I READ with great interest Gerry Hassan’s critical analysis of the “State of the Union” (Seven Days, March 1). His dissection of the Our Past, Present and Future pro-Union Newcastle gathering was not only a narrative but an interesting insight into the state of the so-called Union at this time.
Of interest to me was that the clear objective of this gathering was for “experts” and others to reflect and contribute to the case for the Union, with a rather altruistic aim of providing proof that more unites us than divides us.
This “Better Together” approach was led by a variety of past and present so-called political heavyweights and a number of academics and journalists. Out trots Gordon Brown with nothing new to add to his British nationalist views, and Douglas Alexander, still anti-SNP, stuck in the past and blind to the changes in Scotland since he spectacularly lost his seat and his party was reduced to a rump in Holyrood. Contributions by Willie Rennie and Struan Stevenson – predictably not getting it and simply ranting on about no indy2 and SNP bad and blindingly little on the present state of the Union.
READ MORE: Gerry Hassan: What happened at a pro-Union These Islands event
Much was expected from the academics. Any surprises here? Well actually no. Theoretical ramblings about Scottish nationalism, about the legacy of empire, the UK fighting nation. Irish nationalism infecting Scotland and many other quips and misplaced “facts” about Scotland and the drive to independence.
Glaringly absent was any genuine attempt to look critically at the state of the Union in 2020, particularly after the debacle of Brexit. This one episode has vividly highlighted the precarious position of the “precious Union “ and most certainly Scotland’s position.
Little focus on why Scotland is treading a different path socially, politically and economically. In fact little interest, other than confusing the interests of the UK with those of England masquerading as the UK. Positive UK attributes were limited to exemplars dragged out from post-World War Two and the 1970s and there was little reflection of the here and now.
Gerry Hassan’s six-point summary at the end in my view succinctly summed up the usefulness or otherwise of this Union gathering. I have to say more crudely it really indicates that the pro-Unionists at this point in time are all over the place. They are a disjointed, disparate group with little understanding of the real issues facing Scotland and have only one mantra left and that is “Project Fear 2”. Their problem is that “Better Together 2” is unlikely to rear up in the same way as 2014. The level of fear likely to be generated will not be at the same levels as in 2014.
This is no reason to be complacent, as the usual “SNP bad/incompetent” mantra will be shouted from the rooftops by the opposition parties throughout 2020. If this meeting of pro-Unionists is anything to go by, then it is clear that defending the Union is going to be a hard task for those against Scottish independence. The parties which support the Union will find trying to achieve a Unionist platform with a clear “precious Union” approach incredibly difficult.
The independence battle, second time round, will be direct attacks on the SN and their record in government, and clearly the mantra will still remain “too wee, too poor and too stupid”. The only positive for me of this gathering was a realisation that many Union-supporting individuals see the existence of the UK as a given, which does not require to justify itself even in the face of the biggest threat to its existence.
The simple question at this conference – “ What the UK is good for?” – was met with silence! I rest my case.
Dan Wood
Kirriemuir
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