‘Jam tomorrow’ insults voters

Published on 05/08/2012 00:00

JOHN J G McGill could hardly be more wrong (Letters, 15 July). It is precisely because I recognise and respect the sovereignty of the Scottish people that I say two questions are required to determine Scotland’s constitutional future.

The Scottish electorate is split three ways on the constitutional options. There is significant support for the status quo, for more devolution and for independence. The electors have been way ahead of the politicians on this for some time. This is the reality, however inconvenient it may be, and even if some politicians try to deny it for party advantage.

It would, of course, be possible to hold a one-question referendum on independence versus the status quo. But the outcome would be neither clear nor decisive. The other option of more devolution would be the unavoidable “elephant in the room” – one so large that it could not be ignored as it would inevitably distort the results.

However, the one question on independence could deliver a clear and decisive result if it were asked first in a two-stage referendum. The second question, on more devolution, would be asked later and only if a majority voted “No” to independence in response to the first question.

But for that two-stage approach to deliver a clear and decisive result, the commitment to both questions would have to be written into the Referendum Act. Suggestions there might be future discussions about further devolution if the majority voted “No” in a one-question referendum on independence will just not do. Vague promises of “jam tomorrow” might suit some political parties and politicians, like Michael Moore in his Perspective piece (15 July), but that would be an insult to the people of Scotland.

James Gilmour, Edinburgh