The SNP publishes its referendum consultation paper
Alex Salmond has very conspicuously left open the possibility of staging a multi-option ballot.
By James Maxwell Published 25 January 2012 19:16
Earlier this afternoon, amid considerable domestic and international media excitement, the Scottish Government published its long-awaited referendum consultation paper. The document - Your Scotland, Your Referendum - lays-out the SNP's favoured blueprint for a vote on whether Scotland should become an independent nation-state or remain within the United Kingdom under the current devolutionary settlement.
Its key proposals are:
- That the referendum should be held in the Autumn of 2014
- That the franchise should be extended to 16 and 17 year-olds
- That those eligible to vote in the referendum should be residents of Scotland
- That the ballot should include the question, "Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?"
- That the vote should be "administered" according to the same arrangements as local and parliamentary elections in Scotland and "co-ordinated" by the Scottish Electoral Management Board
- That spending during the 16-week referendum campaign period should be limited to £250k per political party, £750k per designated campaign organisation, £50k per other registered organisations and £5k per individual and other separate bodies
Crucially, although not entirely unexpectedly, the consultation also leaves open the possibility of there being a multi-option ballot in which Scots would have the opportunity to vote for a "Devolution Max" or full-fiscal autonomy option. This will prove highly contentious. All the Unionist parties are united in the belief that the referendum should be conducted on the basis of a simple Yes/No question. They remain convinced that the nationalists, lacking a majority for full separation, want to secure maximum devolution as a "consolation prize". The Scottish government's response, as articulated by Alex Salmond in his statement to the Scottish Parliament today, is that there are many people in Scotland who don't support independence or the status-quo but would like to see the powers of Scottish Parliament significantly enhanced. As such, he argued, it is "only fair and democratic" that their views be heard.
Throughout his address, the First Minister aimed for - and more or less struck - a broadly conciliatory and statesman-like tone. Although he reaffirmed his party's commitment to independence - as well as its conviction that, following separation, the British nuclear deterrent must be removed from Scottish waters - he conceded that the UK Electoral Commission should be involved in the monitoring and regulating of the referendum campaign process, something which, up until now, the SNP had firmly opposed. He also acknowledged that the questions on the ballot paper should, in compliance with the Commission's guidelines, be presented clearly, simply and neutrally.
Another issue on which he indicated he may be willing to compromise was that of the referendum's legal status. "In order to ensure", he said, "that the referendum is effectively beyond legal challenge, we are willing to work with the UK Government and I look forward to my discussions with the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister in the coming days." This could mean the SNP is prepared to allow for greater input from London with regard to the conditions under which the referendum is held in exchange for the transfer to Holyrood of the legislative power to stage a binding plebiscite. On the other hand, it may mean nothing of the sort: Salmond is an expert at double-bluff and will certainly be hoping to wrong-foot his opponents ahead of a series of tough negotiations.
There is nothing particularly revelatory about the Scottish government's announcements today. Most of what is set out in the consultation paper echoes the kind of statements and sentiments the SNP has been making since it won its historic majority last May. It is worth noting, though, that if Salmond was really intent on staging a referendum in which the only two options were independence and the status-quo, today would have been a good day to say so.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists

















12 comments
What about the time-honoured principle that constitutional change only comes about if a two-thirds majority is obtained? Salmond seems to have conveniently ignored this.
Can Mike C point to a single example of his "time-honoured principle" in action? Should be easy enough.
16 and 17 year olds should not get a vote. It is just ridiculous and a blatant attempt to stack the odds in salmonds favour.
"16 and 17 year olds should not get a vote. It is just ridiculous and a blatant attempt to stack the odds in salmonds favour."
As opposed to the evenhanded and fair attempts by the Unionists to force an early one wuestion referendum vote in the belief that the 'No' vote will triumph and that the status quo will then continue...
Fraziel1
Surely not allowing them to vote is also an attempt to stack the odds?
Both sides are trying to secure maximum advantage. The question is: who has a mandate to drive forward constitutional change?
There is a difference in legal systems between English and Scots law, on the age of majority. In Scotland those aged 16 can marry, without parental consent.That has been true for centuries, no doubt some legal eagle can cite the relevant Act. At sixteen.they are legally fully adult, hence it follows eligible to vote. Remember those Gretna Green elopements, until the law changed in England? From a Scottish and SNP perspective, the SNP Government is using its recently created majority mandate to exercise its power to redress a restriction on those people's rights. This is the primary issue.
The secondary issue is whether this advantages or disadvantages the SNP.
If 16 and 16 year olds can't vote in any other elections they should not get a vote in this one. Salmond only wants to allow it as he knows that of the small number who will vote, nearly all of them will vote for independence.
This has nothing to do with giving them a voice or fairness and everything to do with maximising his chances of winning, and I am an SNP supporter! This ballot has to be fair and not open to question and he is already trying to fiddle it to get the result he wants.Put party politics aside and its obvious what he is doing.
Ed Miliband, Dougie Alexander and Margaret Curran all backed an amendment for 16 year olds to be allowed to vote in the AV referendum. Something a journo should probably point out to Labour when they try to make an issue of this...
16 and 17 year olds can already vote in elections to the Crofter's Commission. Long standing SNP policy. Also Liberal Democrat Policy - not that the latter means much!
Post new comment