In the ongoing debate surrounding Scottish independence, a critical question arises: Can Unionists ever be trusted to facilitate Scotland's path to independence? The answer, in my opinion, is a resounding no. This stance is not merely a position of principle but a strategic reality, given the historical context and the current political landscape. Let's delve into this complex issue and explore why the idea of Unionists aiding Scottish independence is not only unrealistic but also potentially harmful.
The Historical Context
The history of the Scottish independence movement is a tale of resilience and determination, often met with resistance from those who seek to maintain the status quo. The 2014 referendum, granted by David Cameron to quell the issue, instead sparked a renewed interest in independence. This event highlighted the power of the independence campaign in opening people's eyes to a better future, which in turn alarmed Westminster. The government and opposition's reaction to this shift in public sentiment is telling: they abandoned Prime Minister's Questions to rush to Scotland, demonstrating their fear of the movement's impact.
The Scotland Act and Its Implications
The Scotland Act, while constraining referendums, enables Holyrood elections, providing a de facto avenue for independence. This is a crucial point often overlooked. If the SNP leadership were to advocate for a referendum, they would likely be met with resistance from the House of Lords, which has historically tried to close off any paths to independence. However, the Act's allowance for Holyrood elections presents an alternative route, one that the SNP leadership might be reluctant to pursue due to its potential impact on their strategy.
The Power of Elections
A de facto referendum through Holyrood elections is a powerful tool. It allows the Scottish people to express their will democratically, and Westminster has historically recognized such mandates. Of the 23 countries that have gained independence against Westminster's wishes since 1945, 19 used elections to demonstrate their democratic mandate. This historical precedent suggests that elections are a viable and effective means of achieving independence.
The SNP's Dilemma
The SNP leadership's reluctance to pursue this route is perplexing. By blocking the clear and obvious path to independence through Holyrood elections, they are essentially tying Scotland's hands behind its back. This behavior raises questions about their strategic priorities and the true nature of their commitment to Scottish independence. Jonathon Shafi's article, 'Why are SNP figures not making a compelling case for independence?', becomes even more relevant in light of this analysis.
The Way Forward
In my view, the way forward for Scottish independence is clear. Holyrood elections provide a democratic avenue for the Scottish people to express their desire for independence. The SNP leadership should embrace this route, using it to demonstrate their commitment to the cause and to challenge Westminster's resistance. By doing so, they can harness the power of democracy and potentially achieve independence in a manner that respects the will of the Scottish people.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the idea of Unionists aiding Scottish independence is a fantasy. The historical context, the Scotland Act, and the power of elections all point to a different reality. The SNP leadership must recognize the potential of Holyrood elections and embrace this route to independence. By doing so, they can turn the dream of Scottish independence into a reality, one that respects the democratic will of the Scottish people.
