I have had less than two days in Scotland and can come to at least three very clear conclusions.
The first is that Scotland is very different to England. So too, I would add, based on experience, are Wales and Northern Ireland. But at present the Scottish difference is more obvious in a political sense. It's impossible to provide precise evidence of how and why this is the case, but it's tangible and real. My suspicion is it is based on a strong sense of identity that has been reinforced by recent experience, right across political divides. What cannot be doubted is the reality of it, and it's also stronger than it used to be, by some way.
The second conclusion is that Scotland is willing to create its own solutions. From the obvious vibrancy of the people from civil society I met on Wednesday to the council and civil society organisation leaders I met yesterday to the politicians I have had discussion with there is no sense that they need wait for anyone's permission to find a Scottish solution to problems, and are willing to do so. Some of the thinking, especially around health, seemed a little too stereotyped to give much chance of unique solutions arising. In other areas, e.g. in youth services, what I heard about was radically different from what I think is happening elsewhere. And simply better too in terms of what services are delivered, and how, and how integration is being aimed at, even if there is a long way to go.
And third? I have to say that this is that Scotland believes it can make its own future and ultimately no one can stop it doing so. And that belief is very, very powerful. I am used to England, Westminster and the sense of frustrating disempowerment that pervades almost everyone in politics that focuses there. There is just no such sense in Scotland. The belief in Scotland is that, despite all the obstacles they will achieve, come what may. And don't shout about oil - it's just something they say they would have taken in their stride, and got on with, and to a large extent I believe them.
So Scotland remains very different.
It's also changed since my last visit. There's a feeling that it was not oil that has derailed them, or the referendum. It was the currency debate that diid that. And I have a feeling that another time there would be no discussion of the euro and no discussion of the pound. A Scottish currency would be on the agenda.
And in the meantime there is a growing awareness that they really might have influence at Westminster, which is, despite the long history of powerful Scottish politicians in the Labour party, something they have not felt they have had for a long time. It is this feeling that they want a distinctly Scottish voice heard that is, I think, motivating the SNP vote.
And what of the SNP? My feeling is it realises that it will have to use power responsibly. They know all about power after all. They have been in government for some time now. They can handle responsibility, and they know all about the compromises needed. It is a shame I will not hear Nicola Sturgeon speak today, but I have to be going south for the weekend. But I think the sense that working out positions that make compromise that will support Labour in power, now exists. And I believe that the compromises that will let the SNP say it is preventing austerity in Scotland and yet permit Labour to continue a deficit narrative are being made.
Which is where Green Infrastructure Quantitative Easing comes in.
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:
The currency issue was a big problem for many, as you rightly point out. However, the entire “financial” package appeared weak and not well thought out – despite the 2 year run up and opportunity to offer something “different”. No suggestion of own Central Bank, citizens bank, Citizens Wage, Tax system overhaul let alone a Green Infrastructure QE. I suspect, had the SNP (who appeared to dominate for the independence side) offered alternative “systems” – demonstrate their notion of a fairer society, the outcome would likely have been very different.
So, you have seen the Central Belt and main cities in Scotland – try traveling further north and see a little more.
I spoke to people from Shetland to Ayrshire
I still have trouble with some of the Aberdeen and Orcadian accents. I do heartily suggest a visit to Shetland though. In fact – please visit a little more often – perhaps organise a meet with Ms Sturgeon and offer up some proposals… for next time.
I have offered to come back as soon as anyone wants to discuss the issues I raised yesterday
“So Scotland remains very different. It’s also changed since my last visit. There’s a feeling that it was not oil that has derailed them, or the referendum. It was the currency debate that did that.”
Richard, you seem to be making the same mistake the SNP makes in confusing the party with the country. Scotland is not the SNP and the SNP is not Scotland, although they would like to give that impression. Scots rejected their “independence” in 2014 and, with no party loyalty to split the vote, would reject them again tomorrow.
The currency issue, the EU issue and the economy issue are all negative for the SNP. And, crucially, the isolation issue. Scots are not Nationalist, nor are they nationalist.
The SNP has a strong anti-establishment wind in their favour (like UKIP and the Greens in England). But the anti-politics fever is not the same as endorsing “independence”.
The recent Government Expenditure & Revenue Scotland (GERS) figures for 2013/14 show a continuing weakness in the current account which is balanced by the Barnett allocation.
