IN a noticeably narrow victory, Humza Yousaf prevented a social and fiscal conservative from leading the SNP and, thus, rowing back on many existing policies.
But Yousaf is no left-winger despite his left-of-centre rhetoric.
The jibe by Kate Forbes of “continuity won’t cut it” had more than a ring of truth about it – albeit for the left not in the way she intended it.
So, where does this leave the left in the SNP and the aspiration for a socially just Scotland?
“Challenges and opportunities” is the best dictum by which to describe the situation as opposed to “merely and mistakenly overjoyed” that Forbes did not win or the simple “onwards and upwards” as many would have hoped with Humza as the “continuity candidate”.
Unfortunately, the left in the SNP is a depleted force after many of its supporters around the SNP Common Weal and the SNP Socialist groups jumped ship to join Alba in early 2021.
Prior to this, the SNP Common Weal group had made advances in securing representation within the structures of the SNP in 2020 such as the National Council and National Executive.
However, even if these many members had not left the SNP, they would have found it hard to break the iron grip of the then “wife and husband” team of Nicola Sturgeon and Peter Murrell.
READ MORE: Calls to fast track buffer zone bill in face of pro-life protests
But the bright spot for the left in the SNP leadership election campaign has been the emergence of the SNP Trade Union Group (TUG) as a potentially influential force with some 12,000 members out of 72,000 overall members.
After a period of relative inactivity since its re-founding in 2014, when it was unsure of its exact purpose, the SNPTUG began to find its feet prior to the leadership election campaign. It started to assert itself and put forward various messages about what it was against.
The issue of the creation of a National Care Service dependent upon private companies was just one instance. So, no longer was it seen as only a means to recruit union members into the SNP.
Its most obvious interventions were to ask the three candidates ten questions and then organise a hustings in conjunction with The National.
The questions covered industrial and economic strategy; industrial disputes, Fair Work and regulation of strikes; the National Care Service; council tax and local authority finances; freeports; a Just Transition; and engaging with the STUC on its revenue-generating proposals.
The SNPTUG broadly welcomed the content of the answers Yousaf gave on many of these questions.
Nonetheless, it saw sufficient ambiguity and insufficient depth in some of his responses so as to be concerned about whether there would be continuing commitment to the positive statements he made, as well as “follow through” on implementation.
On issues like Just Transition and freeports, it’s fair to say the SNPTUG was less than impressed. The SNPTUG has also requested an early meeting with Humza Yousaf as party leader and First Minister.
On the issue of party democracy and membership control, the SNPTUG has called for reform of the way the National Executive Committee operates to ensure greater transparency and accountability.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf faces 'rebel bloc' of pro-business MSPs, say reports
So, the challenges are considerable, but there are also opportunities to advance a left-wing agenda and make good on the claim of the SNP to be a social democratic party. Social democracy is quintessentially about using the levers of the state to intervene in the process of the market to ameliorate its unequal outcomes.
Despite whatever the new SNP leadership wishes and no doubt the pressure to halt a revival of Scottish Labour, the SNP will no longer be the monolithic, centralised and controlling party that they once were.
Yes, the right-wing will be emboldened by Forbes’s performance.
But the old ways based upon loyalty and patronage will no longer work as they have before so that spaces will be opened up for left-wingers to advance their views without fear or favour.
This is why the SNPTUG now needs to go much further. It needs to go beyond its five “ambitious aspirations”. These are intended to help reframe the debate around independence so that the debate is more about social outcomes than political processes.
These are having a strong, dependable NHS and high-quality public services; a wellbeing economy that offers decent, secure work and conditions; educational and creative opportunities for all; a liveable environment for us, and for our children’s future; and power to change things locally as well as nationally through deep investment and democratic accountability.
While welcome, these aspirations fall short of a fully worked-out and rounded manifesto and obviously lack detail. Creating a manifesto is the opportunity to fully set out what the SNPTUG is for.
READ MORE: Kate Forbes hints that she wanted to stay on as finance secretary
In hand, it would not only help the SNPTUG assess Yousaf’s leadership against a set of established criteria but also lay out an alternative around which to agitate and try to influence the new party leadership.
The key means will be to build up an active SNPTUG membership and then draw other members around it. This collective force will now be able to take advantage of these new spaces and opportunities that are opening up in the SNP.
They may be added to by the threat that a potentially resurgent Scottish Labour represents. Showing that social democracy is the guiding principle of the SNP would be the best defence against the Scottish version of “new” Labour.
Professor Gregor Gall is editor of A New Scotland: Building An Equal, Fair And Sustainable Society (Pluto Press, 2022, priced £14.99)
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