George Kerevan: We need common ground in this era of political booby traps and division

There were also clear signs at this year’s conference that the party’s base has been re-energised by Brexit. You could see this in the high turnout of members and in the enthusiastic conference chat in the coffee bars and well-attended fringe meetings. There was a hunger to debate strategy and policy in a constructive manner, suggesting members think that the odds on achieving independence soonish have shortened considerably since June 23. For instance, at the Festival of Ideas sponsored by the Common Weal think tank – a kaleidoscope of lively meetings held simultaneously at the nearby Glasgow Science Centre – mostly SNP members gathered in significant numbers to debate what a future Scotland might look like.

Are members moving to the left? The fact that Angus Robertson was elected deputy leader most resoundingly, on the first round of balloting, suggests there is no left-right tension in the party. Angus is a resolute centrist and pragmatist – which is not a criticism. He believes strongly in governing from the Scottish social democratic centre – which, admittedly, is a more communitarian and collective centre ground than in England. Also, Angus’ clear victory shows that the 100,000 plus new members recruited since the 2014 independence referendum have been absorbed smoothly into the party’s mainstream.

That said, if you listened closely to what delegates and visitors were saying and debating in Glasgow, it is clear that the party mainstream wants to see genuine change in Scotland. For the record, this is more about the speed of implementation rather than any divisions over the line of march. I detect clear popular red lines: on land reform, on questioning charitable status for private schools, on decriminalising the medical use of cannabis, on banning fracking, and on animal rights (including putting mandatory CCTV in abattoirs). There is also growing support for creating an effective state-owned Scottish Investment Bank to fund infrastructure investment. This is actually party policy but the packed Festival of Ideas meeting I spoke at was bursting to see theory turned into practice.

By the way, to be modestly controversial (who? me?) the Festival of Ideas was a great innovation. The official conference fringe is now dominated by corporate-sponsored gatherings and semi-private “roundtables”. This is not wrong in principle: the SNP needs to continue a dialogue with the corporate sector and major NGOs, especially in order to keep them on side (or at least neutral) in any fresh independence referendum. And there is nothing intrinsically wrong with charging businesses and corporates to attend conference if it helps defray the huge costs now involved in holding an event for something as big as the modern SNP.

However, the danger is that the corporate agenda of the “official” fringe (if that’s not a contradiction in terms) is squeezing out discussion of more radical topics, or matters that branches and members would like to debate. In fact, I paid for a slot in the fringe programme so my local Haddington branch could hold a public debate on the pros and cons of decriminalising the sex trade. It would be a shame if the spontaneity and membership involvement “on the fringe” was ever lost. Which is why the Common Weal Festival of Ideas at the Science Centre was worthwhile and a threat to no one.

What the debates at conference did do was highlight the fact that the current political reality is messy and full of traps. What if the UK Government actually delivers an EU deal for Scotland? Won’t that eliminate the justification for holding a second independence referendum? Equally, are we asking for a Scottish side deal on Brexit only because we hope we won’t get one, in order to trigger indyref2? If so, aren’t we open to the accusation of being hypocrites? And if we use our SNP political weight in the House of Commons to thwart England’s popular desire for a break with the EU, are we not inviting retaliation if we seek our own second referendum?

Meanwhile, coming up on the inside: the imminent return of powers from Brussels to the UK offers Scotland the chance to demand that many of those self-same powers are passed directly to Holyrood. Which raises an obvious question. Tactically, would we not be better to fight for those powers rather than risk another independence referendum? A referendum which – if we lose again – will be the end of the matter for a long, long time.

My sense, reading the conference runes, is that Nicola is steering a sensible course through these muddy political waters. Her conference speech was pitched perfectly to prioritise a domestic Scottish agenda based on social inclusion, boosting trade and raising educational attainment. In effect, she was reaching out to both Yes and No voters and to Leavers and Remain supporters. In an altogether new political landscape dominated by the uncertainties created by Brexit, Nicola’s inclusive agenda telegraphs that the only reliable safe haven is for Scotland to control its own destiny. Once that becomes common political ground between Yes and former No folk, the exact details of any fresh constitutional settlement – whether Home Rule or indyref2 – will emerge in short order. But we need to create that common national ground before we can do anything else.

One obstacle I can see (which was flagged up a number of times at conference) is how to keep on board supporters of independence who actually voted to leave the EU? The question was raised in debates but not answered satisfactorily. One solution would be for the SNP to take some international initiative over reforming the present EU structures, which are over-centralised and too dominated by the interests of the big multi-national companies and banks. I respect the worries of the SNP leadership that raising EU reform at this point would only complicate an already mindboggling political agenda. But unless we put EU reform on the cards, we are open to the charge that the SNP is blind to the fact that Brussels has imposed massive austerity measures on its smaller member states.

My favourite moment of the 2016 SNP conference? I ran into a member attending his first ever conference. Nothing special in that these days, you might say. Except that this member’s first political involvement had been giving out leaflets in the 1945 General Election as a young member of Jimmy Maxton’s ILP! We bonded over our joint view that the SNP is the true inheritor of the radical spirit of the Home Rule ILP. It’s been a long road, but most of us left the conference feeling that indyref2 would be sooner rather than later.