Student ID: 2228923 12th October 2013

Nation or valance: Why do voters support the SNP?

Introduction

The story of the Scottish National Party (SNP from now on) is one of patience and doing things step by step. Since its founding, the SNP has not always been taken seriously. Even after Devolution, with a Labour and Liberal Democratic majority in the Scottish Parliament, the nationalistic question in Scotland seemed to be successfully dealt with. As pointed out in McCrone (2012, p. 69) the Labour party in Scotland thought it had stymied the nationalists when the Parliament was designed in the late 1990s by adopting the additional member system which made it almost impossible for any party to get an overall majority. So in the regional elections of 2007, when the SNP surpassed Labour, and even more in 2011, when it got a comfortable majority, shock and doubt were the norm among journalists, scholars and political analysts.

Consequently, we can assess that a profound change in voter behaviour has taken place in Scotland this past decade. When this sort of phenomena occurs in politics, we are inclined to examine the partys manifesto and try to discover the reasons for the SNPs love affair with the voters. We will evaluate the importance of the partys core program, an independent state for Scotland, and whether their center-left approach has beaten up Labour in their own arena. Finally, well take a look at whether valence plays an important role in Scottish Politics. The aim is to shed some light on the reasons for this increased support to the SNP. SNPs success or Labours failure? The story of SNPs success in the 2007 Scottish elections is also the story of Labours failure, a party that had dominated Holyrood since Devolution. In Jones (2007, p. 7-8) the journalist argues that Labours campaign was quite a messy one. The Labour Party was suffering the sequels of Westminster's government and the controversial support for the war in Iraq was still a fresh collective memory.

Moreover, their hierarchy was divided and their strategy for conquering seats unclear.

In contrast, as Jones himself points out Jones (2007, p.11-14), the SNP appeared as fresh as New Labour in 1997 (they were helped by Gordon Guthrie, a former Labour supporter who had engineered part of New Labours renovation). In short terms, the SNP would neither focus on just the Independence issue, nor exclusively in the policies derived from Devolution; it would just skillfully play both sides. Jones's paper also grants a high deal of importance to the fact that the SNP planned their campaign early on the term, a clear contrast with a Labour party that was lost in the desert and randomly trying all directions to achieve their goals. It also takes into account Alex Salmond as a positive force within the SNPs appeal to voters.

All political parties are allowed to have a bad campaign now and then, but Labour did not bounce back in the 2011 election. We live in an era of class dealignment and dissolution of ideologies. In consequence, both Labour and the SNP stand firmly in the center with a soft alignment on the left. Their stands on key issues such as health, education or security dont differ a great deal. When the New Labour shift to center took place fifteen years ago, the SNP embraced a similar change. Nonetheless, voters gave the SNP a chance in 2007 and renovated their trust in the 2011 election, when Labour has been the opposition and thus was in a better starting point to conquer seats. Then, the reasons for SNPs support, might be more earthly than ideological. In order to asses the extent of Labours ongoing drama in Scotland, we are going to take a look at their results in the 2010 elections. Mitchell and Der Zwet (2010, p. 710) provide the election result and reach the conclusion that the Scottish electorate behave differently in Westminster and Holyrood elections. Labour won a significant 42% of the vote, while the SNP managed a poor 19.9%. A meager performance compared with the turnout in Holyrood elections. Politicians in the Labour party breathed out.

The results seemed to indicate at the time that Labour might take power back in Scotland, but in 2011 the SNP made them bite the dust again by winning a

comfortable majority. Therefore, this result adds to the point that the Scottish electorate perceives Westminster elections rather differently than Holyrood elections and that the extent of the SNPs rise is limited to regional politics.

The meaning of Devolution

We can now comprehend how important Devolution has been to the SNP. While the Westminster parties at the time thought that Devolution would calm Scottish calls for independence and self-government, the SNP saw it as a step towards achieving these same goals. Now the nationalists have a platform where they can be agenda settlers instead of a small voice in a big singing chorus; a tool also to achieve the desired goal of independence. Whether this end up being true or not might unravel soon enough, but the important point here is that a majority of Scottish voters think that the SNP is the best party to defend their interests in the regional parliament.

