Scottish independence referendum: Civic leaders aim to enable voice of the ordinary Scot
In many ways, independence is easier to understand and explain
ORDINARY Scots are being frozen out of the independence debate as politicians squabble over the referendum, civic leaders have warned.
The message came from a coalition of business, union, religious and third sector chiefs, which launched in Edinburgh yesterday, to set out the “voice of the Scottish people” .
Voters have been left “puzzled” after recent political spats over who controls the referendum and whether a third option of more powers for Holyrood could appear on the ballot paper, it was claimed.
Supporters of the movement also argued that key questions for the future of Scottish business need to be answered as part of the debate and that a middle ground between the status quo and full-blown seperation should be given more attention.
“To make a decision about Scotland’s future simply by looking at the very narrow political discussion we’ve had so far is inadequate,” said Alison Elliot, of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO).
“The purpose of this initiative is to enable the debate about Scotland’s future to make a connection so far lacking with the things that matter to people in this country.”
The coalition is to consider all options, including “devo-max”, or more powers for Holyrood, as well as full independence and the status quo. But it has not been set up to push for any particular outcome or argue for a second question on more powers. A website, “The Future of Scotland” is being launched and a conference will be staged in March.
Ms Elliot added: “Most people in Scotland don’t have a hand-on-their-hearts view on this matter. It’s not an emotional tie for most people in Scotland – they’re puzzled about it.
“They don’t know where to go and they want to have time to reflect on what this is going to mean for people in poverty in Scotland, for the environment. These are all the type of questions which I think people care about in their daily life.
“I hope this will enable them to make a connection between these questions and the question they will eventually have to answer. That is the first and foremost purpose.”
The Rev Ian Galloway said the Church of Scotland historically supported devolution, on the basis that the people “needed to be as close as possible” to the issues affecting the country.
“There does seem to be a reluctance to have a wider debate and that’s what we want to see happen,” he said.
“I have often been left sadly disappointed by the questions that political parties engage with as to what they think are the most important things.”
Political leaders have also failed to address key questions on the future landscape for Scottish businesses, according to David Watt, from the Institute of Directors.
“What are the answers to the economic questions? And there are massive ones that clearly haven’t been answered,” he said.
“That’s a political debate that we really want to stimulate – get the politicians to answer some very significant questions about what’s going to happen in the future. There massive questions and we need answers to them.”
Westminster and Holyrood are currently in deadlock over who controls the referendum, with coalition ministers insisting only they have the legal authority. Prime Minister David Cameron says they could transfer this legal power to Holyrood, but SNP demands for the vote to be extended to 16- and 17-year-olds, as well as a devo-max option, which the SNP is open to, are stumbling blocks.
Ben Thomson, head of the think-tank Reform Scotland, said: “They’re more interested in the process, and until we can get away from this whole debate about what the process is, that is blocking us from looking at what is the best structure for Scotland going forward.”
He added: “The purpose of this debate is to try and get some voice for the Scottish people to say what is the structure that actually works best for Scotland and here is some of civic Scotland, rather than just politicians arguing about process and two questions or one referendum.”
Mr Thomson said the body wanted to explore the “middle ground”, because two thirds of Scots backed greater powers for Holyrood.
“We see the natural consensus and the common sense approach is how do you make Scotland work within the relationship of the rest of the UK,” he said.
Reform Scotland backs a “devo-plus” option, which would see Holyrood responsible for raising, through taxation, all the money it spends.
First Minister Alex Salmond has said the referendum ballot could also include the option of greatly-enhanced powers for Holyrood if there is “wide support” for this among civic Scotland. But Ms Elliot insisted that the coalition group was not affiliated to any one body.
“The political debate has been narrowed down so much that its practically impossible to move in this without being accused of belonging to one camp rather than the other, and being accused of political bias,” she added.
“That’s not our fault. We knew the kind of debate we were going to have and we’re going to have it, because otherwise would be to silence civil society at a time which is crucial for Scotland’s future.”
