Tag: Referendum

Posted on

We must take this step to independence before a citizens’ convention

First out of the trap in the race for a new strategic plan is Believe in Scotland. Even before the new Westminster parliament had been sworn in the organisation published its report on a Scottish Citizens Convention, heralding it as a new route map to independence.

Although reference is made to the election result, this report takes no account of it, and was clearly drafted well before July 4th. That’s its first problem. The report suggests that the Scottish Government’s mandate from 2021 is intact and we should move towards the 2026 elections as being a “de-facto referendum” on independence.

Hold on a minute. Didn’t the Scottish Government try to implement its mandate and get told by the Supreme Court that it couldn’t? Didn’t the SNP just fight the election asking for that mandate to be reaffirmed and for the constitution to be changed to allow Scottish people to choose their own future? And didn’t we just lose that election? We can’t pretend that didn’t happen.

Believe in Scotland is an organisation I admire. It has done a lot of valuable work is making the case for independence and coordinating disparate local campaign groups. Respect.

It styles itself as the national grassroots Yes campaign claiming more authority and legitimacy than political parties.

This anti-politics infuses this report to an unhealthy degree. Of course, we need people of all political persuasions to be involved in the movement for national autonomy. Of course, it will be bigger than any political party. But politics is how we change society without warfare. It is about making choices.

This report throws the political baby out with the bathwater stating  “politics shouldn’t be anywhere near the constitutional question.” It talks of the 2014 case being “overly politicised” and even suggests that support for “independence has not risen dramatically in the polls, due to its connection to politics.”

So, the Scottish Citizens Convention is seen as an alternative to, rather than complementary to the existing political process. At times this is dressed up in flowery quasi-academic language which is less than helpful. We are told that the convention will solve Scotland’s fundamental problems “by facilitating a more positive mindset change and socioeconomic paradigm shift.” Mmm?

The report doesn’t say exactly how the Scottish Citizens Convention should be established but in a valuable appendix it considers the lessons from earlier attempts at a similar thing including the Scottish Constitutional Convention of the 1980s, Ireland’s Citizens Assembly, and the Welsh Government’s Constitutional Commission. The implication is that the convention could borrow elements from all three.

The big difference from the 1980s is of course that the notion of Scotland becoming an independent country is way more divisive and contentious now than devolution was then. The Scottish Constitutional Convention was established with the support of every party bar the Tories and commanded massive public support.

Believe in Scotland acknowledge this difference and suggest that the way to deal with it is to be clear that a new convention will not be about independence, or the method of Scotland’s government. Instead, it will be charged with coming up for polices for a “better Scotland” centred on a well-being economy. This remit, the report rightly suggest, would allow a number of key players – trades unions, churches, charities – to get involved in a way an explicit focus on independence would not.

It is an idea worth exploring. But there’s a danger that it all becomes a bit too vanilla and ends up with everyone agreed on the type of fairer, nicer Scotland we want, but no further forward on how to get there. Believe in Scotland claim that any conclusions the convention might reach will self-evidently only be achieved by independence. But if we are not linking the two, that seems something of a stretch. Besides I can’t help feeling that whilst certainly we need to illustrate the powers that independence offers, prescribing the details of a well being economy is surely a matter of political debate to be resolved once it is achieved.

At no stage is there a suggestion that the outcome of the Supreme Court needs to be challenged, not by rejecting its decisions which are technically correct, but by rejecting the constitution which it was charged with interpreting.

The lesson that we do need to learn from the 1980s is that policy comes from principle. Before working out the details of devolution the Scottish Constitutional Convention drew up the Claim or Right for Scotland. That asserted that the people of Scotland had the right to choose their own form of government. They built a consensus upon that principle.

And that principle is currently being denied. That is the first order of business. To challenge and change the British constitution so that Scotland’s right to choose its own future is enshrined. It is in that context that the notion of a civil society convention might be best deployed.

Posted on

We need a brand new independence strategy

Welcome to my first weekly column. In the coming months I hope to use this to support the debate on how we rebuild a strategy to achieve political independence for our country. I start – as gobsmacked about the election results as everyone else – with questions rather than answers.  

I will in time reach my own conclusions and advocate them. So will you. In time. But for now, let’s take a beat. Let’s listen to each other, and to the majority of the people who are still unconvinced. And let us try to be nice, even though we might irritate the hell out of each other.  

We cannot take forever of course. But for a few months we can have a period of collective self-reflection. The more we think, and the more of us who do it, the stronger our conclusions will be. 

So, let’s hear suggestions for a strategic way forward. Let’s subject them to rigorous but respectful analysis, stress-testing each proposition to see if it might work in the real world. 

I can start by illustrating how not to do it. Two weeks ago, in the immediate aftermath of the election defeat, I wrote that those who didn’t vote for the SNP because they believed we didn’t have a strategy for achieving independence had a point. 

Within hours Alba were tweeting my words suggesting that the logical response would be to join their party – as only they had a plan to achieve independence. I can’t see that this helps anyone. Don’t get me wrong, I’m as partial to a bit of schadenfreude as the next person. But an “I told you so” response doesn’t really work unless you can provide evidence that the alternative works better. 

In Alba’s case their central strategic mission is that “every single election should be used to seek a mandate to begin negotiations for Independence.” Given the party has just paid nearly ten grand of its members money to the state in lost deposits and obtained 0.5% of the votes, it could be said that strategy is not working too well. 

In truth, I was mistaken. It wasn’t that the SNP didn’t have a strategy for moving forward to independence. It did. I know that because last year I was one of the people who spent a lot of time arguing about it and eventually getting a resolution through the party conference in October.  

The problem was the strategy did not survive its first contact with the electorate. It was a plan predicated on winning a mandate at this election, and then repurposing the 2026 Holyrood election if the new UK government continued to refuse to discuss changing the constitution. 

In the event we didn’t get a mandate, the new UK government have no dilemma, and the plan is now void. 

To go forward we need first to go back to first principles. For Scotland to become an independent country, and to be successful as one, it will require not just the consent, but the support of a majority of people who live there. That makes it a different project from winning an election. It means people who stay at home are voting against.  

A new independent future for Scotland requires not only that a majority are persuaded of the argument, but that they are mobilised into an effective political force than can achieve change. That requires a civic movement wider than any political party. But it does also require a party to win electoral contests. And that will be best created through a reformed and refocused SNP. 

The SNP, winning 30% of the vote this month, had the support of most people for whom independence is a priority. If we are to move forward, there are three broad groups of people whom we need to focus on.  

There are those who say they do support independence, but it wasn’t the main thing motivating them this time round. Many of them voted Labour, reasoning that this month’s priority was the change the UK government, rather than Scotland’s constitution. 

Then there are those who support independence but have convinced themselves that the SNP will not deliver it. Many of them will tell you that belief is fuelled by perceived failures of the party in the Scottish government. Most of them stayed at home, though more than usual seem to have spoiled their ballot.  

And then there are people who do not believe that independence is the best way to change their lives and their country in the first place. In the past few years, consumed with internal debates, we have made little or no progress in reducing this number. 

We are going to need a strategy which relates to all three of these groups in parallel and has realistic targets for winning people over. We won’t get them all. We don’t need to. But we do need to start convincing a lot more people than we have been recently. 

And that is what this column will be focused on in the months ahead. 

Posted on

Why independence supporters must vote SNP at the next election

It’s 2024. Election year. And it really is all to play for.

Under the UK’s unfit-for-purpose constitution, the incumbent gets to decide on polling day. Opposition parties talk up a May election. They will claim the Tories are running scared if they don’t call it then. But unless the gap between the Tories and Labour gets close to single figures, it’s difficult to see why the Government would go early.

It doesn’t really matter, the result is already clear. Labour are so far ahead in England as to be uncatchable. Pollsters predict that if a General Election were held tomorrow, Sir Keir Starmer would romp home with a majority of between 100 and 200 seats. It won’t be held tomorrow, and the majority won’t be that big, but even with their track record of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, Labour cannot lose in England.

The reasons for Tory oblivion are pretty clear. There’s been no Brexit dividend, and the unified right which made it happen is splitting down the middle. Although Reform aren’t quite inflicting the damage Farage did in 2017, they are getting there. Real incomes are falling; most people feel worse off. Westminster’s catastrophic management of Covid continues to unfold with questions mounting as to why they spent so much more than comparable countries only to preside over many more deaths.

Labour just need to stand aside and let the Tories fall apart. That is precisely what those around Starmer will do. Every one of the 44 red wall seats is already toast. You can see it in the eyes of the incumbents; the likes of Lee Anderson and Jonathan Gullis know they are well past their sell-by date. But Labour will oust more than 100 Tories from their own heartlands too.

Now you might argue that with the Tories in such disarray, now might be the time for Labour to champion a revitalised British social democracy. Comparisons are made with 1997.

Say what you want about New Labour – and I could say plenty – they did at least have a bunch of stuff – devolution, tax credits, international aid – that added up to a different vision from the tired John Major government.

But today’s new, new Labour have given up on pretty much everything the party ever stood for. There’ll be no attempt to make the wealthy pay more. Even those at the very bottom subsisting on state pensions and benefits can’t be sure Labour would be more generous. Inequality will remain the scourge that it is without any conviction or plan to change it.

There’ll be no new money for the NHS. No acceleration to green energy. No return to Europe. Every hare-brained right-wing populist idea the Tories come up with is top trumped by Labour.

The Labour strategy isn’t pretty but as a short-term device to win seats, it is effective. I feel for the many lifelong Labour activists in England now abandoned by their party. Some will stay at home, some will vote Green, but most will go along with it. Turnouts will be low, disillusion will be high, feeding a dangerous legacy of alienation and apathy. That’s the price Labour seem content to pay to win Tory support.

This is Labour’s strategy for England. But it won’t play well in Scotland where desire and demography are different.

Against that backdrop, we should consider how this election campaign is fought here. A generation of Labour activists – of which I am one – made a conscious decision to embrace independence as a political strategy not because we were nationalists, but because we believed it offered a better prospect for achieving the social and economic change we desired.

A medium-sized European country north of Britain seemed just more able to deliver a just and equitable future than a vestigial imperial power avoiding coming to terms with its past. And the very idea of running our economy in the public interest sat well with the character and psyche of the Scottish electorate whereas it grated against England’s small C conservative majority.

Every statement Starmer makes, every abandoned promise, every reassurance to the rich and powerful demonstrates that we were right. This is not to say that the right has taken over Labour – although that is clearly the case. It’s more that for Labour to win electorally in England, they must compromise so much that they cannot achieve real change. Independence offers Scotland the chance not to have its ambition thwarted by another country’s political reality.

Given that the prospect of the Conservatives winning this year is practically inconceivable, two things follow. Firstly, what is the best way to influence an alternative UK Government into being something better than a low-calorie version of what it replaces? Secondly, how can we make sure this country’s journey to having autonomy over its own affairs and resources does not stop after two decades of remarkable progress?

There are many decent people in Scotland contemplating voting Labour simply because of a desperation to get rid of the Tories. I understand that. But the Tories have already lost, and the SNP are a more anti-Tory party than Labour. I have lost count of the number of times we have voted against proposed Tory legislation whilst Labour sat on their hands for fear of upsetting some swing voters somewhere.

More to the point, on pretty much every social and economic policy you can think of, the SNP will press for the things that Labour used to believe in and have now abandoned. So, anyone wanting real change at a UK level would do better to send representatives to Westminster who will force Labour to be different, rather than give Starmer a blank cheque.

There is a bigger question for Scottish voters. Will they simply be ignored by a Starmer government? If the SNP lose this election, the answer is yes.

Around half of the population believes that Scotland should be an independent country. The desire has not – and will not – go away. At some stage, we will vote to establish a new independent country – and the campaign to win that vote must be broad and diverse involving every party and organisation in the movement for national autonomy.

But that is not where we are now and that is not what we are voting for in this year’s General Election.

We need to be very clear with the electorate – this year’s vote is about whether the journey continues, whether we can create circumstances to move towards our independence. And with a corrupt first-past-the-post system, the only way to do that is to vote SNP.

The Daily Record, in a hardening of its editorial stance against the party, last week questioned whether the SNP can still represent the political ambition of independence. The point is we don’t have a choice. If the SNP lose the election in Scotland, the debate on independence stops. That is why we must put aside our differences and unite.

If we win, we will use every means to press that mandate against a British state under new management. Crucially, we will demand that this decision must be made in Scotland and that the UK constitution is changed to respect that principle. That is why anyone who believes Scotland should become independent, or even that we should have the choice to do so, ought to vote SNP.

The stakes are high. We must win. It will not be easy. But it can be done.

Posted on

Don’t write off SNP’s election chances

Last week I was chosen by local members of Edinburgh East and Musselburgh SNP to be their candidate in next year’s general election. It’s a great honour. For me, that election cannot come soon enough.

