The National's Agony Uncle is here to sort out your problems
If Corbyn wins, would you reconsider your support for indyref2? @p0liticat
I'VE made no secret of the fact that I would be happy to see Jeremy Corbyn defeat Theresa May and the Conservatives at this General Election. With a measured campaign that has seen him recover considerable ground on “No-Show” Theresa, Corbyn has defied critics who have slung all manner of debris at him. On a human level, he has risen above this and gone some way towards restoring the good name of the Labour Party.
That said, my support for Corbyn is not limitless. While his plans to scrap university tuition fees and increase funding for the NHS are to be applauded, his stance on a second Scottish independence referendum is somewhat less admirable. However, unlike his underlings at Scottish Labour, Corbyn seems at least to acknowledge that Scotland is a nation unto itself. He disagrees with Scottish independence in principle, but does appear more open to a second referendum than the ragtag bunch who claim to represent Labour in Scotland.
The dilemma Scottish voters face is that they must choose either to vote SNP and hope that Corbyn both wins and elects to work with a progressive alliance, or to vote for Scottish Labour and hope that somehow independence doesn’t become an afterthought. Voting Conservative in Scotland, meanwhile, makes about as much sense as challenging Boris Johnson to a crayon-eating contest.
Recently, Theresa May warned that Corbyn will “sell out” the Union to Nicola Sturgeon for power. Now, is this a bad thing? I’m inclined to say this is the best possible outcome for both parties.
Whether this is true or not has yet to be seen, but I would be quite happy to see Corbyn grant freedom to Scotland and Northern Ireland at the expense of an outdated and irrelevant Union. Just as Corbyn hopes to win “for the many, not the few”, I will support the cause of independence for as long as it remains in the interest of the people of Scotland.
Corbyn is by far the lesser of two evils as far as the race for prime minister goes, but anyone who refuses to acknowledge Scotland’s right to determine its own future can never have my full support. Time will tell in this sense, but I’d sooner gamble on Corbyn than have the Tories end my hopes and dreams forever.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kez’s U-turns have flushed Jez’s chances round the U-bend
Could Kezia Dugdale cost Jeremy Corbyn this election? Michael, Dundee
DUGDALE’S disastrous lack of consistency is going to cost Labour votes in Scotland. This is no bad thing for the SNP, but objective political commentators must be pulling their hair out as they effectively watch Kezia’s flip-flopping jeopardise Jeremy Corbyn’s otherwise brilliantly fought campaign. Indeed, the notable difference between Jez and Kez is that Corbyn has been consistent in his message while Dugdale has been anything but.
Woefully, Kezia has talked down Jeremy from day one. She didn’t back him in his attempts to become Labour leader, suggesting that Labour would be in chaos if he did take the captain’s chair. Similarly, she was of the opinion that Corbyn would be an electoral failure that would leave Labour in permanent opposition. In fairness, the former of these accusations is true – Labour is in chaos – but mainly thanks to Kezia and pals' anti-Corbyn efforts.
Instead of getting behind the man who might offer Labour its one last shot at power, the Dugdales of the world have done their best to hamper him from the very beginning. This makes it difficult to take Kezia’s endorsements of Corbyn’s manifesto seriously.
She’s gone from bashing him at every opportunity to half-heartedly championing his vision for Labour. In the end, it simply feels like yet another Dugdale U-turn – something that Kezia has become notorious for.
During Tuesday's Scottish leaders debate, Nicola Sturgeon told the world that Kezia had said to her, in a private phone call, that she was considering softening her stance on Scottish independence in the wake of Brexit. Dugdale later denied that she had ever considered altering Scottish Labour’s position on the Union.
However, only a few Google searches were required to expose this as baloney. Dugdale, in a 2016 interview with the Fabian Society, clearly stated that it was “not inconceivable” that she would argue against the UK following the EU referendum. Moreover, she said in a BBC TV interview that she wouldn’t stop her MPs and MSPs from campaigning for independence in the event of indyref2.
Irritatingly, this pro-indyref2 stance would likely have led to a huge Labour resurgence in Scotland, but by not going through with it – and, worse yet, denying it – Kezia has left herself looking like a ditherer and a deceiver. It’s very hard to imagine that this won’t negatively affect Corbyn’s chances of being elected prime minister.
Corbyn’s progressive policies and down-to-earth attitude could easily have found an audience for his party above the Border, but Dugdale instead chose to cling to the obsolete New Labour style like a child to its comfort blanket.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel