Ruling out a deal with the SNP would be disastrous for Labour – and the union

Scottish independence is now more likely than it was a year ago. This seems amazing given that in the intervening year we have had the Scottish referendum. But that’s where the politics of negativity and division – on both sides – have left us. And now there is a proposition on the table that Labour should go beyond ruling out a coalition with the SNP and rule out any sort of parliamentary deal as well. A wedge could be about to be inserted on the border between England and Scotland (or somewhere slightly north of that)- and not only Labour’s chances of forming a Government but, ultimately, the union itself is at risk.

There are a number of fundamental dividing lines between Labour and the SNP. Of course, independence is the obvious one. There is also the replacement of Trident. And Labour is arguing forcibly against full fiscal autonomy. If the SNP were to try to foist any of these policies upon an incoming Labour government as a price for a deal then essentially no deal is on the table. However, if there was agreement to disagree on these issues but work together where there is common ground on a range of broadly social democratic policies and a pro-European stance then some form of deal, although not a coalition, might be possible.

In the short term, the politics of this are far from plain sailing. There are many in England who will be angry at such a deal – as there was with the current Coalition. Labour may have to go further on English parliamentary arrangements. It will require resolution and creativity.

The argument for ruling out a deal is that a group of Scottish voters think they can vote SNP but get Labour. They can have the best of both worlds. So Scottish Labour want to be able to point out that if you vote SNP you get a Conservative administration. Also, the SNP might welch on any deal further down the line.

This basic proposition is highly debatable and rests on some hastily cobbled together constitutional ‘laws’ such as only the largest party will have the opportunity to form a government. For this to apply, you have to believe both that the Liberal Democrats are going to be the kingmakers and that they will accept that ‘rule’. Given they are likely to be returned with just 25 seats or so it seems unlikely that they will be passing the casting vote between a Conservative or Labour government – both parties are very unlikely to be just 25 seats short of a majority (and, indeed, that scenario relies on a complete collapse of SNP support). And by definition if the total number of seats Labour and the SNP have together is a majority then no other majority coalition or deal is available to anyone else to top it.

In this scenario, if the SNP were to offer a deal that did not contain conditions relating to fundamental dividing lines then, should Labour decline what might on paper appear to be a workable deal, then it would be voluntarily choosing to remain in opposition. Yes, the SNP might welch but then they would bear the consequences (they lost nine seats in 1979). Would ‘back us or else work’ on basis? Only if you think Labour could turn its back on a majority of Scottish MPs. That’s bold; recklessly so.

Might there be an argument for taking the opposition course and waiting for a tactically opportune moment to bring down a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition? There is a risk here of putting pure numbers ahead of political reality. Ironically, this would replicate a Labour– SNP deal but in opposition rather than government. It’s difficult to see how this is better than a difficult but doable common ground deal between the two parties that would enable Ed Miliband to become Prime Minister

So to rule out a Labour–SNP deal for government is to choose a Labour-SNP pact in opposition and sacrifice Ed Miliband as Prime Minister and Labour as the next government. Put this way it seems perverse.

But by choosing to rule out any deal, wouldn’t that mean that some of those voters who think they can have their cake and eat it would return to Labour? There may be some opinion poll evidence that shows that Labour might win back some support in this scenario but it’s not convincing. The Labour they hanker for is not necessarily today’s Labour but a perceived Labour party of the past or an idealised version of a Labour party in the present. We are also talking about voters who refused to be cajoled into voting no at the referendum so the likelihood that this mindset will be cajoled to vote against the SNP this time round seems rather too hopeful to me. Just when is Labour going to start making a strong positive case for itself rather than constantly trying to frighten people away from options it doesn’t like? The appeal of parties such as the SNP is that they argue ‘vote SNP, get SNP’.

Labour’s strategic problem in Scotland in the last few years has been a pervasive negativity. Wouldn’t it be much better if the party concentrated on selling a strong message as to why it was the best party for Scotland? By playing games with potential deals or not, it starts to sound like it feels that it is entitled to Scotland’s support. Whatever the underlying polling data might say, this would appear as arrogant disdain.

Can we really see an argument which basically says that Labour is willing to ignore the vast majority of Scottish MPs as being in any way sustainable? Because of the fractious nature of post-referendum Scottish politics, Labour is allowing itself to be sucked into Lynton Crosby’s SNP-toxification strategy where the SNP becomes the equivalent of Germany’s PDS. It’s superficially appealing but practically wrong-headed.

Besides, unless Labour is going to be very close to a majority indeed, the argument is basically don’t vote SNP who you really want to vote for but vote for us instead so we can do a deal with the Liberal Democrats who you don’t like at all. Some simple messages have a habit of falling apart at the seams and ‘vote SNP, get Tory’ is one of those.

There is a broader issue too. This sort of divisive politics is what ultimately risks tearing apart the union. Labour is fooling itself if it thinks this type of politics is a way to keep the union together and win Scotland back for the party. It is precisely this politics of division that many rightly criticise the SNP for. I really do not want to see a Scotland divided into tribes of 45% fighting over 10% in the middle with one side desperately trying to scrape 50.1% in order to secure independence. Smart advocates of independence would not want this either. If independence did happen it should be a broad national choice rather than a marginal decision in a divided nation.

Scotland needs unifying leadership as does the United Kingdom as a whole. This politics of pitting nation against nation, turning people against each other within the nations, is a disastrous road.

Labour needs to get back on track very quickly. The parliamentary arithmetic after the election will be whatever it is. The task now is to make the strongest and best case possible. It is essential that Labour refocuses itself. Labour needs to get on with making its case for the future of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland – the United Kingdom. Afterwards, it will need to reach out rather than reject. But that is for the post-election world. Now is about making the best case possible.