What Was She Thinking?
Sturgeon's “defacto” referendum is a catastrophic error and will hasten her departure.
This is my spectator column on the aftermath to the Supreme Court’s rejection of and independence referendum. It was clear and emphatic, and entirely predictable. Of course the Scottish Parliament lacks the power to hold a ballot on secession - that is clear from a cursory reading of the Scotland Act 1998. Nationalists may not like it, and the court was not of course addressing the political question, but as a point of law, Holyrood cannot legally change the constitution of the UK without Westminster’s approval.
I then consider the folly of Nicola Sturgeon’s proposal to turn the 2024 general election into a defacto referendum. No one party can dictate to the voters what they should be voting on. Elections are about a whole range of issues, the most important of which is who is to be in government in Westminster. Even many SNP voters will find it hard to vote for a phoney referendum, which has no constitutional significance, when they could vote to kick the Tories out of Number Ten.
Moreover, Ms Sturgeon has set the bar exceptionally high. She says she wants a majority, not just of seats, but of votes to be returned for her cod referendum. The SNP barely achieved 50% of the popular vote in the '“tsunami” of 2015 when it won all but 3 of Scotland’s 59 seats.
Why has a cautious politician like the First Minister opted for such a reckless gamble? Perhaps it is her doorway to that future career she is always talking about. After 2024, she can say she has done her 10 years and it’s time to hand over the reins. But where would such a loss leave the independence movement? In Quebec, a second failed referendum in 1995 nearly killed the independence movement stone dead.