ANOTHER good article from Richard Walker and a great example of headline writing (Now, more than ever, SNP must separate their governing role and the pursuit of indy, Sep 6). Since I’m neither a headline writer nor journalist, I’d be asking: why haven’t the SNP been doing this over the years?
Being able to govern and govern well, when London has the last word, is difficult enough, since devolution is actually a stranglehold wrapped up in sugar-coated, mind-numbing “can’t do” legalese. But a stranglehold nevertheless that can be tightened whenever London chooses: cut the funding, whip up the the pro-Unionist press media, obfuscate with lies, damn lies and statistics!
READ MORE: Ireland's energy bill price cut shows 'boundless opportunities of independence'
It should have been a given that the SNP devoted its resources to engaging with the population, not just its party members, identifying priorities with the populace, with the follow-through ensuring good governance as far as possible, within that stranglehold.
At the same time, if there had been clear messaging explaining that London was preventing more of the governance needed in Scotland, that would have underpinned the constraints of devolution. Beyond words like “levers”, actual details, examples! All these years, there’s been a failure to weaponise devolution, to expose it for what it is, that stranglehold, with the reins held in London. Is it too late now?
Come 2026, just how more difficult will it be for politicians to show the failures of the Union rather than the failure of the SNP, real and faked, the Scottish Government, and devolution? It would be foolish for anyone to hope that Labour will fail so badly between now and 2026 that there will be a pro-indy majority government in Holyrood. There’s a lot of party political work to be done, and not just within the SNP but across the spectrum of parties wanting to be represented in Holyrood.
READ MORE: 'Hard to imagine' who will support SNP Budget, says Lorna Slater
When you turn to the party, the SNP, many will argue they didn’t go far enough in the fight for independence, that it has lost its way, that it’s is currently stalled, but it was the SNP and its members that became the political face leading the drive for independence as we hit 2014. If September 2024 does nothing else, it should revive the understanding that a movement emerged in 2014 that was politicised around a vision for the future of Scotland, again an independent nation. A grassroots movement non-aligned: a movement passionate in its belief that its components were civic-minded, encompassing broad sections of society with a self-confidence and self-belief in the viability of an indy Scotland. That movement hasn’t disappeared.
We’ve been self-funding, self-organising: creative, diverse. Just like 2014 with differing views, but a common purpose. It may be over-simplified to say the 2014 date made an urgency of focusing. Surely 2026 is now the same.
I do believe that the passion and belief are still there, but that’s not sufficient. There’s so much work to be done, so let the politicians do their jobs, better than before, please. But the grass roots need to re-emerge, separate from political parties: regain their non-aligned position with some form of public-facing commonality, just as we had the one word Yes. That was then, not now. So, can we get on with it, please?
A citizens’ convention, reaching out beyond party and pro-indy activists, truly reflective of Scotland’s people, is a great starter. Imagine that: politicisation with the purpose of identifying a future for an improving Scotland. The separation between parties and people will be clear, but which political party won’t take heed of what the people say, what they want, coming from such a base?
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
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