Would Snp Mps Elected On Thursday Be Less Legitimate Than An Others?

[sandyRoe]

There's talk that a Labour government supported by them wouldn't be acceptable to the Tories or their press baron supporters.

[Gromit]

No Deskdiary, you were correct with UK.

10% of the population always decide the election. Most of the seats do not change Party.

[mikey4444]

Gromit is right here...and that 10% may very well be Scottish, from Scotland, which is still part of the UK the last time I looked !

[naomi24]

Krom, At a time when the country is clearly recovering well from the gross mismanagement of the Labour years, I don’t agree that “extremely destructive cuts are causing devastation in the rest of the country”. However, with a political party whose impetus revolves around only one section of the community, and one that only a small percentage of the electorate have the opportunity of electing or rejecting pulling the strings, the rest of the country will suffer. Labour voters - that includes you.

[ichkeria]

I am not a fan of the SNP to say the least but by what token will they be less legitimate than any other MPs?
If you're sitting up in the Isle of Lewis looking at the phalanx of Home Counties Tories in Westminster when there's one Tory MP in Scotland then such comments might seem bizarre.

[naomi24]

ichkeria , //by what token will they be less legitimate than any other MPs?//

As the rules stand, they won’t be – but the simple fact that the vast majority of the electorate will not have the opportunity to elect them or reject them, but will nevertheless find them wielding enormous influence in government, is questionable.

[ichkeria]

If they choose to support either Labour or Tory that is their business and perfectly legitimate unless I am missing something.
It would be unacceptable if they were actually in government of course, but they won't be

[naomi24]

I didn’t say it's not legitimate – I said that given the majority of the electorate will not have the opportunity to elect or reject them, their subsequent potential ability to wield enormous influence over the government is questionable.

[ichkeria]

That was what the question asked though
But the point about wielding influence over the government is valid from the point of view of their stance on the UK for example
Which is why the major parties won't have them in government
They are bound to have an influence in Parliament and by extension some of the government legislation as to whether it gets passed or not, but that is just tough!
It's a parliament of the United Kingdom, with its limited but nonetheless significant diversity
If they stood in non-Scottish seats no one would vote for them

[whiskeryron]

By definition S N P stands for Scottish National Party so as has been said the rest of the UK cannot vote for them but they are all still at the moment part of the UK & a recognised political party & so entitled to have MPs representing Scots in a UK parliament at Westminster.

[bhg481]

The only reason that the rest of the UK cannot vote for them is that they've not contested any seats south of the border. There's nothing to stop them, at future elections, putting up candidates anywhere in the UK - scary.

[Quizmonster]

Toleration and suffering are not synonymous, Kromovaracun.
Do you have any quibble with Mikey's response at 07.42 today...(quote) "Any candidate that wins a Westminster seat is just as legitimate as any other. End of story"?
The SNP is a legitimate party in the United Kingdom and its parliament and that's all that needs to be said.

[naomi24]

Ron, Of course they’re entitled to have MPs representing Scots in a UK parliament at Westminster. However, since few of us have had the opportunity to elect them or reject them, as ichkeria says, the fact that they could potentially wield influence over Westminster is tough. Appropriate word, that.

Whether or not the major parties will have them in government remains to be seen. Watch that space.

[whiskeryron]

Exiting 'innit

[naomi24]

Not sure exciting is the right word - I prefer 'daunting' - but I can't remember any election in the past carrying with it so many 'ifs, buts, and maybes' on the potential of the eventual outcome.

[Quizmonster]

Well, at least it makes a change from Cameron's "no ifs, no buts" claims last time!

[Toque]

In constitutional terms Scottish MPs are full and equal members of the House of Commons but in democratic terms there are question over their legitimacy caused by asymmetric devolution.

A Labour minority government that relied on SNP MPs would have legitimacy on UK/reserved matters but would lack democratic legitimacy (an English mandate) on English domestic legislation. This is essentially the West Lothian Question.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-postelection-shambles-looms-as-70-per-cent-of-voters-say-snp-should-not-be-able-to-veto-uk-government-policies-10227199.html

[steg]

I can't vote for Pliad Cymru, Sinn Fein, Ulster Unionists. Are they also not ligitimate?
There doesn't seem to be any uproar when the governments works with them

[ichkeria]

"A Labour minority government that relied on SNP MPs would have legitimacy on UK/reserved matters but would lack democratic legitimacy (an English mandate) on English domestic legislation. This is essentially the West Lothian Question.
"

I don't accept that at all. The "West Lothian question" I have always thought is a bit of a con. The parliament at Westminster is a national parliament of the UK. This issue can be sorted out only be federalising the UK, i.e. giving England its own Parliament, not moaning about "legitimacy". As long as the SNP are not secretly dealing with a government about issues related to breaking up the union - as they are not even federalists - then I cannot really see the problem

[maggiebee]

Running scared do you think steg?

[steg]

Fat cats can't run, they waddle like a duck mags