I wanted to wait until I had a chance to read through the full text of the SNP's new "strategy for winning independence" before passing comment. Well, where to start. Maybe with the sole positive part: Yousaf has not reversed his dramatic announcement from a few months ago that the first line of the SNP's election manifesto will state that a vote for the SNP is a vote for an independent Scotland. That's important, because whatever the SNP's own views on whether the election is a de facto independence referendum, it at least gives voters the theoretical opportunity to use it as one. They had no such opportunity in 2019 because the manifesto did not contain that language (which is why people are mistaken in thinking the SNP are asking for a mandate they already have and are not using).
When Yousaf became leader, I noted that it meant the SNP had ceased to be a party actively seeking to win independence for the first time since at least 1942. His announcement about the content of the first line of the manifesto (which he was almost certainly forced into by circumstance) caused me to tentatively reverse that assessment, and I suppose because that now forms part of the finalised "strategy", I must concede that the SNP do remain an actively pro-independence party. But it's a finely-balanced call, because almost everything else in the text seems designed to undermine the meaning and clarity of the manifesto's opening words.
How do you signal to voters, the UK Government and the international community that an SNP vote is not really a vote for independence, even though you say it is? Well, how about by going on to say that a vote for the SNP is actually a vote for certain limited powers to be devolved, which would obviously be unnecessary and impossible if Scotland is already independent. Or how about by saying that you want the power to hold a referendum transferred to Holyrood, which would be unnecessary if Scotland has already voted for independence in a meaningful way. Or how about by dropping in the subtext that even if you get the power to hold a referendum, you might not use it any time soon, thus implying the 2024 manifesto is even less of an urgent attempt to win independence than its 2019 counterpart. Or how about by suggesting that if no progress is made as a result of an SNP victory, you might then give 'consideration' to using the 2026 Holyrood election as a de facto referendum, with the implication that - in spite of all appearances - the wording of the manifesto cannot really be construed as making the 2024 election a de facto referendum even if voters wish to use it as one.
That word "consideration" is the most snivelling part of the whole exercise, because at least if there had been a clear statement of intent to use 2026 as the de facto, we'd have a roadmap towards independence. As it is, we instead have the very real prospect of continuing with election after election of just kicking the can a bit further down the road.
* * *
If you're a member of the Alba Party, and haven't yet voted in the party's internal elections, I'd be grateful if you'd consider giving me your first preference for Membership Support Convener. The email link to vote should be in your inbox from last Friday.
The blockage remains what it has always been for the SNP leadership - what do we do when faced with a British state which is determinedly anti democratic on the question of self determination for the people of Scotland ?
ReplyDeleteComfortable, middle class 'suits' will never grasp that nettle. The analogy with Ireland a century and more ago makes the SNP the Parnell party.
By luck rather than judgement David Cameron's moment of arrogant hubris in granting a referendum has worked well for the British state by embedding the myth that we can gain independence by a 'gentlemen's agreement'.
We have a mountain still to climb to convince independence supporters that we need not only a democratic mandate but also the mass determination to, peaceably, make Scotland ungovernable for the UK after the refual to accept our democratic decision.
Easy to say - a massive undertaking to do, even if we can build a political leadership which has the courage to recognise the scale and nature of the task.
Yousaf must have hired the Large Hadron Collider at CERN to find the tiniest sub-Independence particle possible.
ReplyDeleteV O’B
This can that is being continually kicked down the road must be battered beyond all recognition. I just have no trust whatsoever in anything the SNP says. Even if every candidate in the GE have the words "A vote for the SNP is a vote for Independence" tattooed on their foreheads I would not believe it.
ReplyDeleteSnivelling and drivelling SNP - I don't believe you.
Do you think the current middle East events can damage Labour in Scotland considering Starmer's position, particularly in multicultural areas such as Glasgow?
ReplyDeleteVery good point.
DeleteStarmer is making life very difficult for Anas. Sometimes, it's as if having a boss down in London looming large over your every move were a *bad* thing…
The problem that Scotland has never been a democracy will never be solved until the problem is acknowledged.
ReplyDeleteThe problem that Scotland is treated like a colony by England, and therefore in effect is a colony, will never be solved until the the problem is acknowledged.
The problem that is the SNP will never be solved until the problem is acknowledged.
Professor Richard Murphy on Debate Night actually stated on the BBC that Scotland is a colony. Strangely enough the world did not end, the other panellists did not walk out and the audience were not perturbed by this unusual piece of honesty. Be brave like Murphy and tell the truth. Scotland is an English colony.
DeleteOh and that sometime independence suporter, lib dem voter who may vote Tory in future (Campbell) also now says Scotland is a colony.
SAVE THE DATE
ReplyDeleteToday is the SNP's ( Sturgeon's gang) day of shame.
Of course every day is England's ( masquerading as the UK) day of shame.
So what have the numpties in numpty land got to say about today's date. Nothing - not a thing - they have blanked it out of their blank minds. Remember these are the people who claimed Indyref2 would most definitely happen today and if you said otherwise you were a Unionist. The numpties are happy - seemingly Yousaf gave a great speech to conference and he was even a bit emotional. Only the SNP could have the brass neck to have their conference in the same week as the promised - no ifs no buts - Indyref2.
DeleteHey never mind Yousaf seems to have promised some other muddled ( very long) route to independence and we all know the SNP always keep their promises - wait a minute!
The WGD numpties btl continue to prattle on about Palestine and how great Yousaf is and ignore the date. Just as I posted previously Covid gave Sturgeon a cover from her failings and now Palestine is doing the same for Yousaf.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the big dug has now posted an article re the failure of Sturgeon to deliver a referendum today as she promised, and surprise surprise it is all the nasty Britnats fault. Sturgeon and the SNP are blameless according to the big dug. Mr Kavanagh says:- " Realistically what could the Scottish Government have done? " Woof woof - wake up you grovelling sycophant - I'll tell you what they could have done. They could have held a de facto referendum in May 2021 or called a Holyrood de facto referendum any time thereafter. Your article is a load of nicophantic bollocks. You were the person continually saying Indyref2 is just around the corner but now you say it was impossible. Charlatan.
Only numpties believe this charlatan. Only numpties worship the Sturgeon gang.
One thing they could have done was stop lying. One thing Kavanagh could have done was allow debate on his website.
DeleteVery true WT.
Deleteandyfromdunning says on WGD:- " The SNP could have crashed Holyrood to get a vote as allowed in the 2016 Scotland act. They chose not to. Some senior party members even said it legally was impossible even after many Yessers published the sections of the act that showed you can."
Very true andy. There was indeed a way but Sturgeon's gang chose to ignore it. They still do. They are not independence supporters. They are phoneys - Lisa Cameron ain't the only one.
So what reply does andy get from the WGD numpties.
1. Capella says you need a 2/3 majority in Holyrood. Capella really needs to widen her sources of information as she is years out of date - 7 years in fact. An example of a WGD numpty who only reads WGD. My advice to Capella would be read the 2016 act ya numpty.
2. Dr Jim just says it's because people hate Sturgeon. Classic head in the sand stuff from Jimbo. No Jimbo Sturgeon could have called a Holyrood de facto referendum for 19 Oct 23 but as she is a phoney she resigned and ran away.
So there you have it - andyfromdunning posts on WGD a way to get an independence vote and the numpties ain't interested. Like Lisa Cameron the WGD numpties are not real independence supporters just SNP party drones.