Scottish secession deferred? Sláinte! Or “cheers,” in the Celtic tongue. Such is the pronouncement by cabinet minister Michael Gove, speaking on behalf of the British government. With national sovereignty still residing at London, the governing Conservatives have ruled out any new vote on Scotland’s independence until after the 2024 general election.

“I think it’s foolish to talk about a referendum now — we’re recovering from Covid,” Mr. Gove stated. Leader of the Scottish National Party, Nicola Sturgeon, is undeterred. Although her party did not win a majority of seats in the May elections, she argues that the plurality of pro-independence parties have the right to press for secession. If Prime Minister Boris Johnson will not concede to Holyrood’s demands, there is talk of Scotland’s government taking unilateral action.

Barring such a step in self-determination, Unionists are understandably relieved, even if relief might prove transient. SNP politicians pushed the last referendum, in 2014, on the Scots as their “once in a generation” chance at secession. Scotland adhered to the 1707 Act of Union, by 55% to 45%. With the United Kingdom battling any number of political crises — like Covid, lockdown tensions, rising deficits and debt — a respite is welcome.

This pause in the independence debate will give Scottish friends of freedom time to rally to the Union. Which is necessary and even refreshing. The cause of liberty, in Scotland no less than the rest of the United Kingdom, rests upon popular opinion. So believed one of their own, 18th-century-philosopher David Hume. How does the government rule over its citizens, he asked, a case of the few governing the many?

Ultimate political power rested with the people, Hume admitted. “The governors have nothing to support them but opinion,” he reasoned; thus, it is “on opinion only that government is founded.” If Unionists want to head off Scottish independence, therefore, change the debate. Demonstrate the benefits of membership in the United Kingdom. Point out the flaws of secession and, more particularly, the futility of renewed submission to the European Union.

One difficulty for the Unionist message is the relative weakness of Scottish voices in opposition to secession. Overtures from Westminster would receive a less than rapturous welcome. Only a rump of Scottish politicians at Westminster and Holyrood can speak on behalf of the United Kingdom. While their record is less than encouraging, with time their persuasive skills may blossom. In the interim, is there anyone whom Prime Minister Johnson can send as an emissary?

Scotland’s former Conservative leader Ruth Davidson is the choice of journalist Daniel Johnson (erstwhile columnist of the Sun). “The idea of bringing her into the Cabinet in a new post of Constitutional Secretary may well have merit,” he writes. Ms. Davidson is endowed with an optimistic personality. She enjoyed wide popular support — doubling the Tory seats (to 31) in the legislative assembly — before stepping away from politics to raise a family.

That she campaigned for the Remain camp in the 2016 EU Referendum is seen as no impediment. Boris Johnson would win plaudits by placing the cause of Scotland remaining within the United Kingdom on such a broad basis. Brexiteers, if not BoJo, may want to think twice about making her the front woman for Union. If the argument is that the Scots can thrive within the UK, that the answer is not more government but less, and that individual initiative and entrepreneurship can carry Scotland to success, is Ms. Davidson’s support for “social democracy” the answer?

On that score, neither is Boris Johnson the ideal candidate to make the case for the benefits of “maximal freedom and limited government.” One problem at a time, please.

Others are rallying to the call of independence “within” the Union, by restricting the range of government intervention. United Kingdom patriots have given too much credence to Scotland’s leftward politicians, needlessly ceding the field to their political opponents. Happily, this pessimism is shifting. Both the Reform and the Reclaim parties are soliciting Scottish candidates and votes. Contesting seats in the local elections last May was only a test run for the next national election.

Making the case that Scottish liberties are secured through the United Kingdom, and not the European Union, would encourage more Scots to stand up to Ms. Sturgeon. Time is on the side of the Union, as the UK Government signals any future referendum on Scotland would come later rather than sooner. So the SNP will be forced to defend the logic of their secessionist screed. Independence from the Union but answerable to Brussels? And who speaks out for the liberties of the Scottish people themselves?

________

BrexitDiarist@gmail.com