Given how completely obvious it is that the SNP did not fight the general election as a de facto referendum on independence (however much most of us wanted them to), it seems almost unbelievable that unionist commentators like Alex Massie and Stephen Daisley are even attempting the line "you had your de facto referendum and you lost". If they want to gain a reputation as Trumpian truth-deniers, they're going the right way about it. But if it really needs to be pointed out why the election was not a de facto, here are several reasons -
* The amendment to Humza Yousaf's independence strategy, which was passed at the SNP conference (and I believe was tabled by Tommy Sheppard) makes clear that the earliest election which might be fought as a de facto referendum is the 2026 Holyrood election, not the 2024 Westminster election: "Conference further agrees that should an incoming UK Government continue to refuse the demands of the Scottish people to decide their own future, consideration should be given to fighting the next Scottish Parliament election in 2026 as a de facto referendum on independence; and that a majority at that election for the SNP – or the SNP and any other party with which we have reached a pro-independence agreement – will be considered a mandate to negotiate independence."
* Stephen Flynn was asked more than once during the election campaign itself about the de facto concept, and not only did he make clear that this election was not a de facto, he even claimed that the de facto was never SNP policy and was just a personal initiative of Nicola Sturgeon.
* The line "Nicola Sturgeon said this election would be fought as a de facto referendum on independence" is dishonest unless you complete it by saying "but shortly afterwards she stepped down and her successor reversed that policy".
* Many SNP leaflets during the campaign did not even mention independence and instead focused on a scattergun list of other policies. That is plainly not how a de facto referendum would be fought.
* Having given consideration to using the word "independence" in their ballot paper description, the SNP decided against even doing that.
* The SNP's main opponents did not treat the referendum as a vote on independence either. Anas Sarwar directly pitched for votes from independence supporters without asking them to change their views, and when endorsing Labour the Daily Record's first words were "this election is not about independence".
* If anyone is going to argue that the "page 1, line 1" of the SNP manifesto means that anyone who voted against the SNP was voting against independence, they're then going to have to explain how the Tories' election defeats over the last decade were not a vote in favour of Indyref2, because their constant refrain has been "a vote for the Conservatives is a vote to stop Indyref2".
SNP strategy was to bring about a Tory free Scotland, despite the fact that the clear and present danger was from Labour. And the strategy was a failure. Drossy boy managed to actually lose all by himself. The others all kept their seats. Meanwhile the obvious danger was given a virtually free run and guess what. Huge number of Labour M P’s in Scotland. This epitomises the utter incompetence and lack of awareness of those now running SNP. Depressing.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn’t the SNPs plan to make Scotland or the UK Tory-free, because it wasn’t within their gift to do so, and they were fully away of that.
DeleteThe SNP knew their support had dwindled during the last 12-18 months, so the Tory extinction narrative was just a convenient excuse in waiting… hence they are pedalling it post-defeat…
It absolutely was their plan. Have you been asleep? And it is not being peddled by SNP post election. Because they completely failed in doing it. Are you at the wind up or just really stupid?
DeleteThis is similar to the argument made by Nicola Sturgeon on the ITV Election Night results programme.
ReplyDeleteIs this the new successor to "he's growing into the role, has shown sureness-of-touch and made a great speech at conference"?
DeleteDid Humza finally get settled in after all? We were all so looking forward to that.
DeleteNicola Sturgeon pointed out that Humza had made an error in dropping the agreement with the Greens. However John Swinney is the right person for the job. And, since the campaign had not placed independence at its core, it cannot be seen as defacto.
DeleteThe mistake was having the Bute house agreement in the first place. It gave the Greens an 'independence' legitimacy which they did not deserve. It also allowed those green supporters who lent their votes to the SNP to move behind the greens this properly splitting the independence vote. Nothing wrong with the Greens standing against the SNP they are after all a political party with their own agenda it was the BHA that was the disaster. Obviously I blame Sturgeon for that BUT we all have to move on from the Sturgeon Salmond division and try to find a way of uniting as a new yes movement that can put the pressure on our representatives. Too many times our ire is aimed at WM or 'the unionists' letting the inaction of our reps to go without pressure. They had it easy time for the Yes movement to unite and rebalance the voter- rep relationship
DeleteMeant to read as: Time for the Yes movement to unite and rebalance the voter-rep relationship
DeleteThanks James - that's a helpful corrective.
ReplyDeleteWhat is clear is that half folk in Scotland want independence whatever way any one election is apprpoached and its result spun, and if elections are not going to persuade Westminster to negotiate then something much more imaginative than party politics is going to be needed.
My guess is that an imaginative route would not focus primarily on independence but on modelling how bringing back sovreignty to the people enables us to care for each other in a way that leaving Westminster and the landed and corporate elite controlling our lives (and diminishing their own ability to relate as equal real human beings) can never do.
Independence has nothing to do with party politics. SNP was, and unfortunately remains, the only viable vehicle for the journey. It needs stripped back to its pre 2014 state, with Independence front and centre. The old guard need to go. Is there anyone who can get fire into bellies??
DeleteInteresting notion but in reality we know that the electorate responds to short sharp slogans. Sad, superficial but effective. Advertising on the Clydeside expressway will do far more in delivering positive Indy messages than any amount of lengthy glossy papers on Indy. SNP know this but won’t do it. Johnston and Farage are complete arseholes but employ people who know how to get messages, even complete lies, over to people. Gloves off and confrontation is the only way to make inroads in securing Indy.
DeleteAnon@12:28,
DeleteAnother problem is that none of these “lengthy glossy papers on Indy” have addressed any of the really important issues regarding independence, such as currency, pensions, border with England, replacing money we receive vie the Barnett formula, etc. ie the issues people really want to know about.
After all these years, still we wait.
correct - the english invented money, we just get to use it and the oil won't be worth anything anyway as we don't have a refinery; the petrol will have to be imported from england, scotland living off english petrol. Slam Dunk. It's just impossible for a country to issue its own currency, and also impossible for a country to use anothers, like say the dollar - no one uses the dollar. Just because you are sitting on an ocean of the world's most important commodity doesn't mean anything. Who do you think owns all the cash machines - english banks; who owns the internet - the bank of england; who owns amazon - king charles. MI5 is listening in on all your android phones. The wind is owned by foreigners now and anyone who puts a windmill in their garden is stealing profits. It's an anglo world we all live in. Rejoice. We fought hitler for freedom and it's not our fault the irish all decided to eat potatoes. Foreigners love us. I blame the vatican, it's all a papist plot to make good protestant men of the union have gay sex in ayia napa, while drunk and incapable. And if Scotland became independent you would lose the world's greatest football team - Rangers - who would leave to play in the much superior English Super Premier League.
DeleteNot a lot of people know that.
DeleteJust in case the point above isn't satire.
Delete** The English Invented Money **
Reality: Money has been around for thousands of years, way before England existed. The first known money came from ancient Mesopotamia around 3000 BCE. So, it's not something the English invented.
** Oil Worthlessness Without Refineries **
Reality: Oil is valuable whether or not you have refineries. Countries like Saudi Arabia export crude oil, which others then refine. Scotland sitting on oil reserves is definitely a big deal economically.
** Impossibility of Issuing or Using Foreign Currency **
Reality: Many countries have their own money, and some use other nations' currencies without any problem. For example, Ecuador uses the US dollar, and several European countries use the euro. If Scotland wanted its own currency, it could create one by designing notes and coins, setting up a central bank to manage it, establishing exchange rates, and gradually introducing it to the public. It's a completely feasible and common process.
** Ownership of Cash Machines and the Internet **
Reality: Cash machines are run by all sorts of banks from all over the world, not just English ones. The internet is a global thing—no single country owns it. And Amazon? It's an American company, not owned by any royal family or the Bank of England.
** MI5 and Android Phones **
Reality: MI5 is the UK's security agency, but it doesn't control all Android phones. Android is made by Google, an American company. Governments might try to keep tabs on stuff, but saying MI5 controls all Androids is a stretch.
** Ownership of Wind **
Reality: The idea that someone can own the wind is pretty funny. Wind energy is created by wind turbines, which can be built by anyone, from big companies to individual people. Putting a windmill in your garden isn't stealing profits; it's just being eco-friendly.
** Anglo World and Historical Context **
Reality: The world is influenced by many cultures, not just the English. World War II was won by a lot of countries working together, not just the UK. And the Irish potato famine had complex causes; it's not just about what they ate.
** Blame on the Vatican **
Reality: Blaming the Vatican for modern issues is a bit far-fetched. And making fun of Irish history or accusing the Vatican of strange plots doesn’t make sense.
** Football **
Reality: If Scotland became independent, it's highly unlikely that Rangers would even consider leaving for the English Premier League. Rangers is a deeply rooted Scottish club with a rich history and fierce rivalries within the Scottish Premiership, The club's identity and fan base are closely tied to its Scottish heritage. Moving to the English league would risk losing this cultural and historical connection, which is a significant part of the club's appeal and identity.
Did anyone else notice some deliberately misleading potential voters during the election?
ReplyDeleteI lost count on the number of times I seen people (especially on Twitter) say that the plan was for the SNP to win a majority of seats and then declare independence or some nonsense about sending envoys to the EU if Westminster said no. It doesn't help to win supporters back by being willingly naïve to what SNP policy actually was.
Nicola Sturgeon discusses the position of the independence movement quite well in her ITV Election Night programme contributions, including in regard to the question of referendums.
DeleteApologies- posted in the past blog but maybe still relevant.
ReplyDeleteAny chance we can discuss independence and how to achieve it whether in part through a revamped constitution convention for independence (not devolution) and tactics for Holyrood elections. For alba and the other smaller pro independence parties what are your real differences, if any? EU/ EFTA, nato or not? Get together and you may attract more attention and votes looking towards the 2nd vote.
To summarise the Alba Party has consistently called for a Constitutional Convention and they believe that every single election should be used to seek a mandate to begin negotiations for Independence (not a referendum) and the threshold would be a simple majority of votes cast for all pro-independence parties.
DeleteAfter which a combination of Parliamentary Action, Popular Action, Legal Action and International Pressure would be employed.
For other policy differences: Alba advocates for joining EFTA rather than the EU, Adopting a Scottish currency as soon as possible post-independence, a written constitution to be drafted and adopted soon after independence (emphasising direct democracy and citizen participation in its creation), retaining the monarchy initially (with future discussions on becoming a republic), and Alba opposes NATO membership (Advocates for a non-aligned foreign policy, focusing on regional security and international cooperation).
I thought Alba moved to an outright anti-monarchy position once Charles took over?
DeleteDoing fine until your last para. Such matters are for post Indy discussion.
Delete"Doing fine until your last para. Such matters are for post Indy discussion"
DeleteThought I'd add that in as the OP asked about EU/EFTA, Nato etc
"I thought Alba moved to an outright anti-monarchy position once Charles took over?"
DeleteAh you're right, info I was copying was outdated!
Anon at 12.32. Fair enough. Anything potentially divisive should be avoided. We can have civilised debate post Indy.
DeleteNicola Sturgeon would be an excellent President of Scotland.
DeleteAnon at 12.48. Take your anorak off and go out into the sunshine. Maybe try and get your hole. Sad wee man.
DeleteA crook for president. 12.48 🤣🤣🙂🙂 You mean like the USA.
DeleteAnother thing to bear in mind in 2026: the Greens might go into government with Anas in any case. Slater said the quiet part loud, so we know it’s on their radar.
ReplyDeleteThe greens lost my vote the second Slater said that. Will SNP realise and counter the danger they represent. No chance.
DeleteI wonder if the Greens would consider entering government with Labour if there was progress on enough of their overall policy platform? After all parties do not insist on all aspects of their platform being enacted.
