SNP members have backed an independence strategy based on the party winning a majority of seats at the next General Election.
The motion jointly proposed by First Minister Humza Yousaf and SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn originally set out that if the party wins the "most seats" at a General Election, the Scottish Government would be “empowered to begin immediate negotiations with the UK Government to give democratic effect to Scotland becoming an independent country”.
However, amendments for that to be changed to a "majority of seats" for the SNP were subsequently backed by both Yousaf and Flynn.
Other key amendments which were passed included Joanna Cherry's call for a constitutional convention "constituted by the MPs elected to Westminster, MSPs and representatives of civic Scotland".
Policy convener Tony Giugliano's amendment calling for a new Scotland-wide Yes campaign to be established by the end of the year was also agreed upon by members.
Opening the debate, Yousaf said Scotland was told that staying in the UK would mean stability – but the reality was the UK was a country where prime ministers' terms of office were measured not in years or months, but in the “longevity of a lettuce”.
“It is precisely because we have the winning arguments that Westminster is running scared and denying democracy," he said.
But he went on: “However, being honest, the fact is we have hit a Westminster block, so if they are going to deny us a referendum then let us use the next General Election to put independence front and centre.
“Because be in no doubt, this party will never shy away from or abandon our fight for Scotland’s independence.”
Yousaf said he understood why some were proposing setting a bar of 50% plus one of the vote as a mandate for independence.
But he was greeted with applause when he added: “Let’s not fall into the trap of setting ourselves a bar that no other party sets itself to win.”
He went on: “Don’t get me wrong, if the Westminster parties want to test for popular support the proposition of independence, let’s do it by a referendum – if they give us the powers, I’ll hold a referendum tomorrow.
“But in an election, a majority of seats is a victory, plain and simple.”
Jim Finlayson, of the Deeside and Upper Donside Branch, which proposed the amendment for a “majority” of seats, said it would remove all ambiguity.
He said a General Election was determined on the number of seats won, not the number of votes cast.
“I would also remind everybody here ... until March 2000, the SNP’s policy always was that if we win a majority of seats in Scotland at a UK General Election, then that would be a mandate to commence negotiations on Scottish independence,” he added.
“When we fought the 1992 UK General Election, our slogan was 'free by 93' and I didn’t hear a single voice within the party saying a majority of seats in that election would not be considered as a mandate.”
But the afternoon saw debate over what was the best way forward, with some arguing not enough support for independence had yet been secured for such as move.
An amendment calling for a majority of votes for pro-independence parties to be used, instead of a “majority of seats”, had been submitted by SNP MP Joanna Cherry, but she did not take it forward.
However, Andy Oliver, from Angus North branch, spoke in favour of this proposal, saying the SNP did not “own independence” and that there were other parties and other people who will support independence but may not vote for the party.
“We should not prevent them from casting a vote for Scotland in an election or a referendum, and the way to do that is quite clear – by accepting amendment F it allows all of the parties supporting independence to be able to fully stand with us in our call for independence for Scotland.”
SNP MP Pete Wishart put forward a proposal for winning a majority of votes for the SNP to be the basis for independence negotiations.
“The fact that support for independence significantly outstrips support for this party is our biggest problem, but also our best salvation,” he said.
“We get this party back on the road, back to its winning ways, when we close that gap – we close that gap by persuading, listening, campaigning, resetting our vision, doing the hard work.
“But we also get there by presenting a credible and realistic route to get there.”
