So today the debate about the timing of the referendum on Scottish independence returns, with David Cameron ‘throwing down the gauntlet at Alex Salmond’, as the Guardian puts it. The British government wants to add an amendment to the Scotland Bill, which would provide the Scottish government with the possibility to hold a binding referendum with a straight yes/no question within 18 months (the question whether any referendum can be binding is being discussed, since parliament remains sovereign).
The Prime Minister, along with the rest of the Unionist side, is fed up with several things: 1) the SNP’s government lack of clarity about what the question(s) of the planned referendum will be, 2) the Scottish government’s decision to postpone the referendum until the second half of the Parliament’s (extended) term, and 3) Salmond’s continuing popularity in Scotland.
The PM argued that delaying the referendum was bad for the British and Scottish economy (the current ‘situation’ having to do with the independence question, of course; nothing to do with banks and a worldwide economic crisis). If the uncertainty leads investors to ponder whether it is worth investing in Scotland as it may leave the UK (and I have no idea whether this is indeed happening), I guess that may encourage them to settle in England (or Wales, let’s not forget Wales) instead. So while this uncertainty may harm the Scottish economy, it probably does not hard the British economy too much. Does anyone seriously believe that the rest of the UK would be thrown into a deep crisis should Scotland secede? I don’t think so.
Another argument is about fairness. This is an argument that is often being presented by the Unionist parties. Johann Lamont when she was campaigning to become leader of the Scottish Labour Party. Often with a reference to the 1995 Quebec referendum controversy (the question was pretty vague and convoluted), the Unionists say that they want clarity. To a certain extent, they have a point. The SNP government has given no indication of what the question would be, and the possibility of having 3 options (independence/ so-called devo-max/ status quo) leaves many questions open. Indeed, what would happen if the results of the referendum are 32%/35%/33? or 40/35/25? In other words, what would happen if none of the options gets 50%+1 of the votes. As a result, the Unionists want a very simple question: Do you want Scotland to separate from the UK? (or something similar) Yes or No. As I said, they have a point, but the tone of their accusations against Alex Salmond and the SNP suggests that they plan to win using dirty tricks, as if Scotland had become a banana republic after 7 months of SNP majority rule.
Which leads us to timing. The SNP wants the referendum to take place towards the end of the term (listen to Nicola Sturgeon, deputy First Minister, this morning on Radio 4’s Today Programme here). Apparently, the Scottish government would want the referendum to coincide with the celebration of the battle of Bannockburn (which took place in 1314, in case you’re wondering). Others (and possibly the majority of observers) believe that by 2014 the effects of spending cuts will start to be felt badly in Scotland, making the British, mostly Conservative government particularly unpopular. In contrast, a shorter wait until the referendum may mean that the full extent of the spending cuts might not yet to be felt. The Scottish government may also hope that by 2014-15, the economic situation might have improved and that they may be credited for the improved state of the economy.
Finally, Alex Salmond seems to be benefiting from an extended ‘honey moon period’ from the electorate. He was even named Briton of the Year by the Times this year (though he might have issues with being called a Briton) and Politician of the Year by the Spectator (read Fraser Nelson’s description of Salmond as ‘as one of the most formidable and effective politicians not just in Britain but Europe’. Yes, Fraser Nelson). Nothing seems to alter his popularity in the electorate, and whether the three new Unionist party leaders (Ruth Davidson for the Tories, Johann Lamont for Labour and Willie Rennie for the LibDems) can change this remains a moot point. A No campaign lead by the Tories does not seem to worry the Nats (listen again to Sturgeon’s remark about the effect of Tory involvement in Scottish politics on the vote in favour of independence). It seems to worry Labour, though, as their image could end up being tainted by association.
Anyway, with all this, we still don’t know when this referendum will take place. It could even be that the British government includes its ‘sunset clause’ on a binding referendum and that the Scottish government still decides to hold a consultative referendum in 2014-15. In any case, there will be a referendum. David Cameron ca be certain about this, if nothing else
Elodie Fabre 