ALEX Salmond says pro-independence parties should agree to stand a single Yes candidate in each constituency in the event of a “de facto” referendum at the next General Election.
The Alba chief has called on the SNP and Greens to agree to a pact with his party to ensure a “united” front if a “single issue” election takes place.
The Scottish Government aims to hold a referendum in October next year, pending a Supreme Court ruling. If that proposal is rejected, Nicola Sturgeon says the next UK General Election will be considered a “de facto” vote on independence.
Holyrood ministers have said a majority of votes for pro-Yes parties would be sufficient to begin independence negotiations with Westminster.
READ MORE: Plan B: How a ‘de facto indyref2’ will deliver Scottish independence
Salmond, who warns there is “little chance” of the Supreme Court siding with Holyrood, argues a single independence candidate should be put forward in each constituency to maximise the Yes vote in a future indyref General Election - and suggested Alba would not be standing aside for the SNP's benefit.
He said: "After some confusion it is now being said by the SNP that the ‘mandate’ in the election will require a majority of votes as well as seats. That is an extraordinarily high bar to set since no party in Scotland has achieved that since 1955. Even Labour in its best year of 1966 fell a whisker short as did the SNP in the peak year of 2015.
"If that was to be achieved it could not be by a single party – the election would have to be fought by a united movement preferably with a single independence candidate in every seat.
"A plebiscite election would not succeed if it is just party political business as usual on the Yes side.
"Obviously the vast majority of such candidates would be sitting SNP and Alba MPs but it would be wise to bring the Green party on board as well as key independence campaigners outwith party politics aiming to unseat the remaining unionist MPs."
Currently, Alba has two MPS – SNP defectors Neale Hanvey and Kenny MacAskill.
READ MORE: Pollster gives his verdict on what will decide outcome of indyref2
Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie says he would “expect” Green candidates to stand across the country in a future General Election.
He told BBC Scotland’s Sunday show: “It’s always for our local branches to decide where Green candidates are going to stand. I would expect that we’ll stand. But we’ll be debating that in our party conference and in discussion over the coming months.”
Harvie, a government minister, set out what would constitute a victory for Yes in the event of such a vote. “In those circumstances, we’ll have to say a majority of votes for pro-independence parties and candidates has to be respected,” he explained.
Salmond insisted it is “perfectly legitimate to use a democratic election to progress the independence case instead of a referendum which is being blocked and obstructed”.
He added: “Two-faced Tories whine that you can’t fight an election on a single issue, conveniently forgetting that they won the 2019 election in England on the slogan of ‘Get Brexit Done’.”
Scottish LibDem leader Alex Cole-Hamilton has claimed that a victory in the next UK election for pro-independence parties could be ignored by Westminster.
Asked if a majority of votes for Yes parties would be an acceptable trigger for negotiations to break up the Union, Cole-Hamilton told the Sunday Show: “No. Not at all.”
He added: “You see academics and political pundits right across the board, from all kinds of backgrounds, saying you cannot make a General Election about a single issue. You cannot turn it into a de facto referendum. Why? When we fight a General Election we are choosing the government. It is about how we govern our society, the direction of travel for the whole of the UK for five years.”
It was pointed out to the LibDem chief that his party fought the 2019 General Election on the promise of overturning Brexit without a vote. “This was not a policy that went down well," he replied. "In hindsight I don’t think it was the right policy, but we have moved on from that.”
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