SNP’s new ‘mandate’ for Indyref? It’s a myth fuelled by monomania

THEY used to say there were only two certainties in life – death and taxes. It is time, I think, to extend this short list, to add a third thing which cannot be avoided.

This new certainty is that, no matter the circumstances in which the country finds itself, Nicola Sturgeon will insist that the case for independence has been strengthened.

If the economy flounders, only independence can save us. If the economy is booming, only independence can help us build on that success. If the UK elects a Labour government, an independent Scotland would be a friend and ally. If the UK elects a Conservative government, independence presents an escape route.

So it was hardly surprising when the First Minister declared that the result of Thursday’s General Election strengthened her mandate to hold a second divisive referendum on independence.

Nationalists never tire of this particular tune and Ms Sturgeon’s comments will have been music to their ears.

But to most Scots, it will have sounded tired and old.

The truth – a concept alien to SNP strategists – is that the First Minister does not have a mandate for another vote, no matter how loudly she proclaims otherwise.

It is certainly true that, in winning 48 out of Scotland’s 59 Westminster seats, the Nationalists enjoyed a landslide in Scotland – but only a minority of voters backed the two main pro-independence parties, the SNP and the Scottish Greens.

The figures look familiar. Just as the 2014 referendum ended with 55 per cent backing the UK, Thursday’s Election saw 55 per cent of Scots vote for parties opposed to independence.

The numbers show that support for independence is stuck in the mud. The strengthened mandate of which Ms Sturgeon spoke is a figment of her imagination. It simply doesn’t exist.

In advance of last week’s Election, Ms Sturgeon urged voters to support the SNP as a way of trying to block Brexit. One didn’t have to be a Nationalist to back the SNP.

Well, we’ve heard this one before. Back in 2007, Alex Salmond, the SNP leader at the time, appealed to Scots to support his party in order to ensure competent, stable government at Holyrood.

Don’t worry, you don’t have to back independence to support the SNP, he said.

Many people took him at his word, providing momentum to the nationalist movement. So far as the SNP is concerned, a vote cast for the party is always a vote in favour of moving the independence project forward.

Anyone who took Ms Sturgeon at her word and voted SNP last week as a protest against Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans was soon to learn that their vote was to be translated into evidence of the need for another Indyref.

On Friday, she announced she will soon publish a blueprint for a new referendum on independence.

Shortly after this, Mr Johnson let it be known he opposes such a vote.

For all her bluster, Ms Sturgeon cannot escape the uncomfortable fact that support for independence remains stagnant.

Were she to hold a second referendum any time soon, the likelihood is she would lose, and that would not only be an end to her career but an end – for the foreseeable future – to the Nationalist project.

It suits the First Minister to go to war with the PM over a referendum. She will demand that Holyrood be given the right to call one and he will continue to say no. She will tell Scots they are being denied their democratic rights and ignored by a Westminster elite. She will hope to generate more of the grievance that fuels her nationalism.

The First Minister says Scots must have the right to choose their own future, as if the 2014 ‘once in a lifetime’ vote either didn’t take place or did – but produced a result that should be considered invalid.

The majority of Scots, as last week’s Election result shows, have more important things to think about than endless wrangling over independence.

And there is certainly no shortage of important things to think about. If only Ms Sturgeon could put the sort of energy she expends on fighting the constitutional battle into other areas, Scotland might be in better shape. We might have better hospitals and an education system that isn’t churning out kids lacking basic skills in literacy and numeracy.

It is increasingly clear that neither Ms Sturgeon nor her colleagues care about delivering a competent domestic agenda. Independence is all that matters, and any failings that we might dare attribute to this monomaniacal obsession are, according to the SNP, merely symptoms of Scotland’s place in the Union. There is no problem too large or complex that cannot be easily solved by pressing the magic button marked independence.

It is certainly true that Mr Johnson is far from popular among Scots. He’s posh and privileged and dishonest. But Ms Sturgeon’s determination to advance her cause through an anti-Johnson strategy betrays a lack of imagination.

Mr Johnson does not stand in the way of her improving the Scottish NHS or the education system. His presence in Downing Street has no bearing on a whole range of issues.

The First Minister will ratchet up the angry rhetoric, telling us a story of a nation abandoned by a distant, unfeeling Westminster Government. But the truth is she has done little else since losing the 2014 referendum.

Mr Johnson’s refusal to grant the power to call Indyref 2 would not be evidence of him denying Scots democratic rights. Rather, he would be defending the democratically expressed will of Scots.