What Happened Yesterday on Clydeside?

Comments (52)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published.

    1. Al kerr says:

      Most of the NO campaign workers don’t seem to be saying anything positive …they are the ones who have crept back into from whence they came “the Hidden majority” as Brown said they certainly are ..where are their views on the commision ..all they seem to be doing is slagging off the SNP government or doing nothing to forward Scottish Media change etc.I come to the conclusion sad to say a lot of NOs in Scotland are happy to continue with WM power and the sneering attitude of of English home counties MPs who still treat Scotland as out in the sticks somewhere totally irrelevent to English politics…Finally i dont care who hears this…”what a shower the NO voters are and i hope they dont see that the chickens etc….”

      But you know what I don’t think they really care and it will be to them a question of “ho hum….”

      Al kerr

  1. gonzalo1 says:

    British politics is certainly plunging to new depths with the rise of UKIP and the mediocrity of the current crop of Westminster politicians. I feel sorry for English people as there is nothing to inspire them down there. There is a growing mood of optimism in Scotland despite the result of the referendum and events of this weekend just bear this out.

  2. richardcain2 says:

    Generally a good article (barring the typos that Sean highlighted), but there is one massive elephant in the room between now and 2020 which Peter Arnott neglects to mention: the 2017 Brexit referendum. Surely, if the UK as a whole votes to leave, we in Scotland cannot just sit on our thumbs until 2020.

    1. Dean Richardson says:

      If Cameron is still PM after the May election, do you really think he’ll hold that Brexit referendum? Frankly, hardly anybody believes a word he says, such is his form for broken promises. (I certainly don’t believe Call Me Dave.) As for Miliband, he has made it clear that he won’t stage such a referendum at all. He doesn’t even pretend to favour a democratic process. This is strictly my personal view, but I simply don’t think that referendum is going to happen.

      1. richardcain2 says:

        Firstly, Miliband can say whatever he wants, he has no chance of winning the GE in my view. I agree that Cameron doesn’t want to hold it, but if he doesn’t, his backbenchers will have the knives out, so his hands are pretty much tied. That, coupled with the BBC/Daily Mail adulation of UKIP will make sure that the referendum happens.

        What remains to be seen is whether Cameron/Miliband can manage to make said referendum as much of a damp squib as they did with the AV vote, and thereby avoid the embarrassment of being dragged out of Europe against their better judgement.

  3. Peter Arnott says:

    That referendum was one step too far in the crystal ball for me,,,but you are right that that might well precipitate matters…

  4. Dan Huil says:

    Very interesting article. I was not present at either of the two meetings but I do think Mr Arnott might be attaching too much importance to them. As morale-boosting exercises they seem to have been very successful.
    I agree that the SNP must be the “bigger” party in the run-up to the May election and it has already offered non-members and recent members of public note a chance to stand. I also agree it would great if it could allow Maggie Chapman to stand without any SNP candidate opposing her.
    I’m sure everyone at the two meetings enjoyed the experience of mingling with like-minded people. I believe, though obviously I can’t prove it, that the vast majority of both audiences know the vagaries of first post the post elections and also know when, if necessary, to vote tactically. I believe the majority of both audiences would welcome further co-operation between the Yes parties. I believe the leaders of Yes parties know this.
    For example, reading Stewart Hosie’s appeal to voters in his deputy-leader bid it was obvious he saw the advantages of keeping the Yes alliance together. Perhaps the SNP could appoint Mr Hosie, or someone close to him, to liaise on a regular basis with Yes parties in the run-up to May.
    There is, of course, a danger that the Yes alliance will go the same way as the No “alliance” [ lol ] but I am confident those who matter – the people – will do everything to keep the Yes momentum going. ,

    1. MBC says:

      Maggie Chapman is of course an excellent person. But do the Greens, standing as Greens, actually have any realistic chance of winning a Westminster seat against Labour, supposing the SNP don’t stand?

      No offence, but that just seems complete fantasy to me.

      1. tartanfever says:

        Sorry to disagree here, I heard Maggie Chapman speak alongside Robin McAlpine and some others and I have to say her speech was dreadful. It was easily the worst I heard over two years of attending regular meetings.

        Incoherent, no drive, poor delivery, muddled message, long winded. I have no faith that she would be elected in a Westminster election.

  5. Lochside says:

    Very profoundly thought out article. Of which I found myself much in agreement . I too attended both RIC and the SNP gatherings. I would agree that the RIC was far more textured in content and as before, a very stimulating and moving experience with a variety of speakers and subjects.

    The general impression was of the Yes Movement collectively analysing and formulating the future of both the movement and the country. I felt very much that here was the leading vanguard of the ‘Yes’ movement: positive; intellectual but brimming with practical ideas and strategies to realise ‘Another Scotland is possible’.

    I left the RIC conference reluctantly, as I was immersed in the flow of ideas being generated, to attend the SNP conference. The contrast threw me at first: razzamataz and oily presenters; rap artists and Eddi Reader; but most importantly, a crowd that was truly working class unlike the predominantly middle class RIC attendees. The speeches were very polished, but ultimately soundbites, the crowd’s response was adulation, particularly with AS and NS. I joined in. I had finally joined the party that I had always voted for. But I felt worried.

    Why?…because when NS talked about working with like minded political parties, she named Plaid and the Greens. Fine, but my thoughts drifted to my fellow comrades in the nearby building. What about working with them? I thought. On a personal level, I was heavily involved and committed to the ‘YES’ movement and I wanted that to continue. Our local group has started to fracture already because of party allegiances. This is tragic and as Peter points out in his article inevitable in some ways, but not completely beyond remedy.

    The SNP must understand a tribal approach consisting of them only against Labour will fail at constituency level to produce the hoped for meltdown of Labour. Unionists may be squabbling now, but a ‘NO’ alliance will easily re-form in constituencies very quickly. Scots are way ahead in tactical voting. Added into this will be Labour supporters who voted Yes, but will not vote SNP unless presented with a viable left wing candidate e.g. Tommy Sheridan or Colin Fox .

    The SNP are an excellent political party and I will stick with them. However, if they fail to understand that the Referendum ‘YES’ was driven to its incredible heights, at grassroots level, by the leading vanguard of RIC, who organised, energised and politicised the ordinary working people of this country, and they end up reverting to ‘Top down’ led political attitudes, they will fail ultimately.

    1. MBC says:

      I’m not in the SNP so I can’t comment from any insider perspective. But in that Stewart Hosie, Angela Constance and Keith Brown and indeed Nicola Sturgeon have all spoken about involving the wider Yes movement in the GE 2015 as SNP or Yes Aliance candidates, I really don’t see what the problem is that you are raising.

      However, there is one thing that we have to think about, and that’s the voters. They are a varied lot, a spectrum. This goes for Yes voters too in any constituency. They are never of one single type. Whether SNP, SSP, Green, RIC, or what. So to be successful under first past the post, you have to pick somebody who is likely to appeal to most Yes voters – and a very large number of No voters, as these safe Labour seats have stonking majorities.

      If you pick somebody who would appeal really well to RIC types, they might have no appeal whatsover to the other voters in a constituency. You have to pick people capable of appealing to the widest range possible, not just ‘your’ man/woman.

      1. Radical stratagist says:

        Cat Boyd, Jonathon Shafi, Suki Sangha any one of those three would make an excellent choice.

      2. MBC says:

        Radical strategist – With respect, I don’t think Cat, though an excellent and inspiring person, would appeal to the vote we would need to capture. She would get my vote, but then I’m not what’s important. I’m just one person, and so are you. Two votes, between us, not 20,000. What is important is the average kind of voter who are the majority in most constituencies whom we must convince. I also think she would be wasted at Westminster. The home front is far more important, and there she will find ample opportunities for her political talents, whereas Westminster is a desert.

