THE SNP’s new ruling body has rejected a motion calling for the party to set up a working group to advance a strategy to achieve a second independence referendum.

Sources told The National that the proposal was voted down by the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) over the weekend.

“The NEC held the vote on setting up a working group but it was voted down by a majority,” one insider said.

The plan for a working group was originally the idea of MP Joanna Cherry and was put forward as a proposed resolution to the party’s annual conference for debate back in November by the party’s Common Weal Group (CWG).

READ MORE: New indyref2 Plan B backed by Joanna Cherry submitted to SNP conference

But conference organisers rejected the motion – and a previous Plan B motion put down by Angus MacNeil and Chris McEleny – leading to anger among some party activists.

However, it is understood supporters of a working group were hopeful the party’s new NEC may have supported the idea.

The new NEC has a higher number of members open to examining alternative routes to independence if Boris Johnson fails to agree to a new vote than the party’s previous ruling body.

The working group plan was advanced and supported by SNP CWG on the NEC when the body met on Saturday.

READ MORE: Scottish independence: 'Plan B' rejected for SNP conference vote

A National Assembly meeting to discuss a “Plan B” is to be held virtually later this month.

In a statement to The National, the SNP CWG said the motion was brought forward and supported by members of the SNP Common Weal Group (CWG) and would have established “a working group to explore democratic and legitimate routes to independence proposed at the upcoming National Assembly and make recommendations to the NEC on how to implement these proposals”.

Responding to the plan being turned down, a spokesperson for the SNP CWG said: “If these reports are correct, it is extremely disappointing that our party’s NEC has rejected a proposal for a working group on independence strategy when independence underpins everything the SNP aims to do.

“We need to begin laying the path towards independence and the CWG recognises that there are a range of different opinions within the party on how to do that.

READ MORE: Spanish newspaper puts spotlight on Scottish independence and 'Plan B' debate

“The upcoming National Assembly is an opportunity to discuss those views and build consensus.

“This working group was intended to further that work by uniting the party behind one clear strategy to deliver independence.

“The National Assembly is an important democratic exercise and its outcomes will reflect the democratic will of party members. It is crucial that these outcomes lead to real action.

“The CWG has worked with the party grassroots on a plan to improve internal democracy and give members a say on independence strategy and party policy. The grassroots delivered a message at the last party conference elections – it is time for change. Our representatives on the NEC must respect that message.”

READ MORE: SNP to launch independence taskforce to fire up Yes campaign

The SNP yesterday announced it was ramping up the drive for independence with the creation of a dedicated taskforce to lay the groundwork for a new Yes campaign.

The party’s campaign director Keith Brown told the Sunday National that the group would bring together strategic direction and expertise which is the “final piece in the jigsaw” to help deliver independence.

A spokesperson for SNP CWG said: “The announcement of an ‘independence unit’ is welcome but given its remit, it is now even more surprising that a motion to facilitate grassroots input into our independence strategy was voted down.

“It is crucial that elected NEC representatives have democratic oversight of this new unit’s work and that the grassroots have meaningful opportunities to contribute to it.

“We will continue to work with party members across the country to deliver the action on independence that the SNP membership and wider Yes movement believes in.”

READ MORE: Independence: Plan B would take pressure off PM, John Curtice says​

Responding to the motion being rejected by the NEC, an SNP spokesperson said the meaning of the decision was that NEC would defer to the membership’s discussions at the National Assembly on January 24 and return to the subject thereafter.

Citing from the meeting’s notes: “The NEC will look at the potential for establishing a Working Group on Independence Strategy once the National Assembly has reported on its meeting of January 24.”

However, a SNP CWG spokesperson disagreed that the issue was deferred by the party's ruling group at the meeting.

The SNP CWG spokesperson responded: "The NEC voted against the motion. It did not vote to defer the motion. One person requested that this be looked at again after the National Assembly but that was not voted on.

"Another motion on the agenda was deferred to a future meeting using standing orders. This one was not. We are glad to see that the leadership are making a U-turn on this, but this is an alarming precedent to be had - that the outcomes of the NEC can be changed to suit."

Critics of Plan B say the move could undermine attempts to get a Section 30 order from the UK Government.

Last year Professor Sir John Curtice cautioned the SNP against putting a Plan B route to independence in its Holyrood manifesto warning it could weaken its negotiating position with Boris Johnson to agree to hand powers to Holyrood to hold a second independence referendum.

An inclusion of an alternative process to independence could risk such clarity and “let Johnson off the hook”, he said in August last year.

“If you want to maximise the pressure on the UK Government you don’t want to tell them what your Plan B is,” he said.

“If you want the result of the election next year to maximise the pressure on the UK Government, then you want to be able to say. ‘We went to the people, the people have said yes, so can we please have our referendum in exactly the same way we did in 2014.

“If you have said too much along the lines of if we can’t have one, we will hold one anyway, you are letting the UK Government off the hook.

“You have to make the proposition, put it to the public in an unambiguous way. We want a repeat of the process of 2014. Fullstop.”