THE words in Joanna Cherry’s post-conference NEC elections column, calling for unity, were simply hollow (It’s time to resolve differences and focus on how we win independence, December 4). True unity involves building bridges for opponents to walk across. Her rhetoric did not even provide a footpath to the bridge itself.
She talks of toxic name-calling, attempts to close down debate, people pedalling false accounts and parliamentarians breaching the SNP code of conduct. At no stage, in the spirit of genuinely healing rifts, does she even remotely acknowledge any damage caused by her own actions and that of her followers. On the contrary, we have simply to accept that in the noxious environment of social media and Twitter in particular, it is only Joanna and co who behave impeccably. That no undermining of the leadership has taken place nor has there been any promotion of toxic groups like LGB Alliance etc. Let’s just ignore that, shall we?
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: It’s time to unify and focus on how we win independence
She ends her column with a demeaning swipe at her party leader Nicola Sturgeon. She calls for her new colleagues on the NEC to get on with the hard work ahead in order to free up Nicola Sturgeon’s time to deal with Covid. Hardly the words of the true feminist she regularly purports to be. They were condescending and patronising.
I think our country’s first female FM is perfectly capable of deciding when and where to delegate appropriately on a range of areas. I have no doubt that Joanna Cherry aspires to hold the office of FM sooner rather than later. However, she needs to realise that strong, unifying leaders show dignity in victory and make genuine efforts to make peace with opponents. Her aspirations may take longer than she thinks.
Anon (due to the current climate)
AS a senior member of the SNP , only by age and party membership – 86 years old and 54 years a member – I am appalled at the infighting and mudslinging.
Infighting has always existed. The SNP was formed in 1934 by a merger between the National Party of Scotland and the Scottish Party. This was in April 1934 and I was born in October 1934.
The party argued about how to approach independence, and only firmed up its policy under the leadership of Dr Robert McIntyre, followed by Jimmy Halliday, and Arthur Donaldson. This was documented in the book Through the Maelstrom by Dr Paula Somerville, and published by the Scots Independent newspaper – this newspaper was first published in November 1926, eight years before the SNP.
READ MORE: SNP should ‘refocus the culture’ of the party, warns former MP
I came across this paper when I joined the SNP in 1966 in Peterhead and still get it today. During my time in the party we had the emergence of the 1320 Club, the Siol nan Gaidheal, but they were quickly expelled. After the 1979 referendum (which we won by the way), another group – the 79 Group – emerged. This group demanded more direct action. The SNP chairman at the time, Gordon Wilson, put an emergency resolution to the SNP conference in Ayr in 1982, and banned the group.
The members of the group appealed against this decision; I do know that Alex Salmond brought his lawyer with him to the appeal.
At a subsequent National Council, Professor Neil MacCormack had a resolution passed to allow the members back into the party and this cleared the decks before the 1983 General Election.
I have no wish to see a return to these days – the 79 Group issue was a bitter pill.
We are now leading in the opinion polls, 15 at a run, and Nicola Sturgeon is the most popular party leader in Britain. We have a pandemic and the UK is about to exit Europe – she cannot do everything, but the SNP must be steadfast, and not allow independence to be squandered by any personal ambitions.
Jim Lynch
Edinburgh
WHILE the SNP (of which I am not a member) appears to be a relatively broad political church with a social-democratic centre, there seem to be many who support independence, both inside and outside of the SNP, who would strongly advocate a further leaning in their own preferred direction.
The National attempts to represent a broad spectrum of views, as evidenced in the regular writings of Kevin McKenna and Michael Fry, and perhaps if there were independence-supporting Scottish Labour or Scottish Conservative parties, such politically opinionated journalists would be persuaded to join them.
In the meantime, for those who consider independence to be a higher priority than immediately pursuing dogmas on the left or right of politics, much of the criticism of the party which has significantly contributed to support for self-determination averaging around 56% over recent months seems not only self-centred but “self-defeating”. Certainly structures and processes within the SNP, like those of any large organisation, should be regularly updated, but those who wish to publicly express discordant personal views, especially in hostile newspapers, should guard against following in the footsteps of Donald Trump, no matter how convinced they are of the merits of their own opinions.
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