  6. Onwards says:

    In the absence of a formal alliance, I agree that voting SNP tactically is the most logical step for RIC members to achieve some of their aims. Or changing the SNP from within.

    Most RIC ambitions can only be realised once Scotland has substantial new powers.
    The Greens and Socialists actually have a chance of real influence at Holyrood.

    But we need to work one step at a time, and get maximum powers first.

    Realistically, a large block of SNP members is the best way to influence that – especially if they hold the balance of power. Splitting the vote would be pointless.

    1. Radical stratagist says:

      The SNP could use existing planning laws to ban Fracking. It was RIC’s message that was winning votes. hence why where they were strongest was where some of the highest votes for yes where.

      Surely we should encourage another large pro independence party to rise and replace the Labour party on the Left in the Scottish political landscape

      1. muttley79 says:

        Depends on the timing. If the SNP is able to gain significant new powers for Holyrood, in terms of Devo max or something of that ilk, within the next few years, then that would probably be the time to think about it. However, if it is only moderate powers we gain, then the launching of a pro-independence left wing party has the potential to take votes off the SNP/SSP/Greens, thereby splitting the independence and change vote. I am still not sure how and why the launch of a new left wing pro-independence party would bring further benefits, given that the SSP and Greens already exist.

      2. MBC says:

        But RIC isn’t a party and if it does miraculously form a party and find the wherewithal to field candidates in May, it will just split the indy vote and Labour will get back in. These are stonking majorities of over 10,000. Labour is polling badly now, but it will recover. SNP would have to form an electoral pact to decide not to stand in constituencies where RIC reckon they have a good chance, but why would it be sensible to do so as long as RIC just doesn’t have its act together yet? If RIC was a party with a strong organisation sufficient to field candidates, then that would be a different story.

  7. bowanarrow says:

    It like listening to someone shouting at their mummy and daddy, “look at me mummy look at me daddy, my article is clever isn’t it mummy, oh look daddy at how BIG my article is, I bet it more more cleverer than yours”. For goodness sake son lighten up…..it was all about dreams, and hopes, and wishes, it wasn’t about politics, it was about passion and smiling and laughing, things that have been missing from this country for a very very long time. It wasn’t called “hope over fear” for nothing, I have no doubt the shine will become tarnished as the press and TV piss all over it. It was a joy to see people with “hope”, I know I felt better for yesterday. Too soon back to the grudge of spin and lies, let up a little for god-sake!!

    1. Andy Murray says:

      Hey ‘bowandarrow’ you take out of it what you want. Let others take out of it what they want. You sound like a playground bully. Grow up.

  8. muttley79 says:

    I can see similarities in the endings of the referendum campaigns in 1997 and 2014. In 1997, there was a positive atmosphere because the SNP and Labour were able to campaign together effectively for the first time probably in their histories. When the Yes result came through the hostilities resumed. The situation during that campaign could not continue. With the independence referendum, the Yes campaign produced more positive feelings, as people from different parties (and no parties) came together, and campaigned really well. This situation could not continue either (although there is little reason for the hostility of the Labour-SNP relationship to develop between the different elements of the Yes campaign). Electoral politics are a fact of democratic life. The differences between the SNP, the SSP, the Greens were and are going to emerge with major elections approaching. That is normal.

    One consolation is that the Scottish Independence Convention is still in existence. I heard Robin McAlpine mention it from a video of the RIC conference yesterday. This would really be the obvious organisation for people who want to maintain contact, communication, and discuss strategy in regards to independence etc. The desire to continue with the spirit of the Yes campaign could well find a good outlet in the SIC.

  9. John says:

    20:20 vision for a 2020 referendum sounds catchy but I for one don’t want to wait that long. When in 2017 the rUK takes us out of the EU THEN we should have another IR if opinion polls show we have a good YES majority which I am sure will be the case.

    I really don’t understand why labour voters who voted YES can’t bring themselves to vote for SNP. Are they really going to waste their vote by sticking with labour, or a party who have no realistic chance of winning the seat? I have more faith in people’s common sense and expect they will vote SNP in order to keep the momentum going until the next IR. Some might not but that is their problem, so let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot by splitting the vote by attacking the SON.

  10. Davythemidge says:

    For everyone In the 45, for goodness sake let’s rally round the party which will give us another shot at a referendum (SNP). There will be plenty of time post independence to work out the shape of the new Scotland. This is not the time for factionalism within our push for independence. The single simple message is that only the socially democratic positioning of the SNP’s vision for an independent Scotland will carry the majority of Scottish voters with us. Once freedom has been achieved then we talk about more radical routes to equality…..let’s be pragmatic.

    1. “[F]or goodness sake let’s rally round the party which will give us another shot at a referendum (SNP) … Once freedom has been achieved then we talk about more radical routes to equality”.

      This ^

  11. Norrie Hunter says:

    I was at the RIC conference and was disappointed with only one thing Gerry Hassen trying to discount the SNP as not a social democratic party while most of us were here were not wanting a party conference but a pan left wing concensus. It was a great ocassion and great to debate about fracking land reform etc etc

    1. muttley79 says:

      What did he say the SNP were then?

  12. Alan Fleming says:

    As an ordinary member of the SNP, a self proclaimed socialist and a supporter of RIC, I would urge us all to keep together. The SNP, in particular, have to indulge in mainstream politics. It’s how we got the referendum and until we get another it’s how we devolve more powers and make independence a certainty. This doesn’t mean that most of us think it’s the only route to independence, we need to enunce our own personal visions of a self governing Scotland. Please keep the diversity of the Yes campaign going, target the Unionist (reactionary) parties at elections and keep the conversation going as to the Scotland we want after independence.

  13. Clootie says:

    I do not have any issue with people exploring every avenue of discussion.
    You cab be SNP and attend RIC events. You can be SNP and attend Woman for Independence events.
    You can also be in the Greens or SSP and do the same.
    My standing order to the Jimmy Reid Foundation is larger than my SNP membership.

    We are exploring “what could be”

    I hope most will use the SNP as a vehicle to deliver independence minded MP’s to Westminster. However I also hope that we continue to explore new ideas and that the SNP listen to any group who put forward good ideas.

    Let us continue to work together for a fairer Scotland.

  14. Goodness me, do you really need so many words to get your point across? Or did you not have time to write something shorter?

  15. Barontorc says:

    Hey, ain’t it good we’re all heading in the same direction?

    1. Andy Murray says:

      Yes it is mate. Long may it continue.

  16. vronsky says:

    ” there are SNP candidates who already resent the potential votes for the Greens and the SSP that might prevent them taking some devoutly wished for Labour scalps.”

    I very much doubt it. There is not one single constituency where that is possible. Conversely, there is not one single constituency where giving all Green and SSP votes to the SNP would affect the result.

    1. Let’s remember who our common enemy is here. It’s not the SNP, the Greens or the SSP. Do we not all essentially want the same thing for our people. The Briish State is threatened in a way it has never been before. We know that they react to such threats by infiltrating and causing division. Yes, we will have differences of opinion and while we will argue these on occasion, real acrimony and conflict have no place in our movement.
      I will personally question the authenticity and integrity of anyone excessively highlighting sources of conflict in our movement.
      Not that I’m suggesting this is the case with this excellent article but we need to be aware that they are probably walking among us and probing for weaknesses already. They’re The British. It’s what they do.

      1. Spot on. It’s what they do

        2015 and 2016 constituencies favour the party with the best chance of winning. That is the SNP
        2016 regional list is where votes for the other independence supporting parties can best be placed.
        Horses for courses

  17. Bibbit says:

    It’s 5 months and two weeks to the General Election. It’s also not about what the YES parties do between now and then, It is also what the NO parties do between now and then, or what they don’t do, to be precise. The No parties are NOT going to honour the VOW. There will be no devo-max, no federalism. The MSM have no Salmond to villify despite Lewes’ dual pyres. UKIP now have 2 MPs, having taken votes proportionally on an equal basis, from all three NO parties in Rochester & Stroud, The Smith Commission (an unelected, millionaire, Tory, NO champion) will produce a toothless ‘recommendation’ which the next Westminster Govt (of whatever hue) will forget, just as they forget each time in office to reform or abolish the House of Lords. It’s all ‘Child Catcher’ promises of sweets, but to catch votes. Then once you’ve voted, the sweets are forgotten and you’re stuck in the cage until the next GE, when the whole ‘Child Catcher/Vote Catcher’ dance, begins again.

  18. douglas clark says:


    Liked your comment about the abolition or not of the House of Lords. They certainly do have form in not doing anything they don’t want to do.

  19. While I am on the left of the SNP and can see the benefits of the RIC meeting’s discussions there remains an all consuming problem of those on the ‘left’; the inability of their ‘own’ parties such as the SSP to hold themselves together without going to bits faster than a chocolate hand grenade.

    I was hoping to see a coherent party of the left emerge from the RIC conference but instead the meeting had a tone of ‘How dare the SNP take the limelight’ and a sort of smug cleverness that the SNP are not much different from their Westminster opposition, the subliminal message being the SNP are not really ‘left wing’ and only the RIC intellectuals can save Scotland from itself.

    The message for the left in Scotland is simply this, if you want change in Scotland we need 40+ ‘Yes’ MPs at Westminster. A quick look at the opinion polls in Scotland indicates how this will be best achieved – by voting SNP in May 2015. If the RIC is serious about ‘unity’ and retaining cohesiveness then this has to be all of the old ‘Yes Campaign’s’ focus.

    Scottish Independence will be gained by eating the Westminster elephant one piece at a time – the Wesminster elephant has had one leg eaten by devolution and we are halfway through the second one as a result of the referendum. To ensure the Smith Commission does not go the same way as the Calman Commission we need to remove Labour’s Westminster strangle hold on Scotland. Intellectual belly button gazing is not enough, mapping out a Scotland that does not yet exist is no help – deciding what action to take in the run up to May 2015 does.

    Apart from voting SNP in May – how are we going to achieve independence?

    1. Radical stratagist says:

      You call for RIC to stand united behind the SNP etc

      Why was RIC specifically left out AS speech to party conference when he was praising pro Yes groups WFI/National Collective etc.

      Why was there not a single mention of RIC at the Hydro event?

      1. Andrea says:

        Radical strategist – I believe he stated “and many others’.

  20. Dougie Blackwood says:

    Really good article that is thought through. I’m an SNP party member but really want to keep the cohesion of the Yes campaign alive. We do need to engage with all of what is still the Yes Alliance. It is essential that the smaller parties are given enough sunlight to participate in 2015 and are fully supported by SNP activists in some constituencies to provide a mixed phalanx in Westminster.

    SNP have agreed that they will accept non party candidates, provided they are accepted by the constituency, to run under an SNP banner with a qualification in the name. It is imperative that we have several good candidates running under maybe names like “SNP Socialists” or “SNP Greens” maybe even “Old Labour SNP”.

    I campaigned and canvassed with RIC and with Labour For Indy. We do see a different future in an independent Scotland but we are all certain that first we must achieve that independence and only then we can build the pluralist democracy we all want.

  21. liz says:

    I was at the Hydro as a new member of the SNP and enjoyed it thoroughly.

    It wasn’t until I read bowanarra that I realised why.

    It wasn’t about adulation of AS and NS, it was a celebration that we survived a bruising encounter with the British Establishment, to thank all involved but especially AS for getting us this far and for enduring the most despicable personal campaign and for being invigorated into wanting to carry on with the ‘movement’.

    We know there is a Yes movement and we know to support all the different parties.
    We have to be practical, the SNP are the most likely to win in a FPTP election but if one of the other parties were most likely to win I would have no hesitation in supporting them.

