We urgently need a new leadership body for the Yes movement

We seem to be somewhat at sea over how to make the most effective use of our additional member vote in the Scottish Parliament, whether more independence-seeking parties are a good or bad thing and whether there is any likelihood that they will cooperate on a regional list to act in some sort of alliance.

Many of us are beavering away with projects which we believe will contribute to the future common weal but there is a need for some co-ordination, in other words, leadership. A common theme in The National’s letters is that leadership of the independence movement needs to be prised away from the SNP, for a range of reasons.

READ MORE: English independence: 49% of people in England back ending Union

I was heartened when it was revealed in the National on May 6 that the Scottish Independence Foundation (SIF) had in mind to host a congress but that plans had been postponed owing to the pandemic. Deciding to postpone was fair enough in early May, but it’s now clear that it will still be some time before folk can meet indoors effectively. Time is moving on, we really need to set up a leadership organisation now and virtual meetings are straightforward.

Using the second vote issue as an example of how leadership can be given: there isn’t a simple national answer on how to tactically place our additional vote; each region is different but we need a credible body, outwith the political parties, that can assess the best tactic for maximising the independence-seeking seats in the Scottish Parliament and advise each regional electorate accordingly.

While I can calculate the effect of shifting the SNP list vote for the Highlands and Islands region to satisfy myself, a professional psephologist is needed to give credibility across the country. This is where the new leadership body comes in.

The national leadership body that I am calling Yes for Scotland needs to be strong enough to be able to develop a clear strategy and negotiate with political parties. It will likely be what the SIF plans to encourage, but it must be formed very soon to gain its credibility in sufficient time to be useful.

John C Hutchison
Fort William

AN excellent article, again, from George Kerevan in Monday’s National (The independence train is nearing the station but this is what could derail it, July 13).

His article neatly encapsulates the way ahead and warns of the danger of sections of the mass movement planning to run a new independence party for the list vote.

READ MORE: George Kerevan: This is what could derail independence

I particularly like the call for Scottish SNP grassroots to demand an immediate debate recognising that the Growth Report is totally redundant. (As I’ve said often, any future economic policy should start with the objective of a central bank up and running on day one after a transitional period, using a Scottish currency.)

There should also be a move away from the failed neoliberal model enshrined in the Growth Report.

And finally, the SNP movement must question and change the centralisation of power in the top echelon. Sadly this might be brought to the light of day in the current investigation of the Scottish Government’s handling of the Alex Salmond case.

James Macintyre
Lesmahagow

I ACCEPT that George Kerevan has an axe to grind regarding his observations on the entire indy movement. I can more than double is 25 year involvement, not that this is particularly of relevance to the point, and can remember when candidates were elated if they didn’t lose their deposit.

My point is that rather than trying to nail down what kind of country we want before we’ve got it, I suggest all we need at this stage is a WRITTEN constitution outlining the electoral processes and citizens’ rights etc. The “type” of society we have will be determined by general elections as normal.

Anyone who can form a legal political party can stand, be they Unionist, Communist etc. Trying to decide what sort of indy Scotland we will have prior to getting it seems to me to achieve nothing but illustrating what we already know: that there are probably hundreds of different versions. Squabbling over which of these will hold sway is unproductive, and destructive to the whole movement. “See these Nats, they canny even decide whit kinda Scotland they want.” Gold dust to the Brit Nat faction. Be aware.

The British state has scuppered many unwelcome developments from inside. Do you think they only had “plants” in the animal rights movement?

Barry Stewart
Blantyre

SO former SNP MSP Dave Thompson is setting up his own wee party to try and win a seat at next May’s Holyrood elections. He says: “We are looking at anything between eight and 24 MSPs.” which makes me think he has not done his maths homework. Another day – another independence party. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. At this rate the list ballot paper will be the length of a toilet roll.

Brian Lawson
Paisley

READ MORE: Ex SNP MSP to quit and form new pro-independence party​

I’ll be voting SNP on both lists in 2021 and would advise everyone else to do the same. Anything else does carry the risk of splitting the indy vote. However – if nothing happens during the next six months after the election, the SNP will not exist for me any more. The problem is that people (me included) are starting to doubt whether the present SNP is an indy party at all. And judging by the statements in the last weeks from Nicola Sturgeon and quite a few other people in the party, they have every reason to demand the change of current direction.

Peter Dvornik
via thenational.scot