In common with all her colleagues in the SNP, Shona Robison is very good at describing the problem and stating the solution. Where she and they fail completely is in describing how they intend to connect present reality to the solution of restoring Scotland’s independence. The Scottish parties – and in this I include SNP, Alba, ISP etc. – are brilliant when it comes to telling us what we already know about the way things are. They are excellent when it comes to expounding various ‘visions’ of how much better things might be if we brought Scotland’s government home. They are hopeless at explaining how they propose to get us from where we are to where we want to go. For all we hear from them on that, we can only assume that they haven’t a clue how to go about it.
The talk is of a de facto referendum that is to be labelled an ‘independence referendum’. Which might be a solution to the problem of getting people to vote for a badly tarnished SNP. But it most assuredly is not a plan for ending the Union and restoring Scotland’s rightful constitutional status.
By the time a de facto referendum rolls around it will be approaching a decade since the first so-called ‘independence referendum’. More if we’re talking about the next Holyrood election. But after all this time, none of the nominally pro-independence parties has a fully thought through and worked out plan for restoring Scotland’s independence. And they aren’t even embarrassed about this!
A large part of the problem is, as ever, the people. What is commonly referred to as the Yes movement – although whether such a thing can be said to exist now is a matter of debate. As useless as the Scottish parties have been in devising a plan to restore Scotland’s independence, the Yes movement has been at least as bad at demanding one. For the most part, they’ve been content to accept anything that is called an ‘independence referendum’ without inquiring as to exactly what is meant by that term. Not only have the Scottish parties failed to figure out how to deliver that referendum, they haven’t even developed criteria for a referendum which would stand as the formal exercise by the people of Scotland of our right of self-determination,
All we know for certain is that the proposal contained in the Scottish Government’s draft Referendum Bill would not lead to independence. It would lead back to the Section 30 process, which we know cannot lead to independence.
It gets worse! Scotland’s political class has no idea what a proper constitutional referendum would look like and no idea how to deliver that referendum even if they did know what it looks like. Perhaps the most shocking thing is that they aren’t even prepared to entertain ideas in this regard. The recent Alba Party conference came up with nothing even vaguely resembling a plan. Only the most mindless party loyalists imagine the SNP’s ‘Independence Convention’ will do any better. If there is any meaningful debate within the Yes movement it is totally drowned out by the clamour of the tribal bickering, particularly between SNP and Alba supporters.
Shona Robison’s column is sadly typical of what we’re getting from our politicians at the moment. Long on rousing rhetoric. Woefully short on substance. So long as we are content to accept this, we will get nothing better.
Peter A Bell 
Simply stated – w’urr’fucked…
LikeLiked by 1 person
With the SNP’s popularity currently dive-bombing, making the 2025 election a de facto referendum is likely to see our chances of independence put back for another generation. I can’t believe some dumb clucks are still pushing for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I presume you mean the next Scottish Parliament election, which is due to be held on Thursday 7 May 2026. This would be preferable as a de facto referendum for a number of reasons, franchise, Scottish focus etc. But it is too late. The next UK general election is almost certain to be a game-changer for the constitutional issue. And it won’t change in favour of Scotland’s cause.
This is a good example of how we should not cling to fixed ideas but should allow our thinking to adapt to the changes happening beyond our control. Initially, I was extremely dubious about a plebiscitary election. Not quite to the extent of outright opposition. Bot something close to it. When it became clear, however, that the idea was taking hold and finding favour and gaining traction, I started to think in terms of how de facto referendum could be made politically effective. Clearly, it was never going to serve as an exercising of our right of self-determination. So I asked myself what what be the next best thing. And very quickly realised that it wasn’t second-best after all. Making the de facto referendum about the powers of the Scottish Parliament is a better idea by an astronomical margin.
So why are our politicians not talking about it? Are they really so stupid that it hasn’t even occurred to them that the referendum needn’t be about independence directly or explicitly?
LikeLiked by 2 people
It comes as no surprise that Shona Robison, as Nicola Sturgeon’s self-confessed best pal, provides a list of mans and grievances and is spouting the usual platitudes.
Her stated goal is to be to “stand up and defend Scotland’s democracy”. Everybody knows that attack is the best form of defence especially in Scotland’s case as we have nothing to lose and everything to gain from taking radical action like the plan detailed in your “Open Letter Humza” article (https://peterabell.scot/2023/06/03/an-open-letter-to-humza-yousaf/).
But Robison and co are not serious about ‘winning Independence’. They are simply electioneering already knowing that they have dropped very far in people’s estimation and need to make up ground else they will take a substantial hit in the next Westminster and Holyrood elections.
The Shona Robison, the Scottish Government and London leadership team are simply playing for time.
LikeLiked by 7 people
From page 6 of the ISP manifesto available on its website it states
“ISP believes it is not acceptable for one nation to be required to have to ask another for the right to determine its constitution and future.
Plebiscite Commitment
ISP contest Scottish Parliament elections as plebiscites. It is the party’s stance that if a majority of seats return pro-independence MSPs, this is a binding expression of the Scottish people’s desire for independence from the United Kingdom. The Acts of Union were a bilateral treaty. In international law, such a treaty is annulled when one or both parties withdraw.”
ALBA has a 5 point strategy on its website which is tot long to replicate here.
I accept that you may not consider that these do not show how they propose to get us from where we are to where we want to go, but it is, nonetheless more than just a vision of how much better things will be.
LikeLiked by 2 people
To my mind, even ISP’s manifesto is not explicit enough in rejecting the Section 30 process. Although it certainly comes a lot closer than either Alba or SNP. It is important that the repudiation be strong in order to counter the ‘gold standard’ pish peddled by Sturgeon.
It would also be good if all the Scottish parties used an identical form of words in their manifestos for a plebiscitary election. This would eliminate any possibility of them being perceived to be competing on this issue. When I drafted the #ManifestoForIndependence about four years ago (I think!) I had this very much in mind. That is one of the main reasons I sought to keep the wording as simple as possible so as to minimise the possibility of contentious points creeping in. Ideally, the parties would adopt the #ManifestoForIndependence as is. That way it is not the ‘property’ of any one party. No party is going to be perceived as toeing another party’s line. Rather, all are adopting the same material from a third-party source.
Of course, I’m not saying it must be my precise wording. That should be regarded as a template. But it is important that ‘ownership’ of the text should be outside the political parties no matter how the text is altered.
Another reason for keeping the wording simple is that, supposing a party does not want to adopt it verbatim, the same points can readily be expressed in different words without departing from the essential meaning of the original.
I’ve put a fair bit of thought into this.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Reblogged this on Ramblings of a now 60+ Female.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Link:
” COMMENT
Tories and Labour are ‘taking back control’ but we are the targets”
https://www.thenational.scot/politics/23565940.tories-labour-taking-back-control-targets/
LikeLike
Haven’t read your article yet, so here’s what I see:
“The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) has been designed in conjunction with business ”
the big missing word is “some”, and that makes the statement a lie. Lorna Slater has already been pulled up on that. It’s also badly designed, badly communicated and discriminates against small micro-distillers and craft breweries that the big “some” business would be delighted to see go bust, hence increasing their market. Plus many retailers are unhappy about it.
It’s also sad that that is picked as the first and apparently most important thing – something most people now would probably be delighted to see Westminster strike down. And the whole thing is so that Scotland can beat the rUK by a whole year, big effing expensive deal. In short, it is NOT what devolution should be about at all.
“Like three quarters of Scotland, I was proud to vote Yes Yes. ”
This is either ignorance or another attempt at a lie. Three quarters voted YES to Devolution but quite a lot less than that, 63% voted YES to some tax powers, not 75%. Politicians not being trusted is, from memory of Ipsos, the biggest issue for 10% of the people of Scotland. Such casual lying or lack of accuracy does nothing for that problem.
Overall it’s about defending devolution, with independence thrown in at the end as a sop to the weary. The SNP are going to have to do better than that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The SNP/Scottish Government will have to be made to do better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s 20 days to the SNP Special Convention on kicking a can round the room and hoping it doesn’t hit anyone. Anything can happen.
The SNP might even rediscover their number 2 in the SNP Constitution – Independence. Spelt I.N.D.E.P.E.N.D.E.N.C.E. First being their name. Kind of reminds me of a song, mmm:
“Our FM is six weeks old, and he’s smart as any damn kid.
But when you mention the I.N.D.Y. he damn near flips his lid.”
LikeLike
“It would lead back to the Section 30 process, which we know cannot lead to independence.”
As always I disagree on this one. Yes it can lead to Independence. So also could a whatsapp from our lord high muckety-muck prison governor Baron Alister ‘Bobbing John to Sunak saying:
“We should give the uppity Jocks of which I don’t wish to be considered one their referendum and Edinburgh Agreement II as it will settle it for a few years and shut them up and even if we lose and get rid of the pesky critters, I can enjoy my retirement as Lord Baron of Corby, toothpick of the Scots, in peace”.
LikeLike
A Section 30 referendum CANNOT lead to independence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course it can.
Here’s a long list of Independence referendums with the results and recognition – for instance, Algeria by France and Malta by the UK, Iceland from Denmark.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_referendum
That doesn’t mean it won’t be hard work, but yes, it can.
LikeLike
Nope. Just because it says independence in the name doesn’t mean it is an actual independence referendum. I really thought most people had realised the truth about the Section 30 process by now.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Show me the list of examples that are precisely comparable to Scotland’s situation. Wait! How are you going to do that when you don’t even comprehend the situation?
LikeLiked by 2 people
No country in the world is precisely comparable to any other country in the world, as I’m sure you know fine.
The following countries quickly selected from that list ARE quite similar to Scotland though in some important aspects:
United States Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico
Curaçao
Bonaire
Sint Maarten
Saba
Sint Eustatius
Bermuda
Quebec
There WAS a referendum, there was NO majority for Independence, and the result was recognised.
What we would be aiming at of course is to be like Algeria, Malta and Iceland, at least in respect of being Independent and having that recognised.
Malta of course is in the EU, and held the Presidency of the Council of the EU in 2017. That would be a good result to emulate.
LikeLike
I’m replying to myself to limit the indents and increase the line length, though you do have it set to a sensible indent level. Some blogs end up with a word a line very quickly.
Tangentially, bear with me, here’s an interesting article by Aileen McHarg and Chris McCorkindale:
I’m picking out this bit:
“Moreover, in the context of what the devolved authorities see as a generalised attack on devolution – the undermining of the Sewel Convention; the impact of the UK Internal Market Act (UKIMA) on devolved policy freedom; increased UK interference in devolved policy areas; and most recently the clamp down on the Scottish Government’s international activity – the Cabinet Secretary made clear that the Scottish Government felt it necessary to draw a line in the sand, to prevent further erosion of devolved autonomy.”
Basically I’m against this GRR challenge because I think the Bill is flawed, goes too far, and enjoys very little support outside Holyrood. Some think the Scottish People will get behind the challenge; I don’t think so. There’s also the problem that on the face of it it’s a devolved issue and Independence gets rid of any problem.
Put in its simplest, the UK Gov has no respect for the SNP, no respect for the Scottish Parliament, and none for Devolution. It would by that yardstick, got there at last, therefore have no respect for an S30 or an Edinburgh Agreement.
If the S30 is a route to go, then the UK Gov has to be forced one way or another to have that respect in full, including I guess respect for itself which also seems to be completely lacking.
So there you go, I’d be delighted with an S30 while recognising that the UK Gov might disrespect it. My saving argument is that while most care nothing about the GRR, and many would be happy to see the DRS fall, there would be a lot of support in Scotland for a YES result of an Indy ref under an S30 and with something like an Edinburgh Agreement – if the UK Gov tried to ignore it. So that in itself would be worth supporting, but perhaps that means I should not be illogical and should support the challenge to the S35 on the GRRB.
Sorry about the length.
LikeLike
THIS is the problem with the SNP and their indentured camp followers. Too many people rushing in to defend the piles of steaming ordure they leave scattered behing them as they dump all over us:
“To further complicate the mix, we have independence “supporters” who expend more energy berating the SNP and all its works than they do on campaigning.”
And it is a problem. Instead of wondering if those of us who dare to criticise the SNP might have a point, there are people who call us unionists, albinists whatever that means, trolls or even traitors. It’s SNP (and Green) turds in the middle of the Royal Mile and Princes Street and so that’s OK folks, where’s the preservation order?
Campaign for what, exactly, when the SNP politicians are firmly entrenched into self-preservation and squeaky bum oiling with 3 in 1? Better use the WD40 first, it’s all rusted up from lack of use.
Luckily even Pete Wishart is beginning to get the message which isn’t surprising as his majority I think is one of the lowest.
Back Indy – or yer tea’s oot.
In 20 days in Dundee the SNP has a chance. Use it, or lose it.
LikeLike
“Closing down”
Independence needs original thinkers.
Otherwise we’d all still be thinking the earth was flat and those bright lights in the sky were all revolving around our plate.
LikeLike