If SNP are serious about winning independence they must act like it

The National

31-07-2025

If it was, John Swinney's strategy – along with his Constitutional Convention – would be the talk of the independence steamie. But it isn't. Yessers have been round the houses too many times and there's a feeling of weariness even broaching the strategy question again. That's a bad sign. It's a bit like your 43rd birthday. Not particularly momentous, but celebrated in a low-key, box-ticking, performative, kinda way all the same.
No point pals spicing things up with a trip to the pub/restaurant or anywhere else because every aspect of the day will be decided by the Birthday Boy himself. And it'll be 'talk to the hand' for anyone with a different idea, question or alternative proposition. It always is.
Yet an alternative strategy is in the offing – an SNP conference motion doing the rounds of branches right now, calls for a de facto referendum in 2026 instead. Did this prompt Swinney to try and head off dissent with a different strategy upon which he'll stake his leadership? Perhaps.
READ MORE: John Curtice weighs in on Corbyn-Sultana party threat to Keir Starmer's seat
Either way, I'd imagine an alternative will be proposed in October anyway which will be widely reported by the Unionist press as a telling party split.
It will actually be a bit of long-overdue democracy – if it happens.
Already though, Alba leader Kenny MacAskill has roused himself to pour cold water on Swinney's plan. Of course, he would. But I'd say he's pretty well right.
Instead of an SNP majority of seats, he wants a majority of votes for pro-independence parties to act as a mandate for independence talks – not a second referendum.
He wants Swinney to call a summit of all of pro-independence parties now 'to prepare for a plebiscite [or de facto] election in 2026, as a matter of urgency'.
And he wants Swinney's convention to take place right away not after the [[SNP]]'s conference in October. Otherwise, he says, the 2026 Holyrood election 'will be a blind alley leading to a political cul de sac'.
And that does look where we're headed.
The SNP leader has proposed a strategy the party is pretty much unable to deliver. Where does that leave indy?
Then there are all the inconsistencies.
Is Swinney suggesting an election strategy of SNP both votes again – list and constituency? Doubtless he will, since it took list seats to give the party its 2011 victory – the template Swinney has adopted for 2026, even though it is essentially unrepeatable.
In 2011, Alex Salmond led his party to an 'impossible' absolute majority in the Scottish Parliament elections overriding all the checks and balances created by the Unionist architects of [[Holyrood]].
But immediately, tactical voting kicked in amongst Unionist voters, suddenly alert to the fact independence was no whimsy – an awareness the 2014 indyref cemented. And since then, it's been an electoral case of once bitten, twice very prepared.
So, it's unlikely any party will get an overall majority again. And suggesting its possible plays into the first-past-the-post Westminster narrative of whopping great (unfair) majorities, instead of schooling southern commentators by clarifying Scotland's proportional and totally different system.
Even so, many Yessers are dejected, hopeless and desperate enough to swing with any kind of SNP momentum, in the hope the party can produce a genuinely inclusive, collaborative indy election and convention with verve – at last. So some sceptics may yet give Swinney the benefit of the doubt.
And yet, isn't all of this beside the point?
We are all treating independence as a moment. A vote, an election or a unilateral declaration. I'd humbly suggest the right strategy and moment will emerge as events unfold.
And that's the real problem.
There are no events. No momentum. Just words. And endless arguments about strategy.
Yes, the Constitutional Convention might eventually be an impressive event, though there are doubts about its timescale before the May elections, the likelihood of zero collaboration with other independence parties or groups and the possibility participants will have to accept Swinney's take-it-or-leave-it contention that an SNP victory and Section 30 referendum are the only game in town.
But that's not nearly enough.
Consider independence like an athletic championship. There is training for years beforehand. There are personal bests. There are constant competitions. There is working up to a big event. There is learning to work as a team. There is disruption and sacrifice.
Kelso cyclist Oscar Onley lives in Andorra so he can train in the high altitudes that give him a real advantage racing at sea level. That's the level of sacrifice, change and preparation needed for a big successful moment – be it the Tour de France or serious constitutional change.
Yet none of this is happening – at least not within the SNP.
James Murphy made a very strong point about the examples of other recently independent nations in a comment on National coverage. He pointed out that Ireland, the Baltic states, Slovenia, Norway, Montenegro, and the Czech Republic, all asserted their independence first and produced a referendum later.
Indeed, the Estonians co-organised the massive Baltic Chain in August 1989, where approximately two million people held hands to form a human chain across the Baltic States spanning 675 km – an epic public event designed to shame Moscow.
It worked.
Three months later, citizens elsewhere started dismantling the Berlin Wall.
Meantime, independence leaders were encouraging people to claim their citizenship as Estonian – aided by the fact many countries including Britain didn't recognise the legitimacy of Russia's occupation.
And for years they had regular singing events – which may sound wafty to o'er serious Scots, but Estonia's singing revolution let people meet regularly in what looked like a non-political way. All these actions produced their referendum held on March 3 1991, which was the final, not the first act.
There's also a Scottish example, highlighted last week by Believe in Scotland.
Scotland has publicly owned water today because Strathclyde Regional Council decided to hold an advisory referendum in 1994, and it had a massive turnout. Some 71% of folk voted and 97% wanted Scottish Water to stay in public hands. It was such a whopping majority that even the privatising Tories hesitated and let Scotland off the hook (though Strathclyde was later abolished).
That referendum had no legal force, but it was a really, powerful, impactful act before there was a Scottish Government, Parliament, or any formally devolved authority.
Westminster had the legal power to do what it wanted with Scottish Water, but that didn't stop Strathclyde Region from acting.
Charles Gray was actually a Labour council chief (who voted Yes in 2014) and went hell for leather to keep public assets in public hands by throwing a big unpredictable spanner in the works.
That's what we need now. Lots of it.
The [[SNP]] has to start acting as if it really means business. It needs to collaborate with others habitually and showcase the benefits independence would bring every week. At every high-profile event.
(Image: Jane Barlow)
A wheen happened last week thanks to The Donald with not an I-word in sight. Currently the SNP are playing basketball, by trying to land the ball through the hoop in one massive throw from the back line. That's not how it works.
Progress involves passing, moving, tackling, swerving, focusing, getting past each opponent and finally aiming for the hoop when you are much, much more likely to score.
Is any of that going to happen between now and October, let alone May?
There's the biggest problem for indy, right there.