Dishonesty now rules Scottish politics

New Statesman​

a day ago

Photo by Jeremy Sutton-Hibbert / Alamy Stock Photo
Hope is, famously, one of the most powerful words in politics. Every party lays claim to offering it. It helped get Barack Obama elected. It's rarely far from the lips of any politician with something to sell you.
So it proved on Wednesday evening, when John Swinney and Anas Sarwar took part in a live event for the Holyrood Sources podcast. The First Minister said he would put independence at the heart of his devolved election campaign, as this was where 'hope' could be found for Scotland. The Labour leader talked of bringing 'hopefulness' back to the nation if he wins in May.
A powerful word, but sadly not much more than a word these days. There's not much of it around on the international, national or devolved stages, is there? Voters see a deteriorating global scene, desolated public services and an economy that continues to fail them, and wonder where this hope that their leaders speak of is to be located. Like so many words that are common in political rhetoric, this one has been thoroughly devalued: we don't believe you.
Swinney, who has suddenly begun talking about independence again after a refreshing period of silence on the matter, has clearly decided that the best – perhaps only – strategy available to him is to hold out some vague idea that a separate Scotland would be able to do all the nice things that he claims it can't as part of the UK. This is what we might call a bold approach, in that it's neither new nor convincing. It merely takes us back to 2014, when the Yes campaign argued that independence would deliver the best of all possible worlds, and then produced a large, hugely detailed document that managed to answer none of the hard questions about economics and borders. Enough of the population saw the gaps to ensure a win for No. Those pesky questions remain wholly unanswered today.
So who is Swinney's message of hope aimed at? Support for independence sits somewhere just shy of 50 per cent, though support for the SNP is well below that now, at just over 30 per cent. There is a hardcore who will be delighted that the First Minister has started banging on about independence once more. There are a lot more whose reaction is likely to be along the lines of 'not now, John!' The fact that the SNP has been in power for two underwhelming decades also makes its claim to offer hope appear somewhat hollow. But even Sarwar, who promotes himself as the new broom that Scotland needs, will struggle to convince.
The Scottish Labour leader is hamstrung, for now at least, by the difficulties facing Keir Starmer's government at Westminster. He is quizzed constantly about his views on benefit cuts, on the winter fuel payment, on the conflict in the Middle East. Does he agree with Starmer's position on these issues, or is he with the rebels? He can do nothing about any of it, but is forced to triangulate every time he opens his mouth. He can't afford to tie himself too closely to the Prime Minister's unpopular decisions, but doesn't want to appear disloyal. Hence, he says nothing, repeatedly, at great length.
What neither leader seems to grasp is that hope, like happiness, is something that comes as a result of effort, of doing the hard stuff well, of creating the conditions that allow people to glimpse the prospect of a better future. But neither has so far shown themselves willing to have a frank conversation with the electorate about what must be done to build that future. For example, Scotland's failing schools system needs radical reform, in ways that would inevitably provoke fury among the teaching unions and the broader educational establishment. There really is no other way to fix it. But neither Swinney nor Sarwar seem to be up for that particular scrap.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
There is no money, which means the devolved state is in no position to continue to deliver the universal benefits so beloved by the dominant soft left. The state itself has grown like topsy and needs dramatically cut down in size. The population is aging at an alarming rate, and the workforce is predicted to shrink as a proportion over the coming decades. Things are going to get worse, not better; harder, not easier. The data is there, the experts are all saying the same thing, and yet the politicians give the impression they have their fingers firmly stuck in their ears. Jam today, tomorrow, and forever is their retail offer. It is a lie.
The disconnect between the daily lived experience of Scots and the Scotland their leaders tell them they inhabit is growing ever wider. It all plays into the hands of Reform and other fringe movements. What's the point in supporting the moderate mainstream if that moderate mainstream repeatedly refuses to do what needs to be done? Where are Scotland's mainstream revolutionaries – its Thatchers, Blairs, Milburns, Goves, even Streetings? Where are the ministers who will seize their departments by the scruff of the neck and deliver a programme of change that at least stands a chance of making a measurable, visible difference?
That, I believe, is what it will take to bring optimism back to the nation. People are willing to be led through harsh decisions if the values behind them are clear and the outcomes worth shooting for. Can Scotland's politicians change tack, and start telling the truth about what's required? I wish I could say I'm hopeful.
[See also: Inside the SNP civil war]
Related