2007 - 2021

The Anti-Austerity Case for a Second Referendum

Cat Boyd’s weekly vlog …


Comments (53)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. barakabe says:

    Any referendum in the short-to-medium term would kill off independence stone-dead. There simply would be no way back after two back to back defeats. Those calling for a re-run are recklessly deluded. Any future independence campaign really needs to counter the negative spin that will inevitably whirl out of the corporate media machine- the limited nature of fear centred negative propaganda is that it necessarily has to repeat itself ( a case of always the same), in addition to the inevitable arrogance of the No-campaign believing a negative message won out. That has a number of downsides for the victors: firstly we know everything they’re going to say & do more or less & so we have an opportunity over the next few years to counter these factors more effectively; secondly, & the possibly the most significant aspect is that they’re caught in a straight-jacket: the Unionists have no positive narrative to spin, they have no coherent myths to propagate that crystallizes a message of hope.
    Salmond fell into the same arrogant trap as the No campaign are likely to do in repeating what appears to be a ‘winning-formula’: he believed an absolutely positive campaign always trumps a negative message. Research shows that people are more likely to remember a negative event or believe a negative statement is true & they’re even more likely to remember a negative ad campaign even if its a lie ( & a second ad stating the lie is less likely to be remembered). The reality is that is like fighting with one hand tied behind your back. The No-campaign were hamstrung by having only a negative message but it was a message that suits them better. What is the point of unnecessarily hamstringing yourself to an entirely positive message? That is not how the real world works. It certainly isn’t how the political world works. Independence supporters need to prepare themselves to counter the negative message that will inevitable come in Referendum2- we need to counter with a negative message of our own ( & god knows their is plenty that is negative about this Union & the UK in general)- that ought to be our primary objective.

    1. Richard says:

      Exactly. Until there is an obvious, clear majority in favour of independence, it would be folly to waste our efforts on a second referendum.

      Where we really need to be targeting our energies now is getting the mainstream media on-side. Some people have given the MSM up as a lost cause, but the fact is that they continue to hold a huge sway on public opinion. If papers like the Record who are already anti-austerity can be brought to see that Independence is a sure-fire way to break free from austerity, then our position will be much stronger.

      The trouble with a lot of people who perceive themselves as radical left is that they have a guerilla mentality, whereby they only try to combat the establishment rather than to engage with it. The risk with that strategy is that they will be left (for want of a better phrase) “carping from the sidelines.”

      1. Jimmy Waugh says:

        Do you honestly believe that these people and organisations a are going to come onside ? In Britain and Ireland, Rupert Murdoch owns best-selling tabloid The Sun as well as the broadsheet The Times and Sunday Times, and 39% of satellite broadcasting network BSkyB. In March 2011, the United Kingdom provisionally approved Murdoch to buy the remaining 61% of BSkyB,[65] however, subsequent events (News of the World hacking scandal and its closure in July 2011) leading to the Leveson Inquiry have halted this takeover.

        Trinity Mirror own five major national titles, the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The Sunday People, and the Scottish Sunday Mail and Daily Record as well as over 100 regional newspapers. They claim to have a monthly digital reach of 73 million people.

        Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) own The Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, Ireland on Sunday, and free London daily Metro, and control a large proportion of regional media, including through subsidiary Northcliffe Media, in addition to large shares in ITN and GCap Media.

        The Guardian is owned by Guardian Media Group, who use an equity owning trust and a Cayman Islands offshore corporation to minimize their tax liabilities.

        Richard Desmond owns OK! magazine, the Daily Express and the Daily Star. He used to own Channel 5; on 1 May 2014 the channel was acquired by Viacom for £450 million (US$759 million).[3]

        The Evening Standard[66] and The Independent[67] are both owned by Russian businessman and ex KGB agent Alexander Lebedev.

  2. Samson says:

    All I’m hearing is a nationalism. Which is fine, it’s Bella Caledonia, but listening to this – particularly the part about Corbyn – I don’t believe Boyd’s priority is socialism. The argument the RIC offered during the campaign was that socialism was only possible in Scotland. Now that Britain has produced the furthest left leader in a generation, the solution championed is still independence, in a country with no prominent left leaders.

    Also, for all she says about the EU, she was defending remaining in it on Twitter in the name “human rights” only a week or so ago.

  3. Mike Vickers says:

    I have no objection in principle to a second referendum; but there needs to be clear quantifiable proof that an independent Scotland could reduce the austerity in a way that would help those who really need a reduction.
    One has Greece as an example where the approach has failed to deliver

    1. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

      Where’s the proof that the UK can?

  4. David says:

    We only have to wait another 3 weeks until Corbyn is elected or rejected. Then we will start the process of discovering what position the next edition of Labour Party UK adopts on Scotland. I think all these critiques of Corbyn’s stance on Scottish independence fail to place them in the context of the leadership campaign he is currently running.

    Rightly from their perspective or wrongly from the perspective of many supporters of Scottish independence, all four candidates have been trying to avoid making Scottish independence issues a prominent feature of their campaigns. Scotland has already slaughtered Labour and making even slightly favourable noises on the Indy issue is not going to win many votes from the seriously diminished unionist rump that is all that remains of Scottish Labour.

    If Corbyn becomes leader I am not expecting him to move to Scotland and start campaigning for a yes vote in Indyref2 but if his promises about restoring honesty, integrity and decency to UK politics are going to become a reality then the deceitful, manipulative, project fear style campaigning that tipped the balance to No in September 2014 cannot be allowed to repeat itself under his watch. I look forward to the new mature debate on independence that might begin to emerge.

    A Labour Party possibly or probably still arguing the case for the union but also admitting openly that Scotland might be or is a net contributor to the UK, that there is probably lots of oil left, that austerity is not a sensible economic model and that we are right in our support for the unilateral removal of Trident might at least get us to the point where we can bring in a real, fully functional, genuine devomax settlement supported by a healthy majority of Scottish voters. I want a fully independent Scottish Republic and I want it every morning when I wake up. I can also see that some form of pragmatism over the next few years or even decades might actually be the way we are eventually going to achieve this.

    1. Brenda says:

      I agree with you, David. I too want an independent Scottish Republic every morning when I wake up. However I agree that we have to be pragmatic. We Cannot lose the next one. We all need to engage in the hard slog of not only preparing the counter arguments, but of having convinced most people of these arguments long before another referendum is called. To take a simple example; most people in Scotland want us to continue to have our own Scottish football team in international tournaments. Almost nobody wants us to join up with rUK and have team GB. Even though this might mean that we win something now and again. Why is this? Why are all the people who voted ‘no’ not now demanding a UK United football team? Because they are already convinced that it is culturally beneficial, historically important, even financially beneficial. So we have to have rock solid arguments about currency, fiscal responsibility, passports, borders etc. we then have to educate the public so that it makes absolute sense to have complete and early jurisdiction over all Scottish affairs .

    2. Kimberley Cadden says:

      I couldn’t agree more David – I think a Corbyn led Labour party, even if it still took an anti independence/unionist stance, would lend strength to the indy cause by helping to validate our social democratic arguments whilst also seeing the debate take place within a more politically mature context at UK level (even though undoubtedly Scottish Labour would try to use the same old tactics they would likely be much undermined by Corbyn’s more progressive leftist approach to our arguments).

      I actually think if Corbyn was to win the next GE (I acknowledge there is only an outside chance of this, but it’s still a chance!) this would be the best backdrop to indyref2 for the same kinds of reasons; a new socially just UK, on a path of localising and decentralising power, would be a much easier UK state in which to argue for representative democracy for Scotland via independence….we may even find we have more support from the UK left….

  5. Pam McMahon says:

    I think the SNP must keep independence and a second referendum as a stated part of their manifesto, while nor necessarily giving a timetable for its inception. I think the unionist parties will continue to provide us with reasons to call for indyref2 and we should give them a wee bit of time to give us an unassailable position from which to launch the next chapter in our fight for freedom.

    We could, in the meantime, be writing the new constitution for this old country, our Scotland.

    1. Will says:

      Pam, I agree put the referendum commitment in the manifesto with no timetable and if circumstances dictate for example a Brexit with the UK total voting to leave the EU but the majority vote in Scotland voting to stay in EU then that’s one reason to trigger a referendum. Personally until something substantial changes like the former example I think we should play the long game and put our trust in Nicola she will go for it when we are likely to win.

    2. John Page says:

      The written constitution is an immediate task while we pick our time for IndyRef 2…..fully agree, Pam
      Is this something you could kick off?

      John Page

      1. Pam McMahon says:

        Somebody needs to kick start this. It needs to be written by the people of Scotland and with common consent. I have no idea who will do this, or by what means it will be written and agreed, but it can only help the cause of Scottish independence, to have a constitution for our nation (and which England/UK does not have).

        I have emailed my (SNP) MP to ask which of them is prepared to write a constitution for Scotland, but have yet to receive a reply. We would probably need someone with a Scottish legal background to make it viable and unassailable.

        1. Derick fae Yell says:

          The Scottish Constitutional Commission has spread made a good start and there are links to several versions of a draft Scottish Constitution there. Elliot Bulmer’s books are also good primers on the subject.

          1. Derick fae Yell says:

            Already! This site needs a comment edit function!

        2. John Page says:

          A lot of work has been down on this…….I will post references tomorrow
          John Page

          1. John Page says:

            As above W Elliot Bulmer’s A Model Constitution is a great foundation
            I am sure we could all suggest changes
            For one I would add “no nuclear weapons” and “respect for the environment” to the first paragraph emphasising the sovereignty of the people of Scotland
            I am a republican but could live with this model’s suggestion that Elizabeth Windsor be Head of State provided there was a Referendum on the monarchy after each royal death

            It would be great if we had an Iceland type consultation on this and then we could go into IndyRef 2 with a Constitution leaflet like the Wee Blue Book to assist when chapping doors

            John Page

        3. Kenneth G Coutts says:

          I to want Independence and a republic ,whether I am awake or sleeping.Well done to Cat Boyd , all at RIC and beyond common weal, ect.
          all of Scottish society should be involved with the constitution, MP’s for Scotland involved of course but not in control of its formulation.
          The biggest mistake on the first ref was to allow the unionists (who we see now as to having no power in Scotland)to come to Scotland and dictate their imperialist agenda’s to us , by refusing the use of sterling , let’s face it when you have had a dummy or sooky for all yer life, indeed when a nation is fed the drug of misinformation and propaganda and false reliance on a protectorate taking the sooky or drug away can be effective towards the dealer.
          There is nothing to fear but fear itself, Scotland must come together collectively to affect the change we need , to get out of our comfort zone and help all of Scotland for Scotland.
          No one else will, Parliament democracy is no democracy for the greater whole the ballot box is also a corruption in Keeping power away from the citizens.
          We have neoliberal union socialists and corporate right wing union fascists coupled with their MSM trumpet stenographers from all the newspapers ,mags and the state TV outlets.
          Overcoming all this is relatively easy, we ignore them and go our own way, as we will never overcome their agenda’s , it is folly to believe we could.
          Change is not what they want , we have to embrace change and be uncomfortable with change regardless.
          To understand the establishment , the dark state and the neoliberal corporate fascists they will effectively lose all power , which they do not want at any cost, whether it is Europe or globally.
          Do we not see it in their propaganda’s it is our fault therefore we must pay them , what a blatant corruption , the biggest corruption is to ourselves in believing it and allowing them to take.
          Handing over the debate to politicians would be the biggest mistake in achieving our goal.
          If all those that voted NO do not see what is wrong by now, then they are lost forever.

    3. Mark Rowantree says:

      I agree entirely with the jist of these points it would simply be cutting off ones nose to spite ones head. Like Pam, I believe that the SNP should instead committing itself to reserving the right to hold one depending on circumstances.

  6. Derek Grierson says:

    I think we should hold fire on IndyRef2. I want independence as much as anyone, but I think that the weaknesses in our argument for it still exist and have not yet been addressed. In parallel with watching the self-evident disintegration of democracy in the UK, we should be building a constitution and a set of policy documents, to be implemented on Independence. Then the choice will be clear and the rampant dishonesty and empty rhetoric of the Unionist camp will be clearly seen for the snake oil that it is.

    Win the argument first, and we’ll win the second vote.

  7. Amby Loughlin says:

    See the MCrone report on youtube,

  8. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

    Corbyn’s campaign has revealed the extent that the Westminster bubble and their media allies are hopelessly out of touch with ordinary people.

    Unfortunately Westminster’s failings, however severe, will not convince a majority of Scots to vote for Independence. We have to play a long game and wait for the appropriate time. That won’t happen until the economy recovers and confidence is higher.

  9. Darby O'Gill says:

    Although it is self-evidently why they exist, the option to hold a referendum at any time should be a fixture in the SNP manifesto because, with the rapid rate of change in the political/social landscape the optimum time could be with us sooner than we think.

    1. Laura Dunbar says:


  10. Kimberley Cadden says:

    My view is that if we truly believe in our own arguments – i.e. that Scotland would be better off independent – then we can trust that we can continue to build support for independence.

    If we understand that at this point our poorest and most vulnerable are the ones who need this to happen the most, when it comes to health and quality of life; and if we take this together with the pretty much universally accepted premise that the loss of a second independence referendum would end the question for at least a generation or more; then I would argue that we should only fight indyref2 when we know we are going to win (i.e. polling at around 60% seems to be the generally accepted level of support at which we can be confident of procuring a win), as to do anything else would be risking the welfare of the people who need fairer, more representative governance the most.

    So if we believe we can continue to build support and if we don’t want to risk the welfare of our most vulnerable by losing a second referendum then I would argue the logical step is to wait until we are polling at 60%.

  11. Jim Morris says:

    Scottish Independence is now not a matter of the democratic will of the Scottish people. We had our chance when the Edinburgh Agreement committed both Parliaments in London and Edinburgh to respect and honour the result. The London Houses of Parliament will never agree to losing Scotland’s contribution to the coffers or should I say troughs? UDI would be an international and democratic nightmare. Personally, if I was a billionaire, I would finance a referendum every six months, just to expose the democratic deficit of the Union, but I am not, and it is with great sadness that I try to be a realist and accept the lying greedy bandits that make up team GB.

  12. Samson says:

    Bella Caledonia deleted a criticial but non-abusive comment I made in response to this video. I believe this censorship reflects poorly on Bella Caledonia’s integrity and contravenes open discourse.

    1. Saor Alba says:

      Looks like you are making things up Samson. Mischief-making? Oh dear!

  13. Andy Anderson says:

    You are right Cat, the real issue which will move people to take to significant move towards Scottish independence is the struggle against austerity. You are also right to say that what is happening in Greece is of great relevance to us and we must take account of it. However your conclusion is mistaken, we do not need a ‘quick’ referendum to deal with the problems we face we need an effective democratic referendum. The referendum we had last year was not democratic. The Postal ballot was rigged, the BBC, in complete disregard to its own charter ‘led’ the hostile media in misrepresenting the ‘facts’ and the UK establishment deliberately undermined the democratic process. In effect Cat, we have not yet had a democratic referendum as agreed by the two Governments at the Edinburgh Agreement. If ‘another’ referendum means the same again then I see no point in that.
    What we need is an agreement in principle from the sovereign Scottish people that the Scottish Government has a mandate to call a referendum when they have addressed these issues. We should then get to work on the factors which were used to undermine the last referendum, for example the rigging by MI5 of the Postal Ballot before we allow them to do that again to us.

    1. manandboy says:

      You nailed it Andy – but it is amazing that so many don’t.

  14. Mary says:

    Hi Cat
    I agree with you that we need to start developing our strategy for indyref2 now.
    I think the SNP should propose a mandate for it in their 2016 manifesto, but should leave this open as a kind of floating option without a date. That way indyref2 could be held at a time of their choosing when numbers of support were a good way past 50% and it was sure we’d win it.
    With what we’ve already seen of David Cameron and his cronies, I’m absolutely sure those numbers will rise within this WM parliament, and especially as the proposed cuts start to bite. And they won’t just bite the least well off, those with a little extra will start feeling it, and that’s when I think we’ll see the real shifts in Scottish opinion that we need to win.

    1. Kimberley Cadden says:

      I actually think the SNP should introduce (if they can – I admit I am not sure) some kind of legislation for our new political reality to say that any future Scottish government has the right to call a referendum on independence when they see fit.

      I see no reason why independence referendums have to be linked to election manifestos (although maybe I am missing something). It’s not a policy in the sense that voters would be voting for a change in the circumstances of their lives – the referendum would be what determines any change and this will be democratically decided. I just don’t see the need for a mandate to put a question to the people of a nation which they can then democratically vote on and thus decide for themselves…

      And when it comes to demonstrating the need for such legislation, the fact that 45% of Scots voted to leave the union is validation enough that as a nation we need to be able to exercise the ability to vote again on this important issue, if and when the public mood dictates it, not when election manifesto’s need drawn up….

  15. Frank says:

    Well that was an ordeal to sit through. Why do radicals have to be so shouty, appealing only to emotion and seldom to reason – which is basically what this argument amounts too?

    You can’t call a referendum every time the Tories do something unpopular. To call a second referendum without understanding why you lost the first one is mind boggling. Until the currency question is resolved, forget it. The yes campaign won over ‘anti-austerity’ Scotland. The problem was middle class Scotland and rural Scotland, and I can’t see those demographics changing anytime soon.

    For me, the indy ref 2 demand is a strategic attempt to give the ‘radical left’ a distinctive policy position against the SNP. It is part an electoral calculation to get ‘radicals’ elected to the Scottish Parliament next year.

    Rather than shout slogans from the sidelines, the left outside of Labour and the SNP should be examining what powers the parliament has, and how these powers could be used to further progressive politics. And if you want to build alliances it’s probably best to drop the term ‘radical’. Most people want security, not radicalism. Many lives are disrupted by the radicalism of neoliberalism; it disrupts our sense of community and family life, everything is temporary including our notions of work and place. The shout, that we must replace one form of radicalism with another, is a shout that is destined to get lost in the noise.

    1. Ross Cowan says:

      “For me, the indy ref 2 demand is a strategic attempt to give the ‘radical left’ a distinctive policy position against the SNP. It is part an electoral calculation to get ‘radicals’ elected to the Scottish Parliament next year.”

      That seems insightful to me.

      “The problem was middle class Scotland and rural Scotland”

      Those bloody people who don’t live on schemes and who do live in the Countryside! Damn you! Damn you!! Damn you all to hell!!

      1. Frank says:

        I wasn’t trying to be insightful Ross, only suggesting that the position of a second independence referendum is informed by electioneering rather than argued out of principle. Furthermore, to link the demand to austerity will only further alienate large sections of middle class Scotland, and possibly even rightist/conservative strands within the yes movement.

        Developing what I said further, a second referendum could be construed as anti-democratic. 55% of the population voted no. Whether you like it or not, their views ought to be respected. Had Yes won, it is unlikely that we, I was tempted to say ‘they’ for a moment, would be supporting the no sides demand to have another referendum.

    2. Flower of Scotland says:

      I am afraid this is just electioneering on behalf of the Radical Left. This is from one pensioner, who with others during the day, worked our butts off to deliver leaflets , canvas and deliver the Wee Blue Book in aid of the Scottish Referendum!

  16. Ross Cowan says:

    Inspiring stuff Cat, thank you.

  17. Waggle says:

    How about getting more Brits onside before calling for another indy referendum?

    Building a solid reputation for the Bank of Scotland would help too; just to convince the Brits that an independent Scotland would not rely on the Bank of England as its bank of last resort.

  18. Will says:

    It is a shame that during the last referendum that the Pensioners where scared by the establishment Labour, Tories and Lib Dems that they would lose their pensions in an Independent Scotland, it was not nice for Pensioners who now feel much better supporting the SNP who offer Hope not Fear.

