'PEELY WALLY' HARDLINERS START TALKING COMPROMISE

FORMER SNP MP Kenny MacAskill has suggested Home Rule for Scotland could provide a “constitutional impasse” in a “divided” country.

The Alba representative said while he still prefers sovereignty for Scotland, “something needs to be done to break the logjam” of constitutional politics.

Writing in the Scotsman, the former SNP member admitted that the concept is not without its “difficulties”, citing his desire for the country to have power over defence and foreign policy, the removal of nuclear weapons and membership of EFTA or the EU.

However, he added: “That said, we’re at a constitutional impasse in Scotland, where not only is the nation deeply divided, as polls continuously show, but our politics is stultifying as a result of it.

“Indyref2 remains the main debate yet has been rejected by Westminster and deferred indefinitely by Holyrood.”

The SNP and Green manifestos both committed to holding a referendum during this term of parliament, though some independence activists want the vote to be prioritised before the current pandemic health emergency.

MacAskill’s new party, Alba, had actually called for independence negotiations with Westminster to begin within a week of the results of the May elections in their manifesto.

“Something needs to be done to break the logjam and move the country on, as the weekly cycle of ‘we demand it’ and ‘you’re not getting it’ is doing no-one any good,” the MP wrote. He called for people to “think outside the box” during this time of coronavirus.

“It’s clear that there’s dissatisfaction in Scotland with the status quo and disinterest by the UK with the issues facing us in Scotland,” MacAskill added. “Let Scotland get on with addressing those social and economic problems, as Jimmy Maxton once passionately demanded a century ago. It would show a willingness from Westminster in taking cognisance of Scottish democracy.”

The MP’s comments sparked a row among activists on social media, with many criticising the position against the backdrop of MacAskill having recently suggested that his former party were not pushing self-determination hard enough. Though one social media user tweeted: "It is now becoming evident just how much of Alba's indy urgency was borne of sincerity and how much was devised in order to bag enough disgruntled votes for a list seat."

“People who left the SNP for a party that *supposedly* would offer a greater push for independence are now themselves turning away from independence,” wrote WG Saraband. “You just can't make this stuff up.”

“So much for #Alba party supporting independence. Gordon Brown would be proud of this position, independence is and always will be through the SNP!” wrote member of parliament for Dundee, Chris Law.

“From 'demands for negotiations within a week of the new parliament' to now settling for Willie Rennie's Home Rule blethers', way to go Alba!” wrote another.

And: "If this is the voice of 'indy hardliners', we're bang in trouble! Who knew Alba would become the new Peely Wally Party?" another chipped in.

Others felt the possibility was reasonable to debate. “He does make a good point though, and Home Rule is probably more realistic in the medium term,” wrote one supporter.

“Read the article please, it's just a guy giving an opinion on what happens when, we ask and they refuse,” added another.

“No ‘We have the moral high ground’ against a government that could neither spell Moral or High Ground. Just a suggestion of a compromise, of the way it should have been two equals.” said another.

Many genuine hardliners are said to be furious with MacAskill for participating in an electoral exercise that had ultimately taken many of them away from the SNP, the main vehicle for independence, with many of them acknowledging that much of the urgency and pressure on the leadership came out with them and now their main protagonists in the Alba Party are either silent or reduced to peddling freelance articles to British newspapers around mealy mouthed compromises.