Voting No for change doesn’t work
The Alternative Vote (AV) had been chosen as some sort of compromise during the Conservative-LibDem coalition negotiations, but the Tories campaigned against it regardless, and the LibDems were then forced to try and persuade the electorate to support a voting system they didn’t really like themselves.
So it’s likely many people voted No because they weren’t convinced by the merits of AV, not because they were against a reform per se.
However, the No victory buried all hope of another voting system for a generation, because it was interpreted as support for FPTP.
If the Yes side had won, it would have been possible to change AV into something better a few years later, but the No vote was effectively a vote for the status quo.
The lesson for the Scottish independence campaign is obvious.
Many No campaigners argue that all sorts of wonderful reforms will happen after a No vote, but in reality it’s very likely it will be interpreted as a vote to keep things as they are.
A Yes vote, on the other hand, will make it possible to discuss many other reforms in Scotland — such as abolishing the monarchy — that just aren’t on the agenda at the moment.
I actually feel sorry for the Devo-Max supporters out there. It’s a very popular vision for the future of Scotland, but by keeping it off the ballot paper the Westminster government has ensured that it will never happen. We’ll either get full independence or nothing at all.
All Devo-Max supporters must therefore face up to the reality that their preferred option won’t suddenly be resurrected after a No vote. They have to decide whether their favourite outcome is closer to the current devolution settlement or to independence.
I’m a bit confused. I thought from a previous discussion we had that Salmond basically manipulated Westminster into removing the Devo Max option??
The comments here seem to suggest that anyway:
http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/salmond-strong-hint-of-one-question-referendum/20757#
For example:
“London has won”? What a load of nonsense. Gary Gibbon really doesn’t know much about Scottish politics, does he? I have said all along that there would only be one straightforward question about independence. And Alex Salmond has, of course, known that all along. He stated plainly that was he wanted one question, on independence. Him “considering” devo-max was just a ploy to make the Unionists be dead against the only option which could in fact prevent us from voting for independence. So David Cameron has forced Alex Salmond to accept what Alex Salmond wanted all along, but it will be David Cameron and his Unionist colleagues who will get the blame for there being no devo-max option, not Alex? In what sense has “London won”? – See more at: http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/salmond-strong-hint-of-one-question-referendum/20757#sthash.O1Rr2Cix.dpuf
“You, like so many others, have completely misread the SNP strategy on the referendum question. There was never going to be a second question, and if you’d listened carefully you’d have reailised that!
Polls indicate strong support for enhanced devolution, but only Westminster can deliver that. In response to those polls, the SNP had made sympathetic noises, to build up the expectations of supporters of that option but, more importantly, to lay a trap for the unionist parties. Those parties obligingly blundered into said trap as fast as their little legs could carry them. Now we have a situation where many people want substantial change while the parties of the union scream “NO NO NO” at the tops of their lungs.
The SNP (who have only ever existed to achieve independence) now gets to say to the electorate “You wanted a second question and we were prepared to listen, but we cannot give you devo-max. Only Westminster can deliver devo-max and they have refused so, reluctantly, we must offer you independence or nothing. You want change, we offer change. Independence is devo-max plus a little bit extra, so choose independence.”
– See more at: http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/salmond-strong-hint-of-one-question-referendum/20757#sthash.O1Rr2Cix.dpuf“
Pingback: Voting No for change doesn’t work | Refer...