Has the Supreme Court veto on a Holyrood-run referendum enlivened the campaign for independence? It certainly looks that way and not just because three successive polls have put Yes at 54 to 56%.

The judges’ verdict was presumed to be a massive setback for independence, essentially banning Holyrood from organising a lawful advisory poll of its own citizens. “Whaur’s yer indyref2 noo?” snorted most of the Scottish press. “Aye but whaur’s yer voluntary union of equals?” came the louder retort.

The verdict did expose the limitations of Nicola Sturgeon’s Plan B – not surprising since Plan A remains the obvious solution with its transfer of Section 30 powers. But it also cast an unflattering light on the puny, conditional nature of the “powerful” devolution settlement, giving the SNP a boost-in-defeat that’s similar (albeit much smaller) to that experienced after 2014.

On the night of the Supreme Court announcement, 15 rallies were organised across Scotland by Time for Scotland with six European solidarity events arranged by Europe for Scotland. Each event asked how Scots can legally exercise our right to self-determination and each was organised by a group of Yes activists – not the SNP – though figures like Nicola Sturgeon and Tommy Sheppard were invited to speak.

That night, the First Minister did announce an internal SNP party conference, sometime in the New Year “to discuss and agree the detail of the proposed de facto referendum”. That date has yet to be announced, but the Aberdeen Independence Movement (AIM) has already organised a two-day strategy event (with a Burns Supper) for Yes campaigners in February, a weekend after an online Scottish Independence Congress organised by Believe in Scotland. Active Yes groups and all pro-independence parties will be invited to participate and The Herald’s sister paper the National is helping organise both gigs.

Behind the scenes there’s also talk of a Citizens Convention to consider the shape of an independent Scotland, hearing evidence from witnesses and studying models of governance in other small countries.

All of which might seem to be stepping on the SNP’s toes. But whilst the party cannily adopted the Yes logo after 2014, it announced it would neither fund nor help run another general Yes campaign. Political nature abhors a vacuum, so the wider Yes movement has simply moved into the vacant activist space. That was happening slowly, but there’s been an accelerated pace of activist endeavour since November 23rd which might have prompted the SNP to frisk up its own act.  

Consider. Ten days after the Supreme Court verdict, Stephen Flynn announced his bid for the SNP Westminster leadership. Maybe it was just a coincidence. But maybe long-standing dissatisfaction about the party’s low-key approach to big campaigning moments had finally come to a head.

Much has been written about splits, division and personality clashes at Westminster. But Mr Flynn’s motivation might be straightforward. SNP strategy has generally been slow to develop, even slower to be shared and is sometimes missing completely from electoral manoeuvres.

So perhaps the Aberdeen MP simply wants a well-constructed strategy leading up to the de-facto election instead of the stop-start “campaigning” that’s come to characterise the SNP’s London operation. After all, it’ll be MPs – not MSPs – in the front line.

Furthermore, perhaps his election by Westminster colleagues suggests they are also ready to go flat out behind a new, focussed and assertive de facto referendum strategy – delighting the impatient activists back home who helped elected them.  

A similar sense of renewal is needed at Holyrood where the Scottish Government is under pressure from the Scottish TUC to move heaven and earth in this week’s budget to avert economic meltdown.

The STUC has produced a costed alternative strategy using wealth and land taxes to net the Scottish Government an extra £3.3 billion. As General Secretary Roz Foyer explained in a punchy interview on BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show, that money could be used to avoid the looming “humanitarian disaster” this winter, reduce rail fares and avoid recession by creating a national energy company.

It's the kind of detailed plan normally produced by think tanks or opposition parties at election time. But the sense of frustration amongst trade unionists is once again palpable. Activists aren’t waiting for political parties – they’re doing the hard work themselves.

It’s a bold move. After all, the Scottish Government has been praised for settling pay claims and avoiding strikes by getting round the table with rail and health unions – something the UK Government refuses to do, preferring instead to grandstand while secretly pulling the strings. But for the STUC, the SNP’s successful pay negotiations are not enough.

Likewise, the only dedicated child payment in the UK and the progressive tax code which charges wealthy Scots more than in any other part of the UK. Good – but not good enough because of the current economic meltdown.

Hence Roz Foyer’s fierce warning that the Scottish Government will find itself “in a state of open war with the trade union movement unless it uses every power at its disposal in this week’s budget to fund pay rises and protect public services”.

So, is the SNP sitting on its laurels as it refuses to countenance the STUC’s plans for tax-raising and stimulating the economy? It’s a daring suggestion from the STUC leader who also warns the SNP “risks being seen as no better than the Tories”.

But her words constitute an even greater challenge for Scottish Labour.  Does it have a fully costed alternative budget for Thursday? If not, why not? And if not, will Labour MSPs embrace the STUC plan?

Whatever the party-political response, the STUC has asked precisely the right question. Is the Scottish Parliament willing to protect citizens, save public services and overhaul an inequitable taxation system, with no land taxes – uniquely in Europe? Or will it be business as usual on Thursday – better than Westminster’s offerings but not really daring enough?

One thing’s certain – civic society has re-awoken after a long period of lockdown. Political parties must look lively – or risk being overtaken.  

Read more by Lesley Riddoch: