Gerry Hassan: Independence debate needs joined-up thinking

WE don’t exist in a vacuum. Scots have shaped the world, and the world can shape Scotland – including on constitutional matters, writes Gerry Hassan

Scotland has been all over the news: the independence debate, David Cameron’s intervention, and Rangers FC. What has been missing from the Scottish debate is an engagement with the environment beyond Scotland, in relation to the UK and internationally. At times it almost seems as if the debate is being undertaken, irrespective of opinion, in a vacuum.

Among politicians, commentators and seasoned observers, the prevalent Scottish debate is to talk of Scotland in isolation. Unionist, nationalist or neither, many people embrace, often without understanding it, an ‘independence of the mind’.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

This imaginary Scotland is a self-determining territory which operates without much relation to the British state. The crises of the eurozone and European Union go unstated. Even more fundamentally, the global economic crisis, and that of western enlightened liberalism and social democracy, usually pass without comment.

There is a political subtlety and a historical nature in this. The journey Scotland is on and which, post-Cameron, everyone seems to be signing up to, of more powers and self-government, isn’t as many assume cost-free.

Scotland in the union has had to undertake a delicate balancing act between Edinburgh and London. Scotland pre-devolution, under numerous secretaries of state for Scotland and governments, has enjoyed quite a bit of clout in relation to Westminster and Whitehall. It had a cabinet minister; a Whitehall government department; more importantly, it had political relationships and leverage.

Over the post-war period, and particularly post-1979, this carefully balanced system began to break down. Scots saw their interests and wishes being less and less effectively addressed and dealt with.

This built pressure for change and was a factor in the establishment in 1999 of the Scottish Parliament. It also weakened the Scots voice and influence in London; the Scotland Office was diminished, as was the standing of the post of Secretary of State for Scotland. More crucially, Scotland was basically forgotten across Whitehall, seen as having less of a British voice and being more detached, doing its own thing.

This set of dynamics of Scotland accruing more powers, but losing voice and power in the corridors of British government, has to be factored in to current debates. If we are to explore the prospect and detail of full fiscal autonomy we have to understand that complex trade-offs are at work, and that such change would entail a fundamental dilution of Scottish status down south. This would happen formally with the continued reduction of Scottish MPs at Westminster, and consideration of ‘English votes for English laws’, but even more at the level of how British government departments work. Then there is the issue of how we relate to London and the south-east, even if independent. Some anti-independence voices ask when will this Scottish debate ever end. The answer to this concern is that part of this debate is about how we deal with the UK as a deeply unequal, unevenly developed society, and central to this is London and the south-east.

Even an independent Scotland would have a relationship with the world city London and south-east. Living on the same island we will always have to face the challenge of how we relate to London and prevent wealth and power being overconcentrated in it. This is part of what drives the debate, and will go on, whatever our status.

Then there are the external dynamics. What happens if Greece is unable to implement the current austerity programme, defaults, or is driven out of the euro by the European Commission?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

What would occur if the euro itself goes down or, perhaps a more likely scenario, fragments into a core euro zone of Germany-France and a few others, and an outer set of states which have to leave, led by the unfortunately titled PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain)?

Then there is one of the great watersheds. What impact would British withdrawal or serious detachment from the EU have? This is at least a possibility after Cameron’s disengagement from the European Union project at the end of last year, and use of the British veto.

On this, Scottish and English public opinion are not that different; both are Eurosceptic. Yet English political debates are shaped by fear of Brussels encroaching on ‘the British way of life’, while Scottish politicians are comfortable not just in a union, but a multiplicity of unions, which involve sharing sovereignties and are more aware of Europe as a positive.

Then there is the final external variable visible at the moment: the prospect of a US-backed Israeli attack on Iran to thwart its supposed nuclear weapons ambitions. Such an attack would have devastating effects on the region, peace and would one surmises be carried out with the backing of the UK government.

If this occurs and the worst consequences flow from it, it will have huge impact on the shape of the Scottish debate, to put it mildly.

In these turbulent times it is highly likely external events will frame and shape a major part of, and possibly the outcome of, the Scottish debate.

The first two Euro issues would on balance probably deal a blow to ambitions of independence.

The second two would bring to the fore the problematic character of the British state, its isolationism in Europe and fanatical pro-Atlanticism, and overall aid the argument for independence.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Scotland is not an island. Despite the rhetoric of some unionist campaigners no-one is seriously proposing ‘separatism’ and ‘separation’. Scotland is connected to and shaped by the external world, and part of the Scottish debate is about a large part of the Scots public having a lack of trust in believing the British government and state have the interest or ability to look after and protect the values and interests people believe in north of the border.

It would be a sign of welcome maturity if our politicians and other leaders would position Scotland in a wider context, talking about London and our relationship to it, the British state and, crucially, the wider world.

Maybe we could all live up to that age-old retort of Winnie Ewing many years ago, ‘Stop the world, Scotland wants to get on!’

Related topics: