IF nothing else, the past week has provided ample proof that a week in politics can be a very long time indeed. A few days ago I read in your columns John Curtice’s masterful analysis of the present state of the SNP and was comforted by the concluding paragraph which pointed out that the public at large were more concerned over the impact of Brexit and the problems of Covid-19 than they were with internal squabbles between individual Party members. “God’s in his Heaven; All’s right with the world,” as Browning said.

Things were looking good; we seemed on our way to a resounding win in the May election. Disillusioned voters from the main opposition parties were queuing up to vote for us. But then something went horribly wrong. We are now staring possible defeat in the face – with little prospect of gaining any new seats and a high probability of losing many of those we presently hold.

The reason lies in the appalling mismanagement of the recent National Executive Committee. Dirty linen was truly washed in public. Disputes over issues of little intrinsic interest to Jo Public were fully aired and private details were leaked to the press. Transgender politics are not uppermost in the minds of voters and only a handful of die-hard nationalists are concerned over different routes to independence. The main concern for most of us is to get there by whatever means possible.

These and other unfortunate blunders could be dismissed, or perhaps excused, as an artifact of the unusual times we live in: where proper group meetings are replaced by Zoom conversations; where people can no longer have face-to-face discussions leading, hopefully, to consensual decisions. But the ultimate blunder has been the sacking of a hard-working very popular front-bench member and one of her colleagues; an action which is open to interpretation as an act of sheer political vindictiveness. It is this more than anything that will upset voters. People do not like it when facts and reasons for otherwise inexplicable actions are kept from them.

The crux of the problem is that the SNP have now more supporters and members than ever before, but not all of them are committed to the concept of Scottish independence. In a sense we have been hoist with our own petard. Our numbers have increased dramatically because of the sheer quality of the SNP’s efforts and achievements over the last decade. When the party was smaller, it was taken for granted that if you were a member of the SNP you were totally committed to the concept of an independent Scotland. But not so today.

How wide is the gulf between the SNP as a political party and the concept of Scottish independence? I will be voting for the SNP in May, and I would strongly urge all present and former members and supporters of the SNP, to do likewise. It is really a matter of Hobson’s choice: there is no one individual member or party who can be counted on to promote the cause of Scottish independence as effectively. That is not in any way to denigrate the very welcome support for independence from the Greens. But they have their own agenda, their own priorities; and while their main concern, like the SNP’s, is highly laudable, it is quite different.

It is also worth keeping in mind the fact that a political party is after all only a group of people – and very often anything but a cohesive group – at that. As the saying goes if it gets too hot in the kitchen, you know what to do – and one might assume that the same surely applies in politics – particularly true today, when tensions become unbearable, particularly through the inappropriate use of social media.

But this is not the road to go down.

In the past, the SNP has always had an advantage over other parties in that they have one goal, one objective, one end game that has bound them together. This is the presumption that Scotland can stand alone and prosper and flourish as an independent nation. When disputes arose and divisions appeared, as they did in 1979 this conviction has served as a strong adhesive to paper over the cracks; to bind them more securely than any metaphorical glue could ever have done.

The question that must be asked now is whether that adhesive is still strong enough to prevent the cracks caused by the recent NEC’s disastrous muddle from tearing further asunder. Has the damage caused by the sacking of Joanna Cherry really reached the point where the damage is irreparable; where, as the split grows ever wider, the whole building may collapse like the proverbial House of Cards?

Perhaps Jim Callahan’s acerbic comment about turkeys queuing up for Christmas, when the SNP brought down the Labour government in 1979, is more relevant today than it was more than 40 years ago. It may be that only swift, restorative action by those responsible for the recent chaos may save the party from a similar fate.

Jim Towers
via email