INDEPENDENCE supporters expressed their contempt after Theresa May insisted Nicola Sturgeon had “no mandate” for a new plebiscite hours after the publication of a consultation on a draft Referendum Bill yesterday.
The First Minister posted an extract on Twitter from the SNP’s manifesto for May’s Holyrood election which her party won to form its third term in power, while other critics pointed out the irony of the Tory Prime Minister’s position.
Richard Lochhead, the former Environment Secretary, tweeted: “Absurd for a Prime Minister with only one Tory MP in Scotland to claim @thesnp Scottish Government has no mandate to deliver its manifesto!”
The prominent law expert and blogger Andrew Tickell took a similar stance. “‘No mandate,’ says May. If only the Scottish Government had had the wherewithal to anticipate Brexit in their manifesto. Er. If only. Oops,” he tweeted.
The debate arose after the Prime Minister’s spokesman dismissed the draft Bill during a briefing with London-based journalists yesterday morning. “The Government does not believe that there is a mandate for a second referendum on Scottish independence,” he told the press.
“There was a referendum only two years ago and a resounding result in favour of Scotland remaining in the UK. Both sides agreed to abide by that referendum.”
The draft legislation, which was formally unveiled by the Constitution Secretary, Derek Mackay, sets out proposals for the rules governing the campaign, the conduct of the poll and how votes are counted.
Mackay said the proposed franchise would be the same as for the Scottish Parliament with 16- and 17-year-olds and EU citizens living in Scotland included.
“That will mean two important groups of people would have a voice denied to them in the recent referendum on EU membership,” he said.
The eight-page document proposes any referendum would be run in a way similar to 2014, using the same yes/no question: “Should Scotland be an independent country?”
It also suggests the vote would similarly not be subject to any minimum turnout requirement or an approval threshold.
As the bill was published, Sturgeon said: “We will continue to work UK-wide to seek to avert a hard Brexit and we will also bring forward proposals that seek to protect our place in the single market, even if the rest of the UK leaves.
“However, if we find that our interests cannot be properly or fully protected within a UK context then independence must be one of the options open to us and the Scottish people must have the right to consider it.”
She added that any decision on holding a referendum, including the timing of it, would be for the Scottish Parliament to take.
If passed, as would be likely because of the pro-independence majority in Holyrood, the Scottish Parliament would then ask the UK Government to grant a section 30 order to allow the referendum to take place.
Sturgeon, who will next meet May in London on Monday with other heads of devolved governments, has said she will put forward specific proposals in the coming weeks for maintaining Scotland’s position in the single market even if the rest of the UK leaves, as well as pushing for substantial additional powers for Holyrood as part of the UK’s article 50 negotiations, including over international trade deals and immigration.
Neil McGarvey: Leadership demonstrates virtue of patience in pursuit of ultimate goal
In her foreword to the consultation, which will run until January 11, 2017, Sturgeon writes: “In May 2016 the current Scottish Government was elected with a clear mandate that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold an independence referendum if there was clear and sustained evidence that independence had become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there was a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.”
She adds: “The UK Government’s recent statements on its approach to leaving the EU raise serious concerns for the Scottish Government. We face unacceptable risks to our democratic, economic and social interests and to the right of the Scottish Parliament to have its say.
“Indeed those statements contradict the assurances given before the independence referendum in 2014 that Scotland is an equal partner within the UK and that a vote against independence would secure our EU membership.”
The Unionist parties all attacked the draft Bill’s publication claiming it was further evidence the First Minister was not focussed on the day-to-day job of running Scotland.
Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said: “This is the first major Bill Nicola Sturgeon has published after being re-elected as First Minister and shows that separation is her overriding concern.”
Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said: “This is a referendum that Scotland does not need or want.”
She has also written to the Scottish Parliament’s presiding officer, Ken Macintosh, asking for clarification over how the plans will be examined, claiming ministers are trying to dodge scrutiny by publishing the consultation during this week’s Holyrood recess.
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie took a similar stance to the other Unionist parties.
“It is now crystal clear that the SNP’s priority is not education,” he said. “It is independence.”
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 here