The new first minister John Swinney has unveiled his cabinet picks. One decision which immediately attracted controversy was the axing of the post of minister for independence which was created by his predecessor Humza Yousaf.
The decision was greeted with predictable criticism from certain conspiracy theorist quarters who saw it as 'proof' that the Scottish Government and the SNP are not really interested in pursuing independence.
In the new slimmed-down cabinet, the minister for planning role was also dropped, as were specific briefs on the just transition, Europe and international development, and biodiversity.
There is an element of magical thinking amongst some in the wider Scottish independence movement who appear to believe that the SNP merely needs to engineer a massive constitutional confrontation with Westminster and Scotland would immediately shake free from the shackles of Westminster rule.
Sadly, that is not the case.
READ MORE: John Swinney addresses ending minister for independence role
The reality is that Scotland remains a nation in which there is no broad consensus on independence and the overriding priority of the independence movement and the pro-independence parties must be to build that wider consensus in Scottish society.
In an article for The National, the new first minister argued that competent government and "respectful persuasion" were the tools with which a pro-independence consensus could slowly be built across Scots society.
There is, however, an obvious problem with this formula.
The catastrophising and hysterical anti-independence media in Scotland obsessively focuses on the perceived failures of the Scottish Government but glosses over its successes.
A recent example of this was the achievement of Yousaf in ensuring that Scotland was the only part of the UK where NHS strikes were avoided.
Yet BBC Scotland, which had clearly been gearing itself up for days of extensive Scottish Government-blaming coverage should the strikes have taken place, shamefully trotted through the then-first minister's success in less than 20 seconds.
This was not an isolated incident.
It's a regular occurrence in anti-independence media which routinely fails to place the challenges facing the Scottish Government into a wider UK context of its dependency on funding from Westminster and its lack of the full range of powers of an independent nation.
It's a media that acts as though the Scottish Government already had complete freedom of movement even as it relentlessly campaigns to prevent that ever coming to pass.
I've said it before, but it bears repeating, the current devolution settlement in many respects acts as mechanism for devolving the blame for Westminster funding decisions to Holyrood.
This is a serious problem in a nation like Scotland where the disposition of the media is wildly unrepresentative of the range of views within the country on the constitutional issue which is the fulcrum of Scottish politics.
The Scottish media is overwhelmingly hostile to the idea of independence and that ensures that any pro-independence political party will struggle to build a reputation for competence in government.
Swinney argues that there is no need in his new cabinet for a dedicated minister for independence as building the case for independence is a central part of the role of all ministers in his government.
That may well be true and as such is welcome and reassuring.
In his article for The National the First Minister wrote: "Because the Scottish Government believes independence offers the best future for Scotland, all Cabinet Secretaries and ministers – not just one – are responsible for helping to bring about that better future."
However, the optics of abolishing the post of a dedicated minister for independence are problematic at a time when the overriding need of the new first minister is to inspire confidence in the wider independence movement.
READ MORE: John Swinney announces new ministerial team – see the full list
His government remains committed to the furtherance of the case for independence at a time when it's difficult to see a clear path ahead due to the undemocratic behaviour of the Labour and Conservative parties.
The new first minister cannot risk allowing independence to be seen as an afterthought for his government, something which they'd gratefully accept if it fell magically into its lap.
A pro-independence Scottish Government must be the spearhead of the wider grassroots independence movement which it must both lead and inspire.
The Labour backlash against Keir Starmer for his decision to admit a hard-right Tory MP into his party is continuing to gain strength.
Natalie Elphicke, the erstwhile Conservative MP for Dover, crossed the floor of the House of Commons on Wednesday and now sits as a Labour MP.
The decision sparked anger amongst many in the Labour party given that Elphicke was considered hard right even by the standards of a Conservative party which has moved very far to the right in recent years.
Elphicke was as staunch member of the hard right anti-EU European Research Group and was outspoken in her opposition to immigration and her support for the Rwanda policy and frequently spoke of her belief that even tougher measures should be taken against refugees and asylum seekers.
Yet Elphicke now sits as a Labour MP even as Diane Abbott has remained suspended from the Labour party for the best part of a year.
Labour chair Anneliese Dodds is the latest senior Labour figure to sell their soul and has defended the decision to grant Elphicke's asylum application.
Dodds said she believed Elphicke was a good fit for Labour because her remarks on border security and housing were “absolutely fundamental to the Labour party”.
They should have sent Elphicke to the Bibby Stockholm for months to await their decision.
It's not just Elphicke's hard right views on Europe and immigration that have sparked disquiet in the Labour party.
The decision to admit her has been controversial among many female Labour MPs because of Elphicke's defence of her former husband, the Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, who was convicted of sexual assault in 2020 and sentenced to two years in prison.
Shortly after his conviction, Elphicke told the Sun her husband had been the victim of a “terrible miscarriage of justice”, and she cast doubt on his victims' testimonies.
READ MORE: Natalie Elphicke apologises for comments about ex-husband’s victims
She said at the time: “Charlie is charming, wealthy, charismatic and successful – attractive, and attracted to, women.
“All things that in today’s climate made him an easy target for dirty politics and false allegations.”
Elphicke, along with four other Tory MPs, was later sanctioned by the House of Commons Standards Committee for trying to influence the judge's ruling on her husband's appeal against his sentence and conviction.
The appeal failed and the Elphicke’s divorced.
To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics
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