tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/scotland-in-the-eu-10180/articlesScotland in the EU – The Conversation2022-10-26T09:39:01Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1930472022-10-26T09:39:01Z2022-10-26T09:39:01ZScottish independence: how Nicola Sturgeon’s pledge to rejoin the EU could impact a referendum vote<p>In its new white paper on the <a href="https://www.gov.scot/publications/building-new-scotland-stronger-economy-independence-summary/">economics of independence</a>, the Scottish government made it clear that rejoining the EU was central to its vision of how Scotland could prosper outside the UK. Rather than simply being a question of whether Scotland should be part of the UK, the first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, framed the choice facing the country as being “outside the UK, but inside the EU”, versus being “inside the UK but outside the EU”. </p>
<p>In short, any future referendum on independence would be as much about Brexit as it would be about Scotland’s relationship with the rest of the UK.</p>
<p>This, perhaps, is not surprising. After all, in the EU referendum in June 2016, Scotland voted 62% to 38% to remain in the EU. <a href="https://www.thenational.scot/news/20680808.support-rejoining-eu-skyrockets-among-voters-scotland/">Polls suggest</a> that support for being part of the EU is even higher now. Meanwhile, from the SNP’s point of view, the outcome of the Brexit referendum provided the clearest possible illustration of their claim that, as part of the UK, Scotland is at risk of having its “democratic wishes” overturned by the less progressive views of voters south of the border.</p>
<p>The question of whether Scotland could rejoin the EU if it left the UK was much debated in 2014’s independence referendum (the Yes side said it would, the No campaign that it would not). At that point there did not appear to be a strong link between voters’ attitudes towards the EU and their attitudes towards independence. According to the <a href="https://www.gov.scot/collections/scottish-social-attitudes-survey/">Scottish Social Attitudes survey</a>, 49% of voters with a sceptical outlook towards the EU (that is, they either thought that the UK should leave the EU or that the EU’s powers should be reduced) voted for independence. Only slightly fewer – 44% – of those who thought the EU should remain at least as powerful as it was voted the same way.</p>
<p>This pattern was also reflected in how people in Scotland voted two years later in the EU referendum. According to the <a href="https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/">British Election Study</a>, the level of support for Remain among those who voted Yes (62%) two years earlier was much the same as among those who had backed No (60%). </p>
<p>Since the early 1990s, the SNP’s vision of independence has been one of Scotland in the EU. Yet there has always been an element of the party’s support that wished to avoid both the constraints of EU membership, as well as the limitations created by being part of the UK.</p>
<h2>What has changed since 2016</h2>
<p>After the Brexit referendum, some voters began to reassess their attitudes towards independence in light of the decision to leave the EU. As the SNP anticipated, some who had voted No in 2014 and Remain in 2016 switched to backing independence. But these were counterbalanced by some who had voted Yes in 2014 but Leave in 2016, switching in the opposite direction to support Scotland remaining in the UK.</p>
<p>There was no immediate change in the level of support for independence following the EU referendum. But gradually, a link emerged between attitudes towards independence and backing for being part of the EU. By 2017, Scottish Social Attitudes was finding that 49% of those who were in favour of remaining in the EU were also in favour of independence, compared with just 41% of those who backed Leave.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An EU and a Scotland flag flying in front of Westminster Palace, with Big Ben visible against a blue sky" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491308/original/file-20221024-1583-ax57v2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Polling on the Brexit referendum might indicate how another Scottish independence referendum would go.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By the time of the 2019 survey, by which point it was clear the UK was heading for a “hard” Brexit, the gap between the two groups had widened considerably. Now, 65% of Remain supporters were in favour of independence, while only 43% of their Leave counterparts held that view. This rise in support for independence among Remainers was enough to push the overall level of support for Yes close to the 50% mark in the polls.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the eventual implementation of Brexit has seen the gap between Remain and Leave supporters widen even further. In the latest Scottish Social Attitudes survey conducted towards the end of 2021, just over a quarter (26%) of those who currently support Leave said they would vote Yes to independence. Two-thirds (67%) of Remain supporters expressed that view. In contrast to the position eight years ago, attitudes towards the EU are now an integral part of the constitutional debate in voters’ minds.</p>
