Petition updateKeep the independence referendum fair and legal. Please enforce the rules.Petition (amended) to Propriety and Ethics Team
Sara SalyersFalkland, SCT, United Kingdom
Sep 24, 2014 — to: Propriety and Ethics Team of the Scottish Government, On September 10th, 2014 petitioners asked for a legal injunction to prevent a 'new deal' being put to the Scottish electorate within 28 days of the Scottish Independence Referendum. No injunction was obtained. That petition can be found at: https://www.change.org/p/keep-the-referendum-fair-and-legal A second petition asking for an inquiry into the legality of the 'new deal' strategy gained over 14,000 signatures. The grounds for both the petition for injunction and the call for an inquiry are summarized as follows on the petition site: "Under the Edinburgh Agreement all public bodies and parties, including the UK Govmt agreed to be bound by the provision of the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013. These state that no new material may be announced, (made available) within 28 days of the final vote on September 18th. The terms of the Edinburgh Agreement and the SIRA constrain public bodies but not individuals. Any offer of 'new powers for Scotland', however, made by any individual who does not represent a public body, (government, political party or cross-party alliance), is irrelevant and absurd since no individual has the authority to deliver on such an offer. Thus those articulating a 'new offer' must be held to be speaking on behalf of a public body with the power - or the expectation of power - to deliver. And thus the rhetoric of George Osborne MP and former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Prime Minister David Cameron, Leader of the Lib Dem Coalition Party, Nick Clegg and Leader of the Opposition Ed Milliband, and their members within the Scottish Parliament, must be held to represent the views and agreement of their parties and, in Mr Cameron's case of the UK government itself. In order to make these last minute promises of a brand new kind of union, the pro-union campaigners have broken their existing promises and undertakings given at the Edinburgh Agreement and enacted in the provisions of the Scottish Independence Referendum 2013. Are the new offers simply 'clarification of old material? What 'material' was already available in terms of offering greater devolutionary powers after a 'no' vote, prior to the 'purdah period' beginning 21st August, 2014? During the extended consultation process for drafting the referendum legislation, the option of greater devolutionary powers for the Scottish Parliament was suggested for the ballot. It was rejected. In the first week of August of 2014 a cross-party pledge – first endorsed by Scottish leaders of the pro-UK parties in June - offered extra tax and legal powers for Scotland after a 'no' vote. Talks about what these might be were to begin after the vote in September. What would these talks consist of, what new powers would be on the table? As late as August 18th, 2014, David Cameron still resisted the idea of any new powers for Scotland, despite the cross party pledge: "Westminster’s lack of commitment to any new powers for Scotland has been highlighted again today – after it emerged that the power to set Corporation Tax could be devolved to Northern Ireland in the event of a No vote but not to Scotland." http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/aug/more-powers-scotland-not-westminster-radar At this stage in the referendum campaign, therefore, representatives of the parties involved were within their rights only to say what powers future talks would cover, when they would take place and what the different positions of the various parties were liable to be. A detailed plan for a massive devolution of powers and a new constitution for Scotland had never been heard of before the first poll that put the 'Yes' vote ahead of 'No'. That this new material proved to be fraudulent immediately after the election demonstrates that it was introduced precisely as a bribe, it was campaigning; it misled the electorate and it violated the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement and the SIRA in precisely the ways which those statues were designed to prevent. Further: to make an offer to one section of the Scottish electorate that was not available to another, (by making it after the polling has begun and votes have been cast), disenfranchises those who have voted already. It changes the playing field and breaks both the spirit and the letter of the law Official recognition of this fact, via injunction, would put these new bribes into the context of the bad faith in which they have been made and thus help to mitigate any destructive impact, confusion, bewilderment etc. (People who break their given word in order to make a new promise are self-evidently untrustworthy.)" The Strategy and Constitution Directorate of the Electoral Commission replied to this petition on September 17th 2014. I understand the wording of their reply to constitute a guarded and provisional agreement with the complain. "Thank you for your email of 10 September to Scottish Government in connection with the Scottish independence referendum. Scottish Ministers value your engagement in the debate on Scotland’s future. I work in the Elections and Constitution Division of the Scottish Government and have been asked to reply. Schedule 4, para 26(2) of the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013 places restrictions on certain Scottish public bodies on publishing material related to the referendum in the 28 days before the poll. While the UK Government are not bound by the Act they committed (in signing the Edinburgh Agreement) to adhere to the same restrictions." The Division refers the signers of this petition to the Propriety and Ethics Team of the Scottish Government which has the power to act in this matter. I respectfully ask that you review the alleged breaches of the Edinburgh Act and the Scottish Independence Referendum Act. These petitioners now request that you review the grounds on which they sought an injunction and request a Judicial Review to establish the existence and extent of any wrongdoing by elected officials representative of public bodies. Further that these findings and any recommendations be made public at the earliest opportunity. I further ask that you consider this request in the light of some 16,000 signatories, most of whom responded within a 72 hour period, such was the level of public feeling. There is no implied request that any findings should bring into question the validity of the Referendum itself. Nor is this to be considered as a political campaign or the tool of any political campaign. Both in Scotland and internationally, however, the disregard for promises and agreements given, the disregard for binding law, the cynical breach of faith with the Scottish public has caused disgust and outrage. Our laws appear to be meaningless, agreements and promises mere political expediency to be discarded at all and our once admired and respected democracy is now disgraced. Herewith a sampling of comments from the 1495 people who signed: It's illegal!!! Is campaigning! Breaking the Edinburgh agreement and I've already voted  I have already voted as have many others, if they were serious about these options and not just trying to influence Scottish voters this would have been a negotiating position from the outset. (Postal ballot) The No Campaign have used dirty tricks, lies & scaremongering in there campaign. Now they are breaking the law! Please stop this & let democracy run it's course! The law is the law. Westminster should lead by example and abide by the law To make an offer now is illegal and even if it could be allowed thousands of people have already cast their postal votes. The referendum debate should be conducted on agreed terms. This breaks those terms. This latest effort is simply a bribe and not an agreed manner by which the referendum was to be debated. It is illegal. Illegal action on the Referendum by the UK Government. Illegal and undermines Scottish people and their referendum. I believe that the no campaign has broken the agreement and it is there fore illegal that they are promising new powers after the postal votes have been cast and with only 10 days to go they have broken the agreement which clearly states a 28 day period cut off prior to the vote. I am a Scot expat, and following the referendum with interest. The government wrote the rules for the referendum, they cannot break them at will because they are losing. I am ashamed that Westminster is using illegal tactics to sway the referendum vote. I thought we lived in a fair democratic society where it was unsportsmanlike to go against ones word that has now been agreed by virtue of Statute. Now this agreement is being transgressed by no other person than our own elected persons. Please stop now and let the referendum be a fair one. If there is no redress against blatant and public disregard or violation of laws and formal agreements by the elected and the powerful, then there is no safety under the law for citizens, no justice to be served by our statutes and no democracy to uphold. Yours faithfully, Sara M Brown
Copy link
WhatsApp
Facebook
Nextdoor
Email
X