AN open letter to Keith Brown on the responsibility of the SNP
THE constitution of the SNP gives the job of preparing the party’s parliamentary manifestos to the Deputy Leader, the office you hold. Whoever wrote it, the recent General Election manifesto resulted in stripping the party of more than 80% of its Westminster seats, from 48 down to a useless clutch of nine (and led by one of the co-proposers of its fake independence line), a bum-clenchingly mortifying fiasco in a country where half of the people consistently support independence.
READ MORE: Nearly half of SNP to Labour switchers back Scottish independence
But through the fug of empty rationalisation which soon emanated from the party, there has appeared what might be a chink of light, in your statement at The National’s Indyref@10 event, that we have “got to accept” that London is never going to allow another referendum. What you said is unequivocally true. We have a mountain of evidence to that effect, and none to the contrary. Some of us have been making that very point for years, and it is gratifying now to hear it from the holder of the SNP’s second-highest office.
The question which you and the rest of the party hierarchy now must face is: what does the party do about it, in order to fulfil its solemn responsibility, which is to restore to Scotland her long and ancient condition of a sovereign, independent state?
Given that there will be no further referendum, how are the people of Scotland to have their say, and how is a democratic majority vote for independence to be put into effect?
READ MORE: John Swinney: Independence is solution to day-to-day challenges
The answers to those questions are disarmingly simple and straightforward: a plebiscitary General Election (in which your manifesto would say, in essence, “give us a majority of your votes and we will take Scotland out of the Union”), and a declaration of independence by fiat of Scottish MPs (who are our country’s supreme representatives, modern counterparts of those who took Scotland into the Union in the first place, and who would hold virtually every Scottish seat as indy members after a headcount victory).
That second step should not be necessary, because at that stage (though not before it) London will likely accept that the game is up anyway, and come to the table.
Those answers break no rule of law or constitution, and are under no barrier from London, which has always said that the Union is consensual, and which has acted on that precept, eg in the Edinburgh Agreement of 2012 and in the Northern Ireland Act 1998, both of which were only possible because the UK is not an indissoluble entity. Indeed, an election was always taken by both Unionists and separatists to be the route to independence, before referendums were ever contemplated.
READ MORE: Anniversary was a fond walk down memory lane
The SNP’s catastrophic blunder in July has confined it to a tiny minority of Scottish seats, so no actual threat of independence at its own hand can be made until and unless it wins the majority back at the next UK General Election – years away. Meantime, if it now adopts the plain logic of your statement it will have to put together a mock plebiscite for Holyrood 2026, where a simple majority of votes for independence would at least foreshadow Scotland’s impending exit and raise a faint possibility that London would then relent without awaiting the inevitable at Westminster.
Only if yourself and your colleagues take your honest words seriously and act on them will the SNP face up to its responsibility. Unless it does so, the party will deserve no future, and go down to ignominy.
Alan Crocket
Motherwell
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