I read the first part of Steph Brawn’s piece in The National today with mounting anger. Steph has been shadowing Humza Yousaf on his much-hyped campaigning tour of the Highlands and Islands and finally got around to broaching the subject of the constitutional issue when she got together with the First Minister at Stornoway Airport. It is no secret that I have long had serious misgivings about Yousaf’s ability – or, indeed, willingness – to progress Scotland’s cause. There comes a point when, if not allayed, such doubts solidify into a conviction. On reading his responses to questions about restoring Scotland’s independence, I became convinced that Humza Yousaf has to go, He has to be removed from the role of First Minister and de facto head of the independence movement as a matter of the utmost urgency. The man is simply not up to the job. He has neither the heart nor the head to lead the fight to restore Scotland’s independence.
According to her account, the questions “at the heart” of Steph Brawn’s conversation with the First Minister were,
How urgent is independence? How do we break the door down and make Westminster listen? How, after coming so far, do we clear these stubborn hurdles?
Behind the scenes: 48 hours on the campaign trail with Humza Yousaf
Good questions? Perhaps! But the bit about making Westminster listen betrays the colonised mindset which is hobbling Scotland’s cause. Bad enough that this mindset should afflict a Scottish political journalist. How much worse, however, that it should be evinced by the individual we rely on to progress Scotland’s cause. Yousaf’s response to questioning on the constitutional issue demonstrates firstly his reliance on formulaic lines endlessly repeated. When it is put to him that people are impatient for progress towards independence, his predictable response is that he is “the most impatient when it comes to independence”. This is a re-jigging of Yousaf’s claim to be the ‘first activist’. If you are impatient, he is the most impatient. If you are angry, he is the angriest. If you are determined, he is more determined than anyone. It is a clumsy device by which he hopes to both mirror the hopes and concerns of independence supporters and portray himself as being at the forefront of Scotland’s cause.
As a general rule, when politicians are makng such an effort to identify with those committed to a cause and present themselves as their leader it is because they are neither. If Humza Yousaf was committed to Scotland’s cause, this would be evident from his actions. If he was leading that cause, it would be going somewhere. As it is, his response only prompts further questions. If he is the “most impatient” to see Scotland’s independence restored, why has this impatient not been evident during a decade of dawdling and pusillanimous procrastination? How can he truly be the leader of Scotland’s cause when it is so apparent that he has no idea which way to go?
But here’s the clincher. This is what convinced me Humza Yousaf has to go.
We’ve got to create the political conditions so Westminster can’t say no, in the same way we created the political conditions for the Scottish Parliament. We have to do that again.
There’s no magic number with polls, but at every single election test, we’ve got to show the party of independence is strong and winning. The moment the SNP doesn’t win, the Unionist parties will take that as a mandate for further Westminster rule.
If you wanted to capture in a few sentences the attitude and ‘thinking’ which has left the independence campaign moribund for ten years you could do a lot worse than quote these words from the man who is supposed to be at the helm of that effort. What hope is there for Scotland’s cause when the person who purports to speak for all who aspire to restoring Scotland’s rightful constitutional status so casually accepts and affirms the British state’s authority to simply say no?
What hope is there for Scotland’s cause when our ‘leader’ is so deluded as to imagine there are any “political conditions” ” where Westminster can’t say no?
What hope is there for Scotland’s cause when the person charged with delivery so obviously prioritises his own party’s electoral fortunes?
What hope is there for Scotland’s cause when our nation’s political leader is so inanely naive as to suppose the British state’s colonialist domination of its annexed territory isn’t already complete?
Humza Yousaf is not only useless, he is dangerous. His occupation of the roles of First Minister and de facto leader of the independence movement constitutes a real and very serious threat to Scotland’s cause.
Humza Yousaf has to go!
Peter A Bell 
He’s just not interested. He will never unite the movement. The disrespect for independence supporters implicit in his robotic responses is off the scale. A man who has enjoyed a cosseted existence and never had a real job has nothing to offer.
LikeLiked by 6 people
I always thought that Nicola Sturgeon had the potential to be the leader Scotland’s cause requires. She simply failed to realise that potential because she had other priorities. It was never possible to suppose her successor had such potential. But I was previously persuaded there was the possibility that he could be forced to adopt a different approach. I am now obliged to recognise that he is incapable of comprehending what is required in order to restore Scotland’s independence. And that he lacks the cojones to do what is required even if he could be made to understand.
Humza Yousaf just has to go!
LikeLiked by 4 people
“How do we get there?”
“My belief is that we win independence by growing the popular support for it,” he went on.
“We’ve got to create the political conditions so Westminster can’t say no, in the same way we created the political conditions for the Scottish Parliament. We have to do that again.
That is not answering the HOW question, Humza.
Why are you avoiding saying what your ‘answer’ to the ‘HOW’ question is?
Is it because your proposal is to deny and negate the sovereignty of the people of Scotland then concede to the Westminster Parliament?
Why don’t you just say that, then ask people to vote for your ‘plan’?
If Humza were to follow that honest course, then the SNP would very likely be hammered at the next election as large numbers of YES voters either stay at home or #RepurposeTheirVotes.
The obvious question then is, if the current ‘plan’ is so obviously unworkable, why does he choose to obfuscate (lie) about it, rather than steering a course which is more likely to have a successful outcome?
We are left to speculate.
Is it because he is to stupid to understand? I don’t know for sure.
Is it because he is too weak to act differently? It would seem so.
Is he listening too much to those voices in the Partys Ruling Clique who are ‘advising’ him? It would seem so.
All of this has to change. And soon. Very soon.
Otherwise Humza is the soon-to-be ex leader who hasn’t suffered his inevitable ignominious defeat yet.
😦
LikeLiked by 5 people
Humza Yousaf is a gutless, witless, clueless careerist. He appears devoid of any core political beliefs and values. If any there do exist they demonstrably do not include the pursuit of Scotland’s Cause.
Scotland is neither too wee nor too poor to govern itself. Its people are not too stupid for that task either.
It’s just that the dim-witted First Minister and his cabal are.
LikeLiked by 7 people
but too many of the people are too stupid to stop voting for them
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wouldn’t blame ‘the people’. Not yet anyway.
It really only became absolutely obvious that the current leadership had other priorities from 2020/21 onwards with the pursuit of Alex Salmond and other policy agendas.
It is the SNP members that need to stop voting for them to lead their party!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t think they are too stupid. They just don’t see a viable alternative. That’s the fault of the other nominally pro-independence parties who have failed to persuade voters that they are a viable alternative.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Brawn: Would he show supporters independence is firmly on the agenda?
Yousaf: It’s just not on the agenda.
Ooops, sorry I mis-read that, the “just” and “not” are the other way around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Humza definitely has to go, but HOW ? and if he does go who will the continuity-continuity candidate to replace him for a further 18 months and so on and so on ? The logic of what you are actually saying Peter is that the main party of Scottish independence, the governing party, has to go. I know you think there is no alternative to the current governing party, but we all know there is no fixing them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t accept that there is something special about the SNP thst makes it impervious to public pressure. The problen isn’t that the SNP can’t be fixed. It’s that, for one reason or another, far too many people are unwilling to make the effort to fix it. A fatal combination of blind loyalty, mindless hatred and dumb apathy leaves the party leadership at liberty to do (or not do!) as it pleases.
It’s just a political party, Geoff.
I don’t just “think there is no alternative to the current governing party”, I know it for an absolute fact. As does everybody else who is thinking rationally. In order to think otherwise, it is necessary to believe one or both of two things that are patently false – that the SNP is NOT the party of government, and/or that time is of no consequence. I can’t indulge such irrationality. I’m just not capable of maintaining a fantasy of the SNP being replaced as the party of government before the next Holyrood election. Nor am I naive and/or deluded enough to imagine the British state won’t use that two years to introduce measures that will make the restoration of Scotland’s independence massively more difficult.
Like it or not – and increasing numbers do not – but we are stuck with the SNP. Until that reality is acknowledged by the part of the independence movement not mindlessly loyal to the SNP, Scotland’s cause will remain at the mercy of the likes of Humza Yousaf.
A “we all know” what that means.
LikeLiked by 2 people
He’s telling us straight the Scotland needs to keep voting for the SNP at every election just to keep Independence active on election day only. After a Westminster, Holyrood or council elections Independence hasn’t to be spoken about again until these election come around again. I’m afraid there has never even been the GOLD STANDARD its never spoken of anymore. You could ask your self what is the point of the SNP well the point of the SNP is for the leadership to destroy the SNP and any hope of Scotland achieving Independence that is what the party leadership is actively trying to achieve. I’m afraid that even if Humza Yousaf is removed as leader of the SNP and even if Kate Forbes replaces Humza nothing will change other than leader, its the SNP leadership as a whole we need to rid ourselves of and until we do Scotland will be stuck on the road to no where.
Humza is being honest about Independence and is that Independence is only a tool to win elections and nothing more.
Nicola Sturgeon was being honest when she said the only way Scotland can achieve Independence is with the Gold Standard which she knew was never going to be delivered hence she stated it.
The leadership of the SNP actually wants to change the name of the Party to (SNP Independence) knowing that the party will never ever seek to deliver it.
The guy is delivering the message loud and clear it for us to do something about it and after ten years we have done nothing, I’ve even suggest that AUOB shouldn’t be marching around the streets but instead on Bute House its self, I’ve also stated that it isn’t South of the Border who stopping Scotland being Independent but our government North of the Border.
We have a opportunity to send the strongest message to the SNP in the up and coming election but I’m afraid nothing will change the SNP will win the Westminster election and then go back to being the anti Indy party.
I’ll also say that the leadership have every intention of removing Humza but only when all the investigations by the Police have finished and here come the surprise Nicola Sturgeon will be elected again as leader of the party and then FM, hence she stood down and the reason why Humza become leader.
Make no mistakes Nicola Sturgeon will be revived again and the circle of Scotland’s doom will continue.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The attempted rehabilitation of Nicola Sturgeon is underway already. My guess would be she’s hoping to position herself in readiness for Yousaf falling on his sword in the wake of a very poor performance in the UK general election.
LikeLike
Yousaf undoubtedly will never be up to the job of delivering Scotland’s Independence principally for the reasons apparent in your assessment above.
A question of more concern should be who within the current SNP grouping is capable of seriously leading the fight (and it is going to take a fight) to free Scotland from the clutches of Westminster’s colonial stranglehold?
What ever happens Forbes, (another careerist) can not under any circumstance be considered an option given her role as acting consultant for the Freeport scam in conjunction with GOVE and the Global vultures posing as providers of *opportunity*, (read plundering exploiters of Scotland’s people and natural assets).
Forbes association with the British American Project should be a red flag as to who and where her loyalties are bound , particularly in view of the fact BAP business took priority through her non attendance at the last SNP autumn conference.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I agree re Kate Forbes. But I have no other names to throw into the ring. My suspicion is that it will be somebody totally unexpected. It then becomes a matter of trust. Say, for example, Nicol Sturgeon took advantage of her hiatus to reposition herself on the constitutional issue. Since we’re using our imaginations anyway, let’s make them work and suppose in the wake of Yousaf announcing he’s stepping down, Sturgeon comes out and says that in the light of developments and having had time to think, she is now in total agreement with yon Peter A Bell character fae aff the interweb. Obviously, I’d applaud this change of… everything! But could I trust her? Could I have confidence she wouldn’t fuck us over yet again?
LikeLike
Ah think Peter if that situation was to arise it would be a case o’ Sturgeon tellin’ us, fuck yon gold standard nonsense, ‘trust in me’, Bitcoin is the Independent wye forrit, roll up get yours here!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think maybe you are a bit harsh on Kate Forbes.
Sure she might be a wee bit rightwing on some things, but she definitely still stands for social justice and ending poverty, etc.
She was also one of the more competent Ministers in Government, and she would have had plenty respect amongst the wider voting public. And we do know who definitely didn’t want her in charge, and that was the Greens!
Well, I would rather have Kate Forbes than Harvie & Co, at top of Government.
The main question for us, tho, would she have been more for Independence than the Yousaf lot?
I would like to think she would have been, and had she won the Leadership, we would most likely have had Ash Regan still in the ranks, and we know she is very much for Independence.
But, and there’s always one, with next to everybody still wanting to go ask London for “permission” to do anything, rather than tell London this is what WE are doing, and stuff it, then, I guess not too much will change too soon.
However, at least Forbes might have kept the SNP vote up, and not taken it all for granted, the way we see just now.
LikeLike
Kate Forbes has completely espoused the Freeports doctrine .That in itself constitutes a major obstacle to any leadership role in advancing the cause of Scottish Independence. She has demonstrated that her ambitions are to lead a party for devolution rather than freedom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Forbes has conveniently sheltered under the umbrella of the ‘Independence’ movement since she ‘entered’ politics through membership of the SNP and continues to do so.
During her tenure as an MSP Forbes has done HEE HAW to promote Independence whether that be in her home constituency or within the country at large. That is particularly galling when consideration is given to the fact she held ministerial office at cabinet level which provided a platform and endless opportunities to promote Independence. The failure to grasp that opportunity was never more obvious than when she presented herself as a candidate in the faux leadership campaign, nary a word was there said where she would deliver on campaigning policy.
As for being ‘more for Independence than the Yousaf lot’? Why the comparison?None of them should be anywhere near the SNP if they don’t have belief in Scotland’s right to Independence. Forbes has NEVER demonstrated that belief!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The answer to your – rhetorical – ” what hope……..” question is , as you know , P , ” None ” . There is NO hope of Scotland regaining it’s Independence under this – latest- fraud .
I was obliged to watch a video of his equally fraudulent predecessor – in order to verify the perception of the person/site it was on – https://www.offtopicscotland.com/post/i-will-be-with-you
Christ Almighty ! I actually burst out laughing at the ….well , not sure if it’s unhinged self-delusion , sheer brass-necked reputational self-preservation or mere ego-wallowing in the adulation of her flock – maybe a fusion of all three , but the implicit megalomania / narcissism in her sub-MLK manque ” I may not be there with you , but I will be so in spirit ” faux-sincere platitudes was remarkable , for all the wrong reasons .
We’re in a pretty grim situation , P . The former ” Main Vehicle To Independence ” is no more than runaway train heading straight for the buffers ; the other contenders to replace them are either insufficiently different/brave or insufficiently known to apply the coup de grace to the dying SNP and provide the credible , laser-focused-on-Independence force we so badly need . The Is4I ( Independents For Independence ) offer a bit of hope but it would take a seismic transformation of voter-intention/awareness for this to reach the requisite scale . I wish them well nonetheless .
It’s only stubborn , inherent optimism and agreement with the ” darkest hour is just before dawn ” trope that prevents me from abandoning the whole thing as terminally fucked
LikeLiked by 4 people
Your words will strike a chord with a great many people in the independence movement.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree completely with your suggestion, Peter, that both Yousaf and the current SNP government must go if we are ever to achieve our right to Self Determination and the reinstaement of our independence,
A way forward is explained in a document produced by the research organisation Salvo, which has studies the constutional differences between scotland and england which still exist despite the british governments attempts to conceal thses facts.
‘In Right of Crown’ explains the very different concepts of the crown and of kingship in scotland and England , dating from when James VI of Scots became also James I of England, though James himself much preferred the English version, which suited him better, and indeed tried to get the scots to accept that version, which would have gone against the coronation oath he swore to the people of Scotland. from his accession to the English throne, James wore two crowns, one for each of hir realms, thou the fact that he was king of Scots but king of England was significant
To quote from this document – ‘In right of the Scottish Crown reframes everything from privately owned energy and land (mis)use, environmental protection and Freeports to civil rights and those ‘exceptionalmeasures’, rendition, detention without trial. imprisoning journalists, shutting down and penalising protest, imposed on Scotland for the security of the (English) state.
In fact this not ony sets Scotland apart from the rest of the United kingdom , it is a major constitutional lever , if we are willing to recognise and use it to break Westminster control of Scotland and to reform an opressive political and judical system right now. Today.’ (end of quotation).
This shows that if we can get together a significant body of Scots to demand that this information be heard in London ( independence,scot are working on this) we could stop the take over of our sole remaining oil refinery at grangemoth, the imposition of freeporta gainst the will of the people, the theftof our enrgy, both oil and renewables over the years , the attempted destruction of our culture and languages and all the other ills that have resulted from the unlawful English domination of Scotland.
We need to tell Westminster and the international community the truth about our opressed status. What are we waiting for?
”’
LikeLike
Apparently, we’re waiting on London again. I don’t know why. Any strategy for independence which relies on being “heard in London” is doomed from the outset.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I did not intend my comment to be understood as ‘waiting on London’ but folk there need to be told that we have had enough, if only as a courtesy, How they react is up to them but it is probaly more importany that we get the international community on our side. As England has been losing credibility in that area over many years by breaking intenational laws, seeking to remove itself from organistions promoting basic human rights, its treatment of refugees and asylum seekers and increasing impoverishment of the majority of its citizens, I would hopw Scotland would get a sympathtic hearing, though any work that can be done to encourage that in advance would be helpful.
I would suggest that we need to start telling the businesses that have used our land and resources for thir own ends, that there is no legal basis to what they are doing and that we, the people of Scotland have had enough of this fiction that London controls everything and that the Westminster Parliament is soveriegn throughout the UK. It is not sovereign in Scotland as Historic Documents, many already endorsed by the British state can demonstrate, Anything businesses have bought in Scotland, including land, has been stolen and the seller had no right to do that. Surely there is an International Court which would uphold that principle.
We need to fight for our survivsl as a country and for our culture. If we do nothing, large tracts if our country will be taken over as so-called Freeports where there will be no regulation to protect workers or the environment and no benefit to comminities within their areas of influence and that will impossible to undo at least 25 years from now, effectively the middle of this century, as that will be written into the contracts. By that time the wealth and resources of our counntry will have vainished and we will be no better than slaves.
There is considerable anger in Scotland regarding the closure of Grangemouth in paticularand people are already becoming better informed regarding freeports, while those sufferinf from fuel poverty are realising that the windfarms they can watch turning from their windows are sending thir energy away, while they suffer. We must harness that anger and the realisation that we are treated unfairly so that the message about our rightful consitutional position is backed by a significant body of opinion, We are already seeing support for Independence at over 50% while support for the SNP is going down so people are more aware of what is happening and so more likely to support a credible route out the mess we are in,
LikeLiked by 4 people
I don’t think, in the over a year since she resigned, Sturgeon has said one word about Independence – despite being in a perfect position to let rip.
It’s all books, care promises and assisted dying. Virtue signalling.
As for Yousaf, and Slater and Harvie, they are attacking Rowling for her tweets about the HCA. THEY are Government Ministers, SHE is a citizen of Scotland. They should have more respect for the people who pay their wages – that would be us, including Rowling.
They have absolutely no statespersonship at all. They’re like kiddiewinks in a Willie Wonka Experience hoodiewink.
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘National Cultures are incompatible’ (Memmi), which may help explain why the FM seems rather distant from the people he allegedly seeks to liberate. In Scotland, moreover, private schools promote an English superiority and socio-cultural segregation; how does this cultural elite really view working class Scots it seeks to make and keep subordinate? Hence another reason why the present leadership remain distant from the people, and why they misunderstand our cause. Independence ‘is a cultural emotion’ efter aw (Fanon).
LikeLiked by 3 people
a wee song on the theme Humza’s teas oot! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP27nk2-Ro8
LikeLiked by 1 person
The problem is NOT Humza, or not only Humza. He is a symptom. The cause is the Party, the now wholly toxic, dyed in the wool devolutionist SNP, everyone who votes SNP, and, for the first time ever I’ll include a new category, everyone who somehow still manages to vaguely support the inveterate devolutionists holding out hope of a magical, against all the odds rehabilitation.
Actually, is rehabilitation the right word? Has the SNP ever been anything other than a party of devolution?
LikeLike
Postcolonial theory explains precisely what happens to a dominant national party during the decolonization process, as it moves ever closer to colonialism and protection of the status quo, holds the people back, ruptures the movement, and becomes itself ‘an implement of coercion’:
LikeLiked by 2 people
The independence cause is stale. If polls and elections consistently showed that >60% of Scots wanted independence, Westminster would grant a referendum. It’s more like 50/50, and they can just say ‘you’ve already had a referedum and little has changed’. But according to Mr Bell, the step-change can be achived by people not voting. No-one in their right mind is going to call for the de facto drivel when the SNP are on 35% of the vote. No wonder the whole thing’s stale and Yousaf doesn’t want to have much to do with it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The one thing I do agree with Yousaf on is that there’s “no magic number with polls”.
Canvassing opinion means nothing unless acted upon, something that the FM and his party have studiously avoided doing even when YES sentiment was at 55%-58% and rising on some surveys.
Your comment that if “polls and elections consistently showed that >60% of Scots wanted independence, Westminster would grant a referendum” is illogical.
They haven’t ‘granted’ one despite the begging letters and verbal requests since 2017 so why would they if it looked like YES would win?
Your argument makes no sense.
In any event Humza Yousaf and the political representatives of Scotland’s people should be informing the representatives of the British state that the sovereignty, self-determination and independence of the Scottish people is ours to have, not theirs to give.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We do not need Westminster to’grant’ us a referendum. What we should be doing is telling Westminster that as sovereigne scots we are not owned by England for them to take our land and plunder our resources, under the well researched finding of Salvo from our traditional Constitution, we scots own our land under the Right of Crown, where the Scottish Crown, totally different from the English Crown to which the people must swear allegiance, holds the land in trust for the people while the monarch must swear to protect the interests of the people, as should our government.
To simplify massively, because the concepts of Crown and Sovereignty were so different as to be incompatible, it 1707, as England had the majority in the new ‘British’ parliament and the Scots nobles who were MPs, did not object, the English way of managing matters prevailed and has done ever since, but the Scottish concept of Crown and Sovereignty have never been repealed so are still vaid today.
I suggest we should revive our way of doing thins at this crucial time in our history and point out to folk in London that they have absolutely no right, no matter what they think, to buy and sell our land and exploit our resouces for their benefit, not ours.
This would mean that we can reclaim the Grangemouth refinery, stop the imposition of ‘Free Ports on significant tracts of our country, to the impoverishment of our people, localities and the environment which will lose protection eg from Fracking. as our land also includes the seabed within ournational limits, we can reclaim the benefits and control of our offshore energy, oil and wind-power to use or not as we decide.
We need a significant number of Scottish people to back this ultimatum to London and backing from the International community, though it will not be easy and Westminster will deny the validity of our claim, but I see no other way forward to save our country which is presently in serious danger. We cannot trust our current Scottish governent to do this, as is recognised in Peter’s article and thecomments, so it is up to us, the People of Scotland, to act.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry about the delay posting your comment. You’re the latest one Akismet has taken a dislike to.
LikeLike
I have noticed that soemone does not like me saying this, however that gives me an incentive to keep on trying to get the message out!
LikeLike
It’s not a someone. It’s the anti-spam function in WordPress. Lately, it has been dumping stuff in the spam folder for no evident reason. You seem to be one of those affected. I will always retrieve your contributions and ensure they are published. But I don’t monitor the site 24/7. So there may be delays.
LikeLike
Thank you for that reassurance, Peter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s not often I’m accused of giving reassurance.
LikeLike
I think my comment that “the sovereignty, self-determination and independence of the Scottish people is ours to have, not theirs to give” is in sympathy with your view.
LikeLike
Absolutely!
LikeLike