You are here: Home » Comment »

We need more than shroud-waving and casual abuse to beat Salmond

March 11, 2012 10:50 am

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

What’s our problem with an independent Scotland? This is the simplest and most overlooked question facing the UK’s political leaders as they try to convince the Caledonian electorate to remain within the UK ahead of 2014’s referendum on independence.

All three party leaders have tried in recent days to up their game, making a case either for the perils of separation or the benefits of the status quo. Last month David Cameron warned that independence would have profound effects on Scotland’s relationship with the EU and NATO, saying it would be “deeply, deeply sad” to see Scotland leave the UK.

Speaking at Labour’s Scottish conference last week Ed Miliband  accused Alex Salmond of having no “industrial policy” because “they [the SNP] don’t have a single-minded focus on how to create an economy that works for working people; they’re too busy trying to change our borders.”

Meanwhile Nick Clegg promises further devolution of powers and a “green economic renaissance” for Scotland, whatever that means.

All three UK political leaders are now focused on the task, but are they getting anywhere? Many Scots, it is fair to say, remain unmoved by the entreaties of London-based politicians. Opinion polls routinely show around 40 per cent of them want independence against slightly more who wish to stay inside the British state. The rest are undecided.

Unfortunately, the challenge of averting the siren call of independence rests, disproportionately, on Labour’s shoulders. Given there are famously more pandas than Conservative MPs in Scotland and with the Lib Dems sullied amid the compromises of office, this is Labour’s show.

Yet our arguments against “the nats” have always seemed simplistic to the point of bone-headed. It lacks conviction when we attack them as “Tartan Tories” as they go about providing free care for the elderly and a free university education. The SNP are recognisably social democratic: pro-European and non-chauvinistic.

Labour’s new Scottish leader, Johann Lamont, seems a tough operator and the party certainly needs that; but it also needs a first-rate strategist too. Calling Salmond a “conman” and “deluded”, as she did last Saturday during Labour’s Scottish conference, is all good knockabout, but it fails to make a single compelling argument for the union.

The MP and former minister Tom Harris, who also stood for the Scottish Labour leadership last year, did so because none of his more senior countrymen in Westminster were willing to do so. With such a noticeable reluctance from senior Scots to want to lead their own country, should we really be surprised if the electorate takes that to mean the parliament and executive are second best?

Fortunately, the SNP surge in recent years has two critical weaknesses.

The first is that the SNP is neither a proper political party nor a broadly-based movement:  it’s an Alex Salmond personality cult. With some justification, it has to be said. Tough, clever, unflappable and lucky; he is a class act. His open face and easy manner personifies an optimistic, confident future for Scotland. He is hard to best and without him the SNP would be nowhere.

But he is only one man. If Salmond falters, the SNP falters too – and so does the argument for Scottish nationalism. The question for unionists in all three parties is whether they are up to the task of breaking his serve. Salmond on the backfoot would be a sight to savour.

The SNP’s second weakness is cyclical. It benefitted from being a non-Tory, social democratic alternative during Labour’s years in power. (The same thing happened in the 1970s with their last great surge). Fundamentally, though, it remains a protest party. The compromises of office left Labour electorally vulnerable and the SNP gleefully filled the gap.

But by 2014 Labour will have clawed back the powerful advantage of being the party best placed to end Tory rule. Meanwhile the SNP’s support is likely to have deflated through its own failures and compromises in office.

Alex Salmond has one shot at achieving independence. A tsunami of impossible questions about the practical implications of national divorce threatens to overwhelm his political appeal. Yet it still requires compelling voices to ask those questions.

A combination of Westminster politicians warning about the apocalyptic consequences of independence combined with the insular tribalism of everyday Scottish politics conspires to blunt that attack. We will have to do better than shroud-waving and casual abuse.

The best place to start is at the beginning; restating that essential question: what is our problem with an independent Scotland?

Well, what is it?

Related posts:

  1. Why the Left should beware Salmond-onomics
  2. Glasgow North East: remember to thank Cameron and Salmond too (and some replies to my last post)
  3. Cameron and Salmond endanger Scotland’s national interests at the heart of Europe
  4. A very Scottish re-election
  5. To be or not to be – that is the only question worth asking
  • AlanGiles

    I think the Scots have every right to choose independence – they have their own culture and worth, and have a pride in their national identity. I feel it would be best to let them decide for themselves without us Sassanachs  telling them what to do.

    In fact keep telling them what to do (like the U.K. did some years ago in telling the Americans to vote for Al Gore not Bush) they may well decide they resent us telling what they should and shouldn’t do.

    Frankly after hearing his TWAO Radio 4 interview early last week with Martha Kearney (fly the flag for British products by sticking a “Made in England” label on it), I think it is a bit rich for Ed to accuse the SNP  of  ”having no “industrial policy”, because to judge from that lacklustre interview neither does he – and neither does Cameron.

    Westminster can seem out of touch and uninterested in even parts of London, that must be even more magnified in Scotland.

    • DaveCitizen

       I agree Alan – I would like to see Ed M dropping the usual political manoeuvering designed to protect petty short term party interests and hear some real engagement on how democracy in Scotland might actually be a good thing.

      We might even offer our full support to making an independent left of centre Scotland work so as to create a beacon to offset the small minded timid Tory approach that’s presented as the only way.

      Let’s face it, if we are to get the real and dramatic change that ordinary people so urgently need in England, Labour is going to have to step outside the old box. If they don’t we’ll just get more of the same old rubbish that leaves most British people under the cosh of a super rich few. 

      • http://twitter.com/matt_j_little Matthew Little

        Erm, we already have democracy in Scotland…

        • DaveCitizen

           Erm – Democracy: a political or social unit governed ultimately by all its members.

          I think you have confused “in Scotland” with “in the UK”.

  • Daniel Speight

    I have a feeling that if I were a Scot rather the London-Irish mongrel I am, I would be looking to support a Scottish Labour Party in an independent Scotland. Because of what I am, I would be sad to see the end of Scottish Labour representation in Westminster.

  • Derekjs

    The problem might be that England is generically right wing and without the Labour Scottish presence in Westminster Ed will be out of a job.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001102865655 John Ruddy

      Only 1 General Election since the war would have had a different outcome without Scottish MPs. So, no, Ed wont be out of a job.

  • Matthew Fairmind

    Labour will never have an outright win in Scotland again. It will be another Lib/Lab pact. As such they will need to tell the electorate if they will import NHS and Welfare policies currently adopted by these respective parties in London. They will need to put forward their vision of  a future Scotland under their rule. At the moment they are an intellectual irrelevance

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001102865655 John Ruddy

      But Labour never has had an outright win in Scotland. Only one party has gained more than 50% of the vote – the Tories in 1955.

      The electoral system in the Scottish Parliament was specifically designed to prevent Labour winning an overall majority.

      • Don McC

        Eh, Dewar stated it was designed to stop the SNP winning an overall majority, not Labour.

  • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

    “free care for the elderly and a free university education”

    Two very good reasons for voting SNP. What will Labour offer? As far as I can make out Labour’s approach is to show themselves better at managing cuts and, as reported in the Independent last week, out-flanking the Tories from the right (probably with the intention of winning Daily Mail reading swing voters in the south-east of England).
    That might work when there’s no alternative. But in Scotland there is an alternative. In Wales there will be a very compelling social democratic alternative if Leanne Woods wins the leadership of Plaid.

    If Labour doesn’t present an alternative to the Tories and to the failed neo-liberal experiment, others will.

    Even in good old England groups like 38degrees, UKuncut and avaaz are leaving Labour behind as campaigning people-before-profit movements (BTW I’m a late middle-aged Labour Party member, not a starry-eyed teenager). 

    While Labour sleeps other gain ground. The writing is on the wall.

    • JoeDM

       ”free care for the elderly and a free university education”

      Paid for by English taxpayers.

      • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

        You mean to say there’s some money left over after bailing out the bankers? 

        • Chilbaldi

          The Scottish bankers?

          • treborc

             Funny they all had English heads of finance.

      • treborc

        Poor old England, I would think most of the money labour and Thatcher wasted came from the Oil fields in Scotland.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001102865655 John Ruddy

      Both policies, of course, introduced by Labour administrations in Scotland.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001102865655 John Ruddy

    I’d rather hope that the Scottish media will start to examine the SNP more closely. For instance their disgraceful lies about infant mortality in Glasgow during their conference. It was little more than “Scottish Labour will kill your baby”. 

    Yet a) infant Mortality in Glasgow is not the highest in Scotland (its higher in SNP controlled Fife, for instance), and b) it has dropped drastically since the 1970s. Not forgetting that a lot of infant deaths are related to causes outside of local authority control.

    But hey, what does that matter if the SNP can scare the voters of Glasgow into voting for them in May?

  • Stewartwilliam2010

    Facebook.com/ScottishIndependence

  • http://twitter.com/matt_j_little Matthew Little

    This is a great article. Scottish Labour should spend less time trying to knock Salmond on his backside and focus on our own strategy. What would we like to do in government in Scotland? The problem with the last Labour administration in Scotland was it was more defined by what it didn’t want to do, than what it did. It was about “protecting” Scotland from Tories or Blair’s reforms and in the end we didn’t use the power we had to make a difference. That’s where we can get a real definition of why a Labour govt would be better than a nat govt, since the nat strategy for the referendum is to not rock the boat, and do nothing even a little bit controversial.
    People say Scotland is lucky to have such a wide choice in political parties but I disagree.  We have 4 parties but they are all really quite the same. They are all left of centre (yes the tories too) and are all mostly small “c” conservative (yes the SNP are too because besides from the constitution they talk “protecting” Scottish services from reform, just like Labour once did). If Labour want to win in 2016, then they need to occupy the radically reforming ground, a one more heave strategy just will not do. 

