FEW party leaders are capable of mustering the political courage to confront their core supporters' most deeply-held beliefs.
When they do, however, the result can be historic. Tony Blair did it in 1994, when he made the most of his honeymoon period as Labour's new leader to ditch Clause Four of the Labour Party constitution, which promised to win for the workers "by hand o
r by brain... the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange". The result was New Labour and a decade in power.
Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party, is approaching his very own Clause Four moment. As we report today, the SNP is swithering on the one policy that defines it as a political movement - independence for Scotland. Independence is the raison d'etre of the SNP and has been throughout its 73-year history. National emancipation, whether for romantic or hard-headed reasons, is at the heart of the party's culture and the beliefs of its most committed activists.
Yet this very policy is now seen by nationalists at every level of the party as an impediment to power. The reason is simple. If, as polls currently suggest, the SNP is the biggest party at Holyrood after May 3, it could still be deprived of its chance to govern. Why? Because the Liberal Democrats, the only realistic coalition partner, will never agree to holding a referendum on independence.
No one inside or outside the SNP believes Salmond would really surrender the chance of becoming First Minister and of giving the SNP a taste of power, just for want of a referendum. Especially when many nationalists fear that such a referendum could easily result in a No vote, with disastrous consequences for the party.
Sir Tom Farmer, the SNP's most generous benefactor, today urges Salmond to "park" the referendum policy, and there are whispers that he is pushing at an open door. Salmond knows this is a tricky moment - how can he water down SNP policy on independence without at the same time dousing the fire in the bellies of the activists whose hard work on doorsteps is essential to the party's success on May 3?
Ideally he would like to keep all this under wraps until after the polls close. So at some point today an SNP spokesman will firmly deny this newspaper's story and insist independence is a non-negotiable part of the SNP's policy platform. This is only to be expected.
The same thing happened in the mid-1990s when this newspaper published a front-page story headlined: "Salmond backs devolution". We revealed that Salmond wanted the SNP to campaign in favour of devolution, so that it could be used as a stepping stone to independence. At the time this caused uproar in the nationalist ranks and was bitterly denied by the leadership. Yet, of course, it came to pass.
Persuading his party to back devolution required a great deal of skill and patience on Salmond's part. Persuading them to park independence will require even more. Salmond would prefer to retain his referendum commitment intact until the inevitable crunch moment during coalition talks with the Liberal Democrats. At that stage the parking of independence could be presented as a political necessity forced on the party by cowardly unionists - a far easier proposition for the diehard activists to swallow.
This is not just a watershed moment for the SNP. It is a watershed moment for Scottish politics as a whole and it could change the entire tenor of the impending Holyrood election campaign. Just a few weeks ago the contest looked like a simple case of The Union v Independence. With independence parked, it would be a very different election indeed. Schools, hospitals, crime and the environment would come centre stage, bringing the election back into the realm of ordinary voters' lives. The SNP's policies on these issues would come under the scrutiny they deserve. This would be a welcome development. With the constitutional question tucked away, the decision facing the voters on who should be First Minister would take on a new clarity. It would become a choice of who would best govern a devolved Scotland.
Scotland needs such a debate, free of distractions. Before it can take place, it needs Salmond to come clean about his true position on independence. Keeping it under wraps as a bargaining counter for coalition negotiations is simply not acceptable. If he fails to be candid about his intentions he will be campaigning under false pretences. At this, of all moments, he must be honest with the Scottish people he desires to lead.