But the SNP wants Full Fiscal Autonomy (FFA) which by its nature abolishes Barnett, leaving Scotland with an immediate and persistent revenue funding gap averaging around £607bn annually (£12bn in 2012/13 and £12,4bn in 2013/14). And that’s before the oil price fall of late 2014 is taken into account. So the 2014/15 numbers will be even more dire.
They are economically incompetent and would make Scotland independent even though the revenue funding gap means immediate and crushing tax rises and service cuts that the poor would feel the brunt of worst.
The SNP talks left but acts right: they are UKIP in tartan trews. Don’t be taken in.
I make no such mistake
I will talk to any non-racist party
“So Scotland remains very different. It’s also changed since my last visit. There’s a feeling that it was not oil that has derailed them, or the referendum. It was the currency debate that did that.” –
That reads as if the currency debate “derailed” “Scotland”.
But it didn’t derail Scotland or the Scottish people. It derailed the SNP.
Perhaps that’s not what you meant but that’s how it reads to me
The debate was derailed by it being on independence
If it had been on devo-max the outcome would have been different
In that sense currency as metaphor for the wrong debate did derail Scotland
And is why Labou still has problems there, which it obviously has
I’m sorry Alex but you are wrong on almost everything. Your characterisation of the SNP as UKIP etc. etc. is laughable. It vitiates all of your analysis because it is so out there that your understanding of Scottish politics cannot be taken seriously. If you were trying to be fair you would have made allowances for the fact that Salmond was happy to put DevoMax to the people and that option was the most popular (Cameron vetoed it so it didn’t happen). Just because the independence vote was either/or, it doesn’t follow that people see the issue in that way.
You say Richard is confusing Scotland with the SNP but you also confuse matters by saying Scotland is absolutely this or that but many Scots are very stongly for the SNP and the percentage for independence never drops below 25-30%. It is clear many Scots are somewhat nationalist, though that term is a very slippery one.
I think you should look at some of the work of one of the economists who has looked at how funding is allocated to Scotland. According to Andrew Hughes-Hallet it appears defence spending for example is often allocated to Scotland but is not spent there. I know of no-one who has disputed/refuted this claim of his.
Lastly, you cannot compare a geographical area funded by a block grant with a normally functioning country. As a rich country with a lot of natural resources, there is no reason Scotland can’t function as a normal country. It is also the most stupid nonsense imaginable that a party that purports to value Scotland’s independence wants also to place it in the penury you envisage. There’s a lot of work going on beyond the policy caricatures the media serves up, so I think you need to look further than the anti-SNP talking points you reproduce from your other unnamed but obvious sources.
The suggestion I only heard the SNP is absurd. I spoke at a meting chaired by the co-convenor of the Scottish Greens for a start
And I also had informal disucssion woth several Labour politicians
Richard,
The debate was about “independence” because that’s what the SNP had campaigned for 80 years to get, and what they had a mandate for. They had no mandate for “devo max” and they still have no mandate for devo max. Devo max has no agreed definition and was and is Salmond’s tactic to get a consolation prize for losing the referendum.
I didn’t say you only heard the SNP. I know you spoke at COSLA and other events.
Phil,
to address the points you make;
I didn’t say Scotland is absolutely anything, don’t know where you got that idea.
I know how funding is allocated through the Barnett Formula. And this week it showed a £12.4bn gap in Scotland out of a £66bn spend. That’s 18% of our annual spend lost, OVER AND ABOVE ANY OSBORNE AUSTERITY, if the SNP has its way. Is that what you want? Really?
Hughes Hallett is a pro-SNP economist. About the only one willing to go public. I haven’t seen anything from him on the GERS figures. Do you have a link? It would be interesting to see how any reputable case could be made for cutting your budget by 18% when there’s no need to. You don’t have to be a Professor of Economics to see it’s a pretty silly idea.
Of course SCOTLAND could function as an independent country. The more important question for me is: what’s best for THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE? And I don’t see how making the country poorer in the short, medium and maybe even long term is best for anyone.
I happen to agree with the majority of Scots that staying with the union is best for us. You are entitled to a different opinion if you can make a case for it. The SNP’s case was rejected by the Scottish people last year. What’s your different case?
we certainly wont be taken in by the red tories.
Should read gap of £6-7BN annually,
Ask yourself why the labour vote has collapsed since the referendum. There has been a massive increase in SNP membership. Part of the reason surely has to be that people feel betrayed by the UK establishment because of their actions since the referendum. Labour is naturally the loser because the Tories don’t seriously pretend to represent Scotland. They only have one MP and a handful of list MSPs.
