Why politics is more complicated than ever before

Macron’s supporters hope that the people of France will make different choices when they are confronted with electing their own Parliament, rather than the Europe-wide assembly.

But there is a second lesson from France. Which is that the contest under way there is a Parliamentary election. Not a Presidential one. Macron’s own tenure is not in jeopardy, for now.

We should bear that in mind when we contemplate the UK General Election.

It is a truism that, in practice, only Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer will enter Downing Street as PM when the contest is over.

In practice. Strictly, other parties who are contesting all or most seats could win. Technically, Ed Davey could be PM if sufficient voters are impressed by his policies or his aquatic manoeuvres.

Technically, Ed Davey could be PM (Image: free)

I know, I know, decidedly unlikely. But still we should contemplate the system which will generate our choice of the next Prime Minister. It is not Presidential, it is not head to head. It comprises a multitude of individual contests, in individual seats.

Which means that this election is much more than a binary choice. It is rather a game of multi-dimensional chess.

Over the course of this week, I have been chatting to senior figures from each of the principal parties. These conversations reminded me of the complexity of electoral politics, however much our politicians may occasionally seek to simplify matters.

For example, the Liberal Democrats are running nationwide campaigns, both in Scotland and across the wider UK. Hence Mr Davey’s frequent immersion in water. Hence Alex Cole Hamilton’s self-proclaimed permanent smile, seeking to woo voters.

But, in practice, both in England and Scotland, they are fighting a series of local constituency battles, hoping thereby to accumulate a significant and potentially influential presence in the Commons.

In Scotland, they are defending four constituencies – although boundary changes suggest that two of those seats might notionally be regarded now as belonging to their rivals.

Their hope, though, is that they will hold on to all four – and perhaps add two others. While obviously aiming for more, they would count that a good night.

Consider the Conservatives. They are fighting an entirely different contest in Scotland from the campaign being pursued by Rishi Sunak.

Read more by Brian Taylor

Even Douglas Ross knows dumping a sick MP is not a good look

Election: Forget the fog of comfort. This vote involves tough choices

The PM knows he is hampered by history. He knows that, when voters hear him, they also catch echoes of disquiet and discord attaching to his predecessors.

And so, launching his manifesto, Mr Sunak cited umpteen Tory Ministers from the past – and Prime Ministers back to Thatcher and even Macmillan.

There was a passing nod to “Boris” – no surname deployed – in relation to Ukraine. But not a mention of Liz Truss. No doubt shortage of time prevented him from dwelling upon her brief but startling tenure.

But his political target at all times is, understandably, Labour – while seeking to play down the threat posed by Reform UK. However, in Scotland, the story is somewhat different. Douglas Ross, for now the Scottish Tory leader, says he is in a straight fight with the SNP.

He hopes to polarise the discourse in Scotland – for or against the Union – and thereby gather votes which might, otherwise, go to rival parties.

And the SNP? In this multi-dimensional chess game, they require to essay what is known as a fork: that is, simultaneously targeting more than one piece on the other side.

A tricky endeavour. They say Scotland and the wider UK want to dispense with the Tories. Specifically, they say the SNP are best placed to unseat Tories from the seats they held in Scotland.

But they fear that the drive to defeat the Tories could also catch the SNP in the backwash – if people conclude that they want to join the apparent mood to replace the Conservatives with Labour.

Hence, Labour also comes under fire from the SNP. At Holyrood this week, John Swinney reiterated his claim that Labour fiscal constraint would simply lead to a new version of austerity, with implications for Scottish spending.

Privately, SNP canvassers acknowledge the problem they face. They say that some supporters of independence appear ready to vote Labour in order to “kick out the Tories”.

John Swinney isn't standing but is a key player in election (Image: free)

But it was put to me that this conclusion is transactional rather than ideological. That voters could still be prised away from Labour – and back to the SNP. They insist Mr Swinney is going down well on the doorsteps.

If Rishi Sunak found no time to mention Liz Truss, the opposite was true at the Labour manifesto launch. Sir Keir Starmer sought to contrast his approach – characterised as steady and stable – with the brief Truss inter-regnum.

His number one priority, he said, was economic growth and wealth creation. His number one target, of course, remains ousting the Conservatives from office.

However, in Scotland, if Labour is to take seats, it will be from the SNP. There are high hopes. One experienced campaigner told me that canvassing for Labour these days was “like taking a bath in warm bubbles.” A sharp contrast from previous years.

Labour calculates that independence is relatively far down the list of doorstep priorities – not least because even those who want to end the Union reckon it is unlikely to happen in the immediate future.

Hence the appeal to independence supporters to lend their vote to Labour in order to remove the Conservatives.

Labour’s Anas Sarwar resolutely rejects the prospect of continuing austerity under his party. But, again privately, there are concerns that the party’s growth strategy may not produce swift returns.

One senior figure said they would have to show definite, early gains for Scotland. Hence the focus on higher wages for the low paid.

The SNP and Labour also contest each other over which party would best represent Scotland at Westminster, presuming a new government is in place. Subtle gambits indeed.