IT was good to be back in Aberdeen speaking in person about my favourite thing: independence in Europe, and why it’s the best way forward for us all to recover from Covid and indeed from Brexit. It struck me while I was there that this was only my second proper speech for the best part of two years – and what a time to be back in person!
It is truly energising being with so many other like-minded people in the room who all want the same thing. I was really struck that one of the other Aberdeen Independence Movement (AIM) Progress to Yes conference attendees had thought there might be protesters outside the venue, such has been the impression even to some of us within the Yes movement from the online impression and vitriol from some parts of the debate online.
Of course, there weren’t protesters, online isn’t real, the Yes movement is diverse and passionate, and we’re united on the main goal.
Covid robbed us of that energy and focus for two years and getting that momentum back will be a big job, but now we’re reconnecting and remembering that even if there are some disagreements over the detail, there is far more that unites than divides us. The Aberdeen Independence Movement deserves a huge shout-out and congratulations for bringing us together at the weekend.
READ MORE: Scottish Government allocates £20 million for independence referendum in 2023
It was in many ways reminiscent of the 2014 campaign. One of the great joys of that campaign was that the creativity, the passion, the crackling energy that you could feel in the air was often not created by the SNP but by folks of all politics and none. The SNP doesn’t own a monopoly on independence and that’s a strength; the whole point to independence is to put the people of Scotland in charge. I have close relations with Yes Stirling and I’m very much look forward to us hosting an event like this soon!
I worry though that times over the past few years more of the independence discussion has revolved around process rather than why independence is best for Scotland. That discussion has its place of course but I trust the party and our leader to deliver on it. In the meantime, there are still plenty of undecided persuadables that we need to win over and that work is under way.
I took the time in Aberdeen to speak about some of the work as the foreign affairs lead down at Westminster, and the approach Stewart McDonald and I have taken to foreign affairs and defence issues. Having been thrown out my first Parliament I really am working hard to be thrown out my second, and this guides my thinking at Westminster.
We do that by what I only half-jokingly call: The “DtrebleC Strategy”; “Project No Surprises”; and the “Good Neighbour Doctrine”. The DtrebleC Strategy involves “doing stuff” as the Scottish Government and contrasting it with how much better our actions are in government than the UK’s.
We “critique” what the UK Government does, and posit how we would do it better. We also “call for actions” that we would do but can’t because we lack the powers or budget. Finally, we “commit to stuff” that an independent Scotland will do. Take international development as one example. “Doing stuff” things like the Malawi international development strategy. We “critique” the awful decision to cut and run from the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of Gross National Income on international aid.
“Calling for actions” is linked to critiquing the UK’s policies, where we set out what we want the UK to do pending independence such as re-instating the 0.7% aid budget. And finally, “committing to stuff” is what we can do to indicate to the people of Scotland what sort of international actor we will, such as a focus on gender equality, spending 0.7% of GNI and partner-led development.
DtrebleC recognises the fact that we’re a government in our country, not some rag tag opposition protest group, we need to look and sound like it. But we’re simultaneously the opposition with a radical aim within the UK context.
DtrebleC gives us a focus and a prism through which to view the work we do and why we’re doing it, to stop us being buffeted by events because Westminster is really good at generating pointless busywork – I’m not there to do that I’m there to use the platform to build our own case.
“Project No Surprises” is an outreach program to build on what we did not do enough of in 2014: reach out to those with an interest in our independence process not to seek their support but to explain what is happening and where we’re coming from.
We don’t have an automatic right to EU membership, nor Nato, and all the members of those organisations have legitimate interests to what our membership means to them.
Covid has slowed us and everyone else down too but I’ve been round all the relevant embassies in London as well as starting to go back and forth to Brussels to maintain visibility there too. I’m also encouraging MPs to get out and about to member state capitals to have those discussions there too.
READ MORE: Work 'starts now' for independent Scotland to join the EU, says professor Stephen Gethins
The Good Neighbour Doctrine is similar to Project No Surprises, but covers the people of the UK, England especially. I don’t think in 2014 we were sufficiently respectful, and gentle, to the fact that a lot of people in England especially genuinely do believe we’re all part of some common project and that we’re all, somehow, better together.
But it also deals with the reality, that I think we in the Yes movement need to be more up front about, that on a number of matters an independent Scotland will have a shared interest with the UK. Not on everything (and when we do it will be because it suits our interests) but I’m clear that an independent Scotland will be a good neighbour and fierce friend to the UK. Our nationalism is internationalism, and where we agree with our friends and neighbours, let’s work together.
It has been a frustrating few years with Covid and Brexit. Both events have shocked a lot of people out of their preconceptions about politics and brought home to them how important it is to be represented by people making decisions for you who have integrity and share your values.
Times are changing and there’s a fresh wind in our sails as we work towards the referendum and independence. Scotland in the world is what drives my politics and I’m confident the Yes movement’s best days are ahead of us.
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