Both unionist parties seem to be implying that the SNP have no entitlement to have a say in the government of the country. The Labour mantra that a vote for the SNP lets the Tories in is not borne out by parliamentary arithmetic. In 2010, the number of Labour MPs increased in Scotland. Margaret Curran won Glasgow East from the SNP. What was the result in the UK election? There have only been 2 elections since WWII where the Scottish vote would have made a difference.
Labour also attempted to form a government in 2010. As the incumbent they were entitled to do that because no other party had a majority. Why is the mantra of “The largest party forms the government” trotted out so recently after Labour themselves disproved that.
The Tory charge that Votes for the SNP let Labour in are equally risible. There is also an implication that the SNP are somehow not entitled to take part in the Westminster parliament because one of their goals is independence. If enough people vote for them, surely they are entitled to seats in Parliament. Does a Scottish seat have a lesser value than an English seat?
In the eyes of the electorate, Labour are tainted by their association with the Tories at the referendum. Both parties seem to think that the electorate should comply with their wishes than the other way round.
I am very troubled by the idea that coalition with the SNP is unacceptable because they ultimately oppose the Union (as Vince Cable has now said) whilst coalition with UKIP or the Tories who oppose the EU is quite OK
If the choice of the Scottish people is to be ignored after 7 May I think there will be quick and profound consequences
I was very pleased that you came to Scotland to contribute your perspective and ideas to the events.
It’s a potentially pivotal time, and rational alternatives to the single economic script peddled by the tv and print media and all the main UK parties are essential.
I’m sure many others who follow your blog feel similarly.
It’s of the utmost importance to have build discussion around these ideas, and since they are given no oxygen in the standard media, the currently vibrant grassroots of Scotland’s politics is as fertile a place as any.
The grass roots in Scotland are amazing
Very impressed by Common Weal
And others too
You are comparing a party whos leader thinks you should be ‘concerned if a Romanian moves in nexdoor’ to a party that vocally speaks up for more immigration despite this being an unpopular opinion to voice. Not only are the SNP nothing like UKIP they are about as far apart from them as any two parties in the UK on that issue. In fact it is shamefull that the Tories and Labour cow-tow to UKIP to try and win votes rather than raise the tone of the national conversation as they should do as staresmen.
As for FFA it is simply unfair to be supplementing the Scottish budget at the expense of increased austerity in England and Wales. Our political centres are too different now to expect. Redistribution accross the UK. Nicola is right with this one. Implemented slowly and thoughtfully, Scotland will be able to make up the shortfall using the new fiscal levers.
We voted NO in September but the time of the UK as a single homogenous state is over.
We are moving towards a new UK which is a family of nations. Economically autonomous. Confident and learning from each other. That is how we will stay strong.
It is not just Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Regions of England feel equally disconnected from central Westminster control.
Greater Manchester has a similar population to Wales, is larger than Northern Ireland and has a larger economy than both Wales and Northern Ireland and equally feels that as a city region it should have some of the autonomy to decide how to invest and grow the local economy further that is afforded to cities like Munich.
If you dissect the Barnett formula the funding per capita for England is lower than the rest of the UK but when the London spend is removed the difference between England and the rest of the UK is stark.
“Scotland is willing to create its own solutions”
Civic Scotland dissatisfied with the likes of Councillor Alex Gallagher’s Labour party have had to first identify like minded souls via online forums, which lead to blogs, which in turn has grown into organisations like the Common Weal, National Collective and RIC’s who are determined to create positive change for Scotland.
This notion of disempowerment that you speak of was the default setting prior to 2007, when the SNP, in minority government realised that the key to electoral loyalty lay not only in promising and talking about, but in the actual doing. Salmond’s first government set the pace with Cabinet members and MSPs basically canceling holidays, family and social life and throwing everything they had into engaging with a wary electorate. The level of access for the people became the priority rather than the view of the paid for lobbyists. This policy of full frontal engagement has paid massive dividends as can be seen with the SNP results rising ever since even the Referendum say a massive increase from an easily dismissed 20% to a whisker away 47% in less than seven years.
The rout that faces Labour in May is no overnight shock. The SNP have been ahead in Westminster voting intention Polls since March 13 2014 (one year ago yesterday). The result we will see on May 7th will forever change the political landscape in Scotland and no amount of negativity, fearmongering and name calling will alter that. Scotland is ready to embrace itself.
I often think Independence might be good for the Scots- it might show them how not to rely on or blame anyone else fore their own shortcomings . Like teenagers say (!).
But what is a Scot after some many years of interaction with the rest of the UK?
Going back further the Scots are an Irish race, even now some Scots like to refer to themselves as Picts.
Did you notice how many traditional areas of Scotland voted NO to Independence?
Whilst say Glasgow with a cosmopolitan population and left wing urban intelligentsia voted YES.
And I know e.g. that in SW Scotland for instance there is a large population of English retirees who did not intend to settle in a foreign country.
I have loads of Scottish relatives, they are great, but there is no need for them to be regarded as more special than say my Derbyshire ones. So Scotland is just as, but no more, special than any other UK region.
I leave this to others
It us so ridiculously stupid I can’t be bothered to comment
Said as someone with an Irish passport
I quite agree.
I just felt that difference when I first crossed the Border in the sixties!
I`m a great admirer of the Scottish nation for many reasons,not least for it`s huge contributions to the worlds of science,medicine,engineering,law and culture,and for mostly good,the development of the British nation and Empire/Commonwealth.These were made and exceeded by,pro rata,a nation far smaller than the rest of the UK countries put together,and says volumes for their spirit,determination and enterprise. Indeed,contributions slightly more than the gentlemans antecedants in Derbyshire I`d guess!
So,if they seek independence,we must respect their decision.They will no doubt have problems if they do,as did Ireland,but will come through I`m sure.But as a nation within the UK,if they choose to remain so,should require much more consideration as to their future governance than any English region – and that is written only slightly grudgingly,by someone of Cornish origins!
What has happened is that the Scottish people are wakening up to the fact that the Labour party and sad cases like Alex Gallacher believe the rest of us are as stupid and lacking in confidence as they are. Fotunately they are they are held in general low esteem and are being replaced by those they have been insulting for years.
Whatever is the current condition of the Scottish economy it is an economy trapped in a virtually bankrupted UK economy which is sucking most of the UK dry as it contracts back to support the affluence of London and the South East of England.
The point is we wouldn’t be paying for Trident. We wouldn’t be paying for illegal invasions and vainglorious campaigns in parts of the world where have no business and are not welcome. We wouldn’t be squandering the proceeds of our huge natural resources or sharing them with 60 million people. We wouldn’t have abandoned our industrial base. We wouldn’t be paying billions to “national” programmes like renewing London’s underground system or high speed rail links to the north (Leeds?) or enriching already rich bankers. I could go on.
Like Denmark or New Zealand or Finland or Norway we would be using our craft, our resources our abilities and our intelligence to run our economy and our nation to our own ambitions – and they would be very high indeed.
The fact is the condition of the shackled Scottish economy at this moment is meaningless in the constitutional debate and entirely irrelevant to the future economic prospects of an independent nation.
The most compelling feature in the relentless move towards independence is the belief in our ability to do things very differently and very much better.
A significant proportion of the electorate in the south believe we are too stupid to manage it and so, sadly, so still does a diminishing band of our own.
The Tories allege voting SNP will let Labour in. Labour repeat the vote SNP get Tory mantra ad nauseam. Both claims are devoid of substance.
A lot of the Scottish electorate have woken up to the fact that “The Vow was not worth the paper it was written on. The Smith Commission promise limited extra responsibilities rather than more powers. The Daily Record, who look lie the originator of the vow, everyone else is busy denying responsibility for it. The record has totally misrepresented the vow as bringing increasing Scotland’s budget by billions of pounds. IPSO has forced the record into a grovelling apology. This has only been half heartedly complied with.
The Linking of the referendum result to EVEL, by the Tories must be partly responsible for the stream of anti-Scots bile which appears in mainstream media articles and cartoons. Steve Bell’s effort in the Guardian last week dredged a new low. It wasn’t even funny.
I came close to this earlier in this discussion but hadn’t joined up the dots. If either unionist party gets 326 votes in England, they have an absolute majority and form the government. That makes the Scottish vote irrelevant Scotland only sends 59 mps to Westminster.
The current monstering of the SNP is the Unionist parties projecting their failure to command a majority in England onto the SNP. I wonder if this is another manifestation of their agency of the Cowardly State?
The UK parliament got what they wanted in the Referendum. They can hardly blame the SNP for taking advantage of this.
The reality is that I think that, once again, the UK will get the parliament it deserves after 7/5
I may write more on this later
Totally. I’m sure it won’t be the one Scotland votes for. There’s the rub.