AN SNP minister has described the evolutionary process for achieving independence as “almost unavoidable” and the movement should go “down a gear”.
Writing in the Scotsman on Sunday, Ben Macpherson argued for a more gradual route to build consensus, and for his party be open to work with a Labour UK Government to mend relations and seek increased power for Holyrood.
He also argued taking a gradual approach to independence would convince undecided and no voters.
The SNP Minster for Social Security begins by stating that Scotland is no longer about Yes and No as it was in 2014, that it is now more “complex”, and most Scots want some form of independence.
He said: “Those overly simplistic descriptors and groupings don’t reflect the multifaceted politics of modern Scotland, and our relationship with the rest of the UK and Europe.”
READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: SNP candidates must not forget what comes next
By recognising this, Macpherson believes, is a way to build “common ground” to gradually win full independence and further claimed that the transition period following any vote for Scotland to leave the UK could take “many years” or even “potentially decades”.
He argued that Scotland does not currently have the necessary infrastructure to become independent quickly and successfully.
As a result, he wrote: “Any reckless, overly disruptive path to statehood would quickly make our quality of life in Scotland poorer.
“Better to go down a gear and take the journey at a reasonably safe speed than crash trying to rush things.”
His comments came as Humza Yousaf, one of the three candidates to be the next SNP leader and Scottish First Minister, insisted independence could be achieved within five years.
The Scottish Health Secretary told the Sunday Mail: “It can be achieved within five years but that’s going to take persuasion and we’re going to have to give people a hope and a vision.”
However, Macpherson writes: “The fact is – and facts matter – Scotland doesn’t yet have all the necessary 21st century state infrastructure to quickly transition to a successful, modern independent country in the short to medium term.”
He further writes that with no agreement coming from the UK Government, it is now the SNP's job to “build consensus and responsibly deliver more of a gradual process of further constitutional change for Scotland”.
Macpherson argues that the current leadership contest provides the SNP an opportunity to reset and engage with all main political parties, Scottish society, and the UK Government.
He suggests that the party should be open-minded about working with a Labour government in Westminster and should first seek further powers for Holyrood as well as international affairs participation.
He writes that Brexit teaches the independence movement “in spades” that having a good relationship with counterparts during negotiations and a transitional process makes constitutional changes easier.
READ MORE: BBC 'pro-establishment bias' shown in first six months of Laura Kuenssberg show
He concludes with: “Despite how wrongheaded and inept the current UK Government can be, and how much the Union feels like a toxic relationship at times, surely an agreement could be reached in the short-to-medium-term to create a different, better, modern constitutional arrangement – progressing, and certainly not regressing, the current settlement.”
Ben Macpherson was elected in 2016 as MSP for Edinburgh Northern and Leith. He is backing Humza Yousaf in the leadership race, who has stated he will kickstart the Yes campaign.
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