THE mood among Scottish Conservative conference goers yesterday was undoubtedly upbeat - yet scratch beneath the surface and there is a degree of anxiety about the months as the triggering of Article 50 looms and the UK embarks of the process of leaving the European Union.
Members believe their party, which not so long ago was regarded as almost an irrelevance in Scotland, is on the way up and are thrilled it moved from third to second place in Holyrood.
It is the first time members have gathered at a conference north of the Border since last year’s May elections and there is much talk of the record number of MSPs they now have - 31 from 15 in 2011.
But despite Ruth Davidson and her team’s bravado in tackling the “narrow nationalism” of the SNP, a sense of nervousness hangs in the air.
“It’s been brilliant,” said Mark Openshaw, 63, a retired drilling professional, who come down from Aberdeen to Glasgow with his wife Maggie, a retired deputy head teacher, for the event.
“We’ve had very positive results in the elections and for the first time we are seeing an effective opposition in the parliament.”
The couple are buoyed up by Theresa May’s speech and are especially impressed by her commitment as see described it towards”protecting the Union”.
Mrs Openshaw, a retired deputy head teacher, said: “The highlight to me was just one little phrase that really made it for me: it was “we are four nations, one people.”
But despite the positive words Mr Openshaw is unclear what he believes May should do if Nicola Sturgeon calls a referendum on independence and presses the Prime Minister for agreement to give Holyrood the power to hold one.
“I would love for [May] to be able to say no, but I’m not a political enough person to say whether that could play into the hands of the nationalists.
“ I would like May to be able to say when it happens. If it has to happen, then the only logical way of allowing the people of Scotland an informed position is once the outcome of the Brexit negotiations are known.”
He believes if the vote is before Brexit is concluded people wouldn’t know what they were voting for - a criticism levelled at the EU referendum. The couple, both of whom voted Remain in the EU referendum, appear to put on a brave face about Brexit saying “we just have to get on with it”, but there is a sense of worry about what could be around the corner.
Very hesitantly and reluctantly, they concede that independence is something they might even support if the debate was framed “realistically”. “If I heard the SNP say [in the 2014 referendum] that independence could be difficult, could set Scotland back a while but it’s the principle of independence that’s so important. If they were willing to accept all of that, we’ll all work hard and make it work I would have supported independence but clearly the majority of people jumping on the SNP bandwagon were doing it because they thought it was magically going to mean that somebody would give them something.”
Mrs Openshaw adds: “There is one last way for me that I would vote for independence if, whoever was in power in Scotland made a huge success of what they are doing in terms of education in health, the economy, business. If those areas were seen to be successful then I would consider independence, but it’s not.”
Sheila and Steve Mannion were also happy to stop to chat to The National.They do not accept the First Minister’s belief May is poised to use Brexit to transfer powers over agriculture subsidies to Westminster and speak of the benefits of devolution.
“This is imaginary,” said Mr Mannion, 77, a retired police officer. “May has put those concerns to bed. She’s dealt with it. She pointed out there was no question of that happening.”
However, they admit they would not like to see Brexit used to undermine devolution and would like to see more powers, particularly over agriculture, heading to Holyrood. “Yes of course it would be a concern,” said Mrs Mannion, a retired florist. “We are proud of what we have at the moment. Just because we are Tories does not mean we are not Scottish and not pro devolution. We very much are.”
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