Brian Wilson: Majority must reclaim their rights

With fewer than a fifth of Scots interested in separation, it’s time for a focused campaign from the unionists, writes Brian Wilson

There’s nothing inherently impossible about opening 100 Scottish embassies and thus deprive far-travelled Scots – of whom there are rather a lot – of their own representation in half the countries of the world. The relevant question is why would you want to do that?

The more such issues are raised, the greater the counter-productive pointlessness of the whole exercise appears. Equally unconvincing are these heroic Nationalist assumptions about the future generosity of neighbours on whom they are, at the same time, demanding that we should turn our backs.

Nationalist energy policy, for example, is now based on the premise that the benevolent English will continue to run a subsidy regime for Scottish renewables as if we were still part of the same market or indeed state. Has anybody asked them whether or why they would want to? Of course not. So much easier to assume.

All of this is being reflected in the movement of opinion polls which, I hasten to add, don’t win elections or even referendums. They merely reflect snapshots of opinion and, perhaps more important, trends. The deeper the questioning probes, the more useful the collective answers become.

Every poll agrees that support for independence has fallen over the past year, while scepticism about Nationalist claims and assertions has intensified.

Hardly surprising, you might say, given the calamities of credibility among which the EU debacle was only the most spectacular . In fact, 60 per cent of Scots now recognise that there would be no automatic right to EU entry – a complete turnaround.

Embassies, energy, currency, interest rates – the list is long and each makes its own contribution. The consistent theme is that in spite of having had years to think about these issues, the Nationalists have done none of the intellectual or political hard work. Bland assertion, sneering dismissal of objections and downright untruths are no longer seen as enough.

Few would have predicted a year ago that the mood would have moved so strongly in this direction. After all, it is the Nationalists who are forcing the referendum, who hold the levers of devolved power and are quite ruthless in utilising them. Yet, the polls tell us, the focus of attention on the independence question has worked against those who insist on asking it.

Every age group currently shows a majority in favour of the broad status quo. Every break-down shows a substantial minority who were prepared to vote Nationalist but do not support independence. Perhaps to their own surprise, supporters of retaining the United Kingdom now find themselves fighting much less of a rearguard action than had been anticipated.

But that in itself gives rise to a question. How is that strength to be consolidated? The obvious answer is to keep battering away at the same themes but that, in itself, would be inadequate. Those who, from a wide range of perspectives, do not want to break up the UK should feel liberated by these opinion polls to become more assertive in their formulation of the alternative.

A year ago, anyone who advocated reviewing the workings of devolution in order to improve them stood accused of running scared from the Nationalist tide and the march of history.

Then we had the devo-max red herring, in which those who are quite open to reform were forced into pointing out this could not be posed as a third option. The red herring quickly disappeared when it had outlived its usefulness.

Now, from a position of strength, should be the moment for intelligent, non-separatist thinking to resume. Paying attention to the polls does not just mean looking at the headlines. It is worth, for example, noting what happens when the four options posed in the Scottish Government’s own white paper are asked. These were the status quo, two which involve varied powers and independence.

At that point, support for independence drops to just 19 per cent. In other words, there is a clear public mood which is overwhelmingly against independence but is looking for refinements of what exists at present. No formula is going to satisfy all of the other 81 per cent, but most would appreciate a clear indication that they are being listened to.

And that takes me back to a previous point in recent history. In 1987, the Tories received just 19 per cent of the Scottish vote while 81 per cent supported parties who wanted constitutional reform of one kind or another. The response which emerged was the Claim of Right for Scotland and the Scottish Constitutional Convention, both of which were boycotted by both the Nationalists and the Tories.

Amusingly, the 1989 Claim of Right is now quoted by the Nationalists as a document of significance. In his recent musings on a Scottish constitution, Alex Salmond lumped it together with the Declaration of Arbroath. True, the two do have one thing in common and it is that Mr Salmond was a signatory to neither.

The Claim of Right said, essentially, that the Scottish people were entitled to whatever form of government they wanted, a principle which still holds true. But if only 19 per cent want independence as their preferred option, then perhaps – as happened 25 years ago – the majority should be isolating the ruling minority by getting on with the job of agreeing what the alternative should look like.

Each of the opposition political parties at Holyrood is already doing its own work on this. They are also co-operating through Better Together. There should be no insuperable barriers to them gradually starting to negotiate what a revised balance of powers and responsibilities should look like after the independence question is out of the way.

But not only politicians will have a view on this. In its day, the Scottish Constitutional Convention also involved “civic Scotland” – the churches, the trades unions, the Third Sector and so on.

Maybe the best way to isolate an ideologically driven, 19 per cent minority would, once again, be by creating a forum for practical, constructive discussion among those who speak for the rest of Scottish opinion?

If the groundwork was done over the coming year, then the referendum could not only be about defeating separatism, but also endorsing a consensual process which would be both visible and underpinned by commitment. Perhaps it is time for Lord Steel of Aikwood to dust down his gavel and resume duty as chair of a reconvened Convention?