Since the SNP became the biggest party in the Scottish Parliament at the May 2007 elections, it seems that they have systematically debunked the accusations levelled at them for years by the other political parties. Alex Salmond moved quickly to shake off the "narrow nationalist" tag and has shown himself to be a statesman on the world stage, even with the limited powers of devolution. Far from being narrow and inward looking, every aspect of SNP policy looks outward to the rest of the world.
Another of the favourite terms bandied about was of course "tartan tories". The idea that anyone can take this seriously now is laughable. It is actually Labour themselves who have killed off this particular line of attack by going into a "pan unionist coalition" with the Tories and the Liberal Democrats in an attempt to thwart the SNP. It does beg the question, who are the real tartan Tories now? Labour should choose their bed fellows very carefully indeed . Whilst they got away with a coalition with the Lib Dems, the Tories are still despised in much of Scotland for the dreadful way Scotland was treated under the Tory governments of Thatcher and Major.
It is clear to see that the SNP have been proven correct and that the real fault line in Scottish Politics is not Right Vs Left but Nationalist Vs Unionist. Regardless of their supposed differences, the Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour have all conspired to deny the people of Scotland their right to a referendum on the future of their country and indeed there is a suggestion that they will go as far as to attempt to establish a "shadow government" of Scotland, against the will of the Scottish people who ousted Labour from power in May. This will not go unpunished at the ballot box.
It appears to be desperation driving this move by the unionist parties as they clearly believe that they can only defeat the SNP's stated aim of independence by co-operating against them. The Labour Party in Scotland looks like a party which has seen better days and which sees worse ones ahead. The Labour Party can no longer even claim to represent all of Scotland. In many areas, they don't have any constituency MSPs yet the SNP have proven at the last election that they can win all over Scotland, even in former Labour strongholds like Fife and Glasgow.
It seems that Labour are retreating to their West of Scotland heartlands and looking for these to sustain them yet even these bastions are not above the influence of the SNP. The Labour MSPs returned there saw their majorities slashed dramatically and now there are very few seats which could be considered to be "safe". Couple this with the SNP gaining councillors in places they have never had them before and it is possible that support will erode further for Labour in the West, as in the rest of Scotland.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Thursday, August 23, 2007
One long, slow retreat...
Although Wendy Alexander has not yet officially started in her new role as Leader of the Labour grouping in the Scottish Parliament, her statement of intent and alleged difference of opinion with the Secretary of State for Scotland over more powers have been noteworthy. When it comes to further constitutional change, Wendy is between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand she can oppose further change, against the wishes of the Scottish people and on the other she can concede that more change is necessary.
Either of these outcomes would suit the SNP. Further devolution of powers to Scotland is a natural progression in the eyes of the SNP, towards their ultimate goal of Independence. On the other hand, had Wendy outright opposed further change she would have risked being placed in the category of those who did not realise events were overtaking them and opinions were changing. In short, she would have placed herself and her party at odds with mainstream Scottish opinion.
Looking at her decision to embrace more powers, however slight, it must be observed that the SNP has played a clever game and forced her hand. Looking back at the events of the past 100 years, it is plain to see that the times when concessions have been made by Westminster, they have been done at times of SNP strength and have been designed to prevent their further progress. The Labour Party and indeed the unionist parties in Scotland have been in one long slow retreat for many years, culminating in a Scottish Government run by the SNP. The question is now no longer whether we will have independence but when we will have Independence. Sixty percent of the Scottish people believe it is going to happen and when the people believe that something is achievable they are more likely to strive for it than when it is merely a pipe dream.
The unionist parties are continuing their long slow retreat but the best victory they can ever gain is to hold back the tide of public opinion for a further ten years or so. As Rabbie Burns said, "No man can tether time, nor tide". That goes for a tide of public opinion as well. Labour and the other British nationalist parties can only hold it back for so long before being swept away by it's force.
Either of these outcomes would suit the SNP. Further devolution of powers to Scotland is a natural progression in the eyes of the SNP, towards their ultimate goal of Independence. On the other hand, had Wendy outright opposed further change she would have risked being placed in the category of those who did not realise events were overtaking them and opinions were changing. In short, she would have placed herself and her party at odds with mainstream Scottish opinion.
Looking at her decision to embrace more powers, however slight, it must be observed that the SNP has played a clever game and forced her hand. Looking back at the events of the past 100 years, it is plain to see that the times when concessions have been made by Westminster, they have been done at times of SNP strength and have been designed to prevent their further progress. The Labour Party and indeed the unionist parties in Scotland have been in one long slow retreat for many years, culminating in a Scottish Government run by the SNP. The question is now no longer whether we will have independence but when we will have Independence. Sixty percent of the Scottish people believe it is going to happen and when the people believe that something is achievable they are more likely to strive for it than when it is merely a pipe dream.
The unionist parties are continuing their long slow retreat but the best victory they can ever gain is to hold back the tide of public opinion for a further ten years or so. As Rabbie Burns said, "No man can tether time, nor tide". That goes for a tide of public opinion as well. Labour and the other British nationalist parties can only hold it back for so long before being swept away by it's force.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
The Gang of Three
So, the Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives are banding together to deny the people of Scotland a referendum on the future of Scotland and are generally all over the place. The joint letter signed by their respective Scottish leaders, published in advance of the Independence white paper (Choosing Scotland's Future) must have been music to Alex Salmond's ears. For years the Labour Party have tried to depict and smear the SNP as being "the tartan tories" and yet it is Labour standing shoulder to shoulder with them on the issue of the Union. Yet another Labour lie nailed once and for all.
The idea of these three British nationalist parties standing together, setting their collective faces against Scottish public opinion and denying the people of Scotland a democratic choice is even scorned by some within their own parties. Michael Forsyth, who was the Tory pre-devolution Secretary of State for Scotland said on Newsnight that the unionist parties looked "frit" (a favourite phrase of Margaret Thatcher's, usually used to denote fear or cowardice) to ask the Scottish people to decide the constitutional issue. Mr Forsyth is no convert to Independence but at least he is trying to be democratic and believes the choice rests with the people.
Can denying the people of Scotland a referendum be a sustainable position? The more they push against the idea and try to deny the democratic rights of the Scottish people the more they will be hurt at the ballot box and the more the idea will grow and flourish. An opinion poll put support for an independence referendum at 80%. That isn't to suggest that all those people want independence but they want to have their say at the ballot box and are willing to engage in a national conversation on the issue. The longer the Unionist parties delay the referendum, the more harm they will do to their chances of winning it.
The idea of these three British nationalist parties standing together, setting their collective faces against Scottish public opinion and denying the people of Scotland a democratic choice is even scorned by some within their own parties. Michael Forsyth, who was the Tory pre-devolution Secretary of State for Scotland said on Newsnight that the unionist parties looked "frit" (a favourite phrase of Margaret Thatcher's, usually used to denote fear or cowardice) to ask the Scottish people to decide the constitutional issue. Mr Forsyth is no convert to Independence but at least he is trying to be democratic and believes the choice rests with the people.
Can denying the people of Scotland a referendum be a sustainable position? The more they push against the idea and try to deny the democratic rights of the Scottish people the more they will be hurt at the ballot box and the more the idea will grow and flourish. An opinion poll put support for an independence referendum at 80%. That isn't to suggest that all those people want independence but they want to have their say at the ballot box and are willing to engage in a national conversation on the issue. The longer the Unionist parties delay the referendum, the more harm they will do to their chances of winning it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
