With the publication of the results of the Scottish Government’s consultation on equal marriage looming, the debate has roared back into life. For those opposed to equal marriage, the overwhelming support of the public and of MSPs is irrelevant in the face of the fact that the consultation apparently shows a 2-1 majority against the introduction of equal marriage. I haven’t been able to find an article on the web that confirms this, but here’s a snippet from the Daily Mail which makes that claim. Interestingly, it mentions 70,000 responses – my understanding was that there were closer to 50,000. Given the Catholic Church submitted 14,000 postcards that the Scottish Government said it would consider as one submission, it may be that the virulently homophobic Daily Mail is simply including those 14,000 in the total out of sheer mischief or that the Scottish Government capitulated.

Some thoughts immediately occur to me on this. First of all, we need to remember a consultation is NOT a referendum. The two are entirely different methods for measuring public support for a proposition. In a referendum, all that matters is whether a voter agrees or disagrees with a single proposal. The government doesn’t give a hoot why they agree or disagree, all that matters is finding out what the majority opinion is. In a consultation, it’s not the quantity of responses that matters, but the content of those responses. A consultation asks for respondents to give detailed answers to a number of questions on the proposed legislation – in the case of the Equal Marriage consultation, this included questions about whether or not you supported equality in civil marriage and whether or not religious groups should be given leeway to decide whether or not to conduct religious same-sex marriages. That’s why it takes so long to publish the result of a consultation – every individual response has to be read and considered.

It doesn’t matter what the majority opinion in the consultation is if that majority opinion were (in this case) to simply consist of people saying “No, we don’t want the gays to get married because God says they can’t!” That isn’t an argument – that’s a nonsense assertion. For one thing, we all know there are religious bodies in favour of equal marriage. For another, Scotland (unlike England) is a secular country with separation of church and state – the big man in the sky that may or may not exist does not, and should not, have any say over what our government does. Even if we were to accept that argument for religious marriages, it simply does not apply to civil marriages which are unarguably outwith the authority of the churches. It’s my opinion that any individual response which so much as mentions god (or Jesus, or the Bible) outside of the questions specifically on religious marriage should be disregarded on these grounds.

A consultation is also even more self-selecting than a referendum. In a referendum, most of the population will have been debating the matter for months in advance, will know exactly when the referendum will be held, and will only need to give up about 10 minutes of their time to wander down to their local polling station to cast their vote. A consultation is very different – a large portion of the population may not be aware of the consultation at all, and if they are, regardless of their position on the matter, may be disinclined to spend a good half hour to an hour reading through what the proposal is and then writing detailed responses to a number of questions.

As a result, the overwhelmingly religious opposition had an advantage – a captive audience. Religious bodies opposed to equal marriage would have been able to raise the matter before their congregation every Sunday (or similar time of worship), distribute petitions and postcards, and otherwise encourage a large number of people to contribute to the consultation. The majority of the public that support equal marriage didn’t have that kind of network – short of people sharing the consultation response form on Facebook and Twitter, there wasn’t much that could be done to mobilise a large, coherent group of support in the same way.

Given that we know the public and the parliament is overwhelmingly in support of Equal Marriage, it is my hope that the Scottish Government will, when publishing the results, state their intention press on with legislation on equal marriage, both civil and religious. They absolutely should not be put off by the ridiculous idea that it will cost them votes in the Independence referendum, as only a fool would decide to give up supporting Independence just because LGBT people can get married. More concerning should be the fact this is a defining issue for me and many other LGBT SNP voters. Should they decide not to go ahead with the legislation many of us will take our votes elsewhere, most likely to the Scottish Green Party.

Though I will admit the pro-Independence side can seem rather selfish – we do tend to talk about how we want to improve our own lives without giving much thought or mention to the effect Independence would have on the rest of these isles – I don’t think we’ve forgotten about the rest of the UK. When it comes to the impact Independence will have on the rest of the isles, the two camps effectively espouse “outside pressure” or “inside pressure”. We both want to achieve the same goal – we just have different means.

The belief of myself and many others in the Independence camp is that if we do manage to create the kind of progressive Scotland we want to see (one that does not match up entirely with the SNP’s stated policies, such as the plan to cut corporation tax) it’ll serve as an example for the rest of the UK, Indeed, on certain issues, the simple act of secession could produce the results we desire. Opponents might deride Salmond’s idea of a “progressive beacon”, but it’s a good thing to aspire to. If we Scots can show that there is another way of doing things, then perhaps this will motivate people in the rest of the UK in their attempts to move away from the institutionally antiquated and economically insane model they’ve had to suffer in recent years. By operating outside of the UK, we make it easier to pressure the rest of the UK to change through our own example.

Amongst the left-wing Unionists, the belief appears to be that if we all work together, we can achieve a progressive UK without having to selfishly chop bits off of it – to leave the UK is tantamount to abandoning everyone else to the Tories. By pushing for change inside the UK, we could perhaps have a country that is both progressive and a major world player.

For a given individual, it perhaps comes down to what future they see being the more likely. Frankly, when I take a look at the UK’s recent history and current trajectory, and combine that with antiquated political institutions, the most powerful of which is elected in one of the worst manners possible, I really don’t see much likelihood of a progressive future. I see successive governments, regardless of their hue, eroding or abolishing important things like civil liberties or the NHS because they are too obsessed with being a “world power” and playing by the neoliberal rulebook to care about the little people. A truly progressive Scotland that acts as a beacon for our neighbours is by no means guaranteed – indeed, it’s going to be something that will take a phenomenal amount of effort to achieve and absolutely cannot be left to the SNP alone – but I rate the chances as being higher than if we stuck with the UK. The way I see it, the left-wing Unionist position boils down to “let’s try to make it better together, but if we fail, better we all be miserable together!” 

In the end, it’s perhaps all just one last heave for social democracy in Britain – we’re just bickering over how we should be heaving.

What I want to achieve with Independence – 6 principles

Independence is not something most supporters want just for the sake of having it – we all have our own vision for what we want to do with that Independence. For my part, that vision becomes increasingly long winded as I add more and more to what is currently a 15,000 word page on this blog. I’ve finally hit on six snappy sounding principles that I want Scotland to live up to – social justice, sustainability, decentralisation, internationalism, non-aggression and being nuclear free. I do not believe the UK currently lives up to any of these nor do I see any likelihood of it doing so anytime soon.

A description of what each of these principles means can be found on that page, but put simply it means I quite fancy voting Green post-Independence. The SNP’s current policy and stated vision for Independence stands up fairly well for all of those principles with the exception of decentralisation, but the Greens meet all of them and do better than the SNP in some, so they currently represent my best bet for the post-Independence elections.

A constituent assembly

When I originally wrote the Independence piece, I just kind of assumed it would be Parliament’s job to write the constitution. It’s only recently, from reading about the (accidental!) constituent assembly that Spain elected during it’s transition to democracy and the more recent Icelandic one, that I realised the constitution should be more open to input from the people. To that end, whilst Parliament would be in charge of negotiating a deal with the UK government, the people of Scotland should get the chance to elect a standalone constituent assembly that can focus on writing our constitution.

Where the Spanish Constituent Cortes of 1977 was purely political (perhaps due to it’s accidental nature – it wasn’t really intended to write a new constitution, but was pressured to do so) the Icelandic Constitutional Assembly of 2010 was non-partisan, elected from the general populace and included people as diverse as farmers and economics professors. I think a mix of both would be most appropriate for the Scottish Constituent Assembly.

To me, a 10%-40%-50% allocation for a parliamentary delegation, non-partisan delegation and party delegation respectively seems about right (the expert that I am). The parliamentary delegation should guarantee one seat for each party in parliament, with the rest being divided between the parties according to their proportion of seats. The non-partisan and party delegations would be directly elected by the people and allow for a good mix of expert experience, citizen participation and political views in crafting the constitution.

Once the constitution passes through the constituent assembly, it would have to be voted on by the Scottish people before it was accepted. Hopefully, a constitution put together by a specifically elected constituent assembly would be most reflective of our views and therefore pass easily.

Enforced Localism

A common criticism of local government elections is that they are often heavily influenced by national parties and policy rather than being decided by local issues as should be the case. That got me to thinking – what if we enforced the distinction between national and local politics by constitutionally excluding national parties from participating in local elections?

I don’t mean to say that national parties and politicians should be excluded totally from local elections, or that every council should have it’s own political parties – instead, parties would register as either “National” or “Local” and people would be entitled to simultaneous membership of one of each. Local parties might cover a historic area – for example, the Ayrshire Democratic Party could stand for election in North, South and East Ayrshire – or even the whole country but contest only local elections, and may choose to associate with an equivalent national party in a manner similar to the relationship between the Bloc Québécois and the Parti Québécois in Canada.

It’s not a perfect solution, for a few reasons. For one, allowing such associations may result in national politics still leaking into local politics – if you know that the Highland Liberal Party is the local associate of the national Scottish Liberal Party who have been doing poorly in government, you might be less inclined to vote for them – but it would theoretically put a lot more power in local hands as there would be no national leadership to dictate policy. In addition, party funding might be also problematic, as totally separate local parties might find it harder to attract donations than would be the case if they were able to use a national party’s resources and so find it harder to maintain staff and run campaigns – but on the other hand, this also means that a rich national party can’t really use that money to influence local election results in their favour.

Still, it’s perhaps something worth looking into – I have found all the bickering over who “won” the local elections and the ensuing mudslinging over who was the nastiest party for going into coalition with that party rather than this party to be incredibly tiresome, and I can’t be the only one. Wouldn’t it be nice if local elections were truly local, with their own local parties, than just another popularity contest for national parties?

A bold colour is a party majority, whilst pale colours represent pluralities. Blended colours – represented here by the peach of Midlothian – represent two parties ties.

To break it down, that’s 3 Independent majorities, 1 Independent plurality, 3 Labour and 4 Conservative pluralities, 1 Labour Majority, 6 SNP Majorities, 13 SNP pluralities and one SNP-Labour tie. In terms of seats, I was expecting a massive surge in SNP seats (as many as 500 total) with the potential to take a seat in each of Orkney and Shetland, reasonable gains for the Greens (up to 15 odd), minor losses for Labour (maybe down to 330) and the Tories (around 135) and significant losses for the Lib Dems (less than 80).

Here’s how it actually ended up;

The SNP failed to make the gains I expected in the Northern Isles, though they made up for that by taking three more seats in the Western Isles. Labour not only proved more resilient than expected, but made significant gains – of particular note, in my opinion, are beating the Tories in Dumfries & Galloway and East Renfrewshire and coming top in Aberdeen. I was massively disappointed to see them take majorities in my home council of West Dunbartonshire and cling on in my current abode of Glasgow.

Though the SNP didn’t make the gains I predicted, it was far from a disaster for them. We managed good results in North and East Ayrshire and I was right in predicting majorities for Angus and Dundee. Perth & Kinross was a bit of a disappointment – I can’t believe they didn’t take at least one more seat there – but with the largest contingent of councillors in Scotland, we really can’t complain.

However, I was delighted at the gains made by the Greens – especially their gaining councillors in Stirling, Aberdeenshire and Midlothian. I was disappointed they didn’t squeeze another one into Glasgow but on the whole a fantastic result – given the candidates, perhaps they will overtake the Lib Dems next time!

The Lib Dems result was suitably disastrous, as most of us were expecting – more surprising were the significant losses the Tories suffered. I wasn’t alone in feeling the Tories were already down at the very core of their support and so didn’t see them losing any more than ten councillors – instead, they managed to lose 30, which saw them dealt a savage blow in East Renfrewshire and Dumfries and Galloway.

The final breakdown of councillors is 3 Independent majorities, 2 Independent pluralities, 1 SNP-Independent tie, 3 SNP-Labour ties, 5 SNP pluralities, 2 SNP majorities, 10 Labour pluralities, 4 Labour majorities and 2 Tory pluralities. Seat wise, it was 424 to the SNP, 394 to Labour, 115 to the Tories, 71 to the Lib Dems, 14 Greens, one lone SSP councillor and the rest being made up of Independents and local issue parties.

For comparison’s sake, here is a 2007 map;

After the 2007 election, we had 3 Independent majorities, 3 Independent pluralities, 3 Lib Dem pluralities, 4 SNP pluralities, 3 SNP-Labour ties, 3 Tory pluralities, 1 Tory-Labour tie and 2 Labour majorities and 10 Labour pluralities. Compared to 2007, both Labour and the SNP made significant gains at the expense of the Tories and the Lib Dems.

Though the SNP showing wasn’t as good as expected, I certainly don’t think this election constitutes a Labour “win”. Though Labour have also had excellent results, the gap between the two parties has widened from 15 seats (363 to 348) to 30 (424 to 394) seats since 2007 – that doesn’t suggest to me that the SNP are in any grave danger of getting beaten anytime soon. Indeed, the SNP remain the party with the most representation across Scotland, only lacking councillors in Orkney and Shetland. If anything these elections, taken as a whole, tell us relatively little about Scotland’s preference in terms of SNP or Labour, and a whole lot about our preference when it comes to centre-left parties or a viciously right wing UK government.

Update: The national first preference percentage results have finally been released, showing the SNP a hair ahead of Labour. The (almost) final results are;

SNP – 32.32% (+4.46%), 424 seats (+61)
Labour – 31.39% (+3.24%), 394 seats (+46)
Tory – 13.31% (-2.26%), 115 seats (-28)
Lib Dems – 6.59% (-6.10%), 71 seats (-95)
Greens – 2.20% (+0.16%), 14 seats (+6)

Also making the rounds has been a map showing what wards each party has at least one councillor in. That prompted me to do some calculations to find out how much of the country, as a % of wards, each party covers. Given that the Northern Isles still don’t have any official party councillors, I also worked out a percentage without Orkney and Shetland included.

Total wards / Total less the Northern Isles – 383 / 340
SNP wards – 324 (84.60% / 95.29%)
Labour Wards – 245 (63.97% / 72.06%)
Tory Wards – 107 (27.94% / 31.47%)
Lib Dem Wards – 67 (17.49% / 19.71%)
Green Wards – 14 (3.66% / 4.12%)

If we then take all of this to give us a whopping five ways a party might claim to have “won” the election, the SNP could be considered to have “won” on four counts and Labour on one. The SNP won more votes (32.32% against 31.39%), more seats (424 against 394), made more gains (+61 against +46) and has the widest representation across the country (84.60% of wards against 63.97%). Labour won the most councils (4 majorities & 10 pluralities against 2 majorities & 5 pluralities). Alternatively, you could just say that they both had an excellent election result and leave it at that.

Coming a year after their majority win in the Scottish Parliament, these elections will be a major test for the SNP. Many, especially the Tories, have been suggesting the SNP will use a positive result as evidence of support for Independence – and for all that they might deny it at this point, were the SNP to be thumped at the local elections the other parties would themselves be crowing about it showing that Scots favour the Union. As such, there’s rather a lot at stake this year over and above the delivery of local services.

For a bit of fun, I’ve been going through the Councils and making my own predictions of the result. These are only very rough predictions, using the change in support between the 2007 and 2011 parliamentary elections (at individual council level) and educated guesswork from looking at individual ward results and are unlikely to be all that close to the actual result – but then, when are they ever? For the most part, I won’t be predicting which parties will form the council administration as that depends too much on the local situation.

For ease of reading, I’ve split the Councils into four types – City Councils (those which have City in their name), Urban Councils (Most of the councils which share a border with Glasgow or Edinburgh plus heavily industrialised councils such as Inverclyde and Falkirk), Mixed Councils (Councils with a large population centre combined with a large land area with sparse settlement, usually bordering a City or Urban council) and Rural Councils (councils with widely spread populations).

This is also rather a large post, so you might want to search for the following terms (or for an individual council);

• City Councils
• Urban Councils
• Mixed Councils
• Rural Councils
• Short Council Predictions
• Party Result Recaps

City Councils

For obvious reasons, Scotland’s four city councils (Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee) will be amongst the most important. With a little over a quarter of Scotland’s population amongst them, winning a city council is a major jewel in any election crown.

Glasgow City Council, the largest in the country, is going to be the big prize in this election with 79 seats up for grabs. One of the few remaining Labour majority councils after the last elections in 2007, when they won 45 seats, the past few months have seen Labour become a minority administration and with their success in Glasgow seats at the last parliamentary election an SNP victory – once unthinkable in Glasgow – seems a real possibility.

My prediction is that Labour will win a plurality of seats, but only by a hair – I expect something in the mid to high 30’s but only 2 or 3 more than the SNP. I think the Greens will remain quite stable – perhaps losing or gaining one seat – and hold the balance of power. I expect that, given Labour’s history in Glasgow, the Greens will either support an SNP minority or form a coalition with the SNP to bring change to the city. The Tories and Lib Dems will be almost irrelevant – at most, they may win 3 seats between them – but might co-operate with the SNP administration to keep Labour out.

City of Edinburgh Council, the capital, will be the next largest prize and has 58 seats. Currently under a Lib Dem led LD-SNP coalition, it’s highly likely the Lib Dem vote will collapse dramatically though they won’t disappear entirely. Both the SNP and Labour are likely to benefit from this collapse, and the Greens may sneak a couple more councillors in – I reckon the Tories will remain quite stable.

Edinburgh will perhaps be the mirror image of Glasgow – I predict that the SNP will just pip Labour to winning the most seats with around 20, but the legacy of SNP participation in the LD led council and their disastrous handling of the Trams project, amongst other things, will see Labour leading the administration in the capital. Together with the Greens they may not have enough seats for a majority, but may function well as a minority council.

In Aberdeen City Council, there are 43 seats. The 2007 election returned an LD-SNP coalition, but various by elections and defections have since seen the leadership of the council switch to an SNP-LD coalition. Like Edinburgh, the Lib Dems are likely to suffer a collapse in their vote but not to the extent that they are wiped out. Both Labour and the SNP should benefit from this collapse and increase their number of councillors, and the Greens may get their first elected councillors if they can get out the vote opposed to the Union Terrace Gardens project.

Though Labour will make gains, the SNP should still win the most seats by a significant margin. The Lib Dems may hold onto just enough seats that the SNP-LD coalition continues. Again, the Tories will likely remain where they are – set to be a running theme in these elections.

Finally, we have Dundee City Council where there are 29 seats to be filled. The city has been under an SNP minority council since 2007, when the SNP won 13 of these seats. The remaining seats are 10 Labour, 3 Tory, 2 Lib Dem and an Independent. Unlike the other cities, the Lib Dems don’t have much a vote here to collapse – Fraser MacPherson, the LD Councillor for the West End ward won the most first preference votes in 2007 and may squeak back in but I can’t see much chance of them retaining their other seat in Strathmarine.

I think the SNP will easily win 15 or 16 seats and thus a majority – in 2007, they got 2 councillors elected in all of the 3-member wards and a repeat performance there would require wins in the three 4-member wards they only got one 1 councillor elected to last time. They should take that former LD seat in Strathmarine, and knock one or two Tories out to take a second seat in the West End and The Ferry wards.

Urban Councils

Let’s start with my old home council of West Dunbartonshire which has 22 seats. In 2007, Labour lost their majority and though the SNP had one less seat they cobbled together a coalition with some Independents. West Dunbartonshire is unique in that is has the only Scottish Socialist Councillor in the country, Jim Bollan. The Lib Dems don’t stand in West Dunbartonshire and the Tories are non-entities.

Come May, I think the SNP will pick up a couple of seats at the expense of either the Independents or Labour but narrowly miss a majority at 11 seats. Jim Bollan’s seat is probably safe thanks to his popularity amongst and the votes of the people of Renton (one of the villages in the Leven Ward) who have strong socialist leanings.

Moving next door to East Dunbartonshire Council and the 24 seats there. Currently a Lab-Con minority coalition, the SNP demonstrated the often peculiar nature of the Single Transferrable Vote in 2007 when they got all 8 of their councillors – and thus a plurality – despite coming third in terms of first preferences. The Lib Dems were badly hit thanks to STV, returning only 3 of their previous councillors.

Despite this, the SNP aren’t standing any more candidates in East Dunbartonshire this year which means that the likely beneficiary of any collapse in the LD vote will be Labour who may consequently manage to get 9 seats to the SNP’s 8. The two members from the East Dunbartonshire Independent Alliance should be comfortably re-elected and again the Tories likely won’t go anywhere.

Crossing Glasgow to find another affluent eastern shire we come to East Renfrewshire Council, with 20 seats. East Renfrewshire is the lone Tory stronghold in the central belt, with the Tories comfortably winning 7 seats and 34.3% of the vote there in 2007, though Labour matched their seat count. The sole Lib Dem councillor is sitting precariously and will likely lose his seat. In the absolute best case for the SNP, the other three parties will lose a seat each to the SNP resulting in a 6-6-6 split plus 2 independents. However, I think they will probably only pick up that seat from the Lib Dems and the Tories will remain top in East Renfrewshire.

