TWO SNP politicians are trying to revive their plan for securing independence without a referendum in the wake of Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister.
Western Isles MP Angus Brendan MacNeil and Inverclyde councillor Chris McEleny said a “Plan B” was needed if the new PM blocks a second referendum.
Their idea is that if Mr Johnson refuses to grant Holyrood the power to hold a vote using a Section 30 order, a simple election win would be used as a mandate for ending the Union.
If pro-independence SNP and Green candidates won a majority of seats at the next Westminster or Holyrood election, it would trigger independence negotiations.
The Scottish Tories accused them of droning on "like golf club bores".
READ MORE: SNP mavericks suggest a new route to independence
The idea flies in the face of Nicola Sturgeon’s repeated insistence that the legally-binding referendum process of 2014 is the “gold standard” and only template for Indyref2.
PM Boris makes myself an @SNPChris take Independence Plan B back to SNP conference as an amendment - we need the independence volume turned up! #indyref2 #hope https://t.co/oGdhZJ5bQ8
— Angus B MacNeil MP (@AngusMacNeilSNP) July 24, 2019
The First Minister has said she wants to hold another referendum in late 2020, but has so far failed to say what she would do if the PM refused to grant a Section 30 order.
Theresa May simply stonewalled a previous request from MSPs in 2017.
With parts of the Yes movement impatient for action, and worried about another refusal, Mr MacNeil and Mr McEleny tried to get their idea debated at the SNP’s autumn conference.
However their motion was rejected by the SNP leadership, with national secretary Angus MacLeod dismissing the idea as “hastily written, almost whimsically so”.
Mr MacLeod also said it was “wholly inappropriate” for the pair to brief the media about it.
Mr MacNeil said he was “utterly stumped” by the decision earlier this month.
READ MORE: SNP MP 'utterly stumped' by party's refusal to debate independence plan
However he and Mr McEleny now want to resurrect the idea by amending an uncontroversial motion about 20 years of Holyrood to get the subject debated and voted on by delegates.
They are urging SNP activists to email Mr MacLeod to add their names to their amendment, which would instruct the SNP to put the Plan B idea into its next manifesto.
The text of their amendment says: “The manifesto for the next Scottish or UK Parliamentary election – whichever may come first – shall state that, a pro independence electoral victory shall be a mandate from the people of Scotland to commence independence negotiations with the UK Government.”
Mr MacNeil said: “All Scotland is aghast at the latest choice being foisted on our country.
“Clearly Boris and his party are not Scotland’s choice and haven’t been for over six decades, and we can see from our independent Nordic and Irish neighbours that there is a better way.
“Scotland has a mandate for a referendum on independence and Westminster must respect this. If it doesn’t, then we must ensure that the Scottish Government, on behalf of the people, has another club in its bag to influence negotiations over a Section 30 order.
“Namely we need the prospect of a direct mandate for independence from a majority of MPs from a Westminster Election (or MSPs from a Scottish Election) to positively progress Scotland to the prosperity of our Nordic and Irish neighbours and away from the damaging policies of Westminster.”
READ MORE: Neil Mackay: Why the Plan B path to independence reveals a world of pain for the SNP
Cllr McEleny, who represents ordinary party members on the SNP’s ruling national executive, added: “SNP members and the independence movement were not happy when our motion was rejected without even allowing a debate.
With Boris Johnson now PM, myself and @AngusMacNeilSNP have the proposed Indy plan B as an amendment at @theSNP conference.
— 🏴CHRISTOPHER McEleny (@SNPChris) July 24, 2019
Agree to a Section 30 order @BorisJohnson or we will ensure Scotland’s voice is heard another way if need be. https://t.co/AZ8JqT4PVM
“Now we will have the opportunity to recognise all we have achieved thanks to the Scottish Parliament but importantly put in place a plan B to give our Parliament all the powers of an ordinary independent country if the UK Government refuse to agree to Section 30 order.”
Tory MSP Annie Wells said: "Senior figures in the SNP are now resembling golf club bores with their relentless and predictable calls for another independence referendum.
“They’re droning on repeatedly to anyone within earshot about the break-up of Britain, when most voters want Scotland to move on from constitutional mayhem.
“Nicola Sturgeon should be using the arrival of a new Prime Minister as a way of helping Scotland thrive within the UK.
“Instead, she’s being her opportunistic self and banging the drum for another unwanted and divisive referendum.
“That would only set Scotland back even further, and spoil any chance we have of boosting jobs, prosperity and public services for the future.”
Pamela Nash, chief executive of the anti-independence Scotland in Union campaign, said: “This is utter desperation from these senior SNP politicians.
“Scotland voted against independence in a referendum we were promised was once-in-a-lifetime. Trying to get independence through the back door would be simply unacceptable for the people of Scotland.
“Today the steep challenges, including tax rises and public service cuts, that Scotland would face if we broke away from the rest of the UK are exactly the same as they were yesterday.
“Whatever your views on Boris Johnson, the very last thing Scotland needs is another divisive independence referendum and more constitutional chaos.
“Nicola Sturgeon has already had to rule out this irresponsible plan, but this challenge to her authority means she must now do so again.”
An SNP spokeswoman said: "The process of producing the agenda is the internal business of the Scottish National Party, with motions shortlisted by a democratically elected internal body.
"The SNP already has a cast-iron mandate for holding an independence referendum before the 2021 election, and the First Minister has made clear that she believes this should take place in the second half of next year."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel