SNP leadership candidate Ash Regan has set out her plan for if Westminster says no to opening negotiations on securing independence, should she become first minister and use her “voter empowerment mechanism”.
Regan, the MSP for Edinburgh Eastern, is proposing using each election as a means to achieve independence, with a result of 50%+1 for Yes parties triggering negotiations with the UK Government on leaving the Union.
The MSP has consistently been asked what she would do if the UK Government refused to negotiate in those circumstances, and has now set out her response to that possibility.
It comes after a new poll by Find Out Now, commissioned by the Scot Goes Pop blog, found 69% of SNP voters agree that a majority of votes for pro-independence parties could be used as a democratic mandate to negotiate an independence settlement. Among all voters, the figure was 33% - while 30% disagreed and 25% did not know.
The four pillars to ensure #Scotland will become Independent through my #Independence Plan.
— Ash Regan MSP (@AshReganSNP) March 11, 2023
SAY NO to the status quo!#voteAshRegan for Leader of @theSNP. pic.twitter.com/qz4VvtJfdH
“I have the only plan that has historic precedent, can be delivered legally by Scotland alone, moves us beyond the referendum stalemate, is supported by the majority of SNP members, and is accepted by the public,” Regan said.
“Bluntly, there is no possibility of the UK Government not agreeing, as demonstrated in the 65 examples of countries that have left the UK or British Empire,” she said.
“There is a 100% success rate in those countries getting the UK Government to the negotiating table after an initial refusal. It is not credible to suggest anything else, the UK Government will even concede this fact.”
READ MORE: How SNP members at the trade union hustings reacted
Regan split her explanation into four pillars – the first, that the Smith Commission states clearly that “nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose”.
The second pillar is that the international community has always recognised UK elections, and would therefore recognise the will of Scotland’s electorate.
In her third pillar, Regan argued that there’s “no legal method to stop the Scottish Parliament from deciding when it wants an election, in the same manner the UK Government can decide when it wants one”.
And in the fourth, Regan stated the UK isn’t a full democracy, but a constitutional monarchy. As head of state, she noted that King Charles acknowledged Barbados announcing itself as a republic.
“King Charles is the Head of State for the United Kingdom and his public speeches show us the character of the man on the throne,” she said.
“As first minister, I would be required to attend audiences with him, and would serve as a member of his Privy Council - which is the recognised mechanism for reaching interdepartmental agreement for ‘prerogative business’, which is the business of which no other precedent or clear delegation to minister or department exists.”
Regan concluded that while the UK defends its position of blocking indyref2 with “bluster and bullish statements”, the evidence suggests Scotland would not be held in the Union “in perpetuity”.
Her explanation, which was also set out in video, came as her fellow candidate Kate Forbes called for more preparations for independence – including new organisations focusing on reserved areas.
Meanwhile, Humza Yousaf suggested the creation of a new Cabinet Secretary for Advancing Independence, should he win the contest.
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