I am bemused by the widespread feeling, at least south of the border, that the general election has knocked discussion on Scottish independence into the long grass for all time to come. I am quite sure that this is not true.
Has anyone noticed, for example, that the new Scottish Tory MPs are acting as a quasi-independent group? There is not going to be an assimilation into the pack for them.
I suspect this might also be true, to a lesser degree, for Labour. And even, dare I say it, the four LibDems from Scotland.
Something has changed irrevocably. The fact is that the separate identity of Scotland and Scottish political interests is now clear. And Ruth Davidson, the supposed chief exponent of the Union, is if anything in reality the chief exponent of that distinct difference.
This matters, and nor should it be ignored. EVEL (English votes for English laws) makes it a real part of the UK parliamentary DNA now. More than that though, this division is real.
The Scottish general election was very obviously different to that in the rest of the UK. And it's only possible to pretend that a place with a different culture, economy and political ethos is subordinate to its neighbour for so long. Then the differences become intolerable to both (as Northern Ireland is at risk of finding as a result of a DUP alliance).
Far from independence being off the agenda in Scotland that country has re-discovered a healthy pluralism that is essential for its well-being. But all of it is grounded in Scottish identity. I don't see independence soon. But I definitely think it will happen. In fact, I can't really see how it could be otherwise.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Good. I gather the Establishment are beyond terrified by the idea of Scottish independence, and that’s good enough for me. Since they’re agin it, I’m for it.
This:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15343496.SNP_abandons___1m_fundraising_appeal_for_second_referendum/
Which is entirely consistent with what I said
I think you’ll find that Ruth Davidson is self-serving.
Her branch in Scotland stood for election on two principles a)no to a second referendum and b)the (Westminster) Conservative party manifesto. Yet within a matter of days she has flip-flopped (again) on her vision of Brexit (it’s now ‘soft’ I believe) which is not what the farmers, fishermen and Brexiteers in Scotland voted for. Nor has she spoken out against a formal alliance with the DUP, possibly because her own MPs, MSPs and Councillors have similar underlying homophobic and bigoted beliefs.
Ruth Davidson is also on record in the past few days stating that she ‘will protect Scotland’s interests’; but against whom, and what? The Westminster Conservative party? Make no mistake ‘Scottish’ Conservatives will take the Westminster whip on all issues – and yet again will never be taken to task by the Scottish media.
I agree. Ruth Davidson is the chief exponent of Ruth Davidson. Very amusing watch her bounce out of no 10 having given notice to the P.M. Do you think she’s after her job?
Yes
Because she won’t ever get Nicola Sturgeon’s
Yep.
First she was pro-Remain, insisting that was best for Scotland.
Then she was pro-soft, insisting on access to the single market.
Then she was pro-hard, insisting Scotland could be great regardless.
She’s allowed to dodge interviews with no explanation, never gets asked tough questions on matters of actual policy when she DOES turn up, and gets a free ride from our written press on despicable Conservative policies such as means testing the Winter Fuel Allowance, the rape clause, or the “dementia tax”.
Instead, media concentrated on Scottish schools; something that has nothing to do with Westminster at all.
If only all politicians were treated equally. Then Scotland, and the rest of the UK, would see Davidson for what she is:
A self-serving opportunist who’s happy to court sectarian votes, and who’ll take the whip from London when told.
I think the shine will come off Ruth Davidson pretty swiftly. Never one for the homework nor having a grasp of the facts, she often comes a cropper in more in depth interviews. Not everyone has grasped that all her ‘new’ ideas have previously been expressed by Nicola Sturgeon way back.
I don’t believe she has as much clout with May as she and the press appear to think — the appointment of David Lidington, who is opposed to LGBT rights, appears more to be designed to appease May’s new DUP buddies.
Davidson looks weak for not objecting to a deal with them. She did encourage May to not allow them to influence LGBT rights in UK and has suggested that the UK might assist with more progressive policies in NI. Neither of these are at all likely. She couldn’t raise any points regarding issues of bigotry because of her own dubious associations, as has previously been pointed out in another comment.
Finally, I wonder how her new ‘team’ of boy politicians feel about her patronising attitude towards them: she’s sent down HER ‘brightest and best’ and knows that May ‘will take care of them.’ Mind you she’s not quite cutting the strings as she expects them to be accountable to her.
I could go on. 🙂
People in England will need to wait and see what the SNP (and Green) moves will now be. I wouldn’t bet on IndyRef2 being over. Sturgeon knows that if the SNP begin to be seen as an unreliable vehicle for Independence that we have plenty of other options.
We can all vote Green instead, with some RISE people to leaven things a bit.
We can infiltrate Scottish Labour, do a Momentum and take it over, separate it from London and make it Yes.
Thank you. I love your last paragraph Richard. I agree -much as the media would love to control the narrative, and it was priceless last night – support for independence is alive and well. How about this for the alternative news? Two years and two months ago the SNP was the fourth most popular party in Scotland with 6 mps.Now it is the most popular party with 35 mps. That is nearer the truth and its not bad for 26 months work. In the meantime scales have fallen from many eyes.
You may like a video I recorded today that may be out later this week
I agree with the analysis – in the medium-term all that has happened is yet another example
If Scotland ploughing its own furrow.
The role of the BBC and other media outlets in portraying independence as ‘dead for now’ should not be understated. For example on BBC Scotland last night the chief political correspondent Brian Taylor said that the Tories ‘won’ the election in Scotland. Given that they won 13 seats and the SNP won 35, on what possible basis can this be true?
EVEL is an amusing acronym.
BTW I suspect that one reason why the new Scottish Tory MP’s are not being assimilated into the pack is that they are not expected to last that long.
Historically, the Tories have never had much of a foothold up there. What’s more Labour appears to have made some alarmingly basic FPTP errors (or misjudgements)in those particular seats that enabled the Tories and effectively lost the overall election. I would imagine that those mistakes are unlikely to be repeated.
“if she (Ruth Davidson) had not won seats in Scotland there would not be a Conservative government and Jeremy Corbyn would be in Downing Street”.
– George Osborne
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/11/george-osborne-says-theresa-may-is-a-dead-woman-walking
Given that a lot of Scottish Labour appear to be Blairites the basic errors or misjudgements mentioned may have been intentional, made specifically to lose the election and assist their true leader, May, into power.
Just lookee here! http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-ab1d-Arfon-Labour-candidate-lost-due-to-lack-of-help-from-HQ/#.WT8hBe0js5U.facebook “A Scottish Labour source said the party – which won seven seats north of the border, up from just one in 2015 – could have won another five if it had campaigned wholeheartedly for all candidates.”
Bill,
I have seen these and other suggestions that the mistakes were deliberate. Given that Corbyn’s team now have an imperative to avoid them in future they would need to negotiate an agreement directly with the SNP.
With a FPTP system such an agreement would, among other things, try to avoid spoiler effects in Tory seats where the combined Labour/SNP vote is higher than the conservative. They would be looking to allocate their candidates and organise their campaigns in a way that would minimise Tory gains and assist both Labour and SNP parties.
If what you are saying is true then the future Labour /SNP relationship would see Scottish Labour would being sidelined to some extent.
Firstly I am a great admirer of your work Richard. Secondly you are right to say Scottish is as relevant as ever. My only slight disagreement with what you say is I think Scottish independence will happen a lot sooner than many people think. Brexit will cause the UK to implode & Scottish independence will be one of the consequences of that implosion.
You seem to be saying that as a statement of faith a nationalist movement must prevail – eventually.
Much will depend on whether a revived Labour Party can find support across the historic nations of Britain. Today that would seem to be a possibility – at the very least.
I always keep in mind that the Chinese communist party has more members than the UK has population. Partitioning Britain will not benefit working people – wherever they live on the island.
I do not think a revived Scottish KLabour Party makes any difference to this
It will still be a Scottish Labour Party
Richard , I like the tone of your piece but would also like to point out that the SNP won the elction in Scotland, somehting most comentators and media fail to mention, at 35 seats we have more than all the unionist parties combined (24). We have already recieved our mandate for a Referendum in the Scottish elections of 2016, our parliament voted for a Referendum just this year, again, this is being simply ignored. Independence support still sits at 45% with a recent poll suggesting 57% of Scots would prefer to see an Independent Scotland within the EU thanScotland within the uk but out of the EU. Labour and the tories ran their campaigns on the Union ticket, the SNP didnt (maybe they shoudl have!). Many pro Independence supporters gave their vote to labour because of Corbyn (although the irony is that the Scottish branch of labour along with most of ther mp’s and msp’s dislike him). When the SNP got 56 seats out of 59 (a freak result) the unionists were not clamouring around us saying we had a mandate for a referendum, however here we are with 35 out of 59 seats and the unionists are telling us that means our mandate has gone!! You’ll see Indepemdence in Scotland a lot quicker than you think.
You may well be right
And for the record, and unsurprisingly, I would vote Yes
If the SNP and Scottish nationalists generally wish to seek independence while retaining the pound, as it seems they do, then they will retain English hegemony. They will have no independence with respect to seigniorage, sovereign debt, monetary policy / interest rates or trade (exchange rates). In other words no real sovereignty or independence at all.
Westminster and The Bank of England will continue to hold some of the power with none of the responsibility and the Scots would be subject to a kind of Puerto Rico effect. If that’s not enough the SNP have also discussed the ludicrous idea of moving from the pound to the euro. Have the lessons of Spain not been learnt? They would be jumping out of the UK fry pan and into the fire of German (EZ, ECB) hegemony complete with asymmetric shock, permanent trade deficits, sovereign debt traps and all.
If that’s their idea of independence then the Scots would be a lot better off without it. There are quite a few small western nations (eg. Denmark, New Zealand) that do quite well with their own currency. Maybe the SNP should study those examples.
Another good piece Richard. There actually has been no serious discussion about the Euro and as far as I know, Nicola Sturgeon has set up a forum to investigate different options. As a ? Richard Murphy ( only kidding ) pointed out at Holyrood,there are many fiscal twists and turns, legislation and forward thinking to be done before a viable Independent Scotland can flourish.
That said,as pointed out above this was a Westminster election not a vote on Indy and the maddening thing is because of the behaviour of the BBC and Ruth Davidsons candidates ( her words not mine) voters in Scotland were left wondering what is to happen about Trident fishing rights or agricultural subsidies , the list goes on.
Your understanding of the currency options open to Scotland is clearly limited.
It has three
The pound
The Euro
Its own currency
Tell me what else you would add?
Marco Fante, as far as I know the Euro is not an option. During the transitional phase to full monetary independence the new currency would be pegged to, probably, the pound. A central investment bank has to be set up, indeed this is being seen as a requirement before independence, to aid business development. This is what I have been reading and hearing from groups tasked with developing the ideas for an independent Scotland.
Scotland can only be independent with its own currency
Any other option makes a mockery of the term
You seem to have overlooked the rather significant fact that the Scottish Parliament has already voted for an independence referendum to be given to the people of Scotland once Brexit negotiations are complete but before they are implemented. The British government may – indeed almost certainly will – seek to ignore that. But that would be unsustainable, and short of the unthinkable prospect of the SNP Government raising a motion in the Scottish Parliament to repeal the legislation for an independence referendum in the wake of the Brexit negotiations, the referendum will go ahead.
Wow. You have a real grasp of politics, don’t you?
We have to remember that the SNP only gained traction after Labour left office. Labour gave them devolution and it is possible that the next Labour government, under a socialist leader, would be able to woo them back with the offer of devomax. Scottish MPs like Mairi Black are clearly socialists. I think that the stance which Corbyn felt he had to make about Indyref2 went against his natural democratic instincts. Previously he had held the position that it was up to the Scots how they should be governed, whilst wishing them to remain in the union. Perhaps honest politics might become the thing.
Carol, you will not woo anyone back with the promise of Devo max! It’s a massive joke here. Mostly we shudder at the very words after the false promises of Brown Came to nought in 2014. We will not be taken in by any half measures again. As Richard says below, a Labour party is still a Labour party. We need to be independent.
And do you really think that Mairi Black is the only socialist in the SNP? I find that astonishing. For the last few years the SNP manifesto has been more left wing than Labours! We don’t find Corbyn’s manifesto radical up here- just really familiar.
Kezia Dugdale stands for something I’m sure but no-one up here has ever been able to work it out, even on a daily basis. She seems to be like the proverbial fart in the wind. As for Corbyn, he has been all over the place on independence. Who knows what tack he will take when elected.
Please understand this. Despite the desperation of the mainstream media to control the narrative and suggest the ‘dream’ of independence is over, let me assure you on another level it is just about to begin. Do you really think all of the hard work of an army of grassroots activists over the last 5 years is just going to disappear in a puff of smoke? Dream on baby.
Are you suggesting that the SNP is more socialist than Corbyn’s Labour Party?
The YES movement is a much larger body of people than the SNP, as people will find out in due course.
I know
And agree
I did n’t dare think this when I read all the Scottishness of the Tory and Labour group of MPs.
However now you clearly explain it then it fits.
I think you are right too about INDY and see it by 2025 to 2030.
Scots are beginning to realise that a year after independence is declared, Scotland will have in excess of £400 billion in the bank.
Now you can do rather a lot with that kind of money.
Westminster built the M25 with oil money from scotland, there are no motorways in Argyll, it doesn’t suit the tory purpose of reinforcing the “All to me!” techniques they have in play.
In dependant Scotland, nothing much happens because every spare penny the Scottish government gets from Westminster is used to reduce the pain that Scots would otherwise have to bear.
In independent Scotland the safety and rational restructuring of the NHS is assured, the rebuilding of a trustworthy postal system is too. The railways can be rebuilt and extended as can the tramways the schooling and the education system as a whole can be helped to regain its international standing.
The police won’t have to be hobbled by paying vat to Westminster any more. That means more coppers and that’s a good thing.
With its inherant wealth, Scotland would be a powerful draw for inward investment and of course international money markets will be very interested too. Well be asked to make cars again.
What will the Scottish currency be? It simply doesn’t matter! Whatever they choose will be strong and stable. (Where have I heard that phrase before?)
Westminster has plans to spend that first year’s £400 billion and its not destined for Scotland.
If you want it spent in Scotland, you will simply have to support the principle of Scotland being freed from the yoke and the lies and the Westminster controlled media that tells you you are too wee, too poor and too stupid.
You are not without your stupid ones but there’s many more of you that are savvy.
Stand up for freedom and the recovery of democracy in Scotland. More than a £1 billion a day, every day is lost from Scotland while you think it over.
Roll on independence day
Where dos £400 billion come from?
To Carol Wilcox I am suggesting that very many grassroots independence supporters are socialists and are not interested in perpetuating the union. I don’t understand why more people don’t know that.