THE day after Boris Johnson shamefully used the power of his office to whip up hatred against MPs, Richard Leonard stood up at First Minister’s Questions to ask Nicola Sturgeon about the question that will be used in the next independence referendum.
That’s the referendum that Leonard says Scotland doesn’t want, isn’t entitled to, and which a Labour government would block.
"In asking me about this question he now appears to be accepting that a referendum is inevitable", said Nicola Sturgeon.
Richard Leonard shook his head, disappointed that his topsy-turvy logic wasn’t easily understood by anybody apart from him.
It was a line of questioning so bizarre and incomprehensible that some MSPs could be seen popping anti-nausea tablets to combat the dizziness they felt listening to him.
READ MORE: First Minister: Unionists 'wondering how they can rig' indy process
Ironic then, that Leonard’s argument centred around how clear the question indyerf2 question would be to the electorate.
His argument (and bear with me here because it’s a struggle) is that the question and options used in 2014 – and used in polling since – somehow have lost all meaning in the intervening years.
But switching to the language of Leave and Remain – as some would wish us to – is apparently fine and dandy. No foreseeable problems with that.
The question needs to be CLEAR AND NEUTRAL, said Richard Leonard. Because if Scotland wants to LEAVE the UK then it should be forced to share a campaigning slogan with the swivel-eyed loons that we’re trying to get away from. Because nothing says CLEAR AND NEUTRAL like handcuffing the Yes (sorry, Leave) campaign to Nigel Farage and the Bad Bastards of Brexit.
Nicola Sturgeon then made what the Labour benches seemed think was an outrageous suggestion: "It seems to me that now Labour and the Tories have realised they can’t block the people of Scotland choosing their future, they are looking to see how they can rig the process." Richard Leonard was perplexed and befuddled, though granted it doesn’t take much to confuse him.
READ MORE: Michael Russell: Changing indyref2 question would ‘muddy waters’
But – but, he stuttered, "the people of Scotland chose their future five years ago!’’ Did we aye? Weird, because we’ve got a thug Prime Minister squatting in Downing Street, we’re leaving the European Union and the Government are stockpiling body bags for the deaths expected as a result of a No-Deal Brexit. Do any of you remember choosing THAT future?
Leonard persevered with his question-about-the-question question.
"What have you got to hide?" he asked the First Minister. "Or are YOU trying to RIG the process?’’ With all the exasperation of an adult pleading with a small child to stop eating the cat litter, Nicola Sturgeon gently explained the inconsistencies in Richard Leonard’s argument.
READ MORE: Richard Leonard branded an 'anti-democrat' over indyref2 claims
She said he seemed to have missed all that has changed in the last five years. Though we can’t blame him for that, given Scottish Labour have changed their leader so often during that time.
She reiterated her belief that Scotland would have a choice, and that they would choose independence.
This confused Richard Leonard even more. Why was she talking about independence AGAIN? Should she not be getting back to the day job? Why can’t the First Minister just be as CLEAR and NEUTRAL as a question that asks the people of Scotland whether they want to Leave or Remain in the UK?
It’s a puzzle for sure. Lucky for Richard Leonard he has another week to get his head around it.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel