Catherine Deveney: A chance to save the soul of our society

IF THE eyes are the mirror of the soul, then perhaps the State represents the eyes on the body of humanity. There is a tendency to think of the State as "them": grey suits, grey minds, an anonymous army who march on our money and make our choices.

But the State is us. You. Me. The person next door. It is part of who and what we are, a reflection of what we aspire to, the eyes on our face. Never has it been more important to recognise that. Next year's Scottish elections will focus our attention on the different budget priorities on offer. But this is a period in which we won't just save money. It's a period in which we will shape our society for a generation. We'd better get it right.

This week we face the anniversary of the 1988 bombing atrocity over Lockerbie, an event that illustrates why it is important for governments to have a moral dimension. The crime illustrated how catastrophically human beings can fail as individuals. The warped sense of "justice" that can develop which allows people to sacrifice others for their cause. But ever since the terminally ill Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was released, Lockerbie has come to represent something more. Some deplored the controversial decision. But for me, it sent a message around the world that said the state can represent something bigger, better, more humane, than individuals. The biggest crime of any murderer is their lack of humanity. Scotland refused to compound that crime by mirroring it.

Who could ever expect a bereaved family to forgive a killer? Not me. We can witness moments of forgiveness that are truly inspirational. Nobody who ever heard the words of Gordon Wilson, the father who forgave the IRA terrorists who killed his daughter Marie, could ever forget him. Or Gee Walker, who forgave the racially motivated murder of her son, Anthony. Or Margaret Mizen, who said she felt no anger, just sorrow, for the parents of her son Jimmy's killer. "We've got such lovely memories of Jimmy and they will have such sorrow about their son. I feel for them, I really do."

Could we all mirror those sentiments? The worst of me fears that I could not. Not ever. That's why I need the state to reflect the standards the best of me wants to achieve. I need it to reflect my aspirations, not my limitations. Because ultimately, I believe in society. I really believe in what it could be. It could be the sum of our collective wisdom, experience, morality and humanity. It could be greater than the sum of its parts. Nationalism holds no appeal, but I still felt huge pride when SNP Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's words represented Scotland around the world last year. "…we are a people who pride ourselves on our humanity", he said. "The perpetration of an atrocity and outrage cannot and should not be a basis for losing sight of who we are, the values we seek to uphold, and the faith and beliefs by which we seek to live."

What does this have to do with budget cuts? Everything. A state that has no moral judgement is a state that, in human terms, will fail. A society that examines only the bottom line of the accounts and not the body of them, creates a shrivelled society. Earlier this month, it was revealed that the American state of Arizona, which faces a budget deficit of over a billion dollars, refused to fully account publicly for its spending but had axed organ transplant operations. Patients will now have to find up to $600,000 - or die. Morally and financially impoverished governments end up with a vision that is smaller than the individuals they represent, and a scale of priorities determined only by cost.

But we can't afford everything, people will say. Correct. Just last week, we were told the lung cancer drug, Iressa, which is offered to English patients, will not be available in Scotland. Finite resources. Difficult choices. But in recessionary times, our choices bring us closer to the nub of what we want to be. Do we want to be a society that spends millions on Trident or on education? Do we want our taxes to be spent on bonuses for the bailed-out bankers we now employ, or on health and heating allowances? Are we going to be a society whose motto is, "stand on your own two feet or be damned"; or one that says, "if you fall, I will catch you"?

In the 17th century, philosopher Thomas Hobbes argued that when mankind was left in "a state of nature" - in other words, without a structured society - life would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". But even with society, that is what life could become. Different visions are on offer and they will affect crime, education, social welfare… everything. We must choose. It is not "they" who will decide. It is "us".

We have all met people whose personality seems to be physically on display in their face. Hard eyes… or smug superiority… or wolfish opportunism; the outer faade can take on the inner state of being. In an age of political choices and priorities, the same is going to be true of "our" - not "the"- government. When we examine the state, we will see, reflected back, exactly what we are. And in truth, we will receive exactly what we deserve.