ALEX Salmond’s signature political talent was his ability to build coalitions of the unwilling. This was what enabled him to transform the SNP from a fringe movement into the dominant party of power in Scotland.
This is what took him, in 2014, to the verge of breaking up the arthritic British state. Salmond’s ability to forge unlikely alliances – even from the grave – was again visible at his poignant and moving memorial service in the splendour of St Giles’ Cathedral on Saturday.
Who else could bring together Gordon Brown and Tommy Sheridan? Or the leaders of the SNP, Alba and the Independence for Scotland Party? What other nationalist politician in death could unite in genuine grief and sympathy such big Unionist beasts as Labour’s George Foulkes, Lord David Steel and David Davis?
Amid the high emotion of Saturday’s service, especially as Sheena Wellington filled the Saltire-decked cathedral nave with a magnificent rendition of A Man’s A Man, there was a palpable feeling that this was indeed the Scottish nation come together.
More than this, it felt like the nationalist movement was again united, if only in grief and determination to finish the work Alex Salmond had started. Can this sense of unity, briefly felt on Saturday, be maintained?
Is it possible that Alex’s gift for creating political coalitions can be mobilised one last time to re-unite the scattered, rival factions of the independence movement? Is this the moment we sank our differences and started working together again? Does Alex Salmond not deserve such a legacy?
READ MORE: Extent of the pain UK Budget will inflict is becoming clear
I do not minimise the difficulties that bestride the path to reforging the unity of the movement or of agreeing a common strategy.
But both the nation and the movement face a dangerous future without such common purpose. The closet English nationalists of the Farage Reform Party are determined to oust the SNP from government in 2026, by offering de facto support to a Labour administration at Holyrood. Labour should beware of such blandishments.
Farage is only seeking to make it easier for disgruntled Tory and Labour voters to follow his banner. He’s doing the same in Wales. The end product, once there is a Farage government ensconced at Westminster, will be to neuter or abolish the devolved parliaments, including in Northern Ireland.
It is therefore crucial that a common nationalist front retains control in Holyrood at the 2026 elections. But achieving this has suddenly become more difficult. Last July, at the time of the General Election, the situation looked as follows.
Labour seemed on course to be the largest party at Holyrood in 2026. Alex Salmond was pushing for Alba to win 20-25 seats on the regional lists, by arguing for nationalists to give the party their second preferences.
That would turn wasted SNP second votes into Alba nationalist ones. With a bit of luck, nationalists could still form the majority – or at least a significant minority – in the Scottish Parliament. Above all, Salmond back at Holyrood would have provided a trenchant voice for independence, putting heart back into the movement.
But several things have happened to put that gameplan into question.
Firstly, the Labour Government has imploded inside only five months, something no one foresaw happening so soon. Starmer has proven a lacklustre, overly technocratic prime minister, Rachel Reeves (above) has been captured by the Treasury, and internally Labour have descended into civil war.
The disastrous Budget has sapped business confidence, reignited inflation and eliminated Labour’s poll lead. Which means Scottish Labour are unlikely to be the largest party at the Holyrood election.
But defecting, disillusioned Labour voters might swing to Reform if not given a serious alternative. Don’t imagine that Labour’s travails will automatically benefit the nationalist movement if we remain divided.
The second issue is that a strong Reform showing on the regional lists will squeeze the number of seats that the SNP and Alba might otherwise obtain.
The scenario where the SNP win lots of constituency seats and Alba harvest second-preference nationalist votes may not play out.
Present polling suggests the SNP win a plurality of constituencies, Labour come second, and Reform hoover up regional seats. Most second-preference nationalist votes could end up wasted, the more so if the SNP – with lots of their MPs and former MPs vying for regional berths at Holyrood – engage in a cat fight with Alba.
Neither party then gets enough second votes to outflank Reform. The national movement merely cuts its own political throat.
Finally, we have the glaring absence that is Alex Salmond. The last Holyrood election saw a virtual media blackout on Salmond and Alba. July’s General Election was different, with Salmond back on TV and radio.
But he wasn’t a candidate, and the usual UK media quarantine of Scottish issues and voices was again in force. However, 2026 would have been different, with Salmond running for a seat in his beloved north-east and doubtless dominating much of the media coverage.
I know and respect John Swinney, but I think Alex Salmond was a better bet to take on and wipe the political floor with Nigel Farage. Alas, it is not to be.
After Saturday’s memorial service, I heard many folk – inside and outside the SNP – say that, in the wake of Alex’s sad demise, the time has come to reunify the movement. Of course, there are still painful political wounds.
But the personalities involved in past disputes are no long in the frontline. And our movement has found the strength to recover from past political divisions.
It is telling that several people who had their moments of conflict with Alex were there to pay their respects on Saturday. They included Jim Sillars and Fergus Ewing, whose reading of The Wild Geese brought tears to many in the congregation.
At the very least, there has to be more practical co-operation between the various parts of the movement. But there is also an onus on SNP leader John Swinney (who was there on the front row, at the cathedral) to take the initiative.
John was long a protegee of Alex’s. Since he became the SNP’s fourth first minister, he has steered the party and administration back to the practical policies that characterised Alex Salmond’s period in office between 2007 and 2014. That is a good basis for co-operation and unity.
Alex has one last service to do for the movement. That is to serve as the supreme example of a politician who always thought strategically.
READ MORE: Arden Strategies proves we need more restrictions around lobbying
Such strategic thinking is glaringly absent in the movement at present. Leadership is never about reacting to events but rather about shaping them. Instead, we are gripped by an excess of ambition and a fear of taking risks. That will no longer suffice.
Perhaps the most fascinating and pregnant moment on Saturday was the rousing and sustained applause that followed Kenny MacAskill’s (above) passionate ode to his deceased friend and comrade.
It’s not often you get applause like that in a church. Kenny pulled no punches in his call for the congregation to remember Alex: “Cherishing his memory, revering his achievements, seeking justice for his name, and pledged to deliver his dream.”
And that dream will never die.
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