Electoral Commission says proposed question asking voters if they want an independent Scotland is biased towards a yes vote
Alex Salmond has been challenged by the Electoral Commission to test his referendum question on Scottish independence with the voters or risk accusations he is rigging the poll with a slanted question.
In an unusually strong intervention, the commission said that thorough, independent scrutiny of any question in the referendum was essential to ensure it was clear, fair and neutral and to guarantee that the final result was reliable.
There were signs on Wednesday night that the Scottish government was shifting ground by agreeing to allow the commission to independently try out the question on voters, suggesting it could be reworded to make it more neutral.
The first minister announced in January that he wanted to put a "straightforward and clear" 10-word question to Scotland's 4 million voters in the autumn of 2014, asking: "Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?"
But his preferred wording was quickly challenged by a number of senior opinion pollsters and prominent election analysts, who said it was biased in favour of a "yes" vote because it asked people to agree to the proposal, yet failed to spell out to voters that it meant leaving the UK.
Salmond has already confirmed his government would allow the Electoral Commission, which was set up by the parliament in Westminster, to oversee the organisation and conduct of the referendum, but has so far refused to appoint it to scrutinise and test the question.
The first minister has deflected attacks by his opponents by insisting that the commission would have "a role" in this process, without specifying how, but now there are signs that his government could give the commission the legal role of testing the question.
"The Scottish government and the Electoral Commission are agreed on the fact that the question should be properly and independently tested," a spokeswoman for the Scottish government said. "We are happy to work with the commission to put the role that the commission will play in that on an appropriate statutory basis."
The commission's role could be crucial: in 2010, it forced the UK government to drop the original question put forward by Nick Clegg for the AV referendum on voting reform, after finding voters did not properly understand his preferred wording.
In its submission to the Scottish and UK government's separate consultations on the referendum, published onThursday, the commission said it was ultimately for politicians and the parliaments to decide which questions and how many questions would be put at the referendum.
While stopping short of insisting that it carried out that task, it said any question had to be rigorously tested first and this had to be clearly set out in the legislation setting up the referendum. Clear rules for the referendum then needed to be agreed and in place at least 28 weeks before voting day.
John McCormick, the commissioner for Scotland, said: "A clear process for agreeing the question – that includes sufficient time for it to be independently tested with voters – will be particularly important.
"The people of Scotland face an historic decision and the referendum must take place in a way that is transparent, open to scrutiny, gives voters confidence and delivers a result accepted by all."
Despite repeated complaints from opposition politicians and the UK government about confusing voters, the commission said it had no specific concerns about whether two questions could be put, including one on whether Scotland needed extra powers within the union.
However, its submission said: "Any referendum outcome needs to be an accurate reflection of what voters want. It is therefore essential that any referendum question presents the options to voters clearly, simply and neutrally, so that they can easily understand the question – and its implications – and answer it."
Speaking in Edinburgh, Michael Moore, the Scottish secretary, attempted to intensify the pressure on Salmond to agree a deal on posing just one "yes or no" question on independence in exchange for the legal authority to stage the referendum.
Claiming he found Salmond's refusal to give ground on the timing of the referendum "perplexing", Moore said: "We are making an open and generous offer. The straightforward independence referendum that has been the first minister's mission in life. But it's being met with complication, hesitation, and qualification. For whatever reasons the Scottish government is placing barriers on what should be a clear and straight road."
The commission also raised concerns that Salmond's plans to hold the vote on a Saturday could cause problems with staging and counting the vote, since modern practice went against counting votes on a Sunday for practical, security and religious reasons.
It also challenged the Scottish government's proposals to allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote, for the first time in a UK referendum or election, warning that ministers had no clear strategy for guaranteeing they would register. The whole UK voting register is being recompiled in late 2014, the commission warned, introducing a further complication for Salmond's preferred date of Saturday 18 October, 2014.
Meanwhile, an influential cross-party Westminster committee of MPs and peers has accused the UK government's national security council of complacency for failing to carry out any assessment about the impact Scotland's independence would have on the UK's defence and the future of Trident.
The committee, in a report published on Thursday said independence "could have a range of impacts from potential disputes over the response to security threats and the division of resources, to questions about basing of forces and the future of the UK's nuclear deterrent".
It quoted Oliver Letwin, the Cabinet Office minister, saying that Scotland's future was a matter for Scottish voters, and that "we have not come across any practical difficulties arising at the moment and we do not anticipate at the moment any arising".