Latest news with #anti-SNP
The National
11 hours ago
- Politics
- The National
Every plan to achieve indy must be subject to the test of practicality
As an incumbent administration and being at the core of the cause for a very long time, they are fully aware of the practical limitations and constraints of the various possibilities that people promote. Therefore, their plan is already couched in terms of what is achievable. Of course there are always lots of fancy ideas of what people wish were workable, but they will not have any better chance of success than the ones that actually take account of the forces arrayed against us. READ MORE: Holyrood 2026 is the first step in regaining our political mojo This does not necessarily mean that ideas are summarily dismissed, but as with any strategy the individual steps are the most important and hence critical. All plans have to be subject to the test of practicality, and that is what the SNP have been doing for many decades and particularly since the last Labour administration. There are two critical things that complainers ignore. The first is that regardless of whichever plan is pursued – and it may require several running in parallel – they all absolutely must as a prerequisite have the support of a recognisable majority of voters, at the time of being tested, which is in the absence of a referendum based on elections. Without such a majority no plan is ever going to get off the ground, regardless of whoever's ghost is leading it. A minority appeal to the UN or EU or whoever gets nowhere other than an acknowledgement that there are some people wishing for a change. So, secondly, complainers must also bear in mind what we will end up with if they continue to undermine the SNP. Nothing but at best a Unionist Labour administration or even worse, one that is Reform/Tory. Ordinary voters will, unless they are long-term politically astute, invariably vote in accordance with their more immediate needs based around their perception of the parties on offer. So exactly what do the anti-SNP activists think they are achieving? READ MORE: A single electoral outcome could open up many routes to independence Voters will only look as far as the fact that even the so-called independence supporters cannot agree with each other, and base their choice around that. Criticism is one thing but the creation of workable plans and strategies demands working together, and if people think that arguing against the SNP is likely to make them fall in line with whichever minority shouty group is around then they are being naive. The SNP have the experience and detailed knowledge of the situation and are best placed to produce the plan. Such a plan is also tested by those arrayed against us who are in fact the only ones preventing the plans from succeeding. The progress has been stalled not by the SNP but by the Unionists who also happen to be supported, hopefully unintentionally, by those among us arguing against the SNP. And the Unionists seize on that disunity – united we stand, divided we fall. Fair enough, produce a different party to elect after we have independence, but let us achieve that goal first. Nick Cole Meigle, Perthshire I FIND myself in agreement with James Murphy, Campbell Anderson, George T Watt and Selma Rahman (Letters, Aug 16). It appears that the leadership of the SNP are unwilling to consider views other than from the coterie surrounding them. The main idea being to suppress other views and thus contain ideas on how achieve independence to those that the leadership favours. READ MORE: It's clear we need a new way of doing politics and economics No matter that this seems to be keep asking for a referendum until Westminster relents out of sheer boredom with the issue. What matter if independence is thus delayed for another decade or two. Awkward questions can be ignored and issues kicked further down the road. A quiet life had by all at the top as the independence gravy train rolls on! Frustration with current 'strategy' is rising amongst independence supporters and is likely to result in an increase in 'stay at home' by them come next May. This by default is likely to result in a better result for Unionist parties. Drew Reid Falkirk IT is with some dismay and incredulity that I am informed that a motion on a strategy to gain independence submitted by 42 SNP branches for the agenda of the SNP national conference in October has not been included in the preliminary agenda. What is on the agenda is only one motion on independence in the names of leader John Swinney and depute leader Keith Brown. Their motion has been criticised as being a flawed prospectus to gain independence. The 42 branches were to meet in Perth on August 9 to consider their motion and organise support for it. They did not expect that it would be omitted from the agenda, which was published the day before. There has been no explanation, as far as I can tell, as to why it was not included. READ MORE: Tommy Sheppard: Why a plebiscite election won't deliver Scottish independence This denial of basic party democracy, whereby a significant number of branches submit a motion for consideration by delegates that does not reach the preliminary agenda, is outrageous and should not be accepted. I am not a member of the SNP but have long been of the opinion that the arcane practices and rules relating to how the organisation is run are unacceptable. This particular situation must be resolved and it is up to the members of the SNP to do so. As said, I am not a member and some will say that I don't have the right to question their actions. It may be said that I don't have a dog in the fight, but I have, and that dog is independence. I welcomed the fact that there would be a debate with opposing views and strategies being expressed as the right way forward to gain our independence. We have to get it right. I say to the SNP leadership – get a grip. John Milligan Motherwell
The National
7 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Wholly political campaign for independence is a terrible idea
This week, I want to argue that a wholly political campaign is a terrible idea. Most shifts in public opinion are not led either by politicians or resulting from a political process. Yet still we're stuck with the idea that until politicians either create a mass shift in public sentiment themselves or they secure some sort of referendum process, the rest of us just need to wait. This has sidetracked us into another daft debate about whether politicians should be cautious (to not scare off the wavering voter) or bold (to energise the public). It stops us from asking whether they're the right messengers in the first place. READ MORE: Seamus Logan: We need new bold independence strategy instead of focusing on the past They're not. An Ipsos poll from December 2023 gets to the point. It lists more than 30 professions and asked the public who they trust most. Politicians came bottom with fewer than one in 10 people saying they trust what a politician says. By contrast, nurses, pilots, librarians, engineers, doctors, teachers and professors are all trusted by more than three out of four people. We're sending out our least effective message carriers and refusing to deploy our most effective advocates. Wavering voters trust civic voices much more than political ones. Politics is a crucial part of this process – political parties are partners in a civic campaign, not least because we all have to be on the same page and follow the same strategy. But having politicians front and centre is not our most effective formation. This is why, of all the acts of self-harm the independence movement has inflicted over the past decade, none has been more destructive or more counterproductive than the closing down of Yes Scotland as a cross-and-no-party means of communicating to the public. There are many other problems with the politics-only model. If you accept the 'we must have strong support' argument then success or failure rests on the next 10% of the population that gets us from 50% to 60%. Hardly any of that group of people have ever voted SNP. The SNP have never achieved 50% of the votes cast in a General Election in their existence. Why are we targeting our key voters with a political party they have serially refused to support? On top of that, there is one thing worse than a politician to send out to win over voters, and that is a politician from a party which has been in power for an extended period of time. You cannot disentangle those politicians from the track record of their government. A politician may well want to talk to a voter about independence, but the voter may well want to talk about schools, or hospital waiting lists, or ferries. Plus, there is always a good electoral reason for a political party to not promote independence. Remember when, in 2019, the SNP clearly decided that 'stopping Brexit' was a bigger vote winner than arguing for independence? That will always happen. Once again, this isn't an anti-SNP thing. There are very, very few instances of single parties getting majority support in multi-party parliamentary elections, any party would have a built-in self-interest in not promoting independence at some point or other, and it's not that the SNP's politicians are uniquely unpopular, it's that they are just normally unpopular. There is virtually no civic movement left. We don't have prominent leaders in their professions or communities who regularly act as public advocates of independence. The power-hoarding of the politicians has resulted in the long, slow death of the 2014 coalition. It will need to be rebuilt from scratch. We're stuck because we've been saying twe won't convert the public to independence until after someone gives us a referendum and that we're going to get that by making independence a politicians-only zone. Both pillars of this argument are false, yet those have been the sole terms of debate for a decade now. We have explored every avenue of how to skip the consent-building phase and jump to the legislative process stage through party politics and we've not found a way to do it – because there isn't a way to do it. It means we didn't do an autopsy on the 2014 defeat because it wasn't politically expedient – so we've learned nothing. It means we haven't examined the views of voters – so we don't know our audience. It means we haven't communicated to voters in a meaningful or consistent way – so all they've heard is politicians on the BBC. In these two articles, I have not set out my strategy for Scottish independence – you can find that in detail in my book. Sorted. Sadly, we're still pretty far from a credible discussion of strategy. I fear we will waste another year until after the Scottish election. Because frankly, if we're really in a phase where a political party polling at about 30% demands a vote of over 50% as a condition for progress, we're not a serious proposition. It didn't work when the SNP were at their peak and it certainly won't work now. This is all maddening. There is compelling evidence that our target voters are increasingly ready to listen to a fresh pitch on independence. If so, the timescale for getting from 50% to 60% support is not long. Then, if we had 60% of public support, lots and lots of possible avenues to independence open up, with a referendum only being one of them. So what are we going to do? One more shot at finding a loophole in the rules that will let us escape the UK without winning over the public? Two more shots? Or something different? We'll have to choose soon.
The National
10-06-2025
- Politics
- The National
Will the SNP's anti-nuclear energy policy survive?
Just take Wendy Wood, one of the founders of the National Party of Scotland – which later grew into the SNP. As early as 1953, the artist and Scottish independence campaigner was vocally against the nuclear power site Dounreay on the north coast of Caithness, which has been in the long process of being decommissioned since 1994. In the 1970s and 1980s, the wider anti-nuclear movement – which organised mass protests against the likes of Torness power station in East Lothian, which is set to close in 2030 – also had strong ties to pro-independence circles and the SNP. It's a link that has stood until today, with the wider Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) long backing Scottish independence. READ MORE: Former Sky Sports presenter banned from business for football betting scam The SNP, meanwhile, has itself had a long-standing commitment to block new nuclear projects through devolved planning powers. But Labour are pushing for nuclear energy to make a comeback across the UK, lumping pressure on the Scottish Government to do the same. On Tuesday, Keir Starmer promised there would be no more 'dithering' about backing nuclear power as the UK Government committed to the Sizewell C plant and the development of new small modular reactors (SMRs). The Prime Minister said the 'change of mindset' would help free the UK from reliance on international fossil fuel markets and prevent price spikes such as those in the wake of Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Scottish Labour, of course, were at the ready with anti-SNP attack lines. 'A Scottish Labour government with Anas Sarwar as First Minister will end the SNP's ban on nuclear power which is blocking jobs and investment from being created in Scotland,' Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said. The SNP, for the time being, are not for moving. Acting Energy Secretary Gillian Martin said in response to the announcement that the Scottish Government will continue to focus on renewable energy not nuclear power. The party's energy spokesperson at Westminster, Dave Doogan, also hit out at the UK Government. "The evidence is clear that nuclear is extortionate, takes decades to build and the toxic waste is a risk to local communities – Scotland's future is in renewables, carbon capture and links to Europe, not more money for white elephants,' he said. But could that be changing? Polls certainly indicate that Scots aren't totally opposed to the idea of nuclear power. SNP supporters too – over half of the party's voters believe nuclear power should be part of Scotland's mix of clean energy generation, a poll suggested last month. The Opinium survey for the campaign group Britain Remade (which, to note, was founded by a former energy and climate adviser to Boris Johnson) found 57% of those who voted for the party in last year's general election believe nuclear power should be included in Scotland's energy mix to meet the 2045 net zero target. READ MORE: Palestinian shop 'abruptly evicted' from Edinburgh property after 12 years A total of 56% of Scots thought nuclear power should be part of Scotland's clean energy mix to meet the targets, while 23% disagreed, and 21% said they did not know. This isn't a totally new phenomenon, either. Ipsos polling in 2022 found that more of the Scottish public support the building of more nuclear power stations in Scotland (39%) than oppose it (32%). Meanwhile, an SNP source told The National last month that the party's stance on atomic energy is softening. 'The younger membership honestly couldn't give two shits about this sort of stuff,' they said. 'The younger membership are quite distant from CND.' The source also said that Labour continuing to pursue the Tory nuclear policy might eventually make the SNP stance appear 'dated' but predicted any changes in policy would come further down the line given the Holyrood election is in just a year's time. But will Scottish Labour's recent shock win in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election change things? Before last year's General Election, John Swinney scrapped the Nicola Sturgeon and Bute House Agreement-era 'presumption against' new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea. Instead, going forward, the party said it would look at licenses on a "rigorously evidence-led, case-by-case basis". Will the party take this so-called 'pragmatic' approach with nuclear, too?
