Yes campaign is positive choice for Scotland

I READ with interest James Robertson’s essay (The Week, 9 December). It’s true that the Yes campaign has got bogged down in the detail; has run aground on a rock of repeated rebuttal upon the arid territory of the No campaign. This has happened at the expense of vision, which should be the very essence of the Yes campaign.

Since fear of change is the main plank of the No campaign, it’s understandable that the Yes campaign should seek to play down the amount of change involved in moving into independence. As well as soothing the worries of the electorate, the Yes campaign has to avoid antagonising 
powerful interest groups such as the UK establishment and the USA. Hence the SNP’s change of stance on Nato.

Rather than a panacea, independence is a prerequisite for progress. There are no guarantees that independence will bring about the kind of forward-looking, enlightened Scotland many of us would want. However, only independence brings the freedom to choose a government reflecting our needs, able to develop the kind of Scotland we aspire to. Only independence brings the chance of raising our game.

Unionism offers only managed decline, under the power of succeeding governments elected on an agenda fast 
diverging from the preferences of the Scottish electorate. With the security of a No vote behind them, Westminster will have no motivation at all to consider the Scottish interest when deciding policy.

At the 1997 SNP conference, I was the one who originally proposed having a referendum on the monarchy and got this passed for inclusion in SNP policy. Nonetheless, it doesn’t worry me that this policy is currently on the back burner.

A nation which has already attained a state of internationally recognised independence will have so much more room for manoeuvre and development than one which is still struggling to reach this stage.

Mary McCabe, Glasgow