Sometimes if you find yourself stuck in politics, the thing to do is start a fight,” declares the Roman statesman Cicero in Robert Harris’s fictional trilogy. “Start a fight even if you do not know how you are going to win it, because it is only when the fight is on and everything is in motion that you can hope to see your way through.”
The cause of Scottish independence is stuck and so Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister and Scottish National party leader, is looking for a new dust-up. Announcing an intention to hold a fresh referendum in late 2023, she published the first of a series of papers designed to restart the debate after the phoney pandemic-induced peace.
In one sense this is unsurprising. Securing independence is the SNP’s primary purpose and Sturgeon promised a new vote in this parliament. The problem is, as it has always been, that a legal vote can only be authorised by Westminster and Boris Johnson’s government has no intention of granting one. Johnson argues that such votes are “once in a generation” events and only eight years have passed since the 2014 poll. Tories say Scotland must wait till the mid-2030s. This may be unsustainable in the face of repeated SNP victories, but they will hold out as long as they can.
Caught between the expectation of her activists and the intransigence of London, Sturgeon is left with two weak options. The first is an unauthorised poll, something she has resisted for fear it might hamper future EU membership. The second is simply to use her mandate to ratchet up pressure on London in the hope Johnson blinks. Now the SNP leader says she has found a third path, a way to hold a legal referendum though she is not yet saying what it is.
This may involve depicting the vote as consultative. One idea mooted is a vote authorising Sturgeon to open negotiations with London. Though this would be entirely for show, the theory runs that either this vote is held and delivers strong support, or it is blocked in the courts, giving nationalists fresh proof that London is denying Scots their say.
The problem with any consultative vote is that the obvious path for opponents is to boycott it. A 95 per cent victory on a 40 per cent turnout could be said to weaken the case. A legal challenge might help stir up anger but polls suggest fewer than two-fifths of Scots actually want a poll next year.
So far the move is generating little heat. Unionists view it as a sham and think she is counting on the courts to block it. It is questionable whether the endlessly cautious Sturgeon really wants an early vote when her cause is behind in the polls. Despite the flickerings of a Labour revival in Scotland, the SNP remains electorally dominant even after 15 years in power. Against this, politics is often about seizing the moment.
But first the SNP needs to generate renewed heat and momentum. For the real issue is that the cause of independence is treading water. In the years since 2014 — years which have seen Brexit, a Johnson government and eight years’ worth of younger voters who skew heavily towards independence joining the electoral roll — support for separatism has barely grown.
It is hard to think of a better set of conditions for nationalism, yet despite some poll peaks and continued SNP victories, support for the cause has been lagging behind opposition for a year. One reason is that Brexit, while driving nationalist sentiment, is also a poison pill forcing Scots to imagine a hard border with England should they succeed in rejoining the EU. And only the most committed could wish to replicate the Brexit upheavals.
More pertinent is that Scots have other priorities now. Voters share the unionist view that “now is not the time” and want their government focused on the cost of living and public services.
This is no cause for unionist complacency, however. The long-term trends still point to independence and support is rarely below the mid-40s. In the heat of a campaign the Yes camp might reasonably hope to swing support its way.
Sturgeon’s move also signals a campaign strategy. The first paper is devoted to rubbishing the UK economy in comparison with a number of carefully chosen small nations, notably the Nordic countries, Ireland and Belgium. (While much is made of their higher investment and social spending, only limited mention is made of their mostly higher tax burdens.)
The goal here is to reduce the sense of economic risk surrounding independence. Halting growth, low productivity and Brexit all help the argument. The message is Scotland can do better. Other papers will follow, setting out plans for the currency (essentially how long Scotland would stick with sterling), the border and EU accession. This is unlikely to reveal much that was not known but allies depict it as a full prospectus so that, unlike Brexit, voters go into a contest with their eyes open.
The temptation for unionists is not to engage. Delay has worked fine as a tactic so far. Scots don’t want this now. Barring a wholly unexpected legal reverse, Westminster holds the key card. Why play Sturgeon’s game?
But simply stifling a complacent yawn may also be a mistake. After two years of calm the drive for independence is restarting. In their desire not to give Sturgeon the fight she seeks, unionists should be wary of letting the economic arguments pass by default. This may be a false start and the timeline will almost certainly slip but the parameters of the next contest are being set.
