Lesley Riddoch: SNP's quiet indyref2 rebrand may fail to ignite Yes movement

The SNP is emailing members and gathering pledges of support for a “Recovery Referendum” – half a million folk have quietly signed up. An eight-page leaflet entitled Yes – A Referendum For Recovery can be downloaded from the party’s website.

It’s gratifying to see almost two pages comparing the UK’s hopeless welfare provision and sluggish economic performance with our small independent Nordic neighbours. Other pages explain how an independent Scotland will stop Westminster threatening our NHS, wrecking our economy with Brexit and squandering Scotland’s considerable natural and human resources.

And by the time National subscribers read this column, Indy Tsar Mike Russell will have put some flesh on the bones in yesterday’s National Roadshow. But taking a swatch at the online material already penned by the former constitution secretary – now charged with remaking the case for indyref2 – his direction of travel is pretty clear.

READ MORE: WATCH: The National Roadshow with Michael Russell - in full

In an email to members about the forthcoming referendum, the word Recovery appears four times – the word independence, not at all.

Indeed, an accompanying statement by SNP MSP Neil Gray (below) is fair louping with Referendum for Recovery references – let’s just call it R for R to save space and stop bashing folk o’er the heid: “There is a cast-iron democratic mandate secured in May’s election for a post-pandemic referendum for recovery – and there is clear majority support in Parliament for the referendum for recovery.”

The website goes on to cite an opinion poll – “The Redfield and Wilton Strategies poll found 42% of people would support an independence referendum being held in the next five years… removing don’t knows, 51% of those expressing an opinion are in support of a referendum for recovery being held.”

Now colour me carnaptious, but surely those 51% have simply registered their support for a plain old, second indyref. The SNP can badge it an R for R if they like but that’s not what those polled were being asked to endorse – how could they since the Referendum for Recovery has not been officially run up the flagpole yet?

Now I’ll grant you, the vast majority may not much care if the SNP retrofits a timely wee slogan on to their multi-faceted polling preference. Doubtless most Yes voters do back a speedy indyref2 to stop Boris Johnson’s crony capitalism “building back better” here.

But many hopes and grievances drive the case for independence and some, like removing Trident and Westminster’s cruel immigration policy, have less to do with “Covid recovery” and everything to do with the nasty box of tricks that’s been thrust on a protesting Scotland for decades.

This may be a Recovery Referendum for the SNP.

It’s a Last Chance to Save Scotland Referendum for me.

I thought indyref2 covered it all. So if it wasn’t broke, why fix it?

ADMITTEDLY, I am pernickety and old school. I still have the original light blue Yes sticker on my car and bike, because of an emotional attachment to their shape and pleasing simplicity. Am I alone?

Fa kens.

READ MORE: Kate Forbes 'committed' to producing pro-independence GERS data after pandemic

Still, there are some definite upsides to the R for R approach.

The idea of the most inept and divisive UK Government inflicting its version of recovery on Scotland is enough to make the most fervent Tories quake in their boots. Hitching indyref2 to the Covid recovery allows Nicola to deflect the inevitable Unionist complaints about “switching focus from the pandemic”.

If the recovery is rolled into the campaign for indyref2 – if independence and recovery are portrayed as one and the same thing – then it does get harder for Project Fear2 to make that charge stick.

And obviously, if the next independence campaign can be turned into a simple question of personal preference, the SNP can play its strongest card – the stratospherically high trust levels commanded by the FM compared to the minus numbers polled by Boris (Thatcher was an eco-visionary) Johnson.

Mike Russell (above) will have focus-grouped the hell out of different arguments, strategies and slogans for indyref2 before settling on the R for R and has doubtless discovered that undecided voters regard a Boris-led Covid recovery as the very largest, last straw. Positioning independence as an alternative to near endless mitigating, financing, tholing and pleading with Westminster is a powerful argument.

And of course, however the SNP badges its campaign, the Yes movement is free to campaign for independence with whatever emphasis it chooses.

But if we are witnessing an SNP leadership that’s a wee bit reluctant to call a spade a spade – and that’s not clear yet – there are some inescapable downsides.

First it looks a bit weak. As if the SNP thinks the “i” word frightens horses and is determined to soften its impact. Now that’s tough for Yessers to accept.

The very word “independence” is a rallying flag for the million plus Scots who want to become a new state as soon as we can. An SNP leadership that’s vaguely embarrassed by the word looks a bit like a leadership that’s vaguely embarrassed by the folk who like to use it – the Yessers. You know. The folk who march in the rain, dance at any opportunity, scare “right-minded” high-net-worth individuals but connect immediately with the all-important Yes voters living in our schemes and housing estates.

Nicola Sturgeon has been careful to keep her distance from such street-savvy Scots. She wants no hostages to fortune. No platforms shared with “troublemakers”. And no political danger. But there’s the rub.

Risk, comradeship and the tantalising whiff of power and danger made the first indyref an intoxicating, addictive experience. Without these things – will the Referendum for Recovery set the collective pulse racing?

The sensible-sounding, indy-lite name might look good on paper but repeat the mistakes of the 2017 General Election, when the SNP decided to take all mention of independence off the mythical table. The result? Demotivated troops unwilling to canvas, some branches binning leaflets from HQ and a 40% drop in the number of SNP MPs.

It was an M&S campaign – nicely packaged and inoffensive. But it didn’t motivate the foot soldiers or win over Middle Scotland. We can’t run that risk again.

There is another problem.

Gordon Brown achieved more income equality during his time as chancellor than any other recent occupant of Number 11. But redistribution was achieved by stealth, not by setting out political goals fairly and squarely to win the case for equality. When governments have hidden agendas, they are eventually uncovered and look all the weaker for their concealment.

In short, a stealthy indyref now will fare no better than stealth taxes did back then.

Doubtless the SNP want to fight the early part of the next independence campaign on the high ground of public trust for the Scottish Government over its UK counterpart. But the Referendum for Recovery must dig deeper than pandemic recovery and further ahead than the current crop of political leaders to convince wavering Scots.

Recrafting the unashamedly political business of indyref2 into an aspirational-sounding, spring clean doesn’t answer the big questions about currency, borders, EU membership and economic strategy that Mike Russell valiantly undertook to grapple with.

But it might buy him time. And give the SNP leadership an opportunity to explain their decision to rebadge a moment in history that belongs to all of us – instead of just assuming our support.