CONTEMPLATING an upcoming independence referendum, it doesn’t take many brain cells to figure out that winning votes from the conservative (with a small c) older generation could well be the final game-changer. It therefore follows that the concerns of this group need to be understood and addressed – not just during the referendum but every day leading up to it as well.
In 2014, Project Fear concerns about currency and pensions, including downright lies, were used to spook many people.
And the single event that took victory away may well have been Salmond’s poor showing against Darling on the currency question and the infamous “Plan B”.
It should have been a simple question to answer but it wasn’t, because he insisted on saying that it was Scotland’s pound too and hadn’t already countered the false argument that using the pound was in Westminster’s gift alone (I hope all readers understand that this is incorrect, but why go down the “ownership” route at all when it is just as simple to say Scotland will use the pound until it no longer suits us and Westminster can do nothing about it – just as the Bahamas and other countries use the US dollar, and as Ireland, Australia etc used the pound for years after their independence?).
To me it seems glaringly obvious that Scotland’s currency policy should be to use Sterling for a transitional period for as long as it makes sense and then to adopt a Scottish currency without hard rules, instead providing sufficient flexibility to ensure Scotland’s government is not put in a restrictive straightjacket on timing.
The spectre of a hard border with England – if there is a Brexit without a customs union and single market – will likely be used to create similar concerns to last time, except then it was the spectre of Scotland not being in the EU. All the more reason to support the FM’s strategy on Brexit.
It is really also long overdue for the government to issue an official rebuttal of GERS. Others have called for the government to form its own statistics unit, and this will be needed post-indy, so why wait? An official income statement and balance sheet stripping out costs that
will not be incurred in an independent Scotland, including the elimination of the UK’s debt repayment (Scotland did not run up this debt – indeed Scotland only recently assumed borrowing powers – and it has already been acknowledged in 2014 that Westminster owns 100% of the debt – even more so if it claims to own the pound). Additionally, the benefits accruing from independence should be added as an overlay.
I would like to see campaigners addressing such issues on offence not defence. For example, answers to “My mortgage is in sterling, what happens if Scotland has a different currency?” “My pension is paid by the British Army, will it stop if Scotland breaks away?” etc etc.
Whenever a company issues a press release likely to trigger questions, it provides a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) briefing with the answers. Indyref2 should be no different except we should get those FAQs and answers out now and have them broadcast widely.
Companies also know that repeating a message is the best way to make sure that it is heard and registers. These messages must be regularly released and put into the hands of the target group. How areas of concern would actually impact on the lives of individual Scots needs to be drummed into the heads of the electorate to win the argument before a referendum. Repeat, repeat, repeat.
David Cairns
Finavon
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel