This could be a really short article. The answer to the question is obviously and emphatically in the affirmative. Of course the SNP can change! It's a political party. Political parties are predisposed to change. Political parties which function in any way close to the manner in which they are supposed to tend to be … Continue reading Can the SNP change?
I'm revisiting this topic because almost the entire debate around this has been concerned with whether there ever was such an undertaking by the Scottish Government - there wasn't! - and the question of how long a generation is - it doesn't matter! The argument about how many years constitute a generation is totally pointless in this context for the same reason as the argument about whether there was such an undertaking is irrelevant.
MacAskill is fast becoming the voice of a growing 'tendency' within the SNP that has turned to questioning the SNP leadership because all the questions that might be asked of the British state and its apparatus are now rhetorical.
From the moment the EU referendum was called I tried to persuade people that they should be at least as concerned about the constitutional implications of what would come to be called 'Brexit' as with the economic consequences.
We are not just fighting for independence. We are not merely fighting to end the grotesque constitutional anomaly and anti-democratic abomination that is the Union. This is an existential conflict. That is how the British ruling elite sees it. We too must regard it as such if Scotland is to be saved.
Reports of the British state's imminent and strangely spontaneous demise are, of course, greatly exaggerated. They serve only to convince the credulous that the SNP's strategy of doing absolutely nothing for six years is working.
With all the considerable respect that is due to Andrew Tickell, I will make so bold as to suggest that while he brings a legal mind to bear on this matter, I bring a certain capacity for analytical thinking on the political ramifications rather than the strictly legal ones. I would venture to put this perspective 'out there' for consideration.
My preference would be to play safe and assume that everything the British do is, if not planned, then at minimum carefully considered. I would not dismiss anything they do as mere panicked flailing. I would be looking for the purpose behind their every move. I would always assume that they know what they're doing.
...even the longer term hope of a new referendum recedes with every day that action is delayed.
To say that these nefarious qualifications and reservations tarnish the 'gold standard' is to suggest that they somehow reduce the effectiveness of the Section 30 process. Which is to misunderstand entirely the purpose of that process.