2015, the start of a new year. This year may not seem to have the same potential as 2014 because we don’t have an independence referendum scheduled. However, 2015 can and will be every bit as interesting – maybe even more so.
Of course, we could have achieved independence for Scotland with a simple cross in a box – but perhaps we were too naive to imagine ‘they’ were about to let that happen. However, in the process of the establishment shafting us – they did have to drop their pants!
WE HAVE NOW HAD A GOOD LOOK AT WHAT THEY HAVE
We can be stupid and continue along the same path as before – the route to another workmanlike kicking; or we can learn that sometimes we get served a curved ball and prepare for the next delivery.
Many things have happened since the referendum and I would like to explore some of them.
First on my agenda is oil. The YES campaign can take a very deep sigh and congratulate ourselves on a great piece of luck. A very, very lucky escape if you will. One nameless Muppet caused a Twitter storm with disgusting comments following the bin lorry tragedy in Glasgow. I understand that he is currently being dealt with. One of his comments suggested God was not on the side of us Scots. He could not have been more wrong.
Scotland depends on North Sea revenue to the tune of around 20%. In the early years of independence things would be very tight and all the condescending eyes would be on us – waiting for us to fail. When oil barrelage prices fell through the floor, we could not have predicted that. Westminster would have roared with laughter and the new iScots Government would have been under serious pressure. Perhaps, if you believe in a God, he or she spared us this scenario for now! I am sure prices will recover in time but we must base our future on NIL dependence on oil and treat anything we get as a complete bonus. THANK YOU GOD.
Probably the biggest deal in 2015 will be the UK General Election. Judging by past turnouts it would be reasonable to suggest that there will be a continued decline in interest. However, I suspect you would be wrong. I believe GE2015 will attract as much if not more attention than the referendum. Now, if we assume there was no or perhaps minimal interference with the voting in the referendum it would be reasonable to say that YES was outnumbered – and that might be a big ‘if’. I think it is also fair to say that there will be huge support for SNP and perhaps the Green Party at GE2015. That support will not just come from the SNP ranks, I believe the majority voting for SNP will be YES voters and disillusioned NO voters.
However, there will be a huge difference between the referendum and the general election. For a start, we will NOT be outnumbered. It is inconceivable that Labour, Conservatives and LibDems will fight a united campaign in the general election. Some might consider tactical voting against the SNP. We might see some Conservatives voting Labour or LibDem but, seriously, this will definitely not be a united campaign. If that was the case then the political establishment in the UK would be already dead in the water.
On the other hand, the YES campaign or Independence Movement will absolutely put on a united front.
THE WEAKNESS WE HAD IN THE REFERENDUM WILL BECOME OUR STRENGTH IN THE GENERAL ELECTION
If for no other reason than the inability of Labour, Conservatives and LibDems to completely collaborate then we have them completely outnumbered. Each of these parties will be devastated in the GE2015 or potentially wiped out. ROLL ON MAY 2015
If we do return such a result at the General Election then we may have the potential for a Unilateral Declaration of Independence. However, we may not chose to go down that route. I believe we could, but I would prefer if the UK simply recognised the inevitability of independence and worked with us to establish an independent Scotland.
I can already hear the NO camp proclaiming that they won the referendum and that the majority will of the people should prevail. So, we must ask ourselves this question, ‘Is it, or was it, the majority will of the people’.
Forget ‘majority’, was it the will of the people? was it the ‘free will’ of the people?
So here’s the thing. Supposing the referendum played out differently. Supposing Wesminster decided to work with the Yes Campaign to truly understand the proposition at the referendum and whether it would be good for Scotland and good for the rest of the UK.
I AM SAYING, SUPPOSE THE UK GOVERNMENT PLAYED FAIR
We are now entering an imaginary world – I call it imagineering.
Let’s look at currency.
That was a key topic in the referendum. According to Lord Ashcroft, 70% of Undecided voters made up their mind to vote NO based on the currency issue. Now I have blogged a lot around this so called issue but we are in ‘imagine’ mode. When the referendum was scheduled a number of obvious question were asked; not determinates for the referendum question but needing to be asked. Westminster asks Scotland if they will keep the pound. That looks like the sensible option. Of course Scotland does not have a member on the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England so Westminster suggests Scotland should be represented. Also, if the Bank of England are to underwrite or lend to Scotland then it would be a good idea for Scotland to build up a fund, lodged with the BoE, ‘for a rainy day’ if you will. With Scotland’s wealth that will not be a problem. But Westminster spots another problem. When they borrow to run the country, the bit that brings about the budget deficit or the balance between income and expenditure across the UK, the liquidity of oil helps provides surety for borrowing. Scotland recognises that for it to succeed it’s main neighbour and principal trading partner must also succeed. Of course it would be completely sensible for Scotland to act as guarantor for any borrowing – that’s what good neighbours do. The sheer simplicity of a shared currency with all the right conditions built in makes perfect sense.
What about Europe and the EU.
