Wednesday, March 29, 2023

Update about Alba, and VIDEO PREVIEW of the remaining results from this month's Scot Goes Pop polling

First of all, a quick update about one of the points I made in my post yesterday.  I mentioned that my faith in the Alba Party's internal democratic processes took a big knock last month when I put myself forward for a set of internal elections and was not informed of the results, even though I sent a follow-up email to try to find out.  Last night and this morning, I spoke to a couple of senior people in the party, and it turns out that I was in fact on the ballot in February, and I was elected to one of the four committees I stood for (the Appeals Committee).  It's not really clear why I wasn't informed afterwards - it may have been a technical fault, or my email address may have been left off the message by accident, but the important thing is that I now have far more confidence than I did 24 hours ago that Alba members of all shades of opinion still have fair access to the party's internal democracy.  I'm very grateful to the people who helped me resolve the issue.

So I'll be on the Appeals Committee for the next year, and having put myself forward for that position and been elected, I take the responsibility seriously, and I'm therefore fully committed to Alba.  But I would just say this to my own party.  Kate Forbes' mantra was "continuity won't cut it" and in the current circumstances that applies just as much to Alba as it does to the SNP.  I'm not talking about leadership - we're incredibly fortunate to have someone with the immense experience and abilities of Alex Salmond at the helm and he remains the correct person to take us forward.  But in the wake of Humza Yousaf's narrow victory, which sealed the SNP's transition to being a de facto devolutionist party, there are swathes of the independence movement crying out for a credible, mainstream, full-bloodedly pro-independence alternative, and we need to be ruthlessly honest with ourselves about the changes we would have to make to be the party that genuinely offers that alternative - because, after all, if we don't do it, it's likely that nobody at all will.

Jo Grimond famously said to the Liberal Party in the 1950s that they needed to "get on, or get out".  That exhortation could also be fairly applied to the Alba Party at present, because I know many people are painfully aware that if Alba didn't exist, the party's members could have been in the SNP voting for Kate Forbes as leader over the last two weeks.  The more I've thought about it, the more convinced I've become that Alba's existence didn't actually swing the balance yesterday - Yousaf's margin of victory was just over 2000 votes, and apparently Alba has a membership of just under 4000, but we have to bear in mind that by no means all of those people would be SNP members in the absence of Alba, and there would also have been many abstentions and people who didn't use their second preferences, or people who used their second preferences for Yousaf. (Perverse though it may seem, I know anecdotally of Alba members who would have voted Regan 1, Yousaf 2.) So when you put all of those factors together, the strong likelihood is that Yousaf would still have won narrowly - but the fact that we're even posing the question points to a key problem.  Alba members are a precious resource who can only be doing good in one party at any one time, and if we're going to justify to ourselves keeping those people away from the good they could be doing inside the SNP, we need to start proving that Alba as a separate party is capable of moving the dial on independence in a way that we have not yet managed.

What could make a difference?  There is a 'silver bullet' scenario which could transform Alba's fortunes overnight, and that would be defections of MSPs who cannot see a future in a Yousaf-led SNP, and the subsequent creation of an Alba parliamentary group at Holyrood.  The party would then have instant credibility and a good chance of retaining a presence in the Scottish Parliament beyond the 2026 election.  But if that doesn't happen, we're going to have to do it the hard way by gradually tripling our support from 2% to 6% over the next three years (enough to win multiple list seats), and the path to that begins with cultivating a greater appeal to committed independence supporters.  I've lost count of the people who have told me over recent months that they'd love to join an alternative to the SNP, but they look at the Alba culture as exhibited on social media and think "that's just not for me".  I speak as someone who was on Alba's National Executive as recently as six months ago, but I sometimes look at the Alba culture and see a very closed world that I do not fully understand or identify with, and that only really speaks to itself.  Through A Scottish Prism is "the Alba BBC" - everybody watches it, and if you don't, you're somehow not "real Alba".  Wings Over Scotland is "the Alba tabloid" - everybody reads it and likes it, and if you don't, you're somehow not "real Alba".  Salvo is "the Alba faith", and if you don't attend church, you're somehow not "real Alba".  All of those things may be fine, but they're not everyone's cup of tea, and they certainly don't represent the centre of gravity in the independence movement, let alone in wider indy-supporting Scotland.  We need a much more pluralistic landscape if Alba is going to be a party that the average independence supporter would feel comfortable joining tomorrow, or voting for tomorrow.

