Now’s neither the day nor the hour

It’s a puzzling paradox.  Having put the prospect of a referendum on independence on the furthest edge of the political horizon, the SNP seems rather in a hurry to launch the Yes campaign.

According to newspaper reports today, the “Yes, Scotland” campaign will be launched later this week, with two and a half years of activity to persuade the populace to back the shift from devolution to independence.  Part of me is thrilled;  you don’t spend much of your life, believing, hoping and at various points, campaigning for Scottish independence not to be excited that its prospect is within reach.

Which is why the timing of the campaign to secure a Yes, vote is crucial.  As is its launch.  And I fear the SNP, caught up in its own sense of indefatigability as well as in the minutiae of its own issues, has called it wrong.

From the party’s and the leadership’s perspective, there are sound reasons for launching the campaign this week.  The team is in place, as is the war chest, the messaging and the furniture of modern campaigning.

But there are also narrower political considerations.  Euan McColm suggested, in the aftermath of the local government elections, that “Salmond’s ‘unstoppable’ juggernaut seems to have its first roadblock”.  Certainly, the momentum has slowed;  Labour proved that it is not down and out;  in some areas, the SNP did spectacularly well but in others, it failed to make the gains it and others expected.  What better way of re-gaining the initiative than to launch the biggest campaign for hearts and minds we have ever seen?

Then there is the small matter of Leveson.  The First Minister heads there shortly, apparently willing to share with the Inquiry all that he has so far failed to discuss here in Scotland.  There is a chance that what the FM has to reveal, under oath, draws a line under the Murdoch thing and shows that he, his Government and Scotland are so far removed from shenanigans “down there” to enable everyone to move on.

But there is also a risk that what is revealed at Leveson sparks a potential firestorm around the FM which grows in heat and intensity during the long grass of the summer recess.  For the media strategists, this week offers a clear window where the launch cannot get buried by other issues or agendas.  This is true only if you take a very narrow view of what matters in domestic politics, and sadly that is what we have been doing in recent years here in Scotland.

But I’m not sure, people will agree that the timing is right.

You don’t have to stray far this weekend in the news agenda to find the doomsayers.  While there are hopeful signs that a way ahead for the Eurozone has at least been signposted, it remains to be seen if Greece’s participation in the currency can be maintained.  And if it leaves, what then happens to the other economic dominoes waiting to fall – Spain, Portugal, Ireland and even Italy – is almost too scary to contemplate.  Some are suggesting we need more bank bail-outs;  others are calling for them to be allowed, this time, to fail.  Only Germany appears willing to hold the austerity line;  remarkably, the UK has snuck in the back door of the G8 summit and emerged out the front at the side of President Obama, giving the impression that a strategy for growth was theirs all along.

Having read my fill of analysis of what is going on and consulted a few who know about such things, I am none the wiser.  It’s all too complex but like most other ordinary punters out there, I can discern that in the big scheme of things, we’re not in a good place and it could be about to get a whole lot worse.  As we saw last week, with downgrading of banks’ ratings and plummeting share prices, things move fast.  We may or may not be where we started, with Greece still teetering on the brink and Spain still staggering along.  By Friday, we could, however, be in a very different place in geo-economic and political terms.

There was good news for Scotland this week, with unemployment falling faster here than in the rest of the UK and announcements on jobs.  And the outcome from the G8 looks like a victory for the Scottish Government’s call for investment to create growth in the likes of its “shovel-ready projects”.  But the Scottish Government has been largely silent on recent developments on the international economic and political stage.  When we need it to assume the mantle of a government with pretensions to full potency, it prefers not to actually.

Yet, I reckon people would be very interested in hearing the Scottish Government’s view of what is happening in Europe, and what the implications are for Scotland, now, and as we might be, as an independent country with a seat at the European table.   And I’m guessing they’d like a little honesty about our current and future prospects – from all politicians.

In 2011, the SNP received an overwhelming mandate from the Scottish people to carry on doing what it had done so well.  With the other parties posted missing in action, only the SNP had offered leadership – and competent leadership in which they could trust.

Now, with the economic ringwraiths circling at macro level, as well as micro for many households, many people want to be reassured that we have a Government absolutely focused on the job at hand.

What matters to many of the so-called persuadables right now is the threat of joblessness, of mortgage hikes, of drowning in a sea of personal debt proving too stubborn to shift, of having to put the heating on in May because it’s so cold and can we really afford to be doing that, of how to service and MOT the car at the end of the month, of what can be cut back from the food shop to keep the cost down and how to afford new shoes for the kids and a night out for the anniversary.

And this is just what is keeping those with means and some level of security awake at night.  The worries and concerns of those sitting below this waterline are even more fundamental.

But whatever their circumstances, chances are, few people outwith the political bubble are excited about the imminent launch of the Yes, Scotland campaign.  Two and a half years might not seem very long to the SNP’s team, when there’s so much still to do to achieve independence, but for ordinary voters, it’s a lifetime away. And they’d really rather their Government concentrate on what’s bothering them this week than their own political priorities.

The timing of the launch of the Yes, Scotland campaign is important, particularly if the timing is wrong.  And choosing to launch at the end of this week is the wrong time. Now’s neither the day nor the hour to see the front o’ battle lour, to shamelessly misquote Burns.

Wanted: a little fraternal solidarity

One of the reasons many Labour folk cite for not supporting independence is because they care as much about the child growing up in poverty in Camden as much as the one in Calton.  They just about manage to stop themselves from breaking into song on how children are our future.  I jest, but I do accept they make a serious point.  We should care about the fate of all the people on these islands – and I agree.

But I don’t like the opposite preposition – that you people don’t care about children in poverty anywhere other than in Scotland – being tossed carelessly as a jibe at SNP/independence supporters.  Because it’s false.

It is hard to articulate but in some respects, my passion for changing things, for throwing out the old order and defining and re-imagining a new way for Scotland is absolutely linked to a wish to participate fully on the international stage and to be in a position to contribute more effectively to the lot of other communities.  It’s something shared by many other supporters of independence.

Hence, I would like to think, that an independent Scotland would have a different approach to asylum-seekers and refugees, and a *door more open* attitude to economic migrants too.  Scotland, as we all know, is far from full up.

I’d also like to think that we might commit to a decent sum towards international development activity, playing a full role in addressing absolute want in countries and enabling impoverished nations to grow and build their way to a better future.

Having a seat in the EU and the UN would enable Scotland to speak up and speak out on international issues: I’d even like to think that on occasion, our wee voice might be heard and listened to.  Sometimes, too, we might act not only for our own common good, but for others too.  Wee countries can and do make a difference.

The alternative is to stay as we are, largely as international pariahs, trading on a reputation long since burnished.  We get involved too often in the wrong wars. We throw our weight around.  We like to think we are military players: there is no shortage of belief in the right thing to do when it comes to tooling up.

But when it comes to leading on other matters, we’ve become, under this Conservative-led government, Pontius Pilate like.  Old instincts die hard and this lot learned their craft from the Thatcher creed.  Thus, a distrust of all things European, which often betrays itself as outright prejudice and disdain, is the tie that binds the Tory lot.  Playing hardball with Europe has become the bone which Cameron throws to his dogs to satiate their appetites.  It turns my stomach.

As does the idea that we in the UK can withdraw from what is going on over the water, as being nowt to do with us.  When it is everything to do with us: some of our banks helped to cause it, after all.

We are so tied into the idea of the banks being too big to fail, that instead we are prepared to allow countries and peoples to fail instead.  As long as the paper moneymakers remain unfettered to continue doing what they did, who cares who pays the price.

Well, I care and I know others do too.  What is happening in Greece right now is desperate.  There are real people – little people – hurting and I feel their pain.  The country is being asked to deliver impossible levels of cuts, ones that will effectively destroy its economy and society, in order to meet its debt.  I can see why the other members of the Eurozone have insisted on such a course of action, but frankly, I’m toiling to understand it.

Yes they had to attempt to keep Greece in the Euro, to avoid total meltdown of the currency zone.  Yes they could not allow one country to default on its debts for fear of a domino effect.  And yes they had to try and keep all economies inside the tent of the prevailing economic orthodoxy.

But not at any price surely.  Some have pointed out, that this monster was not of Greek origin, yet Greece is being lined up as the first sacrificial lamb.  The financial institutions now appear to be the arbiters of countries’ activities – they set the rules for nation states, while not accepting any brakes or rules to be applied to their own activities, of course.

At what point does someone – anyone – break cover and say enough.  We are brothers and sisters and we cannot, will not enforce poverty and instability on our neighbours.  Being in this together means exactly that.  We cannot inflict financial torture on others, on innocent individuals, in the hope that doing so spares us, yet the behaviour of our UK Government suggests precisely this insouciance.

Today, I am not only feeling the Greeks’ pain, but also sharing their anger.  I am angry that no politician or country is prepared to stand up and be counted on their behalf.  To offer an alternative solution to the shocking fiscal requirements being imposed on Greece.  To signal that it is does not have to be this way, that if we are to prevent this happening again in future, we must work together – as a family of nations to find a different way of financing ourselves and our economies.  One which does not involve a handful of untouchables dictating to the rest of us how to go about our business while taking no ethical responsibility for how they do theirs.

And I am utterly resolved that things in future must be different.  That there is nothing to be gained from staying within the UK, from remaining part of a union of nations which is prepared to abandon its fellow men and women to their fate.  Whether they live in Camden, Calton or Crete.

Nationalism and internationalism

To be a good internationalist, you first have to be a good nationalist.

When this blog was in its infancy, I penned a personal appreciation of the late Jimmy Reid, whose conversion to the cause of Scottish independence in later life was informed by his lifelong belief in the working people’s struggle the world over.  His guiding principles of fairness, equality, justice and indeed, fraternity had eventually led him to reconsider his eschewing of nationalism in favour of internationalism.  The concepts were in fact intertwined and not exclusive, as many in the labour movement still contend.

I was reminded of this while trying to rationalise my instinctive recoiling against David Cameron’s manoeuvrings in Europe last week.   His action left me feeling bereft and forlorn on so many levels.

Whether or not the UK can be kept from the table of European decision-making, make no mistake, we on these islands will be treated differently.  Whenever I want to make a stand on how a country behaves, I often use my personal purchasing power, boycotting certain goods and countries of origin.  I’d imagine many of our continental cousins might now think likewise.  Why support us when we refuse to stay with them in their hour of need? And before you scoff, remember how the UK was treated in the Eurovision contest in the immediate aftermath of the Iraq war.  Null points might translate into null purchases resulting in null profits for many exporters.

David Cameron claims to have used the UK veto on a new European treaty in order to protect British interests.  Effectively these come down to what is in the interests of the financial services industry, particularly those working out of the City of London, many of whose residents and workers are not even domiciled here for the purposes of tax.  It’s nice to know where the rest of us stand in the pecking order.

The Prime Minister has opted out of putting his – and our – shoulder to the wheel to help fix Europe’s problems, despite it being in our best interests to do so given the scale of our export trade with EU and Eurozone members.  Protecting the wealth of the tiny number of firms and individuals who helped cause the insolvency of all those European countries in the first place comes first.  Consequently, Cameron has dragged all of us to the fringes, marginalising the majority, playing the little islander card to the hilt.

We are, for the foreseeable future, on the outside looking in, even though our ability to effect economic recovery will largely be determined by what happens in the Eurozone and on the continent.  It is supremely arrogant and not a little foolish to think we can somehow avoid the domino impact of meltdown if the Euro collapses by simply not participating in future co-operative action.  The water around us is just that, it isn’t some kind of invisible forcefield.

Some of the cant trotted out by Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and commentators this weekend supporting Cameron’s move continues to spin a tissue of lies about what being part of – and at the heart of – Europe actually means.  On so many pragmatic political levels, being part of Europe is a very good thing.

Last week, MEPs agreed the text of a directive which will allow victims of crime – and particularly violence-related actions – to be protected if they move from one member state to another.  The European Protection Order aims to enable victims of crime, who fear repercussions or ongoing threats, even after moving to another country, to apply for continued protection if they have an appropriate legal safeguard at home.  It should be formally adopted before Christmas, with member states expected to make provision for it within three years.

These are the kind of measures that point up the unremitting good that can come of being part of a commonality of nations.  They are also the sort of moves that cause rabid rightwingers to snarl at the supposed loss of sovereignty and the imposition of European mores on our own way of life.   Commentators on and opponents of Scottish independence also like to trot out such vacuous symbols of statehood when it suits them.  How does making your own decisions square with being subservient to Brussels?  If you don’t like being told what to do by London, why swap that for Europe?  Even the more substantive questions – the pound or the euro, Schengen or border controls – are shrouded in a subconscious, contemptuous sneer at the idea of being part of, rather than apart from, the European union.

This (worst) kind of populist patriotism ignores the point of self-determination.  Of course, the concept of independence has changed in an interdependent world.  Being a country with all the normal levers and powers of nationhood means taking and making decisions in the national interest, but it also involves playing a full role in the common weal of fellow nations.  Sometimes the national interest is best served by not playing the national card, something the Conservatives fail and indeed, refuse to understand.

Poverty, hardship and injustice are no respecters of border controls.  Consigning the continent to decades of economic and social misery by refusing to get involved in helping to solve the Euro mess, will not protect our economy.  With nearly half of all our trade conducted in Europe, our economic prosperity in the short and medium term depends on theirs.

But Cameron has not exactly put all of the national interest first, but only the narrow concern of a very few;  he has protected the wealthy at the expense of everyone else.  Indeed, the ones who caused all the misery continue to escape unscathed.  The old world order keeps turning, and it’s why some of us don’t feel particularly British much of the time.

The UK’s continued adherence to the principles of selfishness, greed and individualism, dressed up as the trappings of sovereignty and the baubles of statehood, eschewing in the process the concepts of fairness, respect and equality, are what drive some of us to seek a different future.  The UK had a chance this weekend to contribute to a different future for us all.  It chose not to.

Yet, the measure of mature government and responsible democracy is to know how to play and play well on the international stageL it is not something the UK has ever quite managed to grasp.  Sometimes, it is vital to subjugate narrow national interest to a greater, common purpose.  The key is knowing when your country’s best interests are not served by blindly following narrow self-interest.

It means realising that in order to be a good nationalist, you must also be a good internationalist.