The Courier
30-05-2025
- Politics
- The Courier
Michael Marra: Dundee's humble champion is fighting for fairness, community, family and lasting change
If there's one thread running through Michael Marra's life and politics, it's a deep-rooted belief in fairness, community and the quiet strength of collective action. The Dundee-based North East Scotland Scottish Labour MSP is currently the Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Finance. But long before Holyrood, he was marching for miners' rights as a child, raised in a household shaped by trade unionism, Catholic social teaching, and the melodic storytelling of his uncle – the legendary musician Michael Marra. Now 45, the MSP and former Lochee councillor speaks with the clarity of someone who has witnessed inequality firsthand – whether among the terraces at Tannadice, in Dundee classrooms where both his parents taught, or in the everyday struggles of his constituents. His politics embody practical socialism: less about slogans, more about delivering policies that make a 'real' difference. He's driven by putting money into people's pockets, investing in public services and rebuilding trust in a system many feel has left them behind. But when asked if he has ambitions to lead Scottish Labour, the self-described 'badly lapsed Catholic' and 'radical pragmatist' says it's not something he is 'actively pursuing'. 'Firstly, there's no vacancy at the moment – and I hope it stays that way,' he says in an interview with The Courier, speaking before Anas Sarwar was 'race baited' this week by Reform leader Nigel Farage. 'Anas (Sarwar) is a brilliant, charismatic, politically astute leader. 'Despite the current challenges – like the splintering of the anti-SNP vote – there's no one better placed to deal with them.' But while he doesn't rule out vying for party leadership in future, the father-of-three makes it clear he'd be reluctant to take on the role while his family are young. 'If it were to happen, it would be a long way off,' he adds. 'With my two youngest children at the ages they are, I couldn't do it. 'I've seen Labour leaders put in unbelievable work here in Scotland – often with little electoral reward, but with huge personal sacrifices. 'My children are in their early teens, and they need me now. Sometimes I don't feel I give them enough as it is.' Michael has strong views on international affairs, including the ongoing crisis in Gaza. But it's building a more equal society at home that truly drives him. That core motivator was powerfully reflected when he recently voted against assisted dying legislation at Holyrood. His decision wasn't influenced by his 'lapsed Catholic' faith, as some might assume. Instead, he explains, it stemmed from a deep concern that assisted dying could place a heavier burden on the poor and disabled. Until that fundamental imbalance is addressed, he cannot in good conscience support such a measure. This conviction underpins not only his stance on assisted dying but also his broader worldview, centred around what he calls 'Dundee first.' Born and bred in Dundee, Michael's roots run deep in the city's working-class and Irish immigrant history. His great-uncle was the secretary of the Labour Party in Dundee for 30 years. His great-uncle's father Nicholas Marra, meanwhile, founded both the Independent Labour Party in Dundee and the Jute and Flax Workers' Union. Growing up in a household where both parents were schoolteachers and active trade unionists, social justice and solidarity were lived realities. From marches organised by his dad during the miners' strike to organising holiday camps for children from Fife, activism and a belief in collective progress were part of his childhood. The Dundee of his youth was a city marked by economic hardship but also by community resilience and a fierce pride in local identity. Michael attended St Joseph's Primary and then St John's High School. He vividly remembers classmates who went on to be devastated by drugs and deprivation – a stark reminder of the city's persistent inequalities. He joined the Labour Party as a university student in Glasgow, initially hesitant due to New Labour's perceived shift to the right under Tony Blair. 'I wasn't a Blairite,' he admits. 'My sister joined before me.' But for Michael, Labour remains a vehicle for tangible improvements to ordinary people's lives. Asked if 'soft left' is an accurate description of his politics, he replies: 'I have a radical vision for a fairer economic future. 'I don't believe in the nationalisation of the top FTSE 500 kind of thing – I was never enamoured by Corbynism. I thought it was a pathway to electoral doom. 