But I am under no illusions that it will be easy to keep the job I’ve been doing for the last eight and a half years. The coming election will be the biggest challenge the SNP has faced in a long time. It will be a hard fight. But one I am determined to win.

As I write this the votes are yet to be counted in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election. You’ll know the result now. And I would be astonished if Labour did not win. It used to be one of their safest seats. The incumbent MP, elected under the SNP banner, disgraced herself and was effectively sacked by her own constituents. If Labour couldn’t win in these circumstances, they really ought to give up.

But don’t be too quick to write off the SNP in places like this. I know from having spoken to over 150 people in Rutherglen that there is still strong support for the party. Of course, some are fed up and disillusioned. They read of the resignations and enquiries. They see a party arguing with itself and they question whether it can achieve the change it seeks.

In part this is the consequence of the refusal of the Tories to respect the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Not one, but three mandates have been ignored as the Tories just say no. It wears people down. It saps their confidence. It destroys their self-belief. That’s what it is intended to do.

In some ways we have brought these problems upon ourselves – or at least made them worse. But we are rebuilding now. We have a new leader, a new CEO, and this month’s conference will allow us to refresh our message as we agree our strategy for the election.

Despite all the political turmoil the arguments for Scotland becoming an independent country have never been more compelling. Over the last few years many more people have realised that the powers that come with independence are exactly what we need to tackle the cost-of-living crisis and the climate emergency.

Now more than ever we will need to press that case and demonstrate that this is not some abstract debate about the constitution but a matter of real changes here and now.

This country is blessed with abundant natural resources yet too many of our citizens live and die in poverty. Lives unfulfilled. Potential wasted. Only by taking control of our own affairs can we ensure our wealth is marshalled for the common good and not global corporations.

Across the UK voters are being offered a choice between two sad and uninspiring options. The sickening right-wing populism of the Tories on the one hand and the pathetic lack of ambition of Sir Keir Starmer’s hollowed out Labour Party on the other.

Thankfully, Scotland and Edinburgh have an alternative. We can be better. We can demand more from a new UK government than Labour wants to give us. And we can maintain our journey to self-government. That is why this election is so important.
Bring it on.

Posted on

How to advance Scottish independence at the next election.

SNP activists head to Dundee today battered and bruised by the turmoil of the last few months. We need to regroup, reset. We need to engage and involve our membership, talk to supporters beyond our ranks, devise a strategy to advance our cause at the coming election and work out a way to win. That’ll take more than one day. But let’s make a start.

Support for independence appears remarkably resilient, despite our party’s problems and the fragmentation of our movement. But let’s not get carried away. Given the palpable chaos at Westminster, who wouldn’t consider an alternative. We don’t know how deep or how shallow that support is. And we don’t know whether people who tell pollsters they support independence will vote for it at the next election.

We need to be frank. The police investigation is having an effect. It will need to conclude, and we will need to deal with the consequences. Our activist base is smaller and tired. Our party is still Scotland’s most popular, but political representation of the movement has splintered. There’s caution and uncertainty in the population, and not enough confidence in our ranks. This can change. But we need to be honest and realistic. We need a strategy which isn’t chasing the dream like it should happen yesterday.

The SNP only exists because people want independence. So, we need to ensure that at the next election, we are the political expression of that ambition. Who governs Scotland, and who decides who governs Scotland must be central to our campaign.

But this cannot be the final decision on becoming an independent country. At some stage we will need an eyes-wide-open specific vote on whether people want to do that. The next election is not it. For starters, that means the debate about Yes candidates and Yes alliances is for another day.

First, we need to make independence more relevant than ever. Rising bills. Crippling mortgages. Overstretched public services. Immigration. Brexit. Unionists pretend that independence is an abstract constitutional concern, disconnected from these real-life problems.

This is a lie. Always has been. Independence means the power to change lives. We need to spell out the direct connection. The power to raise minimum wages, improve benefits, regulate energy. To mobilise the capital we need to become a renewable powerhouse. To be part of Europe and allow people to migrate here.

Secondly, we need to show how it can happen. The Supreme Court says that the Scottish Parliament does not have the legal authority to organise a referendum on independence. We must demand that authority. We should seek a mandate to change the British constitution to permanently transfer power to Holyrood to consult and represent the people who live here on how they are governed.

