Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Ian Swanson: A long way down road to independence

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 16 April 2009
IT had the birthday cake last week – but tomorrow the SNP will celebrate its 75th anniversary all over again. The first resolution on the agenda for the party's two-day spring conference in Glasgow pays tribute to "those who have fought for national independence" since 1934, reaffirms the independence vision and "looks forward to delivering that promise".
It's a safe bet there won't be a queue of delegates wanting to speak against the motion.

And the SNP has reason to be pleased with itself. After decades of campaigning and repeated disappointments, the party's victory in the 2007 Holyrood election
s catapulted it into government for the first time. Alex Salmond and his colleagues surprised and impressed with their quick and efficient adjustment to being in power.

And they can point to popular policies they have delivered over the past two years – scrapping bridge tolls, abolishing graduate endowment fees, phasing out prescription charges and freezing the council tax.

But opposition parties believe the Nationalists are now starting to flounder. The abandonment of the flagship Local Income Tax policy, the watering down of the Scottish Futures Trust and the lack of progress in cutting class sizes point to serious problems in fulfilling manifesto pledges.

The agenda for this weekend's conference carefully avoids most of these issues. Instead, delegates will discuss a wide range of topics: opposing plans for a Team GB football squad for the 2012 Olympics, demanding borrowing powers for Holyrood, urging a loyalty points scheme for buying Scottish food, attacking the UK Government over the economy, with resolutions on renewable energy, children's health and part-privatisation of the Post Office scattered between.

But most party conferences nowadays are more about rallying the troops, getting some free TV air time and generating income from exhibitors than debating contentious issues.

In addition to the opening resolution on the 75th anniversary, there will also be a poignant link to the party's foundations in the tributes which will be paid to Sir Neil MacCormick, the former SNP Euro MP and Edinburgh University law professor, who died last week.

His father, the legendary John MacCormick, helped bring about the 1934 merger of the Scottish Party and the National Party of Scotland to form the SNP and is still an inspirational figure for the Nationalists.

Winnie Ewing – who cut the birthday cake last week – put the SNP firmly on the political map with her Hamilton by-election victory in 1967 and the party hit its highest point at Westminster with 11 MPs elected in October 1974.

But the following years saw many frustrations and disappointments until the party's 2007 Holyrood breakthrough, which changed Scottish politics for good by ending Labour's dominance.

The very fact of being in power also brought about a transformation in party discipline. The first eight years of devolution had seen much sniping and internal warfare in the Nationalist camp. And not all the SNP's new MSPs in 2007 were what might be called leadership loyalists. But there has been a remarkable absence of dissent since the election.

Potential rebels know that as a minority government, the SNP must remain united or risk defeat – and few activists would forgive anyone responsible for that.

However, one insider says party bosses cannot expect this enforced unity to carry on for ever and predicts the half-way mark of the government's period in office could prove a "catalyst".

"After that, things could start to change. All governments have a natural cycle. The third year is bound to be different from years one and two."

And the party's unexpected failure to win the Glenrothes by-election last November was a salutary reminder of how things can go wrong.

"Glenrothes knocked the stuffing out of a few things. Up till then, there was an assumption we could walk on water."

The insider points out that before the end of next year the party will have to embark on its regional rankings for the 2011 Holyrood elections – effectively deciding who will get back as MSPs from the top-up lists.

This is the process which in the past led Margo MacDonald to quit and become an independent and also condemned Mike Russell – now back as Minister for the Constitution – to four years out of parliament.

Another SNP source says Minister for Parliamentary Business Bruce Crawford and chief whip Brian Adam are already being kept busy trying to keep people on board.

"Group meetings last just 20-25 minutes. People are not rocking the boat.

"But there is a lot of work being done internally to keep people in line – taking people aside having a chat with them."

The SNP remains a disparate group with political views ranging across the political spectrum, united by a declared belief in the need for independence.

It has come a long way in 75 years and now believes it is closer than ever to achieving its independence goal.

Mr Salmond said right from the start that his objective was to prove the SNP could be a success in government and persuade people to go that extra step.

