Scots want clarity, not endless mudslinging

Disengaged

Uncertainty is a big theme for both sides in the referendum debate. It’s easy to see why so many Scots remain disengaged. The increasingly bad-tempered nature of the debate, the endless stream of supposedly ‘expert’ opinion, the apparent lack of any concrete information about what the various constitutional options might actually mean – all these factors combine to turn people off. The media’s focus on a few big personalities – coupled with its habit of filtering everything through the prism of party politics – hasn’t helped much either.

Clarity

Scots are looking for greater clarity from their political leaders. They want to know what the Yes and No camps intend to do after the referendum. Some things are already fairly clear. For instance, the SNP has laid out an 18 month ‘independence timetable’ during which Scotland would disentangle itself from the Union and secure membership, as an independent state, of international organisations such as the EU, the World Trade Organisation and the UN. However, over these 18 months, the Scottish Government will face a series of tough negotiations with Westminster. The removal of British nuclear weapons from Scottish waters promises to be a major sticking point. The SNP wants rid of Trident “at the earliest safe opportunity”, but the UK lacks an alternative basing site in England or Wales. This creates a dilemma. Either the SNP insists on the swift removal of the Trident fleet (effectively disarming the UK) or it agrees to prolong Trident’s presence in Scotland until another site is built. Without a definite schedule for the relocation of Trident, it’s difficult to know what sort of decision Alex Salmond and his team would make. Equally vague is the SNP’s vision for welfare in an independent Scotland. Salmond has been consistent in his opposition to the UK government’s welfare reforms but he is yet to develop a coherent alternative. He will have to confront this issue sooner rather than later. Scotland’s population is ageing at the same rate as the rest of the UK’s but growing at just half the rate. What new sources of revenue would an independent Scotland under SNP government find to ease the growing strain on Scottish public services?

Devolution

Of the main unionist parties, only the Liberal Democrats have outlined their proposals for the next phase of devolution. They include replacing the Act of Union with a new “federal union” and giving Holyrood control over income tax rates. Westminster would remain in charge of oil revenues, corporation tax and VAT, as well as defence and foreign affairs. The Scottish Conservatives have been less committal. Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson had described the package of reforms drawn up by the Calman Commission back in 2009 as a “line in the sand” as far as constitutional change was concerned. Today, however, she seems to have accepted the need for the Scottish Parliament to raise a larger proportion of the money it spends. In 2012, Scottish Labour established a devolution commission to look at ways of strengthening Holyrood. Yet, in April of this year, reports surfaced that a group of Labour MPs angry at plans to transfer control over income tax to Edinburgh intended to boycott the party’s spring conference. The MPs were voicing the concerns of a number of senior Scottish figures at Westminster who remain hostile to the idea of a more autonomous Scottish Parliament. Labour has long styled itself as ‘the party of Scottish home rule’. The public won’t take it seriously if it fails to live up to its own designation.

Referendum result

A great deal rests on the nature of the referendum result. On the basis of current trends, Scots will reject independence next year. A defeat for the nationalists of 20 or more points would radically reduce the likelihood of far-reaching constitutional reform, particularly if Westminster decided against it. Conversely, were the Yes campaign to secure anything above 44 or 45 per cent of the vote, the momentum towards greater self-government would be unstoppable – and the unionist parties would be under heavy pressure to fulfil (or even surpass) their pre-referendum promises.

Undecided

In recent weeks, polls have registered an increase in the number of Scots who say they are undecided about how they’ll vote. This is no bad thing. Perhaps the knowledge that large sections of the electorate remain open to persuasion will encourage the Yes and No campaigns to refine and clarify their arguments for and against independence. The campaign which provides the clearest account of Scotland’s social, economic and political future stands to gain the most. Voters are waiting for something tangible. Let’s hope the mud-slinging and obfuscation of the last 12 months gives way to a cleaner, less convoluted and more open debate over the next 12.