 | 'The cause of
independence will never be forsaken by the SNP. Unionism will be maintained by many in Labour. However,
common cause can and must be made on a variety of social and economic issues. It can even be made on some aspects
of the constitution.' Kenny MacAskill MSP, 11 th July 2004. |  |
WITH THE SNP IN ELECTION FEVER, A DEPUTY LEADERSHIP HOPEFUL SAYS THE PARTY NEEDS TO LOOK OUTSIDE ITSELF AND BUILD BRIDGES WITH ITS COMPETITORS
WHEN Scotland voted for the restoration of its parliament, hopes were high that it would end the sterility of
confront ational Westminster debate. Yah-boo behaviour had brought politics into disrepute. A new building with
different seating arrangements and a structure with committees seeking consensus and proportional representation
allowing a plurality in membership augured well for a change in politicians' actions and public perceptions.
Some of the expectations were fanciful. Politics is by nature adversarial with differing ideologies and views. Old
habits die hard and new institutions take time to create their own culture. The fiasco over the building of the new
parliament at Holyrood tarred all. Meanwhile the continuing decline in turnout during elections has shown that the
public's negative perceptions of politicians have not changed.
Rivalry between parties is healthy and necessary. Without that there would be a one party state. However, it should be
conducted in a manner conducive to regaining the trust of those now disengaged from the political system and
promoting the best interests of the country. Those goals are essential to all parties and a duty upon each of them.
Scottish politics, though, is still scarred by old tribal loyalties that transcend any national interest. The concentration is
upon apportioning blame for current or past events rather than seeking a common solution for the future. Labour
blames the Tories who in turn deride the LibDems and vice versa.
The real animus, though, is reserved for the division between SNP and Labour. Some of that is understandable, for as
the big beasts in the Scottish political field they forage over the same vote. But the hatred is intense and sectarian.
There are political differences between them, the most marked being on the constitution. However, it results in Labour denying credit to the SNP for any measures no matter how beneficial. It's reciprocated in denunciations of
Unionist sell out to any Labour action whether merited or not. It is caustic and corrosive. Fianna Fail and Fine Gael had a similar rivalry in Ireland but at least they had fought a civil war to justify it. The blood feud is bleeding the body
politic. It must end before it kills it.
Post-devolution political behaviour and public perceptions of it must change. This does not require a love-in between
activists or a common platform between parties. The division on the constitution will remain. The cause of
independence will never be forsaken by the SNP. Unionism will be maintained by many in Labour. However,
common cause can and must be made on a variety of social and economic issues. It can even be made on some aspects
of the constitution. The necessity of having a parliament with adequate powers to address the social and economic
needs of the nation is becoming clearer by the day. Attempts at consensus building on fiscal autonomy are ongoing
and straddle all parties. Other areas of reserved powers are also come under review. Alliances must be formed for the
best interests of the nation.
Some co-operation and change will evolve naturally as a shift to single transferable voting (STV) ends the
winner-takes-all scenario and as electors choose not just between parties but politicians within parties. Candidates will
need to declare what they stand for as opposed to what they rail against.
Voters want change. They are sick of petty squabbling and senseless confrontation. They are entitled to expect the best
from their parliament irrespective of its powers. Politic ians have a duty, therefore, to do their best even if their powers
are constrained. People want improvements in this life not the one hereafter. It means giving credit where it's
due and not simply opposing for the sake of it.
On a broader political agenda there is nothing to stop greater co-operation between individuals albeit of different
parties. There is much that unites as well as divides across many issues. There are also issues that divide along the
political spectrum. SNP and Labour after all are supposed to be left of centre parties. If the left continually squabbles
then it cedes the agenda to the right. Moreover, in a future political landscape where coalitions will become more
common – this is already being seen in local government – a failure to co-operate makes the LibDems
the perpetual kingmakers or gives power to the centre right. Social democratic voters will be appalled if left of centre
animosities result in radical right policies.
Scottish parties need to re-engage with the electorate or it's democracy that dies. A start would be an end to the
civil war between Labour and SNP. Compete against each other in elections but co-operate with one another for the
country. Parties in Ireland and Scandinavia are rivals but recognise the country's interests. Their social and
economic success has been predicated on political rivalry followed by national solidarity.
Unless greater mutual respect is shown and co-operation given no party will win and Scotland will lose. No party has
a monopoly on virtue or integrity. Neither does any party have the salvation of Scotland in their sole grasp. There is a
national duty as well as party responsibilities. Scotland will not be built by one party in one term of office but by all
over years to come.
Return to home page