GANDHI is quoted as believing that “good government is no substitute for self-government”. Most supporters of Scottish independence would say “amen” to that. But in these Covid-strange times, thousands of our fellow Scots have shown that, right now, they just want good government. The kind that can be trusted to keep them and their loved ones safe.
They have been offered that by the Scotttish Government and failed, abjectly, by Westminster. And those Scottish voters have been reflecting that in their growing admiration for our First Minister, in their stated intention to vote SNP at next year’s election and in their increased support for independence more generally.
READ MORE: Michael Russell: We won’t just have Plan B – we’ll have Plan A to Z to get indyref2
Independence supporters often talk about the need to persuade those not yet convinced and to “take others with us” as we build the case for independence. It turns out that to achieve that we didn’t need to march, rally and flag-wave more, we just needed the Scottish Government to demonstrate to the unconvinced and to the waverers that it was by far and away more competent than anything Westminster has to offer on an issue that really matters to people.
Opinion poll after poll this year, when most “normal” indy campaigning activity has been on hold, have shown that crucial shift of 5-10% in favour of independence.
But increased trust and support for independence among this crucial group of persuadable voters will disappear like snaw aff a dyke if they start to believe that those who were delivering on their priorities have now become distracted. They have witnessed and appreciated the First Minister’s laser-like focus on steering Scotland through the pandemic. They have come to believe that an independent Scotland can and will be better governed, in their interests, than the UK will ever be again. But if they start to sense that those leading the charge for independence might in fact deliver them into some kind of Catalonia-style no man’s land, where constitutional chaos reigns and good governance is impossible, then we are likely to see the dials on voting intentions being quickly reset to 2014 levels and an independence majority in the next Holyrood parliament put at risk.
READ MORE: While the Unionists are rattled, it's time to put more pressure on them
Some big beasts in the independence movement have started to indulge their egos of late – with all the restraint of Greek Gods on Mount Olympus, to the delight of the mainstream media and the Unionist opposition. But most ordinary voters want a party and a government whose sole focus is on navigating through the pandemic until their lives and their livelihoods feel much safer than they do right now. Then, and only then, will they be ready to form a settled view on Nicola’s key conference speech question – “who do you want to lead Scotland’s recovery?”
Making sure that, when the time comes next year, their answer to that question is the party or parties that will deliver independence should be a key determinant of the behaviour of all those that want to lead us to those sunlit uplands.
K Dick
Ayr
“MEN’S rants” are the root of all evil according to Shona Craven as she insists “we don’t need middle-aged men ranting at young folk” (December 4). She goes on to call men bigots and explain that those evil “men” (and it’s entirely and always MEN) are somehow responsible for all the evils in the world and are the entire source of ill feeling in the SNP (and somehow trans rights?) Women, it seems, are all of one mind and are on the right side. Whatever that might be.
Some mental agility is required to tie the monstrous use of puberty-surprising drugs on children to “evil middle-aged men” but it’s not really the point I’m making. Craven’s point, whatever it might have been, was lost in an angry, bitter tirade against those evil males of the species.
READ MORE: Shona Craven: Men’s rants must not drown out child protection fears
It would be utterly extraordinarily if a male journalist wrote an article about how women need to shut up. It would be shouted down as vile misogyny and rightly so. Yet week after week The National allows misandrists such as Craven oxygen without any reaction whatsoever.
Does it really need to be said that grouping whole genders together and speaking in collective negative tones is bigotry? That if you did this with a race of people, it would be bigotry?
Does it need to be said that bigotry is bad? Or are “men” fair game?
The National needs to do better.
Rory Bulloch
via email
THE figure of 22 was missing from my letter (kindly published on December 3) highlighting the desperation inherent in criticism of the Scottish Government over its response to the Covid-19 pandemic. This number is the latest estimate by the UK Government of the billions of pounds that will be spent this year on its still-failing test and trace system. Perhaps this revelation, coupled with the knowledge that £10 billion was wasted in purchasing PPE at inflated prices from Tory cronies (never mind the £8bn spend on two aircraft carriers without aircraft) will help critics of Scottish Government spending take a more balanced perspective in future?
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
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