You can watch via the embedded player below, or via the direct YouTube link, or you can listen to an audio-only version on Soundcloud.
Saturday, August 2, 2025
"This doesn't make sense!" x 12: My reaction to the full text of John Swinney's independence strategy motion
For today's YouTube commentary (which as a thrilling experiment is in actual video form!), I look at the full text of John Swinney's proposed motion on independence strategy. I point out the numerous logical contradictions in it, and the ways in which it seems to be designed to fail. In my view the motion should be defeated, with a plan for using the 2026 election as a de facto independence referendum, with votes for all pro-indy parties counting towards the mandate, put in its place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You mirrored my incredulity while reading the statement! I just cannot fathom how this was released, knowing the precedent it sets and the near certainty of it failing.
ReplyDeleteI like John Swinney, he's stabilised the party admirably, but he's nailed his colours to the mast here and it looks like he's knowingly putting the independence question to be bed for at least five years. It has to be challenged. If (very big if) that challenge is successful I think it's pretty obvious JS would need to resign the leadership.
If the challenge could get the approval of Stephen Flynn I would be greatly encouraged about it's chances and the future direction of the SNP.
Flynn's a devolutionist.
ReplyDeleteAnd your a britnat
DeleteAnon @10.34am and you are a Britnat
DeleteThere's not a chance in Hades Westminster will accept what people are calling pro Indy parties votes as counting towards independence unless those parties only have one item on their manifesto, independence for Scotland
ReplyDeleteEven then there's only the Greens with any hope of any kind of support, the other supposed pro Indy parties just don't count and couldn't hit a vote in a barrel of votes between them with a big cannon, and Westminster will say so
4.30pm you are so worried about what Westminster will say.
DeleteThe SNP are Westminster's sole bogeyman. It's only the SNP that they're remotely concerned by and always have been. It's the optic - it's why when they are being scrutinised and criticised doon sooth - they swiftly pull in the SNP as the bogeyman to get their English voters to rally behind them. That's the evidence of the last couple of decades. You have to look at things from the Westminster optic viewpoint. They're not remotely concerned about other independence parties. Look at the times Alba bods and other anti-SNP leadership SNP MPs have rushed off to Westminster to bad mouth ScotGov and bleat for Westminster support. They know that in order to batter down the SNP, Alba cosy in.
DeleteThe only optic which will have any effect on Westminster whatsoever - is if Scotland rallies behind the SNP this once to show that when the big indicator is needed - Scotland will show it rejects Westminster. Swinney knows that - everybody else is playing parochial play-about and pretending their aim is independence - and that taking over the SNP and installing another leader is going to remove all the barriers to independence. Swinney probably wants to stand down as leader if certain potential SNP bods get elected for 2026 who he thinks have the age and time to get right in there and fire things up.
The optic of 2026 is really important. All the time spent on process is fiddling with the non-essential at this time. Westminster only sees the presence of the SNP - in any shape or form or with any leader - as their only bogeyman, especially in terms of his English voter perspectives. MacAskill knows that, so do all of the alleged independistas who are capable of dipping in to the Westminster strategy pool. Jackie Baillie well knows it, Anas Sarwar well knows it. The anglo-Scottish media pool well know it. It's why they accommodate Alba/MacAskill and all of the anti-SNP willing critiques so very often on their platforms. They see the big wood for the trees and it's why they so willingly platform the likes of Joanna Cherry. Anything and anybody SNP - because Westminster need the optic of anything anti-SNP leadership or anti-SNP coming out of Scotland - and in that respect, seeing the movement embroiled in the distraction of a million ways to get independence distraction is gold dust for Westminster.
Swinney sees the much bigger immediate picture. It's only the SNP which opens doors for other independistas and big change AFTER the Holyrood 2026 vote. Westminster don't give a toss about anything other than the SNP optic because without that -- English voters ask too many questions of their government and Starmer can't have that - in the same way that Cameron's defence mechanism was always that big bad SNP want to ruin your lifestyles and break up your UK.
August 2 at 4.30pm - there's also the danger that what's seen as a big bold move for independence parties to 'declare' that voting for them counts towards independence - and then the vote numbers don't come in big style - that is the risk of a massive smack in the face for the notion of independence. Unless you know you are absolutely guaranteed to win votes under those specific terms - from a country where data gathering shows that even some independence supporters don't prioritise independence right now - there's a big chance of massive egg on the face of the independence cause. Saying this isn't being feart of trying -but can you depend, for instance, on Alba raking in massive votes even though Kenny MacAskill and others are doing their best to cull votes from strategising exaggerated disenchantment messaging at wobbly SNP voters?
DeleteThis 'Westminster will say no' is by the by. We can have them over a barrel if we keep the heid and stop pulling that old nut out of the hat and pedestalling it all the time and presenting it as the big distracting anti-Swinney wants to 'beg' for the Section 30 tool messaging. You're missing Swinney's much more subtle point - and too many don't have the patience to think a bit more deeply or are swept along by the anti-Swinney mob who do know better but pretend they don't in order to cull in the most knee-jerk audience available to them.
You have to think like Westminster - put yourselves in their shoes and ask yourself what is it that matters most to them for Holyrood 2026? What is it they think is going to most ease their passage to being able to say 'See, Scotland wants rid of the SNP and that's the evidence Scotland wants us.' You have to imagine what they want the UK-wide headlines to be the day after the 2026 vote - and they've probably already got those headlines ready. 'Scotland rejects SNP - independence is dead' - and all the rest. This is what Starmer and all those wee bantam cocks of anglo-Scottish bods and Lordies need.
The question for everyone is - do you want to give them that? - or not.
Unless you know you are absolutely guaranteed to win votes under those specific terms - from a country where data gathering shows that even some independence supporters don't prioritise independence right now - there's a big chance of massive egg on the face of the independence cause.
DeleteThis appears to be an argument for never standing in any election at all. Swinney knows he's extremely unlikely to win a majority of seats in 2026, so isn't he equally risking (virtually guaranteeing) eggs on faces?
Bang on James, for once I don’t disagree with anything you said!
ReplyDeleteStew???? Surely not?
DeleteYour best video so far, IMHO.
ReplyDeleteOne suggestion: briefly introduce SGP and its purpose at the start of the video, in case any folk find you directly on YouTube or via Google search etc, ie not via this blog.
This
DeleteI went to the National website to re-read the full Swinney statement and it's been removed.
ReplyDeleteMe too and yes, it's no longer in the list of most popular 47 articles, which would seem unlikely. It's been pulled.
DeleteJames - the international recognition thing - where you talk about Swinney's text displaying 'sophistry' - I think you need to look closer at why the 'no detriment' agreement attached to the 2014 Section 30 delivery was the vital thing which secured global faith that the result would preclude destructive, particularly economically targeted, activity generating deliberate instability for every global polity with 'interests' in Scotland and the UK - and particularly future much needed global economic engagements with Scotland if Scotland had voted Yes and global states would therefore be by-passing their current UK Gov generated engagements.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of borders was of massive concern to global states and the EU. This is big world reality politics and the markets respond negatively - instantly - to any signs of instability. The promise of 'no detriment' attached to the Section 30 with Scotland and UK pledging not to make moves to set out to harm each other should Scotland vote to 'separate' itself from the rest of the UK was a vital component in having global states accept that if Scotland voted Yes, there would be no political or economic barriers to accepting Scotland as an independent state and doing business with Scotland as opposed to UK Gov continuing a 'broker for Scotland' role.
You have to realistically try and see how global states view how the independence movement goes about its business in relation to the current SNP ScotGov - because they DO keep tabs, and how, on who they want to form future relationships with. It's all about perceived stability and cohesiveness of a state and a country where only round about 50% support independence doesn't nearly begin to cut the mustard.
You've written a huge amount there and still somehow managed to miss the core point - that international recognition will automatically follow the UK government's acceptance of independence, irrespective of how that acceptance is achieved.
DeleteIt's a BIG gamble. If Reform contests all constituencies next year, unionist tactical voting patterns could disintegrate.
ReplyDeleteEnough to hand SNP a constituency-only majority? I don't know, that's the gamble.
On a minority of the vote? If the Brits (and that vehemently includes Reform) win more votes than the independence parties combined, that’s no place to be to demand independence.
DeleteMind, Swinney and his wing of the party would just love it. Devo jobs for life, chums!
Salmond had a career politician devo job for life and he didn't seem to mind it that much when he was scoffing away with hours with Andrew Neil et al.
DeleteGot a Farage leaflet through the door today. Not the postie, but Revenge UK’s own leafleting operation.
ReplyDeleteThe leaflet says Scotland a lot, seems to be written for here, and mentions independence exactly the same number of times the recent SNP one did: zero.