[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I'm still stuck on knowing where to stand.

A good representation of Scottish Nationalism is important for Scotland, even if it's not for independence, that buffer of... err... "Scotland First" has been a life-saver on many issues north of the border.

However, I do think the emboldened SNP need reigned in a little for obvious reasons.

What I can't decide is whether it's better to have:

1) A non-SNP Scottish branch of Labour in Holyrood, with a strong SNP presence down in London.

or

2) SNP still dominating in Edinburgh but a reduced SNP (and increased Scottish Labour) presence in London.


I'm leaning slightly towards option 2 because with (presumably, lol who knows) a Labour Westminster government... Scottish Labour MP's stirring the pot down on London with same-party colleagues might be better than the "loudness" of 40+ SNP seats.

I'd also be wary of too many Labour (or really, too many non-SNP) MSP's in Edinburgh because Labour controlling both is inevitably going to result in a weakness when it comes to the possibility of Scottish decisions slowly shuffling south.

I'd never advise but I think you're looking at the more appropriate option.

I don't think the SNP have been bad in Holyrood.
If I was in Scotland then I could be persuaded by them to support them.

Westminster as you say, especially IF Labour win and as yet we don't know if it could be a moderate or big majority IF they do win.
So Labour MPs from Scotland would more likely get better for Scotland than SNP ones at Westminster.

I wish you good luck in whatever you decide SB.