Statutory provision for Scottish and Welsh independence referendums
this is a voluntary union of equals, right?
Margaret Thatcher on Scottish independence
In her autobiography, The Downing Street Years, former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said of Scotland:
As a nation, they have an undoubted right to national self-determination; thus far they have exercised that right by joining and remaining in the Union.
Should they determine on independence no English party or politician would stand in their way, however much we might regret their departure. What the Scots (nor indeed the English) cannot do, however, is to insist upon their own terms for remaining in the Union, regardless of the views of the others.
If the rest of the United Kingdom does not favour devolved government, then the Scottish nation may seek to persuade the rest of us of its virtues; it may even succeed in doing so; but it cannot claim devolution as a right of nationhood inside the Union.”
Thatcher is saying here that while Scotland "undoubtedly" has the right to independence, it only has the right to devolution in the UK if the rest of the UK agrees.
Former Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Forsyth, elaborated on this by telling the BBC in 2015:
When I was in government, we used to say if the Scots wanted independence, the SNP needed a majority of seats in Scotland.
And The Labour Party's submission to the Kilbrandon Commission in 1970 declared:
Scotland is not a region, but a member nation of the United Kingdom
Taking these statements together, it's clear that the established view of the British state was that Scotland had a right to leave the UK if that's what it wanted, and the way to exercise that right was to elect a majority of MPs who wanted to leave the union.
The 2022 Supreme Court decision
However, in 2022 the UK Supreme Court ruled that Scotland had no right to hold an independence referendum without the agreement of the Westminster parliament.
Petition
There's a recent petition on the UK Parliament Petition site, Introduce statutory provision for independence referendums in Scotland & Wales. The text reads:
Introduce statutory provision for independence referendums in Scotland & Wales
It has been stated that the UK is a voluntary union. If this is democratically the case I think there should be a legal mechanism for any part of the union to decide whether or not to leave that union.
In 2014 an independence referendum was held in the nation of Scotland. At that time it was decided via referendum that the majority did not wish for independence. Various things have happened since then, and some people would now be eligible to vote who wouldn't have been old enough before. I believe Scotland should be able to decide to do this again if it wishes to. Northern Ireland has statutory provisions for a referendum on its constitutional future. I think Scotland and Wales should have statutory provisions so that they do not have to seek permission from Westminster to hold independence referendums.
I'd like you all to sign it and then publish it far and wide on social media.
Now obviously Westminster are not going to introduce any such statutory provision, because they are against democracy. (The reason they're against democracy is they want the continued rule of the UK's ruling class, or which the Westminster parliament and UK government are major centers of power. This is also why they are against proportional representation and favour FPTP.)
However, if this referendum gets lots of support it will embarrass the UK regime, and lay bare their utter contempt for democracy and Scotland. Which can only help us get independence in the long term.
What might the mechanism for independence look like?
One way might be that if a majority of Scots MPs are elected on as pro-independence platform, and sign a statement declaring a desire for independence, that would trigger and independence referendum.
Of course, Westminster might point out that a majority of MPs doesn't mean a majority of votes (this is correct) and that therefore a majority of MPs doesn't count for anything, democratically. However, if they did make that argument, they would also be tacitly undermining the basis of their rule, as all decisions of parliament are based on a majority of MPs, and not a majority of votes. For example at the moment 2/3rd of MPs are from the Labour Party, who only got 1/3rd of the vote.
So let them make that argument, and in doing so declare their moral and intellectual bankruptcy, for all the world to see.
A more realistic mechanism for independence
Some might argue that a single majority of Scots MPs doesn't represent a settled view that Scotland should be independent. So a more long-winded procedure might be the following:
In two successive Westminster parliaments, a majority of Scots MPs must be elected on a manifesto for independence and then sign a joint statement calling for an independence referendum.
Then the Scottish Parliament must vote for an independence referendum, triggering it.
Then a majority of Scots would have to vote for independence in the referendum.
Thus to gain independence Scots would have to vote for it 4 times -- twice in elections to the Westminster parliament, once in an election to the Holyrood parliament, and once in the referendum. No-one could then say that support for independence was a mere flash-in-the-pan.
You can take this point with a pinch of salt as I am, I'm sure you're aware, an avowed unionist. However, one flaw I see in this plan is that tying election outcomes to future referendums would recharge the constitutional polarisation of Scottish politics. The SNP have, for too long, been able to coast to easy victories at Holyrood without having to actually govern well at all, because they just hoover up all the pro-indy votes anyway and for those voters governance is a concerningly secondary issue (or if the SNP has misruled it's somehow Westminster's fault). It is only in the last year or two that some of the heat has come out of the debate and the SNP have started to pay the price that every party in a normal democracy eventually pays as the government runs out of steam and voters seek pastures new. And that is because independence has moved down the pecking order of voters' issues.
Introducing a scheme like this would doubtless send it rocketing back up the pile of voter concerns again. This would be good for the SNP, but it would be very much an issue for Scottish democracy if the party could continue to win elections regardless of how badly it governs. Northern Ireland essentially already has such a system pushed to its extreme, and you see the result - a hugely dysfunctional politics with regular government shutdowns which is only tolerated because the alternative could be a literal civil war. I'm sure you'd agree with me that the DUP are not a "normal" party but their MLAs keep getting reelected anyway because their voters are so driven to maintain the union that the bigotry and corruption of the DUP gets a free pass.
It's something of a bind. Anything which ties votes to the constitutional question corrodes democracy, because it shifts voter motivations away from their usual purpose of holding the government to account. But if you never let people vote on the most pivotal question deciding the future of their country, that's not democratic either. And I don't know a way of squaring this circle.