Why referendum-obsessed SNP won't talk about reality of independence – William Deans
The SNP’s reluctance to discuss what would actually happen if Scotland became independent speaks volumes
An old legal joke goes: “If the facts are against you, pound the law. If the law is against you, pound the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.”
Not for the first time in Scottish nationalist politics, we are in the “yell like hell” period – and we are getting a reminder of why the SNP will always prefer to talk about the process of getting an independence referendum, rather than the reality of what leaving the UK would actually be like for us all.
First there was the flap with Andy Burnham earlier this month at Prime Minister’s Questions, over when and how a referendum might happen. Then there was the conclave in Cardiff between the SNP, Plaid Cymru of Wales and Sinn Fein of Northern Ireland.
Finally there was last week’s urgent, top priority vote in the Scottish Parliament on the right to hold a referendum – held, rather unfortunately, just hours before new official statistics were released showing Scotland’s drug deaths soaring once again. When someone shows you their priorities, believe them.
Most people would be poorer
The common thread in all these events is the SNP’s desire to redirect the political narrative away from real, tangible public policy of the sort that helps or harms people’s lives, and towards the abstract question of the right to hold another referendum.
You might reasonably ask why the nationalist side seems so fixated on when and how a second referendum could happen, rather than on the bigger picture of winning hearts and minds to their cause. (The more innocent amongst us might even ask whether they could perhaps spend a little more time simply governing the country effectively, but I fear that ship sailed some years ago.)
The SNP’s political logic, however, should be obvious. They would rather talk about the process of getting a referendum than about the reality of leaving the UK, because leaving the UK would be hard. Most people who follow the issues seriously know and acknowledge this fact – even those who have some sympathy for nationalism.
There are tough trade-offs, complex entanglements and unpleasant sacrifices that would have to be made. All the romantic arguments – of what Scotland could, perhaps, possibly look like in generations to come – cannot negate the basic reality that leaving the UK would at best make most people poorer in the short term. And there is no reason beyond blind optimism to assume that it would make us richer in the long term.
Focussing on the process
The SNP know full well that on this debating ground they are at a disadvantage. For some people (often, it must be said, those who know they will be financially comfortable in any political outcome), independence is entirely worth the economic price.
For others in the middle of the debate, however, focusing their attention on the cost to their families of leaving the UK is enough to put them off the idea entirely. That is without getting into the various other practical policy questions – borders, currencies, pensions and the like – which for good reason leave many Scots wary of the table-pounding people.
Far more convenient from the SNP’s point of view, then, to sidestep entirely the consequences of leaving the UK (except in the most sweeping and idealistic of terms) – and instead focus on process arguments. When should the referendum be? Who decides the basis for it? Who can we blame when we fail to make progress?
More to the point, the more time the SNP can spend arguing over the right to hold a referendum, the less time has to be spent on boring, unromantic things like fixing healthcare or education or transport. Nicola Sturgeon famously admitted that they had taken their “eye off the ball” on drugs deaths during her time as First Minister, in a period when independence remained front and centre. If the focus of the Scottish government has changed since her time, it is not showing up in the statistics.
All the better, then, for the SNP to campaign on the principle of a referendum and be thwarted, rather than having to talk about the empty substance of nationalism and its consequences for Scotland – past, present and future.
The most cynical explanation
The most cynical reading of all, however, is that the SNP leadership themselves privately know that their referendum chatter is about nothing more than keeping restless supporters on side. The legal games have played out. There is little appetite within the party management (let alone anywhere else) for a substantive discussion about the reality of leaving the UK – but to admit that fact openly would just mean further division for a party that only truly agrees on one issue: independence.
Activists have been marched up and down this hill for so long that it is scarcely believable they would be satisfied by yet-more rhetorical gimmicks (and if the rumblings around the SNP’s party conference are anything to go by, they are far from satisfied) – but at this point, rhetorical gimmicks are all that Swinney and his team have left to reach for.
The law was already against the SNP. They are making no serious attempt to win the case for leaving the UK on the facts. “Pound the table and yell like hell” may be the best we can expect from here on out.
William Deans is chief of staff to Alistair Carmichael MP and holds an MSc in nationalism and ethnic conflict
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.