A big question for our future – how do we heal Scotland?

Meanwhile, hundreds of MPs (mostly but not exclusively Tory) work for outside corporate interests to the tune of many millions – embodying a broken, corrupt political system.

Scotland may feel less acutely at breaking point but we are not in a healthy place and not all of this can be laid at the feet of the Tories and Westminster. One of the big questions for the future across the entire West, including the UK and Scotland, is how do we heal society after all we have been through in recent times?

The multiple challenges of Covid, Brexit divisions and never-ending associated problems, the fallout from the war in Ukraine, the strain on public services, and the ongoing cost of living crisis have had a devastating effect.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon and Andy Burnham in talks to extend HS2 to Scotland

In Scotland, there is the independence debate, the fact that Brexit was done to us against our popular will, and the legacy and continued bruised feelings from the trans rights controversy. All of this, and more, means we should be prepared to ask how can we heal Scotland? Why is it important? And what would it mean?

All these factors contribute to a public mood where many people feel disrespected and not heard, where they feel there is little genuine exchange and listening, and too many debates are defined by entrenched partisan positions. This feeds a political culture whereby people across Scotland feel depowered, diminished and exhausted way beyond the constitutional question. And, again, not all of this can be blamed upon the Tories and Westminster.

How we heal Scotland is pivotal to how we act and behave as a society. If we put recovery and wellbeing at the heart of government and public agencies, we show that compassion and empathy are fundamental to what we do and genuine change for individuals and communities can result.

It is not an accident that over the past decade some of the most pioneering and imaginative public projects have put nurturing and nourishing relationships at the core of their work, bringing lasting change to disadvantaged communities and people facing numerous challenges.

Think of the Sistema Big Noise Orchestra, which began on the Raploch estate in Stirling and has now expanded out to Scotland’s four biggest cities; the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit (SVRU) which addressed the deep-seated culture of violence in Glasgow; or the inspiring work of GalGael with the long-term unemployed in Govan, recreating ancient Viking skills of building and sailing boats.

These and many more have commonalities. They sprang not from top-down initiatives but had a community, even neighbourhood, dimension, and were not created at a stroke of a ministerial pen. Rather, they posed long-term answers to problems of poverty, diminished opportunities and damaged lives based on respect, inclusion and connectedness.

There are many who think the above examples have little relevance to the future of Scotland and that all that matters is whether we are independent or not. This misunderstands the huge scale of challenges we face both in Scotland and wider humanity, the sheer exhaustion of mainstream politics and public services, and how we have to think of social change and independence differently.

To some of the most passionate supporters in the independence debate, for the proposition and for the Union, nothing else matters. This is a position which can carry some respect, but it is blinkered, and does not connect to how most people see Scotland.

THE notion of healing Scotland is not about parking any issue or thinking that holding hands is the answer. Rather, it is about pro-independence and pro-Union perspectives engaging with each other, listening to each other’s propositions, and being open at least to the potential of change.

Part of the independence community does not want to see this. The same is true of an element of pro-Union sentiment. Some on the independence side would rather frame the pro-Union side in the most caricatured way, refusing to see that there might be a rationale to those they disagree with. The same dynamics can be seen on the pro-Union side with some believing that only nationalists support independence.

This amounts to two assertive, accentuated interpretations of Scotland’s constitutional future, which disrespect one another and talk past each other, framing their opponents in ways which try to delegitimise them. Part of this happens in all politics – trying to frame and undermine opponents –but here it matters more because of the centrality of the question to our society. The notion of healing Scotland goes much further than independence. It is about how we act, live and rub along as a society together and do so with tolerance and mutual regard. Too often, these qualities are missing from our public debate and politics.

One small measure in this would be to encourage parliamentarians and public figures to give more respect to those they disagree with. The Scottish Parliament was meant to encourage a different way of doing politics, more consultative and cooperative, with a language which reflects that. No-one serious would think that of the reality of Holyrood.

A second measure would be to look at how we can dig deeper in debates and get to the core areas of what the values and assumptions at play are. Here, the Scottish Parliament is a major negative example. In Scotland and elsewhere, there are numerous examples of how to host public conversations and deliberations which go beyond superficial and surface differences into what really motivates people’s attitudes – from citizens’ assemblies to deliberative forums and inquiries.

Some on the independence side are so impatient for change that they want a referendum as soon as possible – even a unilaterally-held one by Holyrood – and think (partly through frustration, partly through passion) they can browbeat their way to victory. This is bad politics and unrealistic in that the SNP are not going to countenance a unilateral indyref and UDI and, worse, choose to disrespect the Scotland which needs to be convinced.

Our society has been through tumultuous pressures in recent years and we need to acknowledge that, understand and address it. Poverty and hardship have increased dramatically, public services and public-service workers are exhausted and political leaders who still have to pretend in public that they have all the answers, are profoundly worn out. Society needs recuperation, recovery and healing.

Look at some of the fundamentals under the radar. The two years of Covid lockdown saved many lives but a survey by the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists, for example, reported in the Sunday Post, showed the enormous cost caused to children across Scotland.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon says she has 'never' used private healthcare

Not only has it harmed educational prospects and widened educational inequalities, it has reduced the language and vocabulary that children use. Glenn Carter, head of the Royal College, said that “we’re facing a spoken language crisis in Scotland”, which will have damaging consequences for generations.

Such human dimensions need to be put centre stage in healing Scotland. This would lead to a better Scotland, a better politics, a better society, and would ultimately contribute to a more subtle, relevant independence debate where issues such as trans rights were less toxic and contested and a host of areas around social justice and equality were more real and tangible.

Above all, such an outlook would come from the best of Scotland’s political and philosophical traditions – namely the belief Scotland is a moral community where there is a concern for the wellbeing of everyone.

One question to ponder – given the hollowing out of civil society, the retreat of churches and the bland managerialism of most of our politicians – is that if we believe Scotland is a moral community then who are our moral leaders?