Visits to Scotland this week by Boris Johnson, the prime minister, and Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, suggest that minds in Westminster are turning to the Union. With the SNP agitating for a second referendum, both Johnson and Starmer headed north to talk up the benefits of the United Kingdom. This was not the time for another referendum, Starmer said, it was time to focus on recovery from the pandemic. Johnson, meanwhile, spoke of renewable energy.
There was a bit of low politics from Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, who issued a last-minute invitation to Johnson for a meeting safe in the knowledge that his prearranged schedule would leave him no choice but to decline. This tried and tested dance paid off with headlines about Johnson snubbing Sturgeon. This take distorts the truth which is that Johnson and his colleagues seem to be taking a more conciliatory approach to dealings with the Scottish government than had previously been the case.
Interviewed last weekend, Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, said that there would be a second referendum if it was the “settled will” of voters. He said that the principle that the people of Scotland could ask the question again, in the right circumstances, existed.
Meanwhile Johnson, once said to have demanded Sturgeon be kept away from the forthcoming Cop26 Climate change summit, now insists there will be a role for her at the event.
There is a shift in tone from both Gove and Johnson. Not so long ago, the Conservatives were briefing that “muscular unionism” would save the Union. Not only would there be no second independence referendum, there would be great infrastructure projects, stamped with Union Flags, in case voters should be in any doubt about where the big spending power lies.
Advertisement
This rather loutish strategy — if it may be described as such — would do nothing but play into the SNP’s narrative about an out-of-touch Westminster government handing down diktats.
It is certainly true that the constitutional question continues — even during this pandemic — to be the dominant political issue. This fact, however, will not change reality. Power to hold a referendum lies with Westminster, and while Johnson refuses to transfer to Holyrood the authority to run a vote, none will take place, notwithstanding a court challenge to this reserved power.
This being so, there is nothing to be gained by the UK government getting into endless spats about the constitution with the SNP. When the prime minister says there should not be a referendum while the coronavirus pandemic remains the focus of political effort, he is stating an opinion shared by Sturgeon. It is to be hoped that the “muscular unionism” approach has been dropped. The SNP thrives on conflict with Westminster, and a bullish approach from Downing Street is of benefit to nobody but Nicola Sturgeon.
A change in tone from the prime minister may be the result of political computations but whatever the motivation, it is needed. The idea that politicians should work together wherever possible to ensure recovery from the impact of the coronavirus pandemic has swiftly evolved into a cliché. Nevertheless, it is true. If either the prime or first minister is tempted to play cheap political games when voters expect their shared focus to be the pandemic, they may pay a price.
A faction within the SNP wishes Sturgeon to push ahead with a referendum without the authority of the UK government. These Nationalists want her to generate conflict with Johnson. Just as Unionists should resile from a muscular approach to the Union, so Nationalists should think twice about picking unnecessary fights at a time when collaboration is in the best interests of everyone who lives across these nations.