Why Yes?

Dishonesty in politics is endemic.

Starting with that sentence will not, I'm sure, inspire much controversy. It's human nature, after all, to present your case forcefully and to rubbish your opponent's with all your might. And, for the greater good, a wee bit of exaggeration here, a little distortion there, some wilful misunderstanding on the side – well, it's all in the game, isn't it?

Except that, when it emerges that exaggeration, distortion and wilful misunderstanding forms the whole of your argument, we have a problem. (Please note my heroic forbearance in not placing the word “Houston” before “we” in that sentence.)

Scotland is a small country. In identity it is quite distinct from England, its larger neighbour. There may be some who would argue with that but (apologies for the vernacular) they are aff their heids! Everyone knows we are chalk and cheese – north and south of the border. Our fortunes (Scotland and England) have been linked since a political settlement agreed in 1707 called The Act of Union. For many people in England, in the unlikely event that they would read this far, this is probably a surprise as, through no fault of their own, they believe Scotland to be a province – not a country and have no knowledge of the history of our two nations and their shaky relationship – over a lot more than 300 years.

Nowadays anyone who has a computer ( and that seems to be just about everyone) can look up the history of The Act of Union and research its origins and the motives of those who signed it. Looking back on the history of this period, they will find that chicanery, double dealing and hypocrisy are not modern inventions and that they are not all on the English side. How significant that history is today I leave to you to decide. The main emotion it inspires in me is a sadness that the ordinary people had as little say in things then as they have now. By the time (then) someone became landed or titled, and by the time someone (now) becomes either of the above or a politician, it seems a kind of amnesia about life in a council house where you worry about how much it will cost to live for the week sets in – and very rapidly.

Why this happens is a subject for a treatise on its own and I am sure there is more than one out there already. “All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” was a quote my late father - God rest his soul - was partial to. But it is not the whole story. There are degrees of power, degrees of corruption and, I assert, it is not an impossibility to have an honest politician who is not simply inspired by greed and self interest. Our politicians, in Scotland and the UK, are a mixed bunch in that respect as you might logically expect. I have no-one to recommend for canonisation and stories of expenses claims and second homes span the entire range of the British political parties.

So why am I taking the trouble to write this? Firstly, I believe there is only one sensible response to the Independence referendum – and that is a Yes vote - and, secondly, I believe there is a major, unusual level of dishonesty going on in the year or so leading up to this vote. We have Yes Scotland representing the side of those who want independence and Better Together representing the side of those who wish to continue the Union. It is interesting to consider the various factions on each side. Better Together comprises all those within the Labour Party who have attained any kind of office and everyone in the Conservative Party. The Liberal Democrats – well they just do what they are told these days – so they are there for the Union. Various independents continue to represent themselves and the UKIP and Respect parties are dedicated to the Union. How comforting it must be for David Cameron that George Galloway salutes his indefatigability.

For Independence, obviously there is the SNP - but there are also a lot of other groupings – Trade Unionists for Independence. Labour for Independence, National Collective and many others. The Scottish Socialist Party is also pro independence . There are prominent ex-Labour figures such as Dennis Canavan,who genuinely possesses socialist principles, actively involved in the pro-independence movement. It is obvious that there is a significant pro-independence movement not made up of SNP members. The reasons for this are clear and too many to list here but these, I think, are the main ones:

the lack of support for socialist policies in England

the defection of leading Labour figures to neoliberalism

the lack of sympathy with ordinary working people from Westminster politicians

the readiness of all Westminster politicians to bow to the worst media influences

patronising attitude in the media towards Scots

dishonesty in the Better Together campaign

The fact is that England, for complex reasons, is still a country where there is a conservative consensus. They do not always vote Conservative (please note distinction of lower and upper case) but they are historically conservative. Scotland is not. Recent election results have borne this out rather starkly.

So – to the point. Dishonesty in politics is endemic. But there is a point where it becomes insulting and I am afraid Better Together reached that point some time ago. Their technique ( and, make no mistake, that is what it is) is to continually ask questions about detail which cannot possibly be provided on economic futures. These are not questions they could answer themselves – ask Better Together about the future of Scotland and you will get lots of uplift about the Olympics and how happy we all are with austerity. None of their assertions is evidence based. If figures and statistics are the benchmark, independence will be economically beneficial to Scotland. You won't find Alastair Darling admitting that – but it is true – objectively – and those figures and statistics are available to him.

