Humza Yousaf’s new plan for a route to independence, which he unveiled at the SNP’s independence convention on Saturday, had failed to make a substantial impact on people out enjoying a Monday lunchtime in Glasgow City Centre. 

It seemed to have passed many people on what the new plan or its differences were to what was proposed by former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. 

The new First Minister has been dubbed as Nicola Sturgeon’s continuity candidate – and those in the street felt that this was the case with regard to the independence plan revealed at the conference in Dundee.

Under the new plan, a vote for the SNP in the next election will be a vote for independence, with the party winning 29 of Scotland’s 57 seats in the UK parliament being taken as a mandate for independence. 

Read more: Humza Yousaf appears to admit his day-old Indy plan won't work

For Nate, who is originally from the Lake District but lives in Glasgow, the most significant part of the plan is not actually what it details, but the fact that it puts independence back on the agenda again.

“It’s a good start, it gets people talking. The more it is in the media the more people talk about it, so that can only be a good thing,” he says.

A Yes voter himself, Nate recognises that the change in leadership of the SNP and hence the change in tactics for independence, may present a challenge to swaying the public: “People are going to be slightly more unsure – we’ve got a new leader, so it’s a change which people aren’t used to.”

For others however, independence being back as one of the main talking points on the political agenda is the last thing they want. Carol, 76, from Glasgow, said while she would have voted for independence 30 or 40 years ago, it is an idea which no longer matters to her. 

“Nowadays I don’t think independence is that important. There is the situation in hospitals and the carry on with ferries – I passed them the other day going down to Greenock and they’re costing us a fortune. So I don’t think we should be pushing for independence – we should be trying to fix the mistakes that have already been made,” says Carol.

She points to issues like water contamination which plagued Glasgow’s Queen Elizabeth University Hospital when it first opened as examples of this.

“I had a little niece in there at the time and you couldn’t drink the water, you had to bring in plastic bottles. It was unbelievable, they opened it too early just to say it was open.”

Read more: ANALYSIS: The continuity candidate continues the SNP's dissappointment 

The practical idea of Scotland having the chance to have its say once more was for others the most important thing to come out of the conference, rather than talking points.

For Kathleen Ferguson, 22 from Aberdeen, a second referendum is a chance to “show that politics works”.

“There should be a referendum if it’s what the people want, even if it ends up being a no vote, at least people have been given the choice. It feels like a last resort, Scotland has been trying to get its voice heard for so long,” she said of Yousaf’s plan.

Any moves toward independence being done by the book was crucial for her friend Jacob, also from Aberdeen.

He said: “I think if it’s clearly stated in the manifesto that this is what a majority of seats means, then it is fair. As long as it is done in a way that doesn’t break laws or disregard judicial power, it seems fair enough because it’s not like anything is going to happen otherwise.”