Read on Twitter
Was debating the merits of plan B (civilly) vs Plan A with @AngusMacNeilSNP earlier and this came to a point I wanted to make a thread of it. He or another SNP MP need to ask Boris this:
What more can Scottish voters do, democratically, to get indy?
What more can Scottish voters do, democratically, to get indy?
If the SNP win another election this year with Indyref as a manifesto commitment, then it is the expressed will of the people. Now Boris has said the constitution is a reserved matter and it’s therefore up to Westminster. But we cannot vote for or against the majority of MPs.
Scottish voters have a democratic mandate to give as they choose. If we all vote for MPs that want an indy vote, then that should be it. But it’s not because Westminster are saying they will overrule us. But we cannot vote them out of office.
If @AngusMacNeilSNP or @PeteWishart or any other Scottish MPs so displeased the Scottish electorate, we can sack them. Vote in others. And this happeend in 2015 - we voted out MPs who are unionists and voted in MPs who support indy.
But what else, democratically, do Westminster think we should do? We can’t vote boris out. We are having decisions made about Scotland that Scottish voters get no say over, because those MPs are not accountable to Scottish voters. That’s not democracy. That’s tyranny.
Obviously the answer to this is that the Scottish parliament has the power to hold a referendum, and its proposed to do so this year. But what if Westminster block that?
What else are Scottish voters, if the UK is a democracy, supposed to do?
What else are Scottish voters, if the UK is a democracy, supposed to do?
Now I don’t expect if Angus or Pete or any of their colleagues actually ask Boris, to get an answer, just more of the usual Etonian bloviating. But it’s an important question our media and politicians should be asking.
If the UK is a democracy, if Scottish voters are governed by consent, what more do the decent, democratic unionists in England expect us to do?
If we accept the unionist proposition the constitution is reserved to Westminster, surely a committee of solely Scottish MPs would be the ones to decide. Indeed, I wonder what the response to our MPs holding a constitutional assembly and voting would be.
I believe in democracy by the ballot box. But if at every opportunity the Scottish people vote for indy, but are denied it by MPs we cannot vote for or against, who are not accountable to Scottish voters, where does that leave us?
And before inevitable chimes of “that’s why Plan B”, I think the current plan will work, because folk in Westminster are smart enough to realize where the wind is blowing and how they will get more in the end by begrudgingly accepting a vote then moving to negotiations.
But it’s worth pointing out if Westminster block a SP-organized indyref, and refuse a S30 agreed indyref, there’s nothing stopping them ignoring a plan-B election either. And that moves us on to UDI, civil disturbance etc. which nobody truly wants. Including Westminster.
So I guess the point of this long thread is still to ask the decent, democracy-respecting types in Westminster (they do exist) what they expect us to do, democratically, if Westminster continue to deny us, that DOESN’T lead to UDI etc.
