Show caption Scottish independence protest at Holyrood on 1 February. ‘Across both the question of a referendum and of independence itself, the lack of a strong domestic opposition in Scotland is extremely damaging for the union’s case.’ Photograph: Robert Perry/EPA Opinion To win another Scottish referendum, unionists must use facts, not emotion James Johnson With only a slim majority favouring independence, it’s crucial the message is right Thu 13 Feb 2020 09.00 GMT Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share via Email 7 months old

The battle for the union is once more under way. The last three polls in Scotland have shown slim majorities in favour of independence. It is possible this is a temporary reaction to the UK leaving the European Union, in the same way that independence took a fleeting poll lead in the weeks after the referendum. But with a resurgent Scottish National party and parliamentary elections next year, the UK government – as well as the Scottish Labour and Conservative parties – must start making the case for the United Kingdom again.

In doing so, appealing to the right audience is everything. The contours of the independence debate mean that there is a bloc of about 45% who are committed yes voters, and another 45% who are committed no voters. That leaves both unionists and nationalists fighting for the middle 10% of voters who can be swayed. Both sides, then, should not aim to speak to all Scots, but the relatively small number who could make an electoral difference.

There is a draft video doing the rounds in Whitehall. It is a clarion call for the UK, an Olympic-style fest of union jacks, a celebration of our shared sporting, cultural, and intellectual prowess. It is enough to leave most in Britain, and almost all Conservatives, feeling profoundly patriotic. But however much it might excite people in Westminster, such emotional appeals do not resonate with this Scottish swing group. When I ran the polling in 10 Downing Street, similar emotional calls worked very well with no voters – and can be used to stoke up enthusiasm and turnout – but did nothing to engage the group of persuadables who are so key to the coming independence debate.

These, quite simply, are not voters who are ready to believe there is a beautiful and patriotic UK that they just need to embrace – and they are certainly not likely to change their vote based on the idea. David Cameron and Andrew Cooper, the prime minister’s pollster at the time, found the same during the 2014 referendum. Emotional messages may galvanise one’s base, but do not connect with the waverers.

Instead, these voters’ views are much more hard-headed. They are more likely to be motivated by economic self-interest, and questions over the future of Scotland outside of the UK. The most effective message we tested was that Scotland’s biggest trading partner is the rest of the UK, worth more than three times as much than the EU. This was followed by arguments about oil, and the future of the Scottish currency. There is an added element of concern now, that Scotland may not be able to rejoin the EU – and almost certainly not with the same benefits and opt-outs as the United Kingdom had. There are, of course, risks: sometimes these arguments are met with the view that “things cannot get any worse”, so it is at least worth trying something new. And the risk of the accusation that you are “project fear” is significant.

That’s why the framing is so important. A pro-union campaign may be better off making the case that independence would be a step into the unknown, rather than near-certain economic catastrophe. They will also need to be careful not to be overly precise: people across the country still bring up the remain campaign’s absurdly specific claim that the average household would lose £4,300 a year. They may be able to invoke some of the 2019 Conservative messaging, that we should progress together rather than spend years fighting over constitutions. But overall, messages will need to be practical rather than emotional to cut through.

Of course, before an independence referendum, another argument will take place: whether to have one at all. Here, again, the right arguments are key. As part of a litany of opinion research in March 2017, I was dispatched to Scotland to find out whether the United Kingdom could say “no” to a request by Nicola Sturgeon for a second independence referendum. We could. That soft group in the middle, including people who leaned towards independence, believed it was “not the time” for another one.

The most compelling argument was that the Scottish government now needed to focus on schools, hospitals, and public services – all perceived as deteriorating at a concerning rate – rather than another referendum which would tear the country apart. So Theresa May rejected Nicola Sturgeon’s request. This whole process must have been particularly striking for one gentleman, who told me in a Glaswegian front room that Sturgeon had “tunnel vision”. He must have raised an eyebrow when the prime minister used this exact phrase in her speech the next day and it led the news bulletins.

But although the argument that the SNP should knuckle down and focus on Scotland’s public services rather than having another referendum remains compelling, it is difficult for a British prime minister to make it – especially a Conservative one. It can sound like overreach; as if the prime minister is telling Scots how to manage their business. This is now compounded by the fact that Boris Johnson’s popularity dips significantly north of the border. Add in Brexit, and an emboldened SNP in Westminster, and the potency of the “no second referendum” argument recedes from view.

And across both the question of a referendum and of independence itself, the lack of a strong domestic opposition in Scotland is extremely damaging for the union’s case. The anger the Scottish public feel at their government’s failure on domestic issues, as well as the upcoming Alex Salmond case, should mean they are not on track for a majority in next year’s Scottish parliamentary elections. But with no unified and strong voice holding the government to account – from either Labour or the Conservatives – they may still sail to victory.

If the SNP does get its referendum, then the battle for the union really starts. For both campaigns, the fight will be existential. The unionist side will need to know their audience. They will need to not get sucked into emotion, but play in practical and economic territory. They will need the right messenger as well as the right message. All will be to play for, and the preparation should start now.