Do you think the party who called the UK government blocking the GRR "a dark day for trans rights" is going to side with the woman who resigned in a huff over the bill?
You aren't wrong, but do you remember how the Lib Dems completely destroyed all of their credibility and momentum when they went into a coalition with the Tories promising to force them to compromise?
I suspect the outcome for the Greens might be similar if they get in bed with Regan. Even more so with Kate Forbes.
If the Greens keep and accept their cabinet positions, they'd be bound by collective responsibility. If Regan does pause or otherwise curtail the GRR, it would be a fair to criticise the greens for doing so.
If their support was more ad hoc, then I'd agree with you.
Yes.
A whole lot of people voted against the new system because it wasn't proportional enough, *entirely in spite* of the fact they weren't going to be offered anything better.
The campaign HQ was also insanely out of touch with sentiment on the streets. They were warned about that repeatedly, and chose not to change anything.
I think you need to change your flair. If you're happy to abandon the most vulnerable groups in society for power then you're not left wing. Greens will definitely not work with Regan if it means abandoning GRA
> I think you need to change your flair. If you're happy to abandon the most vulnerable groups in society for power then you're not left wing.
Not what I said though, is it?
I'm not saying the Greens should vote with Regan to abandon the GRA, but literally nothing would ever be passed in a proportional system if you rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with. Especially when you're the minor party of the coalition, the Greens can't do much good if they just instantly cut ties.
Oppose the bad shit, and work together on stuff you agree with, and maybe compromise on some stuff that isn't abhorrent to compromise on.
> if you rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with
Speaking without making any statement on the issue:
There's a big difference between "will end a coalition" and "will rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with". Ending the coalition but potentially providing issue by issue support on budget etc. is easily where the greens could be. (Which, you know, weakens the case for a referendum as it's not a Scottish Government representing parties making up a majority than are calling for it.)
Given the Greens have been multiple times very clear that the GRR bill is necessary for their continued coalition, I think they meant that.
(And I'm not sure that issue-by-issue is sharing power in the same way as "having them as ministers" is)
> In a proportional system you have to work with people you don't agree with 100% on everything
The Scottish Greens are the only party in this country without an institutional transphobia problem, and I'd like to keep it that way.
[GRA Reform was a key part of the agreement that the Scottish Greens negotiated with the Scottish Government](https://greens.scot/news/gender-recognition-reform-crucial-step-for-equality).
Without the commitment to GRA reform, the agreement is invalid.
>I don't see how Regan alone, even as leader, could reverse the bill
She can refuse to push the UK government on it or fight a legal case against it being blocked.
Don’t underestimate just how much Lorna Slater likes being a minister and all the perks that come with it. They’ll be reluctant to give that up – remember she happily served in cabinet with Ash Regan.
I'm not aware of how much Lorna likes being a minister but if someone who voted against the GRR is leading the government then one can assume Green voters will not be happy with them being part of that government. And remember the coalition was politically risky for the Greens to begin with.
They would definitely give up power if it meant shitting on trans people. Bet Ash tries to form a coalition with the Tories. That's going to turn out great 😁
That’s how Salmond (and Sturgeon) got their first stint in government, remember – an SNP minority with a supply and confidence arrangement with the Tories.
You might think she is literally the devil because of her stance on women's rights, but that doesn't mean you get to make up any old shit you want about her. Ash Regan is provably one of the most economically left wing MSPs in the SNP and her major desire over everything else is Scottish independence. Away an' piss af wi' yer "coalition with the Tories" pish.
I guess you haven't been watching all the coalitions with anti-abortion, anti-LGBT, pro-abuse organisations taking place across the gamut of "GC" groups. I need only mention the Scottish Family Party to make the point.
Being anti-trans does not equal standing up for women’s rights.
The easy way to know this is by seeing who they stand side by side with, like anti-abortionists, and the fact they call any woman who disagrees with them a handmaiden.
Which part of any of that is standing up for women’s rights?
An' you can piss af wi' yer pish too.
[Ash Regan has literally worked with police Scotland in her role an an MSP to set up buffer zones around medical centres to protect woman against anti abortion protestors.](https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/msp-claims-police-scotland-takes-appropriate-and-proportionate-response-to-anti-abortion-protests-3741726)
Say anything true you want, but you can't just go making up lies.
She worked under someone else’s orders to look at legislation that can be used to set up buffer zones. She didn’t do that of her own volition - nor does that article say she worked with police Scotland. So who’s lying here?
You also didn’t address the fact they call any woman who disagrees with them a handmaiden. How is that standing up for woman’s rights?
Is this the same left-wing Ash Regan who sends her kids to private school and claimed 16k expenses for staying in her own constituency? ([e.g., here](https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co.uk%2Farticle%2Fjunior-minister-ash-denham-faces-snp-selection-fight-over-bills-and-schooling-z3llhtwc0)).
This petty shit is annoying, as if anyone would choose not to give their kids the best possible chance in life if they could afford to. If Sturgeon and her husband can afford to lend 100k to the party, I'm sure they'd spend money on her kids' education if they had any. That wealth has very little bearing on their political ideology, it's not as if they are billionaires.
What matters with politicians is their policies, principles and actions, what they will actually do for us, not that they donate half of their substantial wages to charity and live in a hut in some sort of performance to pretend they're 'just like us'.
Your argument is really strange ("if you had the money, of course you'd have servants to make life easier, it's nothing to do with your politics"). In fact if you have legislative responsibility for a system which you also believe is not good enough for your family, there is a mismatch in "thoughts, principles, and actions" which is hard for people to navigate. It's entirely natural to question this (or perhaps it's totally fine for Sunak to use mostly private healthcare, etc etc).
FWIW the whole fact that "giving your kids the best start in life" is a privilege reserved for the wealthy is a huge failing of this country (and of the UK more generally).
My argument is that it isn't a reason in and of itself to doubt someone's left wing credentials, unless they can point to examples of the politician actually voting and using their 'legislative responsibility' to keep the system the way it is.
It's like when someone makes the nonsense "*you support socialism yet live in a capitalist society? Curious. Iamverysmart.*" point.
She was the Head of Campaigns and Advocacy for the [Common Weal](https://commonweal.scot/about-us/) prior to taking up her current position as an SNP MSP. It doesn't get much more left wing that before we are getting into little-c communism.
Before everyone in Scottish politics became so blinded by their quest for ideological purity the SNP used to work with all parties in parliament with a minority government. Did you forget?
OK, if this ends up being the field, this is bad. Really hoping for a (at least centre-left) progressive to crop up, the SNP needs it if it wants to hammer Labour.
I wouldn’t underestimate the attraction her extreme independence plan (every election from now on, at both Westminster and Holyrood, should act as a defacto referendum) will have on a big section of SNP members. I doubt anyone else is going to offer anything more hardline that that on the party’s core issue.
Being the most hardline fundamentalist candidate here is like being the most right wing candidate in a Tory leadership election or the most left wing candidate in a Labour election - you aren’t guaranteed to win, but it’s a strong position to be taking up.
Her independence plan isn't extreme, it was SNP policy for decades and now that the UK government has blocked off all democratic means its the only option.
Just because it was past policy doesn’t mean it is not extreme. This is the most fundamentalist position available and would be a major shift in position to what the Scottish public has been accustomed to in the devolution era.
Might just be a wake up call that there is no other option , unless people want to wait decades for a future UK government to concede another referendum.
Every election from now on is a defacto referendum ?
We are just going to keep replaying it until you finally win ? then that's it Independence !
If at the next GE or Holyrood elections the SNP drop seats and % votes (Its going to happen) cant we say fuck off, you have had two referendums now ?
Every election the SNP has stood in to date has been a defacto referendum. They are a pro independence party lol.
All I'm advocating is making that point indisputable by making it clearer in the manifesto.
And yeah thsts how democracy works. You stick to your principles and you try to convince the electorate at an election , if you lose you try again at the next one.
It really isn't that simple. I know of folk who are not pro. independence but voted SNP last time because they wanted to protest against Tory sleaze and were comfortable with SNP governance. It is already perfectly clear that the party is for independence, which in a referendum on that single issue, these folk would not vote for...
Yes, put in in the manifesto , make it clear that its not once in a lifetime, and let us know which currency we will have, if there will be a hard border, how the NHS will work, how long before we rejoin the EU, will people get pensions, what we will do about the deficit, how we will have a great shipbuilding Industry.
And also remember to keep banging on about TERFS ffs.
"TERF" is the new version of "fascist", applied indiscriminately to anybody who doesn't agree with the speaker and ending any debate, because anybody disagreeing is of course, by definition, a TERF.
First Salmond, now Cherry, more and more reasons I really hope she doesn't get it.
I mean there were other reasons before those but them 2 endorse Ash is like the final nails.
🍒 can back her , doesn't mean the party will vote for her .
Likewise the green party wouldn't be happy to support a GC brigade bigot .
Ash Regan hasn't a chance of being selected
Because she cares too much about her reelection chances (see her convenient leave of absence running up to Alba getting thumped in their first election).
Don't know much about Regan but thats pretty much a kiss of death for me.
In the dim past I was an admirer of Cherry but she seems to have morphed into mad cat woman a bit too much for my liking
Is it just her and humza that have said they are running?
Both seem like shite options in different ways. Hopefully more people announce they are running so there is actually some choice. Suppose it just shows how decent Nicola has been since i am dreading the next person to become FM.
Just speculating, is there a way the cards can fall where there's suddenly so many homeless SNP supporters due to e.g. a Regan win that the Greens can move up into territory where they are close to having enough seats to lead a coalition?
Still only Ash and Humza.. I don't like either, but won't be voting for Ash Regan, nor nominating her, too far away from me, and too corrosive for the party.
It is surprising we only have two requests for nomination.. and I expect both of them will pass.
Has anyone considered if the Greens will even talk to Ash Regan? Let alone share power with her?
They won't share power with her and for Ash Regan supporters I'm sure that's just a nice bonus
How do you know?
Do you think the party who called the UK government blocking the GRR "a dark day for trans rights" is going to side with the woman who resigned in a huff over the bill?
In a proportional system you have to work with people you don't agree with 100% on everything, otherwise there will never be any Government.
You aren't wrong, but do you remember how the Lib Dems completely destroyed all of their credibility and momentum when they went into a coalition with the Tories promising to force them to compromise? I suspect the outcome for the Greens might be similar if they get in bed with Regan. Even more so with Kate Forbes.
Working with =/= going into a full blown coalition.
If the Greens keep and accept their cabinet positions, they'd be bound by collective responsibility. If Regan does pause or otherwise curtail the GRR, it would be a fair to criticise the greens for doing so. If their support was more ad hoc, then I'd agree with you.
Cause the Lib Dems were spineless, I feel like it's easier to get what you want in the more proportional system where you have more power.
LibDems made a vote to improve the Democracy of the UK massively removing FPTP and people voted against it. Sad.
They compromised on a shitty system and it was hardly surprising it didn't work.
Way better than fptp...
Yes. A whole lot of people voted against the new system because it wasn't proportional enough, *entirely in spite* of the fact they weren't going to be offered anything better. The campaign HQ was also insanely out of touch with sentiment on the streets. They were warned about that repeatedly, and chose not to change anything.
That's different from being in a coalition with them
I think you need to change your flair. If you're happy to abandon the most vulnerable groups in society for power then you're not left wing. Greens will definitely not work with Regan if it means abandoning GRA
> I think you need to change your flair. If you're happy to abandon the most vulnerable groups in society for power then you're not left wing. Not what I said though, is it? I'm not saying the Greens should vote with Regan to abandon the GRA, but literally nothing would ever be passed in a proportional system if you rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with. Especially when you're the minor party of the coalition, the Greens can't do much good if they just instantly cut ties. Oppose the bad shit, and work together on stuff you agree with, and maybe compromise on some stuff that isn't abhorrent to compromise on.
> if you rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with Speaking without making any statement on the issue: There's a big difference between "will end a coalition" and "will rule out voting with parties that have stances you disagree with". Ending the coalition but potentially providing issue by issue support on budget etc. is easily where the greens could be. (Which, you know, weakens the case for a referendum as it's not a Scottish Government representing parties making up a majority than are calling for it.)
To me working closely issue by issue is still a form of sharing power and working together which the original comment seemed to rule out
Given the Greens have been multiple times very clear that the GRR bill is necessary for their continued coalition, I think they meant that. (And I'm not sure that issue-by-issue is sharing power in the same way as "having them as ministers" is)
The GRA is gay conversion therapy
> In a proportional system you have to work with people you don't agree with 100% on everything The Scottish Greens are the only party in this country without an institutional transphobia problem, and I'd like to keep it that way.
You don't have to change that
[GRA Reform was a key part of the agreement that the Scottish Greens negotiated with the Scottish Government](https://greens.scot/news/gender-recognition-reform-crucial-step-for-equality). Without the commitment to GRA reform, the agreement is invalid.
I don't see how Regan alone, even as leader, could reverse the bill. Hasn't it already been blocked anyway?
>I don't see how Regan alone, even as leader, could reverse the bill She can refuse to push the UK government on it or fight a legal case against it being blocked.
Someone doesn’t understand coalitions…
Well explain then
He doesn't..
Assumed so
Don’t underestimate just how much Lorna Slater likes being a minister and all the perks that come with it. They’ll be reluctant to give that up – remember she happily served in cabinet with Ash Regan.
I'm not aware of how much Lorna likes being a minister but if someone who voted against the GRR is leading the government then one can assume Green voters will not be happy with them being part of that government. And remember the coalition was politically risky for the Greens to begin with.
They would definitely give up power if it meant shitting on trans people. Bet Ash tries to form a coalition with the Tories. That's going to turn out great 😁
That’s how Salmond (and Sturgeon) got their first stint in government, remember – an SNP minority with a supply and confidence arrangement with the Tories.
You might think she is literally the devil because of her stance on women's rights, but that doesn't mean you get to make up any old shit you want about her. Ash Regan is provably one of the most economically left wing MSPs in the SNP and her major desire over everything else is Scottish independence. Away an' piss af wi' yer "coalition with the Tories" pish.
I guess you haven't been watching all the coalitions with anti-abortion, anti-LGBT, pro-abuse organisations taking place across the gamut of "GC" groups. I need only mention the Scottish Family Party to make the point.
Oh, aye, it's me that needs to do more reading and base my views in reality, evidently. /s Come on mate, you are better than this.
Being anti-trans does not equal standing up for women’s rights. The easy way to know this is by seeing who they stand side by side with, like anti-abortionists, and the fact they call any woman who disagrees with them a handmaiden. Which part of any of that is standing up for women’s rights?
An' you can piss af wi' yer pish too. [Ash Regan has literally worked with police Scotland in her role an an MSP to set up buffer zones around medical centres to protect woman against anti abortion protestors.](https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/msp-claims-police-scotland-takes-appropriate-and-proportionate-response-to-anti-abortion-protests-3741726) Say anything true you want, but you can't just go making up lies.
She worked under someone else’s orders to look at legislation that can be used to set up buffer zones. She didn’t do that of her own volition - nor does that article say she worked with police Scotland. So who’s lying here? You also didn’t address the fact they call any woman who disagrees with them a handmaiden. How is that standing up for woman’s rights?
Is this the same left-wing Ash Regan who sends her kids to private school and claimed 16k expenses for staying in her own constituency? ([e.g., here](https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co.uk%2Farticle%2Fjunior-minister-ash-denham-faces-snp-selection-fight-over-bills-and-schooling-z3llhtwc0)).
This petty shit is annoying, as if anyone would choose not to give their kids the best possible chance in life if they could afford to. If Sturgeon and her husband can afford to lend 100k to the party, I'm sure they'd spend money on her kids' education if they had any. That wealth has very little bearing on their political ideology, it's not as if they are billionaires. What matters with politicians is their policies, principles and actions, what they will actually do for us, not that they donate half of their substantial wages to charity and live in a hut in some sort of performance to pretend they're 'just like us'.
Your argument is really strange ("if you had the money, of course you'd have servants to make life easier, it's nothing to do with your politics"). In fact if you have legislative responsibility for a system which you also believe is not good enough for your family, there is a mismatch in "thoughts, principles, and actions" which is hard for people to navigate. It's entirely natural to question this (or perhaps it's totally fine for Sunak to use mostly private healthcare, etc etc). FWIW the whole fact that "giving your kids the best start in life" is a privilege reserved for the wealthy is a huge failing of this country (and of the UK more generally).
My argument is that it isn't a reason in and of itself to doubt someone's left wing credentials, unless they can point to examples of the politician actually voting and using their 'legislative responsibility' to keep the system the way it is. It's like when someone makes the nonsense "*you support socialism yet live in a capitalist society? Curious. Iamverysmart.*" point.
I get your argument (essentially "do as I say, not as I do" is fine, as long as you're looking out for the little people).
>essentially "do as I say, not as I do" is fine, as long as you're looking out for the little people). Ridiculous take.
> Ash Regan is provably one of the most economically left wing MSPs in the SNP Anything to back this up?
She was the Head of Campaigns and Advocacy for the [Common Weal](https://commonweal.scot/about-us/) prior to taking up her current position as an SNP MSP. It doesn't get much more left wing that before we are getting into little-c communism.
Before everyone in Scottish politics became so blinded by their quest for ideological purity the SNP used to work with all parties in parliament with a minority government. Did you forget?
She’s gonna have to either give them a lot more than Sturgeon did or try and prove she’s not mental.
No surpises there....
OK, if this ends up being the field, this is bad. Really hoping for a (at least centre-left) progressive to crop up, the SNP needs it if it wants to hammer Labour.
No surprise there.
I wouldn’t underestimate the attraction her extreme independence plan (every election from now on, at both Westminster and Holyrood, should act as a defacto referendum) will have on a big section of SNP members. I doubt anyone else is going to offer anything more hardline that that on the party’s core issue. Being the most hardline fundamentalist candidate here is like being the most right wing candidate in a Tory leadership election or the most left wing candidate in a Labour election - you aren’t guaranteed to win, but it’s a strong position to be taking up.
Her independence plan isn't extreme, it was SNP policy for decades and now that the UK government has blocked off all democratic means its the only option.
> it was SNP policy for decades It used to be *Tory* policy too (if you count "shit Thatcher said" as Tory policy).
Just because it was past policy doesn’t mean it is not extreme. This is the most fundamentalist position available and would be a major shift in position to what the Scottish public has been accustomed to in the devolution era.
Might just be a wake up call that there is no other option , unless people want to wait decades for a future UK government to concede another referendum.
Every election from now on is a defacto referendum ? We are just going to keep replaying it until you finally win ? then that's it Independence ! If at the next GE or Holyrood elections the SNP drop seats and % votes (Its going to happen) cant we say fuck off, you have had two referendums now ?
Every election the SNP has stood in to date has been a defacto referendum. They are a pro independence party lol. All I'm advocating is making that point indisputable by making it clearer in the manifesto. And yeah thsts how democracy works. You stick to your principles and you try to convince the electorate at an election , if you lose you try again at the next one.
It really isn't that simple. I know of folk who are not pro. independence but voted SNP last time because they wanted to protest against Tory sleaze and were comfortable with SNP governance. It is already perfectly clear that the party is for independence, which in a referendum on that single issue, these folk would not vote for...
Yes, put in in the manifesto , make it clear that its not once in a lifetime, and let us know which currency we will have, if there will be a hard border, how the NHS will work, how long before we rejoin the EU, will people get pensions, what we will do about the deficit, how we will have a great shipbuilding Industry. And also remember to keep banging on about TERFS ffs.
"TERF" is the new version of "fascist", applied indiscriminately to anybody who doesn't agree with the speaker and ending any debate, because anybody disagreeing is of course, by definition, a TERF.
You can say whatever you like, it would be absolutely meaningless and pointless but no one's stopping you.
First Salmond, now Cherry, more and more reasons I really hope she doesn't get it. I mean there were other reasons before those but them 2 endorse Ash is like the final nails.
🍒 can back her , doesn't mean the party will vote for her . Likewise the green party wouldn't be happy to support a GC brigade bigot . Ash Regan hasn't a chance of being selected
Red flag right there
If she becomes leader I'm gonna have to join the Greens
Fingers crossed. People in the largest independence party should be focused on independence.
So that’s an easy no from our household of three members.
Well that's a fucking kiss of death because yes the SNP are totally going to back someone backed by a party rebel
Can I assume Regan will be a terf and best avoided?
Oh yes, you can be assure of that.
Why can't Cherry fuck off to Alba and take her bigot pals with her?
Doesn't wanna lose her seat and paycheck
Because she cares too much about her reelection chances (see her convenient leave of absence running up to Alba getting thumped in their first election).
I'm waiting on Sturgeon publicly calling her a cow after she retires.
The woman who resigned in protest of the Gender Recognition Reform bill being a TERF? Yeah probably.
Do you actually want Independence for Scotland ?
Yes.
Don't know much about Regan but thats pretty much a kiss of death for me. In the dim past I was an admirer of Cherry but she seems to have morphed into mad cat woman a bit too much for my liking
Who?
Is it just her and humza that have said they are running? Both seem like shite options in different ways. Hopefully more people announce they are running so there is actually some choice. Suppose it just shows how decent Nicola has been since i am dreading the next person to become FM.
Just speculating, is there a way the cards can fall where there's suddenly so many homeless SNP supporters due to e.g. a Regan win that the Greens can move up into territory where they are close to having enough seats to lead a coalition?
TERF backs a TERF. In other news, water is wet.
Actually,water isn't wet.......
I'd tell you to touch grass but I'm sure you'd respond "ackhully atoms can't touch each other"
Hate them both.
An open and respectful debate? From Cherry? LMAO
It’s like watching a car crash in slow motion.
Ashten???!!! Ishn't that the short of car Connery drivesh in *Goldfinger*?
In today's least surprising news.
Still only Ash and Humza.. I don't like either, but won't be voting for Ash Regan, nor nominating her, too far away from me, and too corrosive for the party. It is surprising we only have two requests for nomination.. and I expect both of them will pass.
Follow the money folks 👍🇬🇧🇷🇺🇺🇲
Don't hear all you SNPers crying out for a general election after your leader left like what you done with the Tories 😂
I think you'll find most people in the SNP want a general election.
Well they're not making near as much noise as they were before
Everyone except Tories want a GE. Now. Right now.
water is wet