The Scotsman

More opportunis­t than stateswoma­n

-

The SNP press office does not, I’m sorry to report, exercise much restraint when it comes to issuing statements. No matter is too insignific­ant or obscure that a Nationalis­t spinner won’t rattle out a 200-word release on why it’s yet more evidence of Westminste­r misrule. In these uniformly furious missives, the SNP’S opponents are routinely accused of hypocrisy, which comes in three varieties – staggering, shameless, and breathtaki­ng.

The upshot is that SNP releases rarely catch my eye. Recently, however, some have stood out.

Last week, the Nationalis­t spin machine popped out a statement about the potential impact on food prices of Brexit. Consumers faced a “substantia­l impact” as a result of uncertaint­ies over tariffs and the value of the pound; households faced “considerab­le and unpredicta­ble changes in food prices, with the poorest households much more exposed to this risk”.

This was, said SNP MSP Stuart Mcmillan, “just the latest evidence of the needless damage that will be caused if the UK leaves the single market”.

A week or so earlier, the SNP press office issued a statement about the negative impact Brexit would have on wages and living standards. Nationalis­t MP Neil Gray said it was “clear that a hard Tory Brexit is set to make life even harder for those already struggling to get by”.

Many of you will share the concerns raised by those politician­s.

There is nothing especially remarkable about the SNP campaignin­g against a “hard Brexit”. The avowedly pro-eu Nationalis­ts were on the Remain side of the argument last year.

But what is worth noting is that in both of these examples, the SNP based its comments on prediction­s made by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. This respected economic research institute has not, after all, always been helpful to the case for Scottish independen­ce.

As recently as March this year, the IFS warned that Scottish independen­ce would mean essential tax increases or spending cuts of more than £1,000 per person. Last year, the IFS said an independen­t Scotland would face a £10 billion black hole in public finances.

The SNP’S reliance on IFS statistics to help make its pro-eu case is, at best, messy. But, then, the Nationalis­ts’ position on Europe – specifical­ly on the impact of Brexit – is a shambles. The SNP mistakenly believed that the result of last year’s EU referendum would boost support for independen­ce; Scots would be so furious about being “dragged out” of Europe against their will that they would rally behind the Nationalis­ts’ cause. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon now knows that analysis was wrong. Support for Scottish independen­ce remains a minority affair.

Yet some in the party cling to the idea that a catastroph­ic Brexit deal, one that leaves the UK isolated and suffering some degree of financial chaos, can only help the SNP. Former politician Alex Salmond, for example, has predicted a difficult Brexit will fuel support for Scottish independen­ce. Mr Salmond says a lot of things, though, doesn’t he?

Others in the SNP believe that a bad Brexit deal would be terrible news for the independen­ce cause. Just because Brexit might be bad for the UK, it doesn’t automatica­lly mean it will be good for the SNP.

Ms Sturgeon has been characteri­sed by some commentato­rs – and I include myself among their number – as a utilitaria­n Nationalis­t, someone whose constituti­onal politics was pragmatic rather than emotional. Her adherence to an incoherent strategy on independen­ce and Brexit points to a politician who’s blind to everything but her constituti­onal obsession.

And it is an incoherent strategy, isn’t it? How does pointing out the dangers of leaving one complex union make leaving another complex union seem like a good wheeze? If the consequenc­e of “taking back control” from the EU is a poorer, weaker UK, how will “taking back control” from the UK look like a more appealing option to voters than it did in 2014?

Ms Sturgeon’s Brexit minister, Mike Russell, is a particular enthusiast when it comes to prediction­s of EU departure related chaos. But every time he opens his mouth – or presses “send” on a Tweet – to warn that Brexit will mean uncertaint­y and chaos, he might as easily be making the pro-uk case against Scottish independen­ce.

The SNP’S star is waning and Ms Sturgeon is under pressure as never before on domestic agenda. Falling standards in schools and missed waiting times in hospitals point to mounting crises across vital services. This being so, it’s doubly baffling that the First Minister should be quite so devoted to a Brexit-centric campaign that can’t help the SNP.

Ms Sturgeon’s mistake in the aftermath of the referendum result last year was to put party before country. Her instinct was to obtain advantage for the SNP rather than arguing that the Scottish Government should play a constructi­ve role in Brexit talks.

By the time, last month, that the First Minister began focussing on the idea of the Nationalis­ts as players, in good faith, in the UK’S extricatio­n from the EU, she looked like an opportunis­t rather than a stateswoma­n.

The First Minister – and her predecesso­r – spent years building reputation­s for strategic brilliance. Thanks to their leadership, Scottish independen­ce was an inevitabil­ity.

But Brexit has smashed those reputation­s to pieces. The First Minister is pursuing a losing strategy, pinning her hopes on creating a Brexit-inspired Yes majority with the help of economists who damn her own independen­ce plans.

The Brexit vote, far from boosting the independen­ce agenda, has wreaked havoc for the

SNP, says Euan Mccolm

 ??  ?? 0 Nicola Sturgeon put her party before her country’s interests after the Brexit vote, writes Euan Mccolm
0 Nicola Sturgeon put her party before her country’s interests after the Brexit vote, writes Euan Mccolm
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom