For our current list of Friends
Get SR free in your inbox twice a week
Click here
The banner
White hell
Photograph by
Islay McLeod
Douglas Alexander and Alan Bissett
I’d read Douglas Alexander’s speech (12 March) given at the University of Edinburgh with considerable interest as his words had been praised in some sections of the nationalist blogosphere. Clearly they’d seen his call for a national convention as a step in the right direction. It seemed to me that that in referring to a post referendum landscape – No having been the verdict – Alexander had neatly defined what was in front of us:
An opportunity to start a different journey – not one defined by difference or grievance but possibility, potential and hope.
Alan Bissett (14 March) begs to disagree and coming from the hairy-shirted wing of the Yes camp proclaims that not only are Alexander and his party supporters of entrepreneurs/capitalists/the bedroom tax/public sector cuts but are open to ‘reverse devolution’ and the abolition of the Barnett formula. If we refuse to vote Yes in 2014 we poor Scots are going to be left at the mercy of the dastardly unionists. To some that may be preferable to the retreat of Scotland further into a big state laager where our GDP is largely consumed by an ever increasing public sector, all goodies and services are ‘free’ and the apparently bottomless oil well will finance the lot, forever and ever and ever…amen.
Fortunately I think neither of Bisset’s disastrous scenarios is on the political agenda. Not a Yes vote, with Bisset’s fantastic vision of a land of milk and honey, or a 21st-century version of Cumberland’s post-Culloden sweep through our Scottish social institutions and values. It seems to me that adult political thinking in Scotland should indeed be focused on the prospect of a nationalist defeat in 2014. Why do I say this?
On the statistical front the SNP have never polled above 18%- 22% in any Westminster general election where the voter turnout has ranged between the low 60s and 70s. In the by-election for the Westminster seat of Inverclyde, which took place a bare few weeks after the SNP victory in the elections for the Scottish Parliament, Labour crushed the nationalists with a majority of almost 6,000 votes despite a swing against them of 8.9%. This on a turnout of around 45%, not far short of that which returned Alex Salmond’s troops to office in Holyrood.
Where exactly, on a predicted voter turnout in the high 70s, does our dear leader believe that his victorious Yes votes are going to come from? Further to that, the opinion polls, sometimes wrong I have to say, consistently put the support for a Yes vote at 30% or lower. It’s all about the numbers.
Beyond the bald statistical analysis there is another very important factor. The reality is that the leadership of all of the parties in Scotland are in favour of expanding the powers of the Scottish Parliament. I’ve yet to come across an elected legislative body which was not for the expansion of its powers. The example of the conflict between the powers of the American state and federal governments springs to mind as does that of Barbara Castle, a virulent critic of the EEC while in government, but on election as MEP an advocate for more powers for that parliament.
It is inconceivable to me that the real politique of party consensus in Scotland will lead to anything other than more devolution of powers. Did the Scottish Conservatives not come close to electing a leader in Murdo Fraser who not only wanted to change the identity of his party but also move for a much larger transfer of powers to Holyrood? I strongly suspect that some of my Nat friends in the pinstripe wing of their party would settle for that scenario. The only reason that the devo-max/plus/whatever solution is not on the ballot paper for 2014 is that David Cameron knew perfectly well that His Eckness viewed it as his consolation prize/get out of jail card. Salmond is the ultimate pragmatist and he will also be afeard that the No to independence decision in 2014 will drive a stake through his political heart.
Alan Bissett concluded his diatribe against Alexander and his call for a new approach to politics and society in post-referendum Scotland by proposing that ‘we could vote Yes and actually have the country we want’. I prefer to think that a No vote would lead to a real debate on how we build a modern, outward looking Scotland, not based on grievance and how different we Scots are from the English. Does No really mean Yes for some of us?
Dick Mungin is a consultant based in the Highlands
