THE other night, I watched the last ever episode of Still Game. It’s the one in which Jack and Victor consider that they had always intended climbing Ben Lomond but never actually did it. They decide they are not too old to give it a try. They inveigle all their colleagues from the Clansman Bar to accompany them. They borrow a tent, and camp at the foot of the Ben. Late in the evening Navid, from the shop, and Isa, the local busybody, arrive with some whisky. Result? They sit up late and wake with a hangover. Jack and Victor are first up.

“Well, I suppose that’s it until next year.”

“Naw, I think we could still do it.” So, they set off along the path.

“Should we no tell the others.”

“Och, they’ll know where we’ve gone.”

They’ve only gone about 50 yards along the path when they disappear into thin air. In turn, each of the other characters does something similar. For instance, Isa is walking down the street with her shopping when she just vanishes. Navid is carrying a couple of boxes into the shop when he also disappears. After all the characters have gone, the camera pans into the Clansman. None of the old crowd are left. It’s the same owner, but now he’s an old man with grey hair. It’s one of the most poignant ends to a series that I have seen. It’s comparable to the final episode of Blackadder, where all of the characters rise from the First World War trenches and charge the enemy.

It got me thinking about independence. It’s not for me; it’s not for you; or for the man across the road. It’s not for Nicola Sturgeon or for Alex Salmond. It doesn’t depend on you liking one of them but hating the other. And it’s not about whether or not Boris Johnson is a buffoon. It’s actually about Scotland and its future. It’s about whether or not we are so selfish that we might deny our grandchildren and their grandchildren the right to choose who they want to be governed by, just as the Scottish Nobility denied that right to the people of Scotland 300+ years ago.

READ MORE: Boris Johson's big levelling up speech panned as 'empty soundbites'

Since 1954, there have been 26 or 27 Westminster governments. During that time Scotland only got the Government they voted for on three or four occasions. The rest of the time we had to endure the Government that was voted in by England.

Their attitude throughout history always has been entirely different from ours. They have always wanted to dominate.

In 25 years’ time, like the characters from Still Game, I will not be here; but, my grandchildren probably will be here, and they might well have grandchildren of their own. Should they not be able to choose Scottish people to be in charge of what happens in Scotland? Or, should they be condemned to obeying the dictates of a different country, which has a different outlook to Scotland?

A couple of weeks ago we had a Scottish football team playing in the Euros for the first time in some 24 years. We didn’t make it through to the knock-out stages so we just shrugged our shoulders and said, “There’s always next time.”

England lost the final, on penalties, and the commentators spent some 25 to 30 minutes analysing why England had not won the match. It was only after they had thought about how those players must be feeling that one of them actually admitted that for ¾ of the game Italy had been the better team.

You see, England has the attitude that they are always better than anyone else. They should have won the Euros. How dare Italy beat them? We are out of the EU because they don’t want anyone else telling them what to do. It doesn’t matter the damage it causes to the economy. They have taken back control – and that’s what matters.

Scotland has always been different. When England was fighting with France we had “The Auld Alliance”. When the Spanish Armada was advancing up the channel towards England, Scotland was busy trading with Spain. Scotsmen have formed the “Guard of Honour” for many of the Russian Tsars. It was a Scotsman who founded the Russian navy – and the American navy. Russia still has Burns’ Clubs. It was a Stuart King, (to be), who helped draw up the American constitution. We have, usually, always held out the hand of friendship rather than impose ourselves on others.

Don’t get me wrong. Lots of English folk are decent enough. It’s just their attitude that has always been so different from ours. Is it not time we started to assert our right to be friendly to others rather than accepting the present attitude of the Westminster government? It’s an attitude that has been branded inhumane by UNO. Do we really want to be like that? Or, could we be better on our own? I think we could!

Charlie Kerr
Glenrothes