<p>None of this, of course, necessarily means that Scotland is set to vote for independence in the event of another referendum. The country remains evenly divided on the subject. But it does help explain why Sturgeon seems keen on the constitutional debate being about Scotland’s relationship with the EU, as well as about its links with the UK.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/193047/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Curtice has received funding from UKRI-ESRC. The Scottish Social Attitudes survey receives funding from the Scottish Government. </span></em></p>Recent polling indicates that the EU question is central in the minds of Scottish independence voters.John Curtice, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Social Research, and Professor of Politics, University of Strathclyde Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/751972017-04-03T13:28:48Z2017-04-03T13:28:48ZShould there be second referendums? Ask Duke Ellington<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/163354/original/image-20170330-4576-12vk1l4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C59%2C2176%2C1337&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sir Duke wants a second referendum. Or does he? </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jazz_musician_Duke_Ellington.JPEG">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A second referendum on Britain exiting the European Union should be held, some people contend, once voters have a better idea of what a departure would actually involve. Meanwhile, politicians in Edinburgh are seeking a second referendum on Scottish independence sometime in the next few years, though many voters in the first were led to understand that their decision would hold for “a generation”. </p>
<p>So, if voters expect the result of a first referendum to stand, can a follow-up one be justified?</p>
<p>In thinking about this question, I was reminded of a story about Duke Ellington. The Duke, so the story goes, was so addicted to music that after a gig finished he would stay at the piano and keep playing all night. This was inconvenient when he had to play the next day so he gave a member of his band the job of forcing him off the piano. The man with this job, however, had a serious problem. After the gig, Ellington would try to override his previous instructions. But before the gig he instructed the man to take no notice of such attempts. Now which Duke, exactly, was the man answerable to?</p>
<p>Economists call this <a href="http://gregmankiw.blogspot.co.uk/2006/04/time-inconsistency.html">the problem of time inconsistency</a>. But a philosopher could argue that it’s a question of metaphysics. </p>
<p>If Ellington is one undivided entity that <a href="https://medium.com/r/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Ftemporal-parts%2F">endures</a> through time, then his instructions are just contradictory. Post-gig Ellington and pre-gig Ellington are one and the same man – one who has instructed his bandmate both to stop him from playing the piano and not to do so. His bandmate can’t be obliged by contradictory instructions, so he isn’t obliged to do anything at all.</p>
<p>But suppose we hold that Ellington is a <a href="https://medium.com/r/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Ftemporal-parts%2F">“perduring”</a> entity, composed of a string of “time-slices”, running from earlier to later. Then we must ask which time-slice(s) of Ellington the bandmate answers to.</p>
<p>On the face of it, there is a good reason for having the bandmate obey the instructions of the more recent time-slice of Ellington. After all, more recent time-slices have knowledge that wasn’t accessible earlier.</p>
<p>Imagine Ellington learning, just after the gig, that he would be expected to play something new at his next gig and would need to put in some extra practice immediately. Doesn’t his present self, who has acquired this crucial new information, have the right to override the instructions his past self gave his bandmate?</p>
<p>Does that mean that present-Ellington should have ultimate sovereignty? No. This is where the problem of <a href="https://medium.com/r/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fscientific-realism%2F%23PesInd">“pessimistic induction”</a> comes in. Past-Ellington turned out to be making a poor decision when new facts came to light. But present-Ellington will soon become past. He lacks information that will come to light in the future. This is a reason to deny all time-slices the right to make a final decision. The young St Augustine <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110108.htm">faced a theological version of this puzzle</a>: if you can always repent and come to Jesus tomorrow, there is never a reason to stop sinning now.</p>
<h2>The paradoxes of second referendums</h2>
<p>There is therefore a philosophical puzzle around the question of second referendums. The phrase “the will of the people” is thrown about, but who are “the people”? Even if we rather crudely identify the people with the majority, do we mean the majority in 2016, when the referendum was held, or the majority in a later year</p>
