logo
New polls showing rising support for independence are revealing

New polls showing rising support for independence are revealing

The National22-04-2025
It is encouraging, but more than that – it's revealing.
Something is shifting and people are starting to see clearly what many of us have felt for a long time: that Scotland is not an equal partner in this so-called Union. That our democracy can be dismissed, delayed and diluted by powers we didn't vote for.
But if this is the result when the public see a glimmer of what's happening, imagine if we exposed it all, with front and centre headlines. When people in Scotland vote for one party and end up governed by another, that alone tells a story.
When we have more MPs in London than we do in the whole of Scotland. When we vote to remain in the European Union and were dragged out regardless, the message couldn't be clearer. And now, when some placed their hopes in a Labour revival, they've been met with a reheated version of Tory policy but faster and with fewer apologies.
These moments aren't just disappointing, they're disempowering and hopefully more people are beginning to join the dots. At Holyrood, I'm there to debate, to challenge, to listen, and to shape real change for the people who sent me. All of us are elected by people in Scotland to work for Scotland.
READ MORE: John Curtice gives verdict as poll predicts huge pro-independence majority
And while devolution has let us do a great deal of good, we're constantly forced to do it within boundaries we didn't choose. We legislate with purpose, often with broad support, only to see our decisions picked apart or even blocked entirely.
We saw it with the use of Section 35. We saw it in the Supreme Court ruling that forced changes to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act, despite it passing unanimously in the Scottish Parliament.
And now again in another court ruling that has significant implications for how we apply equality-based policy here in Scotland.
We debate. We vote. We pass the law. And then we wait to see if the UK institutions will let it stand.
This is the kind of erosion that people don't always see unless they're looking closely. Take the UK Internal Market Act. It didn't come with flashy headlines, but it has had serious consequences.
It means that even when the Scottish Parliament takes decisions in devolved areas, such as banning single-use plastics, we can be told we have to accept goods from elsewhere in the UK that don't meet our standards. It locks us into Westminster's way of doing things, even when we are trying to do something better.
And while we're constantly fighting to hold on to our ability to make decisions, we're also doing the hard work of using those devolved powers to improve people's lives.
We've introduced world-leading policies such as the Scottish Child Payment. We've made period products free to access via local authorities. We brought in minimum alcohol pricing to save lives. We've prioritised housing, climate action, and progressive taxation. And now, the Scottish Government has committed to removing the two-child benefit cap in Scotland, which has punished families for too long.
That's a massive step forward. But even as we move in that direction, we're still doing it within the confines of a UK system that could snatch that power away again if it suits it.
So much of what we do now is about mitigating the damage caused elsewhere. We protect people from the worst of Westminster's decisions, while trying to build something better. But how much further could we go, how much faster, if we weren't constantly having to shield people from policies we didn't vote for?
Brexit, too, continues to hit economy. We see the impact every day, in labour shortages, rising costs and disrupted trade. My constituency, with its proud fishing and farming industries, knows the cost of that vote better than most. And for what? We're still waiting to see any benefit.
We've seen how powerful devolution can be, but what we're consistently seeing now isn't protection of our devolution by the UK, it's erosion. It's slow but very deliberate. I see it in the Parliament from our Unionist MSPs. A disdain by some for our political institution. Step by step, they are chipping away at Scotland's ability to make its own choices. Just as we make headway, there's that pull on our collar to get back in our box.
And yes, I know that in any democracy, we won't always agree with every decision made. That's the deal. But true democracy means having the right to make those decisions in the first place, and for those decisions to be ours, not made or unmade by a government we didn't elect or a judiciary that is not wholly ours.
If only that were the front-page story across the country, that Scotland has passed good, progressive, compassionate laws, only to be told they can't be implemented.
If only more people knew how often we're overruled. I wonder how it would feel across civic society if that truth were told more clearly, instead of being buried beneath 'SNP bad' headlines and recycled outrage.
Because the truth is, we have the proof. We've lived the consequences. And we're now seeing, through polling, that people are beginning to connect those dots. We need to bring this specific conversation to doorsteps and living rooms, and community halls. Not to win an argument, but to let people see clearly what's happening.
Because if Scotland's Parliament was fully respected and free to act on the will of the people, we wouldn't just be mitigating harm. We'd be building the country we know we can be. We shouldn't be overruled, we shouldn't be content to allow it, and we shouldn't stay quiet about it either.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Plan to fly old burgh coat of arms in Johnstone 'not possible'
Plan to fly old burgh coat of arms in Johnstone 'not possible'

Glasgow Times

time12 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Plan to fly old burgh coat of arms in Johnstone 'not possible'

