How the ghost of referendums past fascinates us today
A campaign button encouraging a vote for Scottish independence
‘THE Menace of Separation’ is the warning title of one vintage pamphlet, drawn up by the Labour Vote No group in 1979.
‘Scottish Communists Say Yes’ declares another leaflet displayed nearby, evoking other memories of Scotland’s modern history.
As Scotland gears up for a referendum in 2014, with the possibility of “devo-max” as well as independence and the status quo appearing on the ballot, an exhibition opened yesterday on the referendums of 1979, and 1997, when devolution first failed, and then succeeded, at the ballot box.
Democracy for Scotland: the Referendum Experience, at the Museum of Edinburgh, features everything from the periods, from campaign buttons and T-shirts, to recorded interviews with key players and even a bottle of Referendum Whisky.
It includes memorabilia from the famous five-year vigil in a hut on Calton Hill staged by Democracy for Scotland campaigners, including a painted shield celebrating the Flame of Democracy and a quaich for a shared dram.
A mock ballot box in the corner invites visitors to cast practice votes.
Key themes in the exhibition included how the Labour Party split in 1979, with influential figures like Tam Dalyell joining the ‘Labour Votes No’ campaign. The exhibition occupies just one room at the museum, but its opening yesterday brought a noisy gathering of veteran campaigners, like former civil servant Gillian Grant, a regular visitor to the Calton Hill vigil that began in 1992.
She said it began out of a “real feeling of helplessness” after the 1979 referendum was lost.
Devolution, under the Scotland Act, won a majority of votes cast, but just failed to reach the 40 per cent of the total electorate demanded in an amendment to the measure put through by Labour backbencher George Cunningham.
The numbers board from the hut, used to count the days, is on display, along with a banner.
“We used to do a night shift,” Ms Grant said.
“Whoever was on the shift in the morning, they would come down and change the number of the vigil day. When it started it was an A4 piece of paper, and someone wrote one on it,” she said.
On the wall – in one echo of the current debate – is a Scottish National Party leaflet from its North Sea oil campaign of the mid 1970s, declaring: ‘Scotland’s Oil - It’s London’s Rip-Off! The Norwegians and the Arabs wouldn’t stand for it. Why should we?’
One notice from the ‘Think Twice’ campaign urging people to vote ‘No No’ in 1997 warned that the cost of devolution would be “£350 per working person”.
The Referendum Whisky was produced by the pro-devolution group Scotland FORward, and is labeled ‘Say ‘Aye’, quoting Robert Burns: “Freedom and Whisky gang-the-gither.”
Museum staff collected materials during the campaigns, including photographs of marches down Princes Street.
Isobel Lindsay, convener of the Campaign for a Scottish Parliament, which was active in both referendums, said: “It’s interesting. One of the things I would guess people will be doing is looking back at the ‘no’ material both in 1979 and in 1997, to see the arguments. They tried to use all these scare stories, that business will leave Scotland.”
Scottish lingerie tycoon Michelle Mone has threatened to move to England if Scotland votes for independence.
“There was the Michelle Mone syndrome then as well,” said veteran campaigner Douglas Robertson.
“Nothing really changes. You will find the same arguments, the same discussions.”
One focus of the exhibition is the divisions that emerged within the Labour Party. “It was awful, because there was no coordination of the campaign,” Mr Robertson said.
The exhibition draws on the collections of the Scottish Political Archive at Stirling University, with more information available at the archive’s website at scottispoliticalarchive.org.uk
1997 SUCCESS
In 1997, the Labour Party included the establishment of a Scottish Parliament in its manifesto for the United Kingdom general election.
In the referendum that followed, 74.3 per cent of voters agreed that there should be a Scottish Parliament, and 63.5 per cent said it should have tax-varying powers.
Overall turn-out was 60.4 percent.
“The 1979 referendum was a textbook case of how not to run a campaign in a referendum,” said Nigel Smith, chairman of the Scotland FORward campaign.
“And that was really my starting-point. We were not going to make that mistake.”
Helen Scott, of the Conservatives, added: “It was a very difficult period for us after the ’97 election – there was a huge surge of enthusiasm for New Labour, and they were promoting it, so I think that meant it was unlikely that we were going to win.”
1979 DISASTER
On 1 March, 1979, Scotland voted on the Scotland Act, the devolution bill put through by the Labour UK Government after pressure from the SNP.An amendment by Labour backbencher George Cunningham required a “yes’” vote by at least 40 per cent of the eligible electorate.
The vote was 52 to 48 per cent in favour, but only 32.9 per cent of the electorate backed devolution.
“There was so much scepticism within the party about it, that it was as far as we could go,” George Foulkes, then a Labour MP, said in interviews recorded for the exhibition.
“In today’s context it would not seem revolutionary, but at the time it seemed pretty revolutionary.”
“It came about far too early for the SNP, although you were campaigning for independence, here a devolution bill had arrived. Nobody really understood what it meant,” admitted Jim Thomson of the SNP.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 18 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Anagach
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 10:29 PM17 Spooked *Lots of seeing the Future* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Amazing, so the SNP are responsible for light regulation, when actually its the FSA, Bank of England and Westminster Government. The Banks are Scottish if they lose money and UK if the pay taxes. And in your version of the future its Scotland that has an expansionist policy, but in todays reality its the UK - which just expanded the money supply another £50bn. On the original point - the Icelanders you met on holiday still have a higher standard of living than the poorly managed UK. And no one in any currency union, on a convertable currency, to date has submitted budgets to a central bank. Small points though when you can see the future and its alternates.
Spooked
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 10:20 PM#15 - The Icelandic folk I spoke to on holiday recently weren't too amused about the last few years they've had. Blamed it on their politicians and that light regulation that Salmond was so keen on a few years ago. I see you avoided the RBS question I wonder how they would have been regarded as a Scottish company before and after 2008. Note they had the Andy Murray touch. Scottish while they win but a UK company when they need bailed. Also while Greece is many miles away, its an extreme example of what happens when a country with an expansionist fiscal policy ( i.e borrow and spend) meets a monetary policy that doesn't support that. The idea that the SNP promote has Scotland withdraw'from Westminster, where if we believe all we hear successive Labour Governments have been reliant on Scots votes hence giving Scots MPs inordinate influence. Instead Scotland will submit it's budget to an unelected Bank of England official who will vet it to make sure it doesn't cause the same problem Greece ( plus Spain, Italy Portugal and Ireland) are causing. So, you deny my claim that Scotland will be like Greece and I agree with you. It won't be allowed to because the "Independence Lite" you propose hangs onto the UK for support when typical SNP hindsight policy making is no longer available
Dr. James Wilkie
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 09:33 PMI was enraged at the corruption and manipulative skullduggery that characterised the 1979 referendum. I compiled a lengthy documentation of the event, which was later circulated by the Scotland-UN Committee as part of its programme of international diplomatic action from 1979 on. …………………………………………………………………………………. The 1998 referendum (I attended the count on that occasion) did not suffer from the same corruption and manipulation as the 1979 one. The reason was that, after the Council of Europe had forced the issue, under threat of international sanctions, devolution became a foreign policy obligation that had to be implemented, no matter what government was in office in London. The referendum was therefore being closely scrutinised by the entire foreign diplomatic corps in the UK, and there would certainly have been international repercussions if there had been a repetition of 1979. There were reasons for the earsplitting silence of the arch-unionist Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, on the subject. ……………………………………………………………………………… By that stage devolution was a diplomatic decision, not a political one. These facts have been consistently suppressed for political reasons, most recently by the English Attorney General within the past few days. An outline of what happened can nevertheless be read in the Scotland-UN Committee papers at: www.realmofscotland.com
Anagach
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 08:48 PM12 Spooked He would have made Scotland like the Celtic Tigers he admired - Iceland and Ireland. RBS would have grown faster and bigger in Scotand under a Scottish "light touch" regulatory regime compared to England and we would have prospered with the Euro and had much more control of our budget as Greece has now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good you can see the future, even alternative ones. How about looking at the present. Ireland, and Iceland have higher GDP per person and also Higher standards of living than the UK, and thats even with all the financial meltdown. As for Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland all are doing spectacularly better. But no, you head off to Greece, a few thousand miles and entirely different economy and culture,why not compare with Burkino Faso or Zimbabwe like old Jeremy Paxman.
gratislobotommy
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 07:58 PMComment removed by moderator
Jimmy Fae the West
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 05:47 PMLabour and the other British Nationalist Parties lost in 1979! They lost again in 1997 and even in spite of those two crushing referendum defeats, they still claimed "Scots need only vote a majority SNP for instant independence". They even disregarded all these facts last year as they still claimed, "Most Scots don't want independence"? The British Nationalists are scattered and in disarray as their attacks on Scottish democracy, lies and gagging attempts have failed to take off. I fully expect another launch of the five BNP No Campaigns any day soon under the tutelage of the Ulsterman Moore or the Londoner Darling or the Oswestry Lord Foulkes or David Cameron of Wantage Oxfordshire or London born Ed Miliband? Hey, I am starting to see a pattern here.
Spooked
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 02:23 PM#8 Yes, Alex Salmond would have got his wish. He would have made Scotland like the Celtic Tigers he admired - Iceland and Ireland. RBS would have grown faster and bigger in Scotand under a Scottish "light touch" regulatory regime compared to England and we would have prospered with the Euro and had much more control of our budget as Greece has now.
Salamanderski
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 01:19 PM8 wee-scamp. As for as the English people are concerned, they want the Scots to take their independence even without any referendum, and go away to build a Socialist land, so that the albatross is removed from their necks.
The West Awake
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 10:27 AM"She said it began out of a “real feeling of helplessness” after the 1979 referendum was lost." This comment raises another question; what happens afterward in the event of a No vote? - especially if it's a close one. If that happens, my guess is the unionists would regard this as closing the book on Scotlands constitutional progress. They would ignore the fact that we might not want outright independence but want a substantial transfer of powers instead. They would put forward the Scotland Bill rubbish and form a committee or a "workshop" or two, but we can kiss goodbye to real progress from them. They would boot the whole issue as far into the long grass as they could. What happens after that? Would we independence supporters be expected to just give up al we have fought for? If there is a narrow No vote, I predict turmoil will ensue.
samcoldstream
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 09:41 AMIn 1979, Voter Turnout at the Scottish Devolution Referendum was a respectable 63.8 percent. The YES campaign won it but the motion still fell because of the controversial "40 Percent Rule". In 1997, Voter Turnout at the two question Scottish Devolution Referendum, was also a respectable 62.9 percent. In comparison, Voter Turnout at the last two UK General Elections was 2005: 60.1 percent, and 2010: 65.1 percent.
wee-scamp
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 09:32 AMif Scotland had voted Yes in 79 it would be a completely different country now. Much wealthier. Much more egalitarian. A broader industrial base with the banks working for us not for themselves. Ah well. Better get it right this time,
gus1940
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 07:05 AMOh for a Mone-free day.
Kinghob
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 06:21 AMWestminster have form on 'rigging' referendum votes as far as '79 is concerned and yet the bbc scotsman etc love them and trust them regardless------------it makes me laugh how the news reports yesterday had to play with words to call the result a 'No' when it was actually a 'YES"!!!!!!
BillDunblane
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 02:07 AM#4 But only for tired paragraphs?
quertycat
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 02:01 AMAlso, when I rule the world, there will be paragraph breaks. :)
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.