Sunday, February 12, 2023

It's time for the independence movement to unite behind the Angus MacNeil amendment calling for an October 2023 Holyrood plebiscite election - the option that gives us by far the best chance of successfully winning an independence mandate

I've no idea whether this will be a help or a hindrance, but I'm more than happy to give my 100% endorsement to Angus MacNeil MP's amendment for the forthcoming SNP emergency conference, which would have the effect of bringing about an early Scottish Parliament election in October of this year (or thereabouts), and using it as a de facto referendum on independence.  The exquisite beauty of the amendment is that it sets out in crystal-clear fashion the legal mechanism by which an early election can be called.  In arguing against the option of a 2023 plebiscite election, the SNP leadership have put all their eggs in the basket of claiming that it isn't legally possible to hold such an election, but now that we know that there is a legal mechanism they weren't aware of and an expert has confirmed that it's watertight, the case for 2023 is left looking extraordinarily compelling.  The leadership will undoubtedly still urge delegates to reject it, but in doing so they'll be relying on unthinking loyalty rather than sound arguments.  

(In reality, of course, even if it hadn't turned out that an early election can be triggered without a two-thirds majority simply by changing the standing orders, there would still have been a perfectly straightforward method by which an early election could have been engineered.  The First Minister would merely have needed to resign, and if no replacement had been elected, an election would automatically have followed.  Although there's a bug in the system that allows an opposition leader to be elected First Minister on a minority vote, that supposed obstacle is a red herring because any government formed in that way would have been ejected on a confidence vote within days.  Excluding the Presiding Officer, the SNP have exactly half the seats at Holyrood, so no government is viable without them, let alone without both them and the Greens.)

When faced with strategic dilemmas over recent years about how to bring independence about, the SNP have got stuck in the one-dimensional thinking that the solution is always to delay.  The default assumption is that the longer you delay, the better the chances of success.  Conference delegates now need to urgently start thinking outside that box, because straightforward logic should tell them that in the circumstances we find ourselves in, going to the people early gives us by far the best chance of winning an independence mandate.  Tory rule from London is the finest recruiting sergeant for independence, and in October of this year it'll still be easy to frame the choice as being a straight one between independence and Tory rule.  That will not be possible at a Westminster election in 2024, when Labour will be seducing independence supporters with the line that if you vote Labour on Thursday, you can end Tory rule by Friday lunchtime.  And if we wait until the scheduled Holyrood election in 2026, the likelihood is a Starmer government will have been in office for two years.  It might be suffering from mid-term blues by then, but there seems little chance that it will be anything like as unpopular in Scotland as the Tory government currently is.

As has been well-rehearsed, there are other numerous advantages that make the use of a 2023 Holyrood election superior to a 2024 Westminster election.  EU citizens and 16-17 year olds would have the vote, there would be no photo ID rules (which would disproportionately target younger voters who are more likely to be pro-indy), and pro-indy party leaders would not be excluded from flagship TV leaders' debates.

By the way, before anyone suggests that I'm singing from the same hymn sheet as Stuart "UKOK" Campbell on this, let me just point out the obvious - or what ought to be the obvious.  Campbell is being intellectually dishonest in his stance on the MacNeil amendment, because he's arguing in favour of something that he doesn't want to happen.  He would be utterly horrified if the people of Scotland are given a choice on independence this year while Nicola Sturgeon is still SNP leader, and by his own admission his "conscience" would prevent him from campaigning for a pro-indy vote in a de facto referendum.  He is, and I quote, "the least Yes he has ever been".  Presumably on the constituency vote in particular, he'd be urging his readers to reject independence "for now" by either voting Tory or abstaining in any 2023 plebiscite election - which makes a complete nonsense of him calling for one to be held.  

However, in spite of the blatant hypocrisy of Campbell's stance, I can only hope that he still has some lingering influence with a non-trivial minority of SNP conference delegates, and that his endorsement of the MacNeil amendment might just make a difference.  I frankly don't care how we reach the right outcome, just so long as we reach it.

*  *  *

If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop continue in some form, donations are welcome HERE.

22 comments:

  1. Quite right. I was more skeptical of the Holyrood route myself but you’ve made the strongest case for it yet: circumstances will be very different once the Tories are heaved out of power. Many Scots will be kind enough to give the new regime a chance and that will tip the numbers against us. Far better to seize the initiative while we have the chance.

    A good article in the National about what happens after such a plebiscite:

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/23315510.scotland-right-hold-indyref2-without-westminster-experts-argue/

    Politics turns very real. We’re in uncharted territory. It’ll take leadership like we’ve seldom seen.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Be ready for the duplicity of the Sturgeon suits and the UK state but -
    we need to do this - seize the time !

    ReplyDelete
  3. James the FM will never ever allow this to be passed. Sturgeon knows she can change the Scotland act to bring about an early election, instead the leadership has tried to make out that its impossible to call an early election. I heard today the SNP has lost 30,000 members what will it take before someone in the SNP see that the FM is more trouble than she’s worth?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "In arguing against the option of a 2023 plebiscite election, the SNP leadership have put all their eggs in the basket of claiming that it isn't legally possible to hold such an election, but now that we know that there is a legal mechanism they weren't aware of"

    This is a very charitable point of view. I'm pretty sure they were aware. If this gets accepted and becomes the plan, it will stop a lot of the attacks on the SNP.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If we win good; if we lose bad. Still, if we win we have more ammo. The Brits won't concede indyref2 - they're by nature anti-democratic; Labour even sang GSTQ/K. The only voice they listen to is one of peril.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Can't Westminster write a one line bill to get rid of the Scottish Parliament if they want? No Parliament, no Scottish election...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, they won't, but if they did it would be the best thing that could possibly happen. A mandate for independence in 2024 would then be guaranteed. The Scottish people will tolerate many things, but not the abolition of the Scottish Parliament.

      Delete
  7. Despite my willingness for this vote to take place as soon as possible, I just can't for the life of me feel satisfied the grassroots are in fine enough fettle or political arguments have been properly rehearsed for a showdown in 6 months time.

    The lack of grassroots engagement from the SNP has been an utter disgrace quite frankly. Where's the National Collective, Women for Indy, Labour for Indy, Radical Indy type orgs? I know these are non-partisan but the fact they havent been reestablished already is not conducive to a vote in 6 months time or show a grassroots ready. Where indeed is the Yes Scotland campaign or equivalent? It's not good enough.

    I'm sure these can be spun up but Salmond knew they needed time to bed in. I'll put my vote in the right place but there is a sweet sport between urgency and cutting our nose to spite our face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think there is, frankly, because if you wait until 2024, let alone 2026, you've already missed the sweet spot for the reasons given in my blogpost. "We're not ready yet" is often an argument for perpetual delay. By the time you get to 2026, we're still not ready, so we'd better wait until 2029, what's the rush, etc, etc. A plebiscite election will be very different from 2014 anyway, so I'm not quite sure what the role will be for groups like the ones you mentioned. Labour for Indy will be unlikely to have much of a role, because in a plebiscite election you can vote for indy, or you can vote Labour, but you can't do both.

      Delete
  8. Ramdom question, as an SNP member do we have to be at the conference to vote or are there options online? Do we get a vote on such matters? Been a member since 2014 but havent really engage much in policy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm almost certain non-delegate members don't get a vote. Which of course is absolutely intentional: it makes it easier for the leadership to control the outcome. But there again, Alba do plenty enough decisions-by-delegate, so it's by no means a problem unique to the SNP.

      Delete
  9. "When faced with strategic dilemmas over recent years about how to bring independence about, the SNP have got stuck in the one-dimensional thinking that the solution is always to delay. The default assumption is that the longer you delay, the better the chances of success."

    I agree with what you say there. Personally I think we've passed a clear inflection point in the past few years where we've gone from "the longer you delay, the better the chances of success" to the opposite - "the longer you delay, the worse the chances of success."

    Advantages have been squandered, momentum stalled, focus divided, unity lost.

    I don't see the SNP doing anything meaningful until they can shake off this one-dimensional assumption that you correctly accredit to them.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I’ve only read your headline but I couldn’t agree more.
    esp as Union Jack is ramping up https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64616887

    ReplyDelete
  11. We already have an independence majority in the Scottish Parliament and Westminster ignored that. Will they not just do the same with a Scottish election?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those majorities we already have are referendum mandates, not independence mandates.

      What's your own suggestion? Pack up and go home?

      Delete
  12. "Campbell is being intellectually dishonest in his stance on the MacNeil amendment, because he's arguing in favour of something that he doesn't want to happen."

    You've hit the nail on the head, James. The biggest irony of all is that Campbell called his post about the amendment "the calling of the bluff", because if a de facto referendum takes place this year, the bluff being called will be his own. Having demanded a 2023 Holyrood plebiscite, would he get behind the independence campaign in that plebiscite? Of course he wouldn't, because that would involve recommending an SNP vote on the constituency vote, and we know that he regards destroying Nicola Sturgeon in revenge for the trans thing as the priority at the moment. So he'd urge a No to independence in the plebiscite he demanded.

    The most charitable way of putting it is that his position is hopelessly inconsistent. There are a number of less charitable ways of putting it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Important nuance James. If there is a referendum, it's inspite of Nicola still being in charge. She doesn't want it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Another mind reader?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Scottish Independence Voting Intention:

    NO: 48% (+3)
    YES: 37% (-7)
    Undecideds: 12% (+1)

    Undecideds Excluded:

    NO: 56% (+5)
    YES: 44% (-5)

    Via
    @LordAshcroft
    , On 26 Jan-3 Feb,
    Changes w/ 7-19 April 2021.

    POLL: Should the next General Election be considered a de facto referendum on Scottish independence:

    NO: 67%
    YES: 21%
    Don’t know: 12%

    Via
    @LordAshcroft
    , On 26 Jan-3 Feb.
    [Scottish voters polled only]

    ReplyDelete
  16. Two-thirds of Scots reject 'de facto referendum' on independence: poll (see the National)

    This is discouraging for a de facto ref approach. One can certainly argue that the SNP doesn't mention indy, thus no campaign but no will for it is typical of the cowardly lion. No campaign, no will, no way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Ashcroft poll isn't a poll, it's a propaganda exercise

      Delete
  17. Ashcroft polls in the past have been fairly reliable. If this one is indicative of where we are now then we are stuck. Sturgeon has to go, she has run out of ideas we need someone fresh. I know people will say who? Answer - almost anyone except the obvious choices. It's sad to say, but Anas Sarwar has been as effective a leader of the independence movement as she has - the result is the same - nothing done. We still can't even get the transfer of control over benefits organised.. This woman is killing independence, she can't even get devolution organised.

    ReplyDelete