I’d vote for either of them!
Nick has a lot to say but little evidence for it. Even a First-Year journalism student knows you need some real evidence to make any case. You know, attributable sources, reliable sources, maybe even some numbers?
Here’s what Nick has:
- [T]here are factions in the party
- There are even conversations
- Some critics say
- Some senior figures in the party, such as MP Joanna Cherry
- Others – such as veteran MP Pete Wishart
- Others still want
- The MP Angus MacNeil is one of those who think
- He added:
- Mr MacNeil is not the only one
- Privately, others also say
- One parliamentarian said
- [T]here are also those
- Some have told me
- [S]ome in the SNP are
- [T]here are those in the SNP considering the possibility of life after Ms Sturgeon – and even some who think she might not be around for much longer.
- Figures in the party have told me
- A few have used the exact same phrase
- I put that point to a couple of SNP politicians who agreed to interviews. First, Mr MacNeil, who said: “I suppose that’s maybe a matter for events and Nicola Sturgeon – who knows? What I’m concentrating on is not so much the personalities involved but it’s the issue of independence.” Hardly a full-throated endorsement. I also asked Kenny MacAskill, who was Justice Secretary in Scotland under Mr Salmond and is now an MP. He praised Ms Sturgeon but also used a phrase that always raises eyebrows in politics: “There is no vacancy.”
- Many of Ms Sturgeon’s supporters are
- One, when asked
- [S]ome are urging the leadership to think about a contingency plan to replace Ms Sturgeon with a like-minded figure if she has to quit.
- One told me:
22 claims, only 6 attributed and to only 4 people within a party of 48 MPs, 63 MSPs hundreds of councillors and thousands of members. Frankly, all Nick has found is polite debate within a healthy democratic party, no factions visible at all, one (MacNeil) tweeting regularly his impatience to get on with Indyref2, one other proposing testing the legal situation, another doesn’t want to do that and one old warrior has nothing to say.
Nick then predicts: ‘The SNP is facing an extremely challenging few weeks.’
Why don’t we check out the polls? If there is any evidence in more than one poll, of a notable fall in support, maybe I’ll worry.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
Did someone not tell me recently that the SNP was a ‘faith based cult’. Does this exposee of disagreement in the ranks now mean that the journalist will ask the cult accuser-in-chief why things have changed so quickly? Perhaps the SNP is manufacturing disagreement deliberately (sneaky eh!) just to prove Jackson Carlaw wrong! My head spins!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ethical journalism..
Facts reported with attribution.
Independent fact checking by another employee.
Named sources. And so on.
The BBC has morphed into gutter journalism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Almost feel sorry for the Biased Broadcasting Clowns as the cruel light of day is shone under their stone by the modern world. Nick’s wittering is a plaintive wail of despair as he realises he is on the wrong side of history both from the immenent defenestration of his employer and his futile railing against the inevitable and relentless march to Scottish independence . There will be losers but many more winners with independence but he is a loser.
All that is left to the English ruling class cast off like him is pointless tittle tattle as the BBC are certainly no longer in the loop.
If Nichola Sturgeon is tired by several years of hard work that has brought outsanding success she can retire at any time of her choosing confident that there is a surfeit of talent to replace her seamlessly.
Yer tea’s oot Nick.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is no vacancy. There is no appetite within the SNP for a leadership contest. Discounting hard-line Unionists, there is little if any demand in the country for a different First Minister. Nicola Sturgeon has proved herself to be a competent and very popular party leader. It is hard to imagine anyone might be a better ambassador for Scotland in Europe and across the world. At home, she has shown herself to be highly proficient at handling the media and adept at explaining, promoting and defending her government’s policies and positions. All round, Nicola Sturgeon scores nines and tens across the board. Yet she may have to go. She may have to step aside due to a problem of her own making.
Angus MacNeil identifies the problem. When Nicola Sturgeon’s strategy for pursuing independence “hit the brick wall” she has nowhere to turn. She is so wedded to the Section 30 process that she has effectively ruled out all other options. She has no Plan B because she hasn’t left space for an alternative approach to the constitutional issue. An issue of such crucial importance to the party and the nation that failure in this area must outweigh all those high scores in other aspects of her roles as party leader and First Minister. It is in her third role as de facto leader of the independence movement that her performance has disappointed many – and continues to cause frustration and not a little anger among those who are otherwise totally supportive of Nicola Sturgeon.
What Angus doesn’t say; what he could hardly be expected to say, is that Section 30 process has already hit a brick wall. It was always going to do so. Any process which is crucially dependent on the honest and willing cooperation of the UK Government is bound to fail. And it has. Nicola Sturgeon’s strategy for getting independence is, in fact, part of the British political elite’s strategy for preserving the Union. The Section 30 process maintains the illusion of a democratic route to independence while keeping the British state firmly in charge of access to that route.
Nicola Sturgeon’s strategy has not only hit a brick wall but a brick wall at the end of a very narrow bind alley. There is no room to turn because the British state has erected an impenetrable barrier to progress. Thre is no room to turn because the walls on either side are hemming her in. She can hardly complain since she helped build those walls. She has no choice but to go into reverse. And she won’t want to do that.
Going into reverse would mean abandon the Section 30 process altogether. Nicola Sturgeon’s commitment to that process is so dogmatic that she has effectively staked her career on it. Politically, a U-turn on her approach to the constitutional issue would be an admission of failure such as might end a political career.
Apart from a handful of thoughtless individuals, nobody in the Yes movement is calling for Nicola Sturgeon’s head. But increasing numbers are demanding a change of approach to the constitutional issue. A clamour is growing for the Section 30 process to be ditched. It is certain that, if the project to restore Scotland’s independence is to proceed it must be by some route other than that to which Nicola Sturgeon has committed. She cannot unmake that commitment. She can’t reverse back to the blind alley’s entrance and drive off in another direction. The damage has been done. She did it. Relying on the goodwill, good grace and good faith of the British establishment was a mistake. A massive mistake.
With no ill-will whatever, and regardless of the protestations of her friends and allies, it looks very much as if Nicola Sturgeon will have to go. The only thing that might make this unnecessary – for the time being, at least – would be if Boris Johnson were to oblige her with a Section 30 order. This would not end the problem for Nicola Sturgeon, however. Grant of permission to hold a referendum would not demolish that brick wall. It would merely knock a hole in it just big enough for Nicola Sturgeon to crawl through. The wall will be rebuilt behind her and the apparently open and clear democratic route to independence will turn out to be littered with traps and landmines making it every bit as impassable as it had previously been.
What chance is there of the British Prime Minister relenting? How likely is it that he would act to save Nicola Sturgeon’s neck? How remote is the possibility that Boris Johnson would be allowed to initiate a process which puts the Union in jeopardy absent an absolute guarantee that the process could be blocked further down the way?
It is this, and not difficulties over any of her policies or ‘scandal’ involving her predecessor, that will force Nicola Sturgeon to quit. She might do the U-turn and hope she can ride out the ensuing storm. But the best option to secure her future career and preserve her political heritage, not to mention keeping her reputation and dignity relatively intact, is to step aside with dignity in order that the independence campaign can move forward.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I actually agree with you on this Peter A Bell. I would also say that Nicola Sturgeon’s political acumen is perhaps lacking, I had expected the start of the process for her to stand aside, with dignity, before now (so that it wouldn’t be seen to be linked to scandals). She has many skills and would be suited to many high level posts, but I don’t believe leadership is the one she is most suited to – the current stagnancy we see really is of her making. Oh well. Not much we can do about that aspect. Her reasons for staying in post when it may have been prudent to move on are her own of course and I wouldn’t speculate, but it is also fair enough for people to point she should consider it, and there is no reason why there shouldn’t be pressure put on the SNP party as a whole to keep them actively trying for independence.
LikeLiked by 1 person