But if problems for the government lead to dissent in the party, that loss of unity could do serious damage to the Nationalists' ambitions.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 16 April 2009 9:25 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Ian Swanson
 
1

The Master,

16/04/2009 11:58:59
" Mr Salmond said right from the start that his objective was to prove the SNP could be a success in government and persuade people to go that extra step."

This is the fundamental contradiction at the heart of this campaign group turned dead end political party which is largely indistinguishable from the Lib Dems apart from the Nationalist rhetoric.

Nats keep on telling us that there will be a number of reformulated parties in a separatist Scotland and that the SNP may well dissolve as it is unlikely to continue in its current form post separation.

Why, then, do the Nats feel that it is of any relevance whether they can prove themselves in government under the current constitutional settlement?
2

Linda,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 12:44:13
No sign of SNP downturn yet. Based on actual votes in actual elections in 2008/2009 SNP still lead Labour with the Tories and Lib Dems well behind.
3

The west awake,

Argyll 16/04/2009 13:44:28
I see no sign of the SNP "foundering", but even if they were, an SNP founder would still be better than Labout at full tilt.
I also see no signs of internal dissent or rebellion, unlike Labour, who are at each others throats.
I agree though, that the SNP are united behind their driving vision of Independence - what drives Labour these days, now that socialism is a dirty word?
4

Merouane,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 13:48:23
#1. It's pretty simple. People are more likely to vote for independence if the people who are campaigning for independence have proven themselves as competent politicians.

Btw #1, after independence, will you still refer to the country as 'separatist Scotland'? And do you refer to the UK as 'separatist UK' at present?
5

Merouane,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 13:50:09
#3. What drives Labour is hatred of the SNP and personal gain.
6

The Master,

16/04/2009 14:49:48
#4 Merouane: The reason the word "separation" applies to Scotland and not the UK is that Scotland is so dependent on the internal market of a wider entity (ie the UK) that what the foolhardy nonsense which lies at the very core of this sorry excuse for a political party can only be labelled "separation".

May I quote founding father Hugh MacDiarmid who wrote to protest "“against the idea that a scheme for developing the poultry industry in Ayrshire, or re-afforesting part of Sutherlandshire, or re-establishing a parliament in Edinburgh, or, in short, any scheme to do anything at all, political, economic, commercial or industrial — except to arouse a distinctive and dynamic spirit in Scotland . . . has anything whatever to do with Scottish nationalism”.

The Nats have settled for power within a dissolved context: the party attracts votes simply because it has a leader with popular appeal and is seen as an alternative to Lab/Lib Dems in the SP.

The crackpoint agenda to turn Scotland into an economic basket case for no good reason other than the call of "songs and heroes" remains as far away as ever.

The Master condemns Nationalism in Scotland unreservedly.
7

The Master,

16/04/2009 14:51:39
Correction: power within a DEVOLVED context. My spell checker is throwing up gremlins, following yesterday's appeal by the Baron for the use of a spellchecker before posting.
8

Dr Light,

Peckham 16/04/2009 15:10:37
Stupid gnats, how could you run your country when you can’t even run your bank. It’s a bad joke. Scotland, you belong to England forever, get used to it!
9

Merouane,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 16:13:58
#6. I fully agree with MacDiarmid's quote. It's the reason why British Unionists can still do good things in Scotland. Seeking to improve the country does not have to be about nationalism.

As for the point that an independent Scotland would be more 'separate' than an independent UK is nonsense. We live in a globalised interdependent world and England would be no less of a market for Scots than it is now. What we might see, however, is a boost to our internal market. The very fact that you see us being so 'dependent' at present just illustrates the need for change so that we lose the dependency culture.

As the article describes, we are part way down that route and the present impetus will see us continue in that direction. Time will tell whether it leads to independence or not. Also, please remember, independence is not just for the 'nats', its for all of us who will still have to live here post-independence. Able people won't stop being productive members of society just because they voted 'no' in a referendum (taking us back to the very appropriate quote from MacDiarmid).
10

The Master,

16/04/2009 16:29:57
#9 Merouane: You're not the brightest, are you! McDiarmid was advocating that the SNP should become a movement with a single aim which eschewed electoral politics like the Anti Corn Law League or CND.