    • AlanGiles

      A pity, Matthew, we in England were not protected from some of Blair’s reforms – not to mention the wars (that I know applies to Scotland equally).  Last Thursday in Afghanistan we had yet another sad reminder of Blair’s legacy with the death of five soldiers aged 19/21 and one of 33.

  • derek

    If the labour party wants to challenge Salmond they better seek out Tony Kinder and ask him to lead the fight back, I kid you not! Dr Kinder would destroy Salmond in any debate.

  • Anotherfive

    I don’t have any problem with Scotland asserting its right to full Independence from the Westminster Parliament, if that is what the populace of Scotland vote to have.

  • robertcp

    My problem with Scottish independence is that it is a stupid idea and I am confident that the Scottish people will vote against it.  Salmond will then be able to carry on doing a good job of running a devolved government with a few more powers.

    It is  just silly to have two nation states on a small island, for example, the island of Ireland or Cyprus.  I genuinely feel more British than Welsh, although this did not stop me making an idiot of myself when Scott Williams beat the English with a typical bit of Welsh brilliance!

    • treborc

      I feel more Welsh then British, and if you go to most of the EU and say your British they say ah yes English

  • robertcp

    My problem with Scottish independence is that it is a stupid idea and I am confident that the Scottish people will vote against it.  Salmond will then be able to carry on doing a good job of running a devolved government with a few more powers.

    It is  just silly to have two nation states on a small island, for example, the island of Ireland or Cyprus.  I genuinely feel more British than Welsh, although this did not stop me making an idiot of myself when Scott Williams beat the English with a typical bit of Welsh brilliance!

  • Amber Star

    Scots have no difficulty getting their minds around why staying part of Britain makes sense. So far Slamond has conceded Scotland would:
    1. Keep the £
    2. Have the same interest rates
    3. Agree to a financial stability pact – which would restrict Scotland’s borrowing powers & fiscal strategy
    4. Keep the Queen as head of state
    5. Continue with the National Grid for energy trading
    6. Have no border/passport control between Scotland & England

    A clear majority of Scots, in recent YG polling also want to:
    1. Have a joint army & NATO defense strategy
    2. Keep our joint presence on the UNSC
    3. Have joint representation in Europe
    4. Be represented by the British embassies/ consuls abroad
    5. Keep our British passports

    It would be much better to continue asking Alex Salmond why Scots who claim to want independence seem not to want very much of it. Of course, neither does Salmond. He deperately wants somebody to put on the ballot the devo-max or devo-plus or whatever its latest name is. He can’t do it because his own Party won’t let him. So far, only Nick Clegg is indulging Alex’s fantasy of having all the money & power but none of the responsibility of running a truly independent country.

     I dearly hope that Labour will not fall into the trap of backing the idea of putting more devolution on the ballot paper. If we do, Salmond will not take the beating from the Scottish people which he is currently headed for. After independence is defeated, the SNP’s activist base will dwindle away & Labour will be well placed to be heard regarding a strong program of devolved government for Scotland.

     So what’s our problem with an independent Scotland? Scots who claim to want independence seem not to want very much of it; & the majority of Scots don’t want it at all. In a democracy, that’s a clear & simple answer to the question.

  • graeme-hillan

    Good article, well balanced and to the point. One issue I would like to point out is where is the real “Scottish” Labour Party? Where is the evidence they obtained a good deal for Scotland when we lost control of our fisheries, where is the good deal with respect to Oil revenues? where is the good deal with respect to our renewable potential? Why are you not crucifying the Crown Estates for selling Scottish public lands into private ownership?

    I will tell you the answer, as Ian Smart noted in his blog, you put the Labour Party first, not Scotland. Therefore you cannot abide Scottish Independance because it would be incompatible with the current system of party politics and the Labour Party in particular.

  • Unopierro

    “it’s an alex salmon personality cult.”

    then i just stop reading.

     

  • Thathistorybloke

    Excellent article, but I think there are a couple of weaknesses that have not been considered. The gnats have more talent than just Salmond; Sturgeon, Robertson and Hosie are decent ‘front office’ performers and Swinney (who is apparently even more dull in real life than on telly) is an exceptionally competent and effenctive policy animal behind the scenes.  On the unionist side there is, as yet, nobody of any stature or credibility to lead the anti-independence campaign. It has to be lead by a Scottish figure, but who exactly? Malcolm Chisholm is widely seen as a reasonable, practical man of integritybut that has not done him any favours with the party hierarchy. Jim Murphy is seen -  wrongly I think - as very tribalist and too much wedded to Westminster authoritarianism. Darling and Brown have no credibility with the Scottish electorate and are ‘yesterday’s men’. Johann Lamont? Seriously? 
    The tories and the glib-dumbs are in no better shape. Ruth Davidson is seen as Cameron’s poodle and the looks on the faces of their MSPs every time he speaks tells you everything you need to know about Willie Rennie.
    Cameron, Clegg, Moore and Milliband have already queered the pitch by trying to push for an early referendum. Parties that were opposed to having a referendum at all can hardly expect to run the show – the Gnats won the election after all. The referendum is not a lost cause, but the ‘no’ campaign needs to put a credible team together pretty quickly and all the parties (but especially Labour of course) need to give some thought to the future if the ‘yes’ campaign wins. If they do, where will Labour stand on NATO/Trident/EU issues? What are the policiesm that would bring a Labour victory in a post-independence election? 
      

  • Uglyfatbloke

    A lot of interesting posts here. A few could have done with a quick shufti at a history book before writing, buit it’s the future that matters. I’m very dubious about ‘what Scots want…’ type statements. People keep telling me that Shetlanders want ‘to remain part of the UK’, but it’s noticeable that none of the folk that say that actually live here. Last May our MSP (Tavish Scott) might well have been out on his ear. Everyone knew that the independent candidate would split the vote. If the Gnats had been a bit more brave (they were n’t….quelle surprise) they would have thrown their wieght behind the independent and given him the sort of help he needed to run a decent campaign.
     If the Gnats are to be beaten – and they can be- it ‘ll have to be Labour that takes up the fight. The Tories are toxic and the Glib-Dumbs are irrelevant. So what’s the plan? First there needs to be a face for the ‘no’ campaign, then there needs to be a policy raft that people actually like…scrapping the supreme court, democratic reform for the commons. ditching the militraily uselsss Trident, embracing personal liberty as a key issue rather than as something to prevent would all be good material.  The ‘face; for the No campaign is more of a problem. it really can’t be abyone wealthy and posh so that rules out the two Eds, Cameron and Clegg. It has to someone credible to the public so that rules out Brown, Darling, Ruth Davidson and Rennie, also Lamont, Curran, Baillie and Baker. Ken MacIntosh perhaps? Ian Davidson?

Latest

  • Comment The culture of high risk credit is being exploited by betting shops

    The culture of high risk credit is being exploited by betting shops

    By Matthew Zarb-Cousin

    Since the financial crisis, the perfect storm of recession and banks restricting access to credit has led to the rise of payday lenders. Our high streets are slowly deteriorating from the vibrant, diverse places they once were into an abyss of pawnbrokers, payday loan shops and bookies. The three feed off of each other, targeting some of our most deprived areas and perpetuating a cycle of despair driven by the need for extra income. Research carried out by Geofutures found [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

    Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

    Chris Clark and Rav Seeruthun on a small change that if adopted, would free activists to spend more time on community work Every year at party conferences we hear professional politicians eulogise hard-working party volunteers. And there’s no activity more often evoked than that of ‘knocking on doors’. It’s a common delusion that the purpose of doorstep canvassing is to ‘persuade’ voters. Having taken part in our fair share of Labour canvassing sessions, we’ve both had the dispiriting experience of [...]

    Read more →
  • Europe Featured You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

    You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

    By Douglas Alexander

    Europe is not often the issue which comes top of people’s concerns on the doorstep. Nor do opinion polls suggest that Europe is a priority for voters when compared to issues like the economy or jobs. But you can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe. This week saw over a hundred Conservative MPs rebel and vote against their own Queens Speech. They were angry that it hadn’t included a bill which would [...]

    Read more →
  • News Seats and Selections Vicky Foxcroft selected as Labour’s PPC for Lewisham Deptford

    Vicky Foxcroft selected as Labour’s PPC for Lewisham Deptford

    Vicky Foxcroft has been selected by Lewisham Deptford CLP as the party’s candidate for 2015 at a selection meeting this afternoon. Here’s a brief biography: Vicky grew up in the North West in a single parent household, and was the first person in her family to go to university. She has held many positions in the party including Chair of Labour Students, has sat on the National Policy Forum and is currently a local councillor and is Chair of Lewisham [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour’s future schools policy: why accountability matters

    Labour’s future schools policy: why accountability matters

    By Mike Ion

    Stephen Twigg, Labour’s Shadow Education Secretary is one of the more thoughtful and pragmatic individuals to hold this vitally important brief for some time. To his credit Stephen has been out and about these past two years listening to pupils, teachers, parents and governors and finding out more about the challenges they face on a day-to-day basis. In addition Stephen has been looking closely at some local, regional, national and international programmes that have had a demonstrable impact in raising [...]

    Read more →