    I think that you will find that come the next Scottish Independence referendum that the SNP will have written into their manifesto prior to the referendum that they will implement a Pensioner Guarantee written into Scottish Legistlation which will Guarantee the Scottish Old Age Pension will always be at a higher level than that in the rest of the UK this will reassure the Pensioners to vote Yes for Independence.

    1. Amby Loughlin says:

      Nicely written piece, could’nt agree with you more Will.

      1. Will says:

        Amby, very kind of you to say so, I was talking to one of my auties who is Scottish and a Pensioner the other week and she told me was so scared towards the end of the referendum that she would lose her pension if she voted Yes, that she voted No mainly because Gordon Brown frightened her which she now says was a stupid thing to do, and she now regrets it, she now says if the SNP implement the Pensioner Guarantee into Scottish Legistlation she will vote Yes the next time for Scottish Independence.

  19. Stalin says:

    Socialism in one country, just love it, especially as 100% of all rail and road transport has to travel through an hostile England and the EC is the supreme unelected source of state power west of the Russian Empire. I am weary though, a total abandonment of the International Perspective has always been on the cards, but is still saddened by it.

  20. John Craig says:

    It’s always worth remembering when talking about us poor old souls ( some of us who live in the country) that it was us who built the nationalist movement to what it is. I have pointed out previously that the horrific on-line exchanges by both sides drove many people used to moderate debate, back into the arms of the mass media.
    It was my devout wish that supporters of independence would show some moral fibre and lessen the damage being done by rising above it. That my own man in Westminster was actively encouraging such behaviour says it all. Maybe we should get Gorgeous George to re-start his RESPECT party.

    If we are to move forward towards a second referendum there’s a lot of patching up to do. Those parts of the latest attempt that were glossed over or air-brushed out such as currency and pensions need to be nailed down. Look to other countries for inspiration when it comes to a constitution, people the world over face the same problems and require the same solutions. Spend your time considering how we can achieve a just society within the boundaries we have to operate in at this time. Demand good governance; demand that our representatives in our own parliament should be above reproach. Show the world that Scotland is worthy of note. I can fully understand the frustration of people who have worked hard to achieve a goal that narrowly eludes them. When I was active in my support of the nationalist cause, victory was a long, long way away and as such mild disappointment was the order of the day. Now, when we are hitting the ball off the bar, is the most crucial of times and requires cool heads. Forget the side shows, forget the claptrap, we’re talking about a nations future, not when we can get planning permission for a new house.
    Cat Boyd shows all the eagerness for change and political commitment that many of us had in our youth and good luck to her, but I think she’ll have to wait a few more years for her new home.

    1. Will says:

      John, I agree your bang on the money in playing the slow game, SNP have to tackle the issues that are opaque SNP need to have ideas on Old Age Pensions have a look at my previous in the thread above regarding the Pensioner Guarantee.

      Regarding the issue of currency and the pound via the UK Treasury and Bank of England perhaps we should be thinking about breaking away from the UK Treasury and the Bank of England and setting up an alternative new Scottish Treasury and new Bank of Scotland with a new Scottish Pound or we can have a compitition to pick a new name for it, we need ideas how to set this up from the many great Scottish Number Crunchers out there so they can crack on with this ASAP.

      The next referendum will be won if we can get the Pensioners onboard so let’s have a policy that says Pensioners can have a Scottish royal figurehead only this title will be voluntary and it will be held on a yearly basis, to be the Scottish Royal figurehead you have to be a Scottish Pesioner and there will be Lottery once a year to pick the Scottish Royal figurehead in a lottery held at the New Scottish Pensions Office and of course the draw will be televised for the nation of Scotland’s viewers to enjoy.

  21. June Maxwell says:

    Why do we have to wait for one ‘significant or material’ change? Our rights, services and support structures are all being eroded gradually but surely, bit by bit. “Mony a mickle, maks a muckle”. We need to draw the line. No one, no one can predict the result of a further Ref. We should not be cowed into accepting if we lose again to roll over and take it forever. If at first we don’t secede, we must try, try and try again. And we must not be shy in saying so.

  22. Len says:

    I couldn’t listen to all of this. I just keep thinking phoney sincerity and too much time spent looking in the mirror.

    1. Will says:

      Len, believe it or not I have an ornamental mirror in the Shape of the UK, after the referendum and the on the eve of the general election which resulted in the SNP tsunami and the election of the glorious 56 my mirror fell of the wall and when I picked it up part of it came away and fell to the floor, when I looked at the remaining part of the mirror it had broken exactly through the border of Scotland and England surely this a miracle and sign of Scotland’s Independence.

      1. Kennedy says:

        i really want to believe that.

  23. Alasdair McCormack says:

    A week is a long time in politics! The SNP can pick to its advantage when the next referendum happens.

    Austerity is here to stay, same as the war on terror or project fear.

    Austerity as viewed by the tories is the opportunity to reduce state spending and adopt a U.S. free market economic model. This reduction in state spending covers everything except military.

    Welfare will be cut further, state subsidies for green energy will end and fracking encouraged, funding for further and higher education will suffer and a picture will be painted on the NHS that shows no alternative to greater numbers of services being privatised. The impact of some of these cuts will be mitigated by an SNP Goverment in Edinburgh, but it’s powers are limited so the impacts will be severe, especially on poor and vulnerable people.

    Peoples ruined lives as a result of austerity are of no consequence to the tories.

    So yes I would agree with Cat that austerity is important in ushering in a referendum, but not exclusively, there will be other factors.

    The disintegration of labour is key, the flicker of hope Corbyn stands for will fade soon as the election result is declared void or the party split after bitter in fighting. Make no mistake the uk establishment, part of which is labour, will not stand for a Corbyn win.

    Where do labour voters in Scotland go, liberals or tories, highly unlikely, they have only one home, the SNP. So labour’s demise is one of those events that can herald in a referendum.

    There are other issues such as public trust, the continued distain the public have for westminster. When the allegations about former prime ministers and others are fully aired and appreciated, trust in sending mps to London will have vanished and people will be disgusted.

    If the labour leadership is anything to go by the EU referendum, will be poisonous, the SNP have the opportunity to steer clear of this by campaigning for a yes vote “on its own”, staying clear of the London based parties.

    So there are many issues or events that can give rise to a referendum, for me it’s the sum of all the above and the ones we currently don’t know or haven’t happened.

  24. Alan says:

    The only incontestable referendum on Scottish independence would be a UK-wide one, and in that circumstance the ideal would be to offer the question of Scottish independence as a second question on the day of the promised in-out referendum on EU membership.

    I do not believe that the (anti-Scottish socialist) English right-wing press campaign, which has continued for many years, could be reversed to ensure the maintenance of the Union. Most of the English I know are therefore convinced that the Scots are leeches on the State and England would be better off without them.

    If Jeremy Corbyn is elected Labour Leader & forms an informal socialist alliance with the SNP, this will encourage Middle England to vote for the end of the Union. Best of luck, Jeremy.

  25. Brad says:

    seriously from now til 2018 this the best time to have a another referendum on Independence the No campaign has no serious contenders to lead their campaign the likes of Brown, Murphy and Darling are all damaged goods … so who is gonna lead it , Dugdale ? McDougall ? Mundell ? Davidson ? Carmichael ? Johnson ? Osborne ? Cameron ? lol … we would be starting the next campaign from 45% plus compared to the 25% in 2012

  26. Cathie Lloyd says:

    I wanted to be convinced by Cat’s argument but I found it thin – it was mainly assertion. I want independence, and another referendum as soon as we can win it. But until the day dawns we can seize, I think we need to build dual power structures. Not just the devolved matters, which incidentally need to be squeaky clean and working well, but in areas which are rather grey, such as energy. Build strong local communities. Build the basis of an independent country, and answer the questions which stopped too many people voting yes. There needs to be a rigorous analysis of who voted no, so that we can target them next time. We need water tight arguments to counter any future Project Fear. And we must make sure that we choose the time and not be pushed into a premature referendum by enthusiasm alone.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.