Referendum Bill is another significant milestone for Scots as the UK crumbles

According to Stewart “the key is to unify and not divide the United Kingdom”. There’s a man who hasn’t studied the black and white map of Remain Scotland and Leave England created by his own party’s botched EU referendum. Meanwhile, Javid says: “Nicola Sturgeon should spend more time improving public services and less time grandstanding.”

Righty. The Scottish Government spends hundreds of millions of pounds to mitigate UK welfare “reforms” so unflinchingly cruel they’ve been compared to 19th-century workhouses by UN poverty expert Philip Alston. Yet Javid still thinks he can lecture anyone about public services?

To paraphrase the “good book”, by their evasion, doublethink and feeble excuses shall ye know them – and boy were the excuses rolled out yesterday feeble.

Still, since Tory leadership contenders must prove they can bite the heads of whippets (in political terms) to out-tough Nigel Farage, the synchronised howl of “No Surrender” from wannabe leaders just confirmed what we already know. Having dared and almost lost under David Cameron, no Tory prime minister will tempt fate again and give a fair wind to indyref2.

The Scottish Government has built a convincing case to prove that “material change” has happened in spades since 2014. But that, of course, was only the SNP’s yardstick for deciding when a rerun could be justified. At Westminster, a reverse logic has always been at work. The bigger the whopping lies told during the first indyref campaign and the more restive “unattractive” Scots have become as a result, the more reluctant the UK Government has become to let the SNP repeat the indyref exercise.

That point-blank refusal by political players at Westminster could make Scots question the real importance of the Referendum Bill, launched yesterday in the Scottish Parliament. Does it have a hope in hell of being used this side of the Holyrood election in 2021 and if not, why push it through now? As Iain Macwhirter argues, it might be better to “seek a test of Scottish opinion this autumn with an advisory referendum”. Even though it would inevitably face a Unionist boycott, such a vote would let indy arguments be reframed in the context of Brexit, prompt a proper debate about the shape of Scotland’s future within a centralist, “independent” far-right UK and give the Yes movement a real focus for action – at last.

There’s a lot to be said for this as a strategy, but since Nicola Sturgeon has nailed her colours so firmly to the official Section 30 route, it stands little chance of happening. Still, that doesn’t mean the Referendum Bill route is pointless. Unionist responses to yesterday’s Holyrood launch have served to prove that times have changed massively since 2014.

First, some of the old scaremongering arguments just aren’t being raised anymore. I was struck by an interview by the BBC’s Gary Robertson in which he pressed LibDem Alex Cole-Hamilton, above, to choose between a no-deal Brexited UK or an indy Scotland in Europe. The Edinburgh Western MSP dithered, but finally opted for the Brexited UK option. So far, so predictable. But, significantly, he didn’t even try to suggest it was a false choice because iScotland wouldn’t get into the EU anyway. Yes, someone will doubtless try to crank that scenario back up again, I’m sure. But any semi-sentient Scot knows the mood music in Brussels has changed completely thanks to Brexit. There is no queue to join. As existing EU citizens, Scotland will be welcomed in pronto. Even the notion that Spain will block Scottish EU membership is just stone dead.

Secondly, complaints about the Scottish Government’s intention to frame the date, question and wording of indyref2 are but a faint echo of the hullabaloo created the first time around. Sure, there’s been an attempt to whip up a row over Nicola Sturgeon’s determination to keep the “Yes/No” options used in 2014, despite the Electoral Commission’s decision to back Remain/Leave in the European referendum as more neutral options because Yes is too positive a word. Aye – it is.

But it’s also a done deal – along with the word Remain, which is superglued to the case for EU membership. Chopping and changing the words might look possible to someone who doesn’t get out much. But consider the reality on the ground. How can anyone seriously present indyref2 voters with Remain in the UK or Leave the UK as options with resonance?

Does anyone think they are neutral or even comprehensible given their recent use in a totally different referendum? In Scotland, Remain sits largely within the Yes domain because of the massive overlap between folk who support EU membership and Scottish independence. Likewise, there’s a big overlap between No voters and folk who supported Leave. Asking Yessers to vote Leave is like asking Nigel Farage to vote Remain. It won’t feel right and it ain’t gonnae happen, whatever tortured logic is deployed by boffins and mischief-makers, because these words are already clearly bagged by organised political camps. They denote deeply held beliefs that will not be lightly abandoned by voters on either side. So what’s the point of trying to make Yessers vote Leave? Does the Electoral Commission really want a confused indyref2 electorate? I think not. If this is the best fuss Unionists can manage, they really have lost their touch.

Pamela Nash, chief executive of Scotland in Union, did try to open up another line of attack, describing the Referendum Bill as “a reckless act by an irresponsible government”. Reckless. Righty. As we all face a no-deal Brexit courtesy of the “strong and stable” Union, that’s almost embarrassing.

Of course, complacency would be a terrible mistake.

Key swing voters are still not persuaded they need to come off the fence yet – even though Halloween is approaching fast. The new case for independence will be bombarded with difficult questions as soon as the campaign gets going. I’d love to think the SNP are researching answers to the already-familiar argument that leaving a 300-year-old union will prove infinitely more difficult than leaving the EU after just 40 years. And that departure has almost torn the two main parties apart. Of course, there have been union break-ups across Europe, but there’s been no precedent for leaving the EU. Still, there’s no point denying independence negotiations will be difficult and ultimately voters will have to trust the capacity of the Scots team to win a good deal without needlessly jeopardising the future of either country.

Building trust is therefore key – partly because it will provide the fuel for the journey and partly because that vital democratic glue is now so glaringly absent south of the Border. Michael Russell was absolutely right yesterday to highlight “a high degree of consensus about the fact the Westminster system is broken and there is no mending it in sight”.

No supporter of the Union can now seriously contest that assertion – another big difference to the prevailing political climate in 2014.

In short, the tectonic plates underpinning the United Kingdom are slowly shifting and this Referendum Bill is another significant milestone – a lightning rod which exposes the weakness of opposing arguments and the pettiness of Westminster. Above all, it’s a signal to voters that the cliff edge is approaching and it’s not possible to abstain or look the other way anymore.

Independence in Europe or Brexit in the UK. Yes or No. It really is as simple as that.