Britain – sleepwalking to separation

The historic victory of the SNP at Holyrood places the UK’s very existence in grave peril writes Marcus Booth.

Alex Salmond

By Marcus Booth, who stood for the Conservative Party in Angus in the 2001 General Election

The biggest cheer at Conservative HQ may have been for the defeat of AV, but the real story of this election is, in fact, the victory of the SNP at Holyrood. The historic result places the UK’s very existence in grave peril.

The prime minister is about to find that the ‘Scottish Question’ is going to be the defining issue of his premiership. David Cameron could be the last prime minister of the UK.

The collapse of support for the Liberal Democrats may have been a principal cause of the SNP victory (the Tory and Labour vote actually held up) and it may be the case that the Scottish electorate were not voting for separation but the shift is seismic and SNP strategy is never accidental.

This is nothing personal; Alex Salmond was the Hon President of the St Andrew’s Students’ Association when I was President. I admire Alex Salmond; he is one of the UK’s most talented politicians. I also like the SNP leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson, who is one of the finest campaigners I know and who has been a friend for over ten years. But as a one-time Tory candidate who fought the SNP machine in an area under SNP control, I learnt that we underestimate them at our peril – they are brutal, disciplined and effective opponents. Once in power the SNP ruthlessly use every means at their disposal to advance one cause – separatism. There is cold calculation behind the bonhomie.

The electors in Scotland may not have voted explicitly for separation but the SNP will now use every effort to create the conditions surrounding a referendum (including setting the rules and the question) that will deliver their desired result. Salmond will only go to the people when he knows he will win.

Those of us who oppose the break-up of Britain have a duty to prevent separation becoming a ‘fait accompli’. The dangerous cocktail that must be faced down includes:

Inertia south of the border – in particular the Tory leadership need to confront the ‘little England’ tendency of some in the Tory ranks. Short-sighted and misplaced self-interest has led some in England to think “we are better off without Scotland”. This is not the case. SNP MPs at Westminster are happy enough to encourage this misinformation.

Weakness of opposition to Salmond in Scotland – the strongest politicians of the principal unionist opposition party in Scotland (Labour) are in Westminster and many of the strongest Tory Scots represent English seats. The likes of Douglas Alexander may well be the brightest stars in the UK political sky but they may be packing their bags and heading North sooner than they intended. We need all hands to the pumps now – the Scottish political leaders of the unionist parties cannot remain detached from events in Scotland any more.

There is nothing progressive about the SNP’s so-called “Civic Nationalism”; there is nothing progressive in nationalism full stop. This is not about reviving ‘Rule Britannia’ but in acting together the nations of the UK can yet be a force for progressive values, a force for good in the world. We are stronger together.

In the coming weeks and months a new cross party group ‘Stronger United’ will be joining those making the positive argument for a modern devolved union; north and south of the border against both the ‘little Englanders’ down south and narrow nationalism in all its guises – fighting the politics of division with the politics of unity and hope.

We must work harder than ever to ensure that there is nothing inevitable about the break up of Britain.

53 Responses to “Britain – sleepwalking to separation”

  1. Simon Wright

    I agree with Ed that the campaign to defend the union must avoid being patronising. Sadly there are legitimate arguments by the opponents of the union on both sides of the border. One thing that the pro union side must not do is simply say “England subsidises Scotland”. This is not true and the SNP can effectively disprove it.

    A tactic that is far more likely to work is to talk up Scotlands contribution to the union, how much damage would be done if they left and what all of us lose out on.

    Of course England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are better off united as part of the United Kingdom. With a larger economy we are able to shield ourselves from economic crisis unlike Ireland, Iceland and Portugal for example. We are a major power in the EU, and not bullied and threatened into accepting something like the lisbon treaty as Ireland was. We have a seat on the UN security council, able to veto any UN resolution, we are a member of the G7, G8 and G20. An independent Scotland would not make it into a G40 if one existed.

    The separatist threat must not be underestimated as mentioned above. Salmond is extremely dangerous. Unionists from all political parties must unite quickly and crush the separatist cause before the official referendum campaign begins. Atleast if action is taken now, its not done with excessive media regulations on balance to the two sides… as would be seen in the run up to the referendum.

    Decades of attacking British identity by all 3 mainstream parties has led us to this position. now everyone has no choice but to fight this dangerous separatist agenda.

  2. Mr. Sensible

    Couldn’t agree more Marcus, and I hope that unionists on both the left and right can work together against those who call for seperation.

  3. Rob Brookes

    It would seem most likely to me that the Scots could benefit from independance from England. They have huge renewable energy resources, a low population density and appear to prefer to be governed by people they vote for rather than from the heads of corporations.
    Rob

  4. Keith Ruffles

    Too often the arguments for and against Scotland’s continued membership of the UK are boiled down into petty spats over tax revenues and subsidies when in actual facts the benefits of mutual union are far more diverse and ideologically profound.

    The proponents of unionism need to make their points much more vociferous and diverse in nature.

  5. Trakgalvis

    RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

Comments are closed.