(Incidentally, I've got nothing at all against Salvo, who have plenty of good ideas to offer, but meditating upon the text of the Claim of Right Act 1689 isn't really my thing, just personally.  I tried to read it a few weeks ago and only got as far as the word "papist" in the second sentence.  I somehow don't think it was written with an Irish-ancestry Roman Catholic audience in mind.)

I think we could also entice people away from the SNP by offering them a much more vibrant, participatory internal democracy than exists in their current party.  At the moment Alba is very slightly more democratic than the SNP, but that's an exceedingly low bar and I think we should be aiming a lot higher.  None of the current members of the Alba NEC were elected by a vote of the whole membership - the national office bearers were declared elected without a vote because there was only one candidate for each position, and the ordinary NEC members were elected by only the relatively small minority of members who paid for a conference pass.  My view is that the case for having the entire ruling body of a party elected by that party's whole membership is close to unarguable, and I also think in an era of easy and quick online voting there's a very strong case that every single elected national position should be elected by the whole membership, rather than by a selectorate at National Council.

To put this as delicately as I can, I think we need to find a way to spend a much greater percentage of our time talking about subjects other than the trans issue.  I'm as opposed to self-ID legislation as anyone (long-term readers will remember I commissioned a poll in 2021 that showed overwhelming public opposition to the proposed law), but we've won that argument comprehensively - so comprehensively, in fact, that even Labour has effectively reversed course, which would have seemed impossible even a few months ago.  It now looks almost certain that there will be no self-ID even under a Starmer government.  There comes a point where you just have to take yes for an answer and turn your focus to other things.

Above all else, we need to stop being driven by naked revenge against the SNP and certain people within it.  If we find ourselves pondering a political intervention on the basis that "it won't help Alba, it won't help independence, but it might TURF OUT THOSE SNP TROUGHERS AT WESTMINSTER SO LET'S BLOODY DO IT", our reasoning is going very badly wrong somewhere.  We need to have a laser-like focus on what will actually help bring independence forward - and number one on that list is winning Alba list seats in 2026.  Why?  Because if there's a narrow pro-indy majority in Holyrood after 2026, and if Alba are a non-trivial part of that majority (big ifs, I admit), we will have an insane amount of leverage to coax the Scottish Government into a much more radical independence strategy.  The option of a unilateral Referendum Bill has been removed by the Supreme Court, but there are plenty of other options that an elected government could pursue.

Last but not least, we need to start talking independence support up rather than down.  I've pointed this out a number of times recently, but Alba seem to be picking up the awful Wings habit of "celebrating" poor polls for Yes and even exaggerating how bad they are.  To me, that speaks to a lack of confidence - it's as if we see independence as a project currently owned by the SNP and not part-owned by ourselves.  We are one of the largest pro-independence parties, like the Greens, and we need to start claiming our stake in good or decent poll showings for Yes.  And on that note, here is a video preview of the remaining results from the Scot Goes Pop polling conducted this month...

I've got an idea (and it's only a vague idea at this stage) that when the autumn comes around, I might try to stand for one of the Alba national office bearer positions, because those are the only positions elected by the whole membership.  It would not be in any great expectation of actually being elected - the purpose would be simply to try to start a debate among the membership about the ideas I've raised above.  Or if someone more telegenic decides to take the task on, I'd get behind them instead, but I do think it's a debate that needs to happen, and sooner rather than later.  Maybe that can be my pet project for this year, to try to stop myself spending too much time repetitively blogging about the opinion poll evidence that Yousaf appears to be leading us all to calamity.  I think ultimately we're all going to have to get on with campaigning for independence in our own way, and give the SNP the space to find out for themselves that they've selected the wrong leader.  And make no mistake, that painful but necessary moment will arrive, even if I can't predict exactly how or when.

30 comments:

  1. Sir John Curtice, on Talk TV said, that Yes and No for independence is still roughly 50/50, when you remove the don't knows. The headline grabbing 39% of the Yes campaign is highly misleading.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with this. I briefly joined Alba as a founder member and attended the first conference, which felt like a breath of fresh air after many years of stifled debate at SNP conferences. It felt like a true party of independence, but within weeks it felt like the party was entering a gender war, with that as the issue it would campaign on rather than indy, and it just wasn't the battle I signed up for, so I reluctantly left. Alba does need to refocus on the lines you state, I have little faith now in the SNP leading us anywhere towards indy in the next 20 years.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We need full-blooded leadership.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I thought at the time of its establishment, and even more so now after this leadership campaign was that the best political space Alba could occupy would be as a more politically conservative Nationalist party. It’s painfully clear that is where the gap in the market is in Scottish politics, Forbes showed that such a proposition is actually rather more popular than I had realised. If Alba ever wants to become a serious political player, it is going to have to move on this direction at some point.

    The politics of conspiracy theories, maximalist positions on independence and little interest in domestic issues beyond transgenderism isn’t a vote winner and will leave the party permanently on the fringes looking in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I thought the same. There was no point fighting the SNP, Greens, Labour and Lib Dems for the centre and centre-left. The Scottish right may be a smaller pool to fish in, but there's only one real competitor in there. Alba could have pinched the domestically popular policies they offer and opposed the unpopular stuff forced onto them by a distant Westminster HQ.

      Drag the Tories back down into third(or fourth!) place, convert the hardest No voters into Yes supporters, pressure the SNP list vote to implode in two directions(the left-leaners go Green, right-leaners go Alba). Could have got our supermajority in seats on the back of an overall popular majority.

      Delete
  5. Excellent post, James. I came to the conclusion a while back that the SNP were no longer the vehicle to independence, and I doubt they ever will be again. Certainly not in my lifetime. It therefore falls upon Alba to take up the mantle and that is where my vote will be going in future. I will probably join the party too, as the only way to shape an organisation is to be a part of it. If we want Alba to look and act in accordance with our views and ideals then we need to be an active part of that process. It might take decades, but I see no reason at all why Alba can't be the political voice of the independence movement. I suspect if it plays its cards right it could have representation in Holyrood at the next election and a proper foothold within a few years of that. I don't think Alba needs to actively attack the SNP, they seem to be doing a good enough job of that themselves.

    I liked your 'Alba culture' section, it made me think a bit. Do I watch 'Through a Scottish Prism'? Occasionally. If I had time I would probably watch more. Do I read 'Wings'? Yes, I do, having stopped for a long time, but I read it through a sort of mental filter, trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were. Have I signed up to 'Salvo'? Yes. Whilst I totally agree with your sentiments about the whole "let's rummage through 16th century documents" thing, I think it is important groundwork that needs to be done, because the Unionist stance is entirely dependent upon constitutional arguments and I get the feeling that they are going to be pressed to fall back on those more and more, and ultimately I think these little details and niceties are going to matter. Getting your ducks in a row is never a bad thing.

    So, with three 'yes's, I guess that means I'm in.

    "Up yer swords, and doun yer guns, and tae the rogues again!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with everything you just posted. It's exactly how I feel now and I think a great many more.
      It's ALBA's turn now , but can they get people in place to stand.

      Delete
  6. Well said, I have my concerns about ALBA which you have put so much better than I could. As a member since the start I have been asked to vote for nothing. I am not experienced in the ways of political parties but that disnae seem right to me. In fact I have been asked for nothing at all apart from money.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Salvo is based on a flawed central premise: that the Claim of Right (1689) is a legally binding acknowledgement of the constitutional supremacy of the Scottish people. You only have to read the 1689 Claim of Right to know that isn't the case. The arguments on Salvo are quite convincing - until, that is, you go and read the source document.

    There is such a claim (the 1989 Claim of Right), so I have no idea why Salvo aren't focused on that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 1989 Claim of Right is a much more impressive and relevant document - but it's certainly not legally binding.

      Delete
    2. You are right of course - there is no domestic law that gives Scots the right of self determination.

      Delete
    3. I think the point is that the 1689 claim was only really legal in retrospect. The important part was that a group of people stood up and said "you're not king anymore, this other bloke is. What ya gonna do about it?" That process and its outcome subsequently became accepted as part of the constitution. The 1989 claim was similar but rather more muted. Sort of "We are sovereign and will choose who we want to be our leader if we want to. Any objections?.." *crickets*...

      The substance of it is yet to be tested.

      At the end of the day, history - and laws - are made by the victors.

      ...and my reading of it is this:
      Parliament gets its sovereignty from the Crown (whether it likes it or not). The Sovereign of the day has to swear an oath upholding the Treaty of Union. The treaty stipulates that the Sovereign also swears to uphold the 1689 Claim of Right.

      So the Claim may not be legally binding, but if it is ignored, the Sovereign isn't sovereign, in Scotland at least, and therefore Parliament isn't either. So yeah, Chuck is only King and parliament is only sovereign because we say so.

