 |
| Nicola Sturgeon (Image: Sky News) |
When a politician lasts a long time in their role as MP or government minister, it's hard to ignore their legacy. Their belief systems, presence and politics tend to stand the test of time. Whether this is a 'good' thing or not, I'll leave that for you to decide. Whether they're 'good' politicians or not, again, people will have their own opinions. For example, when Nigel Lawson passed away earlier this month, while many looked back at his time as UK Chancellor between 1983 and 1989 with some disdain, it's hard to deny his longevity at arguably one of the country's toughest jobs - and his form of Conservatism is still very much alive to this day. Of course, he never pleased everyone, and many corners of British society still haven't quite recovered from his, or then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's, policies. The Iron Lady could have still gone through a handful of chancellors instead of sticking with Lawson. She fired enough ministers in her 11 years at Downing Street.
This article, however, isn't about Mr Lawson, you may be pleased to hear, but another politician who you may not be pleased to hear me praise - Nicola Sturgeon, who recently resigned as both Scotland's First Minister and Scottish National Party (SNP) leader. These positions she held since 2014, just weeks after her party led a failed and bruising pursuit for Scotland's status as an independent country. As contentious as this vote was, it could have resulted in the SNP's demise, considering it partly exists with the aim of the nation doing things without the reliance of Westminster. Yet, eight-and-a-half years later, she'd not only oversaw two Scottish elections which saw SNP continuously strengthen its position as the nation's largest party, but it's become a dominant representative for Scotland in Westminster.
Using the principle of Lawson's legacy, you can't last a tough job for this long without the public trusting you enough to put an 'X' next to your Party's name at an election. Sturgeon achieved that in Scotland, and is recognised fondly by leaders abroad, including Ireland's Leo Varadkar. Her tenure can only be summarised by a conversation I had with a taxi driver in Glasgow in 2017 - "I hate the thought of independence, but I bloody love what the SNP is doing for education."
Despite this, since Sturgeon's resignation as leader in February 2023, she's endured what appears to be a ruthless character assassination, in a way that we perhaps hadn't seen when Lawson left his role as Chancellor in 1989. Of course, media landscapes have changed significantly in 34 years, and media titles were more favourable towards Thatcher's reign in the 1980s compared to Sturgeon's reign during the 2010s and early 2020s. However, the coverage she's received in recent weeks have threatened her profile in a way that could seriously do her and her legacy arguably unjustifiable damage.
We've seen this in recent months with other leaders; for example, people were very quick to pounce on Jacinda Ardern's resignation as New Zealand's Prime Minister to use her measures during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic to overshadow her premiership. All but closing the borders to everyone, including New Zealanders abroad, was seen as harsh, yet the death rate in the country remained incredibly low. It was until she bowed to pressure and reopened the borders which saw the number of deaths spike to levels she strived to avoid.
People were also speedy to discredit Sanna Marin, who formally resigned as Finland's Prime Minister after her Party dropped to third in the latest general election. She'd been 'called out' over her apparent young age (is there an age limit to becoming leader?) and that one time she attended a party where lots of alcohol was consumed. But she also dedicated her time actually protecting her borders by successfully applying to join NATO, after neighbours Vladimir Putin's Russia increased its aggression towards Ukraine. There isn't such thing as a perfect leader, but if they've done mostly good, let's not knock them down for policies that divide opinion.
Sturgeon is in the same boat with SNP's apparent mishandling of party donations and keeping membership figures a secret. The former got her husband and now former Chief Executive of SNP, Peter Murrell, arrested over allegations surrounding the former. As I write this, police investigations are ongoing. But, it didn't stop them from treating the case like a classic episode of Happy Valley, sealing the couple's street and hang a huge tent outside their front garden. We're suddenly very quick to pass judgement on matters which aren't that obvious or blatant. If corruption on a great scale is uncovered, then it should be rightly called out. In the meantime, we let the police do their job and also allow normal service to resume in Scottish politics.
There is also the small case of the passing of a policy which allows 16 year olds in Scotland to legally change their gender without a medical diagnosis of gender dysmorphia. The UK Government has intervened, and we're likely to see lengthy legal battles until the matter is resolved. Yes, I think 16 to make a hugely significant decision like changing one's gender is too young; and in very few cases, this can be abused. That said, only time will tell whether it's a genius or dunce move. Why are political commentators criticising that more than what's going on in, say, Italy, where gay couples are no longer allowed to register children as their own, is beyond me. But no, let's focus on fantasising about Sturgeon's personal life - she apparently had an affair with a French ambassador, a claim she's laughed off.
We can also question whether Sturgeon resigned over the fact she's not managed to get another Scottish independence referendum through the door. She's been trying for years, yet the pandemic and UK's Supreme Court blocking of the move have prevented this. It's hard to see this taking place in the near future. It'll depend on the outcome of more expensive court cases, as well as the outcome of the next UK general election, both in terms of who's elected as MPs in Scotland and who resides at Downing Street. On the latter, quite honestly, regardless of whether it's Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer, neither give SNP confidence of wanting more devolved powers. I don't see another independence referendum until after 2025 (a bold and possibly foolish prediction, I accept).
What the SNP need to do in the meantime is continually prove it can do things well and alone before putting the idea of independence to Scotland's subconscious again. Polls suggest that Labour is doing well there, but its support is bound to wane. As in England, the party in red has a lot of ground to win over and a long time between now and the next general election, expected next year. The Conservatives there have all but given up on progress; its Scottish leader Douglas Ross went as far as suggesting voters tactically vote, even if it means not putting their precious 'X' next to his party, in constituencies other parties have the best chance of defeating the SNP.
The anti-SNP agenda is growing, which is normal for a party that's been in power for an incredibly long time. But we go beyond that - I feel commentators are scared of what an independent Scotland could be capable of, leaving other UK nations lagging behind. Look at Scotland's track record in education, NHS staffing, trade, marine tourism, infrastructure investment, social security and welfare, and cast an unbiased judgement on where the country's been and where it's going thanks to Sturgeon's leadership. It's not as if Scotland's quest for independence has been just the last ten years. Cheap shots at her are aimless. She's one of the good guys.
Comments
Post a Comment