When you’re writing a political column, you sometimes get it right and you sometimes get it wrong. I still cringe to think that back in November 2017 I welcomed the election of Richard Leonard as Scottish Labour leader on the grounds that he would probably be more open to independence than his predecessors.

On the other hand, I did write a column last summer arguing that the SNP should be bold enough to come out four-square in support of a second referendum on Brexit.

The response from SNP members and voters was overwhelmingly negative. Understandably, they felt that their party should focus single-mindedly on independence. It’s not our job, they said, to sort out the problems created by Westminster and the electorate south of the Border. My view then was that Scotland’s governing party should be doing everything in its power to defend the interests of the near two-thirds of the Scottish electorate who voted to remain. And that by taking a strong stance, they would win widespread respect not just in Scotland but across the UK.

After exhausting other possibilities, Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP did take up the cudgel. And by doing so, they have strengthened rather than weakened the cause of independence by displaying serious leadership. Standing up to halt the harm of Brexit for everyone across Britain and Ireland has reinforced the message that when it comes to courage, decisiveness, credibility and competence, Scotland has it in spades. I wasn’t in London at the weekend, but I watched some of the speeches – and it was illuminating to witness the rapturous response to Nicola Sturgeon in contrast to the cacophony of jeers that greeted deputy Labour leader Tom Watson.

Less than two years ago, young people across England turned out in their millions to back Jeremy Corbyn and give Theresa May a run for her money. How incredible then that Labour is now held in contempt by many of these same voters, while the First Minister of Scotland – the leader of a movement that wants to cast off the chains of Westminster rule – should be cheered to the rafters in London. Whether or not you always agree with the policies of the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon, I defy anyone to deny that she is the only mainstream political party leader who, as the final deadline on Brexit looms, still looks like a leader. The more this constitutional debacle unfolds, the more clear-headed she looks, while the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition both look like they’re lost up a mountain in a dense fog without a map or a compass. Neither looks as though they have the slightest clue how to extract the UK from the mess it’s got itself into. Albert Venn Dicey, the Victorian lawyer who first described and theorised the UK’s uncodified constitution, must be birlin’ in his grave right now.

My heart goes out to my former tutor on constitutional law at Strathclyde University, the erudite and witty Professor Aileen McHarg. I’m sure there was a time when exam questions could maybe be adapted and perhaps alternated year to year without too much additional work. But constitutional law academics are having to really work for their money these days. It’s getting to the point that as soon as Aileen puts a full stop at the end of a sentence, the world has tilted on its axis again.

But there is a way to resolve all this. And to be fair to Dicey, it’s the politicians that are the problem. Never have so many been led so badly led by so few. Even our journalists are running out of words to describe how unbelievably diabolical things have become. Sometimes, hyperbole isn’t hyperbolic enough and only expletives will do.

In my younger days, I used to be full of righteous political anger. But as those who read this column regularly will know, these days I like a wee bit of peace, love and understanding. Often, it’s good to get consensus.

But sometimes, especially when there are massive turning points in history, you have to take sides. You need to take a clear and unequivocal stand. It seems like yesterday that Jeremy Corbyn, with his comfy corduroys and affable demeanour, was going to do things differently. That he was going to stand up for the young, the powerless, and the dispossessed. That he was going to put principles before power. But not now. While passions and fears run high over Brexit, and millions sign petitions and march in the streets, Labour are shiftily trying to face both ways for fear of losing support. It looks, frankly, cowardly. It reminds me of Neil Kinnock during the miners’ strike.

To be honest, I’d have more respect for Jeremy Corbyn today if he’d been honest from the start, one way or the other. If he had campaigned to leave in the EU referendum, and followed it through, I would have disagreed with him, but at least I would have admired his candour and clarity.

And had he joined with Nicola Sturgeon and the Greens to argue strongly for a progressive Remain position, defending immigration and the right to free movement, then he would have proven himself a formidable political figure. He would also have kept the Blairites out of the limelight. By his dithering, he has allowed them to stage a Twickenham-style comeback as they gleefully step into the vacuum to push themselves forward as tribunes of progress.

Because let’s be clear. Right now, in 2019, with the right-wing on the rampage as never before in post-war history, the ugly, xenophobic movement to create an isolated UK is reactionary to the core. Brexit has never been about creating a more egalitarian left-wing state freed from the clutches of the Brussels hierarchy. In an article last week in the News Statesman, acclaimed working-class writer James Kelman, who has long been a scourge of the establishment and a fighter for the rights of the exploited and marginalised in his home city of Glasgow and worldwide nailed it in two sentences:

“The ruling elite and their diverse loyal orders have sought to exit the EU for years. The free movement of capital and the right to profit are the sole motivation.”

Exactly.