<p>Suppose we divide “the people” up into time-slices, as in the Duke Ellington example. If, in 2017, we implement the decision of the people in 2016 without consulting the people in 2017, this would seem undemocratic. The whole franchise has been given over to the earlier time-slices.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if we let the later time-slices make the decisive choice, then we’re disenfranchising the earlier versions. They aren’t able to participate in a 2017 referendum for a very good reason: they only exist in the past. And so their past decision turns out not to have been a decision at all. Worse, by induction the same can be readily applied to the 2017 time-slices.</p>
<p>It’s no wonder that Brexiteers hate the idea of a second referendum. It goes against the will of the people, who made their decision and were told it would be final. But the Brexiteers ignore the fact that disallowing a second referendum prohibits today’s “the people” from expressing their preferences, based on the options for Brexit that are emerging.</p>
<p>Scottish nationalists, by the same token, are setting a dangerous precedent in raising the spectre of a second referendum. If they get the result they want, how will they make it stick?</p>
<p>I have no conclusion to draw from all this, except to stress that the question is cursed with paradoxes. How logical simple majority-rule could be, if it weren’t for the passage of time.</p>
<p>Diogenes the Cynic is said to have responded to <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paradox-zeno/#ParMot">Zeno’s famous paradoxes of motion</a> by getting up and walking. Perhaps his point was that we shouldn’t let paradoxes get in the way of our projects. All the same, it’s a dereliction of duty for any thinking person to pretend, in the teeth of a paradox, that things are as clear as day. And there seems to have been a lot of pretending on both sides of these referendum debates.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75197/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexander Douglas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>He’s been gone for 40 years but the Duke could still make a valuable philosophical contribution to the Brexit debate.Alexander Douglas, Lecturer in History of Philosophy / Philosophy of Economics, University of St AndrewsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/417032015-05-12T11:38:20Z2015-05-12T11:38:20ZTom Devine: is this the end of the Union as we know it?<p>The extraordinary electoral destruction of Scottish Labour in the UK election, leaving the formerly dominant people’s party with one solitary seat north of the border, was bound to trigger even more searching questions about the immediate constitutional future of Scotland. </p>
<p>The Scottish Conservatives had been <em>hors de combat</em> since the 1990s. Now,the only remaining party political champion of unionism in the country had also been routed. It does indeed seem that the Union might soon be overwhelmed by this nationalist tsunami. </p>
<p>I am a historian; the future is most certainly not my period. But a few thoughts, based on some reasoned speculation, might be of interest on what might happen now to the so far unanswered Scottish Question. </p>
<p>At first glance, the omens seemed favourable for those who aspired to the establishment of a sovereign Scottish state in the near future. The SNP has turned Scotland into a one-party nationalist polity. The two Scottish parties which staunchly support the Union have only a seat each in Westminster and have been overtaken by the serried ranks of 56 new nationalist MPs. </p>
<p>SNP morale has been boosted to astronomical levels. The Yes movement was not killed off by the referendum defeat but has continued unabated since then. <a href="https://theconversation.com/depth-of-snp-support-bucks-a-political-trend-that-has-held-since-the-1970s-40707">Scottish opinion has hardened</a> around the SNP under the new leadership of Nicola Sturgeon since the referendum, hence it is very likely that the party will be returned to power at the next Holyrood election in 2016.</p>
<p>The nationalists now have the political contest for which they have long yearned, nay lusted: a straight toe-to-toe fight with a Westminster Tory government which has promised to bring in yet more austerity and draconian cuts in welfare over the next few years. </p>
<p>The Conservative campaign before the general election against the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-political-party-is-threatening-the-union-and-its-not-the-snp-40507">supposed threat from the Scots</a> supporting a Labour minority government could hardly have helped the unionist cause. Westminster itself also now seems less a parliament of the entire union than it did a few years ago. </p>
<p>As Michael Kenny <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/10/scotland-independence-day-already-self-determination-legal-problems-vanish-england">recently argued</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>As an unintended consequence of devolution … An increasingly Anglicised polity has quietly emerged as an incubus at the heart of the UK state … the Westminster parliament is gradually evolving into an English-focused one.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This tendency can only increase when EVEL (English Votes for English Laws – the plan to prevent Scottish MPs voting on any proposed English-only legislation) becomes law.</p>
<p>A federal solution in light of today’s fluid set of changing relationships between Edinburgh and London could certainly provide a formidable and possibly an insurmountable roadblock in front of the independence bandwagon. Yet recent talk of a federal solution remains just that: talk. </p>
<p>A federal settlement immediately comes up against the problem of the grossly imbalanced demography of the UK, with England having <a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/population-estimates-for-uk--england-and-wales--scotland-and-northern-ireland/2013/index.html">85% of the total population</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-main-parties-will-regret-not-taking-english-politics-seriously-40677">little interest</a> in the English regions in regional assemblies. A state which has struggled unsuccessfully for many years to modernise the House of Lords is hardly likely to be willing to see through a root-and-branch reform of the British constitution and political system.</p>
<p>Then there is the promised plebiscite over whether or not to remain in Europe which has to be held before 2017. If England votes to leave and the Scots to stay, the SNP has indicated that this will lead to <a href="http://www.cityam.com/214056/snp-manifesto-nicola-sturgeon-promises-scottish-veto-brexit-end-austerity-and-higher-taxes">another referendum</a> on Scottish independence. However, in 2015, the result of that European vote is too close to call. The polls suggest the vote for exit is <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-a-referendum-were-held-today-our-poll-suggests-britain-would-stay-in-the-eu-41148">not quite as strong</a> as it was once some time ago in England. Significantly UKIP, the chief promoter of a British exit, only managed to win one seat at the May election.</p>
<p>Yet, all the above does not necessarily mean that another Scottish independence referendum is inevitable before the end of the current UK parliament in 2020. This year could indeed represent the high watermark of nationalist popularity. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-snp-westminster-intake-the-young-the-inexperienced-and-the-untamed-activists-41557">SNP’s new MPs</a> face a government with a clear though small majority. Will they, “the 56”, have any more chance of changing or influencing Tory policies than their Labour predecessors of the 1980s whom the nationalists themselves memorably vilified as “<a href="http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/torcuil-crichton-feeble-fifty-taunt-5607407">the feeble fifty</a>”? </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=866&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1089&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1089&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/81396/original/image-20150512-22571-115l9rh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1089&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A new landscape.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2015_general_election_results_map_narrow.png">Italay90</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nicola Sturgeon will be more aware than most that a second referendum will be a <a href="https://theconversation.com/indyref2-on-the-back-of-a-big-snp-win-is-not-going-to-happen-heres-why-41008">zero sum game</a>. If there is one and the vote is lost again the cause of independence would be sidelined for many years to come and might indeed never surface again for the foreseeable future. </p>
<p>An entrenched opinion poll majority for Yes of at least 60:40, or more, might be an essential precondition for trying once more. That could be very difficult to achieve in the short run as the current popularity of the SNP is not based on a commitment to independence by all of those those who voted for the party in May.</p>
<p>Then there is the realisation of <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-bill-for-more-scottish-powers-is-one-thing-making-it-law-is-quite-another-36626">The Vow</a> or what might now be termed The Vow Plus. David Cameron performed a brazen <em>volte face</em> in his first speech after his election victory. Only the day before he and his acolytes were still playing up the Scottish card, warning of the terrible fate which awaited British democracy through the feared Caledonian takeover of Westminster in league with the Labour party. </p>
<p>Now he is <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11593179/David-Cameron-Scotland-will-be-strongest-devolved-government-in-the-world.html">declaring his firm intention</a> to grant Scotland “the strongest devolved government anywhere in the world”. What this means only time can tell; and even more time will be needed before the impact, if any at all, of the promise on the Scottish Question can be determined.</p>
<p>Indeed, the tactics of the prime minister may well be crucial to future outcomes. Cameron manifestly lacks what Neal Ascherson <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/10/scotland-independence-day-already-self-determination-legal-problems-vanish-england">called</a>: “the satanic realism to grab permanent control of England by letting the Scots go” (and so ensure a potentially perpetual Tory hegemony in England). </p>