      I'm sure others would beg to disagree.

      Delete
  8. Thinking about Alba going mainstream - that's going to be difficult until Alex Salmond is as exonerated in the court of public opinion as he was in the court of law. Hard to see how that is possible unless prosecution witnesses from his trial are done for perjury.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Problem with not punishing troughers for indy beforehand is that it could be extremely difficult to do so afterward - especially if their corrupting support networks are allowed to grow arms and legs in the interim

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only people we "punish" by installing unionist MPs are ourselves.

      Delete
    2. Quite - and ten times as much when they were elected under an independence banner - as the majority of MPs from Scotland have been SINCE 2015 !!

      Delete
  10. I'm in Alba and I agree with many of these points, James.

    What has happened with the SNP has been a tremendously bitter and traumatic experience for many of the folk who have joined Alba.

    They have experienced Sturgeon's vilification of Alex even after he had been cleared of all charges. They have had to deal with massive waves of unearned hate and attempted exclusion from the democratic process by the SNP. The trans issue has had a multiplier effect on all the bitterness.

    It is extremely difficult to rise above this, but rise above it we must. We have to stop 'taking the negative bait', as I heard Alex once putting it, no matter how difficult it is. Focus on the issues in a forward-facing way.

    Not an easy balancing act because you have to point out what is wrong, but in the right kind of way. If anybody wants a masterclass in how to do it, check Alex's latest press release.
    https://www.albaparty.org/continuity_won_t_cut_it

    Heck, if he can rise above everything he has had to face, the rest of us can.

    The other thing about Alba seems to be organizational. I get no comms from them still, even after being assured several times the problem has been fixed. I have to keep remembering to check the website, where I can get news on the big events but I receive nothing from the local branch. There seems to be a dearth of stall activity, essential to consolidate Alba as a political presence and grass-roots organisation in the eyes of the general public when the party receives so little media exposure.

    As you say, 'a laser-like focus on what will actually help bring independence forward'.


    ReplyDelete
  11. A very good post James, I think it is your most important one for some time.

    I'd be inclined to vote for Alba on the list or in council elections, but since the 2021 election they've degenerated into a fan club of swivel-eyed loons. My only contact with them has been via social media and they, or perhaps better put, people who claim to be associated with them, are nearly all awful with no idea how isolated their views from the mainstream are.

    You have to find and ally yourself with sensible, grounded people in Alba who are focused on the objective and committed to taking it forward. There has to be a strategy to get to around 12% of the list vote and a presence at council level.

    It needs to be about jobs, housing, health, education, pensions and the environment and how independence is necessary to develop Scotland more fully.

    Six topics, 4000 members, so it must be possible to find 25-50 competent people to be active in each of those areas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good post but I can’t believe you didn’t include, arguably always the most important “topic” ie. the economy, on your list.

      Delete
    2. A fair point, but I thought that I did when I said "jobs". Most people understand the economy in the sense of do they have a job that allows them to afford the things they need, have a holiday and save a bit.

      Delete
  12. Yousaf taking SNP cronyism and nepotism to new heights.

    Yousaf said he seperates his religion from his job and then turns Bute House in to a mosque. Mr Progressive Yousaf of course only has his male pals around to worship in Bute House unless the women were out the back not to be seen or heard. Progressive my arse.

    Shona Robison, Sturgeon's bestie, in charge of finance.

    The party I voted for all my life is now an embarrassing corrupt disgrace. I used to be proud to say I voted SNP but not now after 8 years of Sturgeon's demolition derby days. Nicola I CAN'T RECALL Sturgeon and John REDACTOR MAN Swinney all smiles on the back benches yesterday as their boy Yousaf won the day. If they were for Scottish independence they should be looking ashamed at their failure to deliver independence but they are more than happy as they are Britnats and they have pochled another Britnat in to the FM position.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look I'm absolutely no fan of Yousef, but:

      a) Bute House is his home. I understand that uncontainable rage is essentially your default emotion, but I doubt you'd have accused Kate Forbes of "turning Bute House into Wee Free Church" if she'd won and prayed in her own home.

      b) His mother was quite literally in the prayer photo behind him, so unless you're saying his mother is a male, I'm not entirely sure where this "women not allowed" vitriol has sprung from.

      Perhaps if you wiped away those tears of rage once in a while, and got a little perspective, you'd have noticed her.

      Delete
    2. To the best of my knowledge, First Ministers don't literally live in Bute House, it's not like Downing Street. I believe Humza's home is in Broughty Ferry.

      Delete
    3. Apologies, I was under the impression that they could, but Sturgeon chose not to. Didn't one of the allegations in the Salmond trial involve his bed at Bute House? I may be misremembering.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous at 10.19pm - Bute House is an official residence not his private residence. He can do what the hell he wants in Broughty Ferry. Like most numpties you are wrong if Forbes had invited members of her church in for a prayer session in her first afternoon then I would have criticised her. He choose to publicise it. I only saw men in the TV pictures but are you saying women are treated equally in the Muslim religion - of course you are not so pissof - my point stands. The only regret I have is that I have not expressed my views more strongly against Sturgeon over the years. If more people had done this we might not be in this current deplorable situation. It was all the wheest for Indy diddies (probably like you - but you hide behind 'anonymous') that are to blame. Yes the FM has a bed in Bute House so pissof with your pathetic " perhaps I am misremembering " crap. It is still an official not private residence.
      If a woman was there in the picture then she was hidden by Yousaf. You clearly have x Ray eyes or insider knowledge. Pity your super powers didn't include forseeing the future and you could have seen what I and many others saw that Sturgeon would never deliver Indyref2 never mind independence. Perhaps Sturgeon's sister could have have done a Tarot reading for you. Or is she a phoney like Sturgeon.
      Finally, what are you apologising to James for, its me you should be apologising to. Ya numpty.

      Delete
    5. Another point you may want to consider anonymous at 10.19pm - let's just say you are correct that it is his mother standing hidden behind him in the picture - only you have x Ray vision of course- I would NEVER issue a picture to the media of me blanking out my mother like that. It just reinforces the point I made - disrespectful to his own mother the only women there. So your comment just proves my point and that is often the mark of me bungo pony.

      Delete
  13. Shirley - Ann Somerville no longer in charge of the education of Scotland's children is a good thing. Some one with decent values should be in charge of this brief. Somerville should be nowhere near any job that contains the word Justice.

    Jenny Gilruth now in the cabinet - will she pass all the government secrets to her Labour partner /wife Kezia Dugdale - Dugdale now in the Britnat John Smith institute - clearly Yousaf doesn't care as he is a Britnat anyway.

    Angus Robertson - external affairs - very appropriate for a man who has proven he is all for external affairs. A Britnat to his core.

    Angela Constance - useless in the Sturgeon Parliamentary Inquiry - probably being rewarded for that biased performance.

    Neil Gray looks and sounds like the SNP's very own version of Dominic Rabb.

    If I have upset any SNP/ WGD numpties with these comments then please note I do not care as you obviously do not care about Scotland by giving us 8 years of Sturgeon and now this obnoxious Yousaf and his team of chancers.

    ReplyDelete
  14. WGD nasty numpty Dr Jim proving he is a Britnat as he says he will vote Labour rather than Alba. Something about knawing his leg off before voting Alba but he would vote Labour. Lots of phoney independence supporters revealing themselves these days.

    ReplyDelete
  15. James, a quick turnaround for you on the Alba involvement which is good news. Re your post, are we not just mimicking Irish politics with the demise of the IPP after highs and lows, the loss of a charismatic but ultimately ineffectual leader in Sturgeon and the eventual replacement by a more focused and committed political force. Could that force, which I think you are eluding to not be Alba, there is space for a repositioning as SNP are ideology focused, fiscally incompetent (esp with Forbes for Robison) and as a party financially screwed. The SNP’s massive drop in membership and their upcoming drubbing at next GE (now baked in)and subsequent loss of short money will bring reality calling. I believe they will at that point double down and the moment for a UUP to DUP or more similarly IPP to SF will have arrived, I think our ambition to rid the Indy movement of Devolutionists and Gender Zealots needs to be higher and all before 2026 is more than doable.

    ReplyDelete
  16. All these comments that say let's see how he is, give Yousaf a chance, and if he is rubbish then Forbes will replace him at a new leadership election. The only problem with that is the SNP (Sturgeon machine) will probably fix it for Somerville, for example, to win. There is an endless supply in the SNP of these Sturgeon loyalists ( Sturgeon pals) that will be useless and be replaced by more of the same. The only surprise in Sturgeons 8 years was that she didn't get her sister on the gravy train but she probably got the assault charges dropped for her.

    ReplyDelete