MAGNUS Gardham provoked a fair bit of fury, and some derision, for his #SNPbad column in The Herald last week. For those who don’t use Twitter, the hashtag recently emerged as an ironic put-down of those who seem to blame the Scottish Government for everything that goes wrong, as in one recent tweet: “That’s it! The handle jist came aff ma fryin pan. Ah blame the SNP #SNPBad”.
According to Gardham, the hashtag mocks opponents who express legitimate concerns, and consequently makes it more difficult to subject the Scottish Government to proper scrutiny.
Few people would dispute the need for governments to be held to account, both by the media and by opposition politics. But there is no avoiding the fact that many on the Yes side – and not just SNP members – are frustrated by the relentless negativity of Scotland’s official opposition, backed by significant sections of the media.
Labour’s default position is to condemn anything and everything proposed by the SNP, including traditional socialist policies such as abolishing prescription charges and defending free education. Their idea of opposition is not to put forward constructive alternative policies, but to attack the SNP and rubbish the idea of independence.
Even, the Tories, it has to be said, are at least trying to bring forward some credible policies, such as more power to local authorities and the creation of new national parks. Labour, sadly, is now mired in a mindset of… well, for want of a better term… SNP bad.
Which brings me to the need for a credible left-of-centre opposition in Scotland.
During the referendum, we heard much about the new politics. The diversity of the Yes movement was lauded and played a major part in bringing Scotland much closer to independence than most people would have dared to imagined at the outset of the campaign.
Infinite visions of what an independent country could look like were discussed. Debate was friendly, and ideas plentiful. Somewhere along the way, though, a significant section of that movement threw everything behind the SNP.
In some ways, that was understandable. After all, the SNP instigated the referendum and were the most important force on the Yes side. Since the referendum, even folk like me, who are not SNP members, have grown an instinctive tendency towards self-censorship for fear of damaging the cause of independence.
But that is not a healthy state of affairs. It is contrary to the ideals and inspiration that took us from 28 per support for independence to 45 per cent.
I know many great, radical folk in the SNP that I’d be glad to vote for, including for example, the very impressive National columnist and Women for Independence activist, Jeane Freeman.
Yet looking from the outside, it’s a bit perplexing that there seems to be a contradiction between the values of SNP activists and the formal policies of the party. Earlier this year, Herald journalist David Leask carried out an anonymous poll of the new intake of MPs, which included a question on attitudes towards the monarchy. Of the 17 who responded, sixteen said they would prefer a republic. Yet the SNP leadership has gone out of its way to reassure Lizzie and Charles that their crowns will rest undisturbed on their heads post-independence.
The understandable pressure on the mass SNP membership to present a united front means that we cannot rely on it to hold the SNP government to account. So who will play that role?
I know some SNP members are anxious to persuade every Yes voter to back the party with both their constituency and list votes. They are perfectly entitled to argue that that case. But others are equally entitled to argue that it would be beneficial for Scotland, and for the prospects of a future Yes campaign, to have at least a few non-SNP, pro-independence voices in Holyrood.
It can only be good for Scottish politics if tireless campaigners such as Andy Wightman, who has devoted his life to land reform, were to be in the parliament pushing the SNP Government further along the road of radical land reform. And it can only be good for Scottish politics to have inspirational women such as Cat Boyd inside Holyrood speaking up fearlessly in defence of public services and workers’ rights. Unlike the Labour Party, folk such as Boyd – who walked the walk through the referendum – will get a respectful hearing.
Although the SSP in its prime never got anywhere near power, it was able to exert influence. Many of our policies and concerns, such free prescriptions, free school meals, the unfairness of the council tax, creeping privatisation of the NHS, and the treatment of asylum seekers were all eventually taken on board to one degree or another by the Scottish Government.
A constructive, pro-independence opposition can have a powerful impact – and would surely be preferable to the destructive negativity of Scottish Labour or the entrenched conservatism of the Tories. For me, the spirit of the referendum will live on if we return a diverse band of independence supporting politicians in May.
Rollermania continues to march on
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here