THERE is something seriously wrong with the governance of the SNP, especially over the last couple of years. The NEC has been all but uncontactable for a long time. Emails and letters are ignored, requests for information or even functional support are dismissed, and more importantly there is no transparency in its democracy.
Policy decisions are arrived at behind closed doors with no opportunity for the wider party to engage, and the recent NEC elections are a sham, taking a leaf out of the Donald Trump How to Run an Election Manual.
READ MORE: New SNP equalities convener criticises members complaining about her win
There is no proportionate structure to the voting, especially in these times of no face-to-face meetings or hustings. It was and is hard enough reaching out to branch members, and reaching out beyond was and remains impossible.
While it is reasonable that appointed delegates vote, the process was not proportional and is still not transparent, and whoever had the most delegates had a significant advantage. The process itself is little more than a beauty contest and there is absolutely no guarantee that whoever gets selected is actually capable or qualified to take on these vital roles.
READ MORE: Alyn Smith: OK. So you defeated me. Now it’s time to deliver
This is especially important at this critical time, with a forthcoming election and the following referendum. No results were announced to candidates. We have to read them online in a newspaper. What votes were cast for each candidate? No information has been presented, still less to the candidates, definitely conforming to Trumpian management. There are no contact details for anyone in the hierarchy, so even as a senior branch official we have no way of contacting anyone.
There are dark forces at work here. Instead of focussing on achieving an SNP or at worst an independence majority in May and thereby laying the groundwork for the referendum, attention instead is been paid to micro-managing factional issues and obscure policies that will only be achieved following independence.
Debating these is good and yes, the issues are important and need to be addressed, but there are two critical things we have to do before we can have the luxury of navel-gazing.
Nick Cole
Meigle, Perthshire
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