We are beyond asking permission through a section 30 order. This is demanding and asserting a right. The right to decide for ourselves how we are governed. This change would put into legislation the 1989 Claim of Right for Scotland, endorsed at the time not only by the SNP but Labour and Liberal Democrats too.

This is the mandate we should take into the new Westminster Parliament after the election. A clear expression of desire to become independent and a specific mechanism to give people that choice. What happens next will depend on the outcome of that election. If SNP votes are needed for Labour to govern, then we will extract a price for that cooperation.

But what if Labour has a big enough majority to ignore us? This takes us into virgin political territory. Never in history has there been a Labour Government in the UK without a mandate in Scotland.

Of course, there’s a chance that Labour could be every bit as intransigent and dismissive of Scottish opinion as the Tories. But maybe not. It’s not a good look for a new Government wishing to present as an alternative. And after all, we will be pursuing something that they once signed up to. Something resonating with their backbench MPs keen on constitutional reform more generally.

But if we are met with contempt then we still have 2026. If the British state continues to refuse to let people in Scotland have a say, we can re-purpose that Scottish Parliament election to allow that to happen. There are many advantages in doing this then rather than now. We will have given the British state every opportunity to review – including changing its Parliament. The entire focus in 2026 will be about who runs Scotland, not who runs the UK. And of course, the franchise is bigger and the system fairer.

But first things first. We have an election probably within a year. If we don’t win, none of the above happens. Since 1967 the SNP vote has been a barometer of support for self-Government. When that vote rises, the state makes concessions. The reverse is also true.

We must make our electorate aware of this simple truth. If the SNP lose the next election, independence goes off the table. At least until the election after that.

So, we must win. And we must win in an election where many people will be desperate to get rid of the Tories above all else. Some independence supporters will be seduced by Labour’s argument that only they can do that, and independence can be left for another day.

This is not true. SNP MPs will never support the Tories in Westminster. To win, Labour doesn’t need to defeat us in Scotland, it needs to defeat Tories in England. Labour can, most probably will, do that. So voting Labour here isn’t necessary to rid ourselves of the Tories.

Moreover, given the chance would anyone really want to give Starmer a blank cheque? Mostly the SNP wants stronger, faster action to tackle poverty and inequality. Given the choice, we will keep Labour honest.

Voting SNP means getting rid of a Tory Government we didn’t vote for this time, and the choice to lock them out of Scotland forever. That’s a compelling message and if we can’t sell it to our countrymen and women desperate for change, maybe we shouldn’t be in politics.

Posted on

Why I’m backing Humza Yousaf to become leader of the SNP and Scotland’s next First Minister

Whatever your politics, it is undeniable that Nicola Sturgeon has been a commanding figure in Scottish politics for two decades. For good reason many suggest that she is the preeminent politician of the devolution era. She will be a hard act to follow, for sure.

But those hoping that a change of leadership will spell disaster for the SNP, and that support for independence will crumble away, shouldn’t count their chickens yet.

The aspiration that Scotland should become a normal independent country and reset its relationship with the rest of the UK isn’t just a phase. It is an ambition which has registered sustained levels of support among half the population for several years – and enjoys even greater support among voters under fifty years old. The SNP is not the reason people support independence. The desire for independence is the reason there is an SNP.

There is no denying that confidence has been knocked by sustained attacks on the right of people in Scotland to decide their own future. For example, despite continually voting for representatives on a pledge to deliver another independence referendum, those mandates have been denied and blocked by Westminster.

As a result, frustration and anger have ensued which has undoubtedly fractured the wider Yes movement. However, it hasn’t made anyone who thought Scotland becoming an independent country was a good idea suddenly decide it’s a bad one.

So, the challenge for the new leader of the SNP is to galvanise and unite the movement for change. That means building on the strong foundations for independence which have been laid over the last twenty years. But it also means reaching out to engage with new people and harness new ideas.

To my mind, Humza Yousaf is the person who can meet that challenge. Despite his relative youth, he has more than a decade’s experience in high office. In that time, Humza has handled some of the toughest jobs in government, briefs that many others would have shied away from.

Humza is also seasoned grassroots campaigner, who knows how to motivate and lead people on the ground. I remember when he came to campaign for me during the 2019 general election. His energy and enthusiasm were clear to see.

Some have referred to Humza as the “continuity candidate”, implying that there will be no change from the leadership of Nicola Sturgeon. That’s inaccurate.