    The best chance the ‘smaller’ parties have of winning is in the 2016 Holyrood election.

    I am also a member of the local WfI group and there we have a mix of all these parties, most of us will work together to achieve a maximum of Yes MPs at Westminster and Holyrood.

    1. MBC says:

      I agree with all you say, despite what I say below about being slightly discomfitted by the slickness. Very well put, thank you.

  22. arthur thomson says:

    It is brilliant how diverse the Yes movement is. That is where its strength lies together with its one unifying aim – independence. Of course we have been infiltrated – which is why we must reject all attempts to create a formal arrangement which controls the movement and thereby allows those who want to destroy us to control us through such an arrangement. I am absolutely committed to the creation of a ‘good enough’ Scotland. That concept does not need everyone to be tied to dogma. We can take in our stride the assertions that there are divisions in our ranks – of course there are and there always will be because there are trolls in our midst.. But the power of the Yes movement, arising from its diversity, lies in maintaining the dynamism that keeps making the waves that are constantly re-energising the issue of Scottish independence. The process will never be ‘perfect’. Let’s avoid the pitfall of even trying to make it so.

  23. Matthew says:

    With regard to the 2015 election, I think there may be some tactical voting. I’ll vote Green if they’re standing in my constituency, unless it looks like it’ll be close between the SNP and Labour to win the seat. I think it’d be great to see a substantial rise in the Green vote in the 2015 election, to make them more of a viable alternative to the SNP going forwards. I would also consider voting for a left coalition party if they emerge from RIC at some point.

  24. douglas clark says:


    I will vote for both Nichola Sturgeon and Patrick Harvie if that proves possible.

  25. MBC says:

    I’m a bit sad that you feel that way Peter as I think we all have to stick together, and though I wasn’t at either event, I caught up with them on Youtube and Livestream. The oily triumphalism of the SNP event made me feel uncomfortable though. But it was a rally, to enthuse the faithful, not a workshop. The RIC one was more purposeful, and I felt far more in tune with that. I really like the energy and practicality of Robin MacAlpine. I don’t know if he wants to be an MP, but if he did, I’d be horrified, as he’s far too good to waste on the desert of hope that is Westminster. We need him here, sowing the seeds of the new independent Scotland. He’s an ideas man, and a builder, not an attack warrior.

    It’s completely clear to me that we need a range of independence parties forming some sort of rainbow coalition, and that post-independence, if we ever get there (and we’re closer than we’ve ever been, and I canvassed in ’79) then there will be a range of new left wing parties. But until we reach that goal we all have to work together. And that will mean a) realism and b) compromise.

    The GE2015 is a totally different kettle of fish from our referendum. That was our show, but GE2015 is Westminster’s show. If we pin any hopes on it, we need a fight team that is capable of winning under first-past-the-post. Which means picking candidates capable of appealing to the largest numbers of voters in all the constituencies. We are not going to overturn those stonking Labour majorities fielding exotic and deeply interesting candidates that no matter how they might appeal to you and I, might not appeal to the majority. Besides, such visionaries are not fighters; they have other gifts. And are more valuable on the home front. We need candidates that are presentable to a variety of audiences, whilst being totally on-message and capable of being attack dogs at Westminster.

  26. vronsky says:

    I’m an SNP member who attended RIC2014 (and ’13) and was rather glad to avoid the Sheffield Rally atmosphere of the Hydro event. I would prefer RIC to continue as an open-ended forum for people of the left, cross-party and no-party, rather than re-constitute itself as a political party. RIC’s strength and its capacity to act comes from its diversity. Ironically, it has become successful by mimicking the SNP it sometimes critiicises: a group of people of quite assorted opinion, united behind a shared goal. Don’t lose it.

  27. Andrea says:

    I watched the Glasgow Hydro event online from Australia. It seemed more like a celebration – a party – and why not?
    If it was up to Glasgow – Scotland would be an independent country.
    I’ve never voted SNP or been a member – but cannot help thinking that in relation to the core issue – independence – they truly deserve to be the lead voice of the Independence movement.

