RONNIE Cowan’s article “Why we can’t risk firing the indyref2 starting gun at the wrong time” needs to be read by every independence supporter working in the field and all those taking part in discussions on social media.
Nicola Sturgeon is right to point out that the independence movement has time on its side. The truly disastrous results of Brexit are emerging and the country is about to face the prospect of years recovering from the pandemic.
Every day more evidence is emerging that their failure to “Get Brexit done” will be joined by “Building back better” in proving be nothing more than tax increases and a new round of Tory austerity.
Taking back control of our borders is a sick joke, the success of the unnecessary, aggressive policies adopted by the UK Government towards workers from the EU has left the country struggling in transport, food processing, social care, health services and others with a massive shortage of specialised, skilled workers.
READ MORE: Prevarication is not leadership – it’s time to set a date for indyref2
On land, the UK Government cannot keep extending the grace period on imports from the EU indefinitely, and when it ends importers will suffer the same delays and paperwork problems that are faced by our exporters now.
On the sea, the UK fishing industry remains effectively under the control of the EU for years ahead and increased surveillance in the English Channel has done nothing to stem the flow of refugees, in fact it has shown just how ineffective the UK’s new attempts have been, with the numbers entering the country probably far higher than thought.
Policing the border in the air has been the most effective of the three borders, as can be testified by many UK passport holders who have spent hours in queues waiting on document checks, although it looks like it has not been a barrier to Covid entering UK.
The Edinburgh Agreement for a Scottish independence referendum was mutually agreed before the 2014 referendum. This precedent has to be followed as far as possible by the Scottish Government for any future independence referendum.
READ MORE: Section 30 approach to achieving independence is fraught with risk
Ignoring the precedent could result in accusations from the UK Government that it would have been willing to repeat the Edinburgh Agreement and extend it to include the use of UK Government facilities to extract Scottish statistics from UK-wide data that would allow voters to make informed decisions.
The UK Government could also claim that an approach from the Scottish Government would have set the scene for an amicable, timely and orderly transfer of power and associated departments to the Scottish in the event of a majority in favour of independence.
There’s nothing that would please opponents of Scottish independence more than forcing the Scottish Government to switch some of its limited resources from fighting the pandemic to taking on the UK Government by running a rushed campaign for to a non-binding referendum right now.
We can be sure that if there was a low turnout with a majority for independence it would be ignored as not representative of the will of the people. However, if it returned even a marginal vote for remaining in the Union it would become a binding referendum for generations as far as the UK Government is concerned.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
THE article by Ronnie Cowan MP in Wednesday’s edition (“Why we can’t risk firing the indyref2 starting gun at the wrong time”) is a wet blanket on independence. His view is that we should only have a vote on it when victory is virtually certain, and that we must have designed the new Scotland beforehand.
In reality, that means never. We must hope that his fellow SNP MPs have not all so depressingly ungirded their loins, or we’re done for.
Not only does he misconstrue the future, but he misinterprets the past: “Had we held a referendum between 2014 and now, it’s likely the independence movement would not have won.” His pessimism is timeless, casting bleakness both backward and forward.
READ MORE: Tony Blair's former aide says UK can't keep Scotland in the Union without consent
Mercifully, it is all just his opinion – no foundation in substance or fact. He does have a vision, though: “In my head, the independence movement is like a plane full of passengers ... but we are now stuck. We can’t disembark because the last leg of the journey is not clear.”
On Monday your correspondent Ian Roberts had a letter perceptively scrutinising the incoherence of the First Minister’s recent statements on the timing of indyref2, and the difficulty of reconciling those with the actual schedule which setting it up would necessarily involve, if the timetable already announced is to be met, namely some time in 2023. The clear upshot is that there is no time to lose, and we must begin the necessary steps now.
As ever, Ms Sturgeon is not being plain with us, but she and her government have put it about that 2023 will be the year. Now that is clearly too impetuous for Mr Cowan, so how on earth will the poor woman manage to get him to climb down from that wretched aeroplane of his nightmares? Come on, Ronnie, last one out’s a feartie!
Alan Crocket
Motherwell
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