THE suggestion that the majority of the Scottish electorate would vote Yes2, to enable the current Scottish Government to become an internationally recognised National Government of Scotland over the next decade, is deemed a distinct threat by both the current UK Government, and the next UK Government in waiting.
To this end, the overarching effort of this UK “Brexit Together” grouping is to denigrate everything the SNP/Green Scottish Government does, in order to instil a “we are not ready yet”, “No” response within a sufficient number of the electorate of Scotland, who worry about the newness of independence occurring within their lifetime.
Part of this worry is about being out of step with a frequently pro-neoliberal pro-austerity UK Government as a southern neighbour, even if it occasionally moves ever so slightly to the left to partially pro-neoliberal, and partially pro-austerity (so-called economic soundness), before returning back to the political rabbit hole of Tory/Ukip policies.
READ MORE: Labour and Tories 'conspiracy of silence' over Brexit condemned by SNP
Just like the “freedom” of a devolved government to steer its own course, but dependent upon the UK overall control of its finances, an independent Scotland initially outwith the EU would be subject to not just constant denigration by its bigger neighbour to the south, but also subjected to economic policy spillover, at the behest of its larger southern neighbour, as it saw fit.
There is indeed a debate on EU membership to be had, in terms of how far and deep the membership goes in respect of future adoption of the euro, a collective EU army, and the extent of free movement, all of which needs to be addressed in future referenda.
For now, the issue is, does a central bank/Scottish currency/EU membership form a sufficient degree of known certainty and protective clout within a decade of societal and economic change, that Scotland requires to be free from undue influence from the rUK, and has this message been received by the electorate of Scotland?
READ MORE: Lesley Riddoch: Small but mighty EU rally shows importance of impact
Already, the UK is mobilising the lie that the EU would have slowed down Covid vaccination within the UK, so it does indeed already recognise the target audience of the Scottish electorate. In contrast the Scottish SNP/Green Government is apparently already targeting the average EU state pension as an interim destination, albeit wrapped up in new all-encompassing economic policy.
So, the independence policy basket necessarily includes EU membership, Scottish currency, and central bank. Beyond this are the operational/policy issues of wealth distribution within an inclusive fair society, most of which will be more of a self-selection stall for negotiation, election, and referenda, for implementation in some form or other, over the next decade.
Looking forward to the de facto referendum General Election as the first step towards Scotland becoming an independent EU nation state.
Stephen Tingle
Greater Glasgow
AGREE totally with Ewan Ritchie (Letters, Jan 26) that it’s far too risky to put all independence eggs in the next Westminster General Election basket. Far too easy for Unionist parties to avoid addressing the indie issue with our vote dropping as a result. We can’t risk losing even narrowly next time.
My vote would be to have next General Election as a vote in favour of an indyref – a vote for democracy. A referendum where 16- and 17-year-olds etc could vote and we would by 2026 have our chance. I for one could just about wait until then.
C Tait
Bridge of Weir
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here