Starmer isn’t ready for the coming constitutional crisis
Adam Ramsay looks ahead to the prospect of a Plaid Cymru First Minister from Cardiff standing at a press conference with an SNP First Minister from Edinburgh and a Sinn Féin First Minister from Belfast demanding the right to self-determination.
Absolutely nothing about Keir Starmer’s first year as prime minister suggests that he is ready for the coming constitutional crisis.
In a year’s time, elections will take place to the Scottish and Welsh parliaments. Every one of the last nine polls in Scotland suggests a pro-independence majority will be elected, almost certainly with manifesto commitments to holding a referendum on independence from the United Kingdom.
Polling for the Senedd is rarer, but in two of the last four surveys, the pro-independence Plaid Cymru came out on top, and the also pro-independence Welsh Greens winning their first seat.
The Scottish parliament having a pro-independence majority is nothing new. But, if one is elected, and if the resultant government does indeed demand from Westminster the right to hold an independence referendum, then Keir Starmer will be the first Labour prime minister to be issued with such a request.
Every previous occasion that the Scottish government has requested a referendum, the Tories were in office. While Cameron granted the 2014 vote, it was relatively easy for Theresa May in 2016, and then Boris Johnson in 2021, to deny the Scottish parliament’s right to hold such a vote. Tories had few MPs in Scotland, and those they did have were elected on ultra-unionist lines, by voters who absolutely wanted them to reject another indyref.
Starmer is in a very different position. His party now holds most seats in Scotland. Labour’s new generation of Scottish MPs weren’t elected solely by ultra-Unionists, but also by lots of soft independence supporters desperate to be rid of the Tories. Outright refusing to allow an independence referendum – particularly as these voters watch, aghast, as Reform rises in England – is hardly likely to endear this portion of the electorate to the party they just had a one-night stand with, and which is hoping to woo them into a longer-term relationship.
Likewise, it was ideologically easy for the Tories to turn down a referendum. If the Conservative party has one historical constant, it is that it is a devotee of the despotism of the crown in parliament. It believes that sovereignty lies with the king, and is lent down from there. Labour’s constitutional position has always been more complicated – in 1989, all but one Scottish Labour MP signed the Claim of Right, asserting “the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs”. I’m sure that no current Scottish Labour MP supports independence, but I’m not sure all of them would be comfortable denying a Scottish parliament elected on a mandate to hold a referendum to do so.
I’m sure that no current Scottish Labour MP supports independence, but I’m not sure all of them would be comfortable denying a Scottish parliament elected on a mandate to hold a referendum to do so.
What Starmer will do in this situation is unclear. Ahead of the 2021 Holyrood elections, he refused to rule out allowing a referendum in the future. Ahead of the UK election in 2024, he said he would refuse to enter negotiations around a referendum, should the SNP win a majority of MPs in Scotland (which they did not). And in any case, what he has or hasn’t said in the past is utterly irrelevant, given his track record with promises. The obvious answer is that he will do whatever he thinks is politically easiest. Or rather, he will avoid that which is politically hard. And so, for those of us who support independence, the job is to make rejecting a referendum very difficult.
The situation in Wales is slower-moving. If Plaid Cymru do come first in the election, they won’t have a majority, even alongside any Greens who make it. Similarly, while the latest poll does show the second highest ever score of 41% support for independence (and 72% among under 35s), that is still a clear minority. However, a Plaid Cymru victory would be the first time Labour has lost a major election in Wales in more than 100 years. It would leave Labour in a position where it had either to allow a Plaid first minister to take office, or work with Tories and Reform to block one – either of which would have significant consequences.
And the Scottish and Welsh situations will be dynamic – with each impacting on the other. A Plaid Cymru First Minister in Wales standing at a press conference with an SNP First Minister in Scotland and a Sinn Féin First Minister from Northern Ireland demanding the right to self-determination would be a powerful image.
A Westminster government adept at statecraft would be able to navigate these political cracks. Tony Blair was able to see off the political turmoil caused by his decision to illegally invade Iraq, and go ahead to win the 2005 election. But Keir Starmer, less than a year after his historic victory, is languishing at 22% in the polls. In an extraordinary feat of political idiocy, he has waged war on his own voters, and, with the Conservatives similarly imploding, left neofascists in Reform to mop up the mess.
The question for pro-independence politicians in Scotland is whether they can outwit these idiots.
