IN 2014 the No camp won the referendum vote because it could offer certainty backed by the Union, and the carrot-and-whip actions of Cameron against the uncertainty of an independent Scotland. The Scottish people voted with their head and not their heart.
Today the situation is completely different. The certainty of the Union has been replaced by the chaos of Brexit. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the government in London is an English government. No discussions between London and Cardiff and Edinburgh; Belfast hasn’t had any rule for over a year. And don’t think it will be any different under Corbyn – Labour are just as divided as the Tories.
Have things changed in the Yes camp? The answer has to be: “Not yet”. The Yes camp still has some big decisions to make. Monarchy or republic? A presidential republic would save the present royal family from having to make a painful decision. An alternative could be found as a member of the Commonwealth, with a High Commissioner as head of state.
A written constitution? Which currency? A new Scottish pound? Floating or coupled to another currency and if so, which? Next time the Yes camp must offer a viable alternative.
Independence in Scotland is still very much related to the SNP. Without the SNP there wouldn’t have been a referendum in 2014. In 2007 they stuck their necks out and formed a minority government and they’re still there today. No mean achievement. But the Yes camp has to be bigger than just the SNP. There must be many supporters of other parties who look not unfavourably at the thought of an independent Scotland and therefore the Yes camp must be wider, a Scottish independence movement.
What about a roundtable with representatives from all political parties, industry, the trade unions and the religious world, all united on a basis of equality and with a common desire for independence? This worked well with the German reunification discussions in 1990. Roundtables could also be set up for specific fields: the organisation of the new state, for example. The wheel doesn’t need to be invented again, the present voting system came from the German system, so why not a First Chamber based on the Dutch system with senators who review bills using their consciences instead of party instructions?
At this point I awakened out of my day dream and started to write down my jumbled thoughts. Then I said to myself: I’ll send it to The National and see if they’re just daft enough to publish it!
Hugh Michael Eckersley
Sögel, Germany
I WATCHED with disbelief STV’s coverage of Prince Harry and his girlfriend’s visit to Edinburgh on Tuesday. The Scottish cringe is alive and well, indeed thriving. One Unionist elderly man described them as “the future of the royals”. There must be no future for the royal family in Scotland! This is 2018!
The privileged pair then added insult to injury by visiting the Social Bite cafe – much chance of social awareness from these two, in common with the rest of the Windsors! When are we going to come to our senses and consign this bunch of spongers to history where they belong!!
Billy Kerr
Galston, Ayrshire
THERE is much debate about Scotland and EU membership in the letters pages. This is entirely understandable as the only certain thing about it is its uncertainty. However, the main prize is independence, and what happens after is up for debate. We have little influence at Westminster and are constantly seen as a possession. Would the EU view us in the same way? In my opinion they would not.
However, I can put that debate to the side to get us out of this Union, and the sooner the better.
Bryan Auchterlonie
Perth
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel