THIS time a year ago, the Scottish Nationalists were just two weeks away from winning power at Holyrood. No-one knew how the election would turn out and the fate of politicians on all sides were hanging in the balance.
But when the votes from May
3 were finally counted, the SNP had squeaked ahead to become the biggest party and Scotland's first minority administration.
Twelve months on, with the Nationalists meeting this weekend for their spring conference in Edinburgh, Alex Salmond and his party have firmly established themselves as the Scottish Government. They are still riding high in the opinion polls and now there are indications of growing support for their ultimate aim of independence.
Mr Salmond could not have wished to be in a better position as he prepares to address delegates at Heriot-Watt University's campus. And he will be hailed a conquering hero by the party faithful.
There is no doubt the SNP has made an impressive transition from opposition to government and carried the skilful handling of the election campaign forward into the adept management of power.
But part of the reason the SNP "honeymoon" has lasted so long is that the opposition has been so poor.
The election may have left Labour with just one seat less than the SNP, but the fortunes of the two parties over the past year could not have been more different.
While the Nationalists have made the most of their historic opportunity and set about the task of governing with vigour and enthusiasm, Labour has struggled to come to terms with the novel predicament of being out of power.
Almost everything Labour says or does seems petty, carping, ill-judged or badly handled. So when will the shine start to come off the shiny new SNP government? Surely it can't last for ever.
The first year of Nationalist administration has seen a range of populist policies, like scrapping tolls on the Forth Road Bridge, ending student endowment charges and starting to phase out prescription charges, not to mention freezing the council tax, while other promises – like writing off student debt and handing out £2000 grants to first-time buyers – have been ditched with surprisingly little fuss.
And at the same time the SNP government has made sure it is seen to be "standing up for Scotland" by taking on Westminster over issues such as Tony Blair's failure to inform the Scottish Government on his prisoner transfer agreement with Libya and the refusal to give Scotland a share of cash for new prisons.
Mr Salmond's declared strategy for government is to make things as good as possible under devolution in order to persuade voters they would be even better under independence. The battles with the UK government help create a sense of injustice in the present arrangements.
And if last weekend's TNS System Three opinion poll is to be believed, the strategy seems to be working. The poll found 41 per cent in favour independence, with 40 per cent against. And taken together with similar polls in August and November last year, the findings suggest a steady rise in support for independence and a steady fall in opposition to it.
A separate poll by Progressive Scottish Opinion last week also found a growth in support for independence – up ten points since August – though 43 per cent of people are still opposed to it, compared with 41 per cent in favour.
Opposition parties insist these polls do not reflect the real mood of Scots voters and argue there is more support for giving the Scottish Parliament more powers rather than full independence.
One opposition politician says the surge in support for independence is down to the "feelgood" factor Mr Salmond has created. "Salmond is a big personality and he has made people feel better about being Scottish and having the parliament. But it will wear off – it's not real support for independence."
And a leading Labour MSP says: "I don't think we should be too worried. It's not that long since there was a poll showing support for independence at an all-time low."
BUT a senior SNP MSP says the trend identified by the TNS System Three poll has to be taken seriously because it asked the question which the Nationalists propose for a referendum – whether the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the UK government so that Scotland becomes an independent state.
The MSP says: "It's all in the way you frame the question – if you ask people if they support 'separation' they will say No, but if you ask whether the government should negotiate for independence, that's a different matter."
It seems almost certain, however, the real picture of public opinion will become clearer if and when the detailed implications of independence are properly debated. Questions about Scotland's economic prospects, the implications of maintaining sterling as the national currency, the creation of separate armed services and how to divide up UK assets will all spell controversy.
The SNP can be expected to present a slick case for independence or, as they like to put it, taking on the powers and responsibilities of a "normal" country. The crucial factor could be how the opposition parties respond in defence of devolution and maintaining the union with the UK. Will Labour opt once again for the "scare" tactics it has used in the past, with images of a framed map of the UK being shattered and slogans such as "Divorce is an expensive business"?
It may have worked before, but even some Labour politicians were uncomfortable with the stridently negative approach. And now that voters have defied the party's dire warnings about the dangers of electing an SNP government, a more sophisticated argument is needed.