The SNP chose instead to become a party, thus obscuring the separation aim and meaning that the distinction between it and the mainstream parties has become blurred in the public's mind. At the time of the last election, the electorate were more likely to find themselves attracted to the party because of the promise to introduce LIT and freeze CT than because they were convinced that separation was in Scotland's best interests.

Eschewing the movement route has only led to a loss of impetus and narrowing of appeal for the SNP.
11

,

16/04/2009 16:37:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

St.George,

16/04/2009 16:56:31
11. you can't tell me that it wasn't the Dunfermline's fault that they took on toxic loans from america because they ought to have been stopped by regulation. What about RBS overexpanding by buying that Dutch Bank, should regulation have stopped them again?

You jockos have to take responsibility for the bunch of banker's who have brought you down and left us in england to save you
13

Merouane,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 17:15:40
#10. No need to resort to insults. Yes, the SNP became a political party rather than a campaign group for independence. And yes, not everyone agrees that was the right move to make. Some would argue that it has broadened their appeal. Even if these new SNP supporters aren't pro independence, they are certainly not afraid of a referendum on the issue.

This all leaves us with the clear distinction between the party and the movement for independence. We also know that a significant proportion of Labour (and other British unionist/federalist party) voters support independence, we have independent and Green members of Parliament who support, at the very least, a referendum on the issue. It is from this broad base that a referendum will be won. However, it is through parliamentary representation that a referendum will be brought forward in the first place.
14

The Master,

16/04/2009 17:22:10
#13 Merouane: " Even if these new SNP supporters aren't pro independence, they are certainly not afraid of a referendum on the issue."

Just wait until the mainstream parties start bringing it home that the Nats' proposed "consultatative" referendum wording is rigged and meaningless. Gray's been pushing the line until now that it's the wrong time in view of the economic crisis, but it's fairly obvious that he's holding his powder dry on the undemocratic nature of the question itself.

I know it's the only question the Nats can legally ask, but why ask it if it's only going to lead to confusion and would be easily discredited even in the event of a "yes" vote?

Is the Master right, or is the Master right!
15

St.George,

16/04/2009 17:34:57
The Nats' rigged question will be ignored,the plain english campaign will make it clear noone knew what it meant and the newspapers will be full of people who say they voted for it thinking that they just thought that it would allow the politicians to talk and didn't know that the nutty nat fanatic's would take it as all the excuse they need to claim that they've won a vote on separation lmfao.
16

kennedysglass,

16/04/2009 17:46:09
Oh how interesting, the Master & Co seem to have a thread of their very own now. How considerate of the Hootsman to give them one, I know they must have been wanting this for so very long!
17

Time to Show Courage,

16/04/2009 17:53:44
#14 & #15
You don't half talk some nonsense you two. The way I see it, its likely to be a multi option referendum anyway. At least the SNP are happy to put the question to the people they are serving. It is the undeniable right of the Scottish people to make this constitutional decision, and reprehensible that the unionist parties deny them that right.
18

Graham P,

Edinburgh 16/04/2009 19:14:40
#6 "The Master": What part of the slogan "independence in Europe" do you have difficulty understanding? A "separatist Scotland" would have exactly the same access to markets in a rump UK as "separatist France", "separatist Germany" and "togetherist Scotland" do at present.
19

Hugh Roscombe,

16/04/2009 19:33:58
15 St George/kimba/elizabeth the first etc

Another word salad.
20

Eve,

Scotland 16/04/2009 20:19:03
It's a long road right enough!! BUT it will be worth it in the end, my only hope is that we don't loes much more, than we've allready lost.
21

,

16/04/2009 20:38:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

,

16/04/2009 22:04:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

,

16/04/2009 22:35:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Brianwci,

17/04/2009 10:55:54
#12 St George says: You jockos have to take responsibility....

We do St George, it's called INDEPENDENCE.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.