[page 5]
SNP rally in the Grassmarket, Edinburgh.
This year the SNP mounts its biggest local clection challenge to date. The sight of Glasgow councillor Cathy Cantley dismissed from her post for 'irregularities' must have been worth thousands of votes to them. Yet ugain the Labour Party's image seems confirmed by events: empty shell branches, councillors responsible to no one but their families, a party creaking with age and political complacency. It 1s the contrast between the Catherine Cantleys and supposedly radical and dynamic politicians like Margo MeDonald which drives so many away from the Labour Party.
But how deep is the SNP's radicalism? A look at where they are standing gives a clue. In Dundee, where they have one of the two MPs, they are mounting no challenge. In Aberdeen they are standing only eight candidates. All their effort is concentrated on the West of Scotland,
They are not standing to win local office. They want to break Labour's grip on its most symbolic stronghold. Out of a sweeping victory they will claim, not the government of Glasgow, but the right to negotiate the future of all Scotland's working people.
It is hardly surprising they are shy of local office. In the carly seventies they burned their fingers badly with blocks of councillors in the big cities who did them far more damage than credit. And last summer SP-controlled Cumbernauld, under Provost Murray, saw one of the first genuine cases of wage cutting since the 1930s. provoking a long and vicious struggle with the dustcart drivers,
But the SNP are not just "Tartan Tories". The first populist party to enter British politics this century, they seem to offer a way forward which will benefit everyone. If the SNP stands up for all Scottish people, who is to doubt that the common man and woman will gain the most? Are we not the majority of the people?
This argument has a very broad appeal. Many sincere trade unionists have turned to the SNP, believing that working people will prevail in a mass movement of all classes. "After Independence", the argument runs, "We'll sort out the rest".
Yet within the SNP financial and middle class interests hold the reigns. In 1968 a purge of leftwingers removed even National Council members on the eve of conference. Elected branch delegates and nominces for national office were physically ejected.
Last year a storm broke when the press leaked cconomic policy documents being prepared by a committee under MP Douglas Crawford. The documents called for a Scotland "more like Switzerland than Detroit", for the jettisoning of traditional industry and for a mobile and pliable
labour force. But the fuss was not over the composition of the committee - with
half a dozen financiers and no trade unionist. It was not over its secrecy - not even party
members knew who was on it. Nor was it about anti-working class policies.
most of which were adopted. The storm was
about the breach of security!
The influence of the ASNTU - the SNP's trade union grouping - has been in continuous decline since the carly "70's, and its founder chairman, lan Smith, left to join the SLP last year. The SNP's main trade union campaign has been against the
political levy - a policy which will split
the trade unions and move them away from political action. The SNP has no alternative but the breakup of the unions on national lines.
In the same way the interests of privilege and wealth are served by its policies, although they appear to promote the general interest.
"It's Scotland's Oil" seems to promise
justice and a fair share of the nation's wealth for all. But the oil is neither British nor particularly American, It is privately owned and controlled. Its owners, be they BP or Gaelic Oil, will treat Scotland as cynically as Kuwait or Singapore. A St. Andrew's Cross on every platform in the Forties" Field will make no difference.
In local government they promise the
impossible in large dollops. Their Glasgow manifesto unveils a housing policy as deceitful as it is vacuous:
"The SNP recognises that in the present economic climate few tenants will be able to purchase their homes. We will enable tenants to at least buy a share in their homes, with a discount for length of tenancy, and no houses will be lost from the housing pool. Unlike the present system rent payers will receive a financial return".
Their latest eduction policy documents, released on April 18, call for a return to selective schools - whilst the party remains "committed to the comprehensive ideal".
With a stroke of the pen, they remove problems which have deadlocked educationalists and planners for half a century.
Such policies might work in a dream world, Their effect is different where there are rich and poor, earners and owners. Selectivity cannot be combined vith comprehensives because the high-class schools cream off the best facilities. Selling Council Houses does not give hardworking tenants, a roof over their heads as of right. It puts houses on the private market, which means their prices are settled far above their real value by speculators and moneylenders. It removes the best houses from public stock, leaving only highrise flats and slums. And it puts direct labour workers
on the dole.
The ugly face of the SNP has been well veiled until now. If they recerve the mandate they seck, it will take more than popular politians to keep it concealed
much longer.
ALAN FREEMAN NEIL WILLIAMSON