Ok, guess this opens up the stage for me, resident Scot of RU!
Might as well start out by saying that I was in fact in favour of independence, and my vote did indeed reflect that.
So far, all the coverage has stated that there is no way that the status quo will reign supreme: the media has been a strong advocate of no throughout, while social media has been the main movement for yes. Incredible grassroots movement.
The main problems that I have with these supposed 'extra powers for Scotland' are that a) we would have MORE than they will ever give us if we had voted Yes, and b)we have had examples of Westminster politics being nothing but fabrications in the past.
For those that are unaware, there was a vote on Scottish Devolution in 1979 (the result was a resounding No) where the parties promised more for Scotland - promises that were never met.
Fast forward to 1997 - we have a second referendum on devolution for Scotland. Resounding Yes, and smiles all round from the "left-wing" Labour politicians that have ushered in the new era in British politics. The important thing to note about the Scottish devolved parliament was the electoral system, a mix of part constituency, part proportional representation. Designed to prevent a majority (nationalist) party vote.
Fast forward once again to 1999. The night before the Scottish Parliament officially started. Tony Blair and Donald Dewar managed to push through a "secondary motion" as a fail safe to help prevent a possible independence movement. They change historical maritime borders, starting from Berwick (borders) and heading North, almost to Aberdeen. Waters that were Scottish, suddenly became English. Without any sort of parliamentary movement. Hardly a show of good faith, wouldn't you say?
1999 Scottish election, Labour win a minority government and the SNP lead the opposition. Where they should be, I believe was the attitude from all those good, upstanding politicians.
Fast forward to 2006, and SNP have the possibility to be in government; either by entering a coalition with one of the other parties, or on their own as a minority government. They opt for the latter. Still not enough of a push for independence (which would have peaked at 35% in favour at this time, if they were lucky), so they just get on with doing a rather good job of promoting civic nationalism, the idea that it's not nationalism in terms of
where you are from (ethnic nationalism), but instead
where you are now.
Big difference from, say, UKIP or (dare I say it) the BNP.
Fast forward to 2011 - Scotland has seen a remarkable SNP government in minority; prescriptions and university level education free at the point of use, council tax freezes, etc etc. It doesn't take much thinking before you realise that actually they do a damn good job of running a state! So it's no surprise to the people of Scotland that we elect a majority SNP government (again, which the system was DESIGNED to prevent!)
Of course, being a nationalist party, they do have independence on the cards. So, of course, they approach the UK government, currently a coalition between right wing Conservatives and Liberal Democrats (don't think I need to explain a Liberal to you Yanks...), who say (quite surprisingly) that actually it is important to honour promises made before coming to power, and wanting to a) call their bluff and b) find out the real feeling in the Scottish electorate, decide to go ahead and give them their referendum. A Yes/No, Should Scotland be an independent country? The talk of further devolution for Scotland within the UK, however, was off the table at this point.
Fast forward, one last time, to this year, 2014. 2 years of campaigning for and against independence, Yes Scotland and Better Together (personally, a horrible name. Sounds like something you'd say just because a divorce would be too lengthy and tiresome, so you might as well just stick together because it'll be easier). Two weeks before the day of the vote, the first poll suggested there could be a lead for Yes. Excluding undecided votes, Yes were at 51% and No were at 49%. So what happens next, but a rehashing of some unexplained promises from the three main Westminster parties of more powers for Scotland and a sudden move to get the three main Westminster parties (who had pledged to remain out of the Scottish referendum) into Scotland and campaign wholeheartedly for a No vote. Former prime minister Gordon Brown provides a timetable for delivering the extra powers for Scotland, which we still don't know what they look like. (Speaking as of today, the day after the referendum, we STILL do not know what these powers actually are.) This timetable, which is totally unconstitutional to the UK, has already been dismissed by backbench Westminster politicians who pledge to stop any further powers to Scotland.
D Day arrives, the day the world watches Scotland, and no-one but us have a say in the most important debate in the world for that one moment. One moment to put a cross in a box, a moment to wish away or welcome our
Westminster overlords southern cousins.
The results come in. Four small communities provide a resounding no, the city of Dundee present the first Yes of the night, when a lot of people have already lost interest. Followed closely by West Dumbartonshire, who's ballots put the Yes campaign in the lead! (For a grand total of five minutes...) after that, it can only seem to go for no. Seems like the No campaigns incredibly patronising slogan of "if you don't know, vote no" was more popular than it should have been. A couple more for Yes, including North Lanarkshire and the city of Glasgow itself, which was a major win in and of its own. (City of Glasgow also had the lowest turnout rate of 75%, and I have to say that is ridiculously high for a lowest!) Fife, the third last community to provide their vote, provide the final blow. Yes 45%, No 55%. Even including a 100% turnout for the remaining to constituencies, both with 100% Yes votes, we cannot win at this point.
So we look to our
Westminster overlords southern cousins, and out comes the old Etonian from No 10. I won't tell you what he said, instead I'll link it
here.
A No for Scotland, a Yes for radical change to the United Kingdom, and the possibility of a devolved English Parliament. That is the outcome of the Great Scottish Debate, and I'm not sure it's one to be proud of or not.
At least we can rejoice, as the politicians viewing the results coming in did, and note that this is indeed a victory for democracy.
Whatever that may mean.
EDIT: While I was writing this, it was brought to my attention that Aleck Salmond, the leader of the SNP and indeed the Yes movement in Scotland has
resigned today, potentially in light of news from Westminster (Cameron) that the timetable for more powers for Scotland will not be met.
He has agreed to stand down in November rather than stand for re-nomination as leader, however he will continue to stand for MSP (Member of Scottish Parliament) for his home constituency of Aberdeenshire East.
I wonder what he is up to this time...
Your new nightmare XXVII:
Linear Mode
