AS we approach a Holyrood election in May next year, for voters in the south of Scotland this raises an interesting question that Stacy Bradley (Letters, October 22) raised: “Will we see a rise in support for independence from the 34% identified as voting Yes in 2014?”
The Holyrood election and the push for independence are interlinked, as the SNP will highlight independence. But in the south of Scotland, the messaging is not the same. This perhaps is where I differ from Ms Bradley’s analysis.
Ms Bradley refers to the south as “the least understood” part of Scotland. It follows that if we want to achieve independence we need to understand those whose politics differ from ours. We do that through inclusion.
“I’m Conservative, I’ll always be Conservative, but I want to be a Scottish Conservative, not the form of conservatism we have foisted upon us from down south – it might take supporting independence to get that.” These were the words of a woman discussing this with her friend – who, with similar political interests, agreed. Thankfully they missed my raised eyebrows and instant self-reproof on stereotyping! They are not alone, this response is increasingly heard. The south-west of Scotland hasn’t always been blue, and Boris and Gove’s politics do not necessarily go down well here.
A current SNP MSP, Emma Harper (and also a candidate in the same constituency), has expressed her opinion on this. She said recently: “We have to make it clear to Conservatives that is it okay to vote for independence.” Apart from adding “and other parties”, I agree. It is a subtle but mature approach that reflects our specific realities.
Politics in an independent Scotland will not become an SNP monopoly, and in a modern and progressive democracy we need to be very clear about that and inclusive of all political opinions even if we don’t share them. Ms Harper is right and it is borne out by local experience.
When it comes to independence, we need to remind conservative-minded folk that “... and Unionist” is a codicil, not a prerequisite.
Steve Sloan
Stranraer
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