Leader: Independence is far from a simple option to explain

INDEPENDENCE for Scotland. A simple idea, which can be simply defined. If only that were the case.

For despite claims to the contrary from minister after minister at the Scottish National Party’s conference yesterday, we are no nearer a definition of independence from the party which wants to bring about what would be the most fundamental constitutional change for this country in more than three centuries.

Amid suspicions that Westminster might seize hold of the referendum and call it on their terms, there was much huffing and puffing over the prospect yesterday, with SNP ministers arguing Holyrood alone should be responsible for putting in place a plebiscite on separating Scotland from the United Kingdom. Whilst the SNP can legitimately claim it has a mandate for a referendum, its anger appears somewhat synthetic while the details of its plans remain vague. In her barnstorming speech yesterday afternoon, Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, attempted to address this, claiming to spell out what independence meant. In Ms Sturgeon’s view, it included an economic policy suited to Scotland’s needs; a welfare system to tackle child poverty; having the power to decide whether to send youngsters to war; and no longer putting up with “the obscenity of Trident nuclear missiles on the river Clyde”.

It sounds plausible and logical but it is nothing of the kind as Alex Salmond, whether deliberately or not, is due to highlight in his speech today. Although the First Minister will praise so-called “devo-max” which would grant Scotland fiscal powers, saying it good and necessary he will add it is “not good enough”. As he will point out, under “dev-max” Trident nuclear missiles would remain here, Scots would go to war under a UK banner and Scotland would not be a member of the European Union.

By making this point, Mr Salmond only serves to draw attention to the inconsistencies in the SNP’s policy. First, there is the assumption SNP policy equates to the views of Scots. It is illogical to say an independent Scotland would be nuclear-free. It may be likely but it is not inevitable. That depends on the policies of an elected Scottish government unless, that is, the SNP arrogantly assumes it will be them.

Secondly, if, as Mr Salmond claims. the party is prepared to offer “devo-max” as a question in a referendum and if it is, as his party says, for the Scottish Government not Westminster to bring forward the plans for constitutional change, what exactly does this mean? How much of the tax system would come to Scotland? If tax powers come to Edinburgh, will benefits come too? What about the UK public pensions provision in which so many Scots have a stake? Mr Salmond’s speech today is intended to move the constitutional debate on. It is hard to see how it can do so with so many unanswered questions about the SNP’s policies for both “devo-max” and independence.