    Without being aware of political and ideological nuances which to be honest seem really trivial to me in the light of what the Yes collective movement stood together for and almost achieved in September.

    The pre-referendum SNP is a different party to the one today …and tomorrow. How can it NOT be -heading towards 100,000 memberships – 80,000 new opinions of how the party should proceed to advance the cause of independence? New leadership, new cabinet, new real opportunities to shake up Westminster.

    How silly to judge this party from its even recent past – when its present is so remarkably revitalised.

    The notion that it is only SNP supporters who will express resentment if the smaller parties were to stand in opposition to the SNP to split the pro-independence vote is inaccurate. The majority of Yes supporters would feel disappointed if ideological stances and old resentments cost Scotland a critical opportunity to advance on the road to autonomy.
    It would not surprise me if it cost the minorities some of their natural supporters because the passion for Independence and the desperate wish to be free of Westminster so dominates as a uniting force. The SNP are realistically the only party big enough to make any impact at all.

    The more sovereign power they can borrow from all pro independents – the more power Scotland can take back in one giant step up.

    In- fighting is exactly the best scenario for the union supporting parties. Their very best hope for survival, and you’ll save them the cost of a fear and smear campaign.

    Scotland has for four decades voted strategically.Don’t vote for what you want – vote to keep the worst at bay. Lend your wee bit power to a party that is only marginally less repugnant.

    It is ironic that it seems to be ‘on the nose’ to vote for the most positive chance for advancement towards the greatest outcome for Scotland in centuries.

    Self-defeating, and myopic.

  28. Elizabeth McIntosh says:

    We need to be sure this is not another false dawn for the Left and the Independence movement. We all hope the crisis of politics and Labour in Scotland is organic and will rupture its hold on left of centre voters but it may not be. We saw a return to the fold of wavers after Brown’s incoherent rhetoric. In 2015 many will be looking for a reason to go back to labour. It still has an emotional hold which will be difficult to break and we can be sure they will use Cameron’s aphorism on voting UKIP and getting . .. .
    Some of the factors undermining Labour also undercut any other Left grouping – the weakness of TUs, the recomposition of classes, the inclusion and exclusion of factions of classes from power, the dominance of key ideological memes in society which define who is deserving and who is not.
    And we still have the dominant media dismissing the SNP, never mind RIC, as a political force that can transform. Just as all hell was let loose in September so it will be again in May 2015. We will have sensible, trustworth, realistic, pragmatic Murphy presented to us on a daily basis and contrasted with Sturgeon, the small town, anti Thatcher an so anti progress narrow nationalist offering nothing for the 21 century.
    We do need to bask in the glow of 15,000 people discussing politics in Glasgow and hope it show us glimmers of the future. However, I hope someone is working on the plans to deal with the coming attacks and a resurgence of Labour.

  29. Matthew says:

    Given that there isn’t a Yes Alliance (which is fair enough, given where the SNP are now), I think it’s healthy to have a plurality of pro-independence parties standing where they want to raise their profile, engage the new members and test the waters. It can hopefully be done in a spirit of mutual respect rather than rancour.

    Voters will make up their minds if they want to cast a tactical vote or not: I suspect there are very few areas where another pro-independence party would split the vote enough to cost the SNP a seat (McAlpines, Riddochs, Boyds etc. might have been another story, but as I understand it none of them are planning to stand now in the absence of a Yes Alliance). And the strategy of parties not standing in seats can have the opposite effect to what was intended: remember John McAllion and the SSP in Dundee East in 2003.

    1. MBC says:

      No, that’s incorrect. Most Labour seats have stonking majorities of over 10,000. Polls are bad now but will recover. Every vote will count. There can be no tactical voting as SSP and Greens do not have sufficient level of support. SNP could field a Green or SSP candidate, if constituencies agree, but as an SNP seat.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.