“YOU campaign in poetry, you govern in prose”. I forget the name of the New York mayor who said this, but the line came to mind during the minor stooshie that developed after First Minister Humza Yousaf used the phrase “Tory-free Scotland” at the weekend in a speech ahead of the General Election.
The phrase has been used many times in campaigns in a country – Scotland – that hasn’t voted in a Conservative majority since 1955. The phrase has always been taken to mean that Scotland simply doesn’t return any Tory MPs. And with the party polling at 18%, reeling from a racism scandal and with rumours of Rishi Sunak’s jaiket being on a shoogly nail, the scenario may well come to pass.
But the phrase became controversial because some people chose to see the phrase as a desire to remove all Tory ideology north of Gretna.
READ MORE: SNP must show they will fight Tory policies, not just chant slogans
So let’s try to unpack some of this, starting with some recent history.
In 1997, the year of the Labour landslide, the Conservatives returned no MPs in Scotland. Nada. Zip. So it’s been done before. But what makes it fascinating is that 1997 was also the year of the devolution referendum in which Scotland voted overwhelmingly to reconvene its parliament. The Tories campaigned against it, but in every election since, the d’Hondt voting system we chose to use meant that the Conservatives won a significant minority of seats – and quite rightly so. So the irony is that the thing that they campaigned so vociferously against turned out to be the very thing that gave them relevance.
Secondly, in a sense a “Tory-free Scotland” is neither achievable nor desirable. There has always been a fairly strong strand of right-of-centre political thought here. It’s perfectly possibly to see the benefits of an independent Scotland while at the same time holding some centre-right beliefs. These things are not mutually exclusive, and with the constitutional needle struggling to move much above 50%, we can ill afford to alienate folk whose different political outlook does not equate to support for the Union.
READ MORE: Regardless of your views on campaign strategy, voting SNP is essential
And thirdly, there will be right-of-centre parties in a self-governing Scotland. The difference will be that they will be genuinely Scottish ones. In the absence of a Union, there will be no Unionist parties, just as in the absence of an independence campaign – because we’ll be independent – there will be no pro-independence parties. We’ll be living in a normal democracy. Thank goodness. And who an independent Scotland chooses to elect will be fascinating – and possibly surprising.
So personally I’d change the message. Not a Tory-free Scotland – that’s just vacuous, grandstanding nonsense – but one that is free from Westminster governments of whatever political hue that we didn’t elect.
In other words, let Scotland, for better or worse, be Scotland.
Alec Ross
Stranraer
ALL the arguments about strategy, complaints of no progress, interpersonal squabbles count for nothing in the cause of independence. Whatever “strategy” is pursued and all the alternatives – feasible and practicable or not – have a common base which we cannot afford to forget: and that is to win the hearts and minds of a majority of the wider public. Arguing about who is more active or trying to be seen as the prime mover are unhelpful and divisive. The Unionists strive to do that, so why help them? The first goal is to achieve independence.
All the other navel-gazing desires are pointless without being free to implement them or whatever else we decide, and in the interim are diversions away from the primary goal.
Nick Cole
Meigle, Perthshire
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel