THE Growth Commission report has been debated three times at Ayr, Aviemore and now Edinburgh. I attended the SNP National Assembly at Aviemore, one of more than 200 activists gathered to have their say. I detected a strong current running through the gathering. It sought to build the independence case from communities upwards.
The range of topics chosen in the group work sessions inevitably included a new Scottish currency and timing of the next independence referendum, but there were groups that focused on local ways for active citizens to promote self-confidence.
The Growth Commission of necessity chose international comparisons to scope Scotland’s renaissance. Comparing Finland and New Zealand to pick winning ways was refreshing, as one commentator had it, to get away forever from comparisons with England and London.
Yet the concerns of delegates drove the most animated discussions of groups of up to fifteen activists looking to explore the local where all politics begins and ends. They preferred the Growth Commissioners’ triple engines for change, population, participation and productivity rather than the contentious word “growth”. Self-selecting groups often had participants across rural Scotland – Perthshire, Aberdeenshire, Argyll, Borders, Galloway, Easter Ross. One debated how Scotland should feed itself; as the group leader put it, how to make sustainable agriculture relevant? The “big takeaway” at the feedback session was as they put it – to rethink the past (including education, subsidy, land reform, local control) to become agriculturally self-sufficient then grow to export”.
The breadth of that conversation and others included:
1. The challenge of making agriculture, forestry and fishing, dominant in rural economies, relevant for the Growth Commission proposals.
2. Even without Brexit substantial disruption was inevitable for agriculture and food production from subsidy changes vital for marginal agriculture in remoter areas. Answer, a Norway model, perhaps?
3. Scotland exports much of her sheep meat while we import loads of wheat for bread! How can we broker sensible trade relations, which Brexit could seriously disrupt.4. Our food systems are not sustainable, so we need to rethink them. This requires a Scotland-wide debate. What do we want from our land and food producers – via a national land use plan?
5. We need to re-learn how to produce more of what we eat on a local basis, potentially slashing food miles. Since supermarkets dominate supply chains, how does government challenge their grasping ways? You can see that SNP Assemblies question top down propositions that need deeper empathy. The topic of saving Scotland the Brand still focuses on export potential. Will party leaders listen?
Local people want to know how independence will affect them. TheyPeople need to be encouraged to achieve a level of local independence and feel confidence that can then empower the national debate. A group discussion I overheard was about how to make remote mainland areas resilient, now that the islands have their own Act.
A group which I led pointed to community land ownership as it engages people in making their own decisions. In contrast to huge private estates, 2.9% of Scotland in small communities from Galloway to Lewis are carving their entrepreneurial way, increasing local populations, creating new jobs and building confidence through local control of energy and housing. Community Land Scotland supports and stimulates this and prods the Scottish Government community empowerment strategies to do more.
But our group wanted Scottish Government to ensure its agencies, the planning system, energy and food policies give local people the lead role. Fundamentally, we agreed, the democratic deficit requires real local government and local powers to raise taxes and decide how to spend them. Does this go too far beyond current ambitions?
Yet how can Scotland succeed without rekindling that will, that confidence, in every community?
These SNP National Assemblies are a huge stimulus. Two of the Growth Commissioners joined in our debates. Their big asks were heard politely but local activists insisted that progress comes from the roots of the nation. If that doesn’t meet Growth Commission aims what does?
Recently Alastair McIntosh praised the success of the community land movement. ‘I call it independence from within’, he said. Many SNP Assembly goers wholeheartedly agree.
robgibson273@btinternet.com
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 here