....
A place where we could make our own choices and our own decisions without our parliament constantly being hamstrung by "reserved matters" or having its hands tied by decisions made in Westminster. A place where we could set our own priorities for health and social care without having policies designed for a far more right-wing electorate imposed on us.
We looked to a large extent at Scandinavian countries and how they organise sometimes similar resources and coped with sometimes similar problems. We dreamed of land reform, of breaking the death-grip of the huge estates on every aspect of rural life.
....
The problem for those of us less emotionally committed to independence, is that the Scottish Government could have done some of this. We see little evidence of such innovation now so why should an independent government with the distraction of external affairs be any different? In some ways Wales and Northern Ireland have been more innovative around health than Scotland. The record on education is not great. With limited responsibilities what the Scottish Government does do, one would expect them to do well.
The SNP is a very centralising party, it has little interest in the periphery as its power house is the central belt. In many ways it is as remote as a Westminster government.
Scandinavia is often held up as an exemplar, but what does this mean? Conscription? A much greater proportion of private health care (by which I mean having to pay out of pocket for a proportion of services)? Much greater restrictions on the sale of alcohol?
The argument that an independent Scotland could pursue a more Socialist agenda, is not an argument for independence per se, as it is only attractive if you want a Socialist state and is in fact an argument against independence for those nervous of past examples of Socialist Utopias.
The vibe from people I talk to is that they really do not want another prolonged and divisive referendum campaign. That produces a new sectarian divide. There are some people for whom the SNP action is seen as them pursuing 'personal' agendas and not focussing on the Scottish people who voted against independence. That is the true 'mandate', and instruction that was delivered by the people of Scotland. An instruction that the SNP ignores because they did not like the answer they got.
I can see that every new leader of the SNP will have as a rite of passage the need to call a referendum. Can you see someone becoming leader who does not declare an intention to have a referendum?
I think that one thing that has to come out of arrangements if there is to be another referendum is that there needs to be a commitment not to have another referendum on independence for at least ten years.
