In November 2013 I wrote that the SNP were somehow assuming that they had the right to decide the future of Scotland after a Yes vote (http://robthill.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/post-independence/). This is still the case, remember the white paper. Frankly I am not against much of what they propose. However, I think the idea of sticking with sterling and the EU is an attempt to mollify waverers. Personally if we are to be independent I would prefer our own currency outside the EU on the Norwegian model.
More to the point by talking about their vision of an independent Scotland, the SNP may be putting off a number of potential Yes voters who do not like that party or its leaders. A better message would be that after a Yes vote there will be new elections to Holyrood and an all party constitutional convention to explore the way ahead. Of course the SNP blueprint will play an important part.
The SNP should remember they are a national government in name only, in reality at present a devolved administration.
This article has a ring of truth about it for me
A NO VOTE IS NOT A VOTE FOR NO CHANGE By Peter Arnott, published in Bella Caledonia
The full text is here … https://bellacaledonia.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/a-no-vote-is-not-a-vote-for-no-change.pdf
Somehow the fine words of the three main Westminster parties do not ring true for me. The idea of any of them especially the Conservatives being magnanimous and welcoming of Scotland back into the fold is not a characteristic I can link with them.
If the NO vote prevails on 18th September then I think we will not see Devo Max but Devo Min, no NHS, no Barnett formula, more and deeper cuts to public services and an emasculated Scottish Parliament. Most public services such as water and all the various aspects of social welfare will be privatised, rich pickings for the neo- cons. This will of course be under the mantle of improved efficiency and all the usual weasel words. It will not happen overnight but will arrive via the back door in exactly the same way as the NHS privatisation in England and Wales has avoided the scrutiny of most of the voting public.
One of the fears being put about regarding Scottish Independence is that the rest of the UK will become a foreign country like alien, unwelcoming, to be avoided.
There is no need for that attitude. The mature Commonwealth countries like Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada and South Africa regard themselves as part of the British family of nations and many other countries value their membership of the British Commonwealth. In fact countries actually ask to join so there must be some benefits.
There is absolutely no reason why Scotland should not be in exactly the same position vis-a-vis the remaining parts of the UK. I will not think of going abroad if I go on a day trip to Newcastle and I trust that English, Welsh and Irish visitors to Edinburgh or Glasgow will feel equally at home.
In many areas of international relations I am sure Scotland and rUk will have identical goals and aspirations and I am equally sure both countries will support each other in many different ways, big and small.
In fact I would be very surprised if relations between Holyrood and Westminster will not be better in future.
Most commentators seem to agree that the Westminster government has now taken a further step towards exiting the EU and the Convention on Human Rights. This certainly affects the considerations surrounding the Independence referendum.
Personally I would prefer Scotland to have its own currency outside of the EU as the first step. It would appear that this environment has done Norway no harm as I read that its Oil Fund owns on average 2.5% of every listed company in Europe! As a small new nation we would be swamped and ineffective in the EU and hidebound by its rules and regulations. (I do know that Norway has restrictions in trading with Europe.) As for currency why should anyone think that a sterling currency union won’t in the long run face the same problems as the Euro Union?
If we vote YES let’s be truly independent.
It is worrying when the Bank for International Settlements is suggesting that the world economy is more fragile than it was in 2007/8. I have always thought that politicians had really only pushed the problem further down the road and that nothing had actually been done to create a more stable and sustainable economic environment.
Radio 4 Today programme ran a piece about the Chinese developing a railway link from China through to Europe. This may or may not be a good thing for the West or China but it is is another signal of quite how enterprising Asia and in particular China are in grasping every opportunity to develop their economies.
The mantra by the Yes and the No campaigns has been about how it will be better for jobs in the future, either in an dependent Scotland or in the existing Union. Neither side specifies the type of jobs apart form vague murmurings about IT, Creativity, Inventiveness, Science and the like. But the West is lagging way behind the emerging economies in terms of those kind of jobs. Doubtless there will be niche markets and success stories, but we actually need to concentrate on the vast army of the poorly paid, the low skilled and the un- or under-employed. Our education system in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK is still not fulfilling the needs of the up and coming generation. Many people, especially the young, are meandering from one unfulfilling occupation to another, rudderless.
So what jobs will be there in the future. For a minority, there will be jobs requiring intellectual ability in Science, in Arts, in IT as well as the old professions of the Law, Education, etc. But to be really prosperous Scotland cannot afford a large group of citizens who are unable to contribute for all sorts of reasons, mostly not of their own making. One category is the jobs which cannot be readily automated and are labour intensive. These include the traditional trades of joiner, plumber, electrician, the caring professions, nurses, social care officers, home care workers, the entertainment and leisure industries such as catering, personal services such as hairdressers, public transport particularly buses and no doubt others that I have not considered. But our education and training systems must provide young people with an enthusiasm for these kind of jobs as well as a good liberal education and it must become the norm for youngsters to expect to leave school to enter training for these kind of careers if they are not going into more academic further education. I have said elsewhere that the transition from school to the world of work is woefully inadequately catered for in our system and yet it is where most of our young people falter and often fail to grasp good opportunities.
Robert Peston’s BBC programme Scotland: For Richer or Poorer was interesting even if it didn’t reveal anything startling. His interview with the man from the Institute of Fiscal Studies was bland, but Sir Philip Cohen of Dundee University thought that we would not have access to the large pot of research money in the UK. He seemed to forget that in the UK as a whole far more universities compete for the pot whereas in an independent Scotland there would be far fewer competing and no doubt a smaller total amount of money so things might be much the same.
However nobody addressed another overriding economic factor. Europe, the UK and Scotland are all part of a declining world position vis a vis the rising nations of China, India and others. We, either in an independent state or as part of the UK or Europe, will have to raise our game very considerably and fast if our workforce is to have any chance of maintaining the current standard of living. These newer economies are producing highly skilled workforces who work for a fraction of what we in the UK expect. Our politicians talk in terms of the skills in Scotland as though they were ahead of most of the world. That is no longer true in any of the high tech industries let alone basic manufacturing. That is where the real future problems lie for Scotland and for the rest of Europe. “Better Together” suggest that a United Kingdom will be stronger economically but this problem will remain whatever the September 18th outcome.
Both sides of the Scottish Referendum Debate are largely trading conjecture as fact. Assertions about currency, heads of state, membership of international organisations, interest rates etc., will all depend on negotiations after the vote. No binding decisions can be taken beforehand.
In essence the decision rests on each voter’s personal view of how they see the future. Remain in the UK and things will remain much the same. Vote Yes for the possibility of change. Remaining the same in my opinion involves accepting more of the Tory agenda for privatisation, for reducing the level and scope of social support and more inequality. At its worst it means a syphoning off of the public wealth into private hands, those of the already uber-rich. On the other hand we do not know if we have the leaders or the will of the electorate to improve our society to make it more equal, to make sure everyone pays their taxes and to ensure that everybody has the opportunity to have a fulfilled and satisfactory life. With independence there is that chance if we are capable of grasping it. Without independence I cannot see much chance of it happening.
So I am for taking the chance.