APPEARANCES matter. And in the business of persuading swithering voters to back independence, the appearance of good, professional governance at Holyrood may matter more than we realise. Especially when that governance relates to something vital like the pandemic or the transition away from fossil fuels. And particularly when the efficiency and fairness of Holyrood governance sits in direct contrast to the crony-contract-driven chaos of Boris Johnson’s British Government.
When the Scottish Government gets it right on really big issues, it models a different future – even when independence is not explicitly mentioned.
Witness the surge in Yes support last year, when no formal campaigning took place, but Nicola Sturgeon and top medical advisers were on TV, day after day, sounding prepared, co-ordinated, expert, on it, compassionate and together.
For those persuaded about independence long before 2007, it might seem strange that some voters need this unplanned “proof of concept” – this dry run for self-government, performed in conditions of panic, personal tragedy and general fear.
But they did.
Clearly, the Scottish Government made mistakes. But it managed. Nicola Sturgeon could only have done better with the power of hindsight and the ability to diverge more quickly and completely from the London-led, four nations approach.
As it was, the unexpected pandemic let the SNP practice what it preaches, with a Scottish Government demonstrating the likely benefits of independence by simply governing better than Westminster.
Our First Minister did not sound like an entitled old Etonian making it up as she went along. Folk noticed.
Of course, good governance alone isn’t enough as we approach indyref2. Swithering Scots need answers on the hoary, old issues of currency, borders, EU membership and trade and key services like energy. Should iScotland keep the “Big Six” or nationalise energy supply? We must divest ourselves of the broken old templates of centralised, privatised provision inherited from successive British Governments and not questioned nearly vigorously enough in Scotland.
It’s an exciting prospect, for those galvanised by the prospect of change.
For those scared stiff by it, they must be reassured that the SNP leader is full square, 100% behind independence and not tucking difficult but necessary change behind the less challenging idea of “recovery”.
READ MORE: BBC mocked for embarrassing mix-up gaffe on SNP-Greens deal
Nicola Sturgeon’s enduring popularity with voters is a form of currency. If she doesn’t “spend” it on independence, it’ll look like she’s saving it for a (more important) rainy day. When a politician is as prominent as the SNP leader, she can’t stay neutral for long without radiating uncertainty across the whole indy project.
But this First Minister has another way to boost support for independence – through visible, tangible, good governance.
Think back almost a year ago to October 2020, when support for Scottish independence hit 58% without any independence campaign.
Why did that surge take place?
The Brexit debacle doubtless influenced pro-European Scots. Yet here we are in 2021 with supply chains visibly disintegrating in Brexit-related transport and food shortages, and indy polls that seem stubbornly stuck on the wrong side of 50%.
Of course, last summer, the vaccine rollout had yet to begin. And since then, the Salmond Inquiry and Alba Party split have weakened the FM’s authority.
But perhaps the biggest difference between summer 2020 and 2021 is that now there is no massively important social and political challenge which lets the Scottish Government demonstrate better governance standards than Westminster – day in and day out.
Not until COP26 swings into view and the climate crisis tops the political agenda across the planet, with all eyes focused on Glasgow.
And this could be how the SNP/Green alliance boosts support for independence.
IF both sides work flat out and in good faith, they will model independence for a post-oil, post-Covid world by demonstrating progressive, cooperative, green governance.
And that could give indyref2 the kickstart it urgently needs.
Consider.
Back in October 2020, when independence was polling 58%, pollster Savanta ComRes found the SNP were viewed as the most trustworthy party on the economy, jobs and education. Core issues of governance.
And Nicola Sturgeon’s net approval ratings were stratospheric compared to other Scottish party leaders, sitting at plus 28%. Compared to Boris Johnson on -44%.
When Nicola Sturgeon raised the flag of good governance with the Scottish public during Covid, she put percentage points on to support for independence as well.
The SNP and Greens can do the same again as Scotland transitions from managing the pandemic to tackling the climate crisis, by creating a new look, a different template of government, a historic precedent, a more modern Scottish way of doing things and a positive sign of things to come.
Or things could go wrong.
The Scottish Green membership could still veto the deal. The party could be marginalised by a change-resistant SNP and a risk averse civil service so that the “new” government rapidly resembles big business as usual. Some headline grabbing policy moves will run into practical problems – like the free dental care being rolled out while dentists struggle to recruit staff and clear the Covid backlog.
Other initiatives will collide with old, stuck problems of land and housing shortages. The passage of the Gender Recognition Act will be bumpy and unless they contrive some big, eye-catching “quick wins” – like a massive district heating programme – the new green direction taken by the Scottish Government may be invisible.
Indeed, it could well be that nothing (mercifully) matches the exceptional conditions of the Covid pandemic for demonstrating the potential of better governance in Scotland.
But there’s a chance. If there is a confident Yes strategy, enthusiastically launched and explained by the First Minister at the SNP conference and beyond – if Nicola Sturgeon can make a dignified but powerful intervention around COP26, and if the SNP can overcome the habits of a lifetime to include not exploit the Greens, then the cause of independence will move forward again, before the official indyref2 campaign is even launched.
The new government can ditch the empty, last-season talk of “world-beating targets” and show how hard work and cooperation can start to decarbonise big cities and provide the skilled jobs of the future.
If Nicola Sturgeon, Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie can create real green ambition, ensure oil workers aren’t thrown on the scrapheap, stop deprived communities like Torry from being flattened in the “green rush” for wind farm construction in Aberdeen and back collective solutions like district heating to reduce costs on individual families – that will all boost the case for Yes.
If the new joint leadership underwhelm, falter or fail, independence will pay the price. The stakes are that high. As they should be.
Scotland’s new political leaders are about to direct a social, industrial and political shift that will transform our lives, economy and prospects as an independent country – or bottle it as Boris Johnson will undoubtedly do.
Either way, what the SNP/Green government does next will frame the case for independence. That’s the size, the exquisite possibility and the terrible danger of it – in a oner. No pressure.
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