The Scottish National party’s (SNP) leader Nicola Sturgeon’s strong
performance in the televised election party leader’s debate has put the wind up
the establishment. In what looks like a classic dirty tricks operation, the
Telegraph newspaper alleges in a report that a third or fourth hand Foreign
Office official's ‘note’ of a meeting between Sturgeon and the French
Ambassador to the UK, the SNP leader voiced a preference for the Tory leader
David Cameron to remain as Prime Minister. According to the note, Sturgeon
didn’t think that Labour’s Ed Miliband would make a good PM.
Sturgeon and the French Ambassador, Sylvie Bermann, and the French Consul,
Pierre-Alain Coffinier, who purportedly had said this, have all denied that it
is true. The civil service Cabinet Secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood is to
investigate the leak.
In the note itself, even the writer questions the validity of the report,
thinking it unlikely someone like Sturgeon would talk about things like this with
foreign officials. It does beggar belief that an experienced politician like
Sturgeon would say something like this, and it doesn’t add up when Sturgeon is
trying to form some kind of post-election alliance with Labour. If the report
had said something like Sturgeon wanted the Tories to win so as to speed up the
chances of Scottish independence, it would be more plausible, although not completely.
But to say that Miliband wouldn’t make as good a PM as Cameron, doesn’t make any
sense at all.
Another Tory backing newspaper the Daily Mail waded in with a headline
labelling Sturgeon ‘the most dangerous woman in Britain.’ All of this shows
that the establishment is extremely worried about the SNP (and Plaid Cymru and
the Greens) holding the balance of power after the election. What is scaring
them so much?
Clearly, the prospect of pressure being put onto a Labour minority
administration to reverse the poor bashing anti-austerity policies of the
Coalition and opening up the question of why we need the Trident nuclear
weapons system, has thrown them into a tailspin. The prospect of a government
actually introducing policies that favour the bulk of the population over the
establishment elite, and having a proper debate over our defense strategy is
beyond the pale for our establishment elites. This is an eventuality that must
be stopped at all costs.
It reminds me of the infamous ‘Zinoviev letter’ published in 1924 just
ahead of the general election in, yes, the Daily Mail (who later went on to praise
Adolf Hitler). Zinoviev whose signature was (apparently) on the document, was a
senior Soviet Union official, writing to the Communist party of Great Britain. The
letter called for increased agitation from workers in Britain to form a
communist government. The letter was a forgery, but it did enough to collapse
the Liberal party vote and give the Tories a big majority in Parliament.
Labour has been quick to denounced the ‘Sturgeon note’, seeing a tribal
advantage where they are threatened with wipe out at the hands of the SNP, but
few in Scotland will fall for this obvious manipulation of the voters by the
establishment. In England too, I can’t see it having much effect except with
the most loyal of Labourites.
But Labour’s acquiescence with these reactionary forces opens up the
question of a ‘grand coalition’ between the establishment parties, to keep out
the peasants from north of the border and elsewhere. If this comes to pass it
will be the end for the Labour party and perhaps the Tories too. All the talk
of Labour being Tories in disguise will be laid bare for all to see. It really
would be the ‘longest suicide note in history.’
No comments:
Post a Comment