Westminster, or rather the current Conservative Government, recognise that they have a major question over continued membership of the EU. If they cannot negotiate a substantial new deal, which is highly unlikely, they will face an IN/OUT referendum in 2017 or sooner. Westminster have not exactly been champions of Scotland in the past but the new reasonable Westminster approaches Scotland and we agree that the question of EU membership is something both nations should work together on. It would make no sense for the rUK to exit the EU and Scotland retains its membership. Scotland can collaborate with rUK to attempt a new deal that works better for both countries. If this was achieved then the need for an IN/OUT referendum would be negated. But what can Scotland bring to the negotiation table. The answer is a vast amount. First of all Scotland hosts the EU’s nuclear defense. Of course its future has yet to be decided but for now this is a massive bargaining chip. Scotland also has the biggest slice of the EU fishing reserves {and we all like our fish and chips}. Then there is our renewable energy – very important as the relationship between the EU and Russia, their main energy source is looking very strained. And what about the Scots. Arguably the most inventive and innovative nation on earth per head of population, and don’t let’s forget the Scottish Enlightenment from the 18th Century. Scotland brings some real heavyweight arguments to the table and may be able to work with Westminster to secure a better deal for both our nations and ensure that we all benefit from the EU but retain control over our respective countries – a bit like being in the Common Market?
What about Trident and our nuclear defenses?
The UK spends a vast amount on Trident – also known as ‘mutually assured self destruction’. Many years ago, around the time of the Cuban crisis, I found solace in the knowledge that a nuclear war is a bit like two blokes in a telephone kiosk threatening each other with grenades? The UK will never use Trident – it’s a big boy’s toy, designed to get us to the top table of hawks. We are no longer an empire. We are well down the rankings of power and capability in all capacities with one exception – military spend. Not something we should be proud of. When I find myself in a crowd or gathering of people, I don’t instinctively look around and smile because I know I can kick the shit out of most people – because I have a knuckle duster? The UK should be ashamed of their military ranking, not proud of it. Of course, that has not stopped mainland UK from being a terrorist target. Enoch Powell once said ‘the UK is strategically important – because we are 5,000 miles from the US yet holding their gun?
So, Westminster recognises its position in the world and sees the futility of such massive spend on a weapon that is neither a deterrent nor a threat. We really don’t need Faslane with its intimidating fences and ‘stuff’ leaking out on a regular basis. Of course we live in a hostile world and we must secure weapons of defense that can be used if all else fails; weapons that intimidate because of their technological sophistication but don’t annihilate. I believe even a pacifist may respect weapons that say ‘don’t you dare’ rather than ‘look at the size of my d*ck’. Westminster and Scotland can collaborate to secure a well managed transition to sensible security and save a fortune in the process. We may drop a few place on the table of military spend but we would go up many place on most other tables – do they have one for good world citizens? worth a thought!
What about security and our coastline and borders?
Unless we plan to dig a huge canal along the border between Scotland and England so the UK can patrol, control and manage their borders then we must collaborate. Since Scotland and the rUK share companies, inter-work in perfect harmony, inter-trade extensively and share common goals and aspirations it is fundamental that we work together to protect our entire neighbourhood, often called the UK.
Here’s a thought. You have a cafe on the high street and do good business. Someone opens another cafe on the same high street. Do you get pissed of and declare a secret war to drive them off your precious patch or do you recognise that the high street is now know for a couple of great cafes and everyone benefits. Competition keeps you keen, on your toes and always seeking to improve. Your competitor is not your enemy, in many senses they are your ally. The best word to describe this is synergy. Sometimes referred to as the whole is bigger than the sum of the parts. Scotland and rUK must develop their synergies, engage in healthy competition and share success with their neighbours. One day you may just need a cup of sugar?
Westminster suggests that we develop an international constitution of neighbours that become the bible of collaboration, cooperation and harmony. We can do what the Scandinavians do but do it even better?
And so ends the dream!
Now, I have just touched on a small number of questions that may have been talking points in the lead up to Scotland’s referendum. None of what I describe above happened. Westminster came out of the blocks baring their teeth, screaming threats, cajoling anyone they could to join them, threatening the Scots, spreading fear of destruction and recrimination against any dissenters. They proudly initiated Project Fear and funded a massive campaign of negativity. They adopted every conceivable dirty, subversive political trick and recruited the traditional media to hammer home their message. In the end, they adopted a fool with some political credibility to preach a pack of lies to the Scots to persuade towards the Union. We now know that the ‘Vow’ was written in vanishing ink. In any event, who in their right mind wants tax raising and borrowing powers while one of our main assets is being salted away. If we could simply retain what is rightfully ours, pay a fair contribution to support what we have for the common good, what is so wrong with that. Unless of course, we are getting shafted?
For all that, the final margin was only 5%. Yes, 5%. Not 10%. I don’t think the small percentage of non-voters were engaged in the process whatsoever. If 5% NO voters had come across to YES then that was all that was needed.
And here is the question:
In my imaginary world above, if Westminster had done the decent and respected our right to chose without interference or cajoling. If Westminster had used the opportunity to work with us to ensure we made the right decision for everybody –
HOW HARD WOULD IT HAVE BEEN TO FIND THAT 5%
So, you see, the real decider in the referendum was not votes as such, it was the attitude and approach of Westminster.
As we go into the UK General Election on 7 May we must do unto Westminster as Westminster done unto us – vote for Scotland’s best interest – we can sort the politics out later!