THE UK and Scotland are on the brink. High Noon beckons. A decade is ending in which “truth” has become a victim of the rise of populism, an emerging English nationalism and a Prime Minister determined to use his post-Brexit base and the idea of “culture wars” to rewrite the history of devolution and to reframe the debate on Scotland’s future. His approach will only add to the growing sense of historic mistrust and alienation between London and Edinburgh.

Truth is becoming devalued, the common ground of debate is shrinking, shared aspirations and assumptions are diminishing and undisputed facts are now thin on the ground. Political discourse is in danger of losing any meaning because there is no mechanism for resolving or mediating differences. George Orwell said: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it would hate those that speak it.”

This is the window on Boris Johnson’s world. A world where his imagined reality drives his politics and the idea of “cultural wars” where identity, resentment, anger and grievance are packaged to divide and create a “them and us” politics. The Brexit experience will be the template for his period in Downing Street. Johnson is still campaigning.

Amidst all of this, the PM takes time out to further divide an already disunited kingdom. Chaos seems to accompany his every move, but this latest outburst was not a gaffe or an example of his signature buffoonery. This is a calculated assault on the future of Scotland, with Johnson hinting at the constitutional struggle that lies ahead and the brutal role that status quo Unionism and Brexit will play. Johnson has form on Scotland!

No-one should be fooled. Boris Johnson’s populism poses a threat to the Union. Not only does he not have an alternative to independence, he

is now posing a threat to the Scotland Act 1998 and undermining 20 years of a real success story. The internal market legislation turns the clock back and rewrites the constitutional settlement.

Johnson thinks he is Winston Churchill, but he is not. He admires Donald Trump, which is worrying. And in 12 months he has become as unpopular as Margaret Thatcher was in Scotland, but which took her years to achieve! Looking ahead, Scotland’s prospects and Johnson’s behaviour must be understood against the wider populist playbook that Dominic Cummings and the Prime Minister have brought from their Brexit campaign.

Designed to generate conflict between social groups – and countries – with different ideas, beliefs, philosophies, values and practices, culture wars are intended to divide society and replace traditional politics with intense polarised conflict. These “wars” are designed to distort patriotism, undermine social cohesion and destroy trust and tolerance. Feelings are exploited to mobilise “conservative” Britain, build a base of like-minded people, inject aggressive populism and replicate the darker side of American politics.

But we should also recognise the power of exceptionalism, a condition of being unique. This remains the elusive, unspoken driving force behind Johnson’s actions and ambitions, uniting England but eating away at the ties that bind the Union and by intent alienating Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland and Wales.

Johnson plays to those who find their current lives in contemporary Britain uncertain and under threat, who look ahead with some fear. Which of course can be tuned into and nurtured with care and which has a powerful resonance for those who feel their country is slipping away from them. Making England Great Again (MEGA) may not sit comfortably with a more assertive and ambitious Scotland losing its sense of Britishness.

The PM’s electoral “base”, founded on the ideas of English nationalism, exceptionalism, an obsession with “absolute sovereignty”, nostalgia, sentiment, delusion and a contempt of other countries and devolved nations, will be the model of governance.

The National: Former Scottish first minister Henry McLeishFormer Scottish first minister Henry McLeish

Mario Cuomo, governor of New York, famously said we “campaign in poetry and govern in prose”. Explaining this in the American Prospect, Paul Waldman said “the poetry of campaigning is lofty, full of possibility, a world where problems are solved just because we want them to be and opposition melts away before us. The prose of governing is messy and maddening, full of compromises and half-victories that leave a sour taste in one’s mouth”.

Our PM is still campaigning. Johnson finds governing a challenge.

He likes the broad picture but is less comfortable with details. He loves his job but seems less happy with the work. Boris Johnson speaks to his Brexit base, not the country. His Cabinet is packed with pro-Brexiteers and loyalists, but his party and the country are not. His entertainment value is prized by some; to others it looks misplaced in the depth of a deadly national Covid-19 emergency, a Brexit crisis and now a declaration of war against Scottish politics because Scots had the audacity to vote SNP in free and fair elections and dominate politics and Scottish Government.

The truth of course is more difficult to accept. In post-devolution politics, the SNP has only occupied the vacuum left by the two main parties. Devolution opened a new era in UK politics. Scotland accepted the challenge, but Westminster and the traditional parties did not. After losing traction in 2007, the political challenges of a new devolved era were largely ignored as Unionist parties remained tied to Westminster thinking and failed to see Scotland as a distinct nation in its own right requiring a different narrative, a new and distinct frame of reference and a new mind set. Johnson may have decided that Scotland, like the EU, must be brought to heel and be forced to remain or leave the Union on his terms.

Brexit is the ultimate sell-out of the British people, insulting to Scots and ignoring the real challenges this country faces. The lure of greatness never defined was the unspoken driver of this act of collective self-harm – a position Scotland rejected!

Instead of a new model for a modern union, Johnson, despite the stirrings of the English regions for a greater say in how the UK is run, sees the Scotland or, more accurately, the Union question through the dispiriting prism of Scotland v England, nationalism v Unionism, Leavers v Remainers and centralisation v devolution. These are divisive approaches. In a Johnson government, Scotland seems to be of less value to the Union.

THE emergence of a new Scotland in the devolution years has only added to the discomfort of the Prime Minister.

Johnson is not alone in the myths and fantasies he promotes. He is the latest populist to buy into exceptionalism to preserve a dishonest but plausible narrative about the UK’s uncertain role in the world. In his poem To a Louse, Robert Burns wrote: “O wad some power the gift to gie us, To see oursels as ithers see us! It wad frae mony a blunder free us.”

The PM has no instinct for the idea of four-nation politics. The Prime Minister tells us he is a one-nation Tory, but which nation is he talking about?

Boris Johnson’s new narrative of Scotland’s membership of the Union, a construct of the early years of the 18th century, seeks to delegitimise the aspirations of 21st-century Scotland, deny the right of one party to govern, attack the significant achievements of the Scottish Parliament and for good measure launch an attack on post-devolution democracy itself.

These are sensitive times. Boris Johnson’s comments on devolution rightly received a maelstrom of condemnation. But in his first 12 months, his mishandling of the pandemic, the shambolic overseeing of our exit from the EU, his cronyism and the painful level of incompetency of his Cabinet, where only loyalty matters, are worrying reminders of the political troubles that lie ahead.

There seems little prospect of finding a unifying and consensual way forward. Some form of a progressive flexible federal framework (and possibly a form of confederation) for the total transformation of the Union and its four nations is the only alternative to independence.

Time is running out. There is no “settled will” in Scotland about the best constitutional path to take. The country is divided and while recent opinion polls are giving independence the edge, nearly 50% of Scots remain undecided. But this is likely to change if Johnson’s assault on devolution continues. Independence is likely to gain in popularity as issues of competence, resilience, leadership, MEGA and the impact of Brexit strengthen Scotland’s resolve and weaken the lure of the Union.

An out-of-touch Prime Minister, hell-bent on going his own way, needs to bring people and nations together, start to listen and build a platform for serious dialogue and constitutional reform involving the four nations, people and parliaments.

What would that agenda for “constitutional renewal” look like?

Stop saying no to a second referendum. It is going to happen and certainly within five years. Unless Westminster changes its mindset, Scotland could exit the Union within a decade. Saying no is not an alternative, a vision or a policy. It is a denial of democracy generated by a fear of failure. But the debate must be wider than independence and embrace the future of Scotland through the prism of different options.

PROVIDE a workable, detailed alternative to independence. There is no alternative vision of what a reimagined union would look. Redefining Scotland in a new union makes sense and could bring people together. There is only one suggestion currently on the table and it’s absurd to attack one party for being good at promoting their own idea and dominating Scottish politics for nearly 14 years! Status quo Unionism and more “powers” without real “power” will not work.

Some form of federalism is the only way forward, requiring a written constitution and respect for new ideas and shared power. The European Union provides one example of a different model. Nations come together and share power and sovereignty and opt in and out of policy. There would be a continuing process of self-determination for each of the nations and regions of the UK, developing at different times and reflecting the different circumstances and social and economic conditions in every part of the Union. Westminster would downsize accordingly. Scotland would retain the option of going further and faster than the rest in the spirit of a new settlement, including the possibility of independence.

Primitive binary-based approaches to complex issues in the form of first-past-the-post voting, no agreed facts and using traditional UK-style referenda are hopelessly inadequate and only bitterly divide. Referenda need to be reimagined if they are to serve the interests of democracy.

Stop campaigning, start to govern, and give up on MEGA and recognise the importance of four-nation politics where all the countries have a say in determining their own futures. Redesign the Internal Market Bill going through parliament, respect difference and allow the devolved nations substantially more powers and responsibilities for realising their aspirations.

Widely regarded as a gift that keeps on giving to the SNP, the Prime Minister must accept that insulting Scotland is a recipe for the break-up of Britain. The PM is a populist with a dangerous agenda and an increasingly divisive pattern of behaviour. Conservatives in Scotland are already divided. Civil war threatens the party, with an election only months away.

It is worth remembering that national sentiment will be boosted next year. The football European Championships and the rescheduled United Nations Climate Conference will take place in Scotland. Both are being held in Glasgow.

For those who hold out the possibility of Scotland remaining in a radically transformed union, it is the Union that is on trial, not Scotland.