Does Nicola Sturgeon's timetable for indyref2 stand up to scrutiny?

He concludes: “Pulling all this together, and assuming a relatively quick three-month primary legislative process, after question testing and with few further hold-ups, each of these aspects of the Referendums (Scotland) Act 2020 adds up to around 10 months of time already accounted for or implied by that legislation before polling day.”

This does not include the time required for a reference to the Supreme Court, which the UK Government might well make, and which would be months.

READ MORE: Enough dither and delay – it's time to set a date for indyref2

(For what it’s worth, Gove initially denied they would make such a reference on the Marr show in May this year, but subsequently rowed back from that response in a media briefing.)

So from the start of the set-up process to the end of it would probably take more than a year, even if we do actually get a referendum at the end of it. Only then could the campaign proper really begin.

In that light, how are we to take the First Minister’s statement to the Financial Times of October 7?

As we come out of this winter into the spring – with, I hope, a lot more certainty about the Covid situation being a bit more in the rear-view mirror – we start to take more concrete decisions around all of this (legislation for a referendum).

Her timetable would delay the end of the preliminary steps, even if fruitful, until mid-2023. Unless we are to contemplate a very brief campaign indeed, how on earth are we to reconcile that with what she told the BBC on September 10?

READ MORE: George Kerevan: How Nicola Sturgeon can capitalise on COP26 for Scotland and the world's sake

The UK Government has said it intends to block indyref2, but Ms Sturgeon said it was realistic to plan for one by the end of 2023.

The people of Scotland are entitled to receive from their First Minister an unambiguous, practical, authoritative and honest statement of her government’s plan for indyref 2. Also a clear outline of its plan for an independence vote if it turns out we don’t get a referendum. It is looking increasingly likely that the UK Government will not be waiting until 2024 to hold a General Election, thus allowing the Scottish Government insufficient time to turn that into a plebiscite should a referendum not take place. It is well past time that we got this statement.

Ian Roberts
Wishaw

NICOLA Sturgeon’s claim in the Financial Times last week that she has “time on her side” has caused a bit of a stooshie amongst politicians and commentators who are – to put it politely – less inclined to support independence. I wish to examine the rebuttal offered by people like Baroness Ruth Davidson, and offer a personal reflection on this.

The theory goes that whilst young people may show enthusiasm towards Scotland being an independent country now, this will fade over time when these same individuals acquire assets and financial interests, such as owning a home. They are less likely to want to “step into the unknown” and place their hard-earned assets into a world of uncertainty. In other words, I’m alright Jack!

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon cannot assume today’s young folk are tomorrow’s Yes voters

This theory would be far more credible if the economic situation in the UK was in any way desirable. Instead, productivity continues to falter, inequalities between different parts of the UK widen, pensions are being dismantled, consumer prices are increasing rapidly and Brexit has placed intolerable strains on businesses through barriers to trade and labour shortages. Not exactly the best backdrop when lecturing people on how to keep their assets safe and secure.

But there is another fundamental issue here, which people like Baroness Davidson prefer to overlook. When I voted Yes in 2014, I had a car but that was about it. I lived in a tiny rented flat and had no plans to start a family or purchase my own home. Seven years on, I have a young family and have climbed the property ladder. Whilst my financial situation and immediate responsibilities have completely changed, my values haven’t. I still value democracy, citizen empowerment and equality – three important concepts that are largely forgotten about, and in some cases undermined, within this declining United Kingdom.

If there was to be another referendum tomorrow, I’d still vote Yes. Consistent principles may seem alien to the Scottish Conservatives who regularly flip flop on them, but they aren’t to me and many others.

Gary Hogarth
via email

AMONG the present useless UK Government ministers, led by a clueless PM, stalks the amiable but “sleekit” Michael Gove who recently declared: “If it is the case that there is clearly a settled will in favour of a referendum, then one will occur”. However, at the Tory conference he trumpeted that the Tories “will never allow the break-up of the UK”.

Well, Michael, the Scottish people have already spoken in the Holyrood election, where a clear pro-independence majority was achieved. Their will is indeed settled for the next five years.

The most important issue in that election was whether or not Scotland should have another referendum. The Tories, Labour and LibDems fought that election united against such a referendum and lost decisively.

There is a growing gulf between Holyrood and Westminster in terms of how Europe and the world is viewed.

This division has grown with issues such as nuclear weapons, immigration, social deprivation and the climate crisis. Scotland is a social democratic country where England, since Brexit, has become a right-wing centrist country. Conservative Unionism has evolved into British nationalism.

Grant Frazer
Newtonmore