Three steps to independence

Getting real

For many years now, I have been pointing out that Scotland's liberation campaign has two different but connected battles which must be fought and won. The first is the battle to secure a means of properly and fully exercising our right of self-determination. Only having won that battle can we engage in the fight to restore Scotland's independence. Or as I have sloganised this, take back our parliament then take back our nation.

What I meant by this is that we must have a parliament with the relevant legislative competence before we can have a parliament which restores Scotland's independence. This seems like a statement of the blindingly obvious when it is set out as it is in the preceding sentence. Which makes it all the more remarkable that proponents of a de facto independence referendum are so oblivious to it. It seems not to occur to them just how little sense it makes to have a referendum - real or de facto - on something which cannot be delivered. As I put it in a below-the-line response on the National's letters page:

You could get 100% on a 100% turnout in favour of having the entire Forth Railway Bridge gold plated - it wouldn't happen.

Likewise, you could get 100% on a 100% turnout voting for independence and it wouldn't happen. That's because restoring Scotland's independence can only be done by the Scottish Parliament and, as things stand, the Scottish Parliament lacks the legislative competence that would be required.

To put it another way, a referendum - real or de facto - may be regarded as the people giving their parliament authority/instruction to do a particular thing. Now, suppose the referendum was on the question of having John Swinney fly unaided from the roof of the Scottish Parliament to the Castle Esplanade waving to tourists as he passed above the Royal Mile. I think we'd all agree that whatever other talents John Swinney might possess, the ability to fly like an eagle yet eludes him. It would therefore be pointless voting for him to do so. And silly to hold a referendum - real or de facto - for that purpose.

Only once the Scottish Parliament has power over constitutional matters does it make any sense to vote on how it should exercise those powers.

In the party's manifesto, New Scotland Party says:

The Party maintains that the Scottish Parliament is the true national parliament of Scotland on account of the unique democratic legitimacy it derives from the mandate of the people of Scotland.

The Party maintains that the Scottish Parliament has been usurped by the parliament of England, now acting as the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Party maintains that the Scottish Parliament is rightly responsible for ensuring that the people of Scotland are provided with the opportunity and facility to exercise their inalienable right of self-determination.

The Party maintains that the people of Scotland are being obstructed in the exercise of their inalienable right of self-determination by a constitutional settlement which empowers the parliament of England, now acting as the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to withhold from the Scottish Parliament the legislative competences which rightfully fall to a democratically elected national parliament.

The Party maintains that the constitutional restrictions under which Scotland labours are contrary to natural justice and in contravention of internationally recognised principles of democracy.

In other words, legislative competencies which by rights should lie with Holyrood are being illegitimately withheld by Westminster using the powers afforded it by a grotesquely asymmetric political union. Before we can have the proper constitutional referendum that is guaranteed to the people of Scotland under international law as a fundamental human right, we must first restore to the Scottish Parliament the legislative competences being denied to it by the imperialist British state.

The only way the relevant legislative competences can be restored to the Scottish Parliament is by same means as was used to take them from the Scottish Parliament in the first place - assertion. England-as-Britain 'reserves' to its parliament legislative competences in areas such as the constitution simply be asserting its right to do so. So long as this assertion goes unchallenged, it keeps those legislative competences. Power is never given. Power is only taken. England-as-Britain has taken power over Scotland. The only way to get that power back is to take it. Likewise, the legislative competences in question. The only way the Scottish Parliament can get back the legislative competencies (powers) usurped by the parliament of England-as-Britain is to assert (take) them in bold defiance of the British state.

All this is just stating political reality. If it seems strange, or even shocking, this is only because our political class so rarely acknowledges political reality. Not in public, at any rate. That political reality dictates that if we want independence, we must take it. If you are not prepared to take it, then shut up about it. Because the only other way it can happen is by magic. And there is no such thing as magic!

If we want independence, we must have a Scottish Parliament which can take it on our behalf. If we want a Scottish Parliament that can take independence on our behalf, we must have a Scottish Parliament that is prepared to take that ability.

This is where the two steps become three. To taking back our parliament and taking back our nation we must add taking back our government. Obviously, this fresh step is prior to the other two. Only the Scottish Government can initiate and pursue the process by which the Scottish Parliament asserts its legislative competence in the 'reserved' area of the constitution in order that the Scottish Parliament may then pursue the process by which independence is restored. Therefore, we first require a Scottish Government that is prepared to initiate and pursue this process.

(At this juncture I'll note that it could be argued that there is a fourth and possibly even a fifth step. One might justifiably point out that in order to have a Scottish Government that will initiate and pursue the process by which the Scottish Parliament asserts its legislative competence in the 'reserved' area of the constitution, we first require at least one political party that is committed to this course of action. And maybe even that prior to that we need people so minded in order to establish that political party. But this starts to look like infinite regression. I reckon that while it is of benefit to add the Scottish Government step, no concomitant benefit is gained by adding further steps which are necessarily implied anyway by the first three steps. If we need the Scottish Government, then it surely goes without saying that we need the political party or parties which form that government.)

We, the people, must take back our government in the sense that we have to recover it from the British state which has usurped it in order that we may have a government that serves the people of Scotland rather than the British state.

We, the people, must take back our parliament in the sense that we have to recover the powers which have been claimed by the parliament of England-as-Britain in order that we may have a parliament fully equipped to serve the people of Scotland rather than the ruling elites of England-as-Britain.

We, the people, acting through our recovered government and reclaimed parliament, may then take back our nation in order that we may end an ancient and ongoing injustice which prevents us from being the nation we aspire to be.