Leaving aside the cynicism in some quarters about the Scottish Government’s intentions on a plebiscite election (ie. do they genuinely intend to use an election as a de facto independence referendum or is it merely the latest wheeze in the neverending and futile campaign for a Section 30 order?), I’m genuinely puzzled by Angus Robertson’s comments on France 24. Even if it was true that the SNP were pulling the wool over Yes supporters’ eyes, they would surely want to maintain consistency in their public comments about the pretence. And yet Mr Robertson’s comments are quite simply irreconcilable with the position Nicola Sturgeon set out to parliament a few months ago.
He says “a referendum will come, at some stage”. The whole point of Nicola Sturgeon’s statement was to concede that a referendum may not come for legal reasons (in which event there is supposed to be the Plan B of a plebiscite election), and also to give us the exact date for when it will be held if it does come – with that date being 23rd October 2023. There is no longer any “some stage” mystery over the timing. So in the space of just seven words, Mr Robertson has managed to totally contradict Nicola Sturgeon’s words not once, but twice.
He goes on to say: “It is going to come. Among the youngest voters in Scotland, so between 16-25, 25-35, support for independence is running between 60-70%. So it’s going to come sooner or later.” Again, if Nicola Sturgeon is to be believed, a referendum is going to come on 23rd October 2023 or not at all. If it doesn’t come, there’s supposed to be a plebiscite election by 2024 which means that regardless of the result the SNP will stop calling for a referendum for the foreseeable future. So there is no “or later”, and it’s hard to see what Yes support among under-35s has got to do with the price of fish, at least on that point. It does sound suspiciously like Mr Robertson is talking about a world in which there is no intention of having a plebiscite election if the Supreme Court rules against the Scottish Government, with the real “plan” (if it can even be dignified with that word) being to wait around for a few decades in the hope that the usual demographic shifts will eventually produce a 60%+ majority for independence and thus make a Section 30 order inevitable.
Apart from being a betrayal of SNP members who fully expect their leaders to hold either a referendum or de facto referendum within two years, such a plan would be based on no fewer than two false premises. Firstly, it is categorically not the case that mass support for independence among the young in 2022 will automatically translate into mass support among the general population by 2042 or 2052. People often become more conservative as they get older, and the political context will evolve anyway. It’s entirely possible Yes support could stay static or go backwards over such a long period – not least due to a lack of leadership on independence from an SNP that would be tacitly accepting London rule on a long-term basis. And secondly, even if the mythical 60%+ support for independence did eventually arise, how on earth would that make a Section 30 inevitable, or even more likely? It would actually become less likely, because denying one would by that point be the British Government’s best and perhaps only shot at averting independence.
The pessimistic side of me wonders if Angus Robertson didn’t mis-speak on France24, but instead set out the SNP leadership’s private thinking. There would still be the mystery of why he didn’t keep up the pretence for public consumption, but maybe it was accidental – as with Mhairi Hunter’s tweet, it could be that people close to Nicola Sturgeon are so used to speaking this way in private that it sometimes ‘leaks out’ in public, and they barely even register that it’s happened. If we had genuine journalism in this country rather than a glorified Yoon Gogglebox which is content to passively gloat from the sofa about any hint of a Nat climbdown, the media would be vigorously challenging the SNP to reconcile Angus Robertson’s comments with the stated plan, and if they can’t be reconciled, demanding clarity on which is the true plan.
Instructions from Labour to the people of Scotland…
If you want a Labour government: you need to VOTE FOR IT.
If you want to rejoin the EU: don’t vote for that. Give up and vote Labour instead.
If you want independence: urgh. Repent, filthy separatist, and vote Labour.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 9, 2022
I’m curious – what extra freedoms would Scottish independence bring, that they don’t already have? Don’t shout at me – I’m just trying to understand. #ScottishIndependence
— Sarah Gibbons (@SarahG20123) October 9, 2022
Freedom to get the government we elected, rather than one we voted against overwhelmingly. Freedom to rejoin the EU. Freedom to remove British nuclear weapons from the Clyde. In a nutshell: freedom to make our own choices, which is the only meaningful definition of freedom.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 9, 2022
