THE immediate coming days and the following weeks immediately prior to the May elections will be frenzied to say the least. Depending on your view point – pro-indy; both votes SNP or not; believing the FM or her predecessor; never forgetting soft nos, maybes, don’t knows and their votes – it all makes for stressful times.
To think, Scotland, we’ve come to this, at this time. For SNP party members I can well believe the write-up by Kathleen Nutt on March 20, “Salmond-Sturgeon feud casts dark shadow over the SNP as rift deepens”. I’m no party member, but I see shadows and a potential wilderness as a festering sore on the rump of an outpost in the North Sea.
READ MORE: How SNP insiders reacted to a turbulent week for the party
Refusing then to consider, far less speculate on the possibility of the FM’s departure, I simply ask: how do we retain the momentum that led to the hopes of a constituency seat majority come May, bringing with it the pressure of Scotland’s one pro-indy voice? With May in mind, how about a few, simple questions, like:
1) Do I want more weapons of mass destruction?
2) Do I want to believe the promise of federalism, Home Rule, greater devolution, and even more jobs coming here?
I know the Tories still don’t cut it here – thank you Boris, thank you Baroness – and the remaining two, the Bill and Ben flower pot men leading their branch parties have no real hopes of governing via a Holyrood majority. I know they need to build (even hidden) alliances and advocate tactical voting around ABSNP: Anyone But SNP.
So there we have it: the Unionists’ basic manifestos: WMDs, promises around constitutional change, to be delivered via an unholy alliance of three. Sorry to make it personal, but I, my family, my growing grandchildren deserve so much more than that. How about you and yours?
READ MORE: Thousands sign petition urging Nicola Sturgeon to continue as First Minister
So it’s question time again:
1) Can we be safe and secure without WMDs? a) Tell me why we can’t be? b) Can the Unionists explain to Scotland why being able to initiate or retaliate with mutually destructive weapons is a vote-winner?
2) What constitutional change is guaranteed, by when and by which Westminster government, and even if the Unionists could do so,
3) Why the flying duck should Scotland believe the Unionists?
Apologies regarding 3) but you can tell that all round I’m frustrated and worried about the May outcomes. So with only that to offer, it’s goodbye to the Unionists’ manifesto.
But what about an indy manifesto? I need an indy manifesto, a leader, leadership, a party united with a vision and practical polices that will translate the vision into a workable strategy. Such a strategy has to be short-term, post-May for a day-jobbing government in tandem with the road map to independence. And a grassroots movement. Funnily enough, the latter is still there.
I’ve obviously missed the visionary papers and virtual debates around currency.
Equally the visionary proposals about reapplying or not for EU membership, the opening up of offices promoting Scotland, trade, tourism in essential countries, continents. And most importantly the visionary script of how we “manage” decoupling from rUK once #indy is secure.
For Scotland to regain independence, we cannot rely on Boris, Brexit and English nationalism deployed against us to be our winning gambit.
We need more than knowing the indy dream won’t wither, won’t die.
We need to know that all who believe in independence will vote for constituency seat majority (as minimum) come May.
If not, the game’s a bogey.
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
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 here