cobaltmale

SNP embrace the dark side … March 18, 2007

It’s not as if the SNP have just lost my vote because they never had it to lose. But this is the latest in a recent line of developments which has confirmed my fears that the SNP has finally renounced its radical agenda and is courting the red-top reading, God-bothering, footy-fucked-up and conservative (with a small c) elements of the electorate and establishment. Ironically this is the former constituency of Very Old Labour in the central belt. First Fergus Ewing sided with the Cowcaddens firemen disciplined for throwing their toys out of the cot over a Gay Pride event, then Nicola Sturgeon vocally sides with the Catholic Church over gay adoption and now Alex accepts half a million quid from Scotland’s foremost homophobe and anti-competitive businessman. Anyone see a pattern there?

In the 90s (independence issue aside) the SNP was a party I could have voted for and supported and I very much respected Alex Salmond as a pragmatic, statesmanlike and honourable politician. Neither holds true now as Salmond uses his oratory to rabble rouse and go for cheap shots while failing to answer why an independent Scotland is keeping the pound and the monarchy while ditching the BBC (but not Sky and the rest).

Looks like the Greens will be steering well clear at least. I’d urge any gay or gay-friendly voters out there to think twice about ousting Labour by voting SNP. Don’t sleepwalk into realising what sort of party with what sort of bedfellows this is. What payback are the Catholic Church and Soapy Souter after post-election? Anyone who saw the latter on “Question Time” during his “Keep the Clause” campaign know how sophisticated and enlightened his views are over a range of things. Note also he supports the SNP only half as much as he supported the Clause – he spent the full million on that escapade. They are obviously a cheap date.

I’m just waiting for the SNP to start making noises about immigration and reconsidering their EU affinity, then we’ll realise quite how alike the SNP and UKIP have become.

A comment following “Scotland on Sunday”‘s report put it best for me:

“I understand the zeal with which many SNP supporters approach this election. It is a zeal born of years of frustration and denial. But it is a zeal which is in genuine danger of sending us down a dreadful path. Is is no secret that one of the major planks of the SNP’s growth strategy over the last two years has been to court the churches. The SNP used to be a staunch supporter of LGBT rights, but all that changed with the new engagement with church hierarchies, and now it is genuinely impossible to get even a hearing with their representatives on issues like hate crime, thought leadership and suchlike. They have made a political calculation, which it is their right to do, but they cannot be allowed to obscure this calculation from the voters. At the moment they want to appear sympathetic to the churches while not alienated the gay vote. They want to have their cake and eat it.

The bottom line is that, for gay people who lived through his campaign, Brian Souter will forever embody the hate that is hidden in the church pews of this country. The bald fact is that anyone who allies themselves with that figurehead of hate allies themselves with the hate itself. If the SNP is going to accept this money, it needs to make a clear, unequivocal statement of opposition to the views that Souter represents. And it won’t do that, because the political calculation has already been made.

I feel sorry for the decent, hardworking folk who worked on and cherish the SNP’s equality policies. They truly were inspiring. Now they ring hollow, and show the SNP up as being no better than the rest of them.

I have sat, in years gone by, with Roseanna Cunningham and others while we planned and inspired each other to fight for the inalienable human rights of gay people. Now she won’t even return our calls. I feel horrifically let down.”

19 Mar postscript: this blog post includes an enlightening summary of Alex Salmond’s own committment to equality issues via Westminster voting record. Guess what …?