Yes movement has to focus on the big questions – not quick fixes

Over the weekend there were many different responses to the manoeuvres of the SNP leadership. “They’ve bottled it,” said Tory Murdo Fraser; “Yesterday upon the stair, I met a referendum that wasn’t there,” wrote LibDem Alex Cole-Hamilton channelling William Hughes Mearns.

This found echoes across different wings of the SNP, with Alex Neil calling the party’s position “a muddle and a guddle’; Stewart McDonald saying a single-issue election was a “mistake” and Pete Wishart calling it a “massive gamble.”

These remarks say something. They point to a wider set of problems in the SNP, politics and independence. They touch on the vacuousness and lack of candour in SNP leadership post-2014 which has invited pro-independence folk to trust them while offering little in the way of substance or strategy.

This is not to take a pro or anti-Sturgeon line. It is merely an assessment of the record since 2014. There has still been no post-mortem by the SNP or Yes on why it lost, or no significant reaching out to the don’t knows and those who voted No.

There has been no serious work undertaken on independence apart from the Growth Commission; and no attempt to harness the democratic energies and power of 2014 either in government or wider politics. One could go on with other examples, but you get the picture.

We are presented with an SNP which has ridden the wave of independence of 2014 and has used the language of being part of a “movement” – while acting for the most part as a proprietorial political force which wants to use politics rhetorically while retaining the mindset of a centralising party wary of sharing power and authority.

READ MORE: UK Government BLOCKS Scotland's Gender Recognition Reform Bill

We have been presented with the ambivalent messages of a SNP leadership going through the pretence of a “de facto referendum” in a UK election, supposedly as the harbinger to open negotiations for independence. This latter scenario will not happen, should not happen and is bad politics – which the SNP leadership know. Before we get to the bigger questions, just consider some practicalities.

In 2014, 2,001,926 people voted No on an 84.6% voter turnout. In the 2019 Westminster election, the SNP won with 1,242,380 votes representing 45.0% of those who voted. Two years later, in the 2021 Scottish elections, the SNP won 1,291,204 constituency votes – translating into 47.7%.

If in a future Westminster or Holyrood election the SNP won this scale of vote it would represent respectively 62.1% and 64.5% of the No vote in 2014. That is before we get into share of vote, aiming for 50% plus and number of seats.

The 2014 democratic wave in Scotland has to be respected as it fundamentally changed our nation, politics and how independence is seen. That means that a new democratic insurgency and engagement has to be mobilised, of a similar scale to 2014, for independence to win in the future. Trying to do otherwise is pretending there are quick fixes – which do not exist, and which are cul-de-sacs.

There is also the thorny issue of the UK state. The UK Government saying no has consequences. Ciaran Martin, in his 2021 Blavatinik Oxford lecture, observed that it dramatically changes the nature of the Union – undermining the idea of the Union as a genuine partnership, and weakening the case for its maintenance.

The UK Government’s stance comes from a place of weakness, not strength, and is itself in its own cul-de-sac. The same logic is true of a Section 35 order brought against the Scottish Parliament Gender Recognition Reform Bill and has to be understood in that context.

My book Scotland Rising: The Case for Independence includes a chapter on the conditions in which an indyref happens. These are majority support for the principle of Scotland’s right to decide, the Scottish Government having a mandate on an indyref, and support for a vote in the immediate future.

At the moment the first two favour Yes, but the third doesn’t and a large body of opinion does not want an indyref for the next couple of years. Besides this is the work that independence needs to do to put itself in a winning position.

The next UK election will be critical. Some will want to use it to make dramatic gestures such as SNP MPs not taking their seats at Westminster or not sitting until certain conditions are met – as George Kerevan outlined yesterday.

This mistakes, the nature of the SNP vote, Scotland’s status in the Union and political influence. Why would anyone withdraw MPs from a Parliament where Labour are likely to have a perilous or no majority? Doing so removes your political leverage. And Scotland in 2024 is not Ireland in 1918.

This talk avoids addressing the real work that needs to be done, that has been ignored since 2014. Where is the political work remaking the appeal of independence? Where are the ideas on driving forth progressive change, innovation – and making Scotland a land of social justice post-independence?

Where are the debates about the trade-offs inherent in independence? Where is the institution building in government and public agencies, that positively capitalises on the democratic spirit of 2014?

READ MORE: Better Together promises 'falling apart' as Scots shipyard to lose out

And where are the independent bodies beyond state and party working on the details of a self-governing Scotland?

Add to this a critical factor often missed by passionate supporters of independence and the Union – the human dimension.

We live in a country buffeted by huge stresses in recent times. The SNP leadership are exhausted; people are tired and anxious; public services and society have endured enormous cumulative strains.

The last thing many people want is the promise of an indyref or quasi-indyref in the next year or so.

What many want is leadership which understands and connects with where they are, rather than an exhausted SNP leadership going through the motions next year. Instead, it would be more cathartic and liberating, as well as better for the cause of self-government, if the SNP leadership said in a language of empathy and emotional literacy: “we understand how people are feeling and will act accordingly.”

This would have the benefit of being honest and candid, and would bring centre stage to our politics the trials and tribulations that people have experienced. Those stresses and traumas need to be respected and heard, and our politics needs to honour them and put them at the forefront.

Whereas at the moment there is a sense that because UK politics are broken and do not respect what people have gone through, somehow it is perfectly acceptable for Scotland to do the same. Why? Because this is to advance a noble cause. This is poor thinking and instead we have to show in every action the championing of justice and democracy.

READ MORE: Scotland can become 'leading player' in space sector, says top CEO

The current emotional deficit in independence and our wider politics; the absence of nurturing a democratically engaged public culture post-2014; the failure to address the fundamental choices and trade-offs inherent in independence; or reach out to the undecided – all come at a cost.

Too many independence supporters think the cause is already won and in so doing too many judge this true of the nation. This is not true yet and thinking otherwise is not helpful.

There is a Scotland in our homes, streets and communities which has still to be won, listened to and respected. No politics of change should just blithely assume that enough folk will come over to make a majority without serious work.

There are no shortcuts to independence. It is a nation-defining project. It will not be won by assuming it is already a done deal, or by the politics of quick fixes and processes currently being floated by the SNP. The politics of substance and respecting all Scotland will shape our future.