence in the Government, any vote will fail