As I am heading to Scotland this morning to discuss politics on Debate Night on BBC Scotland this evening news has broken that Nicola Sturgeon is to resign as Scottish First Minister after eight years in office.
I have to admit to some relief. Many from outside the SNP and Scotland have seen Sturgeon as a smooth political operator. Those within it have not seen it that way. There have been serious questions about:
- Her authoritarian control of the SNP, which has been managed by a tiny coterie around her and her husband.
- Her commitment to independence, when dithering about when and if another referendum might take place has become the norm.
- Her commitment to neoliberal economics and austerity, most especially seen in the notorious Growth Commission recommendations.
- Her refusal to listen to her party over the issue of Scottish currency, and much else.
There have also been questions about:
- The case against Alex Salmond.
- Her management of the trans issue.
- Her government's record in office.
In that case am I sorry to see her go? No, not at all. She was not the radical or brave politician Scotland needed to drive forward the case for independence, let alone a very different form of government to that seen in Westminster. Scotland did not need the reinforcement of a rather comfortable status quo for a small SNP leadership that she supplied.
The big question will be will her successor be very much different?
NOTE: As a result of this I am not now on Debate Night this evening.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“Scottish Fist Minister”
never has a typo been more appropriate in so many ways…
🙂
I can’t agree with all of your analysis of Sturgeon Richard. Certainly if she went along with the Growth Commission recommendations that’s a mistake, but in other areas I’d be a lot less critical.
I’d view her as a more effective politician, and a better human being, than the liars and charlatans in our rotten UK government. I note both Scotland and Wales have free NHS prescriptions and no student tuition fees, in stark contrast to here.
And while of course the SNP has made some mistakes, you can hardly say that under her leadership they’re in the same room as our awful government. Unlike labour, she’s prepared to make agreements with other parties to keep progressives in power in the Scottish Parliament, for example. Maybe that’s why labour hate the SNP so much? Envy?
And if she’s resigning now after errors of judgement over the case of the trans prisoner case and the issue of an independence referendum, that shows a willingness to admit mistakes and recognise when the time to go has arrived. Utterly unlike the loathsome right wing politicians currently in charge in Westminster who are determined to cling on and wreck everything they can, accept no blame for anything, and demonise an scapegoat left, right and centre. E.g. Truss, Braverman, Anderson etc etc.
I’d like to agree with you
I think history will not be kind to her
I suspect there are good reasons why she has quit that are not being discussed as yet
Start with just why her husband was making big loans to the SNP
Thanks for the reply Richard, we shall see what happens in due course. For the moment though, I hold to my opinion that she is far better than this appalling Westminster government. And labour could learn something from her concerning doing compromise and coalitions to advance a progressive agenda and keep the right out of power.
I agree she is better than Westminster leaders but that is an amazingly low bar
There is a huge historical enmity between the SNP and Scottish Labour, which goes back to the days when they were the only two parties with much support in Scotland. Labour in London may well be reacting with glee, but the truth is in Scotland they took the electorate, and its support for them, for granted. It will take a long time before their support might return. And it wouldn’t hurt them if they showed some signs, any signs, of having some socialist beliefs, nationally.
Coverage of Holyrood generally shows Nicola Sturgeon speaking first. Then Douglas Ross follows, attacking her. He is then followed by Anas Sarwar standing up and saying the same things. No wonder Scottish voters see Labour and the tories as different sides of the same coin.
In Scotland the Tories and Labour are most definitely on the same side of the coin
“I note both Scotland and Wales have free NHS prescriptions and no student tuition fees, in stark contrast to here.”
Both measures were introduced by the Salmond government.
And supported by Sturgeon. That they later fell out is doesn’t alter the fact that they agreed on, nd have implemented, worthwhile progressive policies.
After all, she was, in a sense, his pupil.
Independence is a dead duck if you can’t answer the basic question of what to do about your currency. It’s ridiculous to even discuss it without a coherent plan for this. And after decades of pushing for it ,the two ideas they seem to have settled on were awful:
1) Continuing using the British pound with a very likely hostile tory government in Westminster doing everything to undermine you economically.
Or 2) Use the Euro. If anyone thinks this is still a viable idea they are quite frankly delusional.
