The independence debate that is going on in Scotland will
change the nature of Scotland’s relation to the other parts of the UK no matter the result. If we vote Yes, we will become a new nation state and the
relationship will become international, but if we vote No, we won’t go back to
the place where we were before the debate began. We will rather have decisively
rejected independence and defined ourselves as part of the UK forever.
The reason for this can be illustrated by the example of the
US Civil War. Prior to that conflict it was common to describe the United
States in the plural (The United States are) afterwards in the singular (The United States is). The Civil War fundamentally
was fought over the question of whether a state had the right to secede from
the Union. Force of arms answered the question in the negative.
We in Scotland are asking a similar question albeit in a
peaceful way. The United Kingdom, (unlike the United States in relation to South Carolina),
has given us in Scotland the right to determine whether we wish to leave the
Union. But no nation state can forever be faced with an existential question as
to whether a part will decide to leave. For this reason the choice will be
irreversible.
Scotland will become a part of the UK in the same way that
Aberdeenshire is a part of Scotland. Nationalists, who think that they can
continue to push for referendums on independence every few years, will find
that that the Westminster consensus on this issue will have changed. We will have gone
through the crisis and Scotland will be no more able to secede than South
Carolina. Secession will become something for history books. Of course Scottish
nationalists could always try to persuade Scots of the merits of a unilateral declaration of independence, but the moment would have passed and they will
rapidly become a dwindling band toasting the memory of their lost cause over
the water.
Just as in the United States, the present struggle over
independence will make the relationships within the UK stronger, but also and
for this very reason much looser. Once
it is recognised that devolution is not a stepping stone to independence, the process
of devolving powers can be extended almost without limit. This is the prize
that is becoming available to us precisely because we are going through the
trauma of the present independence debate.
The problem of devolution was always that it was asymmetric.
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were given parliaments, but England had
none. We’re all familiar with the unfairness of this situation. But with the
new powers on offer to the Scottish parliament something will have to be done about England. A wide ranging
discussion is therefore going to take place on how more powers can be granted
to Scotland, but also to England.
Mr Salmond wants a currency union together with close ties
and cooperation with the other parts of the UK. There is much in our present
relationship that he wants to retain. The problem with this sort of
relationship is that an independent Scotland would be sharing part of its
sovereignty with a foreign power, but we would have no popular representation
with which to regulate that relationship. At present the UK shares part of our
sovereignty with the EU, but despite all of its faults with regard to
democracy, at least in the EU we have a shared parliament and representation on
the European commission. But Mr Salmond’s vision of what we would share with
the other parts of the UK is far greater than what the UK shares at present
with the EU. It makes much more sense therefore to have a shared parliament to
regulate what we have in common with the other parts of the UK. But that is
precisely what we have already. It’s called Westminster. Why would you want to
get rid of our representation there? It would be like being in the EU but
withdrawing our MEPs from Brussels.
There is an alternative on offer to us now. If only we
reject independence there is the chance to create a federal UK. Why not have a
parliament that deals only with English affairs, Scottish affairs, Welsh
affairs and Northern Irish affairs, plus a parliament that deals with what we
have in common. But it is precisely this that will inevitably occur once power is devolved to England. This sort of federal relationship would give us practically speaking as much control over Scottish affairs as
independence, but we would still be able to influence the matters we share with
the other parts of the UK.
Naturally Scottish nationalists dismiss these offers of
extending devolution. They have never wanted devolution, they only want
independence. It is also true that the new devolution settlement that would take place
in the UK has not been put to the people of the UK either in a General election
or a referendum. There is therefore the degree of uncertainty that is inherent
in the democratic process. But any fair assessment shows that there is
uncertainty on both sides of the independence debate.
The vision of independence put forward by the SNP depends on
the cooperation of those who have already said No. Mr Salmond hopes to be able
to reverse that No through negotiation, but no one in Scotland can know if he
would succeed. Everything that is said about the pound and about EU membership
is so much speculation governed by the bias of whether the person supports or
opposes independence. But one thing is certain. These matters are uncertain.
The major UK parties could renege on their promise to extend
devolution, but remember it was Labour and the Lib Dems who introduced
devolution into Scotland in the first place.
The Tories now have been persuaded precisely because the irreversibility
of the independence referendum result takes away any risk of extending
devolution.
The future is uncertain. But there is at least as good a
chance of Scotland becoming part of a fully federal UK as Mr Salmond getting
his vision of independence. A federal UK moreover has the virtue of the fact
that we know it would work, just as it works in countries like the USA and
Germany. The nationalists of course don’t want this and will try to persuade us
that it is not on offer. But this proposal is quite real, sincere and naturally follows from caring about both the interests of Scotland and the United Kingdom. It is an offer for those Scots
who want the maximum amount of devolution that is consistent with us remaining a
part of the UK. It’s for those who don’t want to risk losing the pound
or a messy divorce mucking up the UK’s economic recovery. It’s an offer that’s
worth grasping with both hands as it will never come again if we reject it.
