The 79 Group
March 19, 2009 by David Torrance
I have an article in today’s Scotsman to coincide (roughly) with the 30th anniversary of the SNP’s 79 Group. It also features on David Maddox’s blog the Steamie. And for real political geeks, here’s the full text of Alex Salmond’s 1982 letter to the Scotsman that I quote from in the article:
Sir, – I have always been impressed by the ability of most of the regular contributors to your correspondence column to maintain a high standard of coherence in their political arguments. Unfortunately the eccentric Mr Fee – the “Blue Mole” of the SNP – does not fit into this category.
His letter of June 22 displays rather a further hotchpotch of misinformation and prejudice. No doubt Jim Sillars in 1977 argued that the SNP should not move Left in the Scotland of the 1970s when it was assumed that nationalist pressure would deliver a Scottish Assembly.
Unfortunately the “all things to all men” approach, further muddied by the voting habits on [the issues] of our Parliamentary Group, drove us to complete defeat in the class-dominated election of 1979 and continues to be irrelevant in the Scotland of the 1980s.
There is no harm in being wrong if you are prepared to learn lessons and indeed many people have allowed the force of events to alter their opinions on how the SNP can best serve the Scottish cause in the political atmosphere of 1982. Others continue to cling to the safe political nostrums which have prevented the SNP from bridging the gap between being a movement of protest and a party capable of achieving power for Scotland.
The reality of Scottish politics in 1982 amounts to the following. We face as a nation the prospect (and as George Foulkes’s letter confirms this is increasingly accepted in the Labour Party) of a Labour Scottish majority permanently isolated from power in Westminster. In these circumstances two things may happen.
First, the Labour Party itself, and this is the process argued by Messrs Foulkes, Galloway and others, could move decisively in a nationalist direction to meet the frustration of their supporters. That strategy faces formidable problems and opponents.
Secondly, the SNP could position itself to be a real alternative to Labour – not by borrowing voters as in the past, but by winning activists, shop stewards and stable political support to the Leftist nationalist programme which meets the aspirations of the majority of the Scottish people. That strategy also faces problems, not least of which is that under the influence of Mr Fee and others the party is currently running away from political reality.
It should be noted, however, that these two trends – the nationalist one in Labour and the Leftist one in the SNP – are not mutually exclusive and indeed could be of substantial benefit to each other and to Scotland.
There is the further issue which Jim Sillars has correctly brought to the SNP’s and Scotland’s attention of what will be done when Westminster says “No” to a Scottish demand for self-government whether expressed through the SNP or the Labour Party.
In these circumstances only a party willing and able to call for civil disobedience, primarily through organised labour, will be able to effectively back a democratic Scottish majority for a Parliament. At present the SNP are neither able nor willing to face that eventually while Labour are probably more able but certainly less willing.
Finally to deal directly with part of the misinformation in Mr Fee’s letter. He implies that the “settled conviction” of the SNP is an “Independence – Nothing More” approach. This is, in fact, neither settled nor the conviction of all but a minority in the party. For example even Gordon Wilson, who was set-up so expertly by Mr Fee and others to dish the Left at Ayr, is publicly declaring (STV, June 7) the SNP as “moderate Left of Centre”.
Mr Wilson’s problem, of course, is that while he has correctly defined the SNP policy position over a considerable period, most people in Scotland remain unaware of it and he seems hardly in any position now to strengthen the party’s radical image.
Nevertheless his chairman’s Leftist deviations must be a worry for Mr Fee, who will, on his destructive track record in the SNP, respond to an opposing viewpoint by conspiring to purge it from the party. In a party of one Mr Fee would indeed be king.
Alex Salmond
Vice-chairman
West Lothian SNP
Comments
Feel free to leave a comment...