AS a huge fan of Stuart Campbell and his highly reliable Wings Over Scotland blog, I would concur that he would be mistaken and ill advised to set up yet another party, which would be doomed to failure at least and, yes, divisive at most.

His argument of “supporting” the SNP by opposing them is too complicated for a confused electorate. Judging by some of his encouragers he may very well take away enough activists and election workers to do serious harm, not just to the SNP, but to the cause and morale of the whole independence movement.

To say that the Greens, Rise, SSP and RIC failed because they were too radical for the Scottish electorate must be challenged. They failed because of their internal, quarrelsome divisions and attacks on the SNP, and lacklustre “support” for Scottish independence, plus a little help from centrist mixers and Brit agents.

The faction-ridden SSP could have at least taken over from the establishment BritNat anti-Scottish Labour Party, but their leading platform, International Socialist Movement, was still Old Militant Labour and Unionist at heart and bureaucratically manoeuvred any support for independence off the agenda. Their National Secretary described their support for independence as “ambivalent” and the party was furious at my saying, no, it was duplicitous. Even the left Unionist platforms agreed with me by saying there was no need for dirty tricks and conference manoeuvrings as they would have won the argument anyway.

The Socialist Workers Party was recruited to join the Unionist ranks of the SSP, but went native and came out for independence before leaving. The SSP never recovered and never will and is now an obscure rump and an irrelevance.

The RIC, Radical Independence Campaign, also spent more time attacking the SNP than promoting independence. Their leader, Cat Boyd, showed her political immaturity by declaring in her National column that she had abstained on the elections, spoilt her ballot paper and voted for Unionist, Trident-voter Corbyn, by voting for a Unionist branch party Blairite candidate.

Rise, a mish-mash of SSP and Rise “Unity”, with a forgettable, childish and meaningless title, failed because of lack of internal agreements and love for each other’s party and their wimpish “support” for independence. An Irish friend once telt me that their leaders bore the impression of the last person that sat on their faces. They certainly made no impression on the Yes movement or forwarding that cause.

Stu is wrong to say that they failed because they were too radical. They were not radical enough and not needed. I hope radical Stu can learn from the fact that the only time the Unionist meejah were interested in Jim Sillars, whom I also admire, is when he was attacking the SNP, or reported as such. Jim also thinks the boy named Stu is ill advised here.

The only way either could be elected to anything, first or second choice, is by becoming unambiguous SNP candidates, with full and united backing. Now is not the time for prevaricating. There will be plenty of time for genuine and democratic opposition after we have secured the country first and foremost.
Donald Anderson
(Cross-party) Scottish Republican Socialist Movement
Glasgow

WHETHER any new Wings party is linked to Alex Salmond or not (Wings Over Scotland blogger insists new party not linked to Salmond, August 13) is irrelevant, and may well be a distraction raised by a proponent of the risky “Both Votes SNP” strategy.

Discussion about the best way forward to maximise the Yes vote and ensure a majority of pro-indy MSPs in 2021 – if that turns out to be necessary to secure the future of independence and/or a second indyref – should not be about any single personality or party. What may be at stake is far too big and important for that.

What is welcome, and relevant, about Stuart Campbell’s intervention is that it recognises that the “Both Votes SNP” strategy largely adopted in 2016 saw 750,000 SNP votes on the list largely wasted due to the way the Additional Member System (AMS) works, and that a strategy that uses the AMS system to our advantage, to maximise the Yes vote in 2021, may well be necessary if whoever ends up in power at Westminster continues to frustrate the Scottish Government’s democratic mandate to hold a second indyref.

What is also relevant, but unwelcome, is the limited and exclusionary nature of the new Wings party being proposed.

Stuart Campbell says: “People don’t want to vote for far-left parties like the Greens, SSP or Rise,” and appears to posit any new Wings party as a slightly more EU-sceptic SNP Mark II with slightly more socially conservative views. (For some reason he doesn’t mention Solidarity, which got the biggest vote of the smaller left pro-indy parties in 2016).

There’s nothing wrong with that per se in the wider field of independence politics – if you simply limit yourself to saying that in a future independent Scotland there needs to be an alternative pro-indy party that isn’t the Greens or a party of the pro-independence socialist left. But if the idea here is to maximise the electoral effectiveness of the pro-indy vote, then simply setting up yet another indy choice on the list does nothing but further divide the pro-indy vote on the list. It achieves precisely the opposite of your declared intent!

I, along with others, have promoted the use of a “max the Yes” strategy for the Holyrood elections since 2015. At that time Wings was one of the most vituperative opponents of such a strategy. But the idea of “max the Yes”, in its purest and most effective form, is very simple ... and it’s not about multiplying the amount of indy parties standing against each other on the list like the measles.

