Comment & Analysis
Scotland? Whose Scotland?
Salmond’s proposal for the referendum on the future of Scotland and self-determination.
Being a Scot I have been enthused by the recent press coverage granted to the proposed referendum on independence. Naturally, one cannot help but become caught up in the emotion of it all, and feel the surge of almost nostalgic pride for Scotland. Putting emotions aside it seems clear that this peaceful push for independence, whilst perhaps a reasonable model, lacks coherence and legitimacy. The current referendum proposal lacks substance and has potential to be divisive to the entire Scottish community. I do not suggest that Scots should be denied the right to Walzerian self-determination, but believe the present proposal goes some way to denying such a right.
The proposal put forward by the Scottish Government makes for an interesting read to those Scots who do not presently reside in their ancestral homeland. While the SNP claim that they are driven by a democratic desire to enable Scots to have the power of self-determination, the proposal smacks of political manoeuvring that will exclude a large section of Scottish society. It may be electorally functional to maintain the same electorate as was eligible to vote in previous Scottish elections, but this has bizarre consequences. The criteria for eligibility to vote entitles EU citizens to vote in the referendum provided they have resided in Scotland for a sufficient period of time and are enrolled on the electoral register. Such criteria enables a German colleague of mine to vote on the future of Scotland whilst not having firm intentions to stay. Scots who have chosen to pursue Higher Education in England, however, will not be eligible to vote should they be registered in their university town (the author being case in point). This is a strange form of democracy that dilutes the notion of self-determination by excluding members of the particular national group seeking self-determination, whilst affording voting rights to those who are only temporary residents. This is particularly potent when considering those who have enrolled in full-time higher education outside of Scotland are excluded, whilst there are those residing in Scotland for the purpose of education alone are eligible to vote.
The proposal also seeks to extend the vote to those aged 16 and 17. While there have been long-standing debates over the extension of the franchise, it seems baffling to those who do not presently reside within the borders of their homeland that people deemed too young to be able to judge the hazards of alcohol or tobacco are eligible to determine whether said land should sever itself from the rest of the UK. The entire proposal is politically insensitive and reflects the populist posturing of the current Scottish Government – extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year-olds is in itself a political act that could win favour for the pro-independence camp. This brings into question the fairness of such a referendum. While the content of the proposal itself remains questionable the debate over the implications of independence cannot truly be considered.
Where self-determination is concerned it seems clear that the current proposal has potential to exclude vast swathes of Scots who have a vested interest in the future of their nation. While the current rules regarding the referendum are questionable, the peaceful route taken to secure secession is most definitely something that represents the views of all Scots. The question now turns towards the EU – will a Scotland under the EU be any different to Scotland under Westminster? It is too soon to tell what the implications for Scotland would be, but also what the implications will be for the EU as a whole, given the secessionist movements in the Basque territories and in Cataluña.
For more information on the debate see the Guardian.
Or for more on the discussion on ex-pats’ voting rights see the Scotsman.
Tagged Alex Salmond, EU, Scotland, SNP
3 Comments
Leave a reply
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
@LezmondoFebruary 24, 2012 at 10:39 am
I guess it could be argued that Scotland is currently just a single territorial unit of the EU; similar to Wales and Northern Ireland. England being the same; the only difference being that England is split into 9 regions.
The question isn't so much about Scotland gaining independence from Westminster, as becoming a fully fledged territorial unit under the EU. The power of Westminster to govern any UK citizen has been waning for decades and now this power only resides within a few key areas. The bulk of governance comes from the EU with the legal backing of the European Court of Justice.
So the real issue is not one of a referendum for Scotland. The outcome of such a referendum will be meaningless unless you are talking about also gaining independence from the EU (as well as Westminster).
Twitter @Lezmondo
Peter BellFebruary 24, 2012 at 11:27 am
"While the current rules regarding the referendum are questionable…"
An assertion which, while repeated ad nauseam, remains unexplained.
I found it difficult to make any sense at all of this rather garbled offering. But it seems that the author's main complaint is that person's who have chosen to exclude themselves from participation in the referendum will be excluded from participation in the referendum. Nobody forces those taking up temporary residence in other parts of the UK to give up their place on an electoral register in Scotland.
Inclusion in the electoral roll is how you get a vote. If you want a vote, get included in the electoral roll. It's hardly rocket surgery!
Darren DuffyFebruary 24, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Thank you for your comments @Lezmondo and Peter Bell, I am glad to have provoked some reaction – a thorough debate over the proposal is what is required.
In regards to the EU, I agree with the suggestion that there will be limited change but do not believe independence from the EU will (or should) ever reach the agenda. What is most interesting, however, is the implications this may have for the Spanish and French governments who have their own secessionist movements. There was a period in which the prospect of Scottish membership in the EU looked like it may have been blocked by both France and Spain as a result of this – after all, if these governments recognised Scotland should they not recognise Catalan and Basque claims?
Regarding the matter of eligibility, it is not as simple as you have made out. Due to a less than friendly labour market in Scotland, and a higher education system straining under budget cuts (http://www.studentcashpoint.co.uk/Default.aspx?WCI=htmHome&WCU=CBC=View,DSCODE=J4BGRL2,NEWSITEMID=240-N1025) with a 9 per cent drop in the number of Stem (Science, Technology, Engineering & Maths) and social science subjects offered at Scottish universities, people are being forced to search elsewhere in the UK for employment and education. For those seeking employment this often means moving to London – at least on a semi-permanent basis. Remaining resgistered to vote in Scotland would deny such individuals a right to vote in the constituency to which they were forced to move. Were it the case that Scottish independence did not impact the life of that individual then there would be little sense in arguing that they should be entitled to vote. As the implications of independence affect persons who have the intention to return once the labour market is much more hospitable (which could be longer than they had hoped should independence become reality), it seems to undermine the logic of self-determination for their future to be decided upon without their input. Further to this all Scots will be required to take acquire a new passport – a Scottish one. At the very least this will incur a financial cost, albeit a small one. It clearly affects individuals who reside outside of the border. The more interesting implication will be for those whose passport is the basis of their residence in a non-EEA country. A similar argument can also be applied to those who are in higher education in England – as they are spending the majority of their 3-5 year academic career outside of Scotland, thus would be denied either the right to vote on issues affecting local governance in their univeristy town, or the right to vote on the future direction of their country. While not "rocket surgery" it is by no means as black and white as you suggest.
While the language of national self-determination is being employed, those using such language must recognise that the nation of Scotland is not confined to geographical boundaries.
I am suggesting, quite simply, that a greater discussion over who should vote is required before vast swathes of Scots are excluding deprived of their right to self-determination.