A NICOLA Sturgeon ally has said a de-facto referendum would be “more likely” to lead to a plebiscite rather than triggering talks to end the Union.
Mhairi Hunter, who is the organiser for the First Minister’s SNP branch in Glasgow, said a victory for pro-Yes parties in the next General Election would not necessarily begin separation negotiations – but could be the basis for a referendum.
Alba have hit out at the suggestion and demanded clarity on what the SNP think the purpose of a de-facto referendum is.
During an interaction with independence campaigner Jonathon Shafi on Thursday, Hunter was asked: “What do you think will happen after the next election if the SNP win a massive popular vote?”
She replied: “We start negotiations on independence or, probably more likely, an agreed referendum.”
READ MORE: BBC uphold 'pro-SNP bias' complaint over Devi Sridhar book broadcast
There is disagreement within the SNP about how to execute the de-facto referendum strategy – dubbed by some campaigners as Plan B.
Angus MacNeil, the SNP MP for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, told The National on Wednesday that not only could the next Holyrood election be used as the basis for the de-facto referendum but that it could be used to secure independence without winning more than half of the popular vote.
He said: “The only thing that is within the SNP’s control and within the Scottish Government’s control is to call a Holyrood election early because we can’t have a referendum now but we could have a Holyrood election in or around the time we were planning to have a referendum anyway.”
He added: “I’d say Yes having more than the other side, it’s what usually wins elections and that’s how matters are decided in any democracy.”
Deputy First Minister John Swinney has previously said pro-Yes parties must secure at least 51% of the popular vote in Scotland to enter the next stage in the battle for independence – a number never previously achieved by the SNP.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon speaks of ‘distressing news’ in search for missing woman
Sturgeon announced on Wednesday less than two hours after the Supreme Court blocked indyref2 there would be an emergency SNP conference in the new year to hash out the party’s official stance on fighting the next election as a de-facto referendum.
Figures such as MacNeil will call on the party’s high command to call an early Holyrood election – and he took to social media to scold the “arrogance” of the party’s leadership, which he accused of failing to grasp the chance to refine the Plan B strategy in the past.
Chris McEleny, Alba's general secretary, said: "Clarity is required on what the SNP think a defacto referendum is.
"If the referendum strategy route - which has been the centre of the national cause since the formation of the Scottish Parliament - is to be abandoned then a majority at an election must not be yet another mandate to ask Westminster for a referendum, as suggested by Ms Hunter, but it should be a mandate to declare independence."
READ MORE: Watch Europeans read a message to the Scottish people on indyref2 hopes
Speaking to The National, Hunter said: “It could result in either outcome. An agreed referendum is the SNP's preferred option but if UK Government continues to say no then the next opportunity to achieve a majority of votes for independence will be the General Election.
“With a successful outcome the Scottish Government will open talks with the UK Government on achieving independence.
“The UK Government might agree to start negotiating terms or they might say they wished to see an agreed referendum take place.
“I don't think anybody can predict exactly what would happen.
“My personal view would be that [the UK Government] would probably want to see a further process but that's just a guess.
“I think it is silly and unhelpful for Alba to jump on a conversation on Twitter to misrepresent it.
“People in the Yes movement need to be able to discuss things freely and openly like adults.”
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