Summed up, and in its purest form, a proper “max the Yes” strategy that works the best, and ensures a pro-indy majority in the Scottish Parliament, goes like this: The SNP stand wholly unopposed by any other pro-indy party in the constituencies, with the support of the whole Yes movement. A “max the Yes”, Team Scotland or Alba Alliance consisting of a single slate of non-SNP candidates, including the Greens, Solidarity, SSP, Rise – and any new centre-based Wings party – etc, as well as prominent pro-indy, non-party individuals, stands unopposed by the SNP on the list, and supported by the whole of the Yes movement.

This allows all Yes voters to support the SNP in their constituencies – assuring the SNP will win more constituencies than they otherwise would on their own, and allows all Yes voters to support a second non-SNP alliance that is broadly representative of the Yes movement as a whole, on the list. This maximises the effectiveness of the pro-indy vote on the list.

Readers, do the math! It’s the surest path to an indyref majority in 2021, and ensures many places on the list currently taken up by Tories and Unionists would go to a wide mixture of pro-indy candidates.

Such an alliance would have to be negotiated into existence first, of course, and it could be only for the one election in 2021, if it was necessary.

But can we say it won’t be?

Yes, everyone would have to make some sacrifices and compromises to bring such a thing about.

But isn’t the great goal of independence worthy of such compromises and sacrifices?

And wouldn’t it be a tragedy if we woke up on the morning after the next Holyrood election with more Scots ready to vote for indy than ever before, but a Unionist majority of one in the Scottish Parliament able to block and obfuscate the will of the people?

Consequently, let’s hope Wings will stand back here and see an even bigger picture, and we hope that sometime soon someone, or some group, will take the initiative of calling exploratory talks with all the non-SNP pro-indy parties and forces to see if a single pro-indy list alliance is possible in 2021.
Steve Arnott
Inverness

IN this unique period of Scottish politics, where we are finally entering the end of Empire, for London rule, we are at a terminus which may not yet be clear to many, but which shall certainly become obvious in a historical context.

Stuart Campbell’s potential and projected Wings party might just be one vehicle historians will declare ushering in this end, but even campaigning on the list, it’s exceptionally doubtful if it could make a difference by standing alone. It’s most likely to become just a shadow of the Greens, or perhaps the Greens will find themselves dispossessed of their place by this new upstart.

The new Wings party would have both its greatest asset and biggest liability in its association with the website run by Stuart Campbell, who it must be said runs both an informative and educational forum, yet one which, like Newsnet Scotland, offers little opportunity for open discussion. Newsnet was once arguably the premier political news site in the nation, it’s fall from prominence appearing simultaneous with curtailment of its unique interactive aspects. The ability for open discussion seems critical to not just a website, but a political party. Arguably, with curtailments of proposals such as a secondary or tertiary route to it’s goal, the SNP leadership might also be walking this path. Campbell’s reportedly rather conservative viewpoints with respect to some minority rights are also unlikely to help electoral success.

The Greens’ victorious record in any Scots contest is best described as deplorable, gaining only list MSPs, with little local success – they clearly are a force appealing to a specific subset.

With the SNP rightly looking to literally sweep the board on the constituency seats, they will undoubtedly be the largest party after the 2021 election, allowing independence isn’t already in place.

What’s needed is a little outside-the-box thinking by the SNP, and an electoral pact before the next election. Perhaps such an offering could be a tripartite alliance, where in list seats, the SNP will not stand candidates in an agreed portion of regions, ones where it’s unlikely to see success, and instead, actually announce that it would request such voters to vote for alternative parties instead, parties which could be formed as a “National Alliance, Green or Wings”, with the Greens forwarding candidates in half, and a Wings or other party providing the balance of nominees.

Such a format could literally see anything from a virtually guaranteed nationalist/Scotland focused majority to a virtual Unionist annihilation, very possibly not just for this electoral cycle.

One thing is certain: it doesn’t matter what’s done, as long as something is done which will virtually guarantee an appropriate majority at Holyrood with a path to independence, one which will afterwards guarantee that all decisions about Scots are taken by Scots, which should be everyone’s ultimate goal.

Westminster will rarely make choices to benefit Scotland if it compromises England, and we will always suffer as a result. If we need proof of that, we should only look to Ireland, North and South, and where they were relatively in both 1930 and today.

Ninety years ago, the Republic looked north in envy at the prosperity there, while today, the North exists in relative poverty, the Union supporters there remaining unable to accept it was their choice, when they chose London’s alliance, and with it, subjugation, deprivation and unrest. Only we can ensure our own children don’t live this life. It’s time for London to gaze north again, and rue its rule.
Ashley MacGregor
East Kilbride