Mark Smith: How to sell Scottish independence to people like me

READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: I don't want to replace Nicola. I want to get to know her

What’s got me thinking about all of this today is the interview the nationalist MP Joanna Cherry did with my colleague Kevin McKenna at the weekend because Ms Cherry was guilty of a lot of the kind of behaviour that winds voters up, and I would suggest needs to change. Talking about independence as if it’s inevitable, for example, or dismissing concerns about the economy or borders with a wave of the hand. It makes many people think that politicians like Ms Cherry aren’t taking their worries seriously. It makes them dig down into their trenches a little bit deeper.

So, here’s a few ways that I think things that could be done differently – a few ways in which the nationalists could adjust their strategy – and the first would be to talk more realistically about what independence actually means. Some nationalists delight in the thought of cutting the ties with England and some unionists are horrified by the idea, but the reality is that after a Yes vote, the ties would still exist. Scotland would have constitutional independence, but not independence in any total sense: our ability to be autonomous would be limited just as it is for every other nation in the world, including the UK after Brexit.

Talking to voters about independence in this more realistic way would be good for the nationalist cause because it would be less horrifying for unionists or waverers. Indeed, the SNP has not always used the word “independence” as prominently as it does now and for a long time preferred the phrase “self-government”. Naturally, talking about independence fires up the SNP base, but a better approach for general voters would be to talk about Scottish self-government within a new family of nations. It’s a more mature and realistic idea that many voters could buy into.

The second idea for a new approach for the SNP tackles the tricky subject of nationality and identity. The Scottish and British identities are not going to disappear from Scotland just because there’s been a Yes vote and the SNP needs to acknowledge that if it’s to win over voters who feel British. Many SNP supporters and some of its leading figures have attempted to undermine the British identity or dismiss it or mock it and when they do so, there’s a backlash, which isn’t surprising: people cling more tightly to their identity when they think it’s under threat. We’re back in the trenches again.

Instead, the SNP needs to start talking about the ways it would respect and protect the British identity in Scotland after a Yes vote. Nicola Sturgeon did a little of this in her speech on the day Britain left the EU, but not nearly enough. She needs to explain to people that their British identity will be valued and protected even when there is constitutional independence, by guaranteeing a form of dual nationality for Scots born in the UK for example. Changing the constitutional status of a country does not change people’s sense of cultural, social and personal identity.

Which leads us to the subject of Scottish identity and how the SNP approach to that needs to change. First, the party needs to stop talking as if the values ascribed to a Scottish identity are in some way discrete or superior; they’re not. It also needs to dial down on the panic that it sometimes tries to spread that the Scottish identity is under threat from the UK or the Tories. The Scots’ sense of identity was strong before the Act of Union, it was strong after, and it’s strong now. Also, no-one in government at Westminster has ever talked about the full assimilation of Scotland into the UK and playing up such threats strikes many voters as hysterical and silly. The SNP should do itself a favour and stop doing it.

There are a few other ways in which the SNP could re-tune its strategy. For example, it should start talking about building a “settled will” in Scotland rather than promoting the idea that the constitution can, or should, be changed on 50.1% of the vote (again, there was a little bit of this in Ms Sturgeon’s Brexit Day speech when she talked about a broad coalition). Scottish nationalists (and unionists obviously) should also avoid adversarial and aggressive language and behaviour: less shouting, less pointing, less marching.

READ MORE: Scottish independence support maintains lead in latest poll

Finally, the leading proponents of independence should avoid, at all costs, using any of the delusional and misleading techniques we saw in the Brexit debate. In her Herald interview, Joanna Cherry said any concerns that voters might have about the Scotland/England border after independence were misplaced; the idea, she said, that people wouldn’t be able to have a cup of tea in Berwick without showing their passport was ludicrous. But it was exactly that kind of rebuttal – dismissal with a pah – that the Brexiters tried when they were challenged about the border in Northern Ireland.

Another example would be the cabinet minister Mike Russell’s recent comments on the economy. Mr Russell said Scotland pays out more than it gets back from the UK, a comment he might as well have plastered on the side of a bus, just like Boris Johnson did during the Brexit debate. It was an outrageous claim to make and outrageous claims only underline the need for a new, more realistic approach. Mr Russell has announced he is quitting Holyrood. Quite a few other nationalist MSPs have too. Maybe we will finally get it.