A thread about why I am voting for @HumzaYousaf. A bit long but I have a few things to say. I'm dividing this into two parts. 1) the road to independence and 2) the SNP's political position. They are of course closely connected. 1/9.
1) We're at a point of decision on our strategy for independence. I have supported a de facto referendum but recognise there are other views and this is a decision that must be reached collectively. I trust Humza to lead that conversation but not to try to impose his view. 2/9.
(I also trust him not to come up with quick fixes which no serious person believes can be achieved or to flirt with UDI, which has historically usually been a precursor to war. Those who are serious about independence make serious arguments.) 3/9.
Meanwhile devolution is coming under attack from UK Gov. Such sovereignty as we currently possess is expressed through our Parliament. It is inconceivable to me that an SNP FM would not robustly defend Scottish legislation. Humza is the only candidate who has said he will. 4/9.
2) Onto broader political positioning. This matters greatly. You cannot argue for independence in a values-free way. If independence is the SNP's heart, we also have a soul. The soul of the Yes campaign was a vision of a progressive social democratic European nation. 5/9.
Equality was fundamental to this. A Scotland for all of us, where each individual can reach their full potential. This means eradicating poverty, the biggest driver of inequality. It also means tackling prejudice & discrimination against minority groups. 6/9.
This vision brought tens of thousands into our party, believing that a better Scotland was possible. This vision has sustained support for independence and for the SNP. To move away from it at all would be an act of folly. UK politics may have shifted right. We should not. 7/9.
Humza is the candidate arguing for a wellbeing economy & for the benefits of economic growth to be shared more fairly. There's no conflict between a successful economy & an equal society. They're complementary. The UK's high level of inequality has wrecked the economy. 8/9.
There's much more I could say - about the urgency of tackling climate change, about social care etc but that would be far too long for anyone to read. I will of course support anyone the party elects but my firm view is that #HumzaForScotland is the best choice. 9/9.
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Reading over some of the political commentary on SNP leadership & I don't think it sufficiently takes into account the generational impact on politics more widely. I think we struggle to define terms here, it's not simply left wing/right wing. It's changed.
Some is about neoliberalism of course (which in itself is a term I have never fully understood in its wider sense) a model that hasn't worked for anyone under 40. I mean it doesn't work for lots of people over 40 but it's younger people who have really been shafted by it.
But that has given younger people a much more adaptable approach to life. Albeit lives which are far more stressful than their parents & grandparents were. From my perspective they are tougher yet more vulnerable. They don't entirely trust the state while wanting more from it.
The BBC NHS will, I think, provide a good example of how politicians spin things based on an assumption ordinary people don't understand how organisations work. The BBC is careful to make clear this was a meeting of executives who had been given the green light to consider all >
> options in terms of service reform to address financial sustainability. This kind of thing is not at all unusual. It happens in councils every year in the run-up to budgets for example. Officers provide options for politicians to consider. And that's the key point.
Politicians are the decision-makers. If they don't like options, they reject them. But watch today because I predict opposition politicians will seize on this to accuse Scotgov of planning to introduce charges etc. Our politics is just like that. It's stupid.
I made the mistake of reading the replies to Humza Yousaf's tweet about the Scottish Government's budget situation. So just to reiterate the budget is fixed. By law Scotgov cannot raise taxes in year, nor can it borrow to fund day to day revenue spending.
This means pay increases and other inflationary pressures - increased cost of goods & services etc - must be funded from the existing fixed budget. Normal countries have the full range of financial powers to manage challenging situations like this. But Scotland doesn't.
When the 2022/23 budget was set in December 2021 nobody knew inflation would run rampant. But subsequently Scotgov re-allocated some spending to cover the cost of higher pay awards & other responses to the cost of living crisis, such as bridging payments to low income families.
Thinking out loud thead about the indyref2 question. There's a big push to frame the question as Leave/Remain rather than Yes/No. Basic reason for this is that it conflates indy with brexit & polls framed in this language have delivered a lower result for independence.
So, I do believe in principle that it should be a Yes/No question as in 2014 for two reasons - 1. It is recognisable, everyone understands the question and 2. It asks the right question - should Scotland become an independent country?
BUT I do wonder if there could be tactical advantages to a Leave/Remain framing? Changing the question would inevitably alter the terms of the debate. Rather than the onus being only on pro indy ppl to argue our case, would also mean pro UK ppl having to argue case for the Union.
OK once more into the breach of GRA reform because there are dozens of tweets on my timeline from people who still believe a gender recognition certificate acts a) as some kind of license to be trans and b) gives trans ppl some new or additional rights to use single sex spaces.
Starting with a) nobody needs permission to be trans any more than they need permission to be gay or left handed. Trans ppl can change their name, their passport, their driving license and all their other documents already without a gender recognition certificate.
All of this operates on the basis of self-identification & has done for decades. A gender recognition certificate is only required to change one document - a birth certificate. That is all. Going on to b) a GRC does not provide any additional right to access same sex spaces.
Reading the chat about North London jibes by Sunak & someone suggesting Starmer reply by asking how many houses he has. No need to ask - Hallo magazine has all the details. Four. There's a 4 floor family townhouse in Kensington, along with a spare flat in Central London.
Their weekend home is a manor house in North Yorkshire with 12 acres of land. It also has a lake in case the PM wants to do a Mr Darcy. In addition they have a house in Santa Monica.
Good job they're not part of that pesky North London metropolitan elite, eh?