We are supported only by our readers. We don't have corporate backers and we don't take advertising, so we rely entirely on your support.
Help to support independent Scottish journalism
Starmer and the labour party are so in hoc to the israeli lobbists such as BICOM that they are unable to criticise let alone condemn the vile atrocities conducted by Israel — a campaign which has preceeded 1948 with Haganah. Irgun and the Stern gang all engaged in a terror campaign. They killed 784 British soldiers between 1945 and 1947 — mostly national servicemen. They even kept 2 sergeants captive in a cellar for 10 days then took them out and hanged them. Bevin said of the Jews in Palestine ” I hates them I does”
I don’t want another referendum, we were cheated in 2014 and would be again, a plebiscite election is the way to go. I believe there are going to be a lot of ISP and i4i candidates which is great, I hope we have one in the north Isles.
What’s their plan for restoring Scotland’s full self-government?
“The question for pro-independence politicians in Scotland is whether they can outwit these idiots.”
The question, for us, the people, is also whether pro-independence politicians in Scotland have the intelligence to beat them
“The question for pro-independence politicians in Scotland is whether they can outwit these idiots.”
Given that an idiot is the lowest category on the mental deficiency scale what would that make “pro-Independence politicians” if the failed?
You’re referencing a dated system, which was one of many attempts at quantifying intelligence, as if it were the contemporary standard.
Its about as up-to-date as ignoring the periodic table, in favour of naming the elements as: earth, air, fire and water.
Could you let us know what system is currently in use?
Thanks
The “crown in parliament”, as I understand it, is a kind of mystical concept whereby Parliament acts in the spirit of the monarch without the monarch actually knowing or taking part in the process… it’s irrational, mystical gobbledygook…
I’m not sure that you can argue that the Tories believe the monarch is absolute sovereign, that flies in the face of the huge upheavls of the 17th century which sought to establish the sovereignty of Parliament over the monarch, but to do as much WITHOUT losing the kind of irrational and mystical appeal that a monarchy brings (this, after all, is why the monarchy was restored in 1660 after a hiatus of almost 20 years; it was the easiest way for the elite to solve a leadership crisis and buttress their own power against anarchic times)
It’s also true, of course, that we now know that the British monarch is far more involved in some of the decisions taken by government than he/she is supposed to be. The weekly meetings between the UK PM and the monarch are nor minuted as far as I understand it…
It really is extraordinary this bullshit passes itself off as a reasonable form of democratic government almost one quarter through the 21st century…
As Neal Ascherson has pointed out in the past, this anachronistic, irrational, secretive and benighted form of government explains why Britain is so behind in so many other area today..
I hope the very crisis outlined here comes to pass, but even then I doubt Swinney and the SNP leadership will know how to seize the chance. Think what you like about Salmond, but he did know how and when to act decisively… quite possibly we wouldn’t have had a referendum in 2014 without his personal contribution to that process, that is my feeling after watching so many own goals being fluffed since then by the SNP….
“ What Starmer will do in this situation is unclear. ‘
Is it?
It’s entirely predicable what hew will do!
No, no, no, etc!
The only reason we got the vote in 2014 was that they thought they would walk it. Instead it was close and the bbc, press and breaking of purdah won it for them. As a result they will never allow another vote in the conventional sense of democracy, i.e. 50.1% of those that vote win the day!
There will be an insertion of a certain bar to get over, say, 60% of those registered to vote must vote in favour of independence. Alternatively the vote is extended to all of the uk. You can see the bbc and press pushing this and referring to brexit and how this division must never happen again.
The route to independence will be made difficult if not impossible to achieve with the added complexity that unionism can never be trusted under any circumstances and they control all the levers of state!
General Elections be they Scottish or uk are the best way to achieve independence followed by civil disobedience and non co-operation if the democratic will of the Scottish people is denied!
It’s all to play for, but let’s play by rules defined by Scotland’s needs and not the needs of others outside of Scotland!!
Iain – I am afraid that any student of British history would understand that you have given a very realistic assessment of Westminster intentions. Cameron would never have accepted a referendum in 2014 if he considered Yes had any chance of winning. He saw the exercise as a way of splitting Labour in Scotland and diminishing rising support for SNP. The fact that his instincts were so wrong and Yes nearly won but he then decided to repeat process to enable a Brexit referendum for short term political gain with same lazy assumptions speaks to his personal stupidity.
The fact that neither Labour, Tories or Lib Dem’s have even outlined under what circumstances they would agree to another referendum indicates that they are not willing to agree to one period. They also see this refusal as a political tactic to make voters think independence is impossible and therefore make them less likely to vote for independence supporting parties. A tactic which was successful at last years GE. Labour and Tory parties now have no interest in independence and little interest in Scotland they are only interested in Westminster and political power.
You are correct John!
The overall need for England to keep Scotland has many facets and can be broken down:
Loss of face and corresponding lack of confidence in England on the international and domestic stages!
Economic, Scottish people, workforce, taxes and market!
Energy, renewables and fossil fuel!
Defence, bases including Trident, land mass and strategic location!
Natural resources including water!
Political, the whole edifice of uk would crumble!
All of the above are benefits for England and not Scotland!
Starmer shortly after becoming labour leader stated in a border poll in Ireland he would support unionism. If they are to fight to retain the Irish region of Northern Ireland that they have no political or economic reason to keep, the lengths they will go to, to keep Scotland, are quite clear and should a surprise to no one!!
Adam is right that the Kid Starver is way out of his depth and will be unable to cope with any kind of crisis, let alone the possible break up of Ukania…
..but dont underestimate the ruthless cadre of blood thirsty neo-liberal, new Labour zealots behind him in the shadows, people who would sell their own mothers if it earned them some hard cash which is the only language they understand…
But nor are the SNP remotely prepared either, with the archly conservstive Swinney and wee free Kate at the helm, both deeply relihious people, not to mention the teppish, lukewarm Sturgeonites, absolutely in thrall to performative politics / not pissing anybody off…
I would suggest you probably cant win indie – which would be a massive blow to the entire anglo-anerican fascist western order – without a smart, sleek, modern and media savy indie party on the left…
I dont think it can be done, Salmond was a maverick figure, a one-off, there is no one in the SNP like that now….
I fail to see why we dont have such a left wing party in Scotland. I think we really ought to take that step…a playful, mischevious, anti-establishemnt left wing party is what we need, without the dour solemnity of the old left, which has been rejected a gazillion times…
I am sorry to admit I agree with you. A referendum at this time would result in a NO vote again, even if it were allowed.
What would work is convincing the paymasters behind the government of the day and the ” ruthless cadre of blood thirsty neo-liberal, new Labour zealots behind him in the shadows, people who would sell their own mothers if it earned them some hard cash which is the only language they understand…” that they too would profit from a YES vote. How to go about it is another question to which I have no answer as yet.
With polling split 50/50 and younger demographic more supportive of independence no one can say with any certainty what the outcome of an independence referendum would be at present time.
Westminster government must also be unsure of potential result as if they were as certain as you are of a No vote they would have agreed to a referendum hoping that another defeat would kill issue as happened in Quebec.
While the demographic trend is undeniable, John, who can honestly say that they feel like they are living in a country on the cusp of independence? It feels like just the opposite, that we are in a country doing no more than treading water and in fact, failing to keep our heads above water…
We have the most diasatrous first year of a new UK govt in modern history, with the sole excpetion of the Truss fiasco. We have an ongoing genocide in Palestine supported by the UK establishment. We have a disgruntled electorate crying out for change. And then we have an SNP govt in Scotland which, or so it seems, couldn’t lose next year even if it actually tried to…
You might expect that now would be the time for the SNP to push the boat out a bit and take a few risks, but what do we get? John Safe as Houses Swinney and Kate Forbes, the staunchest opoonent to basically any and every possible kind of change in society, from assisted dying, to reintroudcing beavers, to gay marriage..
Seriously, in all earnestness, who can believe for a second that Swinney and Forbes are the leadership required to lead Scotland to independence? If it happened during their stewardship, they’d probably negotiate the most tepid and conservative severance agreement possible with London, their chief tactic being to bore the anglo-British elite into letting us go…
The SNP membership voted for the Swinney-Forbes ticket which shows how conservative it is.. And, as I recall, they voted for Swinney for precisely the reason that he is seen as a safe pair of hands. So it¡s not an accident and it’s not a surprise…
I think you come to the conclusion that Britain, Scotland too, is just the most conservative country in Europe, still under the sway of people like David Hume and Adam Smith, Edmund Burke and John Stuart Mill…
With a small and savvy party on the Left, at least the chance exists that you might goad the SNP into doing something useful with all their power. The alternative is to join the Greens, currently in a state of flux, and try to refashion them toward the Left…
But seriously, the absence of vision is simply astonishing…
On the other hand, it might make for a fine T-shirt for the Forbes faction: “No Beavers, please, we’re Scottish…”
But seriously, the beaver POLEMIC sums up the colonial mentality…
Beavers damage salmon spawn with their infernal dam building, they are therefore pests and ought to be exterminated..
We can’t have them in the wilds of Scotland, because they would hurt farmers’ income etc…
And if they can’t be in the wilds of Scotland, where could they live?
Nowhere human beings live, ie, nowhere on Earth…
They should be exterminated or else consigned to the zoo…
That is the colonial mentality in a nutshell, just change beaver for native indian / highlander / Tasmanian boy (whose skull is destined to end up in a glass cabinet in a Scottish university for a century and a half)…
Frobes is with the farmers and agin the beavers…
Douglas – I only disagreed with dateman comment that No would definitely win another independence referendum. I didn’t say Yes would win I just said that result could not be predicted with any certainty.
I never supported independence current strategy (or lack off) of SNP.
Spot on!
And don’t forget that Kate Forbes, like Anas Sarwar, is a Fellow of the British-American Project, which promotes the adoption of neoliberal policies in the United Kingdom. There is no hint of her repudiating that connection, despite the alarming political developments on the other side of the Pond.
Though a contradiction in terms, how about ‘Bugger the beavers’?
Sure, John, but the SNP voted for the current leadership, no question, the rank and file, which makes you think that they’re not very inspired at all really, and in fact, they are a downright dull bunch all things considered, and, seriously why would you vote for a party which, after Brexit and Gaza, thought the solution to the multiple problems we face would be a Swinney- Forbes ticket, beavers or no beavers in the wild?
I think a new party is a must really, with the beaver possibly as a leitmotif running through everything, a kind of logo for the new creation which could be called, say, The Alternative From Below or The Alternative From The Left, or The Scottish Independent Beavers Party even…
Whatever became of RISE ?
Rise rose and then fell…
I have never heard the full story about happened to Rise, I am stumped, it seemed in the wake of those fairly electric RIC conferences in the run up to 18/9/14 that a new party was there to be established, but it all just dissipated and petered out…
I think the name was a mistake, too grandiose, also an imperative tense, a mistake…
“How to go about it is another question to which I have no answer as yet.”
Farage as next UK PM. Convince Nige that he can make a few billion from Scottish indpendence. Putin will contribute in order to further break up the UK. Trump would maybe chip in a few dollars to see his Granny’s clan made great again. Simple. And what could go wrong?
God! The world of 2014 was a lot more benign and ordered than it is now.
Politicians nowadays do and say whatever they want to any group of people with no power. Scots voted away their power in 2014. Said “No” to having autonomy and leverage. Starmer will just tell us to “F-off”, but do it in a nice lukewarm-grey fashion.
What cards do we have to play? Could we appeal to a higher, international authority if it could be demonstrated that most Scots want out of the UK? Seems unlikely. We live in a world where the UK and USA are supporting/arming a genocide and jailing people who protest against it. The gloves are off and Might Hath Right.
However, no point in making it easy for the cnuts.
“Tony Blair was able to see off the political turmoil caused by his decision to illegally invade Iraq, and go ahead to win the 2005 election.”
It’s a little known fact that Tony Blair’s Labour actually lost the popular vote in England in 2005 and came second to Michael Howard’s Tories. The electoral system came to Labour’s aid however and they won over 60% of the seats, as well as seat majorities from pluralities in Scotland and Cymru. This was a sort of reversal of the 1951 situation where Attlee’s Labour beat Churchill’s Tories with their highest ever vote share but lost in seats.
These vagaries of the first past the post system are thrown up from time to time in a dominant two party system. In England in the recent council and mayoral elections threw up even more extreme examples of undemocratic winners and losers. In the West of England UK Labour won a mayoral post covering Bristol and surrounding communities with just 24.97% vote share (and the winner will now have a seat at Keir Starmer’s Council of Nations & Regions (sic) equivalent to First Minister of Scotland). Meanwhile in nearby Exeter, UK Labour topped the poll with 27% and a 3 point lead over the next party, but failed to win a single one of the nine County Council seats coming second or third in every individual contest. In first past the post five party England it is no longer possible to talk about “win an election”, only winning the prize.