Plain old Renfrewshire Council has 40 seats. In 2007, the SNP and Labour were neck and neck with 17 seats, with the 4 Lib Dem councillors opting for a coalition with the SNP and 2 Tories filling the last seats in the chamber. If the Lib Dem vote collapses, they may hold their seat in Paisley East and Ralston where they had a slender win over the SNP’s top candidate in First Preference votes but will lose the other three, which will probably fall 2-1 to the SNP and Labour. If the SNP can equalise in Johnston South, Elderslie and Howwood ward which currently has three Labour councillors they will control half the council.

Inverclyde Council has 20 seats. A former Lib Dem stronghold (is it just me, or did the Lib Dems really suffer for their introduction of STV?) turned Labour, it’s very likely to stay that way in May. A collapse in the LD vote is likely to benefit the SNP the most, but Labour may pick up another seat to take half the council.

Outside of Glasgow, North Lanarkshire Council was the only other council to retain a Labour majority, where they held 40 of it’s 70 seats – in fact, Labour almost won a majority of first preferences too, with 49.6%. Much like Glasgow, the SNP are by far the largest opposition party with only a token councillor from the Lib Dems and the Tories with Independents holding the remaining five. I can see Labour shedding a few councillors to the SNP, but I think North Lanarkshire will have the distinction of being the only Labour majority council in Scotland though that majority will be much slimmer – perhaps 36 or 37 seats.

Moving across now to the Edinburgh satellites in the Lothians, starting with the 32 seats in West Lothian Council. West Lothian was another narrow Labour win in 2007 with only a fraction of a % and 1 seat between them and the SNP. West Lothian lacks any Lib Dem councillors and has only one Tory though local issue party Action to Save St John’s Hospital brings some political diversity with three seats – and with the two extra candidates they are standing this year, they could muddy the waters. Without any real knowledge of the situation I can’t say what the impact of the local party will be, but I do expect Labour to lose a couple of seats to the SNP.

East Lothian Council’s 23 seats ended up rather evenly split last time, with 7 each to Labour and the SNP and 6 to the Lib Dems. Few of the Lib Dem seats seem like they will be safe from the likely collapse, though they may hold onto one. Like many councils, if there is a large collapse both the SNP and Labour will be the ones to capitalise on it though I suspect it will be the SNP who pocket most of the seats.

Midlothian Council was until recently Labour’s other majority council in Scotland, with 10 of 18 seats – though it only reached that number with the defection of a Lib Dem councillor. As has consistently been the case, the Lib Dem seats are anything but secure and will probably fall to the SNP. With the SNP standing two candidates in each ward this time around, they will be a real challenge to Labour. I predict that the council might end up evenly split with 9 apiece for Labour and the SNP, though the SNP will win the popular vote.

Falkirk Council, home of Tory-battering MP Eric Joyce, has 32 seats. Labour won a narrow victory in 2007 with 14 seats to the SNP’s 13, with the Tories and a few Independent councillors making up the numbers. Since then, the SNP won an absolute majority of votes in both Scottish Parliament constituencies in Falkirk, and with the endorsement of the popular local former MP and MSP Dennis Canavan may do very well in Falkirk. In fact, I predict they will manage to just scrape a majority.

Mixed Councils

The bonnie environs of Ayrshire are home to three of Scotland’s "mixed” councils. East Ayrshire Council was another one of those with an even split between SNP and Labour at 14 councillors each out of the 32 available with three Tories and an Independent making up the rest. In what will come as no surprise, I’m expecting the Tories to stay about where they are. Given Labour has three councillors of the four in two wards, I think that they will probably lose the third councillor on each to the SNP, bumping the SNP up to half of the seats on the council.

South Ayrshire Council is another one of those rare Tory plurality councils with 12 of the 30 seats. Labour with 9, the SNP with 8 (their entire slate) and an Independent make up the rest of the council. With the SNP standing more candidates this time, I expect them to pinch at least one seat off each of the other two parties to become the second largest party on the council, with the Tories holding onto their plurality by a whisker.

North Ayrshire Council is the only one of the Ayrshire councils with Lib Dem representation amongst their 30 councillors, though only two of them. Labour won the last time with 12 seats to the SNP’s 8 along with 3 Tories and 5 Independents. Again, the Lib Dems will probably lose their seats and the Tories remain mostly static, with the SNP likely to pick up a seat or two from Labour in addition to those from the Lib Dems, making them the largest party on the council.

Stirling Council has 22 seats. Labour won last time with 8 of those seats to the SNP’s 7, though the SNP went on to form a minority administration. 3 Lib Dems and a Tory make up the rest of the council. Surprise surprise, I don’t see the Lib Dems being returned or much of a dent being made in the Tories. Perhaps I’m being a bit hopeful, but with the Greens making a strong showing in Stirling in the Parliamentary elections (over 5% of the vote), I’ve got a feeling they might manage to take a seat in Stirling, whilst the SNP gain the other Lib Dem seats to make them the largest party.

Perth & Kinross Council has 41 seats. Last time, the SNP won the most councillors by a significant margin – 18 to the 12 for the Tories – with the Lib Dems returning a respectable 8 and Labour showing their weakness in rural Scotland taking only 3 councillors, all of them in the city of Perth. In a welcome break to the pattern, I’m not expecting a total Lib Dem wipeout in Perth & Kinross and think the Tories are going to lose a few of their seats. What seats the Lib Dems do lose, along with the Tory losses, are likely to go straight to the SNP and I predict the SNP will win just enough for a majority of seats.

South Lanarkshire Council’s 67 seats show much greater diversity than their Northern counterpart splitting 30-24-2-8-3 to Labour, the SNP, Lib Dems, Tories and Independents. With their success in many South Lanarkshire constituencies in 2011 and an increase in council candidates, I think the SNP will reverse the current Labour-SNP seat share and perhaps take a couple of additional seats from the Tories. If they are lucky, the Lib Dems might manage to hold onto one of their seats.

Fife Council has 78 seats which are presently quite evenly divided between Labour, the SNP and the Lib Dems with 24, 23 and 21 respectively, with the Tories and Independents each on 5 seats. As a council with a large Lib Dem contingent, I’m expecting them to be quite hard hit, losing as many as half of their councillors with many of their seats falling to the SNP and a few to Labour. A couple of the Tories and Independents look like they might be easily dislodged, too. I predict that the SNP will end up with a seat share in the low 30’s whilst Labour pick up a few seats to take them to the high 20’s.

Rural Councils

Let’s start with the easy ones. Both Shetland Islands Council and Orkney Islands Council currently lack party councillors, with 22 and 21 Independents respectively. This year, the SNP are the only major party standing candidates in these councils with 2 in Shetland and 4 in Orkney. I think chances are good the SNP might pick up at least one councillor in both councils, but obviously the councils will remain under Independent control.

The Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (Western Isles) is also dominated by Independents, though both Labour and the SNP have representation on the council with 2 and 4 of the 31 seats. I think the SNP might manage to get a couple more councillors elected, but again, the Western Isles are going to remain dominated by Independents.

Highland Council is another largely Independent council, though they do not have a majority there – there are a total of 35 Independents out of the 80 councillors in total. The Lib Dems and the SNP have significant representation with 21 and 17 councillors, whilst Labour have 7. Once again, I’m expecting the Lib Dems to shed a good number of their councillors, many of whom are going to go straight to bolstering the SNP ranks on the council. A few Independents may also go and Labour and the Tories may pick up a seat or two but I think most of the movement will be from Lib Dem to SNP. I’m also hopeful that the Greens will manage a councillor somewhere, as they won over 5% of the votes at the last election – though with only four candidates standing, that may be a vain hope.

Moray Council’s 26 seats also sit largely in the hands of Independents, who hold 12. The SNP hold 9 with the Tories and Labour only having 3 and 2 respectively. The 9 the SNP won represent their entire slate of candidates – this time around they are standing 16. The SNP are so strong in Moray I predict that they will take a majority, getting 14 or 15 of their 16 councillors elected, largely at the expense of the Independent group.

Argyll & Bute Council is the last council in the Highlands and Islands area and, like the others, has a strong Independent presence with 16 of the 36 seats. The SNP form the largest party grouping with 10, whilst the Lib Dems and Tories have 7 and 3. SNP support in the council area increased a fair bit between 2007 and 2011, so I think they will pick up a good few more seats. As you might expect, most of those will probably come from Lib Dem losses, but we might see a couple of the Independents go too – enough that the SNP will be the largest grouping in the council.

The Scottish Borders Council has 34 seats. The largest grouping are the Tories with 11 seats, followed by the Lib Dems and the SNP on 10 and 6. There are 5 Independents and the Borders Party is represented by 2 councillors. The Borders party may muddy the waters a bit, but I expect that the SNP will pick up a few councillors at the Lib Dems expense – the Borders are quite a strong Lib Dem area, so I don’t anticipate a complete collapse. I predict that the Tories will hold onto their status as largest party, though the SNP might be uncomfortably close.

Neighbouring Dumfries & Galloway Council is another Tory stronghold, with 18 of the 47 seats. Labour are next with 14 seats, the SNP have 10, the Lib Dems have 3 and there are 2 Independents. The Lib Dems may be reduced to a single representative and the Tories may shed a few seats with both Labour and the SNP picking them up. The Tories will likely remain the largest party though I don’t think Labour will be very far off.

Angus Council’s 29 seats used to be dominated by the SNP until they were pushed out by an “everyone but the SNP” alliance consisting of 6 Independents, 5 Tories, 3 Lib Dems and 2 Labour councillors. This time around, I think the SNP will manage to win a majority – probably by poaching two of the Lib Dem seats and perhaps knocking one of the Independents out too.

Clackmannanshire Council, or the Wee County, has 18 seats. Labour and the SNP dominate with 8 and 7 councillors respectively, with a single Lib Dem, Tory and Independent making up the numbers. The Lib Dem is likely to lose their seat, but the other two lone councillors look much more secure. There are two wards where Labour’s second councillor is looking uncomfortably close to being beaten by an SNP candidate and I predict that is what will happen, with the SNP creeping to a narrow majority of 10 seats.

Last but certainly not least are Aberdeenshire Council’s 68 seats. Though the SNP won a significant lead in First Preferences in 2007, the Lib Dems won 24 seats to their 22. There are 14 Tories and 8 Independents, but surprisingly no Labour councillors. This time around, the Lib Dems are only standing 21 candidates so have forfeited three seats. I expect they will lose a good few more to the SNP on top of these, which should push the SNP into the 30’s, though they’ll still need support from another party to form an administration.

Short Council Predictions

  Pale Party Colour; Plurality – 21 councils 
Bold Party Colour; Majority – 10 councils
Blended Party Colours; 2 party tie – 1 council

1. Aberdeen City Council
   • SNP; plurality
   • Labour; small gains
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Greens; may make small gains
   • Independents; little to no change
2. Aberdeenshire Council
   • SNP; plurality
   • Labour; none
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; little to no change
3. Angus Council
   • SNP; majority
   • Labour; little to no change
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; small losses.
4. Argyll & Bute Council
   • SNP; plurality
   • Labour; none
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; small losses
5. Clackmannanshire Council
   • SNP; majority
   • Labour; small losses
   • Lib Dems; lose all
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; little to no change
6. Dumfries & Galloway
   • SNP; small gains
   • Labour; small gains
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; plurality
   • Independents; little to no change
7. Dundee City Council
   • SNP; majority
   • Labour; little to no change
   • Lib Dems; lose all
   • Tories; small losses
   • Independents; may lose seat
8. East Ayrshire Council
   • SNP; plurality
   • Labour; small losses
   • Lib Dems; none
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; little to no change
9. East Dunbartonshire Council
   • SNP; no change, may win popular vote
   • Labour; plurality
   • Lib Dems; significant losses
   • Tories; little to no change
   • Independents; little to no change
10. East Lothian Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small gains
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
11. East Renfrewshire Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; little to no change
    • Lib Dems; lose all
    • Tories; plurality
    • Independents; little to no change
12. City of Edinburgh Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small gains
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Greens; small gains
      • Labour led administration likely
13. Falkirk Council
    • SNP; majority
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
14. Fife Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small gains
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; small losses
    • Independents; small losses
15. Glasgow City Council
    • SNP; significant gains
    • Labour; plurality
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Greens; small gains
      • SNP led administration likely
16. Highland Council
    • SNP; significant gains
    • Labour; little to no change
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; small gains
    • Independents; plurality
    • Greens; may win a seat
17. Inverclyde Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; plurality
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
18. Midlothian Council
    • SNP; half seats, win popular vote
    • Labour; half seats
    • Lib Dems; lose all
    • Tories; none
19. Moray Council
    • SNP; majority
    • Labour; little to no change
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; small losses
20. Comhairle nan Eilean Siar
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; little to no change
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; none
    • Independents; plurality
21. North Ayrshire Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; lose all
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
22. North Lanarkshire Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; majority
    • Lib Dems; lose all
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
23. Orkney Islands Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; none
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; none
    • Independents; plurality
24. Perth & Kinross Council
    • SNP; majority
    • Labour; little to no change
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; small losses
25. Renfrewshire Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; little to no change
26. Scottish Borders Council
    • SNP; significant gains
    • Labour; none
    • Lib Dems; significant losses
    • Tories; plurality
    • Independents; little to no change
    • Borders Party; little to no change
27. Shetland Islands Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; none
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; none
    • Independents; plurality
28. South Ayrshire Council
    • SNP; small gains
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; plurality
    • Independents; little to no change
29. South Lanarkshire Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; small losses
    • Tories; small losses
    • Independents; little to no change
30. Stirling Council
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; lose all
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Greens; may gain a councillor
31. West Dunbartonshire
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; none
    • Independents; little to no change
    • SSP; little to no change
32. West Lothian
    • SNP; plurality
    • Labour; small losses
    • Lib Dems; none
    • Tories; little to no change
    • Independents; little to no change
    • Action to Save St John’s Hospital; little to no change

Party Result Recaps

1. Scottish National Party
   • The SNP should make significant gains in these elections.
   • Majority in 6 councils – Angus, Clackmannanshire, Dundee, Falkirk, Moray and Perth & Kinross.
   • Plurality in 13 councils – Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Lothian, City of Edinburgh, Fife, North Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, Stirling, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian
   • Equal seat share but win popular vote in 1 council – Midlothian.
   • Less seats but win popular vote in 1 council – East Dunbartonshire.
   • Largest organised party in all 4 Independent dominated councils – Highland, Na h-Eileanan Siar, Orkney and Shetland.
2. Labour Party
   • The Labour party will have a mixed election, making small gains in some places and small losses elsewhere. On the whole, they should not lose too many seats.
   • Majority in 1 council – North Lanarkshire.
   • Plurality in 3 councils – East Dunbartonshire, Glasgow and Inverclyde.
   • Equal seat share in 1 council – Midlothian.
3. Conservative and Unionist Party
   • The Tories are unlikely to see much movement – may lose a seat or two here and gain a seat or two there. On the whole, their losses may be in single digits.
   • Plurality in 4 councils – Borders, Dumfries & Galloway, East Renfrewshire and South Ayrshire.
4. Liberal Democrats
   • The Lib Dems are likely to see significant losses in this election – local elections they may be, people will still feel utterly betrayed by the Lib Dems and their vote has atrophied over the past two years.
   • The Lib Dems will no longer have a plurality in any council.
5. Scottish Green Party
   • The Greens will always find it hard to make any headway against the major parties, even under the Single Transferrable Vote system, but I think the Greens may gain a few extra seats this election.
   • The Greens are too small to have a plurality on any council, but may form part of a governing coalition in Glasgow.

The Nations within Spain

There are many separatist movements within the Spanish nations, but the strongest are those in the Basque Country and Catalonia. The Catalan Independence movement in particular is often of interest to pro-Independence Scots, and vice versa, as both have made significant leaps in recent years. In fact the polling in Catalonia in recent years has been remarkably similar to what we currently see in Scotland right up until about a couple of years ago, when Independence opinion began to spike.

You can find a long list of polls by different organisations on this Wikipedia page, but I’ve selected a few to show how opinion currently stands and how it has changed from a selection of the polls by the Centre d’Estudis d’Opinió (CEO). CEO runs multiple polls over the course of each year, and a handy (Catalan Language) chart can be found under the numbers, but I’ve produced a simplified version here using the first poll from each year. (I’m no Peat Worrier, but I felt like a little bit of charting…)

When offered multiple options, we can see that in recent years Catalan opinion has converged in the same way it has in Scotland – a very close three way split between Independence, more powers (confederation in Catalonia’s case) and the status quo. There’s also a small hard-line group that want to see Catalonia reduced to a “region” rather than a “nation” within Spain – the closest Scottish equivalent would be the fringe in favour of abolishing the Scottish Parliament. It can be seen that support for the status quo has dropped quite dramatically since 2010 – from 38.2% to 27.8%, whilst support for Independence has increased from 19.4% to 29.0%, putting Independence ahead of the status quo for the first time since these polls began.

Just like in Scotland, a clear majority of the population favour increasing the powers available to Catalonia – so how would they vote in a single question Independence referendum? In tandem with it’s last three polls, CEO has asked exactly that question.

Interestingly this poll counted the number of people who would abstain from the vote – I don’t know how exactly the poll was conducted, so abstainers could simply be counted as anyone who did not say they would definitely vote, or they may actually be people who have stated their intention not to vote at all. Whatever the case, we can weed them out for a more accurate picture of how the actual result might look if a referendum was held;

With the abstentions and the like removed, we’re left with an overwhelming opinion in favour of Independence – almost 2:1. It seems that when faced with a single question, a large number of people who would otherwise vote in favour of a confederal arrangement instead plump for Independence – more change than desired is perhaps preferable to no change at all to such people. Yet in a potentially worrying precedent for our friends on the Pro-Union side of the debate, this has been a sudden increase – according to some of the other polls on the page, which presented “Yes/No/Other” options to respondents, until about mid 2010 Independence sentiment was sitting in the 30’s whilst Union sentiment sat comfortable in the 40’s. Again, these figures are extraordinarily similar to what we are seeing in Scotland – two years before a referendum!

For all the similarities between our nations and the astonishing parallel in opinion polling, there are also significant differences that mean we should be wary of drawing unqualified comparisons. For example, the linguistic situation (language being an extremely important aspect of culture) in Catalonia is far better than here in Scotland. Whilst very few Scots can speak Gaelic and almost none of us speak the Scots language in it’s “pure” form anymore, 5.7 million of the 7.8 million people in Catalonia can speak Catalan – and a further 800,000 can understand the language, something that no doubt helps reinforce independentist sentiment.

Politically, the situation is almost completely different. In the UK, the UK Government opposes Independence but accepts the Scottish people’s right to decide the matter for themselves via a referendum. In Spain, though it recognised the right to internal self-determination decades before the UK, the constitution explicitly states that the country is “indivisible” and so central government will not – in fact, cannot – allow an Independence referendum to be held in Catalonia or anywhere else. In spite of this, since 2009 informal referendums have been held all over Catalonia at municipality level. Though turnout has been low and they have been mostly ignored by pro-Union voters, they will have kept the issue high on the agenda. In addition, in June 2010 the Constitutional Court of Spain rewrote or otherwise altered a number of the articles of Catalonia’s 2006 Statute of Autonomy which has perhaps acted as a catalyst for the rising support for Independence.

Words of caution aside, Catalonia does present a heartening example for Pro-Independence campaigners – it shows that, if the situation is just right, opinion can shift extremely rapidly and by significant amounts.

With regards to the SNP and their policy on the monarchy, there are two debates to be had. First of all, should their stated policy of retaining the Queen as Head of State after Independence be used as an argument against Independence? As far as I’m concerned, no. I am all for a republic as a matter of principle, but in practice the monarch has little real political power. As many will point out, countries like Canada or Jamaica are no less Independent despite having the Queen as their head of state. So if it gets more people on board with Independence, then I’ve no huge objection to this policy.

Let’s not forget that the Queen is by this point a very old lady – even if she matches her mother’s extraordinary lifespan, she’ll only be around until 2028. The current Prime Ministers of both Jamaica and Australia have made it clear they believe the death of the Queen to be an appropriate time for their countries to become republic. If we look across the sea to our Celtic brethren in Ireland, we see that retention of the monarchy is not eternal. It took from becoming a dominion in 1922 to a new constitution in 1937 for the monarch to be stripped of most of their roles – and until 1948 for Ireland to explicitly declare itself a republic. I see no real reason why Scotland shouldn’t be similar – maintaining the monarchy for a time to smooth the transition to Independence then becoming a republic when auld Lizzie dies. As I’ve said many a time, I’d rather have an Independent Kingdom of Scotland than a United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Change doesn’t need to happen in one big lump – it can happen as a process too, and there’s no point rejecting the process in the vague hopes of getting a big lump of it!

