THE UK’s leading political analyst believes the First Minster will circumvent Theresa May and bring forward Scottish Government proposals to hold a legally-binding referendum on independence.
John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde University, said it is likely Nicola Sturgeon will return to a path pursued by Alex Salmond a decade ago when it was unclear whether the UK Government would consent to a vote on self-determination.
The strategy pursued at that time involved coming up with a form of words which would allow Holyrood to hold a vote under devolved powers and would not have to rely on getting consent from the UK Government.
So the question put in September 2014: “Should Scotland become an independent country?” would not be permissible as it focused directly on the constitutional issue.
But an alternative approach such as should “The Scottish Government be allowed to negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state?” may hold.
“If Theresa May isn’t going to say yes, what can Nicola Sturgeon do? The possibility that I would watch is that the Scottish Parliament attempts to hold a referendum under its own authority,” Curtice told The National.
“I would refer you to numerous documents that were published between 2007 and 2012 by the Scottish Government on this very question in which it laid out the kind of question it thought could be asked in an independence referendum that would be legal and would not require the consent of the UK parliament.
“An alternatively worded referendum – that was were the debate was a decade ago. It wasn’t pursued because the UK Government did give the go ahead in 2012.”
Salmond’s 2007 white paper suggested the following proposition could be put to voters: “The Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state.”
Curtice added there were legal arguments about the issue. He believed the First Minister would be seeking legal advice from the Lord Advocate on what wording could be used.
“The point is, it’s not clear, it’s not clear whether or not it would be possible to do it, but the point is it may be possible and the Scottish Government certainly was minded to believe it might be possible a few years ago,” he said.
Curtice said it would not be possible for the Scottish Government to progress with the current draft referendum Bill as the wording in it required a section 30 order.
“That bill needs a section 30 order to be passed as it is essentially a replica of the Bill that was passed for the 2014 referendum,” he said.
Sturgeon yesterday sent a letter asking permission from May to hold a referendum before spring 2019, when the UK leaves the EU, but it was immediately rejected.
The August 2007 white paper published by the Scottish Government explained how a referendum could be held by the Holyrood if the issue turned on enabling the Scottish Government to enter into negotiations with the UK Government to allow the country to become independent.
It said: “The competence of the Scottish Parliament to legislate for a referendum would depend on the precise proposition in the referendum Bill, or any adjustments made to the competence of the Parliament before the Bill is introduced.
“At present the constitution is reserved, but it is arguable that the scope of this reservation does not include the competence of the Scottish Government to embark on negotiations for independence with the United Kingdom Government.”
Curtice explained his thinking to The National after the First Minister said she would set out to the Scottish Parliament how she would to take forward an independence referendum when MSPs met in Holryood after the Easter recess if the Prime Minister continued to deny the Section 30 order request.
“I hope that the UK Government will respect the will of this Parliament,” Sturgeon told MSPs on Tuesday.
“If it does so, I will enter discussion in good faith and with willingness to compromise.
“However, if it chooses not to do so, I will return to the Parliament following the Easter recess to set out the steps that the Scottish Government will take to progress this Parliament’s will.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel