THE SNP is meeting in more pensive mood than in some previous conferences, which often seemed more a revivalist rally rather than a party gathering. That’s no bad thing, as there are serious topics to debate even if discussion will be constrained by set-piece speeches. At least they’ll commence, as well as providing the chatter in the bars at night for delegates.

It will also be a more subdued conference as political reality bites. Being in government for 11 years means there’s nowhere to hide when folk complain about public services and pressures mount. Blaming it on imposed austerity is mostly correct but more often cuts no ice with punters who don’t care that it’s not as bad as in England. All politics is local and it’s the Scottish service they relate to, not the debating point of comparison elsewhere.

But that allows for some more realism. It’s not just at Holyrood but Westminster and council chambers that the SNP has elected representatives. That creates an internal discipline of mutual survival even alongside the mutual antagonism and rivalry that can develop. That now applies in the SNP as it has in others before them.

It’s time for the party to do some reflection and for the leadership to set out their political direction. That’s been brought about by the long-overdue publication of Andrew Wilson’s Growth Commission report, but also by Father Time himself. It’s now three and a half years since Nicola Sturgeon took over from Alex Salmond and it’s time to spell out her own vision. To date much has either been overshadowed by Brexit or talk of the date for an independence referendum, but the nature of the country she seeks has still to be detailed.

The Growth Commission report closes down one topic of debate but equally raises some more fundamental issues. Its appearance assures those demanding a second referendum now or as soon as can be that progress towards it is being made – though it’s hard to see how other than satisfying the zealots it does anything other than kick the issue into the next conference in October when once again a date will be demanded or explanation given.

But buying time is a useful tool in politics, especially when you’re under pressure. Without clarity on Brexit it’s impossible to call one, but with the report being viewed as a preparatory step it calms that faction. They’ll be persuaded that progress is being made and the one true faith adhered to.

However, it’s on the wider vision of the sort of independent Scotland she seeks that the interesting debate is beginning. She has made some radical changes on gender and pursued issues of sexual politics but on a wider social and economic agenda it’s basically been a steady as you go delivery of her predecessor’s legacy. That can’t continue, as much of it is running out of road and in any event the times are a changing and government needs to reflect that.

So the SNP is at a juncture where choices require to be made by party delegates. Given the agenda has been set it’s unlikely that any major decisions will be made this time but the likely route to be taken will begin to become clearer to those gathered and others watching. That will be the interesting aspect of conference and for which all eyes will be on both the First Minister’s speech and that of her party chairman and Finance Secretary, Derek Mackay.

Given her comments since the Growth Commission’s report it’s unlikely that she’s going to roll back, let alone repudiate it. But whilst it has been broadly welcomed by the business community and powers that be, it has caused fear and alarm in many radical, and even amongst more social democratic, members.

That’s something that she has to address as they’re core not just to SNP membership but voters. The old canard of tartan Tories was always absurd. The SNP membership whether in the central belt or rural parts was always radical without being socialist, other than some who identified as that. The core votes in the likes of Peterhead and Fraserburgh came out of housing schemes, many of which rivalled the central belt for bleakness and deprivation. It was never the farmers and skippers but the agricultural workers and the crew who voted SNP. Likewise, in the central belt it wasn’t the hard-core left but those who sought not just a better but fairer society.

Ms Sturgeon needs to reassure that audience that the party hasn’t rejected those values in its push for modernity. That’s possible as some of the interpretation of Andrew Wilson’s work has been over the top in hyperbole about a Scottish Thatcherism. It’s more like France’s President Macron and there’s still room for manoeuvre.

So the rumours put about by Tory political commentators of a parting of the ways within the SNP are not to be believed. That’s simply wishful thinking on their part. The SNP has stood together over decades and had deeper divides at previous junctures. Some will be disappointed on either wing, but most can be pulled together. But it will be a debate that will run and run and controlling it will be the hard part.

Moreover, rumours of the party’s imminent demise are also to be disbelieved. These are challenging times for both the SNP and the Scottish Government. But good work is still being done not just in Holyrood but in council chambers – where the leadership of Glasgow City Council has been a breath of fresh air through corridors that reeked of Labour cronyism.

It is always said that governments lose elections rather than oppositions winning them. But, that still demands a credible alternative. Despite Ruth Davidson’s sophistry she’s still a Tory and a majority of Scots still know they haven’t changed. As for Labour, what is it that you’re being asked to vote for and why should you trust them?

Despite is travails the SNP can still hold on, as Labour does in Wales on the basis at minimum of who else is there to vote for. But what they can’t do is alienate the social democratic base in the party or the public. That’s where Ms Sturgeon must allay concerns.