THE SNP would be the largest party in the Scottish Parliament, and may be capable of blocking a joint Labour and Liberal Democrat coalition, according to a new analysis of the latest Herald/System Three poll.
It provoked heated political debate yesterday after showing the SNP had opened up a five-point lead over Labour in voting intentions for the Scottish Parliament a year from now. The new study of the effect of the second, regional votes will raise the temperature further.
Scottish Office sources, meanwhile, last night ridiculed the notion that a proposal to bring forward the opening of the Parliament by six months was a panic measure to draw attention away from Labour's slide to 36% in The Herald poll of voting intentions for next year.
Scottish Secretary Donald Dewar announced at Westminster that he was consulting with political opponents about the most appropriate vesting day for the Parliament. At first, January 2000 had been proposed, with the body sitting for several months as a shadow authority before assuming power.
He made clear yesterday the choice now lay between September or October next year, or July.
''Our initial view is that July is preferable,'' he wrote to Opposition party leaders. ''It would keep to a minimum the time during which a Parliament and executive were in existence but had little power.''
But who will form that executive? The assumption has always been that Labour, either alone, or comfortably in coalition with the Liberal Democrats, would form the new Scottish Government, with Mr Dewar a racing certainty as First Minister.
This is suddenly less inevitable, following the trend in recent Herald polls, culminating in a 41% to 36% lead by the SNP over Labour.
The Herald estimated this would produce a breakdown in terms of seats of 53 for Labour and 52 for the SNP, with the Conservative and Scottish Liberal Democrats taking around 12 each.
However, Malcolm Dickson, Strathclyde University politics lecturer, has factored into the original findings the impact of people casting their second, regional list vote differently from the initial first-past-the-post constituency vote.
The results are dramatic: the benefits tend to go towards those parties unfairly dealt with by the constituency vote, making Labour the main loser.
Mr Dickson estimated that, on the first ballot, with 36% of the share, Labour would get 42 seats; the SNP would gain 23 seats with 41%; the Conservatives none in spite of 11%; and the Lib Dems eight seats with 10%.
He has now overlaid that with the kind of second preference switch in voting identified by the weekend's ICM poll in Scotland on Sunday, to calculate that Labour's 31% share of regional list votes would bring an additional four seats.
The SNP, with 44%, would gain 31 additional members. The Lib Dems with 14% would gain an additional 12 seats, while the Tories would gain nine seats from their 10% of second preferences.
This would give Labour 46 of the 129 seats, and the Lib Dems 20: enough to gain an overall majority in coalition by just three seats.
The Conservatives would have nine seats while, with 54 seats, the SNP would be the largest single party, 11 seats short of an overall
Continued on Page 6
Continued from Page 1
majority and just two gains short of denying a Lab/Lib-Dem working majority. Evidence that around 12% of voters will exercise their second preference differently comes not just from the weekend's ICM poll, but from some internal party canvassing.
SNP constitutional spokesman George Reid, who contested Ochil a year ago and hopes to do so again a year from now, said his local canvassing effort had now covered 2200 voters, many of these questioned on the telephone by party volunteers in London using their new Alpha 4 database.
They were now clear that around 12% of voters were considering using their second preference differently and the SNP would be a key beneficiary of this.
He barely needs it: according to Malcolm Dickson, Ochil would be the SNP's first gain, followed by Caithness; Inverness, Ross and Skye; Argyll; Govan; Kilmarnock; Renfrew West; Dundee East; Western Isles; Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale; Aberdeen North; Edinburgh North and Leith; Linlithgow; Livingston; Midlothian; and Dumbarton.
Against the background of this potential onslaught on Labour, it was scarcely surprising there was a sceptical reaction to the Secretary of State's proposal yesterday to bring forward the vesting day of the Scottish Parliament, with opponents painting this as a manoeuvre to draw attention away from the implications of the recent poll.
Tory constitutional affairs spokesman Michael Ancram dismissed the move as a ''panic'' measure. ''The Labour Party is severely shaken and not surprisingly Labour is panicking. In my opinion, they have lost control of the devolution agenda,'' he told a Westminster news conference.
Downing Street sources were dismissive of the poll. The Prime Minister's official spokesman said: ''I'm consistent in never responding to opinion polls, be they up or down. I'm equally consistent in saying that once people focus on elections to bodies that have real power, then they may give very different answers.''
Scottish Tories said they would reject the plan to advance the starting date of the Parliament if it was merely ''a quickfire suggestion inspired by panic'', but promised to give it full consideration.
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Jim Wallace welcomed the move, however, as did the other Constitutional Convention partners, the STUC. Mr Wallace said it made no sense for MSPs to twiddle their thumbs for six months. ''If we are to maintain momentum, it makes sense that the Parliament gets going as soon as is efficiently possible.''
Campbell Christie of the STUC said the promise to get the Parliament up and running within three weeks of next May's election was a tremendous achievement by Donald Dewar, and he made another pitch for the parties to do all they could to ensure gender equality at Holyrood.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article