Indyref2: Why the UK might say yes to a second Scottish independence referendum

But does this stance stack up to scrutiny? Is it really the dead-end some are determined to paint it as, and does Boris hold all the cards? Let’s have a look at the state of play.

Let’s first consider at what is certain: the Scottish Government has an unquestionable democratic mandate to hold a referendum in the first half of this five-year parliament.

The Referendum Bill will be published soon and a Section 30 order will be requested. The Scottish Government has said a referendum will be held with or without a Section 30 order.

READ MORE: Scotland's independence movement could learn a few lessons from Wales

That puts the ball firmly into the UK Government’s court. The decision is not as straightforward as many think and every choice it makes will have political consequences. The decision to accept or reject both come with their own pros and cons, so let’s look at them.

REJECT

The significant advantage of rejecting is a shortlived one – it would play well with the Conservative Party’s more Unionist voters but we are not due to go to the polls again until 2024. After the dust settles, the question for

the UK Government would be what now if the Scottish Government sticks with the plan to hold a referendum anyway?

The UK Government has a few options, none of them great. It could challenge the Scottish Government in court – likely a disastrous move that would destroy any pretence of this being a union of free choice based on democracy. This would be an utterly destructive move, an attempt to save the Union that would instead absolutely torch it.

Another option would be to use proxy groups and private citizens to take the Scottish Government to court. This would be transparent, though, and most people would see through the thin veneer of invented grassroots legitimacy. If these proxy groups won their case, the outcome would be the same as if the UK Government had brought the court case itself.

Does Boris Johnson hold all the cards?

A further option, and one we often hear about, is that Unionists and the UK Government could simply boycott the referendum campaign and vote. Again, this strategy is not risk-free and not the “gotcha” many seem to think it is.

In 2014, this could have easily worked. The Conservatives, Labour and the LibDems were pretty much in lockstep with each other against independence. Most of the unions were either anti-independence or neutral.

But that has all changed – for a boycott to work, it would need a united coalition of the three Unionist parties, the unions, the media and civic Scotland behind it. That is not likely to happen today. The media and the Conservatives would likely back it, but what about the others?

The LibDems are a hollowed-out shell of what they once were and are a strange mix of extreme Unionists such as Alex Cole-Hamilton and Willie Rennie, and of proper old-school Liberal Democrats in Beatrice Wishart and Liam McArthur. I really can’t see Liam backing something so undemocratic as a boycott – it goes against everything he is politically.

Labour would be split, with major party figures such as Monica Lennon, Mercedes Villalba and Alex Rowley all publicly backing Scotland’s right to choose. A united stance around a boycott for Labour would be impossible to hold.

The unions now also back Scotland’s right to decide, putting pressure on Labour not to support a boycott. Many leading figures and organisations in civic Scotland now also back independence – the issue cuts through so many areas of life in Scotland and a growing number now see independence as being essential to building an ambitious and inclusive society.

A boycott would be a Tory media-led campaign, so would likely be an out-of-touch failure. With only the most hardcore Unionist voters staying at home, a Yes vote would be a certainty. The Unionists would likely hope that turnout was low enough to render the whole vote pointless, but that’s a hugely risky strategy. Even if it worked, the vote would still undermine the Union, likely being the case that delaying independence would only make it all the more inevitable.

ACCEPT

So what about accepting the Section 30 request? Well, that has two apparent negatives for the UK Government. First, with the polls at 50-50, it faces a campaign it may lose. Some Scottish Unionists would see it as a total betrayal but do a handful of Scottish Tory MPs matter to Boris? He could be very confident that the Unionists would forget about the betrayal after a few weeks of anger and concentrate on the campaign that lay ahead.

READ MORE: Scottish independence campaign set to have 'Yes pledge' at heart

But these negatives are balanced out with positives, such as accepting a Section 30 meaning the UK Government would have a say in campaign spending.

The most essential thing in Boris Johnson’s world is Boris and he knows that during a referendum campaign his job is safe. Accepting the Section 30 request keeps him in a position until late 2023. Boris is a prime minister who gets bored with the day-to-day of his job, but who loves a campaign. A referendum gives him that campaign distraction.

So, in the end, he goes into the campaign knowing he is safe till it’s over and if he wins, he wins the 2024 General Election off the back of it.

With demographics running against the Union, stalling, postponing, or dodging a referendum does not sound like the slam dunk some seem to think it is.