Sunday, June 09, 2013

Road to Referendum: the book and the film.

My documentary series on the national question "Road to Referendum", continues this week with part 2 on Tuesday at 8.00pm on STV.  See the stars of the poll tax era - and I mean stars - as we revisit the 80s and Thatcherism. 

    Also, Part 1 is repeated tonight at 7.00 on STV for those who missed it through technical difficulties. This tells the extraordinary story of how Scotland went from being at the heart of the Union in 1945 to a referendum on independence in 2014. 

I have also written a book of the same name - Road to Referendum -  which is launched at the Aye Write book festival in Glasgow on 17th June published by Cargo Press.  This charts the history of the national question in Scotland since the Middle Ages,  through the age of Empire - when Scots fought Britain's wars and ran much of its colonial business  -  to the present existential crisis of British unionism. 

Reviews of "Road to Referendum":

"A truly important book, particularly at this moment. It offers a huge sweep of history and deals with recent Scottish politics in formidable, but never tedious detail". --Andrew Marr

"Iain Macwhirter is shrewd, insightful and with few rivals in the business of understanding - and explaining - the changing politics of Scotland". --Jonathan Freedland, The Guardian

"Iain Macwhirter offers a highly readable and personal account of Scottish history drawing on wide reading and a career during which he has followed these debates more closely and consistently than any other journalist. He enlivens old stories with new perspectives, challenges established wisdom and raises awkward questions for protagonists and antagonists in equal measure on either side of today's debate". --Professor James Mitchell, University of Edinburgh


This extract from my book was published in the Sunday Herald 2/6/13.

The most extraordinary thing about Scotland's independence referendum next year is that it is happening at all. We could be only eighteen months away from the dissolution of one of the most successful political unions in history: the United Kingdom - a country whose empire once dominated the planet. Yet, Scotland has no real history or tradition of political nationalism, at least not on the scale of Ireland or any of the former British colonies that sought independence in the 1950s and 60s.

And there's a very good reason for this. Scots have not rebelled against the UK because, for most of the last 300 years, Scots have been among its most enthusiastic supporters. They helped to create it after 1707 along with the currency union based on sterling. The Bank of England was even founded by a Scot, William Paterson. Which makes it offensive to hear unionists like the Chancellor, George Osborne, threaten to deny Scotland the use of its own currency. It's like denying the pound and the Bank of England to Yorkshire.

When Scotland gave up its parliament in 1707, it wasn't quite the corrupt annexation that has been presented in Jacobite lore, or the ambiguous poetry of Robert Burns. Nor was it the last gasp of a nation impoverished by the Darien disaster, which is how it tends to be presented in some school history books. The Treaty of Union was essentially about security: about ending three hundred years of debilitating warfare between Scotland and England, that had continued, and even intensified, after the Union of the Crowns in 1603 which was supposed to have ended this historic enmity.

King Edward's armies may never have conquered Scotland and extinguished Scottish nationhood, but Oliver Cromwell's roundheads nearly did after 1650. The Wars of the Three Kingdoms, and the turbulent Stuart Restoration that followed, left Scotland exhausted physically, economically and spiritually. It has been estimated that 100,000 Scots died in these terrible conflicts, in a population of little more than 1 million.

Economic and political union was seen by its advocates as a way of resolving this conflict by creating a new economic and political entity, Great Britain - rather as the European Union was seen as a way of ending conflict between France and Germany. And it worked - even though, crucially, Scotland and England remained nations with their identities intact. The abortive '45 Rebellion was the last battle ever fought on British soil.

England didn't move the Treaty out of altruism, of course. It wanted the security of the Hanoverian succession, and also needed Scottish taxes and Scottish men to fight its battles with France. Scotland's parliament was folded into Westminster with indecent haste. However, losing a parliament was not considered as great a loss in 1707 as it would be today. Scotland was not a democracy at the start of the 18th Century – it was more like a theocracy, dominated by the Presbyterian Kirk.

The old Scottish parliament before 1707 was more like a chamber of commerce for the nobles, lairds and burgesses - people of property. Yes, 'a parcel o' rogues', were shamelessly bribed by Queen Anne's agents into voting for the Treaty of Union. And yes, many Scots did riot against the 1707 union, especially when they discovered that they were expected to pay the cost of it through an array of new taxes, like the hated Malt Tax on alcoholic beverage. But crucially the Presbyterian Kirk accepted the deal because the Acts of Union left it in sole charge of its own religious turf, and for most Scots this was more important than the location of a parliament in which they had no say.