The other debate, which is much more serious, is whether it was right for the SNP to change policy from “holding a referendum on the issue” to “we’ll keep the Queen.” I have to say no. Whilst I do support the policy on the grounds of making Independence easier, it’s a policy change that appears to have been decided unilaterally by Alex Salmond without any debate within the party. That is not right, nor is it healthy. With Independence so close, the SNP has basically closed ranks and suppressed any dissent in the hopes of avoiding any public divisions that may threaten their chances of winning the referendum. That’s fine in itself, the SNP as a party is all about internal compromise, but we should have had some proper debate before we compromised on this matter.

On the subject of the Northern Isles, I already talked a little bit about their situation when discussing the problem with partition. I have no problem with self-determination for the Northern Isles and for the most part I think other supporters of Scottish Independence feel the same – though there are perhaps a few that are comically “English” in their reaction, in that they have reacted much like many English people have to Scottish Independence, which is to ask rather dejectedly “You want to leave us? But… but why?” The problem I have is that every time the self-determination of the Northern Isles comes up the first thing that any Unionist says is “what if they want to stay part of the UK?”

The argument is that Orkney and Shetland feel distant from the Government in Edinburgh who they feel often neglect their needs. That’s a perfectly legitimate thing to say. But if they aren’t keen on Edinburgh because it’s distant, how can the even more distant and more self absorbed London be any better at governing them? In Holyrood, they have 2 MSPs out of 129 (in my preference for an expanded Independent Parliament, that would be 2 out of 160). In Westminster, if they were lucky enough to get their own individual seats, they would have 2 MPs out of 550. I find it very hard to believe that many islanders would rather this was the case. Westminster might appear to offer a nice deal on extra powers should these isles stay in the Union, but is anyone stupid enough to think that they want them for any more than their oil? It’s certainly not because of any real kinship with the islanders!

We need to remember the question that is going to be asked of people across Scotland is not “do you want your little part of Scotland to become Independent” but “Do you agree Scotland should be an independent country?” We cannot, and should not, partition the country based on the result of an Independence referendum.

It’s also daft to suggest that without their share of the oil, the case for Independence is fatally undermined. As stated in the Guardian article, around a quarter of current Scottish Oil Revenues come from the fields near Orkney and Shetland. That’s by no means a deathblow for Independence – it just means we will not be quite as well off as we otherwise would, we’d still be perfectly viable as a country.

Some of the oil fields in the North Sea – I added the Red Line to show the approximate maritime border between Scotland and England, and the Blue line is a very rough guess at a Scotland – Northern Isles border.

On the other hand, suggestions of a renegotiated relationship between Scotland and the Isles present an idea well worth pursuing. As I said in my previous article, the Northern Isles do indeed have a strong claim to self-determination. I support an increase in responsibilities for all local authorities, but for Orkney and Shetland in particular I believe that their councils should receive an extension in their powers to include areas that would otherwise be under national government such as healthcare.

Something I think would be a good idea is setting up an “oil grant” for the islands that would see them receiving a certain amount of the oil revenues every year, on top of the budget for their local authorities. At least whilst oil revenues are still quite high, perhaps something along the lines of £500 per head of the population – which would work out at approximately £10 million for Orkney and £11 million for Shetland – could be made available each year. The grant could be made with a condition that at least a quarter of it be saved or invested to provide the isles with a long-term “oil legacy” for long beyond the oil running out, with the rest being available for use in community projects, in schemes to boost tourism to the isles and so on. This could operate in a manner similar to the existing Shetland Charitable Trust.

Should the development of tidal power really take off around Orkney, I would expect such grants from central government to continue from that revenue source. Indeed, the idea of “community payback” where the rural communities that will be at the heart of Scotland’s renewable revolution receive a share of the revenues is something that should become a core government policy in an Independent Scotland.

On the whole, I think that these two things have a bit of a desperate feel to them when brought up by Unionist politicians. That’s not to say they should be dismissed out of hand as scaremongering or mischief making – such arguments do help to identify areas where real debate needs to occur, and we need to approach them in a mature way.

I might as well ask him what the tax rates will be in the UK in the year 2050, or what military policy he’d like us to pursue when it turns out that wee auld Luxembourg wants to take over the world in the year 3164, or even how they intend to tackle an invasion by a highly advanced alien race. The answer is of course that policy – in any area – will be set by the government of the day, as elected by the people, to meet the needs of the country at that time. We cannot expect to be given a detailed breakdown of everything that will happen between now and eternity – but at times it seems that is exactly what Unionist politicians want. The way they go on, you could be forgiven for thinking that part of the SNP’s plans for Independence include abolishing elections and establishing one party rule that will follow an exact set of policy guidelines set out in 2012!

Of course there are questions that need to be asked and answered about Independence, but they will almost always come down to – and this is somewhat frustrating for both sides – “policy in this area will be what the Scottish people vote for.” At best, all any party can do is express what their preference would be. Depending on public support for certain things, policy can be made slightly more solid – for example, few Scots would support privatisation of the NHS and so it’s relatively safe to say that in an independent Scotland we will retain a publically owned health service. On the other hand, it’s much less clear what currency Scots would like to use should we become Independent – hence, the best we can do at the moment is “well, we’d initially use Sterling.” It’s then valid to ask how we would do that for that initial period, but not to try and make out that’s the end of the matter and there couldn’t possibly be any further policy development from future governments.

Something I’m finding problematic is that the SNP are kind of playing along with Moore’s game. They often make policy announcements along the lines of “In an Independent Scotland, this will be what happens” whether that’s retention of the Monarchy or a cut to corporation tax. Perhaps they are doing so because they don’t want to appear weak on any issue – but I don’t think it’s really helping, as it just gives opponents an easy target to slate. They need to start making it clear – “This is what our policy is for day 1 of Independence, but anything beyond that will be decided by the people of Scotland in parliamentary elections.” Not only do they need to make that clear, they have to emphasise how that is the beauty of Independence – it will allow Scots to make these decisions for themselves rather than have it decided for them by a distant Government they have relatively little say in.

On the Unionist side, though it may seem naive to expect them to abandon such a rich line of attack, they need to start being a bit more mature and stop trying to mislead voters. To basically say that “the SNP say they will do this, ergo you should not support Independence even if you would otherwise agree with it” is ridiculous. If, to take a personal example, you are uncomfortable with the SNP’s current intention to cut corporation tax, you can vote for another party such as the Greens post Independence. Disagreeing with an aspect of the SNP’s vision for Independence does not require you to vote against Independence.

Indeed, for all that they may support the Union and cannot really be expected to formulate their own policies for Independence right now, I do not for one second think that many Unionist politicians who currently serve Scotland are going to suddenly stop wanting to do so should we vote for Independence. They may realign their parties to greater or lesser degrees, but they will still be there, they will still care about doing what they think is best for the country, they will still be standing for election and Scots will still be able to vote for the party they feel best represents their views.

