I’M left constantly wondering what it will take for the likes of Neil Findlay to wake up to reality. He constantly tweets about great socialist and progressive policies and laments that the SNP is not left enough.
For example, his recent tweet about how “the SNP’s real sister party in NZ” was “gubbed”, extolling the policy promises of Jacinda Ardern’s Labour party. Neil is on solid enough ground liking progressive policies, but where he gets shakier is the needless comparisons. If we compare NZ Labour with the last elected Labour governments of Scotland and England, their policies were hardly those cheered from afar by Neil.
It is safe to say that the socialist nirvana Neil hankers for is simply not possible as part of the UK. The Tories won’t do it and the evidence is damning that given the chance – outright power before devolution and dual governments in Westminster and Holyrood later – not even Labour would or could do it.
Why? Simply put, there are too many conservatives in England who would not tolerate progressive policies to the extent Neil idolises. What England wants, England gets – it’s very simple maths for anyone to understand.
The sad fact is that many Scots do back these kinds of policies but have realised that, even given the chance, Scottish Labour cannot deliver them. The obvious conclusion, given the years of left-leaning election victories in Scotland, is that the desire exists without the ability to implement.
There are two solutions: independence, or convincing the majority of conservative English people to become more progressive. Neil and his colleagues are trying to swim against a tsunami with the latter. However, if the remaining “old” Labour people really wanted to deliver their policies, it is obvious they could in an independent Scotland. The potential for the votes exists.
Perhaps they are scared, perhaps its a lack of funds to stand without a big party electoral machine, but isn’t politics about standing for what you believe in? It’s obvious the only way to even have a chance of delivering is to campaign for a independent Scotland and put the policies they admire to the people of Scotland.
In any event, campaigning for something you can deliver must be better than kidding yourself that another Browntervention will see Scottish Labour sweeping to power in Scotland, doesn’t it?
Gareth Hay
via email
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