CALLS from a former SNP policy chief for a three-option referendum have sparked a debate throughout the independence movement.
Writing in The National on Wednesday, Chris Hanlon (below) makes the suggestion – arguing that excluding the possibility of devo-max may be “just plain wrong”.
He suggests that heightened devolution could be a popular option among the electorate – referring to reports from before the 2014 vote and calling reluctance to discuss this third option on both sides of the constitutional divide an “outrage”.
“However much I personally want independence, I am of the opinion that intentionally frustrating the sovereign will of the Scottish people because you don’t want the outcome is unacceptable,” he writes.
Hanlon adds that while devo-max is not his first choice, he does not believe in keeping it off the ballot paper. “The people must have the option of choosing the path the largest percentage of them favour,” he says.
According to the activist, devo-max could involve securing a guarantee of the permanence of the Scottish Parliament, a guarantee of its supremacy over devolved matters and a guarantee of the voice of Scotland’s people, meaning assurance that Holyrood could call indyref2 without Westminster’s consent.
The calls have sparked conversation online, with Michael Russell, the SNP president, among those most vocal against them.
READ MORE: Josh Taylor deletes 'SNP fascist state' tweet – but insists he 'stands by it'
“I do not support including a third option,” he explained on Twitter. “The normality of independence works as does constructive #EU membership. More #Brexit accepting imposed fudge ( as described by Starmer yesterday) is about saving Westminster not securing the best future for the people of Scotland.”
Meanwhile, SNP MSP Kevin Stewart called the third option suggestion “idiotic, foolish” and “nonsensical”.
We’re keen to hear our readers’ views on this debate. Below, you can cast your vote in a sample poll and indicate whether you back the idea in the first place.
There is also a short form where you can put forward your own views, which we will be publishing later on Wednesday.
What do you think of the proposal for a third option on the independence referendum ballot?
Tell us how you feel about the suggestion from the former SNP policy chief Chris Hanlon.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel