Tom Devine: Scottish independence supporters have to wait

The post-referendum polls did not record a collapse in the vote for independence, perhaps in part because there had been a considerable surge in the numbers who favoured Yes in the latter stages of the 2014 campaign.

As the years passed, however, it had become apparent that a very substantial minority vote for independence had become entrenched and intact, although not yet growing at that stage towards majority numbers.

READ MORE: Support for independence rises to joint record level, new poll suggests

This outcome differed from what happened in Canada in the aftermath of the Quebec independence referendum of 1995. That contest had been a very close-run thing, much closer than in the Scottish poll of 2014.

The No option won by a threadbare 50.58 per cent of the overall vote.

Yet that very narrow result has not to date triggered a demand for another referendum in Quebec.

The UK Government should have taken note of these comparative outcomes but did not do so.

The threat of the independence movement in Scotland manifestly had not gone away after 2014, though perhaps Westminster was just satisfied the nationalist menace had been contained and there was little need for unionists to be over-concerned about the immediate future.

Yet the continuing support for independence, despite defeat, was soon to become the foundation for what was to come in 2020.

As is now well known, from early summer this year poll after poll has confirmed a clear majority in favour of Scottish independence, even if the overall figures varied marginally over time.

No poll since March showed a lead for No.

The psephologists detected a unique and unprecedented scenario. Never before had this happened.

The Anglo-Scottish Union was now unquestionably in mortal danger, never more so since the 18th century when Prince Edward Stuart’s army marched as far south as Derby in the ’45. and the Hanoverian monarchy and the Union seemed doomed.

Some commentators even took the view that independence had become the new “settled will” of the Scottish people.

Moreover, the SNP developed a commanding lead in voting intentions for both the constituency vote and the regional vote in next year’s Holyrood elections, with the other parties adrift and well behind.

If those intentions are translated into real votes next May, an SNP landslide can be anticipated.

That, it is argued, will not only give the Scottish Government a strong political mandate for calling another referendum but also end the stonewalling Westminster opposition to a new plebiscite.

A host of reasons can easily be marshalled to explain this political transformation.

The Scots voted overwhelmingly against Brexit and yet were then wrenched out of Europe against their will.

It seems that the surge in support for independence has come about in large part because many pro-Europeans who used to oppose independence have switched to supporting it.

That trend is likely to continue because, as this is written,the possibility of a catastrophic no-deal Brexit is still very real.

Also, the most accomplished recruiter for the SNP still keeps house in Downing Street. Boris Johnson may yet go down in history as the UK’s most feckless Prime Minister in living memory. Even the Scottish Tories are in despair about him.

The Scottish Government and the First Minister, on the other hand, are perceived as having performed creditably and competently during the current Covid-19 crisis, especially in comparison to the UK administration.

It does not matter a jot in political terms whether this opinion is true or false. It is the belief of very many Scots at the present time.

Then there are the effects of resurgent and reckless English nationalism.

Having achieved Brexit, many of its enthusiasts now show little sympathy for the Union or for those parasitical and ungrateful Scots who for too long have been been subsidised by English taxpayers.

One poll in November suggested only 46% of English people wanted Scotland to remain part of the UK.

The centuries-old Union is now therefore being battered on two fronts.

READ MORE: Indyref2 inevitable says Sir Tom Hunter as he lambasts politicians over Brexit process

Having demonstrated an intrinsic resilience in the past it now faces a perfect storm of destructive forces.

It is hardly surprisingly even respected commentators insist the present disunited kingdom will soon fragment, with Scotland leading the way towards an epochal reconfiguration of the nations of these islands. But I am not yet convinced. This may be because, as I commonly insist, that as a historian the future is not a period in which I can claim any expertise.

The SNP’s record in government will also come in for sustained evaluation.

Its ability to manage the impact of Covid has been praised and suggested that if it can handle such a major life-threatening crisis it should have the capacity to run an independent country.‎ But other aspects of the record will give opposition parties plenty of ammunition, especially on educational standards, the scandalous increase in drug deaths, with Scotland now emerging as the drugs capital of Europe, the fiasco over ferry orders and the overt weaknesses in the Hate Crime Bill, to list but a few examples.

But my caution is also founded on the fact the historical record has shown time and time again the only certainty about the future is its fundamental uncertainty.The real battle over the future of the nation has yet to be joined. It can only be triggered when a referendum and, crucially, the form of the question(s) asked in it is called.

Then the arguments of the No and Yes camps can be scrutinised in depth in the public domain.

Most press commentaries thus far have not surprisingly become infatuated with the dramatic and seemingly inexorable rise of the Yes vote.

But there are many other sides to the Scottish Question that have been ignored or sidelined in the past few years and especially in 2020 because of the pandemic.

Can the economy of a post- Brexit and post- Covid Scotland provide a sound basis for convincing voters of the potential advantages of becoming an independent country in such a very uncertain and hazardous world?

The currency and the economy were the Achilles heels of the Yes campaign in 2014 and may be so again in much more straitened circumstances.

So far, the SNP has been silent on how it might effectively combat the inevitable avalanche of criticisms from the unionist media that are likely to come its way on these matters.

The loathing of Mr Johnson and his gang in Cabinet has undeniably reinforced the Yes vote. But all governments are transitory. Perhaps sooner rather than later there might be a more emollient and competent PM in office who would prove a formidable adversary to the nationalist cause.

Let us not forget either, amid the current euphoria in the independence camp, that the polling evidence also confirms nearly half of the Scottish electorate remain stubbornly attached to voting No.

Yes supporters, on the other hand, must hope that behind the scenes the Scottish Government and its advisers are developing a robust and intellectually compelling case for independence that is effective enough to convince the nation when the time comes for the great decision to be made.

In my view that should be later rather than sooner.

I am not convinced the Scottish electorate would take kindly to another referendum in the short term while the country struggles to recover from the impact of the pandemic and then, in addition, has to confront the adverse economic effects of Brexit.

Passionate supporters of the SNP may be running out of patience for action.

But the Government should bide its time and bear in mind that another referendum defeat for Yes will consign their cause of independence for Scotland to the political wilderness for a very long time to come.

Professor Emeritus Sir Tom Devine is Scotland’s leading historian