Scottish merchants and money lenders got what they wanted: access to the lucrative markets created by the British Empire. By the 1750s, they had begun to make good money out of tobacco, the slave plantations of Jamaica and the cotton trade, which helped fuel Scotland's mills in the early industrial revolution. Meanwhile many lower class Scots, some of whom had fought for Bonnie Prince Charlie against Cumberland's red coats in the '45, were enlisted into the British army and became the shock troops of the British Empire.

Scotland provided an “inexhaustible treasury of men”, according to one contemporary account. From Quebec to Balaclava; from the Indian Mutiny to the First World War, it was generally the Scots who went over the top first, suffering the worst casualties as a result. Their exploits were glorified in epic Victorian paintings like the Thin Red Line and Scotland Forever. These were the blockbuster films of their day and lent a mystique and celebrity to the Scottish soldier which exists to this day in plays like Black Watch.

Scots saw themselves as partners in the Empire - junior ones, but partners nevertheless. The Scots fought Britain's wars, kept its books, ran its colonial administrations, evangelised the heathens. By the mid 19th Century, Scots were flattering themselves that they were the best bit of the Empire – the hardy ones who did the work, handled the natives and even lent a moral dimension through the work of Scots missionaries like David Livingstone.

Back home, the fantasy image of the heroic Highlander, created by the novels of Sir Walter Scott, captivated Victorian England and helped turn Scotland into a deer-hunting theme park for the English upper classes. They were often clad in tartans invented by the Highland Society of London, and wearing the short kilt or philabeg, which was popularised, if not created, by an Englishman, Thomas Rawlinson, and bore little relation to the great plaid worn by true Highlanders. 
Scots rather liked being regarded by the English as fearless warriors, canny entrepreneurs and prudent bankers. Being a patriotic Scot, and celebrating Wallace and Bruce, became a way of expressing Britishness in Scotland. The mighty Wallace monument outside Stirling was built in the 1860s. Scotland became a hub of the British industrial revolution, thanks to Watt and his steam engine. By the end of the 19th Century Scotland was arguably the most technologically advanced country in the world after England and Glasgow called itself the Second City of the British Empire.

Working class Scots didn't get much change out of it however – Edinburgh's slums in the 19th Century were almost as bad as Calcutta's. Scots, many cleared off their ancestral lands by former clan chiefs, were turned into industrial wage slaves. But their patriotism, and their presbyterian religion, consoled many lowlanders, and seemed to immunise Scotland from the political nationalism that swept Ireland and Europe in the 19th Century. 1848 may have been the Springtime for Nations on the continent, but it was still winter in Scotland. Scots continued to respond to the call of the British Empire in 1914, enlisting in prodigious numbers and dying disproportionately in the trenches.

World War Two is often called the “High Noon” of the Union, as Scottish and English soldiers fought to defeat fascism. And they fought side by side again afterwards to create the welfare state, a new post-imperial social contract, defined by the NHS, sponsored by the 1945 Labour government. It really did look like a land fit for heroes in the 50s, as the slums were cleared, Scottish wages tripled and infant mortality became a thing of the past. Scots probably never felt more British than they did in the early 60s, as popular culture and television made the border seem irrelevant

Scottish nationalism was certainly irrelevant in post war Scotland. The SNP, created in 1934, barely registered in elections until 1967 when Winnie Ewing won the safe Labour seat of Hamilton. That, plus the discovery of Scottish oil, launched the wave of constitutional innovation that ultimately led to the creation of the Scottish parliament in 1999. Though it was Margaret Thatcher, and her poll tax, who finally convinced Scots that they needed to restore their parliament, essentially as a defence against Tory governments in Westminster.

But this was very much Labour's Scottish parliament, the SNP having boycotted the cross-party Scottish Constitutional Convention that devised it. Holyrood was delivered on the back of the 1997 UK Labour landslide as a subordinate, devolved parliament within the UK. In the early years, it looked as if the Scottish parliament really had “killed nationalism stone dead” as the former Labour Shadow Scottish Secretary, George Robertson had forecast in 1996. As late as 2003, the SNP's support was in steep decline in the Scottish parliamentary elections.

It was only the return of the 'absentee landlord' Alex Salmond from voluntary exile in Westminster that allowed the SNP to crawl to power in 2007 over the ruins of the Scottish Labour Party, whose period in office had been marked by scandals and resignations. Scots were so relieved at the SNP's performance that they re-elected Salmond with a landslide in 2011, making the referendum inevitable. The Scottish parliament had thus been the incubator, for the first time, of a genuine political nationalism in Scotland.
However, it is important to stress that most Scots were not voting for independence in 2011, but for a better devolution. Scottish voters have told opinion pollsters repeatedly over the last thirty years that they do not want to leave the UK, but want a stronger, essentially federal parliament with a full range of economic powers, but leaving policy on defence and foreign affairs with Westminster. The most recent confirmation came in the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey in January 2013. In this most exhaustive independent survey of Scottish opinion, two thirds, 67% said either that the Scottish parliament should take all decisions for Scotland (35%) or that it should make all decisions apart from defence and foreign affairs (32%). Yet, this is the one option Scots are not allowed to choose in the 2014 referendum.

It isn't hard to understand why so many Scots are confused and irritated about the referendum in September 2014. They will be presented with a choice of unacceptable alternatives - independence or the status quo – in a referendum they never really asked for. Moreover, Alex Salmond, in trying to tailor his message to mainstream Scottish opinion has confused matters by talking of a new 'social union' in which Scotland would keep the Queen the pound, Nato bases, UK pensions etc..

So, on the one hand,we have the Scottish National Party offering a form of ersatz autonomy, which leaves so much power with Westminster that it is hard to call it independence. On the other we have the reactionary unionism of Labour's MPs in Westminster, who won't even allow their own Scottish leader, Johann Lamont, the freedom to contemplate more powers for Holyrood, as was demonstrated by their rubbishing of her tentative tax proposals in March.

Scots are increasingly confident that they could become a viable independent country if they really wanted. The great change in the Holyrood years has been the increasing acceptance by both sides of the independence debate that Scotland, with its burgeoning oil industry, its financial services, its universities, renewable energy resources etc, has the means to become an independent state just like Denmark of Norway. Scotland increasingly resembles a Nordic country in terms of economic and political culture. This is apparent in the continuing commitment in Scotland to collective provision expressed in policies like elderly care to student fees and opposition to the commercialisation of the NHS.

However, it is understandable that the Scots should not want to discard the UK because they helped build it, even if it is looking unfit for purpose. With Conservative-led government back in Westminster, the divergence of political culture between Scotland and England is becoming more pronounced. “Tory” is still a four letter word in Scotland.  Scots can no longer be confident even of remaining in the European Union now that the UK Conservatives are committed to an in/out referendum.

The worst that could happen in 2014 is an inconclusive and bad tempered referendum campaign after which a No vote is taken by Westminster as a sign that the Scottish question is no longer important. This is what happened after the 1979 referendum, which failed to meet the 40% rule.   UK governments then allowed Scotland's manufacturing economy to be dismantled, while the UK balance of payments deficit was being financed by Scottish oil revenue.

To avoid that fate, many Scots may be tempted to vote Yes in September 2014, even though they don't want independence. Others may vote No, even though they want a deeper form of devolution. The fate of Scotland may be decided by the frustrated middle who decline to make any choice at all. It would be the ultimate irony if Scotland left the UK through apathy.


cynicalHighlander said...

The worst that could happen in 2014 is an inconclusive and bad tempered referendum campaign after which a No vote is taken by Westminster as a sign that the Scottish question is no longer important.

Summed up as:

Vote ‘YES’ to make Scottish history,
Vote ‘NO’ to make Scotland history.

Stan Ley said...

Mr Macwhirter you conveniently omit to mention the English navigation acts of 1660 and 1663 which prohibited Scotland from trading with the English colonies.

Despite the risk of their ships being blown out of the water Glasgow merchants found ways of evading the prohibition.

In 1674 we find recorded the first cargo of tobacco from Virginia. Other such imports are recorded in 1677,1681 and 1691.

The Scots, wrote the Collector of Customs of Carolina, were able to undersell the English....By the end of the 17th century, despite the discriminatory Navigation acts, ships from the Clyde were trading (smuggling) goods for tobacco with the English American Colonies. (to be cont)

Stan Ley said...

.....There was also much trade with England, in spite of the heavy tariffs imposed on Scottish goods by the English Parliament and merchants after the Restoration.... It was the discrimination by the English Parliament against Scottish sea-going trade and the specific attempts to prohibit any Scottish participation in England's profitable commerce with Asia, Africa and America, that led the Scots in 1695 to set up their 'Company of Scottish Trading to Africa and the Indies', a venture deliberately sabotaged by English interests, who prevented the Scots from raising money for the company outside Scotland.

Forced to go it alone the Scots thought up the idea of founding a trading colony of their own on the Isthmus of Darien, which connects North and South America and seperates the Carribean Sea from the Pacific Ocean, apparently a natural centre of World trade. A great deal of Glasgow money went into this promising venture. When it ended in total disaster in 1701, with the evacuation of the colony and appalling losses both of men and all the money invested. There was both shock and anger in Glasgow as elsewhere in Scotland, and the English were blamed for deliberately sabotaging the scheme... (to be cont)

Stan Ley said...

....The problem of Scotland's access to English colonial markets was finally solved by the Union of 1707, when Scotland joined England in an 'incorporating union' and though Glasgow's Member of Parliament voted against the Union and there were riots against it in the city, the Union immeasurably improved the prospects of Glasgow as a city trading accross the Atlantic and opened a new chapter in its history.

The foregoing extracts are from a book entitled GLAGOW, written by David Daiches.

I would suggest that the period covered by these extracts, from 1660 through to the act of union can justifiable be called a war of attrition conducted by England against Scotland. Other readers may agree.

handclapping said...

It is disputable whether nationalism was dead after 1945. The Covenant Association got 2,000,000 signatures in the 50s and it was at least in part as a consequence of Westminster's ignoring it that the upsurge in political support for the SNP took place in the early 60s.

Independent_Scot said...

Looking forward to your sequel, “Road to Independence”.

Boorach said...

Think you and STV are missing a trick by not releasing the series on DVD.

Excellent programme by the way.... thanks.

kintra hopeful said...

Book is a great read Iain,did not agree on a couple of items but was impressed with your fairness.

Voyance mail said...

Félicitation pour votre excellent beau travail
C’est super. Bonne continuation
voyance par mail gratuite

Best Reviews for Westport Fishing Washington said...

This book is absolutely fabulous as both a history volume and a tome on the socio/politico aspects of all areas of Scotland and it' s relationship with the UK, and by definition, the world.


Vente appartement marrakech said...

Nice share! Keep it!

voyance gratuite par mail said...

You could have a great blog here! would you wish to make some invite posts on my weblog?

Marlene Detierro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marlene Detierro said...

An accessible, fast overview of political history leading up to the Independence referendum.

7.3 Powerstroke Injector

voyance gratuite said...

Super bien fait et très bons documents, très agréable à parcourir bonne continuation à bientôt.

rosi said...

Mille merci pour tout.
Tu es incroyable, mille bisous pour toi.
voyance mail gratuit

rosi said...

votre site et vos créations sont magnifiques j'adore merci
voyance serieuse gratuite par mail

rosi said...

Voilà une description qui donne envie... Je le note dans un coin ! :)

voyance email amour

datriyo said...

Telecommunications’ Managers take care of communications technologies in an organization, such as telephones, PCs/laptops, tablets, mobile phones, and fax machines, so that its daily operations happen seamlessly.

Super deals on Black Cloud South Bend Diesel Clutches said...

There 's a new and urgent relevance to Ian Macwhirter's readable but authoritative survey of the shifting sands that make up the United Kingdom. Highly recommended.

rosy123 said...

Très bon article, comme toujours. Il a le mérite de susciter le commentaire
voyance en ligne gratuite et rapide

Anonymous said...

Situs Judi Online Bola Slot Terbaik dan Judi Online william hill william hill 1xbet korean 1xbet korean 카지노 카지노 ラッキーニッキー ラッキーニッキー 1xbet 1xbet 바카라사이트 바카라사이트 640 Legalbet : 바카라 사이트 가입 쿠폰 가입 가입 쿠폰 가입 가입 가입 가입 쿠폰 가입 가입 가입 가입 밀입 가입 가입 가입 가입 가입 가�

rosy123 said...

Un petit mot pour vous dire que votre blog est super!

voyance privée en ligne gratuite

Majortotosite Com said...

You are so awesome! I don’t think I’ve read through anything
like that before. 먹튀검증

Racesite Pro said...

So nice to find somebody with unique
thoughts on this subject. Really.. many thanks
for starting this up. 경마사이트

Oncasinosite Net said...

This website is one thing that is
needed on the internet, someone with a bit of originality! 카지노

toto said...

Excellent blog here! Also your web site loads up very fast!
What web host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host?
I wish my website loaded up as quickly as yours lol 토토사이트