Sure, the Scottish Government will continue to deliver on the manifesto it was elected on. However, as leader of Scotland’s largest political party, Humza will bring with him a fresh approach in how the SNP organises, communicates, and engages with our base. This is essential if we are to unlock new levels of engagement.

With a change in leadership also comes the opportunity to reset political strategy. It will allow us time to think about how we deliver a credible roadmap to independence, and to shift the debate from process to policy. In doing so, we must set aside the idea of using the next Westminster election as a de facto referendum, and instead use each democratic event to advance the case for independence.

With this approach, we can build support to levels that cannot be ignored and demonstrate majority support for independence. Only then we can definitively say that independence has become the settled will of the Scottish people. Only then will we achieve it.

Posted on

How each election can be a vote on independence and the right to choose

The best way to demonstrate majority support for Scottish independence is a referendum. But in the wake of the Supreme Court judgement and with Westminster’s continued denial of Scottish democracy, that ain’t happening any time soon. So, with support for independence rising, how can we allow people to express their view?

Much has been said recently about the pros and cons of using an election as a de-facto referendum. Some have argued that the next Westminster election should be a vote on independence. Others have argued that a Holyrood election would be the better option. But why don’t we use both?

For too long we’ve been chasing the next election, hoping it would be the vote which delivers independence. We need a longer-term plan which uses each and every democratic event as a stepping-stone towards independence.  

Of course, the next Westminster election should be about independence. More precisely, it should be about how Scotland becomes independent and what that looks like.

Scottish independence requires two things. One, majority support in Scotland. Two, a negotiated settlement with the British State. Until we can demonstrate the first, we won’t get the second.

The Supreme Court has exposed a gap in the British constitution. There is no way for people in Scotland to consent to staying in or leaving the union without the sanction of Westminster. To be clear, the Court did not say we shouldn’t be able to choose, simply that the current statutes do not allow for it.

Front and centre of our next election manifesto should be a demand to fix the broken British constitution by updating the current devolution settlement. The Scottish Parliament now needs the very powers the Supreme Court ruled it does not have to determine Scottish opinion and a mechanism for negotiating change with the UK.

This is a different proposition from a section 30 Order. It is not about asking permission on a one-off basis to determine public opinion, but about enshrining the right to choose within the competence of the Scottish Parliament. It would in effect give legal expression to the Claim of Right for Scotland.

Making this the central focus of our campaign would present our argument as one of democracy, as well as self-determination. It would demonstrate a determination to exhaust every opportunity to allow the British state to respect democratic norms, and assist in garnering international support.

Clearly, the outcome of the next Westminster election is unknown, but it is probable that the Conservatives will lose. This opens up the prospect of change, and we need to be agile enough to take advantage of new opportunities that may come our way.

It’s possible we can build support amongst other parties for a proposal to give the Scottish Parliament this power. It is entirely consistent with the principles of devolution which other parties say they are committed to. And the parliamentary arithmetic may afford us more leverage at Westminster than ever before, despite our previous electoral success in Scotland.

If we achieve this reform, we could then go forward and exercise this new power at the earliest opportunity. If we are thwarted in our objective, at least we will have been seen to have exhausted every last possible mechanism to gain our independence by consent.

This would then tee up the next Holyrood election, scheduled for May 2026, as an opportunity to mobilise people in support of a vote for independence. We could re-purpose that election as an effective referendum. The franchise is more inclusive, the voting system is fairer and, most of all, the focus is all about how Scotland, rather than the UK, is governed.

In the meantime, we still have an argument to win. This is the year where we should consolidate majority support for independence, maintaining polling levels above 50% and nudging support towards 60% to bolster the case.  But support cannot be fuelled by indignation alone. We need to complete our prospectus for what independence looks like. We need a rational and compelling narrative, completely related to the social and economic crises of 2023.     

Our opponents will continue to attempt to undermine support for independence by pointing to problems with devolved services. Sometimes criticism will be valid, but often they will lie. And, of course, always pretending there are no constraints on what we can do.

Where we already have the power, we’ve used it to make far better, fairer decisions. If we can do this with one hand tied behind our back, imagine what we could do if the Westminster straitjacket was undone. We need to explain, perhaps more than ever, that independence is essential to tackling the biggest challenges we face. In doing so we will need to be bold and ambitious, offering a vision of a new Scotland that will inspire and mobilise its citizens.