Lesley Riddoch: It’s a bit early for unionists to panic

We have two and a half years to decide our future, so politicians should take a longer, more open view, writes Lesley Riddoch

Brainstorming – usually the first part of good decision-making – is an exciting and chaotic process but it’s not to everyone’s taste. No ideas are off limits, duplication and bad grammar are acceptable and every thought about the question in hand is captured. A good brainstorm produces a full spectrum of hopes, fears and ideas. Taken seriously – and given proper scope – it makes sure the fact-finding, option-building and decision-making stages which follow are neither kneejerk nor narrow. Ignored it produces sensible-sounding but unpopular “solutions” like the present Scotland Bill.

Happily, the unionist parties of Scotland are currently in brainstorming mode about the constitutional debate. Unhappily, they’re also in denial about that fact. It’s the denial, not the brainstorming, that’s currently causing political panic.

Devo Max, Devo Minus, Devo Plus, Indy Lite, Jam Tomorrow, a Union of Crowns and a Union of Currencies – are all on the table with full independence. Soon there will be as many constitutional options as varieties of Heinz soup. So what? In a two-and-a-half-year process, two months of brainstorming is absolutely nothing to worry about. And yet the natural anarchy of new ideas has provoked a deep-seated need to “restore order” amongst those politicians, parties, academics and commentators who are happier dusting down old ideas than rolling with new ones.

And yet, nothing’s wrong. The panic-inducing problem at the moment is not the plethora of ideas or absence of agreement – it’s the failure by unionist parties to accept 2014 for the referendum and change the pace of the race accordingly. This is no longer a flat-out sprint – it’s a marathon. Two months after David Cameron effectively fired the starting pistol, Scotland’s constitutional debate is precisely where it should be. Nuanced, animated and all over the place. Soon brainstorming will give way to fact-finding, strategising and – finally – decision-making. And then, I’d guess, quite a few prominent politicians will be eating their words.

Having spoken at Law Society Fringe meetings this weekend it’s clear leaders and activists at the Scottish Labour and Lib Dem conferences are out of kilter with the public mood as captured in the latest Ipsos-Mori poll. It found 59 per cent of all voters want two referendum questions.

A straw poll at the Lib Dem fringe meeting found exactly the opposite – roughly 70 per cent of activists in a packed meeting supported leader Willie Rennie in favouring just one question. The Scottish Lib Dem leader explained that he generally backed devo-plus and isn’t opposed to a second question on principle, but can’t see a way to ask it well. Just such a solution was instantly supplied by a member of the audience – first question – Independence: Yes/No? Second question – If No: status quo or devo- plus (spelled out in a sentence)? And of course there’s the single transferable vote. Funny to have to remind Liberals about that.

Now the Ipsos-Mori poll doesn’t mean the public is omniscient (reaching consensus on devo-plus before everyone else) or daft (just liking Option B). They may simply be more confident that a practical, popular, intermediate position will emerge by 2014 and more comfortable with ambiguity than “professionals” whose status and therefore employment appears to depend on having an immediate answer for everything.

It’s strange. Outside politics, know-alls are generally regarded with suspicion. Interview processes are constructed to weed out dogmatic, inflexible thinkers and find those most able to collaborate in new situations. And yet in the face of the most important decision we will take in 300 years, those who oppose independence have adopted Churchillian-like tones of absolute certainty and conviction – unwisely. This is not a war.

Of course, it’s entirely possible the old Snake Charmer is constructing a trap – generously and flexibly offering space for a second question the SNP leader knows unionists will be unable to agree upon in the knowledge that such transparent failure will dent confidence in “jam later” and in the workability of any option bar total independence. I’ll grant you, Alex is that smart.

Happily for democracy though, there is a solution.

First, the unionist parties must bite the bullet and accept that Alex Salmond’s 2014 timetable gives them time to get their act together. Party leaders could stop pretending they have “oven-ready” devo solutions in the backroom, park stories about deadly economic damage inflicted by constitutional uncertainty and use the time and space to start from scratch with all self-imposed deadlines removed.

Of course, if we are three months from polling and still brainstorming every constitutional idea under the sun – that will be a problem. But why should that happen? Already some options are being worked through in detail by Sir Ming Campbell’s Home Rule Committee and Johann Lamont’s Devolution Commission – when they report those options will be honed down further.

Secondly, unionists could accept that most voters see this as Scotland’s constitutional referendum (viz, a selection box of choccies which ought to contain something for all the family) not Alex Salmond’s independence referendum (viz, a single poisonous dark chocolate delivered by the Slippery Genius himself which should not be touched or even referred to under any circumstances).

Voters are already rummaging round in Alex’s forbidden selection box for our favourite choccies. We are in a two year process and there is no getting the public out with dire warnings or grim, unpleasant, cataclysmic, John Knox-style thundering. Widen the selection – don’t try to close the box. And let people say what they really think now – when boat-rocking is helpful, not disastrous.

I’ve noticed two important points listening to folk this weekend. First, the emerging devo-plus option deals mostly with tax and economic powers – but just as many Scots would prefer control of defence, immigration, benefits and pensions. If Scotland can’t opt out of Trident spending, for example, some economic unionists may consider independence.

Secondly, attitudes in rUK (rest of the UK) do matter – for federalists this is also a make or break moment for their preferred UK solution. If that doesn’t materialise they too may back Independence . Or not.

For many people it’s too early to tell. And that’s perhaps the most significant aspect of the Ipsos-Mori poll. Only 4 per cent are undecided about wanting a second question (whatever it finally proves to be) compared with 20 to 30 per cent undecided about independence. I’d call that a settled will.