We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.
author-image
ALEX MASSIE

Conviction, not logic, drives the first minister

Nicola Sturgeon has still to realise that most of us have no appetite for a vote

The Sunday Times

Unpredictable times are not the ideal moment at which to set sail on a fresh voyage of uncertainty. This is a reality dawning on the SNP and the wider independence movement. Whether SNP politicians like or accept it or not, President Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has depressed enthusiasm for the independence referendum that Nicola Sturgeon still pretends will be held next year.

Asked in a poll published by The Scotsman if the Ukraine war should prompt a pause in referendum talk here in Scotland, 59 per cent of voters agreed it should. As it happens, I think this question lies on the useless side of interesting but, nevertheless, it demonstrates for the hard of learning that there is no appetite for a referendum on anything like the first minister’s preferred and pretended timetable.

If it were not the war in Ukraine it would be the cost-of-living crisis, and if it were not that it would be something else. Poll after poll has confirmed that the Scottish people are in no great rush for another vote. At least two polls this month reported that no more than one in three voters wished to be asked the national question before 2024 at the soonest.

This being the case, it is necessary to note that the first minister is leading her supporters up the garden path. Again.

As there are council elections in May SNP politicians are again beating the drum for a referendum they, or at least the smarter ones among them, must know will not happen.

Advertisement

This endless game of make-believe has long since passed the point at which it became subject to the law of diminishing returns. It has become tedious. Sturgeon is of course entitled to argue her case and no one suggests the nationalists must abandon their belief in independence, but there comes a point at which changing the subject may prove a surprising relief even for committed SNP supporters.

Like most of her colleagues, the first minister lacks even the capacity to make an honest appraisal of her beliefs and motivations. She claims to be a “utilitarian nationalist” because, on the basis of a rigorous cost-benefit analysis, independence is best for Scotland.

This is a position she has held since she joined the SNP as a schoolgirl. The years may come and go and circumstances change but independence remains a constant, forever desirable, forever necessary, regardless of the moment. I think it fair to say there are no conceivable circumstances in which Nicola Sturgeon would not think independence the answer to any and every question.

Her claim to be a “utilitarian nationalist” is a fraudulent one. Her belief is unfalsifiable and so a matter of ideology or faith, not reason. Just as a belief in the almighty is fine, so is this — but it would be better to be honest about it.

It is conviction, not logic, that drives the first minister.

Advertisement

By contrast many unionists can easily consider circumstances in which, however regretfully, they might think independence the less unattractive option. If Scotland really were an oppressed land or if its people were denied rights routinely enjoyed by those resident elsewhere in the realm, independence might seem like a necessity.

If Sturgeon’s deception ended with herself it might be of little account. But it does not. From time to time the first minister will acknowledge that “of course” independence would come with “challenges”. This is true. But if you ask what, precisely and specifically, these challenges may be, you will not receive an answer. They exist as abstract nods to reality but magically disappear as soon as anyone demands to see them. A movement that cannot be honest about the implications of the only policy it takes seriously is a movement that cannot be trusted.

Sure, the cause is fine but the deceit with which it is advanced long ago ceased to be entertaining. And, of course, try as they might, everything, no matter how grotesque, must always come back to independence.

Confronted with the fact that — rightly or not — most people want no more talk of a referendum this year or next, Rona Mackay, the SNP MSP for Strathkelvin & Bearsden, complained that “suggesting that Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine means the democratic process in the UK should be suspended would be grist to the Kremlin’s mill: Vladimir Putin should not be handed an effective veto over democracy in Scotland or anywhere else. You don’t defend democracy by suspending it.”

Awkwardly, it turns out that 43 per cent of SNP supporters think war in Europe justifies suspending talk of another referendum. I doubt they believe they are allowing Putin “an effective veto” over the referendum and, even by the SNP’s elevated standards, it is beyond preposterous and beyond tedious to suppose this could be the case.

Advertisement

As it happens, Putin would be happy to see the UK dismembered but it would be grotesque to think that his desire for a smaller, weaker Britain in any way invalidates or compromises any Scottish person’s desire for independence. The threat of Russian interference is both real and easily overstated. Putin has little interest in Scottish politics save to the extent he has an interest in division, discord and confusion in any western democracy.

At this point, and to demonstrate the manner in which the Russians will play both ends, the better to muddy the waters, I suppose it is necessary to point out that prior to the last referendum an unsourced Russian news agency report claimed that David Cameron had asked Putin for assistance in seeing off Alex Salmond. Credulous independence-supporting newspapers duly amplified the story, despite its prima facie improbability and a complete lack of any corroboration.

Be that as it may, not everything is about Scotland and astonishingly this may include a war of aggression in Europe.

The plain fact of the situation is there will be no referendum until it is clear a significant majority of Scottish voters demand one. That may happen and if it does then so be it. Until then, however, it would be better to accept our constitutional stalemate and concentrate on other matters.

@alexmassie

Advertisement

Read Alex Massie in The Times every Tuesday