Caitlin Logan: Independence more important than infighting

Last Sunday, a poll for The Times reported 54% support for independence and a projected 74 seats for the SNP at the Holyrood election next year, as well as nine seats for the Greens. That’s a pro-independence majority of 19, compared to the current majority of five.

The same survey found that Nicola Sturgeon’s handling of the Covid-19 crisis had an approval rating of +60, compared with a rating of -39 for Boris Johnson.

READ MORE: ‘Alternative vote’ ruse will not help gain us international respect

This is just the latest in a string of polls leading to the logical conclusion that the pandemic, and the events which have played out around it, have boosted support not only for the Scottish Government but for the prospect of Scotland breaking off from the UK altogether.

Anecdotally, this isn’t particularly surprising. Many people – of varying degrees of political engagement, and with wildly differing views on the SNP in normal times – have been thoroughly impressed by Sturgeon’s response to the crisis.

And it’s not hard to be impressed when presented with a direct point of comparison in the form of Johnson’s Tory Government. In the face of a literal life-or-death situation, the game of “in whose hands would you rather place your family’s continued existence?” has hit a bit too close to home for many people, and the answer has become glaringly obvious.

Without even mentioning “the i word”, Nicola Sturgeon’s Government has demonstrated not only what is, but what could be if Scotland didn’t have to depend on the UK Government

At almost every stage of the process, the Conservative Government has shown itself up to be not only dangerously incompetent but utterly contemptuous of the vast majority of its population. You know, the ones who have neither blood relation nor dirty laundry to hold over the Prime Minister to get public health rules changed on their behalf.

The corruption, dishonesty and lack of transparency around an issue which has affected every one of our lives in some way, has been a sobering lesson in how – and in whose interests – the British state operates.

This has been a wake-up call for many, and the fact that the Scottish Government has been able to hold itself up in contrast to this – with tangible results in the form of Scotland’s lower infection and death rates – has only strengthened the case for independence. Without even mentioning “the i word”, Nicola Sturgeon’s Government has demonstrated not only what is, but what could be if Scotland didn’t have to depend on the UK Government to make the call on so many life-altering decisions.

Even where the difference in actions taken by the two governments has been small, the communication and the general attitude displayed by the First Minister has been worlds apart. This is perhaps the key point: Nicola Sturgeon has succeeded in gaining the trust of the public through a combination of appearing and sounding like a normal, reasonable human being (a worryingly remarkable feat in these strange times), and making the effort to convey empathy and respect for her country’s citizens.

Importantly, the messaging from the Scottish Government has carefully avoided framing its Covid-19 response in terms of party or constitutional politics. As much as this might be irritating for those, on all sides, who would rather argue about independence on a loop until their batteries run out, polling would strongly suggest that “showing” is more effective than “telling” when it comes to convincing people that a better way is possible.

READ MORE: Party led by Alex Salmond 'would win list votes' from Yes supporters

In many ways, this strategy is simply a continuation of the approach the SNP was taking before the pandemic. While Unionist parties accused the Scottish Government of prioritising independence above all else, critics within the movement claimed the SNP leadership was overcautious in pushing for a referendum or other routes to leaving the Union.

But for all the hand-wringing at both extremes, support for independence was already rising, and the SNP gained 13 additional MPs at the snap election in December.

It seems the pandemic – with all its heartbreaking consequences and the fundamental questions it has posed about the kind of society we want to live in – may well be the drop that breaks the dam and shifts the balance of public opinion in favour of independence.

Whether there is a majority of one or 64 makes zero practical difference when it comes to votes in parliament

This, you would think, would be cause for optimism, inspiring long-standing independence supporters with a shared sense that a brighter future is within reach.

So far, it seems, this is but a distant dream. There are some within the movement who appear more concerned about promoting the status of their own faction than convincing anyone new to support their cause. People who, for some inexplicable reason, think now is the right time to claim that independence can’t or won’t be achieved under the current SNP leadership.

People who are more intent on arguing about how to use tactical voting to secure the highest possible number of pro-independence MSPs than on thinking about how to secure the highest number of pro-independence voters.

IN that particular debate, two very obvious facts have been lost on a lot of people. Firstly, whether there is a majority of one or 64 makes zero practical difference when it comes to votes in parliament, of which there have already been two in favour of a second referendum to no discernible effect.

And, more crucially, working the system to elect a proportion of pro-independence MSPs which is significantly higher than the actual vote share of those parties will do nothing to increase the number of people in Scotland who actually want independence – an aim which should, surely, be front and centre of any democratic movement for change.

READ MORE: Unionists are already ‘gaming the system’ at Holyrood elections

It is, of course, also vital to any democratic movement that people are free to criticise and scrutinise those in power and offer competing viewpoints. This is not the point of contention here, and there are certainly a number of important areas in which the Scottish Government is deserving of criticism.

However, if the question at hand is how best to achieve independence, it simply makes no sense for supporters of that goal to attack the First Minister for a political strategy which is demonstrably effective.

For some, the promise of “everything, now” has an undeniable allure; it certainly has its merits over “almost, soon”

The problem, perhaps, is that many of those advancing these challenges are unable to make the distinction between what might be popular within certain circles of die-hard “Yessers”, and what is likely to be persuasive to the wider population.

As much as fixating on the former might feel more personally satisfying in the short term, it is only the latter that can win independence.

After losing the referendum in 2014, and after a decade of Tory rule, it is understandable that some once hopeful voters have become so dejected that it’s hard for them to believe that good things come to those who wait. For some, the promise of “everything, now” has an undeniable allure; it certainly has its merits over “almost, soon”. But it would be far worse to sell people a fantasy that is doomed to failure than to ask for patience when all the signs are pointing to success.

There was once another political party that reigned supreme in Scotland, which you may have heard tell of. They say it was called “Labour”. Among other mishaps leading to its untimely demise, Labour tore itself apart. Some say Labour can still be heard yowling in the mountains as it continues to tear itself apart with yet more infighting.

As it stands, things are looking up for Scottish independence. If there’s anything that can shatter that momentum, it will be a refusal to learn from the ghosts of politics past.