I AM not an SNP member, and in normal circumstances it wouldn’t be for non-SNP members to question the party’s leadership contest.
However, we are in anything but normal circumstances. We are in a cost-of-Union crisis that is affecting everyone of us, and a constitutional roadblock with the British establishment blocking the people of Scotland having their say.
I believe that independence is inevitable for Scotland. The seed that was planted in 2014 may have faced some tough winters over the last eight years, but the thing with seeds is that as long as they have a good root, they will year on year attempt to flourish. That is why the independence movement offer opinions on the SNP leadership contest, as the result could define how many more bad winters it takes before independence flourishes.
So far we have seen three different strategies emerging.
Humza Yousaf wants to create regional paid SNP organisers and have regional assemblies to decide the best way forward. He often mentions we need to stop talking process and start talking policy, but surely process is just as important as policy.
We can have the best policies and get support to 70-80%, but what then? I’m afraid I see this as echoing what we have been doing for the last eight years. Fine talk, but no real plan to get us independence.
Kate Forbes wants to focus on building the economy and economic case to increase support, and would write a prospectus for the first 10 years post independence. She wants to go into the next General election on a mandate to demand powers be transferred that allow us a referendum within three months of the General Election.
I like Kate and see her as the strongest candidate in hustings so far, showing her impressive knowledge with quiet confidence, and that she could handle the British media. However, as much as I want to fully support her, I am struggling with the seeking of another mandate on a referendum. We have that mandate now, five times over.
Ash Regan wants to call an independence convention of all parties, organisations, trade unions and civic Scotland to lead the case for independence then use something called a “voter empowerment mechanism”. This would see the SNP change back to putting top of their manifesto that a vote for the SNP is a vote to begin negotiations for independence, rather than the current mandate of voting for a referendum.
Some critics have said the UK Government would just say the same as they say now. They are not negotiating. The difference is this. If the SNP, and any other parties with the same mandate, won the majority of votes, the people of Scotland would have already declared independence at the ballot box. This would be recognised by the international community.
Once Scotland has international recognition as an independent country, the only negotiations with the UK Government will be on trade and borders.
Any independence supporter knows the vast resources Scotland has with renewables, its oil, its food and drink etc, but we also know the UK has huge debt, for which Scotland is not legally liable.
When the people of Scotland vote for independence at the ballot box, then get the international recognition as an independent country, who do we think will be not only willing but desperate to get round the negotiating table?
For these reasons, IF I had a vote on who was best to become the next SNP leader and presumed First Minister to lead Scotland to independence, it would have to be Ash Regan 1, Kate Forbes 2 for me.
Hector Macleod
Isle Of Skye
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