Tavish vetoes SNP independence referendum hopes

Despite Lord (Paddy) Ashdown’s public declaration last week that the Lib Dems should support a referendum on Scottish independence, Tavis Scott has made it clear he won’t budge – here’s today’s Daily Telegraph:

Tavish Scott, the Scottish Lib Dem leader told the Daily Telegraph he would rebuff any offers made by the First Minister because he did not want to be drawn into a constitutional “trap” that could threaten the Union. … The rejection leaves Mr Salmond with an almost impossible task to win the parliamentary majority he requires at Holyrood to get his Referendum Bill passed. Without the Lib Dems, the First Minister needs to win over the Conservatives or Labour, but both have made clear their virulent opposition to staging a vote.

I’ve been one of those who (observing from afar) has been surprised that the Lib Dems have not adopted a ‘bring it on’ stance. But, to give him his due, Tavish has mounted a strong and eminently rational defence of the Scottish party’s anti-referendum stance, reflected in the Telegraph’s story:

Mr Salmond’s preferred referendum question is whether his administration should negotiate a settlement with the British Government so that Scotland becomes an independent state. Because constitutional issues are reserved to Westminster, this convoluted wording, asking for permission merely to negotiate, is the only one legally allowed for a vote organised at Holyrood.

But Mr Scott is understood to oppose such ambiguous wording, with voters confused over whether they were voting for secession from the Union or merely talks. Mr Salmond’s desire to use a system of single transferable votes (STVs) to decide a three-option referendum could also lead to independence through the back door.

This would see Scots number the choices of status quo, more powers for the Scottish Parliament and a separate Scotland in order of preference. The least popular option would then be discarded, and the second preference votes of those who backed it distributed among the remaining two choices. But this system could mean that even if a third or fewer Scots named independence as their first choice, it could still win through thanks to the second preference votes.

The Scottish Lib Dems’ fears seem to me to be reasonable. I have no problems with the principle of referenda to decide such issues, certainly ones which relate to where power resides. But there are two essential pre-requisites to any referendum: (i) the question posed must be crystal clear; and (ii) the options must produce a clear-cut majority result.

But, in this instance, it appears the question could be open to interpretation – it’s easy to imagine a doorstep conversation in which a nationalist canvasser assures a voter that their pro-independence vote will simply give the SNP a stronger negotiating hand when talking to the Westminster government to deliver a better deal for Scotland.

And while I’m a fan of STV voting for elected representation at all levels – to ensure all votes count, and to gain councils/governments which reflect the popular vote – I am not convinced it’s a system well-suited to referenda, where every single vote will carry equal weight in any case.

I’ll leave the last words to Tavish, as quoted by the Telegraph:

People in Scotland are fed up with endless speculation about independence as they worry about having a job tomorrow. Speculation that the Scottish government is moving towards a multi-option referendum is an attempt to woo the Liberal Democrats is inevitable, if a little tiresome. But, unfortunately for the SNP, I will not fall into this trap. Liberal Democrats do not support independence and we will not support a referendum that could let independence in through the backdoor.”

Read more by or more about , , , , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

5 Comments

  • As Jeff Breslin has pointed out the party’s policy of federalism has been ruled out by Calman.

    http://snptacticalvoting.blogspot.com/2009/02/how-long-will-lib-dems-stick-with.html

    Which has been followed by John Farquhar Munro backing an independence referendum as well as former-leader Paddy Ashdown.

    Since we’re looking for we should ensure that it demands that a federal relationship is back on the table. At the same time the likes of John F Munros and Paddy Ashdowns should be stating their support for a referendum.

    The implication would be clear to the other parties in the Calman Commission. Stop treating our position as not worthy or we will leave and support a referendum bill with our option included instead of Calman’s.

    I’m sure that would concentrate their minds since in any such referendum it would be our option that would win and that would strengthen us as the SNP face defeat and the other two parties look like bit players.

  • Tom Robinson 6th Mar '09 - 11:19pm

    Opinion polls in Scotland strongly indicate a much more severe setback for the Liberal Democrats is coming in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK.

    I find it strange that the leadership does not recognise that this is because they have cast themselves as a third unionist party rather than a first federalist party.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarDavid Evans 4th Jul - 1:57pm
    Kevin, I'm sad to have to tell you, but your article is about as clear as mud. Just looking at one point - “Promote /stick...
  • User AvatarSue Sutherland 4th Jul - 1:43pm
    There is definitely a correlation between inadequate housing and ill health and the Covid pandemic is exacerbating this. I would have thought, though, that this...
  • User AvatarWilliam Francis 4th Jul - 1:22pm
    "Reduce the number of people in poverty by 25% – this needs an agreed measure of poverty this needs an agreed measure of poverty" Why...
  • User AvatarJohn O 4th Jul - 12:50pm
    Really don't understand all the apologizing & distancing from the coalition specifically aimed at Labour voters, many 'soft' Tory voters thought the coalition worked well...
  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 4th Jul - 12:37pm
    The comments from Geoffrey are ott, John, thanks, as with David, Barry!
  • User AvatarGeorge Kendall 4th Jul - 12:36pm
    @Tim Harney You are right that these words have different meanings to different people. Tories think leftwing means a big state, so North Korea which...