Analysis: Where does the SNP's roadmap leave the indyref2 debate?

The purpose of the document itself is clear enough. If it symbolises anything at all, it is a clear move by the leadership away from simply putting two fingers in their ears when those asking about a ‘Plan B’ on independence and towards an attempt at a compromise. The olive branch may well work and there will always be those on Twitter and internally who decry it as unambitious. But the plan itself feels contradictory. At the very same time of ensuring a referendum must be “beyond legal challenge”, the party sets out its plans to potentially legislate for one anyway if Boris Johnson continues his plan to ‘just say no’ to Indyref2. The SNP plan is simple, legislate to hold a referendum – that solves the internal problem – and then put the focus on Johnson. If he doesn’t give consent, push for a referendum to be held under the guise of Holyrood’s perceived competence and dare the Conservatives to block the move through the Supreme Court. That would see a 'legitimate referendum’ subject to a legal challenge. Hardly ‘beyond legal challenge’, you could argue. The fact SNP figures are failing to rule out a potential ‘wildcat’ vote also can’t be ignored but nothing suggests explicit plans for an illegal vote. One only has to look at Catalonia to see the perils of that approach. But the SNP have form for this approach. On Brexit, Joanna Cherry attempted a similar legal challenge to one the SNP hope the Conservatives may well try with Scottish Independence and the merits of this Plan B are obvious. It’s rarely a good look to be blocking the democratic will of the people through the courts, and grievance politics has gained the SNP significant political capital. But should Boris Johnson take the bait, refuse a Section 30 request and fight the referendum in the courts, what happens if the Scottish Government lose? A surge of support from aggrieved Scots may increase support in the short term, but it doesn’t solve the fundamental problem of still being under the UK’s constitutional thumb. The document also kicks the discussion of how the Scottish Government delivers a referendum into the long grass. After all, it’s hard to define what the plan means by “once the pandemic is over” as a starting point for beginning the legislative process and a lengthy court battle would push any vote into the latter stages of the next parliamentary session in any case. Meanwhile, Westminster is scrambling in its attempts to halt what most UK voters now see as an inevitability. With Gordon Brown in discussions with Michael Gove on unionist strategy, their response feels a bit like a return to 2014. The plans include highlighting diversity in the UK cabinet; challenging the idea the 'woke’ view (their words, not mine) that the union is a hangover of the empire; and stick a union flag on anything paid for by the UK Government. The lack of substance in the plans perhaps highlights the malaise of unionist politics and the scale of the challenge ahead. A message from the Editor: Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers. If you haven't already, please consider supporting our trusted, fact-checked journalism by taking out a digital subscription.