The Scotsman

Scottish Parliament backs call for independen­ce referendum

But Theresa May says no to indyref2 despite Holyrood vote

- By TOM PETERKIN Political Editor

The UK government last night kicked Nicola Sturgeon’s bid for another independen­ce referendum into the long grass moments after it was backed by a majority of MSPS.

Scottish Secretary David Mundell said the UK government would not consider referendum discussion­s until the Brexit process is complete.

His comments came as Prime Minister Theresa May signed the letter to make the UK’S exit from the EU official last night. The letter will be hand-delivered to the president of the European Council Donald Tusk at 12:30pm this afternoon.

It will trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, starting the clock on two years of formal negotiatio­ns that will see Brexit take place by 28 March, 2019

Mr Mundell underlined his opposition to Ms Sturgeon’s proposal for a vote in about 18 months time.

He said there could be a transition period after EU withdrawal raising the possibilit­y of a referendum being delayed until after

the 2021 Scottish elections. After plans for another referendum were passed at Holyrood, Ms Sturgeon warned it would be “democratic­ally indefensib­le and utterly unsustaina­ble” for the UK government to stand in the way of a second vote. But Mr Mundell was unmoved by the vote, which saw Ms Sturgeon’s referendum call passed by 69 votes against 59.

Six Scottish Green MSPS join with the 63 SNP MSPS to defeat the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems to set Holyrood on a collision course with Westminste­r.

A Green amendment to the motion calling for 16 and 17-year-olds as well as EU citizens to be given a vote was passed by the same margin.

Speaking a few minutes after the votes were counted, the Scottish Secretary said he did not recognise Ms Sturgeon’s proposal that a vote should be held between autumn next year and spring 2019.

“We are not entering into negotiatio­ns on whether there should be an independen­ce referendum during the Brexit process,” Mr Mundell told the BBC.

“We don’t have a crystal ball as to how long that process will take. We don’t recognise, for example, 18 months as being a key point in the journey.

“It will be a journey that will involve negotiatio­ns with the EU. It may be a journey that involves transition­al measures. It may be a journey that will involve significan­t implementa­tion time. It is not appropriat­e to have a referendum whilst people don’t know what the future relationsh­ip between the UK and the EU is and they won’t know that until the Brexit process is complete.”

With the deadlock between the two government­s becoming more entrenched, Ms Sturgeon said she would return to parliament after next week’s recess to set out the next steps she will take “to progress the will of the parliament”.

In the meantime, the First Minister said she would act on the mandate given to her by the Scottish Parliament by formally approachin­g the UK government for the section 30 order required to pass referendum holding powers from Westminste­r to Holyrood.

She said the approach would be made within the next few days after Mrs May has triggered Article 50 today.

MSPS voted at the conclusion of a two-day debate, which had been interrupte­d by the attacks on Westminste­r last week.

Re-opening the debate, Ms Sturgeon made a plea for MSPS of all parties to use respectful language – a sentiment that was echoed by others across the chamber. Despite their requests the session was marked by ill-tempered exchanges.

Ms Sturgeon said Scotland, like the UK, was standing at a “crossroads”.

“My argument is simply this: when the nature of the change that is made inevitable by Brexit becomes clear, that change should not be imposed upon us, we should have the right to decide the nature of that change,” the First Minister said.

Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson called on the Scottish Government to concentrat­e on the day job of running the country rather than fostering division.

She said: “This isn’t the serious plan of a responsibl­e government. It’s just the SNP cooking up the same old recipe for division.

“Take one unworkable proposal. Add in some Greens. Stir in grievance. And bring to the boil. It might have worked once – but let me tell the First Minister: it stinks and most people in Scotland aren’t buying it”.

Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said: “Let’s not pretend that this Snp-green push for another divisive referendum reflects the will of the Scottish people. Because it doesn’t. My message to the First Minister remains unchanged: we are divided enough – do not divide us again.”

We heard it when the Prime Minister first declared she would not agree to a referendum on Scottish independen­ce, we’ve heard it frequently since then, and we heard it once again last night when Theresa May’s government responded to the Scottish Parliament backing a second referendum. “Now is not the time.”

The phrase has become the Conservati­ve mantra, to be repeated at every opportunit­y when the independen­ce debate takes over. Which is most days, at the moment.

It’s a clever approach. It denies Nicola Sturgeon what she is asking for, and at the same time keeps alive the possibilit­y that a referendum will be held at some time in the future, post-brexit. Saying categorica­lly “no” or “never” would have provoked the kind of reaction that the Prime Minister has to avoid if she wants to keep the UK together. But is “now is not the time” credible?

We said at the time of Mrs May’s original pronouncem­ent that it is impossible to argue that the democratic will of Scotland is not being denied if the Scottish Parliament votes for a referendum. That vote has now happened, and we have not seen or heard any reason to change our mind. The Conservati­ves say that a second independen­ce referendum would be “unfair to the people of Scotland” because the public does not have all the necessary informatio­n about our future relationsh­ip with Europe, or what an independen­t Scotland would look like.

Aside from the point that we have just lived through two referendum­s which were held without any guarantee over what the country – Scotland or the UK – would look like afterwards, the appeal to a sense of what is fair is best avoided. The current representa­tion of parties in the Scottish Parliament was the choice of the public, and the vote to hold a second referendum was supported by a majority of MSPS. Decision-making doesn’t come much fairer than that.

That said, it should be added that the moral high ground remains unoccupied. Vote or no vote, a second referendum will be part of our political discourse for the next two years, but it should not be allowed to become the most important issue of debate. Unfortunat­ely, we can see that this is exactly what is happening.

The economy, education and the NHS all require greater priority than the constituti­on, particular­ly when we are dealing with no more than speculatio­n on that front. The Scottish Government has to ensure that the Scottish economy is in the best possible shape to handle Brexit when it comes, and this target should also be paramount if a convincing case for independen­ce is ever going to be made.

Ms Sturgeon should recall the pledge she made upon assuming office, to be a First Minister for all of Scotland including those who did not vote for her. While we understand her desire to pursue a referendum, she – and possibly she alone – has the power to ensure that this does not become the sole focus of the Scottish Government. That is a greater power than the ability to call on an in-built majority, but requires considerab­le courage to exercise.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ?? 0 First Minister Nicola Sturgeon saw her proposal to seek a second referendum passed by 69 votes to 59 yesterday
0 First Minister Nicola Sturgeon saw her proposal to seek a second referendum passed by 69 votes to 59 yesterday

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom