Why I’m going to vote No

Since the independence referendum campaign began, I have felt unable to write down in one place a summary of what I believe about the central issue. I wanted to hear the debate on both sides and the task of distilling my feelings into a single statement seemed too complex. With my postal vote arriving through the mail yesterday I now have to confront myself, if no-one else, with my reasons for voting ‘No.’

There is no simple answer. My reasons are both positive and negative, rational and emotional.

To begin with myself. I have many identities. Not least, I’m a partner and father. I’m a British citizen and I’m a European. My partner and children are Scottish. I’ve lived in Scotland for longer than anywhere else, nearly thirty years. And I’m English. I’m English in the same way my brother-in-law, who has lived outside Scotland for nearly all his adult life, is Scottish and will always be Scottish. I am relaxed about all these differences and about many more.

Not only am I relaxed about the differences I rejoice in the diversity they represent. But I am uneasy about nationalism. I despise the crude nationalism of ‘We’re better than any other nation’ and I am wary of it dressed up in its civic clothes. I am told constantly that independence for Scotland is about the future. At the same time I am assailed with a never-ending litany of dates, 1319, 1320, 1603, 1707, 1715, 1745, 1979 …  , each with its own myth of triumph, despair or grievance.

I already live in a liberal democracy. It’s called the United Kingdom. It’s far from perfect but what nation state is? For every wrong it might have perpetrated, I can point to good that it has done. By and large we live in peace within its boundaries with a standard of living amongst the world’s highest. We get to choose our government. We can say and write nearly everything we want, and many of us do. A right-wing Conservative government, which I do not support, has even legislated for equal marriage, and before the Scottish Parliament did. I see no point in breaking away to form a separate liberal democracy behind a new international border.

Some seem able to find a single overwhelming reason that makes them want to leave the UK. It may be a political party, most often the Tories, nuclear weapons, or poverty. The usual formulation is ‘I want independence because of the obscenity of X. Independence will make Scotland an X-free zone.’ With the possible exception of nuclear weapons, which would most likely be a question of displacement rather than abolition, I don’t believe any of these claims. And of all the reasons to break away, dislike of one political party in a democracy seems the most facile.

Much of the debate about independence has focussed on its likely impact on the economy. Listening to all the arguments, my conclusions are

  1. the Yes campaign has not made a coherent case for which currency an independent Scotland would use. The SNP are adamant, in Alex Salmond’s words, that ‘It’s our pound and we’re keeping it.’ This is in the face of the clearest statement by all the other main political parties that there would not be a currency union between the UK and an independent Scotland,
  2. with potential Spanish and perhaps Belgian opposition, EU membership seems to waver somewhere between possible and probable, and is by no means a foregone conclusion. It would be likely to require long and arduous negotiation and exact a heavy price in commitment to arrangements many Scots would find unpalatable,
  3. oil is by no means the bonanza the Yes campaign seeks to portray and is unlikely to deliver the revenue and ‘savings for a rainy day’ that the SNP claim it would [I have blogged separately about the SNP and the oil industry],
  4. the important financial sector would be under significant threat as its main markets are south of the border and major relocation of companies and jobs is likely,
  5. not unrelated to these issues, there has been enough doubt cast on the SNP’s forecast of government revenues to make me wary of an independent Scottish government’s ability to deliver better services than it can in the UK.

At the ‘rational’ end of my spectrum of reasons for voting ‘No’ I also include the NHS, which is the responsibility of the Scottish Parliament and which works well. I do not believe it is under threat from what happens in England. I do believe however that the state pension may be harder to sustain, let alone increase, in a smaller country with a significantly older population than the rest of the UK.

Of course there are arguments against my conclusions on the economy, the NHS and pensions. But I’m not convinced that enough of those arguments are correct to overcome the counter-arguments. In particular, the manipulation by the SNP of information about many of these issues is distasteful and reinforces my view that they will sacrifice anything including the truth to achieve their one over-riding objective.

As I was thinking about what I could write here I visited the tail-end of the wonderful Edinburgh festivals. In the unlikely venue of a recording of the BBC Radio 4 programme Book Club, I heard journalist and author Allan Massie talk about his novel A Question of Loyalties. I have since discovered he is both a unionist and a Conservative so sceptics may wish to switch off here. The question of the referendum did not surface at all in his discussions with Jim Naughtie and the Book Club audience. But as with so much else in this year’s festivals the question of independence hovered unspoken in the air.

Massie said much that I found sympathetic. In particular, although I did not make a note of his precise words, he said something to the effect that

I believe most people make decisions on emotional grounds.

If he was thinking of independence/separation I believe he is right. Those emotions will be affected by rational argument and by facts, or at least their interpretation. But underlying the arguments are deep feelings.

My emotions lead me to the conclusion that I want my adopted country Scotland to stay together with the other nations of the United Kingdom. In a phrase I hesitate to use but keeps buzzing around in my mind, everything is too ‘jumbled up in a good way.’ I can see an opponent making sport with the words but they reflect a shared history and shared values, as well as a contemporary strength that comes from being together. That’s not to say the British state doesn’t need reform. It does (I tend increasingly to the idea of a federal state and may return to that in another post).

I don’t expect my arguments to convince anyone who is going to vote ‘Yes’ – that emotional factor again. It’s not why I’ve written this. But I have at least tried to be honest with myself in what will be the most important vote I will have cast in my forty-five years of adult life.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Why I’m going to vote No

  1. 21cscotland says:

    I am sorry that you do not feel that though you live here this vote is about nationality. It is about representation and the people that live in this country. ALL the people that live here and work for the country’s survival. Perhaps some of the politicians involved do not even grasp this. We have not had the government we voted for much of the post war period and even when we did those who ‘represented’ us did not. This has been apparent since 1999 with our own parliament – a ‘blessing’ England does not have – when to start with nothing changed. Only with SNP MINORITY government did we see action. All has been controlled by Westminster before this time. We need people in Scotland that wish to work towards a good society through wealth creation. The SNP are dubbed ‘Tartan Tories’ but they still have an eye on the inequity of land ownership etc They do want enterprise and so wealth creation – and tho they may not admit it – they do not think they have all the answers but recognise that there are some fine entrepreneurs in this country that have the energy to generate wealth.

    YES = a long term investment in self determination – a struggle – a cut in public sector spending in the short term and the painful decisions associated – BUT these will be our choices to ‘vary’ in Scotland.

    Believe – times ahead are rough.
    Believe – both sides will cut public spending in totality – both have said so at some point
    With a smaller budget – could we make our decisions on home turf better?
    Health or warheads? What will the UK say? What will Scotland say with the same question?

    Regardless of the result in September – please vote – please be positive regardless of the result and please stay IF you love this fine country and you enjoy living here. There are many places in England also worth living in. England sadly has not made the decision to approach self government yet – it can be divisive – but the world now lends itself to smaller autonomous states – look at Singapore – cut adrift by Malaysia and after the pain highly successful…..

    Regardless it will be painful. In time it will probably happen. Let’s be proactive.
    God Bless


  2. Noel Darlow says:

    “a standard of living amongst the world’s highest”

    For whom? We live in a country with massive food bank use, where welfare claimants – often with families and children to feed – are bullied by an aggressive sanctions regime and left to starve if they trip up. A high level of inequality is a sure sign of something seriously broken in the political system. There’s a real opportunity for Scotland to improve on that in ways which seem impossible in the UK.

    “We get to choose our government”

    Not if you’re Scottish. Scotland regularly has to endure right-wing governments which it did not vote for. The political cycle will of course swing left and right in an independent Scotland too but the rightward swings will not be towards a less extreme centre-right which, for example, accepts its responsibility for health care. We don’t have the same misanthropic, extreme-right constituency which exists in rUK.

    “I believe most people make decisions on emotional grounds”

    This is quite a silly thing for AM to say. Democracy and equality are two very rational reasons to vote YES.

    Arguments based on currency and economics are plagued by short-termism. Independence isn’t the same as choosing a government with a five-year plan. This is a long-term decision and in the long-term we have the resources to succeed providing we can make smart decisions and smart investments. That’s all there is to it. Nobody will even remember the currency question 25 years from now any more than they remember all the ins and outs of the ERM.

    You can pretty much guarantee that a country plagued with high levels of inequality like the UK presents a much bigger risk for the well-being of its citizens.


  3. Alistair Gray says:

    Hi Roger. Thanks for an unusually thoughtful and articulate post.

    The problem I have with it is that (like the entire No campaign) it fails to engage with the reason we are having this referendum. Millions of UK citizens are on the verge of walking away from her parliament. Those who wish to defend the Union need to examine the reasons, and propose a response. Your post, and the No campaign, have entirely failed to do so.

    You yourself may be reasonably content with Westminster government, content that it deserves the appellation of “liberal democracy”. I and others do not feel the same.

    For the past 35 years, Westminster has functioned as little more than a vehicle for asset stripping the public sphere. The central program of successive Labour and Tory governments has been to transfer public assets into private hands, enriching corporate lobbyists and impoverishing both the mass of the population and democracy itself. The result is a United Kingdom which when set beside our European neighbours fails almost every test of good government.

    UK politics is simply corrupt. The two main parties have been captured by a corporate oligarchy. The dreadful electoral system perpetuated by these same parties ensures that they remain in power, and chokes off any attempt by a new party to break in. I am no fan of UKIP, but it cannot be right that current polls predict that they will win over 20% of the vote – but no seats. That is not democracy.

    Holyrood by contrast is a modern 21st century parliament with a good proportional voting system. Successive Holyrood governments have given Scotland a thoroughly decent social-democratic politics, and have extended and protected the public sphere.

    If Westminster worked, Scotland would not need devolution. As things are, there is simply no argument for leaving the currently reserved powers in the hands of a corrupt and discredited regime which no longer deserves the honourable title of democracy.

    For these reasons, I will be voting Yes.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Laura Morgan says:

    Dear Roger
    Although I agree with other responders that your post is thoughtful and well-written, I’m afraid I agree more with the following two links:

    You say you can point to the good the UK has done and appear to be proud of its “liberal democracy” but are uncomfortable with nationalism… isn’t being proud of the UK just a different type of nationalism?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.