The real problem is that many of the assertions the Better Together campaign make are childishly stupid and transparently false and, much though I dislike Darling, I don't think he is stupid so why is he making statements like," independence is a one-way ticket to send our children to a deeply uncertain destination". What kind of destination is a vote for more Westminster led politics?  (Labour or Tory – it makes little difference now.)  The poor will get poorer – the rich will get richer and the sneer on the face of the ruling class will be just that bit more complacent. Happy days indeed! A funny thing – as you might imagine - I get into arguments and differences of opinion often here in Dunfermline (out in the provinces) – often with people who I feel should really be on my side – Labour party members. Mention the word “socialism” and it is a bit like mentioning a dodgy old uncle we don't talk about. Say, “Do you believe in cutting benefits? Do you think immigrants and the unemployed are responsible for the financial state of the country? How about the bedroom tax? What about that anti-union legislation – is Ed going to repeal any of it? Should Darling have gone along to the Tory Conference? Any plans to really throw your weight about and abstain on some Tory motions? ” Straight answers – don't hold your breath.

But when did that matter in politics? Better just to try to frighten people about their pensions and benefits (at the same time as calling them scroungers). And there are always those dodgy foreigners that we can blame too. In case I am not being crystal clear here, my point is that they know these points are false and they know the arguments are dishonest – but they don't care. This union is so important that they will say anything to try to preserve it. For some of them, of course, it is purely a career decision. After her Thatcherite statements about “something for nothing”, it is unlikely that Johan Lamont could forge much of a career in politics in an independent Scotland. But for some, there is a genuine attachment to the Union, which I understand to some extent. I was brought up British and Scottish. As kids, my older brother, sister and I went to the Picture House in Kings Park where we lived and we were members of the GB club. It wasn't till about thirty years later that I finally realised I was a member of the Gaumont British club and not a strange alien body called “The Jeeby Club” but I would have been proud and happy, had I known. I understand and share in the feeling of Britishness that comes from that era but the basis of it is simply not there any more. Materialism, Thatcherism, Monetarism, Neoliberalism and apathy have destroyed it. I went to school with children who mainly had Polish and Irish and Italian surnames – because I was brought up Catholic. It never occurred to me then that some of my classmates were immigrants, that my ancestors were immigrants and it was never brought to my attention in any way. Nowadays, mainly because of newspapers like The Daily Mail, immigration has been identified as the root cause of all problems in Nigel Farage's England – but, with a few exceptions, this attitude does not prevail in Scotland.

The Westminster government in recent years commissioned a study into immigration, and what they describe as “Benefit Tourism”, and the finding of a thankfully scientific and objective team was that there was no clear evidence of this. Furthermore they found that , on balance, immigration was economically positive to this country. Needless to say the findings have never been mentioned in any press reports I have seen. David Cameron has not been particularly forthcoming on this topic either but then neither have there been any Labour Party views aired on this subject of late – apart from craven agreement with the Daily Mail element which seems to characterise Westminster these days.

Here are some hard facts. I am a lifelong Labour voter. I will never vote Labour again. In the last few years they have betrayed the working class – who pay their wages – again and again. The “Free market” movement that was begun by Margaret Thatcher is being perpetuated by Darling, Lamont, Murphy and co in Scotland and Miliband and Balls in Westminster. I hope they are proud of themselves. As for Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon, John Swinney and the others, I am sure there is plenty of room for improvement. None of them were elected by me and who knows what the future holds. But this I do know. A Yes vote is not a vote for the SNP. It is a vote for self-determination. It is a vote for a better future. When Scotland becomes independent we will elect those we want to run our country – and I predict confidently they won't include Rupert Murdoch, The Daily Mail or Nigel Farage.

Jesus and Me

For a dyed-in-the wool agnostic, I find myself making religious references often in my writing. Not quite sure about why but this poem, I hope, helps to explain it.

agnostic prayer (de profundis)

from the heart of my arid soul
and the depth of my lack of faith
a surprise

the procurator's blood red cloak
the prisoner's willing suffering
jeering mob
crying mother
frightened followers
the hard violence 
of swords and soldiers
nails and crosses

impulses and feelings
thoughts the material world
cannot explain

perhaps my upbringing
dominus vobiscum
et cum spiritu tuo
or a touch of the sun
or a touch of the son
agnus dei qui tollis peccata mundi

pierce my side

perhaps
his willingness to suffer
reluctance to blame
tears and sweat and blood
at what must be

pin me here

they say god is above
they say god is love
faithless now
yet still there is love

I suppose, for me, poetry has always been what I referred to in my St Monans blog as "trying to write the trouble out of my head."  After all these years away from a faith I rejected as a teenager, I am still deeply affected by images from the New Testament.  Cynical friends will probably say, "Once a Catholic, always a Catholic" but it really isn't that. I have no interest in participation in any organised religion and feel only dismay at the spectacle the Catholic Church has made of itself in my lifetime - ironically through a lack of Christian virtues.  Years ago in the Sacre Coeur in Paris I picked up a leaflet produced by the Church aimed at non-believers and "Catholiques, negligents peut-etre" which ended with a prayer that has stayed with me.

"Oh God, whom they call love, if you exist, enlighten me."

But he never has.

Independence - The Yes/No Interlude

I recently wrote and recorded a song called "Country of the Blind".  It comes as near as I will ever come to writing an anthem in favour of Scots Independence. I have put it on Reverbnation, You Tube  and Facebook and played it live more than once and, while response has been favourable, it hasn't prompted any comment about the subject matter or any argument and, given the current state of play in the media and the slugfest about voting Yes or No in the coming referendum, that surprised me.  One possible reason that suggests itself to me is that people don't know that's what it is about.  I have never subscribed to the "War is Stupid" or "Give Ireland back to the Irish" style of songwriting. For me the direct approach works well in speech but not in poetry and song.  Anyway, here is the lyric in full and you can judge for yourself whether it is clear or obscure, after which I will make a few observations on why I have come to this political position.

The Country of The Blind

Sun is hot and the day is golden,

Dublin Street is all aglow.

Eyes are closed on the crowded pavement,

Cause no-one wants to know.

Nothing moves in the townhouse windows,

Not one flicker of the blinds,

Mindless cars jam up this city,

In the country of the blind.

Moon shines cold in the frosty evening

Stars are burning in the sky. 

Empty street and boarded shopfronts,

Disappointment in your eyes.

You grew up with a chance of living,

One day it would be your time,

Those who ruled would not prove faithless,

In the country of the blind.

We are here with a glimpse of freedom,

Or we can turn and walk away,

But if you're weak or sick or hungry,

You know they'll make you pay.

Raised to feel like second-best,

Taught that thinking was a crime,

Worked to subsidise the rich,

In the country of the blind.

I grew up with the same illusions,

Just like everybody else.

Waved the flag and I took my medicine,

And learned to hate myself.

Now I've seen the simple truth

I will no longer walk that line,

Hoping that it's not too late,

In the country of the blind.

First of all, I have never in my life voted for the Scottish National Party.   In the last verse of my song I am 9 years old and waving a wee Union Jack at the Queen and Philip as they drive through Kinglassie. (I can only wonder at what they made of the raggedy-arsed crowd cheering them as they passed.)  For most of my life I have written "British" on forms asking for my nationality and I have always found lyrics like "Caledonia's been everything I ever had" embarrassing. I do not walk around thinking I am from "Caledonia" and it's been "everything I ever had".  So why would I say it in a song?

So what has brought me to the decision I have made - and why is it important to me? There is no way that I can put my reasons in an order of importance - it is more complicated than that so please bear with me.  First of all, the Labour Party, which has had my vote for most of my life, no longer exists as a left-wing party. It is not worth constructing an argument in defence of this statement as it is self-evident. When the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland describes free prescriptions and universal child benefit as "something for nothing", unconsciously, or perhaps consciously, echoing Mrs Thatcher; when the Parliamentary Labour Party abstains on the Workfare Bill (slavery by another name) and Miliband and the shadow cabinet are desperately espousing austerity and accepting the rhetoric that describes anyone on benefits as a scrounger; when no-one in mainstream British politics is prepared to challenge the assertion that immigrants are to blame for our economic problems, it is time to accept that there is no real opposition.  Yet there is only one Conservative MP in Scotland and no such consensus here - so who speaks for me? Not the Labour Party.

