Yes movement should learn five lessons from Australian referendum

This is not about the pros and cons of the Voice debate, but an opportunity to learn on how to win referendums. The five lessons were:

1) Discipline and a small leadership team works.

2) Rely on uniform messaging from only one or two members of the leadership team.

READ MORE: Australian referendum to create indigenous advocacy committee fails

3) Have simple and memorable messaging. Revolve around only two or three themes.

4) This may not be popular with purists, but negative campaigning works and conflict goes viral.

5) With BBC Scotland, STV and all newspapers bar The National blatantly biased against independence, you have to be world-class in using social media. Going back to point four – the TikTok algorithm puts a premium on friction. Posts that attack and create conflict with the Tories and Labour will travel further and faster.

Manufactured doubt always kills the mood for change. If the SNP do not improve in how we communicate with the Scottish people you can bet all the old scare stories around the economy, currency, pensions etc will prevail. SNP CEO Murray Foote, with his media background, has a great opportunity to get on the front foot. To quote the old football chant: “Let’s get into them”.

Robert Allan
Fochabers, Moray

SINCE the aftermath of the 2014 independence referendum we have been like gullible fools and accepted that support for independence and support for the toxic Union bounce up or down within 10 percentage points of a 50/50 split.

We can say that support for independence sits within this region but we cannot say that supporters of the Union make up a similar percentage, as we have been led to believe.

READ MORE: Jamie Hepburn: Majority of votes 'not necessary' for independence talks

Many of those who would vote “No” in a referendum do not support the toxic Union, they support the status quo. Presumably were Scotland to achieve the natural condition of any nation in the modern world they would come to support the new status quo, an independent Scotland.

This notion gives added legitimacy to the SNP position of planning to negotiate independence if their party wins a majority of Scottish seats at the next General Election. Scotland must no longer be held hostage to a significant proportion of the electorate who do not care to envision a positive future and invest their votes in a country modelled on social justice, which we all can see is a diminishing concept under the Westminster government.

Ni Holmes
St Andrews

SO the SNP conference has spoken and Humza has asked for unity – members who don’t support his majority-of-seats policy are to put up and shut up. It is to be a majority of seats not a majority of the vote. Taking the easy option has won over political reality.

Given the results of recent local government by-elections, the Rutherglen by-election and many recent opinion polls, there is a very distinct possibility of the 2024 Westminster SNP group consisting, at best, of only around 30 MPs (down from 43) with only around 35% of the vote. Like it or not, the Labour Party are on a roll and likely to form a government with a working majority. They will be more than happy to ignore the remaining SNP MPs, even if they do actually manage to represent the majority of Scottish seats, and easily laugh off any attempts at, and suggestions of, independence negotiations.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon gives SNP independence strategy her 'full support'

The around 65% of voters who have supported the Unionist parties will breathe a sigh of relief that the Labour Party will save their precious Union. The SNP MP group will settle down to life at Westminster content in the fact that their jobs are secure for probably another five years.

We can clearly kiss goodbye to any hope of independence being back on the real agenda until, at the very least, the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026 where with a new strategy and a new leader we might, just might, have a chance of convincing 50% + 1 voters of the benefits of independence.

Brian Lawson
Paisley

I HAVE just read Chris McEleny in Monday’s National (It’s crucial for independence that the SNP change course, Oct 16). I didn’t realise that Alex Salmond’s middle name was “Superman”! It must be given the list of things he personally did, according to Chris!

Chris mentions two polices, with which he disagrees, that were passed by the Scottish Parliament. Gender Reform and the Deposit Return Scheme. Both of these were scuppered by intervention of the UK Government. Is Chris happy that such interventions stopped policies with which he disagrees, despite democratic votes in the Scottish Parliament?

READ MORE: SNP rebuttal unit to be launched next week as party takes fight to Unionist 'lies'

He also mentions that the Scottish Government should abandon council tax rises and use its resources to scrap the two-child benefits cap. Both attractive policies, except that he fails to identify the costs and to suggest which other budgets should be cut to pay for these actions.

Finally, the old chestnut of a Scotland United for Independence platform. Is it just me or do others think that this is simply an Alba ruse to try to retain their two MPs that were elected on an SNP platform?

One afterthought: if Alex Salmond is such a “Superman” and so in touch with the needs of the people of Scotland, why is the party he leads only polling around 3%?

David Howie
Dunblane

CHRIS McEleny for First Minister ... in a nutshell, the route we should be taking. Humza and co (the Greens) stand aside so indy can and will survive. Well put Chris. Most sense I have read in a while.

Frieda Burns
Stonehaven