Scotland the brave

I have spent the last few days in Scotland, where on Wednesday First Minister Alex Salmond announced the date of the independence referendum; 18^th September 2014.   The main reaction seems to have been a certain resignation and weariness at the idea of a 546 day campaign, which some seem to feel has been cynically designed by the SNP to bore those least fervent for separation  into a state of torpor. 

As a visitor, Scotland certainly does not appear to be a country bursting with revolutionary fervour.  Admittedly the friends I spoke to may not be typical Scottish voters- as business people they are mainly concerned that they will still have access to the much bigger and more lucrative markets of England and the rest of Europe if the accident of independence should come to pass. It underlines how important it is for the SNP to be able to confirm that an independent Scotland would lose none of its economic leverage and would be, for example, a member of the EU.

Fortunately, the question of whether Scotland should be independent or not is not one in which I will have a say, which is lucky because if I was Scottish and living in Scotland, I am really not sure how I would vote.

As a local government man, I have great sympathy for any people wanting to make their own decisions locally.  In the case of Scotland, the political culture has always been distinctive and, if anything, has grown apart from the rest of the UK over recent years.  The Conservative Party, which has spent most of the last hundred years governing the UK, now barely exists in Scotland.  According to one theory, the long, slow death of Toryism in Scotland dates back to the formal merger of the Scottish Unionist party with the Conservative Party in 1965, which is seen as the moment when Scottish Conservatism lost its soul and became simply a branch of a tree with its roots in London.  It was an historic mistake, which the party might well want to dwell upon before it reacts to criticism from Conservative local government leaders on the subject of cuts.

One Scottish friend has a theory that David Cameron will deliberately undermine the unionist campaign because he realises that getting a Conservative majority in a UK without Scotland will be a lot easier than it is now.   Perhaps, but to me that under estimates the visceral adherence to the union that lurks in the hearts of many Tories, and also ignores the fact that Cameron himself is of Scottish descent.   For Machiavellians, you might equally argue that it would be in the interests of the SNP to undermine their own campaign, because who in an independent Scotland would need the SNP?

Indeed there is also a strong thread of Unionism in Scottish politics. Lots of Scots describe themselves as being British, which you might argue is simply a fact of geography for mainland Scots – they won’t ceased to live in Britain just be leaving the UK – but actually underlines the fact that in three hundred years of political union and four hundred years of a shared monarchy, the Scots, the English and the Welsh have been through a lot together.    

It is disappointing that in a country which should have a strong grip on the importance of devolution and subsidiarity, the draft constitution currently circulating does not have more to say about the importance of local government to a strong, independent Scotland.  Bearing in mind that the adoption of a final constitution will have to wait until independence is declared,  I suspect that if I was Scottish that would weigh heavily upon me.  Would I be voting for a transfer of some last remaining powers from Westminster to Holyrood and no further?

Scottish practicality might yet be the factor that saves the union.  As another friend put it to me, the scale of what would need to be done in order to set up an independent Scotland are an enormous challenge and have not really been thought through.  There would need to be a cast-iron case for doing it as far as many Scots are concerned, not just a romantic ideal of an independent nation. At this moment in the history, with so many ifs and buts to be resolved around the economy, the future of public services, security and Scotland’s role in the greater Europe,  this may be the time when Scots say that in regard to independence we’ll get back to you later on that question.

Ultimately the union potentially means much more to Scotland than it does to England. There is no Union Street in central London, but there is one in Aberdeen, which I joked with a friend would have to be renamed Alex Salmond Boulevard  in the event of independence, and there is also one in Glasgow,  which it easier to imagine being reborn as Donald Dewar Street.   A real son of Glasgow. Dewar’s image seems to be everywhere in that city, which, it must be remembered represents about half the nation’s population.  It might be significant in the end that Donald Dewar, currently regarded at least in Glasgow as the true father of the nation, apparently always opposed independence.