I FIND it hard to attribute any credence to the long letter by Cliff Purves published on Thursday, a piece so redolent of the very hostility and resentment of which he accuses Alba Party supporters. I feel I must remind Mr Purves of the pure and simple aim of the SNP (or at least what it was at its inception): an independent Scotland. Mr Purves being apparently uncritically hog-tied to the SNP is either unaware, or chooses to ignore, the facts of the situation in which the pro-independence movement finds itself in the run-up to, as he rightly says, the most important election in Scotland’s history.
In 2016 SNP won 63 of the total 129 Holyrood seats. 59 of these seats were won on the constituency votes and only four – yes four, from the whole of Scotland– were won from a total of 953,587 list votes cast for the SNP.
Of the four, one SNP list seat went to Highlands and Islands region and three SNP list seats to South Scotland.
Three-quarters of a million wasted votes. This is what “both votes SNP” actually achieved in 2016 and the indications are there is little chance
of there being much of a difference in the 2021 election when the independence movement most needs every seat it can get. A list vote for Alba Party now offers an alternative to this waste (orange paper), whilst still promoting SNP in the constituency vote. Win/win for Scotland.
I am not alone in asking the question, why would the SNP not want to obtain every pro-indy seat possible on May 6 and why reject the goodwill of the Alba Party who, unlike the Greens, are not challenging SNP candidates on the constituency vote, but are asking voters to vote SNP with their constituency vote? Is the Alba Party a “focal point for all that is unsavoury” in wishing to enhance the number of independence-supporting MSPs and to accelerate, through a variety of legitimate means, Scotland’s right to choose its own pathway? There will never be a better time to drive home this message to Westminster nor to progress the cause.
I do agree with Cliff Purves in challenging Adam Tomkins’ attempt at legislating in the English courts to hobble Scotland to Westminster for all time, (remember the union of equals?) but this is exactly the reason why moving the independence case forward now is urgent. Adam Tomkins’ suggestion is not the first of this kind and is not the only attempt at diminution of the Scottish Parliament. There is the Internal Market Bill, the Unionist hubs in Glasgow and Edinburgh intended to bypass Scotland’s Parliament’s decision-making, the expansion of the nuclear submarine programme in the Clyde, five times more toxic waste about to be dumped in the Clyde, the disastrous impact of Brexit on Scotland’s exporters (especially the fishing and farming communities) and no doubt many other atrocities about to be wreaked upon Scotland.
Now, after waiting very patiently for seven years under an SNP government with little or no opposition in Holyrood and with at least three tidy mandates for independence tucked under the belt, we are expected to accept another rebuttal of a S30 by Westminster followed by years of court wrangling at horrendous expense with no guarantee whatsoever of a favourable outcome for Scotland. So please, Mr Purves, don’t try to fool us with talk of “hotheads” in the independence movement and “causing the Scottish Government to go way to early with the independence referendum”.
Mr Purves predicts the likelihood of civil unrest. May I just quote a line from a very successful former First Minister, Alex Salmond: “Scotland doesn’t do riots”. That was the case then and it is the case now, so Mr Purves can rest easy on that one. How many “All Under One Banner”marches has Mr Purves attended? I can tell you these marches were held peacefully and good-naturedly with not one arrest. Ask the police.
Mr Purves refers to UDI, which is not what’s proposed by Alba, but self-determination “ the motivation behind the choices people make without external influence and interference”certainly is. In political terms it’s the right of a people to decide upon its own political status or form of government, without outside influence - and that’s Scotland’s claim.
The barrage of unsubstantiated abuse at Alba Party supporters and fear-mongering about violence in the streets would indicate Mr Purves is following the wrong types on social media. As for his “eyes on the prize”, may he never forget the “prize” is Scottish independence – nothing less and it won’t wait.
Ann Williamson
by 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