This piece, which appeared in the Sunday National yesterday, looks back at the signing of the Edinburgh Agreement, the document which gave permission for the Scottish Parliament to hold a referendum on independence. The anniversary comes at an interesting moment as the UK Supreme Court in London will hear arguments next week over whether the current Scottish Parliament can hold a new referendum,
Think back to October 15, 2012, ten years ago this month. Headline news was the signing of the Edinburgh Agreement. This historic treaty was the culmination of a negotation that took several years and had many twists and turns. In the end, both governments signed up to an accord based on democratic values.
Prime Minister David Cameron and the then Scottish Secretary Michael Moore arrived to blue skies and autumn sunshine to meet First Minister Alex Salmond and his deputy Nicola Sturgeon at St Andrew House in Edinburgh for the ceremony.
At a press conference afterwards, Sturgeon and Salmond stood side by side a lecterns marked with the St Andrews Cross. Salmond waved the document at the assembled journalists, saying::
"It paves the way for the most important decision our country of Scotland has made in several hundred years.”
A video from the day shows a confident Cameron, with Edinburgh’s North Bridge in the background. An Ipsos Mori poll that week showed support for independence at 28%.
An end to uncertainty - a single question
Asked what he had got in return for giving Salmond control of both the date and who could vote in the poll, Cameron replied:
"What we have is what I always wanted, which is one single question, not two questions, not devo max, a very simple single question that has to be put before the end of 2014, so we end the uncertainty.”
Ironically, Salmond and Sturgeon did not want a third question either. But saying they were prepared to accept one, a proposal initially made by Scottish Labour, opened up a negotiating strategy for the SNP. From Cameron’s point of view, giving in gracefully was part of his pitch to Scotland - that the country was being treated with respect.
A screeching U-turn from Scottish Labour - “Bring it on”
By that point, pressure for a referendum on Scottish independence had been building since at least 2007, when for the first time the SNP became the largest party at Holyrood, leading a minority administration.
In 2008, Labour leader Wendy Alexander took the Scottish party and the country by surprise when on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, with no warning, she declared: “Bring it on”.
The Sunday Times report the weekend after read:
Mike Elrick thought he knew all about blood, sweat and tears as he sat slumped in Holyrood Park after completing last Sunday's Great Edinburgh Run. Then he switched on his mobile phone.
As it started to beep like the heart monitor of a patient going into cardiac arrest, he was given a painful reminder of what it is to be Wendy Alexander's principal policy adviser.
Unknown to him, his boss had just gone on live television and announced she was scrapping 100 years of Labour unionist tradition by committing the party to support for a referendum on Scottish independence. In three short words - "bring it on" - she had, unilaterally, changed the Scottish political landscape.
Later, Alexander clarified her position, saying she supported a referendum on Scottish independence if it also had a question on more powers for Holyrood.
Alexander believed a ‘No” vote would leave the SNP rudderless and lead to Labour regaining power in Scotland. She was certain that the middle option of more powers would win the ballot, and felt that support was rising for independence so there was no point in waiting.
But Scotland’s Unionist establishment was furious. Alexander was immediately denounced for “misjudgement and political naivety”. Leaks - possibly from within the Labour party machine - led to claims that donations had not been properly declared. Alexander resigned just a month later.
"We will not stand in the way of a referendum on independence” - Cameron and Clegg
The SNP went into the May 2011 Scottish election with the top line on the manifesto being a promise to legislate for a referendum on independence. The balance of support was such that they took 52 constituency seats - 10 fewer than they were to win in 2021. But they still were able to gain 16 addiitonal members on the regional lists. The upshot was that the SNP ended up with an overall majority of 69 out of 129 members in a system that was designed to make that all but impossible.
The Conservative/ Liberal coaltion in charge at Westminster decided to bow to the inevitable. In January 2012, they published “Scotland's Constitutional Future”. In it, Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg wrote: "We will not stand in the way of a referendum on independence: the future of Scotland's place within the United Kingdom is for people in Scotland to vote on."
A treaty or a contract?
Legal opinion was divided about the legal standing of an agreement beteen two UK institutions. Was it a treaty or a contract or something in between? Previous post-colonial treaties had been made with governments that were regarded as states-in-waiting. The Edinburgh Agreement did not fit the bill as a contract either.
Professor of Constitutional Law Christine Bell wrote:
“Paradoxically, the Agreement may have been presented so formally precisely because it had no binding legal status.”
The signing at St Andrews House was so ceremoinal for a reason. It was essentially the start of a political campaign. Both parties had an interest in being seen to uphold democratic values and the rule of law, in the eyes of their own citizens, and of the world. The SNP wanted to present themselves as a credible national government; the UK government’s case was that Scotland was a valued partner in a union of equals.