Scottish Trades Union Congress assistant secretary Dave Moxham said the organisation was “nowhere near taking a final view”.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Scottish independence: I don’t want ‘separatism’ says Sir Tom Farmer
- Scottish independence: Labour voters ‘will deliver independence’
- Craig Levein insists Scotland will recover from US thrashing
- Rangers administration: End game nears for fallen icon
- Tom English: ‘A mammoth investigation, so vast that it is without parallel in the history of the Scottish game’
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Monday 28 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 15 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 10 C to 16 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 553 comments to this article
Page 1 of 37
allymax
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 04:30 AMIf the SNP really cared about Scotland they wouldn't force a Same-Sex Marriage bill on Scotland. the vast majority, (98.7%) of Scots have no use for this bill, and the tiny tiny tiny 1.3% of gays that want it are actually dwindling in numbers. In the next 5 years, less then half of that tiny tiny tiny amount of gays that have civil partnerships in Scotland will be getting civil partnerships. The numbers are going down, not up, so why are the Scottish Government so keen to force Gay marriage on all of Scotland and Scots ?? For those that refuse to listen, and attempt to brush the dissenting voices under the decadent-fancy Holyrood MSP privileged carpet, you are doing Scotland a huge amount of harm in the run-up to our independence vote. If the SNP Scottish Government can force a horrible law on Scots, a law that the SNP never put in their manifesto on their re-election bid, then that means the SNP Scottish Government can force anything on Scots and Scotland; that's no different from the Mammon at Westminster they chide and blame for the same thing. Whoever in the SNP that thought this S-SM bill was a good idea, especially before the independence referendum, should be sacked! Stop this stupidity now.
Canny Mann
Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 12:44 AMI have read an awfull lot of the reasons for Independence. I want to hear from the unionists what is to be gained by remaining in the UK and the benefits of being overlorded by a foreign country. Alba gu brath...
The Tin Man
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:53 PMListening to the the spokesefrinkle for civic land one has to wonder what or who this spokeseperson is proclaiming about. Never have so few people said so little...
Tartancult
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:52 PMFor skies read spikes.
Tartancult
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:40 PM#542 If all the Scots were sitting in rags with a crust in there hands, and they were seperated, still what a glorious feeling that would be.........................................................No it wouldn't. All it would demonstrate is that those (independents) with rags and crusts are too stupid to live (which probably explains the skies in the head thing you mentioned, though, knowing the Scots it was probably self-inflicted).
Danielrober2
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:33 PMWhen it comes to asking for a plan, a published plan with reasonable data, information, methodology and conclusions, along normal EU standards, from the SNP seems to be classified as a personal attack on Alec.S and the SNP. I think those people very close to politics start to lose perspective about what is important and normal. Asking a for a plan as opposed to another executive summary, this is not a crime nor is it slander. ............................. With the exception of a few who seem to feel free to attack me constantly for asking questions, I quite admire those of you who put the effort in each day and night for what you believe. I too have strong beliefs including a strong belief in planning and open government. I am firmly committed to American style democracy where we ask our leaders what is their plan, where is the evidence and what are you risking for your aspirations. ............................ Scotland has no Master and has been an evolving democracy for a considerable length of time. Democracy is not about who gets the power or power under the title of responsibility. Democracy is governance by the majority with respect to the minority. The minority in the Scots Parliament has asked for the SNP to publish its plans. As a fundamental aspect of Parliamentary Democracy the Leader of the oppositions must respect the minority and publish. End this constant strife SNP, Publish your plans according to EU norms.
Libra Personified
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:20 PMThe thing about this excuse for democracy website is that you can still either suffer the little children or give them a proverbial clip round the ear - regardless of their age.
Libra Personified
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:17 PM545 Peripatetic Pensioner. Are you of the opinion that that you are constantly surrounded by incompetence? Even in your travels?
Peripatetic Pensioner
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:07 PMIs it only me or are others that can´t be anal sphinctered to wade through all this excrement to find some informed and well judged comment?
jaydee
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:04 PM539Simonsaid.... This is what you said quote.. "The 6th largest oil producer in the world” Aye that is whit a thought ye said – Jeez-us you are anither wan on the bottle. The UK ur 21st in the oil producing league table aw right? And, a wull take this operchancity tae remind ye that bein a rich oil producer disnae guarantee that the ordinary folk will be ony better aff or safer because of it – if ye dinnae believe me ye can always ask the Libyans, Nigerians and Iranians as weel as loads o ithers. Noo lets examine yer Luxembourg – and so on""" unquote.. .......... With your half baked attempt at what you perceive to be Scottish where every body is a Rab C Nesbit.. I picked up what you said in the exact same way as Jimmy fae the West did.. Over and above that you concluded that the billions of tax revenue generated from oil was a nothing and that anybody could have nine tenths of white fish stocks of their shores...And that to is billions in revenue... What exactly in English did you mean... apart from the fact you make it clear you graduated from the Ed Balls School of Economics..
Canton-eze
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:45 PM#442 Jo'Burg Jock - You beat me to it. The constant anti-Salmond, anti-SNP attack-dog ramblings of Danielrober2 are enough for most of a normal disposition. Compounded with his grammar, spelling and punctuation, life becomes too difficult. I have asked him on a couple of occasions if he knows the difference between "been" and "being". Evidently not. Clearly, he has never heard of the word spelt "B-E-I-N-G". At #425 we get (after the "pint") such gems as "young people are not been trained" and "we are been lead". (Better dead than "LED", eh Danielrober2?) In #440 the grim story continues with "shear drought". (I'll need a pint of sheer draught to get through this.) At #507 "miss quote" makes her entrance (who she?). At #504 there is the truly amazing "I gone off taking about ..." Aye, clean off. Take the advice offered in #442, Danielrober2. Your affected knowledge of Scotland by affecting to have migrated to my country, and dealing high-handed "advice" to thinking Scottish people, does not cut it.
Graeme M
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:34 PMYou know, I am all for this!..Its all down mainly to the man in the street. There can be the arguers for aye, and arguers for no, but on the outset, the higher ups think Scotland can be its own master, why not?...I think in my heart of hearts, for all those folks in the past, men women and children who died at the hands of the people from the south, whether soldiers or soldiers of fortune, in this modern age, it should all be sorted out once and for all...If all the Scots were sitting in rags with a crust in there hands, and they were seperated, still what a glorious feeling that would be...Sure, it will take time in the future, but that's the way of all things. While working for archeologists at Cramond in the 50's, I dug up a skull of a man who had been hit with one of those handles and ball with the spikes on it. On his own soil!...I felt sick and disgusted...Iwas 18 then, I am 75 now, and I still feel disgust!Ciamar a that thu!...
Jimmy Fae the West
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:26 PM539 Simonsaid Did I say that? – no I did not. What I said was that because a country is wealthy does not mean that it makes the majority of its inhabitants wealthy. Nor does it make it any more secure. Now I suggest you look again at what you said I said – if you cannot tell the difference between what you think I said and what I actually said then you are a lost cause and I give up. ________________________________________________________ There is an ocean of difference between your perceptions and what you actually wrote. You warned (in that superior british colonial manner) that not all oil rich countries profit from the discovery hence my request if you were offering Iraq and Libya as examples? I also saw a hint of a threat in your warning like the one by Lord Ashdown on the Beeb that England would balkanise Scots as Serbia did and repeated by Law Lord Wallace again on the Beeb without the host being phased. your points are poor as independence is not about fortune or the Congo would belong to Belgium, so too would Liberia, Burundi and Haiti belong to London? But they are independent.
Anagach
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:23 PM539 Simonsaid Did I say that? – no I did not. What I said was that because a country is wealthy does not mean that it makes the majority of its inhabitants wealthy. Nor does it make it any more secure. Now I suggest you look again at what you said I said – if you cannot tell the difference between what you think I said and what I actually said then you are a lost cause and I give up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dropped the Scots parody I see.
Simonsaid
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:10 PM# 534 - Jimmy fae the West - Once again for the thick? OK! Are you offering Iraq or Libya as Oil rich nations which did not get richer from discovering Oil. ================================================== Did I say that? – no I did not. What I said was that because a country is wealthy does not mean that it makes the majority of its inhabitants wealthy. Nor does it make it any more secure. Now I suggest you look again at what you said I said – if you cannot tell the difference between what you think I said and what I actually said then you are a lost cause and I give up.
Page 1 of 37
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.