The SNP must remember ‘national’ is not a dirty word

It may be just a straw in the wind, but reports are appearing of irritation in Europe that Britain has failed to name a day for the next gathering of the European Political Community, which London is set to host. One senior EU official said: “We keep asking for a date and [the UK] say they can’t give us one ‘for obvious reasons,’ which we take to mean they have not fully decided about the election.”

It’s true that one slothful response doth not a May election confirm. But if we suddenly get plunged into campaigning in two months’ time, is the SNP ready?

You might wonder.

Looking at this weeks’ newsworthy comments by Humza Yousaf, we learn he’s invited Keir Starmer up for a chat, declared the election for Labour and feels uncomfortable about including the word “National” in his party’s name.

Dearie me.

Quite apart from conveying zero excitement – and excitement is the rocket fuel that powers any party that aims to overturn the status quo – the SNP leader is missing open goals and giving very mixed messages.

READ MORE: UK Government 'unlikely' to scrap biofuel cap to save Grangemouth

Take the “Labour’s gonnae win” pronouncement, designed to reassure wobbly voters that Labour doesn’t need Scottish votes, cos it’s already got this one in the bag down south.

Now it’s true that Scottish votes have only altered the outcome of a General Election four times since 1918. But you do kinda need to spell that out in words of one syllable at every opportunity to counter the “Tartan Wall” narrative deployed by broadcasters like Nick Robinson during his recent northern trip for the Today programme.

Without a sniff of real electoral jeopardy in Scotland, folk south of the Border will not give a flying wotsit about the outcome here. So hacks who fancy a trip up the road must pretend the result will matter big style down south.

But there’s an even bigger problem. The “Labour’s gonnae win” SNP narrative is defeatist and confusing.

After all, the SNP argues that retaining a majority of Scottish seats means winning the election in Scotland – sufficient to trigger the demand for control over key devolved powers and the right to hold a referendum and to convene a constitutional convention before a de facto vote in the Scottish 2026 elections, as Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp has recently advocated.

But this is only possible if the SNP “wins” the General Election in Scotland. How confusing then, to hear the SNP leader apparently concede defeat?

Of course, Yousaf has been careful to qualify his words – Labour is set to win a UK-wide victory and become the largest party at Westminster. But winning is winning. It’s a powerful word. And rash to have handed it to UK Labour, when so much depends on breathing life into the concept of “winning” here.

Of course, the SNP might argue that Scottish voters are well accustomed to the business of having two different victors north and south of the Border at General Elections. It’s why so many Scots want independence – to simply get the government we vote for.

Still, as Starmer is carried shoulder-high into Downing Street, it will be hard to produce the same “winning” frenzy in Scotland. And conceding victory doesn’t help.

Then there’s inviting Starmer for a chat – clearly hell will freeze over before the Labour leader comes anywhere near Bute House.

Starmer’s last trip north was conducted at breakneck speed to outrun activists protesting about his criminally weak stance on Gaza. The second Prime Minister Starmer crosses the Border, they’ll be back. And while Keir ain’t Boris Johnson and Humza ain’t Nicola Sturgeon, there’s still the spectre of that dreadful visit four years ago. Why risk it?

Now, it’s very likely the First Minister didn’t expect Sir Keir to jet up the road just for tea and Tunnocks teacakes. This was a gesture, presumably designed to emphasise the SNP leader’s credentials as a mediator, snub Anas Sarwar by courting his boss and reflect the First Minister’s guid conceit of his ain office – equal in status to that of the Westminster Opposition.

READ MORE: Stephen Flynn: No SNP MPs will enter House of Lords under my watch

OK, fine. But essentially this just name-checks and adds credibility to a political opponent. Such empty gestures may seem awfy daring to minders but are no substitute for actual policy.

And then there’s the other wee problem – inviting Starmer reminds us of inviting Turkey’s President Erdogan – Yousaf’s truly bizarre hosting decision.

Sarah Glynn has written about Erdogan’s “ethnic cleansing” of native Kurds: “As a result, millions of people in north and east Syria are currently without electricity, water and cooking gas; economic and social life is at a standstill; and people are in fear of their lives – providing fertile soil for the revival of Isis.”

This invitation is best lost in the post.

The next invite could usefully be extended to someone the FM might actually hope to meet.

Finally, there’s the baffling difficulty with the word “National” in the SNP’s name. Really, if an SNP leader can’t do something pretty special with that powerful word, we are all sunk.

Scotland’s main claim to fame and strongest card in our demand for self-determination is, precisely, that Scotland is a nation. Not just a cluster of randoms waiting at a constitutional phonebox. Not a sizeable posse nonetheless content to be ignored – like the good folk of Yorkshire. Scotland is a nation. Yorkshire is a county or a region.

And this distinction – this unique constitutional and cultural national status – allows Scotland’s case for statehood to be understood (if not always accepted) by folk in the rest of the UK, for whom “nation” and “state” are conflated as easily as “England” and “Britain”.

But the argument needs to be made – boldly.

Forgive me for quoting my own book Thrive: “The United Kingdom is a state composed of four nations.

“A deck of four distinct suites, not 66 million individual playing cards.

“That’s why it doesn’t matter if Scotland contains fewer folk than Yorkshire.

“Scotland is a historic nation that helped create the modern United Kingdom (God love us).

“Yorkshire is a region with a distinct personality but no constitutional identity within the UK.

“Thus, Scotland is a player. Yorkshire isn’t.” All because of our status as a nation.

So, I’d humbly suggest the party that aims to empower the nation of Scotland is well-named as its National Party.

READ MORE: Poll: Majority back Scottish Parliament having independence powers

It’s true that some important cultural figures regard nationality as a mere accident of birth. Strangely though, that non-ethnic outlook is a fairly pivotal part of Scotland’s distinctive national outlook.

Consider these words, written 10 years ago by veteran writer, singer and musician Dick Gaughan, whose surprise appearance on stage during the Red Clydeside concert at

Celtic Connections last week prompted an immediate standing ovation amongst the sold-out Concert Hall crowd.

“I don’t think there’s a single corner of England I haven’t been to several times in the past 40 years, and I have huge affection for most of it.

“Apart from the accident of nationality, I have more in common with a coal miner from Yorkshire or a dock worker from Liverpool than I do with the Duke of Hamilton, Michael Forsyth or Alistair Darling. But that would be true of a miner from New South Wales or a docker from San Francisco.

“There is nothing about solidarity which implies any necessity for political or cultural union.”

Amen.

Happy Burns Night.