By Jason Michael

SCOTLAND’S BREXIT MINISTER, Mike Russell, has reported he had a “very constructive” discussion with Hugo Dixon, a founding member of the People’s Vote campaign, on Wednesday. So far the Scottish government has not backed the campaign, but the First Minister has said that her government will not stand in the way of another referendum on Brexit with the proviso that, in the event of another vote, Scotland is not pulled out of the European Union against its will. There is a problem here that seems to be missed every time this is touched upon in the British media; the People’s Vote and another Brexit vote are two entirely different things. One could be forgiven for thinking there is an attempt here to confuse the public by using these terms interchangeably.

Another Brexit vote would be a complete rerun of the referendum of 23 June 2016, where the question of EU membership would be put to the public again. The People’s Vote is something else entirely. This is not a rerun for the referendum. It is an acceptance of the result of the referendum. What the People’s Vote is, in fact, is the demand that a vote on the nature of the final deal – negotiated between the EU and the British government – be put to the public. When the organisers of the Scottish People’s Vote rally promoted their event, they said:

…over 230,000 people have signed the petition calling on government to give the people, not just politicians, a vote on the final Brexit deal.

In effect, this is a call for democratic action, but – at the same time – it makes an absolute mockery of Scotland’s democracy. On 23 June 2016 the people of Scotland went to the polls and voted overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the European Union. This was not the vote of an English region or county, this was the vote of a nation – a devolved nation of the United Kingdom. Asking the people of Scotland to support a vote which presupposes the acceptance of a decision England has made on our behalf; a decision that will have us removed from the EU against our will, is a capitulation to the idea that England can indeed make decisions for us.

Asking this of Scotland is just more proof that within the union our nation is seen as nothing more than added support for England’s political causes. By having a People’s Vote in Scotland we are accepting England’s instrumentalisation of Scotland and conceding that our voice does not count in the union when it is at odds with that of England. This is why the Scottish government will not stand in the way of another Brexit referendum whilst unable to back a People’s Vote. We know how we will vote in another Brexit referendum. We will vote as before and hope to hell England votes in the same way – because if it doesn’t we will be ignored again. Supporting a People’s Vote is nothing short of an admission that our votes do not count in the union.

It is worrying, however, that Mike Russell would be in talks with the People’s Vote campaign. The position of the Scottish government – if it truly supports Scotland’s voice in the union – on such a vote should be a flat-out rejection. Holding such a vote would essentially rob us of the argument that we have already rejected Brexit. We have rejected Brexit and this assertion and defence of our democracy must be our central negotiating position with the British administration.

If the Scottish government hopes to defend our voice in London then it has no option but to stick to its guns, forcing the British government to ignore us and take us from the EU without our consent. Only then will we be in a position to resist and protect our sovereign democratic will – even if that means seeking independence. The moment we support a People’s Vote we accept the result that was made for us and thereby lose the high ground we currently hold.

Perhaps this is why the British media is confusing these two votes. If enough people in Scotland can be convinced that a People’s Vote is fundamentally the same thing as another Brexit vote then pressure can be put on the Scottish government from within Scotland. This way the British government can use the People’s Vote to undermine the Scottish position on Brexit, removing Scotland’s objection to an English Brexit.

Our democracy has been insulted by London’s autocratic behaviour over Brexit. Until the Article 50 negotiations are completed – negotiations from which we have been completely excluded – we are living in what amounts to a totalitarian regime. Brexit and its terms and conditions will be dictated to us regardless of the fact we have rejected it. The insult would only be compounded by a People’s Vote. We would again be tools for England’s political requirements at the absolute cost of our own political dignity. We can only hope that by “very constructive” Mike Russell means that he spelt out Scotland’s position, hammered home the imperative of protecting the sovereign will of the Scottish people, and told Hugo Dixon to sling his hook.

Brexit gives us two options. We can – as Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the Conservatives want us to do – bend over and assume the position for Westminster, and accept that we do not really have a democracy in Scotland, or we can put the foot down and stick to the decision that we have made. London can attempt to ignore us, but at this point defending the democratic will of Scotland demands more serious action – another independence referendum. Those who want us to bend over for London and those who want us to accept a People’s Vote are no friends of Scotland. It is time we showed them that we are prepared to stand our ground.


Brexit explained: what happens when the UK leaves the EU?

032 001

9 thoughts on “No People’s Vote for Scotland

  1. Jason

    It is not just the moral argument.

    Pushing a “peoples vote” plays into Westminster’s tactics to delay public outrage. Westminster knows this would undermine any public calls for the SNP to activate their mandate. It looks all the world like the Tories delaying tactics on their Brexit legislation.

    This is in the same vein – UK’s delaying the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement is not incompetence. This delay is deliberately orchestrated to remove Scotland’s escape routs. If Westminster can delay the WA until November or December, Scotland’s political options are difficult.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I agree that the delays at Westminster make Scotland’s political options difficult – nothing is clear. Will there be a GE? will there be a second referendum? who will be PM? will the 29 March deadline be extended? will it be deal or no deal? what will happen with ireland?

      It is difficult to make a call on indy2 against such unknowns. When NS made that call positively 18 months ago, she rapidly got trumped by TM calling a UK GE – once burned etc.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Mr Dixon and his ‘People’s Vote’ brigade of smoke and mirrors fandancers can simply sling their hook (and I trust and hope they were told to do so diplomatically, of course).

    Scotland voted Remain by a large margin.

    End of story, Hugo.

    Time for EWA to grow up and sort out their own self-made problems which they seem to be continuing to compound if the current BritLab conference is any indication.

    Roll on further chaos in this respect with the Tories when they do their conference variation next.

    Infantilists the lot of them too long dependent on milk from other teats.

    I hope the EU soundly thrashes their collective arse and the rest of the world moons at them.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. It’s worse than you make out because there are many backing a People’s Vote that view it’s primary purpose as an attempt to reverse the EU referendum and return to the status quo. Clearly that would be a democratic outrage. On top of which any result that wasn’t decisive wouldn’t stand unchallenged for long. Scotland has made its decision already and would be wise to steer well clear of getting dragged into ‘having another go’

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @Peter

      Listening to many of the Peoples vote’s arguments – their so openly a NIMBY cause. They expect everyone to rally for them but they would never consent (or even consider) offering the same rights to Scotland.

      Hence, to Scotland these people are not even fair-weather-friends. Scotland is just a tool to them so they can get their way on this issue. Then everything can go back to their version of normal.

      There is no solidarity here. If Scotland was to expend political capital and energy to be part of that cause, (diluting its own more valid Indy cause), these people would walk away from you as soon as their campaign ended. More than that, many would become your opponents. Cant you just hear the twitter posts:
      – “We’re tired of referendums and political turmoil.”
      – “We’re back to normal, stop being divisive”
      In other words: lets go back to how it was before…it was ok for us.

      Liked by 1 person

Please Share Your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s