IN Wednesday’s National, Kevin McKenna states that an independent Scotland “ain’t about to happen any time soon. But maybe that’s alright. Maybe we can live with that.” I say we must not.
I agree with a lot of what he says in his article except that we must not live without independence for a second longer than necessary – for the abolition of deprivation and persistent child poverty that abounds in Scotland, for the sake of our own much-maligned NHS, for the eradication of energy poverty despite us having energy in abundance, etc, etc.
I listened to Humza’s acceptance speech and was heartened to hear his emphasis on inclusivity, thinking that maybe he could actually manage to maintain unity within the SNP.
But then came the slap in the face to all centrist members of the party and all supporters of independence: the proposed demotion of Kate Forbes, the most eloquent of the leadership candidates and the one that had the greatest appeal outside the party.
That early misstep underlines the Sturgeonistas’ control of the party. Humza, who I assume is a fairly intelligent man, would have seen the benefit in appointing Kate to a high-profile position where her presentational skills could have helped promote support for independence.
But sadly it seems that the appointments of his ministers have been preordained by the cabal that he allegedly leads.
So, having been warmed by Humza’s initial words, I now have to doubt their sincerity and I’m drawn to rename his SNP as the Scottish Autocratic Mindless Endgame (SAME) Party. Yes, autocratic in their imposition of legislation that clearly does not have popular support (such as the GRR Bill) and autocratic in their management of the leadership process (we all loved being told who to vote for!).
Yes, mindless too, in the dumping of Kate Forbes – a huge asset in the pursuit of independence, the most “progressive” of objectives from which all truly progressive policies can take root.
It seems to me now that it may well be best for the SNP to split, simply in order to broaden the appeal of independence.
The controlling cabal in the SNP don’t seem capable of change. It’s either their way, or you are out of the way. They increasingly now are becoming toxic to the cause of independence, for too many people will be looking at their behaviour and thinking “that’s not how I want an independent Scotland to be run”.
With a split in the SNP, there can be room in another party for centrist MSPs, like Kate Forbes, to flourish and espouse the vision for a fairer, greener, independent, and democratic Scotland.
That way, votes for SNP will decline but support for independence, rather than waver, can increase substantially.
With a split, we would probably see more Scottish Unionist MPs get to Westminster. I don’t think that should worry us. When it comes to the next Holyrood election, we would expect some collaboration between the four independence-supporting parties against the three main Unionist parties.
With substantially improved support generally for independence, a Holyrood election could then see the Unionist parties lose many of their “list” seats and a big majority for independence in seats and the share of the vote.
Split the SNP. Then, when popular support for independence holds persistently above 55%, collapse the Holyrood government to engineer the first and last de facto referendum for independence.
Yes, independence can come sooner than many imagine – despite the SNP.
Alan Adair
Blairgowrie
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel