It’s 2020 and Brexit is “done.” Is it now time for Scexit?
Brexit is finally happening, and a majority of the people of Scotland now want another referendum, but does the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, actually feel the same?
The December General election cemented the SNP’s position as the standout party in Scotland, winning 48 seats out of the 59 north of the border, leading to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, to proclaim that there is a cast-iron mandate from the public and from the Scottish Parliament for a referendum. Now, leaving aside the fact that the SNP won 81% of the seats but only gained 45% of the votes, there is undoubted extensive support for Indyref2, and Sturgeon has been clear in her intent for it to be this year, but is this really her intention?
Legally, the position is questionable, but certainly resolvable too. The formal request was made and, inevitably, then rejected by Boris Johnson, in the meantime the Scottish Parliament passed its Referendum Act, in preparation for going ahead anyway. As it stands, a referendum cannot be held without the agreement of Westminster, but a legal challenge could turn this around, on the basis that it would simply be a test of public opinion. The reality is, it would be extremely difficult for anyone to stop Holyrood from going ahead with a referendum, it just means that any outcome is unlikely to be legally binding, if not impossible to ignore.
But we had a once in a lifetime vote back in 2014, goes the shout of those opposed to Indyref2.
I, like many in 2014, was torn over which way to vote, and my doubts very much reflected the views of the nation as a whole. Disaffected with Westminster I was keen to see additional powers for Holyrood, but at the same time was concerned over the economic impact of Independence, and was unwilling to risk our membership of the EU. For many, it all came down to the fact that Scotland can undoubtedly make it as an Independent country, but doesn't need to in order to be a proud nation - so why risk it?
But much has changed. The economic arguments against Independence remain, particularly given the drop in oil prices, but the old adage that it’s The Economy Stupid, seems to have been thrown out the window with the madness around Brexit. There is increased despondency and anger with Westminster, particularly following the last General Election and the Brexit referendum. Add to that, the fact there have been none of the promised increase in powers for a devolved Scottish parliament, we are no longer members of the EU despite overwhelming Scottish support for Remain, and there is an ugly rise in English Nationalism south of the border. The context that led many to vote No in 2014 has, quite simply, moved on.
And these thoughts are reflected in the polls, as for the first time in a number of years, support for Independence tips over the 50% mark. As a wise man once told me, those wanting to remain in the Union have to win every referendum, the Nationalists only need to win one, they’ll keep on asking until they get what they want.
So, if the SNP have clearly stated that they want to hold Indyref2 this year, there’s every likelihood that they will be able to, and there is growing support for their cause, why is it unlikely to happen?
The answer is fear and uncertainty. In 2014, the risks associated with Independence were simply too high. Voters balanced up the benefits and risks and played it safe. If we had to make that decision again now we just wouldn’t know where to start because, despite the oven-readiness of it, Brexit simply isn’t done yet. With Brexit negotiations still ongoing it would be utter madness for the SNP to hold a referendum, when we really have no idea what the implications of a Scottish Independence vote would be.
If we take two very different Brexit scenarios, we can see how Indyref2 would be completely different:
A Hard Brexit, or the Australian model, as the Westminster Government is now trying to rebrand it, would have dramatic economic implications for the whole of the UK. It will result in the need for border controls with the EU, and the implications for the Island of Ireland are extremely worrying. Remaining a part of the UK in this context, would mean a continuation of Scotland’s status as a junior partner within the UK, suffering for the decisions made by England and Wales. On the other hand, a vote for Independence would open up the option to re-join the EU. It would involve a potentially unpleasant divorce, and would inevitably lead to Scotland adopting the Euro over the longer term, but for many the idea of being an equal partner in Europe is far more appealing than being the junior one in a post-Brexit UK.
But there are a few buts. EU membership cannot be taken for granted, and if it does come, then the inevitable outcome would be a hard border with the rest of the UK, Scotland’s biggest trading partner. For many brought up as British this just might be a step too far.
A soft Brexit on the other hand would be entirely different. The lack of any trade barriers with Europe could possibly minimise the anger over Brexit, Scotland could continue with the status quo and little would change. At the same time, a vote for Independence would also have less dramatic consequences, allowing Scotland the opportunity to re-join the EU without risking the current trading relations with the rest of the UK.
The two scenarios are extremely different, and without knowing the context, any referendum would be based on so many conflicting scenarios, all of which could be both true and false at the same time, it would become almost meaningless.
That is why Nicola Surgeon will not want to hold Indyref2 in 2020. Not only will the electorate be making a massive, once in a lifetime, decision without all of the facts confirmed. When they are faced with fear and uncertainty, they have already proven to be risk-aversive, there is every chance that the people will vote NO once again, preferring the flawed status quo to so many unknowns.
So, Nicola will continue calling for a referendum in 2020, keeping the more hard-line Nationalists happy and the idea of Indyref2 in the limelight, and she will continue challenging the decision of Boris Johnson and his Westminster government. Everyone loves a David, especially when the Goliath is seen as a posh entitled Englishman denying us our rights to self-determination. The more Westminster says no, the more the people of Scotland become indignant at being told what to do, and move just that little bit closer towards wanting self-determination.
And then, when there is clarity around the kind of Brexit we are to suffer, we will finally get our Indyref2. And what will the outcome be? Alas my crystal ball is still malfunctioning after failing me so badly over Brexit. Whatever the outcome though, it will be divisive, it will be unpleasant, and it will have ramifications for years to come. Pandora’s box is overflowing.