Follow Tory Hoose on Twitter. Read more from this author

Mev Brown works with the homeless in Edinburgh, a guest columnist for the Edinburgh Evening News, a contributor to the Police Professional magazine and a conservative.

It would seem the old Chinese proverb “may you live in interesting times”, applies.
In May the SNP won a majority victory which was, supposedly, impossible. This was quickly followed by the resignation of the leaders of the three Unionist parties inScotland.

For 60 years the Lib Dems have sat on the fence telling voters they were better than Labour and the Tories. Their support suffered when they got into bed with Cameron.
Interestingly, this reaction never occurred inScotland when they entered a coalition with Labour. I suspect it could be a generation or more before Scots voters forgive or forget.
So, with just four possible candidates, the Lib Dems were first to select their new leader.

Labour, however, have a genuine lack of talent following their disastrous results in May.

As for us, we have seen the early stages of the campaign dominated by a single issue – the party itself. Should its name be changed, should it be disbanded, or is it fine as it is?

I originally joined the party in 2004 and was selected to stand for Edinburgh East in 2005. While I enjoyed the campaign, my doubts started in the immediate aftermath.
I sensed a lack of leadership, a lack of direction and a lack of commitment to win. Even then, there seemed to be a culture of: “one more heave”. I left the party a few weeks later.
I rejoined the party in June. In the intervening years I stood as an independent and for a number of the smaller parties.
During my time in the political wilderness, I gained some valuable insight which I feel has some relevance to the Scottish Tory leadership election and independence referendum.
Firstly, regardless of who says what, there will be a referendum on independence at a time chosen by the First Minister. He has stated it will be in the second half of the current parliament, and the year generally expected by thoughtful commentators is 2014.
And the wording of the referendum question, itself a highly contentious issue in Scottish politics, will also be of his choosing.
The SNP’s majority means these points are no longer the subject of political negotiation.
So, hopefully, Scottish voters will not witness MSPs work themselves into a tizzy over the details of the referendum – the most famous example coming from Wendy Alexander in May 2008, the [then] leader of Scottish Labour with her ill-fated “bring it on” statement.

 
Secondly, Conservatives must, absolutely must, learn from history. I recall reading the February 28th front page article in the Scotsman: “Detoxified Tories can make big surge inScotland” and thinking “aye, right”. We can’t, we simply can’t keep on ignoring the past.
In 1979 there were 22 Scottish Tory MPs. Since then there has been a fairly steady decline until the 1997 wipe-out. But in 2001 one Scottish Tory was returned toWestminster.
The Scottish Parliament offered a ray of hope. But again, the numbers of MSPs has been in decline. After May’s elections, the number of MSPs was cut again to 15.
We ignore the past at our peril.

 
So far 4 candidates have thrown their hat into the ring for the Tory party leadership.
Murdo Fraser, the front runner, takes the view that the Tory party brand is so toxic that a new centre-right party created.
However, Ruth Davidson, the “new kid on the block”, dismisses this idea as a distraction, saying that the party has “moved on” and that she can convince voters to rejoin the party.
So, who is right?

 
Well, Fraser is correct in one regard. Today, say the word “Tory” and Scots still think “Thatcher”.
While Scots bought their council house’s in their droves, the lingering memory is of the Poll Tax, of closed pits, steel mills and shipyards – of hollowed out communities.
Rightly or wrongly, the party is still seen by most Scottish voters as: “the nasty party”.

So, will a re-branded Tory party do the trick?
No.
During a hustings inEast Kilbride in 2007, I questioned Andy Kerr on NHS policy and referred to him as “a Tory”. I got a round of applause from traditional Labour voters.
When listening to traditional Labour voters during the various campaigns over the years, many told me of their sense of “abandonment” by Labour.
In fact, many felt that during 13 years in office inWestminster and 8 years in Holyrood, Labour didn’t actually do much for Labour voters.
The 1990’s New Labour re-branding did the trick south of the border. But inScotland they are viewed in the same, or similar, light as the Tories and have become toxic themselves.
In May, they paid the price.
I understand senior [Labour] figures have actually recognised that the SNP has effectively muscled in on Labour’s former role asScotland’s social-democratic party of choice.
Again, consider the fate of the Lib Dems since their coalition with the Tories – they’re toxic.

 
Margaret Mitchell is correct in one regard, it is not about toxicity, it is about relationships.
Damaged relationships can be rebuilt – off course they can.
The problem for us is, since the ’97 wipe-out, we still haven’t started that process.

On a more positive note, it is never too late.
Although, I would humbly suggest, now is a good time to start. The Council elections are only 8 months away.

The Lib Dems are crumbling while the SNP is on a role.
The Tories can’t afford another false dawn.
The days of “one more heave” have gone.
As for the independence referendum, its not about independence.
It, to, is about relationships.