Views

Leaders Debate

I remember reading somewhere that, at the height of the Second World War, Westminster was debating some fairly mundane but important stuff like a new education act and building the national health service. Crisis, literally, means “turning point”. In the midst of a global conflict they were starting to build a Brave New World. They knew that it was perfectly possible – indeed essential – to deal with what was in front of us whilst planning for the future. Indeed, I suspect they’d consider it their duty. Which it was. And is.

I guess what irks me most is the lack of nuance.

Referendum / recovery isn’t an either / or. The increasing number of us who want the normality of self-determination need to be making case that independence isn’t a distraction from recovery but its enabler. You either trust your fellow citizens who happen to also be your elected representatives to use the powers invested in them responsibly or consider them among nations historically and uniquely incapable of doing so and instead outsource Scotland’s recovery programme to a neighbouring country and a political ethos that we haven’t voted for since 1955.

It isn’t independence or recovery. It’s independence “for” recovery.

It’s clear that a Scotland with every power available to it will recover much more quickly than one that doesn’t.

Either we trust our fellow Scots with powers that every other democratic country takes for granted – or we don’t.

The good news is, of course, this. When we reclaim democratic normality we can kick them out when they screw it up!

Stay safe everybody.

3 replies »

  1. Well said sir, I can see the phrase “ It isn’t independence or recovery. It’s independence “for” recovery.” become widely used.

  2. I agree- we’ll recover better with independence than without!
    Best wishes from the Isle of Arran,x

Leave a Reply to Eugene Kelly Cancel reply