The West Lothian Question Reframed

[f4f3]

In case anyone hasn't noticed, the Tories managed to get one seat in Scotland at the election.

One out of 59.

The Tories finished fourth up here, and their share of the vote was less than 17%.

Labour's vote increased in Scotland, as did that of the SNP.

The LDs also lost vote share, though the unfair first past the post system gave them a disproportionate amount of seats. I haven't heard them complain about that yet.

I'm setting this out plainly by way of stating my problem.

Scotland voted very strongly for a Labour government. The Tory party didn't just lose in Scotland, it was a pathetic, irrelevant, distant and despised fourth place.

And now, thanks in part to the LDs, we have been told that they will govern Scotland for the next four years.

This isn't a new situation for me. From 1979 to 1992 Scotland voted Labour and got Tory. I know lots of Britain (and Northern Island) suffered under Thatcher (and I know parts of the South East of England prospered), but she seemed to loathe Scotland almost as much as Scotland loathed her, and we were beaten severely for our temerity.

I'm socialist to the core. Good times, bad times. And I voted Labour all through those years. There was no choice. Now though, there is a choice. A year to eighteen months from now Scotland will vote on independence from the United Kingdom. Not devolution, a full separation.

I've always put Socialism first and Independence second. Despite the fact that I'm convinced by the economic case, by the morality of a country exercising its right to self determination, by the fact that every advantage we gain from the Union can be matched as fellow members of the EU, I've always believed that more good can be done for the UK by Scotland staying a part of it.

Before the election I said that I would do everything I could to help Labour get elected as the UK government. And I did, and so did the rest of Scotland. 42% of the vote. 41 seats. Scotland could not have tried harder, could not have hoped for a better outcome (and even if they had secured the other 18 seats, it still wouldn't have given Labour a UK majority.

I'm tired. Tired of being saddled with the government England wants. Tired of seeing Cameron proclaim his mandate for "the country".

Enough.

I'm sorry, England, Ireland, Wales, but I don't want to be part of this union anymore. I'll be campaigning for a "Yes" vote in the referendum, for full independence. And I'm sorry if that leaves England, Wales and Northern Island with an inbuilt Tory majority, but, really, that has to be your problem.

This isn't an anti-English statement. Not even an anti-Tory statement. It's about being pro-Scotland, and pro-what's good for Scotland. It's not you, it's us.

Full Scotland Scoreboard

Party	Seats	Gain	Loss	Net	Votes	%	+/-%
Labour	41	0	0	0	1,035,528	42.0	+2.5
Liberal Democrat	11	0	0	0	465,471	18.9	-3.7
Scottish National Party	6	0	0	0	491,386	19.9	+2.3
Conservative	1	0	0	0	412,855	16.7	+0.9

Comments

[hano.livejournal.com]

I'm not going to argue one way or the other, but I can certainly see where you're coming from. Tell me, how widespread is support for full independence?

[anthrokeight.livejournal.com]

This question wasn't for me, but I'm going to speculate (and will be very interested to hear what f4f3 will say).

A lot more now that the Tory govt. is in.

I was very interested to read my Scottish friends' posts on why the chose to vote for the candidates they chose.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

Less than a third, before the election.
As Kate says, I think it will have gone up already. It will be an uphill struggle to convince a majority - if there had been a Labour government I'd have backed the "Devolution max" option that's been talked about, and I suspect I'm not alone.

[psychochicken.livejournal.com]

One suspects that option won't even be on the cards now. I also suspect that the Tories are an awful lot more pro-independence than they're publicly letting on for many of the reasons you have highlighted.

Which is a shame, because whilst I'd have voted for more devolved powers I won't vote for independence. Effectively removing the middle ground polarises everyone. It's a bit like removing the "Lib Dem" option.

Having said that, I'm pro-asking-the-people and if it goes against me I may well have to consider my place here, but I'll have to accept that I didn't get the outcome I voted for, because that's how democracy works.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

I think there will still be three questions, and I'm far from sure of the outcome.
As you know, I'd only be interested in getting independence and then the SNP should wither away - I find it hard to trust any party with "Nationalist" in their name.
Also, and I won't let it go without saying, you're exactly the sort of person who I'd want to stay.

[psychochicken.livejournal.com]

Interesting. Do you think the SNP *will* wither away if independence happens? Or will they simply become a mainstream Scottish political party?

Oh, and thank you. I hope Scotland remains a place I want to be.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

I think they'll wither away. They are a single issue party, and that issue being resolved, there wouldn't be a huge reason to vote for them.
I suppose it depends to some extent on what Labour in Scotland do. I'd imagine there would have to be a Scottish Labour Party, which I'd certainly sign up for, and I don't think the SNP would fill that gap. If anything, they would fill the place the Tories do in England. But if that happens, they won't be the same party they are now.

[anthrokeight.livejournal.com]

I was thinking that an independent Scotland might show a pretty wide diversity of votes, actually. It's just that they would be a cluster of parties that, in general, fall further along the left of the political spectrum than England's do as a whole.

You know, like, there are left-leaning, centrist, and right-leaning parties in the UK, and there are left-leaning, centrist, and right-leaning voters (if not parties) in the US. But our left is further to the right than Scottish Labour, and even in the UK our right-leaning voters look utterly wackadoo.

Whether or not this would be the case in the long run, however, doesn't change the fact that just now a vote on independence would polarize people living and voting in Scotland.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I think it's time to start advocating for an independent Northumbria (meaning England north of the Trent)!

[hano.livejournal.com]

Let's not forget an independent London. Who needs the countryside anyway? :)

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

I'd be happy to take Newcastle. Not so sure about Gateshead.

[anthrokeight.livejournal.com]

Are you all gonna play poker for Milton Keynes?

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

I think anything south of the Tyne is off the table...

[anthrokeight.livejournal.com]

Ah well. I was hoping loser takes it, but I see your point.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

The English parliaments can fight for it.

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

And yet... I agree with you, but from the other side. The West Lothian question has got more and more important.

Personally, I'd solve it by having an English parliament - ideally at least two, if not more, English parliaments to reflect local concerns. London is partially there but cannot legislate on things like prescriptions for the capital, and maybe the classic English line halfway across the country would be a preliminary solution. However, the south west, for example, would have a strong case for a parliament in its own right (and Exeter would be an ideal location), and maybe it might make more sense to divide England into geographic areas with similar interests, with Westminster becoming the UK equivalent of the EU Parliament?

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

The thing is, there already is a European Parliament - why have Westminster at all? I see nothing wrong with England becoming independent, and having it's own parliament, but further steps along the devolution road start to seem a little silly. A parliament in Exeter? Why not. One in Newcastle? Well, what would Liverpool and Manchester think? Independence for London (as Phil jokingly suggests)? So long as it takes the budget with it - after all, the South East benefits most in the UK from Government spending.
I read Billy Bragg's "The Progressive Patriot", and I was glad that it confirmed what I've always known - that there is a thread of English patriotism that's not founded in racism and fear, but in a justified pride. So, yes, independence for England, that's what I say.

[kapusta-volante.livejournal.com]

The regional parliament thing kind of makes sense-in Canada the national government is in charge of things like military and foreign policy type stuff and overall budgets for healthcare, education, transportation etc. which are dished out to the provincial governments.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

I'm too lazy to google this, so what is the split in population between the Canadian states? I have a feeling there is no "Super State" there or in Australia, the way that England would be in any UK federation.

[psychochicken.livejournal.com]

I think this is probably the crux of it: we either become semi-autonomous 'states' within the UK, ruled at a higher, less intrusive level from Westminster and forget about Brussels altogether, or we plunge headfirst into Europe.

2 levels of government seems fairly reasonable; three (Edinburgh/London/Brussels) is just silly. Especially when the bottom two are going have endless petty arguments and so are the top two.

I'd suggest however that the North of England has exactly the same argument for independence as you've outlined for Scotland above - it's politically very different to the majority down South. Sure, it could get silly, but as you yourself have alluded, the political divide is not the border.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

Yes - I lived in Newcastle for 12 years, and it's a very different place from the South East. I remember telling a taxi driver at Newcastle Airport that I was glad to be out of London and back in England...

I never really felt any appetite for independence from the rest of the UK, though, and only small support for a regional assembly. I wonder if that will change now.

[psychochicken.livejournal.com]

English nationalism (I hate the word patriotism more than the word nationalism, and that's going some) is just the same as its Scottish counterpart. There's a section of it that's sourced in xenophobia, fear and hatred and a section that's not.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

We're using two different definitions of patriotism here. I picked mine up (and Bragg did too) from George Orwell, who regarded a natural pride in your homeland as patriotism, and Nationalism as a form of mental illness. I was going to try to paraphrase his definitions, but paraphrasing Orwell just shows any other writer up as a clumsy hack, so I'll download the essay and put up another post. But, roughly, his definition, and mine, puts all Nationalism as a product of xenophobia, fear and hatred.

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

Indeed. And yes, that's what I meant by regional parliaments - Newcastle would indeed have one for the north-east or north of England.

Of course, what would be most interesting from my point of view if Scotland went independent is what the reaction would be in Northern Ireland. How can you stay loyal to a Union that no longer exists?

[rhade-rad.livejournal.com]

Labour also picked up votes and control of councils in Inner and East London - BNP got their *sses kicked in Barking and Dagenham. I suspect the North West would like to join with the North East - hey reinstate the Plantagenets Council of the North...

Unfortunately, the Tories' bits are the Cities of London and Westminster and all the areas where the people who like to avoid paying tax live. If we let those go how do we pay for the things we all need?

Are you thinking about an immigration policy for Scotland if you do achieve independence? 'Cos there may be English who want to come and live in a fairer society. *G*