The noble world of
Bobby Charlton is
becoming a distant memory
The Cafe 3
John MacLeod
The philosopher
who seemed a genuinely
nice guy
Humeisms
Sayings of the great man
A guide
to the new
Scottish Parliament
The final score
A last look at the seats
The also-rans
In the regional vote, the most successful of the minor parties were the Greens, who polled 87,060 votes. Next came the All-Scotland Pensioners’ Party with 33,253.
UKIP – the United Kingdom Independence Party – received 18,138 votes, ahead of the Socialist Labour Party with 16,847 and the Scottish Christian Party with 16,466. The BNP polled 15,580.
None of the small left-wing parties did well. The Scottish Socialist Party (founded by Tommy Sheridan) has seen its vote collapse from 117,000 in 2003 to 8,272 in 2011. Solidarity – the breakaway party established by Tommy Sheridan when he left the SSP – attracted a derisory 2,837. George Galloway’s Respect Party got 6,972 votes.
The combined vote of the SSP, Solidarity and Respect was 57 less than the vote for UKIP.
SR accepts no advertising or corporate backing. We depend entirely on the generosity of our individual supporters. Help SR to flourish by becoming a Friend. [click here]
The concept of Union
will not disappear. But
it needs adjustment
Robin Crichton: The aftermath (3)
Viewed from the Pyrenees, the Scottish election result clearly provides the SNP with a platform of opportunity. But it is also evident that the SNP is marred, or perhaps tarred, by two misnomers of vocabulary. The titles ‘nationalist’ and ‘independence’ were conceived nearly 80 years ago before the creation of the EU.
Nowadays ‘nationalist’, in most countries, including France, is generally taken to indicate the extreme right-wing. So it is unfortunate that the SNP, by its own nomenclature, suffers a knee-jerk connotation overseas which it does not deserve and which almost always demands clarification.
There is also a need for clarification of the concept of ‘independence’. The press has immediately started talking about the break-up of the Union. To the uninformed, ‘independence’ suggests passport control on the English border and isolationism. It is argued that Scotland is too small to go it alone. But the question that really needs to be asked is: ‘Is the UK too small for Scotland?’.
Three hundred years ago the Union permitted the creation of an empire which benefitted both countries. But times have changed. Britain is not the country it was when the Union was first defined in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our economies are now domestic not colonial. While our whole political, economic and social fabric has changed dramatically, the structure of the Union has not.
Part of the problem for England is perhaps that it has never successfully integrated with Scotland. It is against the nature of the English.
Without reform the ‘Union’, as a politico-economic system, is increasingly out of step with the times and an impediment to the future of both countries. Communication is no longer geared to horsepower or the steam engine so is it not time to review and restructure the Union to better represent the needs and aspirations of the constituent countries in the 21st century?
To remove the strictures, it is essential to redefine the structure. Scottish and English economic and socio-political priorities increasingly have a different weighting. The British prime minister has announced he will defend the ‘Union’ with every fibre in his body. Maybe he does not need to defend it, but simply develop it? Part of the problem for England is perhaps that it has never successfully integrated with Scotland. It is against the nature of the English. Wherever one travels in the world, one finds Scots well integrated into the cultures in which they live. The English tend to remain distant. There is always an ‘English colony’. This is equally true in the UK.
Scotland has never stood alone and never will. Today it is part of a ‘Union’ in Europe. Before Union with England, Scots, for centuries, shared dual nationality with the French in the Auld Alliance. The concept of ‘Union’ will not disappear – but it needs adjustment to the times. A reappraisal after three centuries is surely in the interests of all the constituent parts. Let us hope that London is not too conservatively embedded in tradition. Otherwise both countries will be the losers.
Robin Crichton is an independent producer