Another consequence of Devolution is that Scottish people believe that whoever they put into power in Holyrood will make a significant effect in their lives. Johns et al. (2009, p. 214) provides data which indicates that most of the Scottish people attribute a great deal of responsibility on key issues such as law and order, health, education and environment to Holyrood rather than Westminster, with the economy being the only relevant exception. Since Scotland holds more decentralized powers than, for example, any French region, the voters are capable of evaluating substantial differences between a Labour government and a SNP one in Scotland. The same paper reaches the conclusion that the Scottish people dont perceive much difference between Labour and SNP in policymaking, except for the constitutional issue. And although support for independence remains low an d its not the core reason for the SNPs rise, polls indicate that the constitutional issue matters and that most of the population supports a greater development in selfgovernment. Thus, Labours Britishness, whether its real or perceived by the voters, might take its toll on the party.

As Laffin et al. (2007, p. 15) indicates in its conclusion, the Labour party is still conceived as an English brand trying to make its own way in Scotland, instead of reforming itself to create a genuine Scottish brand. The National Executive

Committee, based in Westminster, holds a great deal of power in intra-party affairs, including key organizational issues that affect Scottish Labour. The authors suggest that a federal reform of the party, with more devolved powers to the regional brand, might help them dust off some of their britishness and improve their results in Holyrood.

The role of valence

Valence as a key factor in modern British politics is a thoroughly researched and commonly accepted theory. As parties come closer together in the left-right axis and become more pragmatic, valence becomes more vital when voters cast their ballots. They are ideologically unfaithful but vigilant of party performance. Do Scottish voters behave like this? Firstly, to evaluate a government's valence you need to feel that the policies it puts in place have an effect in your lives, and we have established that above in regard to the Scottish parliament. Secondly, valence becomes a tricky question when several parliaments aff ect the same territory: its difficult to draw a line when granting responsibility. Its part of nowadays political game in Scotland. According to Johns et al (2013, p. 163) when we downsize the role of the constitutional issue, valance is the main explanation for SNPs prominence in Scotland this past two terms. As pointed out, while support for independence has been generally flat from 2003 and 2011, SNPs support has more than doubled.

Conclusion If we agree upon a downsized role of independentism within the SNPs voters preferences we reach the conclusion that valence is the key factor to understand why voters turned massively to the SNP. In 2007 they successfully took advantage of Labours wounds and finished it off in 2011, although the results in 2010 suggest that Scotlands love affair with the party of the rose is still ongoing. In regional elections, the Scottish people turned to their local brand. Labours intra-party system with a leadership based in Westminster, as well as a greater affinity with Westminster policies, makes them appear too British. Therefore, in 2007 Labour failed to deliver in the terms of Scottishness and the SNPs Put Scotland First type of slogans were just what the voters wanted to hear. Later on, the Scottish

people voted even more massively for the SNP and granted them a comfortable majority in an electoral system naturally averse to them, mainly because the electorate thought they performed well in government.

Without Devolution, the SNP would not have had a platform where playing the role of The True Scotsmen were so profitable. It allowed them to set in the agenda their long desired goal for an independence referendum: a risky issue where they gamble much of their credibility, since not every SNPs voter is an independence supporter. The result on the referendum will be important in future elections, but the valence effect will strengthen further because of the current majority government. It creates no less than greater expectations for the events in years to come. Bibliography JOHNS, R., MITCHELL, J., CARMAN, C., 2013. Constitution or Competence? The SNPs Re-election in 2011. Political Studies, 61 (S1) pp. 158-178. JOHNS, R., MITCHELL, J., DENVER, D., 2009. Valence Politics in Scotland: Towards an Explanation of the 2007 Election. Political Studies, 57, pp. 207-233. JONES, P., 2007. The Smooth Wooing: The SNPs Victory in the 2007 Scottish Parliament Elections. Scottish Affairs, 60, pp. 6-23. LAFFIN, M., SHAW, E., 2007. British Devolution and the Labour Party: How a National Party Adapts to Devolution. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 9, pp. 55-72. MCCRONE, D., 2012. Scotland Out the Union? The Rise and Rise of the Nationalist Agenda. The Political Quarterly, 83 (1), pp. 69-76. MITCHELL, J., VAN DER ZWET, A., 2010. A Catenaccio Game: the 2010 Election in Scotland. Parliamentary Affairs, 63 (4), pp. 708-725.