At best it’s protest politics and has wasted a lot of time that could be better spent uniting to get rid of the tory b***ards in Westminster.
The SNP did of course decide on 3, have an independent currency
Tim Rideout wrote the policy and I assisted a bit
Do you mean BBC Scotland have dropped you from the show, or is it your choice, Richard?
The entire panel was cancelled for tonight and replaced by others. Not my choice. I also think it is no longer coming from Pitlochry.
Perceptive as always Richard.
I am now utterly convinced that if you and Robin McAlpine joined forces, stepped out of the shadows and somehow got together to take Common Weal from it’s current think tank status and position it front and centre into mainstream politics, what a difference could be made
http://robinmcalpine.org/after-the-messiah-complex/http://robinmcalpine.org/after-the-messiah-complex/
For all his faults I hold Robin in high regard as a thinker and friend.
For all my faults I think he has the same regard for me.
We have spoken today. That is as much as I will say, but do not hold your breath.
I take your points about Sturgeon quitting. She owed her position to the appalling state of the Tory government and the non-opposition of a right-wing Labour alternative. I was very impressed by her when they had the leader’s debates a few years ago when she, Caroline Lucas, and the Plaid leader clearly stood out from the others. However, thank you for pointing out her not understanding the importance of an independent Scotland having its own currency and not being subservient to a Bank of England pound and her authoritarian tendencies.
Going to be very interesting to see the slant and take on Sturgeon from the mainstream media, and the broadcast commentators. There is, as you indicate, a whole lot of issues that could be brought up. If none of them are – bar the usual “there are, as in all political parties, people who feel that some matters have not been done as well as they could, but…” yada yada yada. Surely something will come out of the Police Scotland interest in the finances? But then – absence of coverage is sometimes more illuminating than when they do cover something.
Will be interesting to see what the fallout is
I think there will be one
I thought Sturgeon came across well during Covid – more coherent than Johnson, but I’ve never found her to be of interest to me – in fact I don’t really have an opinion of her. I might have called her ‘competent’ at one time.
I felt for her when the Scottish Tories kept having ago about the Scottish NHS without acknowledging the cuts from central government and their own party. It’s hard to judge a leader I suppose when they work under the constraints that exist generated in the English parliament.
I’m one of those however who thinks it would be a good idea for Scotland to have and create it own domestic sovereign currency. Doing this helped another small country called England in its formative years and it makes sense for Scotland to do this too in my view if they gain independence.
This needs to be debated widely but I was always puzzled why this seemed to be suppressed in the wider independence debate.
I picked up the business about SNP finances in the Guardian this lunchtime too. Hmmm……………..
Hmmm…..indeed
I think there are two issues to separate here. Has NS run out of energy for independence? Yes and I look forward to seeing new voices and debate come to the fore.
But as a citizen of Scotland and putting the issue of independence aside, I think you’d be crazy to think we’d have been a ‘better’ country with either Labour or Conservative or Li Dems in power at Holyrood. Have they’re been issues? Absolutely. But we still have a government that are trying to make a fairer society. Do I mind paying more tax? Absolutely not when the outcome is less people in poverty or not having to pay tuition fees or prescriptions etc.
I have some family who moved back to Scotland and (one has a rare disease) they were saying how much better they were carried for in Scotland, and they got their free bus passes earlier.. and their kids didn’t have to pay tuition fees… But they hate the SNP! (And they’re particularly enraged at the “ferry fiasco”… Though they’ve never been on a Scottish island in their entire life!!) They can’t connect the dots that the SNP government is delivering benefit for them and it doesn’t help that everything in the press is billed “controversial”. No it’s not but there can be no debate about anything in Scotland as the press just love manufactuing drama everywhere (it’s a bit like how news channels loved the Trump presidency and there was always drama!). Have they’ve got everything right? Absolutely not but Scotland is not the poor crumbling wreck that we’re depicted as!
But I remain a frustrated independence supporter but my view that Scotland should be independent won’t change just because NS is standing down. The press said (with glee) that independence was “dead” when AS resigned and are saying the same now. They will be proved wrong again.
I agree with your conclusion
Thanks
Speaking as a non Scot who despairs of the awful situation in the UK brought about by the Westminster parliament’s dreadful politics, I wholly agree with you.
Of course the SNP isn’t perfect, but its done more for Scotland, and is more progressive, than the LDs, labour or , god help us all, the appalling tories. Incidentally, I heard the leader of the Scottish tories on the Today program this morning. Pathetic.
Sorry to say WeeMee, but your relatives are daft! It just shows, as did Brexit, how guillible a lot of the population are absorbing the crap so much of the press puts out. And you’re right about the independence debate not being settled. All the unionists do when they glot over Sturgeon going, is demonstrate their arrogance and ignorance. Rather like the attitude of the same press and politicians when they ‘won’ the Brexit vote. Where’s all the talk of ‘global’ Britain, ‘we hold all the cards’, ‘world-beating’ now then?
Because frankly, when you look at all the problems facing Britian now thanks to disastrous tory rule and decades of failed neoliberalism, it’s going to become more and more obvious as the years go by that Scotland would be better off independent.
I’m still trying to assess potential outcomes of Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation, but the almost total ignorance of the UK media about actual life in Scotland and the benefits that our citizens have in comparison to rUK (especially England) results in nonsense being spouted; it’s one of the reasons for the huge rejection of much mainstream media in Scotland.
Weemee mentions the “ferry fiasco” and the impact on the Hebridean islanders has undoubtedly been massive and unjustifiable. Much of the indignation has been directed at the Scottish Gov, but until the whole story comes out, it’s pretty obvious that Calmac (the ferry operators) and other companies in the Calmac pyramid have failed to operate a functional system for replacing ageing ships, hence their frequent breakdowns. When the cycle time for design specification, tendering, contract negotiation, construction, testing and delivery of new vessels can easily run to 5 or more years and the working life of these ships is about 30 years maximum, it shouldn’t be beyond their wit to have a rolling replacement cycle in place that actually delivers. The scale of breakdowns and disruption over the last 5 years or so suggests that they haven’t and, if so, why not? The people who crew the ships will know this, the islanders and passengers will know this, so why not the upper levels of management of Calmac? My experience of turning failing businesses around suggests that is where new faces are required urgently.
The way I heard it, the botched contract for the two as yet uncompleted ferries came about because Calmac imposed frequent (and sometimes radical) changes to the specifications which resulted in the shipyard having to stop work, rip out work already done and rectify it to comply with the new spec. No surprise that costs spiralled, contracts were rewritten, time was lost and, with the press full of stories about aged ferries breaking down and island economies being damaged, opposition MSPs saw an ideal way to attack Scot Gov. With this pressure building, Scot Gov put pressure on Calmac to finalise the contract for once and for all and give them a final price for Nicola Sturgeon to announce in a forthcoming speech. Calmac then put pressure on the yard to agree a price which the yard viewed as neither reasonable nor feasible, but Calmac told Scot Gov the most recent contract figure would stand. Sturgeon made the speech, quoted the figure not agreed by the yard and the project imploded with the yard going bust.
Thanks
I should also say that I am an islander so I do understand the negative implications for the islands but no proper discussion can ever happen. Everything is turned into SNP Vs everyone else. Part of what we want from our parliament and politicians is for them to work together FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PEOPLE (and not to have your main concern being how to cover your backside for your own mistakes or work out how you can get rich quick from it). Is that too much to ask? Yes it is seems it is with fptp, but we all deserve better.
Your third paragraph Ken sounds about right. Arse covering by a useless management team, the unionist politicians using the fiasco to attack the SNP government…..Sounds like the Calmac senior management would have great careers in the tory party.
Incompetent, buck passing, it’s all there.
As an S.N.P member for many years Richard, I agree with you on one point. There is a lot more to her resignation than meets the eye. Frankly, for the first time in my life, I thought she was, if not lying, was being economic with the truth.
As someone with parents that were Scots but born in England as a teenager I became fully aware of the English indoctrination passing for history lessons, so decided to search for historical truth myself and soon a very different picture emerged. The United Kingdom was forged with brutality in Erin,Cymru and Alba. The Act of Union was agreed to for a few pieces of silver by Lowland Lawyers, the Scottish people as a whole were never consulted.
The biggest mistake that the Scots have ever made was when the vast oil and gas fields were discovered in 1971. That was when Scotland should have declared UDI. It would now be a very wealthy country. If the English had dared to threaten invasion we could have gone to Russia for weapons to defend ourselves,which would have driven the Americans crazy. They would have pulled the English public schoolboys from their rectum and slapped them around, then they would have behaved themselves.