'But essentially I'm a socialist who wants to see significant progress on equality.' As Scottish Labour's Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Finance, he focuses heavily on financial inclusion. He is critical of what he calls 'chaotic' SNP budget management and 'waste'. On the relationship between Scottish Labour and the UK party, he highlights the autonomy of the Scottish branch while stressing shared interests. He works closely with Chancellor Rachel Reeves. Michael, who previously worked for Oxfam, supports a two-state solution and a free Palestine when it comes to the Israel-Gaza conflict. While acknowledging the trauma of the October 7 attacks on Israel, he describes recent Israeli state actions as 'completely unacceptable' and is sickened by the 'horrific' humanitarian crisis in Gaza. His family's ties to Palestine run deep. His father is active in Dundee's Nablus Twinning Association, and his late colleague Ernie Ross was a long-time supporter of Palestinian solidarity. On a lighter note, Michael is an avid Dundee United fan who's delighted to see the club back in Europe. A season ticket holder in the Eddie Thompson stand where he sits with his football 'fanatic' son and dad, he speaks warmly of the club's recent successes and the passionate atmosphere at matches. But the legacy of his late uncle Michael Marra, the celebrated musician, also looms large. 'Mick was a storyteller who captured the spirit of Dundee – its people and its struggles,' he says. 'We didn't always agree politically, but he was kind, caring, and proud when my sister entered politics.' Though he describes himself as a 'badly lapsed Catholic,' faith remains a cultural touchstone. Michael is deeply concerned about the rise of populism and right-wing politics globally. He links this shift to the atomising effects of social media, which promotes individualism over community. Locally, he takes pride in Dundee's strong community spirit and its tradition of female-led activism. Yet he remains worried about persistent challenges: child poverty, drug addiction, and economic decline. He also campaigns on issues close to Dundee's heart, such as supporting footballers with dementia. Asked about his hopes for the future, Michael is clear: 'I want more and better jobs in Dundee. I want schools to improve, young people to get work, and a more equal Scotland where people feel at ease with themselves. If politics can help make that happen, I'd be happy.' And his dream when that day comes? 'I'd be quite happy sitting at Tannadice with my grandchildren and not being recognised by anybody!'
Scottish Sun
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Scottish Sun
Moment John Swinney heckled by Reform UK campaigner as FM dodges warring activists ahead of Hamilton by-election
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) JOHN Swinney today breezed past two sets of warring activists hurling abuse at each other ahead of a hotly contested by-election. The First Minister was met with heckles of 'Swinney the swine' by Reform UK campaigners who were locked in a bitter stand-off, on Hamilton's Quarry Street, with rivals from the Scottish Socialist Party. 3 John Swinney was campaigning in Hamilton with SNP candidate Katy Loudon Credit: Wattie Cheung 3 Reform UK activists shouted abuse at the First Minister in Hamilton, Lanarkshire Credit: Staff An anti-immigration canvasser, puffing on a cigarette, was heard telling voters: 'Take a leaflet and put it in your sky rocket.' He displayed homemade signs reading 'Just stop immigration' and 'Stop the boats'. Across the street, three left-wingers set up shop with posters urging for a workers' wage and 'reject corruption'. However, Mr Swinney - accompanied by two protection officers - ignored the screaming match and stopped outside a nearby Greggs. He quizzed SNP candidate Katy Loudon on her least favourite pastry from the high street bakery to which she replied: 'The Festive Bake.' It comes ahead of a by-election on Thursday 5 June, following the sad death, aged 57, of former Nats MP Christina McKelvie. Meanwhile Labour chiefs fear Reform's surge will hand the SNP victory in the Hamilton by-election. Insiders in Anas Sarwar's camp admitted they now face a struggle in what looked an easily winnable seat. The mood has shifted as angry voters ditch Labour after last July's landslide Westminster victory over Sir Keir Starmer's policies like slashing winter fuel payments. Sources now worry Nigel Farage's Reform are set to split the anti-SNP vote in the June 5 contest and next year's Holyrood election. Russell Findlay quickfire Q&A UK Election fallout & buying Liam Gallagher's mum a drink One Labour insider said: 'To win we'll need to convince every single anti-Nat voter to back us, and for them all to turn out. I just don't think that is going to happen.' Polls show Reform on course to become Holyrood's second party after big gains in council elections down south. It has scuppered Scottish Labour chiefs' bid to bill themselves as 'the best way to stop the SNP' — as Reform also eat into the Tory base. Another Labour source said: 'If we can't win Hamilton, the writing is on the wall for 2026. There is a lot of pessimism at the top of Scottish Labour.'
