WHAT a weekend that was in the campaign to see this Tory Brexit end and ensure our place in the European Union remains secure.
A million people marched through central London for a so-called People’s Vote, and the petition to revoke Article 50 had just passed five million at the time of writing. There is a real sense that the public want this madness to end and it’s starting to feel like the beginning of a real people’s revolt.
The petition has forced revoking Article 50 on to the agenda as a real proposition. Until this weekend, very few people in Parliament took this proposition seriously. When Angus MacNeil and I first presented this amendment to Parliament a few weeks ago it secured the support of only 12 MPs. That is because the main driver to stop Brexit has been the People’s Vote campaign. This had been presented as the only means to stop Brexit and therefore attracted all the attention.
READ MORE: Wishart issues warning on dangers of People's Vote
People have even tried to conflate revoke with a second referendum, with some even wanting Article 50 revoked just to start all the madness over again with another vote! It is therefore important to understand that the two are significantly different.
Revoke would end Brexit in an afternoon. We have the “Scottish Six” to thank for this. It was they that secured the landmark judgement in the European Court which stated that the UK could unilaterally revoke Article 50. Revoke is a clear, straightforward route to rescuing the UK’s place in the EU and its simplicity is the thing that has driven so many people to sign the petition.
Revoke would also secure Scotland’s place in the European Union in line with how we voted and what we as a nation clearly want. A People’s Vote is a lot more complicated. Firstly, its advocates can’t agree on how this should be progressed and what should appear on any ballot paper.
There are also the issues for Scotland. We have not secured any protections for our national interest in a second referendum in return for our unconditional support.
If Scotland voted to remain again (which it would) and the rest of the UK voted to leave (as it very well might) we could be expected to respect the UK-wide result again.
Worse than that, the momentum for a People’s Vote is for what is called the Kyle-Wilson amendment. This is a compromise specifically to get the Labour Party off the hook in line with its almost contradictory Brexit policy. It proposes that the Commons allows the Prime Minister’s deal to pass on condition that it is then put to the people in a confirmatory referendum.
We would be asked to vote for (or at least abstain on) the Prime Minister’s deal. We would have to let a deal pass that we know would make our constituents poorer; that would end freedom of movement with all its disastrous consequences for economic growth and our population issues, that would deny our young people the opportunity to live and work across a continent.
Scotland’s EU future would be out of our hands and we would have to trust a Labour Party whose leadership wants to leave the EU and can’t even say if remain would even be on the ballot paper.
It is also a “confirmatory” referendum with all the associated risks. If this principle was extended to a future successful independence referendum, Unionists would be working from the day after the vote to undermine that result and the UK would ensure we were given the worst possible “deal” in order to try to reverse the result.
Eventually Scotland is going to have to accept that the only way we are going to rescue our EU membership is as an independent country. At some point Scotland is going to have to decide whether we go down as part of Brexit Britain or make our own relationship with Europe as an independent nation.
For all the dramatic activity over the weekend, none of the proposed UK options are likely to salvage our situation. The days of a UK solution to Scotland’s EU membership are swiftly coming to an end, just as it is becoming apparently obvious that it is only the people of Scotland who can rescue our EU membership.
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