Today’s banner:
North-west of Skye
by Islay McLeod
Get SR free in your inbox twice a week
Click here
Dripping wet in Copenhagen
Donald Murray’s recent potted history of Finland and its Baltic neighbours (16 August) is interesting but little to do with the reason I believe Scotland shares important similarities with the Nordic region.
When asked by non-Scottish friends to define the difference between England and Scotland I usually point to what might be called social democratic tendencies north of the border which seem to be absent south of Gretna. By this I mean government policy towards caring for the less able and less fortunate members of society. Add to this that all other Nordic countries (with the exception of Sweden) have similar populations, are less mobile and on the fringes of Europe.
Nordic citizens pay more tax, have lousy weather, yet OECD consistently rates them as amongst the world’s happiest places. Is this not something to aspire to in Scotland? I’m not sure whether independence, devo max or compulsory Buddhism is the key but it seems an aspiration devoutly to be wished.
Bill Fraser
Is it not interesting that the Scottish Gnats (they say ‘Bitter Together’, I say ‘Scottish Gnats’) get so upset when anyone uses the word ‘separate’ or its derivatives to describe their aspiration (see, e.g., Gordon Hay)? What is that they want other than to separate Scotland from England, Wales and Northern Ireland (but especially from England)? Do they not want Scotland to be a country that is separate from England? I should have thought that that is precisely what they say they want.
Ah, but…What they want is ‘independence’ – of a kind that entails continuing dependence. They want Scotland to continue to use sterling as its currency and to depend on the Bank of England as lender of last resort. They want Scotland to ‘share’ British embassies with the rest of the UK. That’s a funny kind of independence. But, come to think of it, I suppose it’s not very separate, either.
Jill Stephenson
In his latest highly entertaining article Kenneth Roy refers to ‘the deep need of the Scots for self-determination’. I take it that means self-government, otherwise independence. The statistics suggest that an increasing number of Scots do feel this need.
Speculating, as I have been, as to the reason for it, I have had another glance at the American Declaration of Independence. As every schoolboy knows, it begins: ‘When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation’.
Then, after the familiar passage about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it goes on to make this disclaimer: ‘Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient causes’. And there follows a detailed recital of the alleged abuses which the American people have suffered at the hands of the British government, which they say justifies their declaration of independence.
Since I am not aware of our having suffered any similar abuse, I wonder whether anyone will feel impelled to make our own declaration as to the reason why so many Scots feel this ‘
deep need for self-determination’. Or, has someone done it, and I missed it?
Iain Macmillan
The Cafe is our readers’ forum. Send your contribution to islay@scottishreview.net
