Tomorrow

Tomorrow is a day that will go down in Scottish history.

In 20 years time, as we look back on how Scotland became independent, 25th January 2012 will be seen as the starting point. The interviews to the media, the photographs from the referendum consultation launch, will feature in the retrospectives and in the history books. Those images and soundbites will become part of our nation's story, a well-remembered back drop: the sights and sounds at the very beginning of a process that will change Scotland for good.

This is the most exciting project that any nation can undertake. We have the opportunity to choose a better way forward, to choose the right path for this 21st century.

70 journalists from nations around the globe will be in Edinburgh tomorrow to witness events. They know something is happening in Scotland - they can see a nation on the move. I was speaking to one of them today. A man who has witnessed the emergence of many new, independent nations, and indeed, whose own country became independent in living memory. And he used a phrase that has stuck with me:

"Every independence movement has its heroes, men and women who perform herculean tasks for their country."

Across Scotland tonight are the men and women who will become Scotland's heroes. The people who will build our new, independent nation. Some will be at the coal face of government, working hard to ensure that on day one as an independent country, Scotland has everything in place, with the firm foundations we need to prosper and grow. Knowing many of these people, I have no doubt that they will be successful in this task.

However, the majority of our independence heroes will not work for the government or for the SNP. But, over these next two and a half years, they will be the people who deliver independence. They will be advocates and ambassadors for independence, making the case in their work places and on the doors.

And, they will have a powerful and winning message: independence will put the people who care most about Scotland, that is the people who live and work in Scotland, in charge of Scotland's future and Scotland's success.

No one is better placed to govern Scotland than the people of Scotland themselves. No one will do as good a job, because we have the greatest stake in making our country the best it can possibly be. It really is that simple.

Another one bites the dust . . .

Another independence scare-story bites the dust, or in this case, more precisely, has been explictly denied.

The Independent on Sunday, quoting UK government sources, suggested that Spain would seek to veto Scottish membership of the EU. The parallel given was Spain's refusal to recognise Kosovo and the claim was based on alleged Spanish fear that Scottish independence in the EU would "encourage separatist ambition" in Catalonia and the Basque Country.

The IoS story has now resulted in what seems to be a stern rebuke from the Spanish Foreign Minister (translation provided via Google translate).

The actual position of the Spanish government is that the referendum on independence is an internal matter for the UK and that Scottish independence and the situation in Catalonia and the Basque Country are "completely different processes in which no parallels can be drawn (translation)". The story in IoS was "strictly false".

It shows how far British ministers are willing to go to try and misinform and, basically, scare people in Scotland. As the First Minister pointed out yesterday, this story was based, not on what Spain was saying, but on a UK government briefing. However, it's a big deal for the UK to have one of its allies forced to deny a story emanating from "senior Foreign Office sources" using quotes from "a senior UK minister".

This is the latest in a string of empty scare-stories from the anti-independence campaign. In future, perhaps they should all come with a special government health warning - "please take with a very large pinch of salt".

Our own voice and our own priorities

The anti-independence campaign has shifted focus. In their sights, Scottish defence policy. Last week we had Tory Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, describing SNP defence plans as "laughable". This, of course, from a Defence Secretary with an aircraft carrier but no planes to fly from it . . .

Mr Hammond also wishes to spend billions on new nuclear weapons, replacing Trident, a cold-war relic designed with the sole purpose of obliterating the USSR, with 'son of Trident', a nuclear missile system designed, well, to obliterate the USSR. But the USSR no longer exists - you get my point. So what is the purpose of spending £100 billion on new nuclear weapons? It seems, solely to keep the UK's seat on the UN security council - £100 billion to be spent so the British Prime Minister can keep up the pretence of global influence and power. Laughable? Perhaps, if it wasn't so serious.

And then we had Labour's Lord George Robertson of Port Ellen, former NATO General Secretary, describing SNP plans as perilous, despite those plans being for a defence posture similar to NATO members and partners such as Denmark, Norway, Austria or Sweden. I presume that when he was NATO General Secretary, Lord Robertson didn't believe those nations' defence profiles were perilous to them or their allies. Indeed, as we saw recently, Denmark, a nation the same size as Scotland, flew, together with Norway, as many sorties over Libya as the UK. To put it at its simplest, what the SNP proposes for Scotland is what suffices for the UK's allies.

I saw a quote recently, which some attribute to Ghandi: "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win". It seems very appropriate as we watch the anti-independence campaign unfold.

The UK government clearly doesn't have a clue about Scotland or where Scotland stands today. It seems a big part of their strategy, if they have one, is to try to talk us down, to tell us that we shouldn't rise above our station and do the things the big boys do. Have an army? Not Scotland, no. Although it's ok for Norway and Denmark, for Sweden and Austria. Have our own foreign policy, our own national interests and our own priorities? No, leave that to those who know best.

The problem for the Westminster government is that we've seen how they've managed our defence policy and how they have spoken and acted for Scotland on the international stage. UK government figures confirm decades of defence under-investment in Scotland, while we bear the risk of housing Britain's weapons of mass destruction. Decades of cuts, base closures and amalgamations. Soldiers sent into the frontline with inadequate equipment, maritime reconnaissance cover removed from Scottish waters, no major conventional surface vessels operating from Scotland. A smaller military footprint in Scotland than in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Austria or New Zealand. And I haven't even mentioned Iraq, yet.

An ever-growing number of people are realising that taxpayers in Scotland contribute more than £3 billion to the UK Ministry of Defence and that nearly one-third of that huge total is not spent here. We pay our fair share, and more, which means, with independence we are in a strong position to safeguard our bases, regiments and the appropriate capabilities needed for the 21st century.

They want us to believe that Scotland is too stupid to run our own foreign policy. That somehow we are uniquely incapable - a claim brought to you by the very same people who delivered the biggest foreign policy disaster in perhaps 50 years, yes, in Iraq. But don't worry there's another one beckoning as Mr Cameron puts Britain on the fast-track to isolation in Europe and, if his backbenchers have their way, withdrawal from our biggest trading partner, the EU.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating, because the anti-independence camp don't yet realise. Scotland isn't the same country it once was. Our eyes were opened long ago. We won't be frightened out of this choice. The more they laugh at us, the more they fight us with their belittling scare-stories, the more certain I am that we will win. Roll on 2014.

Nostalgia meets the cold light of day

I was fascinated by Douglas Alexander's approach on Question Time last week. Not so much his demeanour and behaviour (as someone born just down the road, I always thought Bishopton boys were brought up to behave much better than that), but more the substance of his comments.

Mr Alexander's first line of argument revolved around the question: do we really want to break up the nation that defeated fascism together? He was referring, of course, to the Second World War. We owe the most enormous debt to those men and women who sacrificed their lives to protect this country. In many ways we owe them everything. Like Douglas Alexander, I was not around to experience the horror, the fear, the heartbreak, the courage or the indomitable spirit of those who lived through the war, I simply heard the stories second hand. But what I do know, intuitively, is that the Second World War should never be used as the basis for political point scoring.

Men and women who believed in the Union and in independence fought and died together.

Nations around the world united to stand up to the fascist threat, including some newly independent of Britain and some not. Even when Britain 'stood alone', the reality is that we stood shoulder to shoulder with, and fought alongside, people from New Zealand, Australia, the West Indies, South Africa, Canada, Newfoundland and India to name just a few.

And, have no doubt, an independent Scotland and an independent England would unite to fight fascism, or a similar threat, today, just as Scots, Welsh, English, Irish (including many from the south), Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders, South Africans and more did 70 years ago. You didn't have to be one country to fight fascism 70 years ago and you don't have to be one country to fight for what is right today. 

The political point I will make is not about the past, it is about the future. In years to come, being independent will give Scotland the choice to fight with others, once again, in a just war, like WW II,  and allow us to keep our young men and women out of an illegal war, like Iraq.

Mr Alexander's second argument followed on closely from his first: do we really want to break up the nation that, after the war, built up the NHS and the welfare state? 60 years ago the London government was building these things up, with the full support and participation of Scotland. Now, they are knocking them down.

And this is not a sudden or new direction of travel. For 30 years the choice of Westminster politicians has been to move further and further away from the social democratic founding ethos of our welfare state. This may make uncomfortable reading for Scottish Labour supporters, but they know in their hearts it is true: not even 13 years of a (New) Labour government reversed the trend, it didn't even halt it.

The country being fashioned by London governments is not the one we "built together" after the war. Devolution has allowed us to save our NHS from Tory plans to dismantle the service down south. Independence (or indeed devo-max) will allow us to save the rest of our social democratic society. And it is a society and a consensus, here in Scotland, that is under grave threat. If you doubt this, just read the Spartacus report to see what is being done, in our name, yes, in our name too, to some of the most vulnerable people in our country.

The "what we built together" argument harks back to a Britain that no longer exists. Nostalgia, as an anti-independence weapon, will back-fire spectacularly. Because, once the warm glow dissipates, the cold reality of today and the future comes crashing in. 

Yes, we fought a just war together and would do the same again, but we don't want any part of Westminster's illegal foreign adventures and horrific weapons of mass destruction.

Yes, together we built the NHS, the state pension, the welfare state, but today, the NHS is on the way out in England as Tories build on Tony Blair's 'reforms'. And does anyone seriously believe the state pension or the welfare net are safe in David Cameron's hands?

Douglas Alexander is one of Labour's top thinkers, but by asking Scots to look to the past he serves only to highlight the many ways Britain is no longer the same country. The post-war Union 'deal' has changed - against the will of the Scottish people expressed in election after election. The pace has stepped up, once again, under the Tories, but have no doubt the terms of the partnership have been altered by successive Westminster governments. 

If we want to protect and preserve the things we hold dear, the things that reflect our values and our priorities, then independence is the answer.

If we see the contract we thought we had signed together, changing beyond recognition, is it not time to look for a new deal? To replace the old Union we have today with a more modern relationship that works for both nations as we move forward together in this 21st century?

Let London, if they choose, spend precious billions on new nuclear bombs rather than those same billions on better childcare or decent pensions. But not in our name. Instead, let the people of Scotland, the people who care most about Scotland, choose a better way. Let us learn from the past, and build for the future with independence.

Fair shares

As the London media tries to play catch up on the independence issue, we are starting to see many of the old hoary issues resurrected.

One, of course, is currency. What currency would an independent Scotland use?

Scotland already has a currency - its called the pound, aka sterling, aka £. On independence day that will remain our currency.

Lets be clear, the London government doesn't have exclusive ownership. It is as much our currency as it is the rest of the UK's. Any suggestion that a Tory government in London will have to give us permission to use sterling is just absurd. Decisions on sterling's future use will not be for London to take unilaterally, they will be for Scotland and the rest of the UK to take together.

And what about the Bank of England, aka the UK's central bank? Some might argue that because a Scot created it, we should take ownership after independence . . . but that wouldn't be fair!

The UK's central bank is something Scotland and the rest of the UK own together - we must not forget that. This means the rest of the UK does not have exclusive rights to the institution, or an exclusive say on its future. The Bank of England was a private company nationalised after the Second World War. Scotland will be entitled to its share of this asset and, as 'part-owner', Scotland will be entitled to representation (something we don't have just now).

An independent Scotland doesn't start from scratch. We already have everything we need (or a share of everything we need). We are entitled to a fair and equitable share of the assets and are responsible for a fair and equitable share of the liabilities we have built up together.

What we won't have a claim to is those assets that nature has bestowed on the rest of the UK. The coal under Yorkshire or Wales was not put there by the Union. Scotland has no claim to it. And the Union didn't put oil and gas under Scottish waters, so, quite simply, the rest of the UK has no claim to that.

Thank you, Mr Cameron

It's not often that I spend my Sunday lunchtime with colleagues from the SNP, but this Sunday the smiles weren't anything to do with the quality of the food or the conversation. It was all down to the interview the Prime Minister had given to the BBC earlier on Sunday morning.

It seems the UK government has blinked.

The mistake is not to offer the Scottish Parliament the power to hold an independence referendum (not that we need it). On its own that would have been seen as a constructive suggestion designed to protect the poll from mischievous intervention in the courts by those with the determination (and deep enough pockets) to try to stop the people from having their say. It would have shown respect for the mandate given by the people of Scotland to the SNP in May.

But what is a mistake, and a monumental one, is to try and attach conditions.

A party with just one MP in Scotland, that has been rejected time after time by Scottish voters, thinks it knows best. And thinks it can tell the Scottish Parliament what to do on timing, on wording and even on the choice that will be offered to the people. No wonder thoughtful Unionists, like Malcolm Chisholm think it is madness.

It is clear that the Tory Party doesn't understand Scotland. Their Westminster MPs don't really care about what happens up here. But one thing they do understand, to the point of obsession, is Europe. So let me explain, in language they will understand, just what they are about to do. And I don't do it to try and make them change their mind, but because the die is now cast: they have chosen their course.

Just a few months ago Tory backbenchers proposed a multi-option referendum on the UK's relationship with the EU. The referendum would ask people whether they wanted the status quo, a return of some powers from Europe or withdrawal from the EU. Can you imagine the furore if the EU Commission had intervened and said you can hold your referendum but only if it is a single question, with certain wording and within a time-frame that we, the EU, will decide? Such an action by the EU would have added millions to the 'UK independence' vote.

And as with Europe, so with Scotland. This is a decision for people living in Scotland: the sovereign people who have the right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs. We entered the  Union as an equal partner and we have the right to decide our future in that Union: whether we want some of the powers we gave before repatriated (as some may press for) or whether we want a completely new relationship as equal, independent nations. The Tory government in London is entitled to make the anti-independence case, but they have no right to try to hijack the referendum.

Today, we've seen a spike in hits on the SNP website and numerous telephone calls to the office. Thank you Mr Cameron! I can hardly have imagined a better start to the New Year for those of us who believe in an independent Scotland.

The Tory government is showing no respect for the voters, the parliament or the government of Scotland. They think they can treat us as though we were their Eton fag. They act towards Scotland in a way they would not accept for themselves. They just don't get it.