Secondly, the real contempt that has been shown for Scotland and ordinary Scottish people by the "Better Together" campaign beggars belief.  Despite a fairly high profile and many assertions in the media, they have only two strategies: 

Appeal to Selfishness - Independence will cause you to lose influence/importance/a say in world affairs/we (English People) won't like you any more/we (English People) will stop subsidising you.  When it is Scottish people who are  delivering the message they couch it in more acceptable terms but the message is the same - you will be out of the club.

Fear - and this is the big one - Your pension might come from another country and maybe they won't give it to you any more (those bad untrustworthy foreigners).  The oil might dry up - then where will you be? What if there is another Recession? How will you cope without England to protect you?  We won't let you use the pound as we were only pretending that it was a shared currency - it was really English all along!  You won't get into the EU! You might have to stay in the EU! Your bank account/mortgage/credit card might be from a foreign country (their words, not mine) maybe that will cause problems for you...

I could go on, as there are lots of stupid scare stories going the rounds, but most of them are so genuinely fatuous that it's not really worth it.  Losing influence is one of the most ironic threats of all. We couldn't have less influence on anything than we have right now.  When England decides whether the EU is a good/bad thing in Cameron's referendum, make no mistake, England will decide - not Scotland/ Wales/ Northern Ireland.  Recently in the ridiculous currency debacle, one of the threats made was that Scotland would not have  as much influence over economic matters if they used the pound (which, after all is England's property). What will we do after losing all that influence that we never had anyway? And all the foreign country nonsense? At the moment my mortgage is with Santander (the clue is in the name) and most people don't know geographically where their credit comes from - but here is a clue. It's probably already a "foreign country".  In a way I am quite annoyed that I am spending time on such plainly spurious nonsense - but people are susceptible to scare stories and the media (in my view a national disgrace) know that.

The other dimension to the Fear argument is uncertainty and here I am going to quote an online source as he has put the point very succinctly. This is from a Facebook page called The Point:

Aided by a gullible and sympathetic media it’s easy to get results. Simply challenge the SNP, or Yes Scotland, to come up with ‘detail’ on how an independent Scotland would work on a range of issues; in relation to Europe, currency, borders, international treaties and so on. Even when a perfectly reasonable position is laid out by Yes campaigners, they then claim ‘uncertainty’ or that ‘the SNP have no answers’. This is an utterly dishonest position because they know damn fine that the ‘detail’ of all of those things would have to be worked out in a process of negotiation between all parties concerned after a pro-independence vote. Calls from academics, independent groups, and think tanks for the UK government and the Scottish government to come together and thrash out a programme for transition to an independent state have fallen on deaf ears as far as the unionist side are concerned. The UK government say they will not pre-negotiate independence. From their point of view that would remove the very ‘uncertainty’ they are trying to create to frighten voters.

Uncertainty is the natural position of human beings, countries and political parties.  If there is a Yes vote, there will be decisions, changes and elections. If there is a No vote these things will still happen but you and I will not really be involved.  We will be in or out of the EU depending on how many people in Middle England are reading the Mail. The British Government cannot tell you whether you will better or worse off in the Union three years from now. No-one can. They can tell you what their plans are (and they make my blood run cold as it is) but they don't know how it will pan out.  The rhetoric also manages to imply that, if there is a Yes vote, the oil will run out but, if there is a No vote, it will last forever. How is that for arrogance?  What have they done with the oil money so far? They didn't spend it in Cowdenbeath or Kinglasssie or Shotts or Lerwick or Tullibody or Motherwell - I know that.  Oil, as a resource ,  is a big one and Westminster don't want to lose it.  That is why Osborne could even be bothered to come up here and try to intimidate voters with the rubbish he spouted (with no authority) about the pound.

Finally, I stated near the beginning that I have never voted SNP.  I am not easily roused to political writing and I have never been given to singing anthems and romanticising William Wallace but, as a Scottish born adult, my intelligence has been insulted, my friends and countrymen abused and my patience exhausted by the tirade of idiocy that politicians and the tabloid press have heaped on us.  Right now I feel that I am being ruled by the Daily Mail and that there is no desire for a real debate on this subject - just more condescension and threats that lack substance.

An Independent Scotland will not be perfect but it will be better, much better ,  than this.  I am not , as I said before, a nationalist by inclination but I pray that I do not have to spend the rest of my life being patronised by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband.  We are better than that.