![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
On Sturgeon - Hot Takes Part Une
Feb. 15th, 2023 03:00 pmI'm inclined to take Sturgeon's resignation announcement at face value.
I find being on the senior management team of a small tech firm tiring, on occasions exhausting verging on debilitating. So I entirely believe her when she says that running Scotland is hard work and that she recognises that she's running out of spoons and needs to stop soon-ish.
I also take her point that if she's not able to commit to being FM and SNP leader for the next 2-3 years then it is probably the right time for her to step down before the SNP make a very, very big decision about the mechanism and timing of their Plan B to a Westminster sanctioned referendum. I think she's right that she would have large influence over that choice. The FM and SNP leader will have to be the front-rank salesperson of that plan to the SNP membership, the wider independence movement and the Scottish people. If she can't commit to being around to do that job then probably right for her to step down before she exercises the Chairs' vote in the SNP internal debate on Plan B. The new person can be chosen with the Plan B approach in mind - or vice versa. Nice and clean.
So I don't think her resignation is particularly tied to the GRR issue or the problems with party financing.
I thought the GRR issue might cause her some difficulty over the next 6-12 months. I never thought the mechanism of that difficulty would be the type to trigger a sudden resignation. (1) I don't think some people in grey suits have taken her aside and told her that the game is up.
Unless she has personally defrauded the SNP independence fighting fund of half a million quid - which seems very unlikely. We've had instances of independence fighting funds being stolen by SNP MSP's and it's not brought down the government. So not that (2).
Or any of the other hot button issues that are going on.
So, probably just the tiredness then.
She'll be a big loss to the country. Or the countries. She's lead Scotland very ably and with great humanity through some difficult times. She's also served as a role model of how the UK could do politics if it weren't run by e.g Johnson and Corbyn and those like them.
She's been a very, very successful politician. Perhaps the most successful in the UK in the last few decades. Perhaps the best politician in the UK.
(1) What I thought likely to happen was that the fall out of the GRR Bill would cause friction and confussion thusly - Scottish Government would appeal the Secretary of State for Scotland's veto of the GRR Bill and lose. Quite rightly lose, the law on S35 seems much, much clearer than the law on S30 or what exactly constitutes a reserved power. The SNP would have to decide whether to re-introduce the Bill or lobby for action at a UK level or leave it alone. Noting that, per both Ashcroft and Kelly polling what the GRR actually does is probably not supported by voters at large and what the GRR is truthinessly claimed to do is not at all supported by voters and they certainly don't think the issue is important to them. Voters unlikely t be delighted with more on this issue. The Scottish Green Party would favour more action and activism on this than the SNP. This would lead to tensions in the coalition, particularly as it looked likely that one of the SGP ministers was going to be in spot of bother over misleading Parliament on wind power potential in Scottish Waters. Do you push on on an issue where the public are not strongly supportive of your position or do you risk a bit of rift with your coalition partners? Messy choice. And you and your government start to look a bit less awesome and you dip a few points in the polls just at the time you need to not dip in the polls and it becomes hard.
(2) Glenn Campbell you bell-end.
I find being on the senior management team of a small tech firm tiring, on occasions exhausting verging on debilitating. So I entirely believe her when she says that running Scotland is hard work and that she recognises that she's running out of spoons and needs to stop soon-ish.
I also take her point that if she's not able to commit to being FM and SNP leader for the next 2-3 years then it is probably the right time for her to step down before the SNP make a very, very big decision about the mechanism and timing of their Plan B to a Westminster sanctioned referendum. I think she's right that she would have large influence over that choice. The FM and SNP leader will have to be the front-rank salesperson of that plan to the SNP membership, the wider independence movement and the Scottish people. If she can't commit to being around to do that job then probably right for her to step down before she exercises the Chairs' vote in the SNP internal debate on Plan B. The new person can be chosen with the Plan B approach in mind - or vice versa. Nice and clean.
So I don't think her resignation is particularly tied to the GRR issue or the problems with party financing.
I thought the GRR issue might cause her some difficulty over the next 6-12 months. I never thought the mechanism of that difficulty would be the type to trigger a sudden resignation. (1) I don't think some people in grey suits have taken her aside and told her that the game is up.
Unless she has personally defrauded the SNP independence fighting fund of half a million quid - which seems very unlikely. We've had instances of independence fighting funds being stolen by SNP MSP's and it's not brought down the government. So not that (2).
Or any of the other hot button issues that are going on.
So, probably just the tiredness then.
She'll be a big loss to the country. Or the countries. She's lead Scotland very ably and with great humanity through some difficult times. She's also served as a role model of how the UK could do politics if it weren't run by e.g Johnson and Corbyn and those like them.
She's been a very, very successful politician. Perhaps the most successful in the UK in the last few decades. Perhaps the best politician in the UK.
(1) What I thought likely to happen was that the fall out of the GRR Bill would cause friction and confussion thusly - Scottish Government would appeal the Secretary of State for Scotland's veto of the GRR Bill and lose. Quite rightly lose, the law on S35 seems much, much clearer than the law on S30 or what exactly constitutes a reserved power. The SNP would have to decide whether to re-introduce the Bill or lobby for action at a UK level or leave it alone. Noting that, per both Ashcroft and Kelly polling what the GRR actually does is probably not supported by voters at large and what the GRR is truthinessly claimed to do is not at all supported by voters and they certainly don't think the issue is important to them. Voters unlikely t be delighted with more on this issue. The Scottish Green Party would favour more action and activism on this than the SNP. This would lead to tensions in the coalition, particularly as it looked likely that one of the SGP ministers was going to be in spot of bother over misleading Parliament on wind power potential in Scottish Waters. Do you push on on an issue where the public are not strongly supportive of your position or do you risk a bit of rift with your coalition partners? Messy choice. And you and your government start to look a bit less awesome and you dip a few points in the polls just at the time you need to not dip in the polls and it becomes hard.
(2) Glenn Campbell you bell-end.