Provost Lorraine Cameron has confirmed the local authority encountered a 'problem' that effectively means it does not have the power to display that particular emblem at this time. The council had intended to fly the burgh flag in the town's Houstoun Square but could now fly the flag of Johnstone Burgh Football Club instead following their Scottish Junior Cup win in June. There are no such issues in the case of Renfrew, however, because the community council petitioned to matriculate its arms to the group in 1987. In an update to councillors, Provost Cameron explained: 'Unfortunately, we have uncovered a problem in respect of Johnstone. 'Following the council meeting, [the head of corporate governance] contacted the Lord Lyon's office to confirm what was the correct coat of arms for Johnstone Burgh and to confirm who had permission to fly it. 'The response received from the Lord Lyon's office was that under the Local Government (Scotland) Act, the status of 'Burgh' was abolished in 1975. 'They have stated that this makes the 1955 Grant of Arms to the Burgh of Johnstone redundant and therefore they may not be displayed. 'Unlike Renfrew, there has never been any such petition in Johnstone, so currently no one has the right to fly a flag bearing that coat of arms. 'Were the council to do so, the Lord Lyon has criminal enforcement powers. 'Accordingly, we will not be able to fly the old burgh coat of arms in Johnstone as envisaged in the council decision, unless a local group, like the community council, petitions the Lord Lyon. 'I have asked what this would involve and have been told that even if there is an organisation that could petition to matriculate the Johnstone coat of arms it could take 30 to 36 months to complete the process. 'So, in the absence of the power to fly the burgh flag in Johnstone, I am proposing, in honour of their recent success, that we fly the flag of Johnstone Burgh Football Club until April 2026 when the Renfrewshire Council flag will be raised in respect of the anniversary of the council. 'If a local Johnstone group decides to petition the Lord Lyon for matriculation of the flag, the council can revisit the issue if they are successful.' Councillor Andy Doig, an independent representative for the village, said he was 'hopeful' one of the community groups would pick up the mantle and petition the Lord Lyon for approval. 'That would be great if they wanted to do that,' he added. 'But I feel that it sticks in my throat that we're hidebound by these sort of medieval rules. 'I agree with the provost's suggestion, however, and I think it's wise under the circumstances. 'Johnstone Burgh Football Club did so well and everyone wants to recognise that.'

In wartime, demonstrations in Ukraine can never be more than a peaceful protest
In wartime, demonstrations in Ukraine can never be more than a peaceful protest

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

In wartime, demonstrations in Ukraine can never be more than a peaceful protest

Once a decade, Ukraine has a moment in which street protests redefine the country's political direction. The Orange revolution of 2004; the Maidan revolution of 2014; and now, over the past 10 days, the first major wave of protest since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion. A series of unexpectedly boisterous and well-attended demonstrations forced Volodymyr Zelenskyy to execute a swift U-turn on his decision to scrap the independence of two anti-corruption bodies. On Thursday, MPs reversed the contentious changes they had adopted a week previously. Outside the parliament building, crowds whooped and cheered as the result of the vote was announced. The size, scope and demands of this latest protest movement have been much more modest than those of its revolutionary predecessors, but the spectacle has been no less remarkable, given the context of full-scale war in which it has taken place. The final, celebratory gathering came only hours after the latest massive Russian airstrike had hit Kyiv, killing at least 28 people including three children. Hardly anyone had managed a good night's sleep before arriving at parliament armed with banners and high spirits. This wartime context to a large extent inspired the protests: a common sentiment that when people are laying down their lives for the country on the frontline, the government has to live up to a certain set of values. But it also limited their scope. There was none of the revolutionary enthusiasm of Maidan present here; instead, there was a sober acknowledgement that all-out political unrest would only play into Russia's hands. 'There were some people chanting for impeachment and the vast majority of others said, 'Shut up, we do not undermine the legitimacy of the president, what happened is that the legitimate president made a mistake,'' said Inna Sovsun, an MP from the opposition Holos party who attended several protests. Dmytro Koziatynskyi, whose post on social media provided the initial spark for the protest, dismissed any comparisons to Maidan for exactly this reason. 'Even if they don't pass the law, this will never become anything other than a peaceful protest,' he said, in an interview before the parliamentary vote. Koziatynskyi was a masters student in the Czech Republic before returning to Ukraine after the full-scale invasion in 2022 and signing up to become a combat medic. After three years on various parts of the frontline, he left the army in May and now works for an NGO. When he saw the news last week that parliament had rushed through a law curtailing the independence of two bodies specially designed to go after high-level corruption, he found it 'insulting', he said. 'People are not fighting so that our government can do some crazy stuff, that destroys all our achievements since 2014,' he said. He penned an angry post on social media calling on people to protest against the new law. He expected 'maximum 100 people, mostly friends and acquaintances' to join the protest. By the second night there were about 10,000 people outside the Ivan Franko theatre, the nearest point to the presidential office that is accessible to the public. Most of those who came out were young – this has been a protest wave dominated by gen Z, with friends competing for the wittiest slogan or meme reference on their handwritten placards. On Wednesday evening, a man leading the singing of the Ukrainian national anthem through a loudspeaker was holding a sign that bore a single word: 'Cringe'. Suddenly, the fate of two relatively small institutions – the national anti-corruption bureau, known as Nabu, and the specialised anti-corruption prosecutor's office, Sapo – had become the issue of the day among Ukrainian teenagers. Nabu and Sapo were established after the Maidan revolution as part of a drive against the long-running scourge of corruption in Ukraine, financed partly with US money. Some western observers agree that there are problems with Nabu and Sapo: too many cases opened and not enough of them brought to a conclusion, for one. In theory, some streamlining would make sense; in practice, Zelenskyy's move looked a lot like bringing independent investigators under political control. With the Trump administration no longer pushing an anti-corruption agenda, and Europe on summer holidays, Zelenskyy's team appears to have felt they could push the bill through quickly, without anyone paying much attention. That might have been the case were it not for the protests. But the images of thousands of young people demanding the law's repeal forced European politicians to take a stand, and several leaders spoke privately to Zelenskyy to tell him he needed to find a way out of the self-inflicted mess. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion 'This became a major breach of trust. It's problematic both from an EU accession point of view and in that it makes it much harder for friends of Ukraine to continue making the case that the country needs support,' said one diplomatic source in Kyiv. Zelenskyy's response was swift and decisive, even if somewhat embarrassing for the MPs of his Servant of the People party, who were instructed to vote against the very thing they had been ordered to vote for the previous week. Now that the status quo has been re-established, there are two very different readings of the whole episode. One sees a leader using wartime powers to try to stifle independent institutions, too out of touch to predict the obvious backlash. Another reflects on how, even in wartime, Ukrainian society is still capable of expressing democratic sentiment, and its leaders still able to react swiftly to it. Koziatynskyi, whose post started off the protest wave, leans towards the second view. 'The protests showed that Ukrainian democracy is as strong as possible in times of a full-scale war, and our society is mature enough to have a dialogue with the government, and the government is able to listen,' he said. Zelenskyy's five-year presidential term should have ended last year, but almost all Ukrainians, including his fiercest opponents, agree that elections are both legally and technically impossible during wartime. With Russia's nightly attacks continuing, and a hope that Donald Trump might finally start getting tougher on Russia, that consensus has not changed. Nobody wants upheaval, but the outburst of protest may yet change the political atmosphere. 'Legally, everything will go back to how it was; politically, it's more complicated,' said Sovsun. 'It's unpredictable what this might have done to Ukrainian society. We have basically lifted the unspoken rule that we don't protest during martial law.'

