The view from County Antrim
Scotland’s date with destiny beckons. But who will prevail?
As party political leaders from Westminster remind us about their emotional ties with Scotland, it is equally important to highlight Scotland's special relationship, current and historical, with Ireland north and south.
A variety of elected unionist members of Northern Ireland’s assembly have suggested that Scottish people (our “kith and kin”) should vote No on next Thursday. The common thread of their case was that they oppose the break-up of the union and regard Scottish nationalism as inward-looking.
The Scots are our celtic siblings. We have
switched populations on countless occasions throughout our history. These repeated population
movements substantially pre-date and also post-date the seventeenth century
Plantation of Ulster.
A variety of elected unionist members of Northern Ireland’s assembly have suggested that Scottish people (our “kith and kin”) should vote No on next Thursday. The common thread of their case was that they oppose the break-up of the union and regard Scottish nationalism as inward-looking.
On Saturday September 13, Orangemen from Northern Ireland
will gather on Edinburgh to support “brethren” from Scottish lodges in a march whose
objective is to encourage the electorate to vote No.
There are reports, however, that the Better
Together campaign regards the Orange Order’s marching support as unhelpful to
its cause (better apart perhaps?).
Orangemen disagree.
 |
| Orange Order march Scotland (STV photo) |
On September 7 an opinion poll in the Sunday Times (You
Gov) revealed a majority favouring independence. Since the announcement of the referendum a
couple of years ago, every poll has forecast a victory for the No side. Being the first poll to forecast a Yes
outcome, the You Gov prediction has shocked the political establishment.
This observer is convinced that the Scottish electorate
are treating the referendum with great responsibility and are engaging in a rational
and fact-based debate.
They are primarily
concerned about what is best for Scotland and its future governance, about the
Scottish economy, and about the policies and practice of Governance over recent
years from Westminster.
Better Together
After many months of riding high in the polls, there are
signs of surprise and disappointment becoming evident among people in the No
camp. They consider that the main party
of Government, the Conservatives, has hidden behind the Labour Party allowing
them to lead in making the pro-union case.
The complaint is that the PM has substantially disengaged
from the debate (until it is too late) and has failed to advocate an effective
case for Scotland remaining dependent. The
PM himself has stated that his Government has made no plans for the prospect of
an independent Scotland.
Some regard
this as complacent.
Others explain the relatively
low-profile tactics as his acceptance that when he has entered the debate,
voters flock to the Yes camp.
An example that is cited is the Prime Minister’s decision
to exclude a “devo max” option from the ballot paper. A respected journalist writes:-
“Had it been offered as
a choice, I am certain there would have been a thumping majority for devo
max.....If Scotland votes to terminate the union, a generation of Westminster
politicians will have to reflect on why there were so slow to see it
coming....If Scotland gives the union another chance, a constitutional reconfiguration
will have to be pursued...The very concept of a United Kingdom has never before
faced such a test.[1]
With a renewed sense of mission, the leaders of the
Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democratic parties sacrificed Prime Ministers
Questions on 10 September travelling to Scotland in a concerted bid to bolster
a No vote. In some quarters, scepticism surfaces
about Westminster politicians’ promises made before the 2010 General Election.
Dead heat
Given the closeness of the referendum (in both senses), the
question to consider is why is Scotland flirting with a Yes vote? Here are three possible reasons.
1.
Disenfranchisement
Scots draw confidence from the performance of its devolved administration. It appears to work constructively, by and large, delivering on its mandate for the electorate.
In contrast, many in Scotland feel alienated from the policies and decision-making of the national Government in Westminster.
They see the problem as democratic legitimacy.
In contrast, many in Scotland feel alienated from the policies and decision-making of the national Government in Westminster.
They see the problem as democratic legitimacy.
This process is not new – it began about 35 years
ago.
The administrations led by Margaret
Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron have
progressively displeased opinion in Scotland.
The Scots consider that policies made in Westminster have developed without
a Scottish mandate.
Legitimacy is a
major issue. There is currently only one
Conservative MP in Scotland.
Scots have unfond memories, for example, of the trialling
of the universally unpopular Poll Tax in their country before it was rolled out
in Wales and England.
Likewise they strongly
disagreed with the decision to go to war in Iraq in pursuit of non-existent weapons
of mass destruction. They disapprove of
nuclear weapons and oppose the continued basing of the nuclear submarines armed
with Trident missiles at Faslane naval base on the River Clyde.
Monetarist economic policies (begun in 1979 by a Conservative
Government and continued by Labour from 1997) have promoted the development of
the British economy in a way that is inimical to egalitarianism; it has
contributed to the collapse of the financial system; and the consequent regime
of public service austerity have been implemented with no popular support in
Scotland.
2.
North
South Divide
Scottish electors feel disempowered by the economic model
that has allowed the divide between those who have and those who have not to
widen enormously.
The Scots see no benefit to them in “cashing out” public
utilities[2] to promote private
gain. This business model for the UK economy
has operated for over three and a half decades.
Scots would prefer a more socially democratic model as used successfully
in places such as Scandinavia.
They look to Norway, for example, where the proceeds of
oil production help pay for essentials such as child-care costs. In contrast with existing governance
arrangements, this practice promotes family life and makes it easier for
mothers to return to productive employment.
In general terms, people in Scotland are unhappy to
countenance that an oil producing country like theirs should be continuing to
experience poverty and poor health.
They
want to protect their public services including education and their top class
universities.
3.
Europe
Scotland sees its future firmly as part of Europe.
The Government in Westminster plans to have an in/out
referendum after the next General Election.
If polling evidence is accurate and Britain votes to leave the EU, the
Scots do not want a prospective UK majority to foist another unpopular decision
on their country. They want Scotland to
be outward looking and playing an important role at the heart of Europe and in
the international community.
The political debate among in the UK in the lead-up to
joining the European Economic Community, the EEC or Common Market, on 1 January
1973 was robust, fiercely contested and argued.
This was intensified before the historic first UK-wide referendum, and
which took place in June 1975. It was
about whether or not to stay in the EEC.
Both the Labour and Conservative parties were split internally. But the lively and healthy quality of debate
ensured that the issues were teased out fully.
The same thing has been happening in Scotland this year.
For this very reason, Scotland will make the
correct decision.
Outcome on 19 September
If the referendum reflects the opinion polls, the margin
of victory will be small with a large consequent minority. If only for that reason, the real debate
about Scotland’s dependence or sovereignty will begin on and after 19 September.
The closer the outcome, the more intense will
be the subsequent talks.
Whatever choice the people make, the world will not
end.
Scotland will still be Scotland the
brave. It will continue to have a border
and be friendly with England.
It it will still be the home of golf, it will still have
heather, single malt whisky, the Edinburgh Festival, shinty, caber tossing, Scots
porridge oats, midges, shortbread biscuits, the Gaelic language, Irn Bru, the
Lough Ness monster, Tam o‘Shanter hats, beautiful islands loughs and mountains,
romantic castles, kilts, bagpipes, great museums and art galleries, sword
dancing, the Proclaimers, and it will still have black gold.
The result will depend on what people decide when
standing on their own in the polling booth next Thursday.
Whatever the people decide, a significant message will
reverberate through Westminster. And
Scotland will have done everybody a favour by focussing constructive debate on
our future governance.
©Michael
McSorley 2014
POSTSCRIPT
SOME POST REFERENDUM THOUGHTS:-
The Scots have had a peaceful and constructive debate about independence for the last two years.
The referendum was all about governance and devolution.
The leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth Davidson said on election night TV that the status quo would be "smashed" because of the referendum, whatever the result.
The day after the result, the PM summoned the First Ministers of Wales and NI to talks; he has been talking about devolution for English regions, and has promised major changes to powers that will be devolved to Scotland.
So things are going to change - a lot - because of the will of the people.
There are lessons in all of this for Northern Ireland's politicians - but at least there is a new context for that review of the NI system to take place.
With 7 grandchildren and 3 children + spouses living working, rearing families in Scotland (never mind our cousins and a nephew), I want the best for our family.
It may be that many of the 1.6 million yes voters are sceptical about the Westminster system's ability to deliver on election promises based on events like the Iraq war intervention, the collapse of the financial system, the UK threatening to pull out of Europe.
There is big pressure in England to get out of the EU; the Scots want to stay in. This remains a big issue - Scots do not want a UK majority to foist another unpopular decision on their country.
People can feel proud of the considered and exemplary way that the Scots conducted themselves during the campaign and took the responsibility seriously. Many others could learn from this model exercise in democracy and the restoration of legitimacy to politics in the UK.
The No campaign in Scotland was always expected to win. Only one poll predicted otherwise; and latterly that particular polling organisation predicted No twice as we got closer to voting day.
In fact that same very respected polling company (You Gov) was the first after polling booths closed to predict the correct result (and did so within one percentage point).
The result of the referendum, for that same reason, was not a surprise to me or to most people. The only surprise was that as many as 45% of Scots voted Yes, faced with concerted opposition from the political and business establishment. Scotland's biggest city surprised everybody as one of the regions that voted Yes.
Such a large majority coupled with the enormous voter turn-out says an awful lot about how responsibly the Scots treated this opportunity to deal with the constitutional status of their country.
At a time when apathy has become the norm in elections here in the UK (caused by issues like expenses scandals of Westminster MPs, broken promises, failure to foresee the financial crash and its UK consequences etc), the referendum in Scotland and the attitude of the Scots has re-energised politics not just in Scotland but across Great Britain.
English cities and regions + Wales are demanding more local control over their affairs - decentralisation. This is all in the interests of legitimacy and better governance.
The Scots have done everybody in the UK an enormous favour.
This Scottish vote was a fact-based debate with none of the emotional wrangling that passes for debate in this part of the UK.
To persuade Scots to vote No, the Conservatives through the PM himself made a joint "vow" (their word) with the opposition Labour Party, a "desperate" last bid attempt. The promise was to fast-track and maximise devolution powers to Scotland. This pledge influenced many don't knows to vote No.
In the aftermath of the event the Conservatives are, however, already back-tracking. Michael Gove has found a mechanism which, as the Times explains, will block the promised devolution to Scotland.
Some would call this treachery.
Scotland will be arguing that the PM made a vow. He will have to stand by his pledge to prove his honour.
This is the big consequence of the referendum - and all achieved peacefully in the interests of improving democracy and governance.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-launches-biggest-ever-shakeup-in-the-constitution-30601436.html
Three days after the referendum took place, the Observer has devoted 14 pages of reporting to the outcome - all sorts of commentators, people from all sides of the debate, all constructive.
As one person said, this process has had little to do with nationalism - rather it is about a fairer society and about self-determination.
It is also clear from many of the commentators that there remains huge distrust for the establishment and the promises made to gain the No vote.
Ordinary people do not think that the politicians will deliver on the promises made in the lead up to the vote.
There is already evidence of that happening, listening to what Conservative Party leaders are saying. Deceit is not a good way to run the UK.
As for Scotland not being allowed to join the EU, that is an incorrect assertion.
Whereas some politicians who campaigned for No said that they will be denied entry, the fact is that there is no legal or constitutional reason to reject an application from a sovereign Scotland. EU officials have stated this clearly.
Had Yes prevailed, those nihilists may have attempted to block a Scottish application, delaying accession, but there would be no sustainable grounds to keep them outside the union. Why should there be?
There will be a by-election taking place in Clacton, England soon.
Polls predict that the right wing UKIP will oust the Conservatives.
Should that happen, now that we are getting close to a General Election throughout the UK, the political establishment will be spooked and is likely to react with anti-EU rhetoric being stepped up - among other things which will be likely to include rowing back from the vow to the Scots.
Interesting times.
POSTSCRIPT
SOME POST REFERENDUM THOUGHTS:-
The Scots have had a peaceful and constructive debate about independence for the last two years.
The referendum was all about governance and devolution.
The leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth Davidson said on election night TV that the status quo would be "smashed" because of the referendum, whatever the result.
The day after the result, the PM summoned the First Ministers of Wales and NI to talks; he has been talking about devolution for English regions, and has promised major changes to powers that will be devolved to Scotland.
So things are going to change - a lot - because of the will of the people.
There are lessons in all of this for Northern Ireland's politicians - but at least there is a new context for that review of the NI system to take place.
With 7 grandchildren and 3 children + spouses living working, rearing families in Scotland (never mind our cousins and a nephew), I want the best for our family.
It may be that many of the 1.6 million yes voters are sceptical about the Westminster system's ability to deliver on election promises based on events like the Iraq war intervention, the collapse of the financial system, the UK threatening to pull out of Europe.
There is big pressure in England to get out of the EU; the Scots want to stay in. This remains a big issue - Scots do not want a UK majority to foist another unpopular decision on their country.
People can feel proud of the considered and exemplary way that the Scots conducted themselves during the campaign and took the responsibility seriously. Many others could learn from this model exercise in democracy and the restoration of legitimacy to politics in the UK.
The No campaign in Scotland was always expected to win. Only one poll predicted otherwise; and latterly that particular polling organisation predicted No twice as we got closer to voting day.
In fact that same very respected polling company (You Gov) was the first after polling booths closed to predict the correct result (and did so within one percentage point).
The result of the referendum, for that same reason, was not a surprise to me or to most people. The only surprise was that as many as 45% of Scots voted Yes, faced with concerted opposition from the political and business establishment. Scotland's biggest city surprised everybody as one of the regions that voted Yes.
Such a large majority coupled with the enormous voter turn-out says an awful lot about how responsibly the Scots treated this opportunity to deal with the constitutional status of their country.
At a time when apathy has become the norm in elections here in the UK (caused by issues like expenses scandals of Westminster MPs, broken promises, failure to foresee the financial crash and its UK consequences etc), the referendum in Scotland and the attitude of the Scots has re-energised politics not just in Scotland but across Great Britain.
English cities and regions + Wales are demanding more local control over their affairs - decentralisation. This is all in the interests of legitimacy and better governance.
The Scots have done everybody in the UK an enormous favour.
This Scottish vote was a fact-based debate with none of the emotional wrangling that passes for debate in this part of the UK.
To persuade Scots to vote No, the Conservatives through the PM himself made a joint "vow" (their word) with the opposition Labour Party, a "desperate" last bid attempt. The promise was to fast-track and maximise devolution powers to Scotland. This pledge influenced many don't knows to vote No.
In the aftermath of the event the Conservatives are, however, already back-tracking. Michael Gove has found a mechanism which, as the Times explains, will block the promised devolution to Scotland.
Some would call this treachery.
Scotland will be arguing that the PM made a vow. He will have to stand by his pledge to prove his honour.
This is the big consequence of the referendum - and all achieved peacefully in the interests of improving democracy and governance.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-launches-biggest-ever-shakeup-in-the-constitution-30601436.html
Three days after the referendum took place, the Observer has devoted 14 pages of reporting to the outcome - all sorts of commentators, people from all sides of the debate, all constructive.
As one person said, this process has had little to do with nationalism - rather it is about a fairer society and about self-determination.
It is also clear from many of the commentators that there remains huge distrust for the establishment and the promises made to gain the No vote.
Ordinary people do not think that the politicians will deliver on the promises made in the lead up to the vote.
There is already evidence of that happening, listening to what Conservative Party leaders are saying. Deceit is not a good way to run the UK.
As for Scotland not being allowed to join the EU, that is an incorrect assertion.
Whereas some politicians who campaigned for No said that they will be denied entry, the fact is that there is no legal or constitutional reason to reject an application from a sovereign Scotland. EU officials have stated this clearly.
Had Yes prevailed, those nihilists may have attempted to block a Scottish application, delaying accession, but there would be no sustainable grounds to keep them outside the union. Why should there be?
There will be a by-election taking place in Clacton, England soon.
Polls predict that the right wing UKIP will oust the Conservatives.
Should that happen, now that we are getting close to a General Election throughout the UK, the political establishment will be spooked and is likely to react with anti-EU rhetoric being stepped up - among other things which will be likely to include rowing back from the vow to the Scots.
Interesting times.
