It's looking more and more likely that the elections for the Scottish Parliament in May will see the nationalist SNP take the largest number of seats and form the government at Holyrood. If that happens, the SNP has promised that it will hold a referendum on full independence by 2010.
This fills me with dread: not because I think the Scots have no right to make this decision, but because I believe I've seen this movie before, in Canada. Unfortunately, I can't tell you how it ends, because it never does.
The largely francophone Canadian province of Quebec first elected a "separatist" government, led by the Parti Quebecois, in 1976. It held a referendum on sovereignty in 1979, which was soundly defeated. But the separatists kept getting back into government, and finally plucked up the courage to hold another sovereignty referendum in the mid-1990s. This one was defeated too, but only by a hair's-breadth majority of about 1%. The separatists claimed the result was unfair ("yes, we were defeated, but by money and the ethnic vote", quoth the party leader at the time, Jacques Parizeau) and vowed to try again until they got the result they wanted. This hasn't happened yet, and the poor showing of the PQ in the recent Quebec election means the issue may be on the back-burner for a few more years. But it will be back -- after all, it only takes two separatists to form a party and try to win public support.
Unfortunately, there are reasons to fear that this pattern could be repeated in Scotland in the coming years:
* opinion polls show that in both Quebec and Scotland, many more people are prepared to vote for the sovereignty party in an election than to vote for independence in a referendum. Elections are always about a wide range of issues. It seems that many Scots will vote against Labour to express their disgust at the Iraq war. This does not mean that they will support a referendum on independence, but it will put the SNP in a position to hold one.
* in both Quebec and Scotland, there is no other convincing alternative to the incumbent party. In Quebec, the Liberal party is the main pro-Canada voice. The Conservatives, powerful across much of the rest of the country, have struggled for a foothold in Quebec. When Quebecers want to vote against the Liberals, they turn to the PQ. There is a clear parallel in Scotland: people want to punish Labour but can't stand the Tories, so they will turn to the SNP.
* the sovereignists themselves try to confuse and soften the issue as much as possible, in order to maximise support when the referendum is held. In Canada, the PQ tried to win the 1975 referendum by calling for "sovereignty-association" with the rest of Canada. (This prompted one Quebec comedian to note that what his fellow citizens really wanted was "a free and independent Quebec in a strong and united Canada") There are signs that SNP leader Alex Salmond is thinking on these lines, pledging to retain the pound and keep the Queen as head of state. It probably won't work, but it will help to muddy the waters, and make it impossible to judge the real meaning of any election result.
If the SNP wins in May, I have one piece of advice, courtesy of Douglas Adams: DON'T PANIC! Canada has prospered despite the persistent threat of the departure of Quebec, which not only accounts for 25% of the population, but also physically separates Atlantic Canada from the rest of the country. The economic dangers posed to the rest of the UK by the possible departure of Scotland would be very limited, particularly given the existence of the EU. Those of us living in England and Wales should simply hope that the Scots can make a firm decision, one way or t'other, in a reasonable period -- but I wouldn't bet on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment