Alex Salmond - Mr 20% (sic!)

While it's perhaps trite to claim that the lack of popular interest in politics means the UK suffers from something of a democratic deficit, this was underlined in the Scottish context by remarks yesterday from Alex Salmond, who suggested that a 40% poll for the SNP in the forthcoming Holyrood elections would be enough to propel his party back into power.

Well 40% certainly wouldn't be a bad result in terms of a mandate, but of course the big caveat for the sceptics is the usual one. Turnout.

In 2007 this was slightly more than 50%, but it would certainly come as no surprise if this time round less than half of the electorate actually bothered to vote. Thus even if Mr Salmond's party secured 40% of the vote and formed the next Holyrood administration then only around one in five of voters would have endorsed 'Alex Salmond for first minister', which at best suggests a lack of democratic legitimacy.

Of course, even this would represent an improvement on last time round, when the SNP won the support of less than 17% of voters, thus a mere one in six of the electorate. Then the Nationalists secured around 32% of the poll, with the 40% winning line suggested by Mr Salmond this time round arising from the collapse of the Lib Dem vote, with neither the Conservatives nor the minority parties likely to benefit.

Thus while the 'winning' party in May is likely to secure a bigger mandate than in 2007, this will be partly due to antipathy towards one party rather than the attractions of the victor. And in terms of legitimately speaking for the oft-adduced 'people of Scotland', forget it. Indeed, even of those actually endorsing a particular party, how many do this with great enthusiasm, or is it more a case of 'the best of a bad lot'?

While the political class can't be wholly blamed for voter indifference - with consumerist citizens perhaps more inclined to vote with their wallets in favour of corporate behemoths like Tesco, which often seems to be where the real power and influence really lies - the campaign thus far predictably provides little evidence to suggest any alleviation of this apathy. Indeed, perhaps exacerbating the antipathy would represent a better characterisation.

But whatever the reasons for all this, what will be so galling come the election aftermath will be the self-indulgent triumphalism of the winning party, when the lack of a ringing endorsement surely meaning that a bit of humility should be the order of the day.

As usual, however, the winning post will be all that matters to the politicians, with those who feel disenfranchised being of little relevance. It's the result that matters, not how they got there.

(The 2007 results represent rough averages of the constituency and regional votes.)