In short, no concrete policy for an Independent Scotland can possibly be set at this point – at best, all we can get is “this is what we want the situation to be on day 1.” To try and suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

Since the introduction of civil partnerships in the UK – which grant pretty much the same rights as marriage – a common response to calls for marriage equality, heard even from those who are otherwise very supportive of equality, is that they don’t see what the point is in getting all worked up about marriage as “it’s only a word.” As far as I’m concerned, the reason we hear this argument is that there’s no such physical thing as “marriage.” You can’t touch a marriage, you can’t visit it, you can’t hear it. Since you can’t in any way sense it, you can’t imagine how not being able to have it could be in any way hurtful – it’s just a concept. But it’s a very important concept, and one that’s taken on the status of an “institution.” In the linked article, you can find loads of other examples of “institutions.” Universities. Hospitals. Courts. Factories.

Now imagine – what if LGBT people had to have all their own institutions? What if we had to learn somewhere that was equivalent to but not legally allowed to be called a university? To be treated in different hospital-analogues? Be tried in something comparable to a court? Work in our own quasi-factories? Even if these things were absolutely identical in terms of quality, would that be fair? Imagine going to a job interview and not being legally able to say you had went to University, because as an LGBT person you had went to an LGBT only degree awarding institution. Imagine being involved in a serious accident with a family member or a friend, and waking up in an LGBT only medical facility where the staff had no idea what had happened to that person and may find it difficult to find out? Of course, these are some very drastic comparisons and it’s fortunate that’s not the situation that we’re in – but in principle, it’s the exact same thing. It’s excluding a group of people from the norm just because they are in some way different – it doesn’t feel good and it isn’t right.

When they did this sort of thing in the US and (though in reverse, with the minority oppressing the majority) in South Africa it was called “segregation” or “apartheid” and the rest of the world found it utterly repugnant. Again I’m not saying it’s the same in terms of practice – and we’re very fortunate for that – but it is indeed the same principle. It’s excluding perfectly normal people from something the rest of society enjoys simply because of something which has yet to be proven is anything other than an accident of birth. Marriage may well only be a word to those who already have that right, but for those of us that don’t it’s an extremely important institution that we’re being unfairly excluded from for no justifiable reason.

Another common argument, primarily from those who are opposed and religious, is that marriage is for the sole purpose of procreation, and that since people of the same sex physically cannot procreate they cannot get married. This is of course nonsense as it ignores the fact that people who are infertile or who are past childbearing age are able to get married without facing any legal impediment. That they may have had, at one time, the ability to bear children is surely irrelevant – if marriage is about bearing children, then you either have to do so or you can’t get married.

Yet another has it that since LGBT people are a minority, there isn’t much point anyway – and most of these point to a figure of 2% of the population being gay. They don’t often point out that figure may be as high as 10 or even 15%. As yet, no one has been able to identify a genetic marker for alternate sexualities, and since there is still a significant social stigma against being gay (see, for example, the fear and anger many straight men express if mistakenly identified as gay) it would likely go unreported in even the most anonymous of polls as people deny it to themselves. But since they use the 2%, a comparison may be drawn with redheads. They make up approximately 1-2% of the world population and are rendered distinctive by natural means – imagine for a second that redheads were legally discriminated against. That would seem completely ridiculous, no? If anything, it’s less ridiculous than discriminating against LGBT people – you can at least tell a redhead at a glance, but you can’t do the same for an LGBT person (we don’t all conform to stereotype – a majority probably don’t.)

The final, and perhaps most insidious, is that to allow equal marriage would “redefine an institution that has been constant for millennia.” Complete crap. Marriage has been many different things to many different cultures in many different eras. It’s been about cementing the authority of a ruling family, about obtaining property, wealth or land from your spouse, about entering into a holy sacrament before god(s), about carrying on the family name. Only very, very recently has it become primarily about love.

Today, very few people would get married if they did not love their potential spouse – yet as little as 200, perhaps even 100 years ago, the idea of marrying primarily for love would have been seen as laughable. What practical reason could there have been for marrying solely for love? Let’s not forget, it may be so called “gay” marriage that’s on the agenda today, but once it would have been unthinkable and often illegal for someone to marry below their station, or to marry someone who belonged to a different religion or to a different ethnicity. Today, we quite rightly find those ideas disgusting – and I hope that one day, people will look back at a time when two people of the same gender were banned from marrying with the same disgust.

Humanity has been redefining marriage as it felt necessary for as long as marriage has existed. Marriage has evolved, just like our languages, our cultures, our borders and our religions. In the modern, Western world, we marry because we love our partner and want to express that commitment in a way that is legally and socially recognised. To allow equal marriage might well redefine marriage, but it will be a very minor redefinition – it will no longer be between a man and a woman that love each other, but between two people who love each other. I really don’t see what could possibly be dangerous or offensive about that, or indeed, what could be more beautiful than two people that are deeply in love.

By this point in the day, there’s little else I can say that hasn’t been said already about the recently reported allegations of domestic abuse suffered by three (bloody hell) ex-wives of Dunfermline MSP Bill Walker. We already knew he was a nasty homophobe when last year he said “… anything that puts homosexual marriages as any way equal to male-female marriages is just not right.” but this revelation really leaves Bill Walker with one one option – to resign. Domestic abuse is a serious problem – one that anyone can be the victim of, be the male or female, gay or straight, old or young – that demands a zero-tolerance approach whenever it rears it’s ugly head.

I’m glad the SNP acted quickly in suspending him from the party, but should these allegations turn out to be true – and it seems likely they are – then he simply is not fit for public office and must vacate his seat. For that matter, so must Eric Joyce, the Labour MP for Falkirk who battered his parliamentary colleagues and had an inappropriate relationship with a 17 year old girl. Being a parliamentarian should not excuse a person bad behaviour. On the contrary, we should expect an even higher standard of behaviour from our politicians – how can they presume to lay down laws dictating how we are to live our lives if they can seemingly get away with anything short of murder?

If we are to see by-elections, they will be of even more importance and be even closer fought than would normally be the case. Though Labour are sitting on a tidy majority in Falkirk and a resignation in disgrace from a government MSP with a slim majority in Dunfermline, they are suffering their worst poll ratings for decades at around half that of the SNP. The most recent poll (I believe it’s the most recent anyway!) on voting intentions had the SNP on 49% to Labour’s 23%. If Walker resigns promptly the SNP may manage to hold onto their support in Dunfermline through decisive action, whilst the Joyce situation has dragged on long enough it might prove damaging enough that Labour lose the seat.

I’d also expect to see these by-elections become a sort of mini “referendum on the referendum.” The SNP would, at the very least, use such a by-election as a means of demonstrating public support for their approach to the referendum – and may even go so far as to claim any win as being proof of support for Independence. The Unionist parties would probably act in a similar manner, claiming any win as a sign of unwavering support for the UK. All parties might be keen to avoid by-elections for exactly that reason – it would represent a significant blow to their respective campaigns at this early stage were they to lose.

Unfortunately, I don’t think a Falkirk by-election is very likely – Joyce seems determined to cling on until 2015 whilst Lamont ties herself in knots over the issue, and one Labour source stated they would rather “have a nutter than a Nat” in the seat. Dunfermline may be more likely given the severity of the allegations against Walker, but that may depend on how willing he and the SNP are to listen to their members. I hope he makes the right choice. To adapt Labour’s own phrase, I’d rather not have a Nat than have a nutter.