A former SNP deputy leader and pro-independence heavyweight attacks the Yes campaign's incoherence, striking "a hammer blow to Alex Salmond".
.
With Alex Salmond having made clear his desire to see a second question on “devo-plus” included on the ballot paper when Scots vote on whether to become an independent nation, further divisions emerged over the weekend with an attack on the Yes to Independence campaign from a former SNP deputy leader.
Speaking to Scotland on Sunday, Margo MacDonald, now an independent MSP, argued that the idea of a second option featuring on the ballot paper should be dropped altogether, as it would need the approval of English as well as Scottish voters and politicians.
She said:
“Ditch the second question, because you can’t deliver it. The only thing you can deliver is independence.”
Amidst criticism from the pro-union camp that Yes to Independence remains vague on an independent Scotland would look like, MacDonald took a broader swipe at the campaign as a whole:
“It’s got no shape, no boundaries, no premise. In short, I don’t think we’ve had a debate, I think we have had a lot of noise.
We should have already had the information stage. We should be at the stage now of arguing what is the best way. But we don’t have an agreed premise.”
Her comments come just weeks after Patrick Harvie, the Scottish Green Party’s co-convenor, took a swipe at the Yes to Independence campaign, arguing that it had effectively been hijacked by Alex Salmond and the SNP.
Scottish Labour’s external affairs spokesperson, Patricia Ferguson, said of MacDonald’s intervention that:
“Margo is well-respected in Nationalist circles and her intervention will come as a hammer-blow to Alex Salmond’s approach. There is now growing consensus that there should be one, straightforward question. In that sense, Margo is merely agreeing with the SNP deputy leader, the chair of the independence campaign, and its director.”
Meanwhile, following last week’s revelations from Scottish Labour that SNP ministers and officials have not had a single discussion about the consequences of independence with any of the UK’s ten major government departments, the Herald reported this weekend that Whitehall – concerned that the SNP administration is dragging its heels on the issue – is considering taking control of the referendum.
• Salmond must stop moving the goalposts on Scottish independence referendum 4 July 2012
• Do the SNP see England as a foreign country already? 2 July 2012
• The Scottish press’s verdict of the launch of the “Better Together” campaign 26 June 2012
• Darling launches campaign for the Union: ‘Better Together, united not divided’ 25 June 2012
• Salmond’s independence campaign lurches from one problem to another 19 June 2012
The paper quotes what it describes as a “senior coalition source” as saying that “this is a scenario he [David Cameron] may have to face.” A second source told the Herald that “Salmond is dragging his feet and it seems to us pretty clear why. It may well be the PM might have no choice but to make the decision himself.”
Commenting on the possibility, the Herald’s Martin Settle and Kate Devlin observe:
“Such a move would be fraught with political danger as it would leave Mr Cameron open to accusations from Nationalists that he is trying to hijack the process they feel is Holyrood’s preserve.
Ideally, the PM would not want to go down such a difficult path, but Whitehall sources have made it clear that, having come so far, Mr Cameron feels the people of Scotland deserve a “fair, legal and decisive” vote and that if only Westminster can facilitate it, then so be it.”
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
28 Responses to “As Yes to Independence campaign splits (again), Cameron considers taking control of Scottish referendum”
Mitchellajm2
Margo never left with Sillars. She was an SNP MSP up till the 2003 election. Her decision to leave was down to Salmond, Swinney and Sturgeon trying to force her off the Lothian List for that election by pressuring SNP party officials to get shot of her as she was critical of their leadership of the SNP. She left the party with legitimate disgust at their under handed ways, and won her seat back as an independent on the same list. Also Margo MacDonald, is someone who commands widespread respect for the lack of bitterness and animosity that she shows towards other politicians, of all backgrounds, working well with all in Parliament and out with it.
There is, as Patrick Harvey has cited (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18763175) no clear definition of Devo-Max. Salmond believes it to be something totally different from what Henry McLeish sees it as, and he in turn sees it differently from Neil Findlay and the ‘Red Group’ in Labour and then they all view it differently from Jeremy Purvis and the Reform Scotland group. So how can we have a vote on something which has no substance or design, and is just noise. We need an alternative in a multi-option referendum which is as solid an idea in where we are going as independence, or we have a vote between independence, the status-quo and ‘devo-max’. The idea is a consolation for Salmond. We were lead to believe in Scotland up till 2011 that the independence referendum was to be straight in/out, yes/no. It was to be what was proposed in 2010 by the SNP from the 2007 election manifesto. They achieved power again, with a majority, and began to announce the idea of Devo-Max. This was a clear move for Salmond not to go down as the SNP leader who lost independence, like Bloc Quebecois in Canada did on a couple of occassions, but to give him an opt out. All power short of elements of macro-economics, foreign policy and defence. In short, to give him fiscal control of all Scottish taxation and control of every other aspect of Scottish life, at least it was that to him. The Unionist parties, or as I think we should call them the ‘Devolutionists’, were thrown off guard by this, as you would be by a man who since he was in politics has wanted total independence, and have taken time to regroup.
Further devolution is fine, and will come if we vote NO in a referendum, as it is clear that all parties in Scotland want more power in Holyrood, even the Tories do. More fiscal responsibility is what we need, more power of elements of our welfare policy is also needed. But that is a debate over devolution. Independence is a different debate, and the combination becomes muddied. As if you argue for devolution you will always come across the SNP going ‘but with independence…’ so it’s an unusual, and frankly, cynical move by Salmond to go here. He was elected on a manifesto which in print says a vote on independence, that was what his last 3 year consultation gave us up to 2010. Now he wants a plan b, a safety net for him and his party. That’s playing politics with our future as a nation. If he is a conviction politician with a belief that he can win this vote for an independent Scotland then he should go for it all guns blazing. There’s no shortage of people who would support him Patrick Harvey, Colin Fox (SSP), Margo MacDonald, Jim Sillars etc, all ‘well kent faces’ up in Scotland. But he seems to be moving to some strange, vague plan of nothing really.
I agree, Cameron should NOT take control of this, but Salmond shouldn’t be running all this either. It’s our future as Scots together. A special committee of the Scottish MPs, MSPs, Lords and members of Civic Scotland to form the bill and the rules of the process, along with the detailed time table up to the ‘big day’ in 2014. It should also be left to the Electoral Commission to form the question (as they have on all UK referenda since they were formed). What is clear is this is an issue which is too big politically and culturally to be left to one government, or parliament. Both are attempting to rig it. We want more power, the debate the SNP want, and have got the chance for, is on independence, NOT more devolution and what form that should take. If we Scots say NO in 2014, then we all come together for a new devolution settlement (and the need for that in Northern Ireland and Wales is clear too) in the UK. If not and YES, as surely Salmond wants, wins the day, then we ‘devolutionists’ wipe ourselves down and get on with the job we all need to get on with, and make Scotland a better country than the one we find today.
Mitchellajm2
Tbh, you’d think they’d have had discussions with Government departments over how a post-independence vote Scotland would want to conduct its negotiations. Especially considering the SNP are so sure on how the defence estate, national debt, pensions liabilities, national boundries at sea and liability for decomissioning of Faslane and North Sea Oil when it runs out would be split post-YES vote. Yet that hasn’t and until it happens all we get told will be assertion.
Kilsally
As Yes to Independence campaign splits (again), Cameron considers taking control of Scottish referendu http://t.co/5DCZPHtj by @EdJacobs1985
Gus Jackson
As Yes to Independence campaign splits (again), Cameron considers taking control of Scottish referendu http://t.co/5DCZPHtj by @EdJacobs1985
ProUnionist
As Yes to Independence campaign splits (again), Cameron considers taking control of Scottish referendu http://t.co/5DCZPHtj by @EdJacobs1985