British politics, so centred in the Westminster hothouse, has suddenly become a tale of two cities, not one. The argument ricocheting between London and Edinburgh about Scottish independence is wonderfully exhilarating – a new year breath of federal fresh air reflecting some of the authentic layers and complexities of British political life. For the Scottish nationalists, however, this tale of two cities is appropriately both the best of times and the worst of times.
It is always tempting to cast Alex Salmond, the Scottish National party leader, as the man with all the cards in his hand. Tempting, in part, because both Salmond and the media, in London as much as in Edinburgh, have fuelled the myth of Scotland's first minister as an irresistible force leading a movement whose time has come. Yes, it may happen if the SNP's opponents allow it. But the time that has come could mark the breaking of the Salmond wave, not the consummation of his party's quest for independence.
Keep in mind two things about the nationalists' current run of success that are too easily ignored. One is that the steady upward trend in electoral support for the SNP – marked by the milestone Holyrood victories in 2007 and 2011 – has not been matched by an equivalent rise in the support for independence. Scottish voters have opted for Salmond as first minister, but they prefer him fighting Scotland's corner in the United Kingdom not severing ties altogether.
The second point is a variation on the first. The SNP won an overall majority at Holyrood last year: 69 seats out of 129. Yet more Scots – 55% compared with 45% – voted against the SNP than voted for the party. It was a formidable win; there is no argument about that. But even facing three discredited opponents, the SNP did not win a popular majority. And the independence referendum will be all about winning such a popular majority.
These points are not made to belittle the SNP's achievement, which is formidable, or to underestimate their capacity to win the referendum, which is real. But they are made in order to avoid overestimating that capacity too, and to question whether the claims about Salmond's brilliance are not sometimes a convenient legend. All polls show that Scotland is not pro-independence. The SNP's popularity in Scottish elections does not translate into support for separation. And Salmond himself is prone to mistakes, and as liable as any other politician to lose his allure. His customary bravado, an asset in the past, could begin to grate if the voters sense that he is overdoing the cocky brinkmanship in what is manifestly a serious moment.
No one grasps that more than Salmond himself. It was he who, in mid-campaign last year, hurriedly improvised the proposal – which was not in the SNP's manifesto – that the independence referendum would only take place some time from 2014, not before. Salmond fears the early contest that the UK government pressed for this week. He has tried to load the referendum dice in his favour – proposing referendum votes for 16- and 17-year-olds, an ad hoc supervisory arrangement instead of the UK electoral commission, and putting a third "devo max" option on the ballot paper. And he backs away on popular UK issue after popular issue – the crown, the pound, the British army, the BBC and the NHS among them. Anything, in short, rather than a simple yes/no on separation.
The UK government did some foolish things when it challenged Salmond this week. But Salmond's predictable sneering at David Cameron as Margaret Thatcher reborn should not distract from Cameron's achievement. The large change this week is that the UK government, and the other political parties, have broken out from the corner into which Salmond had pinned them. They have asserted their right to a say in the argument about process and, more importantly, over the substantive issue of independence versus devolution and the union. Before this week they were all on the back foot, in a corner. Now they are on the front foot, and this is turning into a contest of movement, not of position.
Salmond will play the Thatcher card hard. But Scottish voters can see the differences. As long as he is humble not vice-regal, Cameron could take some tricks. But this is about Scot versus Scot, not the Scots against the English. Salmond is now facing serious, grown-up "Made in Scotland" opponents, not straw rivals. The appearance of Alistair Darling to counter Salmond on the Today programme on Wednesday showed that there is a weightier opposition to the SNP in the field than Salmond has been used to. Darling is about to team up with Charles Kennedy of the Liberal Democrats and the former Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie in an anti-separation, pro-devolution common front, pitting the three most credible party politicians in Scotland – and non-politicians too – against the fourth.
Salmond will hit back, sometimes effectively. He is nothing if not tactically inventive. But these things are not set in stone. It is not so long ago that Gordon Brown was regarded as the most brilliant politician in the country – and look at him now. Salmond's position may not be as strong as it looks. He was pushed into promising a 2014 referendum this week, when in the past he has encouraged the idea that the vote might not come before 2016, after a possible outright Conservative UK general election win. Now, all of a sudden, he is also talking about talking to the other parties, and even to London, in more conciliatory terms – a brief respite from the previous incessant abuse. He began to lose his hegemony this week. That's immensely important.
And it is why a deal on the referendum process beckons if both sides are canny enough to make one – perhaps with Salmond winning on a 2014 date, and somehow keeping the devo-max option in play too, while conceding to the UK over the Electoral Commission and changing the voting age in return for a confirmation of legality. It may all have to go to the supreme court, though that will be a political calculation too. Do not lose sight of the essential facts amid all the posturing. Salmond is in the market for a referendum deal, because without one he is more likely to lose. It's as simple as that – and this week has made that outcome more likely.
• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree
Comments
Sign in to comment or to join the conversation
11 January 2012 10:08PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
11 January 2012 10:13PM
I have respect for Alex Salmond as a politician, and prefer most of his policies to those that the rest of the country has to endure, be it under Labour or the coalition.
But I hope he isn't successful in his bid for independence, if only because the UK would be worst place without Scotland.
Ultimately it should be the Scottish people's choice of course, and he certainly has a mandate to hold a referendum. Cameron wouldn't have a leg to stand on politically if he tried to disallow it.
But London may well be justified in being able to decide the wording and the timing. That's because for now it remains the sovereign power. There's a moral argument for that too: the rest of us are affected by whatever Scotland decides. Not least because if it goes its own way, we'll all be condemned to Tory government for the foreseeable future. So we need to make sure it's done properly and decisively.
11 January 2012 10:13PM
Martin
I think what Mr Salmon is in favour of is a non binding referendum - and one with a third option. That's because he's more interested in making political capital out of the result than actually facing the stark reality of the terms for independance.
11 January 2012 10:14PM
Well personally I think Scotland will vote no on independence. Devo Max is certainly an option. That is of course, if the media doesn't whip them into a frenzy. It is really down to the media at the moment and how successful they are.
Scottish people apparently don't really want independence and the reason why the SNP are in, is due to the fact that they were the alternative choice. If they can continue this growth and support I think we're in for second parliament with the SNP's.
11 January 2012 10:15PM
This is a good piece, and summarises the issues perfectly.
About 32% of Scots currently want independence. It's not going to get appreciably better.
Salmond has a role in Scottish and indeed British politics only for as long as he succeeds in not having a referendum. As soon as his bluff is called, people are going to wonder what he and the Scottish "National" Party are actually for, and they'll be history.
11 January 2012 10:16PM
Given that nobody sane would want to join the eurozone any time soon, what will the new currency be called?
11 January 2012 10:16PM
Yes because Cameron looks oh so much better -.-
11 January 2012 10:16PM
Why can't the UK government organise their own referendum in 2013 with the single question. If the Scottish Parliament has no legal basis to hold a referendum then the UK Government can hold one. If they do, it would be daft them holding a referendum 1 year after the UK governments one.
All Cameron has to do is to say "there will be a referendum in Scotland on dd/mm/2013 asking the question "Independence Yes/No", only people on the electoral register for MP elections get to vote ... And the Scots can decide their fate, Salmond is following, not driving, etc.
11 January 2012 10:17PM
They'll use the Pound sterling. It might be issued as the Bank of Scotland, but it'll still be the Pound sterling.
11 January 2012 10:18PM
I think the UK would be worse off without Scotland and Scotland would be worse off without England/N Ireland/Wales. Everybody would be losers.
I agree that as we are currently a single country there is a case for us all having a vote to determine the way forward - it impacts us all.
11 January 2012 10:20PM
Devo Max is Salmond's true goal is total power without fiscal responsibilty and the Bank of England cheque book sitting snugly in his sporran.
Salmond is probably the most astute and capable leader in europe at this time and he will probably get his way.
Cameron, Clegg and undEd know this and are trying to head him off at the pass with a simple in or out referendum.
11 January 2012 10:22PM
If he does that, Scotland will vote for independence. He'll be calling the Scottish out on a dare and I know what the scottish are like for their dares.
Heck why do you think they throw logs annually?
I don't know one single Scottish person that if you say to them, "I bet ten pence that you can't down that bottle of whisky" ...well you know the answer. Of course the whisky is going to cause more harm than ten pence but they just don't give a damn. They like a challenge and they'll relish the opportunity and then they'll wake up with the hang over in the morning and get on with it.
If the Scottish see a challenge, they'll take it and say, "We'll do it and by the mountains we'll do it with a grin."
11 January 2012 10:22PM
So the currency union would remain - see how that works in the eurozone?
I'll believe it when I hear the SNP say they are happy to let the Bank of England set their interest rates etc.
11 January 2012 10:23PM
Scotlands economy is looking shakey and now Salmond's idiotic brinksmanship is certain to cause a couple of years unnecessary uncertainty. Is he deliberately trying to blight Scotlands economic development for his own political ends?
11 January 2012 10:24PM
Why are we going to be worse off without Scotland? More to that point why are Scotland going to be worse off without us? I'm a little confused. It's not like they're going to suddenly stop employing thousands of doctors and nurses. It's not as if they're going to suddenly stop educating and it's not as if they're not going to be trading with us. I am admittedly a little lost.
11 January 2012 10:25PM
Where to start.
Why make this about Alex Salmond? Why not discuss the issues here and answer why the Scotland is on the verge of independence.
Alex Salmond hasn't backed down from anything. He's outlined his views on the military and everything else.
He didn't "sneer" at Cameron about Thatcher. he just laid it on the line that Cameron is a direct descendant of Thatcher. Quite right too.
Alastair Darling as big gun to save the union? Excuse me whilst I laugh.
Salmond is on much much firmer ground than Gordon Brown. Nor has he lost his "hegemony" this week. Where do you get all this from?
I think you do mean this article to denigrate Alex Salmond. But you forget Scottish independence is much bigger than him. Even if there's a No vote in 2014 and Westminster predictably tries to tear Scotland apart our quest for independence will never go away. We'll never stop agitating for it.
11 January 2012 10:27PM
"They'll use the Pound sterling. It might be issued as the Bank of Scotland, but it'll still be the Pound sterling"
No it wont. it wont be backed by Boe and it will rank up there with the Ukraine Gryvna and the CFA.
Oh and if Salmond wants to join the EU he''ll have to join their Ponzi scheme take the Euro.
11 January 2012 10:27PM
The scots are genetically identical to the English.
And the idea that the English are some chiselled jaw handsome ubermenschen is laughable.
11 January 2012 10:28PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
11 January 2012 10:28PM
Agreed. Scottish, English, Irish we all want our independence it's what makes them British. Now...you try to find the same gumption in Wales XD Ah poor Plaid Cymru.
11 January 2012 10:29PM
...you can't let it go, can you Martin?
Anyway, I've said my bit on Steve Bell's brilliant cartoon thread. As it is, Miliband and Labour (in Scotland, certainly - if not in England and Wales) are now finished.
11 January 2012 10:31PM
And their tendency to have ginger hair is just down to excessive bad weather
11 January 2012 10:32PM
The Poond
11 January 2012 10:32PM
Desperate stuff indeed.
The story is not the inexorable rise of the SNP but the final realisation that the 3 main English parties are governing for an ever smaller minority in the south of England.
On the question of the support for independence - the Tories are in a blind panic that the referendum be help before the real cuts hit home.
The referendum will not take place in a vacuum but against the background of the cuts; the changes to the NHS in England are anathema in Scotland and this is just one of a number of high profile government measures that cuase huge antipathy within Scots society.
11 January 2012 10:32PM
Okay...you obviously have your type. But I don't think that Cameron has anything better. Shiny skin, huge forehead...weird mouth (maybe he should grow some facial hair?) and the constantly worried eyes >_>
Who looks the most confident in the above picture? Regardless of physical features, Salmond is coming off better, more confident, head up, broad smile, shoulders back. Now...about Cameron.
11 January 2012 10:33PM
Only the scots could have a taxman (Burns) as their national hero.
11 January 2012 10:33PM
...no offence, but this is utter rubbish. Cameron's achievement?! Words fail me.
11 January 2012 10:33PM
Henry VIII, Elizabeth I..... come on. History history.
11 January 2012 10:34PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
11 January 2012 10:37PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
11 January 2012 10:40PM
Quite a mild response based on the command from Westminster central, who can blame Salmond for not accepting the terms being dictated but to apply a process of reflection and consultation.
Salmond and the SNP achieved a majority in a system which was designed to avoid that very outcome, and in pushing his agenda Cameron should be very careful to not be seen as trying to subvert a democratic process.
11 January 2012 10:40PM
I think there is a similarity re; Alex Salmond and Ken Livingstone
Huge personal egos that pick up and wear a party gown to further their grotesque rampant self.
Reference Salmond comment on PM's size 10 footware, he is trying to personalize the debate and reduce it to cat calling.
11 January 2012 10:41PM
SoundMoney
We have no idea what the outcome might be. To suggest the SNP will be history is simply guess work. I originally come from Scotland and I can tell you the Scots voted (mostly) for Labour ever since I was a child, however since Blair and his Thatcherite policies the SNP has gained considerably. Cameron and the Coalition do not have many friends in Scotland and the possibility of Independence as far as the electorate is concerned, might prove to be the best option. Tories are rare in Scotland as Scots on the whole tend to be inclusive and supportive of their fellow human beings. Incidentally I have great friends here in England, and my partner is English. I deplore racism and the opening salvo on this thread left me bemused to say the least, ultimately it is the poster's problem. I trust the Scots will make their choice hopefully free from interference from the sleekit chancer Cameron.
11 January 2012 10:41PM
Ah, like the Irish Punt eh...whatever happened to that?
11 January 2012 10:43PM
It's going up and down the river.
11 January 2012 10:44PM
They took a massive punt on the Euro and lost thier shirts
11 January 2012 10:45PM
All those Scottish MPs in Westminster WILL be sacked overnight if Salmond wins, won't they?
11 January 2012 10:46PM
You mean up the creek.
11 January 2012 10:46PM
I believe this is likely what the Coalition propose to do, if the SNP won't negotiate.
The SNP would either:
1. Mount a legal challenge - which they'd almost certainly lose;
2. Tell the 'the people of Scotland' to boycott it, but we wouldn't, we'd vote;
3. Tell the people of Scotland to show Westminster what we think of them, by voting for independence & I doubt we'd do that either. We'd vote exactly the same way as we are planning to vote now.
There is going to be 2 or 3 years of arguing & it probably won't change the outcome. Most Scots don't want to break up Britain.
11 January 2012 10:47PM
Independence means there will be no Scots MP's and no Scottish Office.
11 January 2012 10:47PM
Just a bit confused on the issue.
Why can't we do what they did in Canada?
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
(By the way they voted no)
Isn't it a bit silly wanting a country based on a name ? they are not really different from us, 33% germanic stock ..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_language
33% original british stock ie the Picts..
and 30% Irish ( The scoti are not even British they are an irish tribe)
it all seems a bit nationalistic , if not racist.
it's the ruling classes who we should overcome not eachother.
11 January 2012 10:49PM
"All those Scottish MPs in Westminster WILL be sacked overnight if Salmond wins, won't they?"
With one G Brown leading the charge to the dole office but in his case will anyone notice the difference?
11 January 2012 10:53PM
Scotland would need a complete set of infrastructure, as would England/N Ireland/Wales. Smaller means more overheads. Even if you pt the declining oil revenues to Scotland, they are still subsidised (i.e. their government cost per head is somewhat higher than England/N Ireland/Wales. Add in the higher infrastructure costs and the situation gets worse meaning either higher taxes or lower services in Scotland. England/N Ireland/Wales would benefit from no longer subsidising Scotland but would still suffer the higher infrastructure overhead per person and would thus suffer as well. As two countries, both would be rather small. I Scotland would lose more, but we would both be losers.
Salmond is coming across quite badly at the moment -continually trying to blame "Westminster interference" and repeatedly refering back to Thatcher. What people need are true facts, not political deception. At the moment we are just hearing hot air. People need to be told exactly what is proposed e.g. Currency - if sterling Scotlans interest rates determined by "London" and would "London" be lender of last resort to Scotland when it has no control over their regulations, budgets, etc.. What about military, what about deficit, etc. Answer are needed not political posturing.
11 January 2012 10:53PM
Why would they? They're the ones who'd politically gain from Scotish independence.
11 January 2012 10:55PM
So, for the avoidance of doubt, does Devo-Max. If (the rest of) Britain is left with only a treaty obligation to provide defence and foreign policy, the Scotland has no better right to seats in Westminster than the Channel Isles or the Isle of Man, where exactly the same deal applies.
There is no way under this option that someone in say Kent or Cornwall is going to accept Scottish MPs deciding the future of his local road widening scheme or whatever.
There is nothing good whatsoever to be said about the fudge option, but Scotland especially needs to be very clear about that. Independence or union: no halfway houses.
11 January 2012 10:55PM
Good answer, but I'm afraid I have a bit of a mental block when it comes to economics. So to answer your question from the perspective of somebody with a poor grasp of economics, I suppose the Irish people did well out of projects paid for with European money and thought that closer ties with the EU could only be a good thing.
And now they're buggered, but they weren't exactly an economic superpower before they joined the euro were they?
11 January 2012 10:56PM
And Einstein was only a patent clerk. Oh to be so superior to look down on people.
11 January 2012 10:57PM
...just in case you're in need of a laugh (and haven't seen it yet):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2012/jan/11/cameron-miliband-scottish-referendum
11 January 2012 10:58PM
The non-Tory parties will because they'll lose 58 MPs votes, but the Tories will only lose one.
11 January 2012 10:59PM
They own most of the land in Scotland - the 2 largest landowners in the country are Etonians.