<p>Any leader of the Conservative Party, conscious of its great unionist traditions, would prefer not to go down in history as the person who allowed the Union to break up on their watch. David Cameron’s approach over the next few months might turn out to be the x-factor in the next stage of the attempt to provide an answer to the Scottish Question.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41703/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Devine does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Scotland’s pre-eminent historian analyses the road ahead for Scotland and the United Kingdom.Tom Devine, Sir William Fraser Professor of Scottish History Emeritus, The University of EdinburghLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/313892014-09-08T06:02:58Z2014-09-08T06:02:58ZSocial media and grassroots activism have taken Scotland to the brink of independence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/58384/original/t8r5vzmy-1410106447.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Yes campaign has been fought on the streets and online.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pgautier/">Phyllis Buchanan/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you wanted an explanation for the momentum that has <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/1331427/scots-yes-camp-not-complacent-over-poll-lead">carried the Yes campaign to the brink of victory</a> in the Scottish referendum, you have to look at what’s happening on the ground. The extent to which the independence referendum has engaged and mobilised people during the campaign is palpable. </p>
<p>Beyond the public discussion, mainstream media coverage and focus on high-profile politicians, far more political dialogue is taking place between family members, friends and work colleagues than usual. You don’t have to look far on Facebook to find users displaying “Yes” or “No Thanks” badges in their profile photographs. </p>
<p>Similar expressions of political activity are evident from equivalent car stickers and posters on house windows across Scotland’s neighbourhoods. Blogs have become enlivened and there is substantial online footage of different referendum-related events all over the place. Little wonder that poll research group <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/report-yes-supporters-more-likely-to-turn-out-and-vote-in-indyref.1398944965">ScotCen is forecasting</a> a turnout of around 70% to 80% on September 18, far higher than recent UK and Scottish government elections.</p>
<h2>Ordinary activism</h2>
<p>Some see in this explosion in grassroots political activity echoes of the movement against the poll tax in the late 1980s. Many still believe that the Thatcher government’s decision to impose it north of the border before anywhere else in the UK was indicative of its antipathy to Scotland. This in turn fuelled the growing movement for home rule and has both directly and indirectly brought us to the current referendum. Both the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-vote-supporters-are-biggest-grassroots-movement-9457481.html">Yes</a> and <a href="http://bettertogether.net/blog/entry/The-Grassroots-team-is-now-recruiting">Better Together</a> camps have sought to emphasise their grassroots credentials. </p>
<p>The Yes side is adept at portraying No as being driven by London elites. The Better Together campaign accuses the Yes camp of being driven primarily by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in a bid to break up the United Kingdom. We’ve seen much the same narrative from the majority of mainstream media, where independence supporters are regularly referred to as being a nationalist, “Nat” or separatist. You could be forgiven for thinking that September 18 is Alex Salmond’s referendum, rather than Scotland’s – and <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/08/28/uk-scotland-independence-poll-idUKKBN0GS2SU20140828">the two TV debates</a> arguably reinforced this sense of reducing the referendum to key individuals.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/58386/original/xv6kz5dv-1410108132.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Independence supporting blog Bella Caledonia.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet as tends to be forgotten, the pro-independence movement also includes The Scottish Green Party; The Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament; The Scottish Socialist Party; the socialist party Solidarity; Women For Independence; the artists and creatives group National Collective and the socialist Radical Independence Campaign. Yes Scotland is a loose amalgam and umbrella of different pro-independence groups and individuals. A significant number of front-line activists campaigning under the Yes Scotland banner represent ordinary people with no party political membership. Some have never been involved in political activism before. </p>
<p>Yes groups have been organised in the majority of towns and villages across Scotland. In some cases, group organisation corresponds with parliamentary constituencies; but it is not uncommon to find groups within specific neighbourhoods within some larger towns and cities. And though Yes groups identify with Yes Scotland, individual groups are organised autonomously. The age and background of campaigners is as diverse as the different colours and styles of Yes badges that they wear. Activities such as canvassing, leafleting and running a street stall attract significant numbers of volunteers on a daily basis. A further indication of local engagement is evident in the large numbers of people who attend public meetings. </p>
<p>The demarcation between professional politicians and this grassroots mobilisation of ordinary people appears to be blurred in this contemporary Scottish political landscape. It is evident that a hybrid movement has emerged within the campaign, which according to Tommy Sheridan “dwarfs the anti-poll tax campaign” that he led in the late 1980s.</p>
<h2>Patriotic nationalism? No</h2>
<p>It might surprise some outsiders to hear that any theme of patriotic nationalism has generally been absent from the pro-independence campaign, and that the main case being made for independence has involved arguments around democracy and social justice. The prominence of social welfare issues reflects the fact that socialist and social democratic politics continue to maintain a particularly high profile in Scotland – hence the involvement of the likes of the Radical Independence Campaign. The opportunity to build a new Scotland free from nuclear weapons, austerity and welfare cuts has widespread appeal. It is this concern with social justice and welfare that has galvanised support for Yes.</p>
<p>Whether Scotland says Yes or No, many people in the electorate have switched on to Scottish politics in significant ways. Many of them will undoubtedly continue to do so after the referendum, whether as engaged actors with a voice in the political process or as interested observers with an increased tendency to take notice of social issues. Longstanding caricatures of voters as apolitical, apathetic and disengaged have been staunchly challenged. That is surely a victory in itself.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/31389/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glen is a volunteer activist with YesRutherglen in Glasgow.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gerry Mooney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If you wanted an explanation for the momentum that has carried the Yes campaign to the brink of victory in the Scottish referendum, you have to look at what’s happening on the ground. The extent to which…Gerry Mooney, Senior Lecturer, Social Policy, The Open UniversityGlen Gourlay, Associate Lecturer, Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/261442014-05-01T05:12:24Z2014-05-01T05:12:24ZScotland Decides ’14: who is right on EU membership?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/47457/original/txdpwfyt-1398876738.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The row over Scotland in Europe lives on...</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ykoutsomitis/6861702519/in/photolist-bsm26R-4anxp6-62gQhq-9uhLp9-3XkTw-4uiE8q-6ehuSM-6mH4Je-b7T2L-h4rDF-7tqe1B-6mMeEC-9cWdt-7ZT7io-aqWdMo-dkNKBh-5xNHet-km5rRy-dVND41-bVjE9Y-dXH4yQ-dZymg9-e1g3Ph-85rYyr-umoEK-e1XEh7-9Y3riV-6hCGQx-oYJun-518NwF-8ag5GG-6NcKLa-5HoTH9-7Vh4w5-81R2b1-DmC14-4GPzFS-tViuj-7gDUBq-7WYfPz-5xtMS8-4TffqD-5GvBde-8rXnop-4GjH8a-kxK7Ck-9qcft6-4Cx8Rv-57JHsX-hXZ758">Yanni Koutsomitis </a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Europe is back on the agenda in Scotland. William Hague <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/28/hague-salmond-urge-plan-b-eu-membership">wrote to</a> the Scottish government calling for a plan B in case EU membership is refused. </p>
<p>Meanwhile Alex Salmond <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/28/alex-salmond-fisheries-eu-scotland">warned</a> EU member states that there would be consequences over fishing rights in Scottish waters if Scotland was declined membership, while <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27218692">attracting some bad publicity</a> for sounding rather too positive about Vladimir Putin during an interview a month ago. Our panelists say: </p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Michael Keating, Professor of Politics, University of Aberdeen</strong></p>
<p>I don’t think William Hague’s letter adds anything to the debate. He doesn’t say that Scotland would not be a member of the EU. That’s the most significant thing about this. It means we must assume that Scotland would be a member. It would be useful if the British government would just say that, as they have said they will recognise the referendum result.</p>
<p>Then he’s talking about article 49 [general entry] versus article 48 [special entry by unanimous agreement]. This is really a technical matter. If there’s a political will, Scotland will be allowed in. </p>
<p>The UK government’s position on the budget issue is quite incoherent. It’s true that the budgets from 2014 to 2020 are already agreed, but the UK share is for the whole of the UK not the remainder of the UK. The most likely outcome would be to divide the existing budget pro rata. The other states will not want to get into a fight between the UK and Scotland about that.</p>
<p>As for after 2020, the big difficulty is the UK keeping its rebate, not Scotland getting a rebate. The UK is going to find it very difficult to do that if it is going to pick a fight with Europe over renegotiating the terms of membership and have a referendum in 2017. The idea that it will be able to keep all the rebate as well seems much more implausible than anything the Scottish nationalists are proposing. In fact, it’s rather dangerous for them to talk about the rebate at all. </p>
<p>After 2020, the only friend that the UK would have over keeping its rebate might be an independent Scotland. The UK has to be able to argue there are special conditions that apply to the UK to justify the rebate continuing. It would enormously help the UK if Scotland were a member because it would mean that someone else was getting it too.</p>
<p>London is just raising hypothetical problems and is evading the big question: would the UK support Scottish membership of the EU? Everything else can be negotiated. </p>
<p>It’s more than likely that the other states would just follow the lead of the UK. The Spanish government has said that Scottish independence is a matter for the UK and Scotland. They have not said they would veto it, so you have to assume they would agree to it.</p>
<p>As far as the fishing issue is concerned, Salmond is effectively just taking the unionist position to its logical conclusion. If you are threatening to throw Scotland out of the EU, your fishing boats aren’t going to be allowed there. </p>
<p>In any EU negotiation for Scotland, fishing is not going to be a particularly powerful card. The only other people that care are the Spanish. It may be part of a deal with Spain, but I don’t think it would be a dealbreaker.</p>
<p><strong>John Curtice, Professor of Politics, University of Strathclyde/ScotCen Social Research</strong></p>
<p>I think the Scottish Government now accepts that it will in some way have to apply for membership. It has suggested it might be possible to use the procedure under article 48 as opposed to article 49.</p>
<p>But as I understand it, the article 48 procedure still requires the unanimous consent of all the members –- just as a Article 49 application does. So although the Scottish government is arguing that it is a way of facilitating Scotland’s membership relatively quickly, either option is going to require at some point the acquiescence of all existing 28 members. </p>
<p>This has implications that are not always appreciated. One is that if one accepts the argument that the rest of the UK would be the successor state, the UK will have a veto on the terms of Scotland’s membership. </p>
<p>One knotty issue is the UK budget rebate. Nobody will wish to unravel and reopen the EU settlement through to 2020, and from the EU point of view the easiest solution might be for Scotland and the UK to agree on how to divvy the rebate up. Obviously this could still lead to problems between the two sets of negotiations. </p>
<p>But after 2020 Scotland would probably struggle to maintain the rebate. Making it clear that would be the case might well be one of the ways that a country like Spain, facing demands for Catalan independence, might hope to show there is a price to pay for going it alone. </p>
<p>The fact that Scotland’s membership is not automatic weakens its bargaining position to some degree. There will have to be a bit of negotiating and hand-holding to sell the political deal to the 28 members. You can see why some countries would prefer Scotland not to vote yes and you can certainly see that none of the states are going to say before the referendum that everything is fine. </p>
<p>On the other hand there are the thousands of EU migrants whose current right to stay in Scotland rests on Scotland’s membership of the EU. It is sometimes argued that if Scotland was not allowed to maintain membership, those citizens would potentially have standing in the European Court of Justice to argue that the EU cannot just take away their rights as citizens. </p>
<p>But the EU issue is largely irrelevant to the outcome of the referendum. Scotland is more europhile than England. Scotland would probably vote to stay in. But even so, the modal voter in Scotland would probably take the view that it would be good if Brussels was not so powerful -– a position somewhat similar to David Cameron’s. </p>
<p>The Scottish people’s commitment to Europe is too weak to think that many are going to vote yes to avoid an EU referendum initiated by a future UK Conservative government or alternatively that they vote no on the grounds that independence potentially undermines the stability of Scotland’s membership of the EU. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>The rest of our panel’s analysis of the referendum campaign can be found <a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/scotland-decides-14">here</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26144/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Keating receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Curtice does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Europe is back on the agenda in Scotland. William Hague wrote to the Scottish government calling for a plan B in case EU membership is refused. Meanwhile Alex Salmond warned EU member states that there…John Curtice, Professor of Politics, University of Strathclyde Michael Keating, Chair in Scottish Politics, University of AberdeenLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.