Scottish industry would have grown enormously building the platforms and rigs from Scottish steel and built in Scottish yards. We would have developed the new skills of deep sea drilling providing well payed employment for generations of young Scots to work across the world. I have a cousin who became a geologist specialising in oil and was to head major projects across the world. He agreed this was the greatest opportunity to obtain not only independence but prosperity for all. Scotland would have become a second Norway and England – a failed State governed with brutality by the public schoolboys.
The irony is that this is indeed what is happening right now to England.
If independence is achieved, will the EU admit Scotland and wouldn’t it insist on Scotland adopting the Euro? Those who do not see that the conflict in Ukraine and how it unfolds is key to the future of all Europe. If it goes badly then Scottish independence or not becomes irrelevant.
Scotland has to commit to joining the euro if it joins the EU but only when the conditions are right and are met. As Sw2eden has proved, technicalities can delay this for decades, and so the threat of the euro need not impact on Scotland’s decision on this issue.
It’s worth noting that a country applying for EU membership must have its own currency and central bank.
Correct
Mr Crawford,
As a matter of history, the “people” in neither Scotland nor England were consulted about the Union. I am afraid that is a sentimental red herring. The people representing Scotland and Scotland were elites on both sides of the border. The reality is that the Scots elite embraced the Union because they saw an opportunity to reatain their power in Scotland (and freedom to run their fiefdoms – they were called ‘hetitable jurisdictions’), while freeing themselves from the dangerous burden of responsibility of controlling the Scots Parliament, surrendered for what they really wanted – access to Empire. They had been blocked by the Navigation Acts, Darien had failed (the disaster that changed their minds about independence, because William III betrayed the Scots Parliament by forcing the East Indies Charered Company to abort its London finance raising) and now the Unio offered Empire. Their ambition was to particpate in Empire on the grand scale for economic reasons, but only outside Scotland, because they desired to guarantee their total control of Scotland, and the continuation of a status quo of complete domestic economic inertia (the Union did very little to change the internal economy of Scotland for decades).
The Union was an economic project, pursuing the ideology of mercantilist imperialism. We plundered the world on a scale never seen before in the modern world, and the Scots were in the vanguard. I am afraid I do not do sentimental history.
‘Scotland and England” of course.
You’ve just rubber stamped what I said about the ordinary Scots people – why repeat it. The Act of Union was of benefit to the English, not the Scots.
If Scotland had remained independent then they would have had no part in the rape and pillage carried out by the English across the world, that also applies to Celts of Cymru and Erin as well. you’ve just tried to rope The Celtic peoples in – it doesn’t work and I’m well aware that the opium trade was dominated by three Scots families. Again this would not have happened if we had not been part of the United Kingdom. No mention of the latter part of my post.
The seas around Scotland have the most potential for wind and sea generated electricity in the whole of Europe
. We need to develop our our own initiative in design and build of turbines. We have the enviable opportunity to export electricity to other countries. With modern 21st century grow houses we would have no need to import the chemical laden salad and veg from southern Spain. Iceland with it’s abundant thermal energy actually exports fruit and veg to Norway and Denmark.
So few English are aware of just how desperate life would be with the collapse of Sterling as nearly 60% of their food is imported and every day planning consents are given to build on prime agricultural land.
Fishermen in both countries moan that because of Brexit because it is almost impossible to export fish and shellfish to the EU. In reality it should present an excellent opportunity to change the crap diet of so many on the island.
Mr Crawford,
No, I have not “rubber stamped” what you said. I pointed out the English people were not consulted more than the Scots in the early 18th century. Through the 18th and 19th centuries the Scottish economy thrived on Empire (including the slave economy of the West Indies), and as the electorate expanded to include a wider franchise that commitment to Empire did not change. We like to emphasise that in WWII Britain defended freedom; but we forget that equally, in two world wars Britian, including Scots were determinedly defending the Empire. I am not inclined to whitewash our history (an apt description), because it is quite obvious we still require to do much recognise its real nature. I am glad to say that the University of Glasgow has been prepared to recognise the facts of its own history in the 18th and 19th century.