In Scotland it’s important that Pro UK people move
beyond our disagreements. Keeping up the
pressure on the SNP requires us not to squabble among ourselves. Whichever way we voted in the EU referendum
it’s crucial that we learn the lessons of that campaign. Obviously Remain had good
arguments that can be adapted to persuade Scots of the benefits of remaining in
the UK, but what may be less obvious is that so did the Leave campaign. We
must think clearly about past campaigns and focus on what works. In this way we will be able to develop
arguments that may prevent a repeat of the Scottish independence referendum, or
alternatively if the worst happens, to win it.
I have made clear on a number of occasions that I
don’t think the SNP have a right to break up our country. The issue has been
settled. But I am one voice and others such as Ruth Davidson disagree with me.
Nicola Sturgeon may ask and she may get. In that case we would have a fight on
our hands. Never underestimate your opponent. History is littered with the example of
complacent generals who lost.
Campaigns are won with simple messages that are
believed. Not everyone follows politics as closely as you do. Not everyone
understands every detail. I’m certainly hazy about certain aspects of Scottish
devolution, international law and how the EU works. But a Nobel Prize winner in
economics gets one vote just the same as the rest of us.
During the EU campaign the Leave team realised that
detailed discussion of the Single Market baffled most voters. Even most MPs
were unclear about the various distinctions between the European Economic Area
(EEA), the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) and the EU Single Market. A campaign
that got itself bogged down in a debate about the benefits of these various options
would be followed only those who already knew about the issues and who had
probably decided how to vote already.
What matters in any campaign is to target the message at those who are
undecided and who are persuadable. These are people who usually don’t follow
politics closely.
It was for this reason that the Leave campaign had
relatively simple messages:
Leaving the EU would mean that we would take back
control. Parliament once more would decide everything rather than Brussels.
Leaving the EU would save us money. We would no
longer have to pay the subscription fee. This was said to be £350 million a
week (the gross figure before any rebates and before anything we got back).
This looks like a lot of money to most people.
Leaving the EU would mean that we could control the
level of immigration rather than leave it uncontrolled.
These issues were the ones that decided the EU
referendum. They were simple and for the most part they were believed. That is
why Leave won.
Crucially these three issues work for Pro UK people
in Scotland. It is, of course, the case that Scotland voted to Remain in the EU.
But this has more to do with the political circumstances of Scotland rather
than genuinely different attitudes about the fundamental issues. It’s hard to
think of a mainstream Scottish Politician living and working in Scotland who
voted Leave. Scotland has a far smaller population that England does. Imagine
if three new towns were planned in Scotland to take some of the strain from
England. Imagine if tax breaks were given to encourage English people to move
to these towns. How would the SNP react? Half a million new Scots with English
accents might well change the electoral arithmetic. No doubt Nicola Sturgeon
would be most welcoming.
But what is more important is how these three key
messages could work in the context of independence.
Leaving the EU is going to bring back to the UK
control over a number of issues including fisheries, agriculture and all the
rules and regulations that currently govern our membership. People in the UK
are going to control these issues. Many of these people are going to be in
Scotland. While at present issues that
the Scottish Parliament controls can be overruled by Brussels, soon Scottish
politicians will have the freedom to do as they please. This automatically will
make these politicians more powerful and more able to control how they run
Scotland. Voting for Scottish
independence will on the other hand mean losing control over whole areas of
Scottish life, because it will first be necessary to check what Brussels
thinks. After we leave the EU someone in the Scottish Government will end up
deciding how we fish in the waters around Scotland and how we farm our land. Massive
areas of ordinary life that are now controlled by the EU will instead be
controlled in Scotland. This is real power and real control. If on the other hand, Scotland were to leave
the UK and join the EU we would, of course, lose control.
Scottish nationalists might argue that by leaving
the UK Scotland may gain control over some issues that are now controlled by
the UK such as macroeconomics and international relations, but ultimately the
Scottish Parliament having become “independent” would have to vote to make EU
law supreme. So how much control would independence bring you? We know how
little control small EU countries like Ireland and Greece have ended up with. Scotland
has a bigger deficit than either of these so what would prevent the Troika of
the European Commission, IMF and European Central Bank running Scotland instead
of the SNP? Independence then could well involve a loss of control.
The UK will save some money by not having to pay the
EU membership fee. A proportion of this money will go to Scotland. Scottish independence would mean losing this saving
and losing the money that Scotland at present gets from the Barnett formula. It
would also involve paying money to the EU. Scotland would be expected to pay
proportionally more than the UK does at present. There is going to be a bit of
a hole in the EU’s budget now that the UK has decided to leave completely.
Someone has to fill the gap.
It is not at all automatic that an independent
Scotland would even get into the EU. Catalonia is once more trying to break
away from Spain. It only needs one EU member to say “No” and Nicola Sturgeon
would be sent homewards to think again. It’s hard to imagine then that the EU
would vote to allow Scotland a rebate on EU membership fees.
It will be difficult therefore for the SNP to
convincingly argue that leaving the UK will save us money. This is not least
because we do far more trade with other parts of the UK than with the EU.
Depending on how UK/EU negotiations go, Scotland could end up having to pay
tariffs on our trade with England. In five years’ time England, Wales and
Northern Ireland might have trade deals with India, Australia, New Zealand and
the United States. We might be able to live and work in some nice warm places
that speak English. Scotland though in voting to leave the UK wouldn’t have a
share in these deals. We would quite literally be left in the cold.
Immigration is a controversial issue. No-one should
be nasty to anyone who has chosen to live in the UK. But the argument was never
about that. It is perfectly possible to be in favour of immigration, but want
to limit it. After all there are billions of people in the world. They can’t
all have the right to live here.
Again the choice for Scotland will be to be in a UK
that can limit immigration or an independent Scotland that can’t. When the UK
leaves the EU we will be able to choose who from the EU and elsewhere can come
to live here. Perhaps we will have a points system or develop some other
method. But it will be Parliament that decides. Those who wish to increase
immigration can vote for a party that argues for that. Those who wish to limit
immigration can make that argument. But it will be the UK electorate who
decides, because the UK electorate will now be in control.
Alternatively we can choose to live in an
independent Scotland that will have to be a member of Schengen. It is a condition
for joining the EU. This means that there will not even be passport controls
between Scotland and the other parts of the EU.
Unlimited immigration into Scotland however would
logically mean that England would have to set up border controls between
Scotland and England. How else could they control who came over the border. A
passport has to be shown somewhere or else the UK will not be able to limit
immigration.
The Republic of Ireland is not a precedent here for
Scotland as Ireland has an opt out from Schengen. Even then there is likely to
be some sort of border checks at the Northern Irish border as the UK will not
be in the EU’s customs union while Ireland will be.
Who knows which countries will be able to join the
EU in the coming decades? Perhaps Albania will be able to join, perhaps Serbia,
perhaps Turkey. We just don’t know. The choice for Scotland will be between
limited migration if it remains in the UK or unlimited if it leaves to join the
EU.
Of course Scotland could decide to leave the UK and
not join the EU. But this would make Nicola Sturgeon’s grievance rather
empty. You can’t very well vote to leave
the UK because it left the EU and then decide not to join yourself. That looks
like hypocrisy. What’s more you would then have to negotiate from scratch a
trade deal both with what remained of the UK, with the EU and in fact the whole
of the world. It’s hard to imagine that leaving Scotland more prosperous.
The key lesson in the weeks and months ahead is to
think about the new situation that Brexit has given us. We can turn it to our
advantage by developing arguments that show how leaving the EU makes Scottish
independence harder. This is how we will keep the UK united and see off the
threat from the SNP.
