THE commitment apparently made by Scotland’s new First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, to represent and ostensibly be a leader for everyone in Scotland irrespective of their different political leanings and allegiances is likely applaudable. But whether it is possible might be another matter. Does a like commitment emanate, for example, from Westminster where it seems to me David Cameron fronts up a government of sorts that noticeably reflects his Conservative Party leadership. I would presume that during Prime Minister’s Questions sessions in the Commons he champions his own party’s policies and ideologies without much acknowledgment as to a general political consensus.
Nicola Sturgeon as Mr Cameron’s more or less (likely less, considering how things are in GB) Holyrood equivalent is likewise first and foremost leader of a particular political party in the Scottish Parliament which thus enables her into First Ministerial office. As such, there should be no expectation as to her being any more committed to the whole electorate than there apparently is for David Cameron to show similar commitment.
The indy referendum was not about ousting the dominant political party in Holyrood, nor about empowering the electorate outwith its engagement in the referendum itself. If such implications were there then maybe more debate should be attendant on the practical effects and consequences of the referendum and how it has imbued parliamentary business at Holyrood as distinct from business at Westminster.
If commitments and pledges are presently of credible substance, perhaps better to wait until those outstanding from the referendum campaign are caught up with before expectations as to substantiality become too unrealistic.
Ian Johnstone, Peterhead