It is a pity that Ed Miliband timed his announcement ruling out a formal coalition with the SNP on the day of Nicola Sturgeon's latest speech to the metropolitan thinking classes in London.
Perhaps Labour didn't want too many of their own supporters hearing it in case they found themselves agreeing.
The First Minister's speech to the London School of Economics, like her last one at University College London last month was thoughtful rather than polemical. Quoting the Labour thinker, Beatrice Webb, she explored the options for a broad "progressive alliance" with Labour and others.
It certainly didn't merit the Daily Telegraph headline: "SNP: we have right to dictate to all of Britain". The Ms Sturgeon insisted that the SNP wanted to work with parties towards parliamentary reform, for example in translating Holyrood's budgetary cycle to the UK.
The Scottish Government has to publish a detailed draft budget four months before the Budget bill is placed before Parliament. This means John Swinney can't play the UK Chancellor's game of pulling rabbits out of the hat at the last minute to wrong-foot the Opposition.
These usually end up wrong footing the Chancellor, as the omni-shambles budget of 2012 demonstrated. It is a daft way to run a whelk stall. The First Minister also called for the UK budget to be subject to an equality assessment as it is in Scotland, from the Equality Budget Advisory Group. This is not a bad idea.
Ms Sturgeon then went on to make the case for minority government - quite astonishing for a First Minister who is sitting on an overall majority in Holyrood. "When we were in minority we could only win votes by winning arguments," she conceded and continued: "Sometimes we had to compromise. That process can and often did lead to better budgets."
In other words, the old winner-takes-all approach mitigates against good government. Well said. No doubt, some opposition MSPs will quote this back to her during the 2016 Holyrood election campaign: "But Ms Sturgeon, didn't you say that an SNP majority was a bad thing?"
Of course, her main purpose yesterday was to lay out her vision of how the SNP could support a minority Labour government in Westminster without seeking seats around the cabinet. Any such pact would be based on two principles: First, that the SNP would always vote to keep the Conservatives out of power and, secondly, that any support would be on an issue-by-issue basis.
So, the SNP would support initiatives such as extending child care and increasing the minimum wage, but not foreign wars or welfare cuts. When it came to confidence motions in the House and on the Government's Budget, the SNP would vote in whichever way prevented the Conservatives from getting back into power.
This is actually what Mr Miliband was hinting at when he formally ruled out a coalition (which neither of them actually wanted) while not ruling out a looser deal. He is clearly thinking what the First Minister is thinking, though I don't know if Jim Murphy is.
But there are problems. To keep the Tories out, the SNP would probably have to vote with a Labour government's Budget, or at least abstain on it, depending on the arithmetic. Critics will say that this in itself means the SNP would be tacitly supporting both spending on Trident and austerity cuts in public services.
But I suspect that this could be finessed. Moreover, as the First Minister also said yesterday, it is surely time to question the renewal of Trident, which she said would eat up 10 per cent of the UK defence budget.
At a time when there is a crisis in Britain's conventional defence capability, aircraft, boats and personnel carriers could prove of greater use than an anachronistic nuclear system designed to destroy cities.
The more I think about it, the more I suspect Labour just didn't want this speech getting too much of an airing. It's in interests of both the Tories and Labour to suggest that the SNP are militant, blue-painted chauvinists whose only interest is in breaking up Britain and demanding money with menaces.
But Ms Sturgeon said the SNP accept the verdict of the September referendum. They're looking to play as much of a constructive role in government as possible. That's surely good politics in Westminster as in Scotland.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article