In 2021, I made three adventurous predictions about the result of the Holyrood election, one of which was that Alba was likely to win at least a seat or two. When I was later taunted about being a long way out with the Alba prediction, I pointed out that I never claimed to be Nostradamus, but actually the other two predictions were proved right, and in the immortal words of Meatloaf, "two out of three ain't bad". And in fairness, I think last night's Question Time was a belated insight into why I made that Alba prediction in the first place, because you could see how the audience started to warm to Alex Salmond once he was given the space to talk sense about a wide range of bread-and-butter issues. What I hadn't anticipated in 2021 was that the BBC in particular would treat Alba in the same way that they treated Sinn Fein during the Troubles - ie. as a 'non-normal' party who could only be given airtime if every second of that airtime was devoted to delegitimising their very existence. Last night will have repaired some of that damage, but only a small portion of it, simply because of Question Time's modest audience figures.
The programme encapsulated the problem faced by the independence movement at present, because it confirmed that there is a party with the right independence strategy and a convincing leadership, but that party is the one with 2-3% of the vote, not the party with 30-40% of the vote. Mairi McAllan's answers on behalf of the SNP were dismal beyond belief, and confirmed yet again that the SNP under Yousaf have ceased to be a party actively seeking to win independence for the first time since at least 1942. So how do we square this circle? I know many of my fellow Alba members would say "simple - everyone ditch the SNP and start voting Alba" but in the real world that's not likely to happen any time soon, barring some kind of game-changing event such as a high-profile defection or series of defections. And while there's a degree of impatience with the likes of Ash Regan for not joining Alba as of yet, those parliamentarians may well have calculated that there is still a bigger percentage chance of "recapturing the SNP" than there is of building up Alba to the point where it overtakes the SNP as the largest pro-indy party. Given that Yousaf only won the leadership by a wafer-thin margin, it would be hard to argue that they're wrong about that, at least for the moment. The dilemma is that you can't pursue 'change the SNP from inside' and 'leave the SNP and replace it' strategies simultaneously - you have to commit to one or the other, albeit with the option of switching from the first to the second if the first runs out of road.
But the second dilemma is just how long do you give it? What if, despite his vulnerability and unpopularity, Humza Yousaf does a John Major and clings on by his fingertips for a good few years? In that event, some parliamentarians may end up wishing they'd tried to change the weather by switching parties. One possibility that is perhaps more likely than it currently seems is that SNP rebels could set up yet another new party, albeit one that becomes a close ally of Alba's, perhaps with a relationship along the lines of the SDP-Liberal Alliance of the 1980s. That way they might feel bolder about leaving the SNP, because they wouldn't have to worry so much about any image problems or baggage that Alba has, while they could still benefit from the political talents of Alex Salmond and other leading members of Alba. It would be a neat way of resolving the current stalemate - but first of all the SNP rebels would have to feel their current party is unsalvageable, and we may yet be some distance from that.
* * *
This is the core of the current problem. I see that Peter A. Bell is struggling with it too, though he seems to be unwilling to consider both options and has plumped for 'Only the SNP can save the day'. Personally, I take the opposite view. Only the switch to another party (i.e. Alba) can save the day. Or rather, this is the option which is far more likely to be achievable, and is therefore the one to be pursued. The problem is how to achieve that, and I think that media exposure is key. How that happens is obviously the issue, as the MSM are studiously trying to ignore Alba in the hope that they go away.
ReplyDeleteI suspect a significant, and understandable, cause of Peter Bell's insistence on the SNP is a personal sense of urgency: he's not a young man.
DeleteThe fastest achievable independence is undoubtedly from the SNP swerving into being a party seriously trying to make it happen. It doesn't currently look probable, but many independence supporters simply don't have the time it will take to build up Alba or another party. Not necessarily into a party of governance: UKIP unfortunately achieved their goals from a lower level of support, but it still took significant time.
The fastest route would be ideal for Scotland too. Does pursuing it set back the timeframe for a more probable route though? It's impossible to be sure, since so much can potentially change depending on the SNP's actions.
Peter A, Bell wants Scotland to declare UDI. Rather unlikely when the country is split 50-50 on independence.
DeleteWe need Alex Salmond to do more appearances on TV and to call the SNP out on Independence and he needs to stop mentioning the Greens and start mentioning ISP.
ReplyDeleteAt the next Westminster election the SNP will end up loses votes to Labour and the Alba Party simply because they have no idea if they want Independence or more powers.
The same ISP who's electoral support is microscopic?
