Alex Salmond wishes to inform us that “the days of
the British Empire are over, and the days of British prime ministers denying
self-determination to the Scottish people are over as well.” There are all
sorts of odd things about this sort of statement. Most of us who have any
knowledge of history are well aware that the British Empire is over. There are
a few British Overseas Territories, but they are few and far between. They
could hardly be called an Empire. So Mr Salmond is informing us of something we
already know. Why is he talking of the British Empire at all? Could it be that
he thinks that Scotland is somehow the last remnant of that Empire?
I come across the idea every now and again from
Scottish nationalists that Scotland is somehow a colony. I sometimes wonder
where such ideas come from. Well obviously they come from the top. But it is a
very odd idea none the less. If Scotland is a colony, who has been colonising
us? From where have they come? During the British Empire people from the UK did
indeed settle in parts of the Empire. Many of the descendants of those people
still live in Australia, New Zealand and Canada. So who are the settlers who
came to Scotland? Are they the English, the Poles or the Pakistanis? It’s
fairly obvious how offensive this is likely to get quite quickly.
Scotland isn’t a colony. Rather for the past 300
years and more we have been part of a nation state called the United Kingdom
where people have moved about freely. Scots have moved to England in large
numbers. English people have moved to Scotland. This is not settling an Empire,
but rather it is people moving within their own country. I am not colonising
England if I decide to set up home there. It is ludicrous and offensive to
suggest that I am.
Mr Salmond is complaining about a British Prime
Minister apparently denying something to the Scottish people. What is this
thing that is apparently being denied and who is denying it to whom? Firstly
there is a false distinction between a “British Prime Minister” and the
“Scottish people”. A British Prime Minister could well be a Scot and has been
on many occasions. Moreover, the Scottish people are all British citizens. Some
of them may not like this fact at the moment, but nevertheless it is a fact.
Britain is not some Empire ruling over Scotland. Rather we are British. If you
doubt this, I suggest you look at your passport at the point at which states
British citizen.
Has anyone denied self-determination to the Scottish
people? It depends what we mean by the “Scottish people”. Who are they and how
do we determine who they are? Are Scots a tribe that can be distinguished from
other people in the UK? If so I would very much like to know on what basis Alex
Salmond thinks he is from a different tribe to Theresa May. Is it because he
speaks a different language to her? Is it because his culture or religion is
vastly different to hers? Does he think that his ancestry means that his tribe
by necessity must diverge from her tribe? What then is this “Scottish people”
that Alex Salmond belongs to but, Theresa May doesn’t? How is it defined?
No-one is denying self-determination to people in
Scotland for the simple reason that we live in a democracy. The British Prime
Minister was elected just as much by Scots as she was by any other British
citizen. The fact that most Scots would have preferred someone else is neither
here nor there. In any democracy some people are disappointed. Scotland is not
ruled as if we were part of an Empire, because we each have just as much
representation and just as much electoral power as any other British citizen. I
as a Scot have one vote in a General Election. So too does someone in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland. In addition I have a vote for the Scottish
Parliament where all sorts of devolved issues are decided.
Constitutional matters are not devolved. That was
the deal when we set up the Scottish Parliament. That is what people in
Scotland voted for. The Scottish Parliament cannot decide UK foreign policy,
nor can it decide UK macroeconomic policy and nor can it decide that Scotland
ought to have a vote to become independent. For this it requires permission. This
is what the majority of Scots voted for when we voted to establish a Scottish
Parliament.
No-one, as far as I am aware, has denied Scotland
the right to have another independence referendum. All that has been said is
that the SNP will have to wait. There is nothing undemocratic about this for
the simple reason that electorate in Scotland expressed their view about this
matter decisively less than three years ago.
There is hardly a nation state in existence that
would allow a part a vote to leave. I can think of no EU member state that
would allow such a vote. The United States likewise has shown that it would
prefer to fight than allow itself to break up. Yet because the UK Prime
Minister has said that Scotland will have to wait, Alex Salmond has the nerve
to describe her as if she were Queen Victoria and Scotland was part of Empire.
People in Scotland are a similar mix to people in
other parts of the UK. Some of us can trace our ancestry back to Macbeth others
of us have arrived more recently. We have a shared history, language and
culture with our fellow British citizens across the UK. There is no real distinction
between us.
What I find most peculiar is the contradiction in
Scottish nationalist reasoning. The SNP
accept that someone can arrive from anywhere in the UK or the world and become
part of the Scottish people. They can do this almost instantly. All that is
required is that you live in Scotland. But how is it that this quality of being
Scottish is so easily acquired that Theresa May could acquire it simply by
retiring to Inverness, but that after three hundred years of living in the same
nation state Scots cannot acquire the quality of being British? How is it so
easy for anyone to become a Scot, but so apparently impossible for Scottish
nationalists to be British. After all we Scots live in the United Kingdom. Does
this not by the reasoning of civic nationalism make us British? If not, why
not? If we all share the same identity by virtue of living in the same country,
why on earth are they trying to split it up?
Given how easy it is to become Scottish. Given how
this quality is open to anyone who arrives, on what basis does Alex Salmond
speak of the Scottish people at all? This is where the real nature of his
thinking peaks through. He feels that there is a real distinction between a
Scot and someone from elsewhere in the UK and it isn’t a matter of where they
live.
The SNP like to give the impression of how welcoming
they are. All those Remain voters who are disappointed by Brexit should move to
Scotland. But what if they actually took up Nicola Sturgeon’s invitation? What
if the UK Government decided to help them by giving them tax breaks and grants
to move to Scotland? We could set up some new towns and add half a million to
the Scottish population quite quickly. But what if these new arrivals despite
their wishing to remain in the EU also wished to remain British citizens and
for the UK to remain intact? What if they opposed Scottish independence and by
their arrival tipped the balance against the SNP? How long would it be before
they were described by Scottish nationalists as settlers? After all Alex
Salmond apparently already thinks that they come from an Empire.
