Order of Preference

There is, yet again, some discussion of a second independence referendum and the circumstances under which it might happen. And, in the event that Westminster refuses permission for such a thing, whether the SNP should use an election as a proxy for such a referendum.

My strong preference is that this matter should be addressed with a referendum. People vote in elections for a variety of reasons, and consequently it is really hard to pin down a single cause for them voting a particular way. This is especially so in Scotland where the SNP are able to make a unique offer to the public that they can provide minimally competent governance (albeit even that just barely). The only alternate government is a Con/Lib/Lab unionist coalition, and given the vacuum of talent on offer even between those parties, that's a prospect that I find frankly terrifying. So giving people a choice between independence or a coalition of calamity isn't ideal.

Likewise, my strong preference is that such a referendum should occur with the underpinning of a Section 30 order. That puts to rest all doubts about the validity of it, means there will be no large-scale boycott, and should ensure that the result is respected.

However, we cannot allow Scottish democracy to exist at the whim of a Prime Minister who owes his position almost entirely due to English votes. (In the 2019 election even if 100% of the people of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland voted Labour, Boris would still be PM; conversely, had England been excluded from the vote, Ian Blackford would now be PM.)

Additionally, it needs to be understood by our politicians that a mandate is not permission to do something; it is an instruction to do that thing.

So, my preferred course of action is as follows:

In the first instance, the SNP (and Greens if they want) should run on a manifesto with a clear and unambiguous commitment: if they win a majority, either alone or together, they will hold a second independence referendum.

If they win a majority then they should apply one final time for a Section 30 order to hold that referendum. (Obviously, if they don't win a majority, the issue is moot.)

If they are denied the Section 30 order, they should proceed anyway - referendums in the UK are by default consultative anyway, so this should be possible. (Obviously, if they are granted the Section 30 order, the issue is moot.)

At this point, the UK government may allow the referendum to go ahead (in which case the issue is moot), or they may block it - either by winning a legal challenge using existing law or by using emergency legislation to explicitly and formally reserving the required power. (At the moment, there is some doubt as the issue has never actually been tested. What isn't in doubt is the UK government's ability to close any possible loophole.)

If the UK government do block the issue, then at that point I believe the SNP (and the Greens, if they want) should stand in every future election on a manifesto with a clear and unambiguous pledge: if they win a majority of the seats, that will be taken as a statement that the people of Scotland want independence, and they will seek to negotiate accordingly.

Sooner or later, it's likely they'll win that majority, at which point the people of Scotland will have had our say. After which, it is a matter for the diplomats.

That is a slower process than just using May's election to short-cut the process and going straight to the final step. However, I do think it is a necessary delay. (My view is that the SNP and the Greens should have started the process with the 2016 election, and we should already have done steps 1 and 2 by now, but they didn't and we haven't - the manifestoes weren't quite clear enough, and they chose not to press the issue when May and Boris said "no". But that's the past - we are where we are.)

The only issue with that approach is time - standing in 2021 on "we want a referendum" means that it will be 2026 before the next scheduled election. So either that means five more years of waiting or it means collapsing the parliament for an early election (which isn't ideal for several reasons). And, of course, in the meantime we're likely to see Holyrood gutted, if not shut down completely.

But I think those delays are necessary. If the current majority for independence is actually as solid as the polls indicate then they should remain solid as we work through the stages. If it isn't then perhaps we shouldn't be heading for independence anyway - something like that really does need to be the settled will of the majority, and not just a knee-jerk response to Boris, Brexit, or the balls-up of the pandemic response.