Deletethere has to be a movement within the SNP that began with the leadership campaign, people have to join and be persuasive, just plain militant , or both, about changing the party at the top, last night Alex performed well, they had him to compare to the SNP, even the audience was applauding him, lots of people saw that, I assumed he was now a problem, but now I think people are listening to him and taking notice, even at the AUOB in Glasgow, jo public not Alba were happy to see him there, that could be the silver lining to the demise of St Nichola, it didn't seem like a movement fighting like cats in a sack on question time, both groups of supporters maybe want to take some time out from twitter and let the arguments do the talking. if he can keep pushing up the profile and squash some of the pro Russian stuff coming out which would set them well back then they could be an Alba surprise in the polls of a Scottish election. In the short term i rejoined the SNP now I have to find a branch that wants change, not sure my local one is up for it, but we have to start now. Not sure what the mechanism is to get the ball rolling on that?
ReplyDeleteI dont have the patience for the Yoonyonist Leopard that is the SNP now to change its traitors spots.
ReplyDeleteSalmond was the most impressive on QT. Mind you that wasn't difficult as the rest were all total numpties.
ReplyDeleteMcAllan had a scowl on her face every time Salmond spoke. Not surprising as she is just one of many of Sturgeon's pals given jobs in government. McAllan embarrassed herself and the SNP by saying the route to independence was continually begging for a section 30. These people are (like Sturgeon) time wasters and phoney independence supporters.
Lord Offard, is just a complete Tory arse. Bailie was Baillie - the same Labour tripe she has been spouting for decades. The final member of the panel was a nonentity of a journalist.
Bruce very kindly explained to her English audience where Fort William was located but unsurprisingly not where the name originated from.
A crap programme from the British state propaganda broadcaster hosted by the worst ever holder of the position in QT history - Fiona Bruce.
There already is another Independence Party that is not carrying "baggage". It's the ISP (Independence for Scotland Party). We stood aside last time to let ALBA rn without a dilution of the vote. Strangely you seem to have forgot about us, and not for the first time.
ReplyDeleteI certainly haven't forgotten about you, not least because I was quite shocked to hear (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you *openly supported* Westminster's use of the Section 35 veto, an extraordinary position for any pro-independence party to take. That in itself constitutes 'baggage', although even leaving that aside, I'd have thought any potential defector who wasn't sure about joining Alba would be even more sceptical about joining IFS due to the small size of the party.
DeleteFor the person trying to draw a heroic comparison between a Section 35 veto and an ECHR ruling: Alister Jack may be a great many things, but he's self-evidently not a human rights court. Let's be serious, please.
DeleteOne can't - governments lose voters; the SNP was the first time voters left the Brit parties, and that took a hundred years. Alba is slave to the misfortune or fortune of the SNP. Alba can act as a pressure group or await the implosion of the SNP.
ReplyDeleteWhile I'll always listen to Alex Salmond's contributions with an open mind, I have concluded that he's not going to play any further significant part in winning independence. In very blunt terms the public made their minds up about him long ago, at least half of them well before any charges were hinted at, and the other half can't forgive him for being exonerated. There's no value to spending any energy in rehabilitating the image of someone his age and negative political ratings, it's much better to find someone competent and presentable.
ReplyDeleteIf Alba are to move beyond the fringe, the swivel-eyed loons and Internet trolls need to be controlled and a professional and competent set of candidates need to be presented. The brand is barely credible and even a devalued SNP polling 25-30% still seems a better prospect for developing an indy winning case.
I want an independent social democratic Scotland where the focus is on delivering substantial improvements to the living conditions of the majority. A winning campaign is only going to be built on focus, professionalism and competence. Right now no pro-indy party gets close on any of those.
Second, YouGov Westminster voting intention, Scottish sub-sample released in as many days. This one from field work 17 - 18th May. More of a settled appearance this time.
ReplyDeleteCon - 18%, Lab - 30%, LibDem - 8%, SNP - 34%, RefUK -1%, Green - 5%, Others - 3%, Plaid C - 1%.
Not as catastrophic as previous sub-sample (field work 9 - 10th May) but averages (combined sample population 350).
Con - 16%, Lab - 35%, SNP - 31.5%
I'm fed up of the defeatist acknowledgement that Salmond has 'baggage', when we know fine that said baggage was the product of a vicious conspiracy followed by sustained slander. We should be attacking that slander at every opportunity instead of -- apparently in the name of realism -- helping its originators continue to do their dirty work from behind the scenes.
ReplyDeleteHonest political analysis is not "defeatism". I'm not talking about my own views (if I was, I wouldn't be an Alba member), but about how other people, notably SNP parliamentarians, may view Alba. If I'm not going to be honest about that, what would I be doing? Propaganda? That's just not for me, thanks.
Delete