Hostility to his idea voiced at the LibDem conference in Dunfermline means the First Minister will not have enough support to pass a bill at Holyrood.
Mr Salmond’s flagship policy was to have a vote on breaking up the Union late next year. But the lack of LibDem support means that, even with backing from the Greens and Independent MSP Margo MacDonald, the SNP can muster only 50 votes for a referendum bill, 15 shy of a majority.
The SNP said it planned to introduce its bill regardless, as it was a manifesto promise and they wanted the opposition parties to justify why they would deny people a say on their future.
But Labour and the Conservatives said ministers would only be wasting public money if they went ahead and urged them to be realistic.
Many MSPs believe the SNP exercise is a charade, as Mr Salmond does not want a referendum in case he loses and fatally undermines his authority.
Murdo Fraser MSP, deputy leader of the Scottish Conservatives, said it was time to “kill the bill”.
He said: “Alex Salmond dumped local income tax when he knew he would lose the vote in parliament. He should learn that lesson.
“Rather than waste time, effort and public money pursuing the minority whim of independence, the SNP should get on with what it was elected to do. The SNP should stop obsessing at the extremes of the constitutional debate.”
And Pauline McNeill, for Labour, said: “It is becoming increasingly clear that the SNP cannot win a majority for a referendum on independence.
“This issue is an unnecessary distraction when everyone in the Scottish Parliament should be working together to protect jobs and get Scotland through the recession.”
The SNP plan to issue a white paper on a referendum on St Andrew’s Day, and a bill in the spring, and had wanted a referendum in late 2010.
They only ever had an outside chance of passing a bill, as the three unionist parties oppose it. Ministers privately acknowledged defeat was likely, but kept pushing the policy to avoid splits within their own party.
However, in recent weeks tensions emerged with the LibDems on the issue, suggesting a referendum might be possible after all.
At the LibDems’ UK conference last month, Kevin Lang, the Westminster candidate for Edinburgh North and Leith, and Scottish MEP George Lyon both argued in favour of a referendum.
The party’s Holyrood leader, Tavish Scott, ordered former minister Ross Finnie to review the policy, and party members discussed the issue in a closed session yesterday. Although no vote was taken, sources said there was “no enthusiasm” for Mr Salmond’s bill.
But the question of whether the LibDems would support and help draft a referendum in the next parliament remains open, and Mr Scott could use the issue as leverage in any coalition talks.
Alistair Carmichael MP, the LibDem shadow Scottish Secretary, said: “The party overwhelmingly rejected Alex Salmond’s referendum bill.
“There was genuine and widespread anger at the rigged question put forward by the SNP.
“The Liberal Democrats are a party that will remain at the heart of the debate on Scotland’s constitutional future. But on our terms.”
A spokesperson for the constitution minister Michael Russell insisted a bill would still be issued: “The opposition parties will not be able to dodge the issue when it comes before parliament. Any party which votes against the people choosing Scotland’s future will pay a heavy electoral price.
“A majority of voters support a referendum, and we are focused on translating that popular support into a parliamentary majority next year, including being entirely open to including a ‘more powers’ question, alongside the option of independence and equality for Scotland.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article