A single, unifying vision for independence is not only unrealistic, but anathema to the diverse and varied political stances of Scotland.Stephen Paton: This is why a single, unifying vision for independence is unrealistic Surely the most sensible - even insightful - thing Stephen Paton has ever said. If he'd written no more than that then … Continue reading Less vision! More focus!
Ruth Wishart adds her own plea for an end to squabbling within the independence movement to the seemingly endless list of other such futile efforts at refereeing the affray. The Believe in Scotland Facebook group threatens to eject anyone judged to be conducting "internecine warfare". There we have the two most common 'solutions' to the … Continue reading If only
My heart lifted slightly when I caught sight of Richard Walker's latest column in The National. For a moment I thought he was about to break ranks and suggest a change of approach to the constitutional issue by Nicola Sturgeon. Perhaps I fooled myself in my eagerness to have someone of Richard's standing add their … Continue reading Bombarded!
Without some way of defining the criteria for the crisis being over the decision as to whether or when the referendum takes place is entirely in Nicola Sturgeon's hands. Entirely in the hands of the person who has spent the last six years finding excuses to delay a referendum. So that's not promising. But then, there is no promise. There is no actual undertaking to do anything - ever!
Of course, the SNP's manifesto hasn't been published. It may not even have been written yet. But there are abundant clues as to its probable content in various statements from Nicola Sturgeon, Mike Russell and others. We also now have the draft Referendum Bill, which provides conclusive evidence of the SNP leadership's thinking on the constitutional issue.
Yes activists - including SNP members - didn't remove Nicola Sturgeon from her role as the de facto leader of the independence movement. She never showed any sign of wanting that role other than for the purposes of helping win elections. She never gave the slightest indication of wanting to pursue Scotland's cause. She allowed that cause to languish for nearly seven years giving rise to the frustration among Yes activists which is now becoming anger.
In terms of the claim that we don't need the SNP It need only be pointed out that there simply is no other credible candidate for the role of political arm of the independence movement. And not the remotest possibility of developing an alternative before the 'last chance' of the Holyrood election. The reality of real world politics is that we are stuck with the SNP whether we like it or not and regardless of whether the party is fit for our purpose.
My hope is that Now Scotland will use the opportunity of its 6 March assembly to debate and vote on resolutions relating to the constitutional issue. I think it would do Scotland a great service if it were organised as a kind of mock party conference. I would like to see it staging the debates that should be taking place at the SNP's conference.
The question defines the campaign. In the 2014 referendum the campaign was defined such that the Yes side must always be on the defensive. Why in the name of reason would we want to repeat that appalling error?
When Boris Johnson shows me something and says look at my plan I expect to see a bungling buffoon stuck on a zip-wire. For no reason other than that is the image I simply can't help associating with the vacuous ideologue.