Trump's stunning 39% tariff give Swiss watches hard time
Trump's stunning 39% tariff give Swiss watches hard time

The Herald Scotland

time3 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Trump's stunning 39% tariff give Swiss watches hard time

The Swiss government said it viewed the White House's new tariffs with "great regret." The Swiss Federal Council said it remained in contact with U.S. authorities about the tariffs and "continues to strive for a negotiated solution." Guitars, bagels and booze: How Canadians became reluctant warriors in Trump tariff fight Only Laos and Myanmar (also known as Burma), at 40%, and Syria, at 41%, fared worse than Switzerland in terms of Trump's fresh tariffs on their goods. The Alpine country now has until Aug. 7 to work out a trade deal with the United States or chocolate, jewellery and, yes, watches, will be subject to levies more than double the 15% rate for most European Union imports into the United States. Switzerland's pharmaceuticals sector was not included in the tariffs. Switzerland shipped about $63 billion of goods to the United States in 2024, according to the office of the United States Trade Representative. That's about one-sixth of its total exports. Going the other way, goods exported from the United States to Switzerland totaled an estimated $25 billion last year, a trade deficit of $38 billion. The U.S. was Switzerland's top market in 2024 for perhaps its most famous good: timepieces. They accounted for about 17% of exports, or about $5.4 billion, according to Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry. July jobs report: employers added 73,000 jobs; unemployment rises Still, for the Swiss watch, Trump's 39% tariffs may amount to bad timing. The industry has struggled with weak demand from China, the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry says. The trade uncertainty unleashed by Trump's tariffs over the last few months has meanwhile boosted the value of the Swiss franc currency, making the nation's watches more expensive for tourists who buy them while on vacation. Over the last decade, some brands of Swiss watch have also lost out on market share to the Apple Watch. Overall, Swiss watch exports have been falling. They were down as much as 10% in May. More: Trump's new tariffs slam trading partners, U.S. stock market: Live updates Financial markets in Switzerland were closed for a national holiday on Aug. 1, giving respite to the shares prices of producers such as Richemont and Swatch Group. But Watches of Switzerland Group, a retailer that sells Rolex and other timepieces in the United Kingdom and the United States, saw its U.K.-listed share prices fall nearly 8%. Critics of tariffs argue that the additional costs of goods are typically passed to the consumer. Analysts at Jefferies Global Research and Strategy told Bloomberg that if the 39% tariff goes ahead for Switzerland, it could require price increases in the United States for Swiss watches of more than 20%.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store