DeleteThe Greens are not strictly a political party but more of a protest movement that would enter coalition with anyone prepared to say they'll save something cute and cuddly or keep the air invisible to the naked eye
DeleteLorna Slater would probably make an excellent politician if she joined a political party
DeleteSlater is an exceptional talent: most people don't even realise she's a satirist. Her dry, rabbit in the headlights, authentic delivery of wildly clueless nonsense is truly masterful. Easily Holyrood's finest "politician." Bravo, Lorna, we salute you.
DeleteI think that’s exactly the route many countries took when leaving the British empire throughout the 20th century.
ReplyDeleteI am unaware of one and I have worked in law for 45 years. We need confrontation and effective communication of the benefits of Independence. And then international pressure. And unfortunately, we need but don’t have a Leader who can hold a crowd and deliver a message. History happens when some such person comes along.
ReplyDeleteKC, you know perfectly well why your comment was deleted, but as your question is remarkably simple to answer, I'll answer it. Yes, of course there have been successful plebiscite elections in the past, most obviously Ireland in 1918. Now kindly stop posting.
ReplyDeleteKC - take your nonsense to a different forum.
ReplyDeleteIs it accurate to refer to the 1918 election in Ireland as a successful plebiscite election? The emphasis being on successful. An awful lot had to happen after that. And please James I am not K C.
ReplyDeleteYes, KC, it's accurate to refer to 1918 as a successful plebiscite election. You're welcome.
DeleteWe will have to agree to disagree. Jim McNab called this right, but your blog, your prerogative.
DeleteKC, please stop infesting this blog with your "I am not KC" troll posts. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteJames Kelly, a think you maybe got this wrong. The guy by the name kc posted a comment directly to yourself couple o blogs back think it was yesterday, he said he wisnae going the post again.
DeleteHe seamed genuine in the comment. A was surprised you didnae reply tae his comment but maybe you didnae see it.
Hope you didnae mind me pointing this out tae you.
"He seamed genuine in the comment."
DeleteOh my God. Yes, I saw the comment. No, it did not seem genuine. He went out of his way in that comment to say that I had been mistaking him for other people, which was preparing the ground for a hundred "I am not KC, you've got it wrong" posts today. I've been dealing with this guy for years, even when I had pre-moderation on he was trying to post every day.
This was entirely predictable. The dishonesty of Massie, Daisley and others was to be expected. It does not matter what the facts were, the plan is to kick the SNP and therefore Independence when it is down. Because in the minds of Massie, Daisley and their handlers/superiors those are one and the same thing. It is obvious now that that is convenient for them to perform that conflation.
ReplyDeleteThey have the media megaphone. Even with their dead tree circulation now at miniscule levels, what they print is then picked up and amplified by a union compliant BBC. Sky get in on it too. It is unending blanket propaganda.
We get the media message they have been paid to spread. They sold their souls and took the coin.
Scotland needs its own media and has been denied it so lies like those can be broadcast without challenge across the country, reinforced by non news TV shows, because they control terrestrial programming and so influence it negatively towards independence.
This is why websites like this must continue to exist, and why trolls still infest them. If this site and other blogs and podcasts were not still a residual source of concern to the unionist machine that has just 'won', why spend so much time trying to dispirit those who remain committed to independence? If the war is over why haven't they demobilized? Because for them the war isn't over, and neither should it be for us.
I think people would have noticed if a major party had run a single-issue election campain.
ReplyDeleteEvening, KC. Of course they noticed it happening! Just because you slept through it doesn't mean the rest of us did. Plebiscite elections like 1918 are dramatic affairs and are pretty hard to miss.
DeleteI'm talking about 2024 the same as you did in your article, in agreement. I have no idea who your pall 'KC' is and you need to stop acting wierd. 'Plebiscite election' is a complete contradiction - it's a stupid collection of words - I also suggest that everyone lays off the Latin gobledegook.
Delete"Alex Massie and Stephen Daisley"
ReplyDeleteMairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey.
I'm sorry, I won't do it again.
I'm sorry. That should of course have been:
DeleteMaissie dotes and Daisley dotes and Lidl Lambs they divey.
What a rum do!
Have you ever heard of this as the actual words - don't know if it's true
DeleteMares eat oats and does eat oats
And little lambs eat ivy.
Yes, that's what a lot of people actually sang. Including my father to annoy me :-) Often.
DeleteI thought it was just my crazy mum😁
DeleteJim Sillars open letter to the movement published in the Herald .
ReplyDeleteI suggest you all hae a look.
I did read it. Seemed too harsh on Swinney.
DeleteNot sure how, Swinney becoming leader didn't wipe out his previous record in Government and his close involvement throughout everything that happened (or more importantly didn't happen) throughout the entire Sturgeon years.
DeleteIt's ludicrous to suggest becoming leader hits the reset button. He's as much to blame for the situation the SNP now finds itself in as Sturgeon & Yousaf.
Swinney needs to be given a chance.
DeleteThat's what they said about Yousaf...
DeleteNicola Sturgeon correctly pointed out on ITV that Swinney is the best man for the job and recommended against a change.
DeleteMight be better asking the opinion of someone who isn't a close friend who had John Swinney as their Deputy for over 8 years. She might be just a smidge biased.
DeleteIt’s as though last Thursday didn’t happen. J S is an integral part of
Deletethe team and set up that has proven itself incompetent in the past four or so years across a range of areas of governance, and the SNP itself is being run in an entirely undemocratic way. We need the SNP but we need the pre 2014 SNP, both as the vehicle to achieve independence and as the party of sound governance. Right now we have neither. And it won’t change as long as people stay in denial.
So what. The tactic by the opponents of the snp is to always change FM’s … Here’s a thought, get your own people elected first.
ReplyDeleteIf only the SNP had put independence on page 1, line 1 of their manifesto. That would have made all the difference. Oh, wait...
ReplyDeleteAs James Kelly points out it's not enough. You have to campaign on page 1 and line 1.
DeleteIf you say "Vote SNP for Scotland to become an independent country" mean exactly that.
DeleteNot some waffle about negotiations for a referendum (which everyone knows would be denied) and your election in the 2017 General Election already gave you a "triple-lock mandate" for.
Words are easy. What action did they take. Where was the continuous disruption of Westminster, the defiance of oil and gas decisions through imaginative use of planning powers and the confrontation that will have to occur?
DeleteAnother myth is that Defacto referendum is singular. Like any referendum you can ask the question more than once. In Scotland it looks like we accept, uniquely, that we need permission from those who fear asking the question again in case we give the “wrong answer”. So even if a Party were to turn an election into a defacto referendum, that can’t be classed as “your referendum” singular. Defacto referenda can be held by any political party at any and every election if they wish.
ReplyDeleteSo we just declare every election a de facto referendum until we get the result we want?
DeleteExactly . The people are Sovereign , they can decide at any election that they want independence
DeleteYou're quite bright fae a Britnat.
It’s a great idea. Just makes you wonder why it hasn’t been thought of before. I think we should definitely go with it. If we don’t gain independence in 2026 it’ll surely only be a matter of time.
DeleteAbsolutely, we just need to proclaim that we have the right to self -determination and keep shouting it out . UN says that a people have this right . That good enough for me.
DeleteDe facto election. Majority in favour. What then? What is the process?
DeleteWhat’s next is Westminster telling us not to be so hasty and that they would love to grant us a super duper “real” referendum whose narrative they will be able to formally control.
DeleteSo there’s no next planned out?
DeleteIf the next Holyrood election was declared a de facto referendum, but we didn’t win, then obviously we’d move on to the next GE. If we won a majority at that the unionists probably wouldn’t be happy if we declared independence at that point, so realistically it would have to go to the following Holyrood election, thereby making it best of three.
DeleteAnon 12.16. Process , well it's happened with other countries - negotiations..
DeleteThe moment any Scottish government were to declare UDI or a referendum or anything like any of those things on Scottish independence they would be removed from office and arrested by the British government
DeleteThose opponents of the SNP who insist differently are lying populists
We know the Unionists will not negotiate, so what comes next.? Which international law forum do we go to and seeking what? The SNP at present has not set out a specific process. Am I the only person bothered by that? And please spare me any britnat troll comments if you do not actually have an answer to this huge issue. Informed suggestions please? I want confrontation and daily disruption of Westminster and direct opposition to U K oil and gas proposals. We are being ignored while our energy resources are being taken to keep England afloat.
DeleteThe Supreme Court ruling acknowledged that referendums, even if non-binding, have significant political consequences. This acknowledgment can be interpreted to suggest that other political processes, such as elections, also have important political implications and can reflect public sentiment on major issues, including independence.
DeleteIt could be argued that using the ballot box via a referendum or an election would carry authority, which would force the UK Government to recognise that authority and therefore cause a change to the Union. At the very least following a successful 'de-facto referendum' that would open up other legal avenues to explore.
Err, you did lose your defacto referendum, you said half the seats was a mandate - ERGO if you get less than that, you have on YOUR OWN DEFINITION no mandate. Not that it makes any difference, I can win the high jump if I get to set the bar low enough.
ReplyDeleteDon't know when you lot are going to wake up and smell the coffee.
What about those mandates following the 2017 and 2019 General Elections?
DeleteIn 2017 the SNP quite clearly stated that winning the majority of seats would give them a "triple-lock" of mandates for another independence referendum.
Then in 2019 they again said it would give them a mandate for a second independence referendum and allow Scots to choose between Brexit and independence.
The SNP won a majority of seats in both elections...
Yes, what about them, make up your own metrics for success that no one else has agreed to.
DeleteIf I win a council seat on a mandate to abolish all council tax does that mean the council has to do it?
You can make up any mandate you want - ONE DAY YOU'LL REALISE like the little boy that cried wolf - PEOPLE HAVE LONG SINCE STOPPED LISTENING.
Carry on screaming into a dumpster if you want
Whoooosh. Leave this discussion to people who understand the issues. Your council example is beyond stupid. Away back to WOS.
DeleteAs much as it pains me to say, Jerry does have a point.
DeleteI’m actually flabbergasted that , if anything talk of independence and de facto referendums and the like has increased since the GE, given that the SNP lost 39 of their 48 seats and their share of the vote was 30%.
Let’s be honest guys, independence needs to be put on the back burner, at least for now.
AnonymousJuly 10, 2024 at 5:41 PM
DeleteAt last a glimmer of realism, the only way to get independence is to ask for a referendum - THAT's IT, if they say no, then that's it.
Its like having a small child endlessly crying and stamping their feet because mummy won't buy them sweets.
Old Mrs Krankie proved what was obvious, the power rests at Westminster - LIKE IT OR NOT, and if they say no then you aren't going anywhere no matter how much you scream and stamp your feet.
Has the last 10 years of HARD EVIDENCE not taught you anything? No wonder educational standards are through the floor
"the only way to get independence is to ask for a referendum - THAT's IT, if they say no, then that's it"
DeleteThere's no circumstance where they'll say Yes again though. Even the suggestion some make of maintaining 60% in the polls are nonsensical as they'd have even more reason to ensure that it doesn't happen in that scenario.
With that reality what is the democratic route to achieve independence? Or are we admitting that democracy doesn't exist in the UK and it was never a voluntary union to begin with?
People like Jerry just confirm that England is a colonial country full of colonials who think they still have an empire.
DeleteHe uses the analogy of a small kid asking their parent for sweets.
DeleteI think it's more akin to being in a relationship with an abusive partner who says you can't leave & that you'd be nothing without him!
Anon at 5.41. It doesn’t pain you at all to say it. Britnat trolling standards really are appalling. Agreeing with your own posts is pathetic. Away back to your village.
DeleteSo the SNP have managed to create the situation where the Britnats can claim there was a vote for independence when people who would have voted for independence knew it was not. The SNP really are shit at this independence thing. You would almost think they are doing it on purpose.
ReplyDelete