Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee 18 December 2025
I agree. That is contradictory, not just in terms but in publicly stated positions. As stated in June 2014, the position of the leaders of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party, the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats was:
“Power lies with the Scottish people and we believe it is for the Scottish people to decide how we are governed.”
Also in 2014, the Smith commission stated:
“nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose.”
Another very strong quote states:
“Mandates come from the electorate in an election ... it should be the people of Scotland that decide when the next referendum is.”
That quote is from Anas Sarwar.
I could go on. It does not matter whether politicians—I could go back to Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Theresa May and so on—have all said similar things, there has been an acknowledgement, even among people who do not support Scottish independence, that self-determination, which was the key point in Mr Brown’s question, is an inalienable right of the people of Scotland. That being the case, being repeatedly unprepared to answer the simple question, “By which mechanism can Scotland secure a referendum on independence?” is withholding the right of self-determination.
It is a denial of democracy. A number of rhetorical flourishes are thrown into the debate, which are there to stymie, when people say that now is not the time and that things are required to be the settled will. There is a whole series of things that are absolutely and totally irrelevant to the simple question that you have asked, which is about what the mechanism is.
10:30I think that, as democrats, we all agree and would avow that the only route for significant constitutional change is through the ballot box. The question for all of us to answer, without cavilling at that, is about how that can be secured. The good news is that we have done it. When the Scottish Parliament election happened in 2011, the UK Government acknowledged that a majority in the Parliament had been elected on a manifesto commitment that a referendum should take place, and that is exactly what happened.
We have now had a number of elections since, including those for the current Scottish Parliament, in which a majority of members were elected on a manifesto commitment that there should be a referendum, yet a referendum is being blocked. We have the de facto blocking of a referendum, and we have the de jure challenge from others who oppose independence, although not from all of them—there are some observers out there who have made other points. I have read commentary from the likes of Kenny Farquharson, a Scottish columnist who did not support Scottish independence, that there should be a mechanism.
There must be a mechanism. The issue is not going to go away. I acknowledge that there are strongly held views for and against independence, and for and against the union. However, that is not the question before us. The question is, what is the democratic mechanism at the present time? At least half the Scottish electorate support Scottish independence, and a higher percentage believe that one should be able to make a decision about it.
There is a precedent, and there are different ways in which this happens. Mr Brown mentioned other parts of the world. The National Assembly of Québec has the right to decide whether there should be a referendum, but we do not. That is perfectly possible elsewhere, and it should be possible here. The longer the current situation goes on, the more unsustainable and corrosive it gets for our democratic culture, because it is a roadblock on democratic decision making and a denial of a democratic right of self-determination.