To those who know me it will come as no surprise that, given the opportunity, I would vote ‘Yes’ in this year’s Scottish Independence referendum. Sadly, that opportunity won’t present itself given my current residence in the United States. I do believe, however, that restricting the vote to the country’s residents is the fairest method that can be used and, at the end of the day, it’s those that live there that will be affected by the outcome most. That’s not going to stop me from having my say though, and so, here lies the purpose of the article you’re reading.





Even from afar it is clear that the lack of information available to the public is the cause of many of the political disagreements. I’ve read thousands (I think I wrote this as an exaggeration at first but it can’t be far off) of blogs debating various issues ranging from Currency to Border Control. To be honest, the information available on these topics is probably not sufficient enough at this moment in time for either side to be truly satisfied with their arguments. That being said, there are a number of areas that I do believe have come to influence voter’s opinions that should be discarded because of their lack of relevance and I've decided to take the time to try and dispel some of these ‘myths’ in question. Just to be clear, I don’t believe that every ‘No’ voter has formed their opinion based on these areas but I’m certain there are some.





The Auld Enemy





Until September last year I had been living in Madrid for 2 years. I love the Spanish People. I love the Spanish way of life. I love the Spanish culture, the cuisine, the nightlife and I am envious of their weather. I respect the Spanish achievements and admire the Spanish History. But would I be happy if Scotland formed an alliance with the Spanish and allowed our countries to be governed jointly from their capital? Of course I wouldn’t.





Now substitute the word ‘Spanish’ for ‘English’ in the previous paragraph and I can assure you that the truth remains. The appetite for Scotland’s independence is in no way fuelled by any bitter or tested relationship with the people of England. To quote The Godfather’s Michael Corleone, “It’s not personal, it’s strictly business”. Perhaps quoting a fictional Italian mobster is a bit misleading in terms of imagery but essentially he removed emotion from his decisions and made them in the best interests of his family. This is the foundation for the ‘Yes’ vote.





All too often you hear or read comments from Union supporters claiming that the desire to live in an independent nation stems from passionate nationalists whose emotions run high on memories of Braveheart and the bellowing of Flower of Scotland. Whilst the Scots in general are a patriotic bunch, the notion of independence originates from a yearning to be treated fairly. Whether or not this is an acceptable notion is up for discussion but do not deem this craving to be one made of pure emotion. It is much more than that. If you are worried that the ‘Yes’ vote will result in the country being ruled by kilted warriors negligent of their new found responsibilities then don’t be. Everyone of us is taking this vote seriously, on both sides.





Up like a Salmond





th September 2014 there will be a referendum vote. An opportunity to vote on whether or not you believe Scotland should be an independent country. This is not a General Election. You are not voting for a political party, you are not voting for particular reforms and you are not voting to bring change to fiscal or monetary policy. You are voting on whether or not to turn an idea into a reality. Only if Scotland wins independence will these other factors become significant - which is really the point all along… they will actually be significant! Ok, so just to clarify, on the 18September 2014 there will be a referendum vote. An opportunity to vote on whether or not you believe Scotland should be an independent country. This is not a General Election. You are not voting for a political party, you are not voting for particular reforms and you are not voting to bring change to fiscal or monetary policy. You are voting on whether or not to turn an idea into a reality. Only if Scotland wins independence will these other factors become significant -which is really the point all along… they will actually be significant!





th March 2016 and an election of government on 5th May 2016. At this point the people of Scotland will be given a variety of options on how they want their country to be run for the next 4 years (assuming that’s the agreed constitutional term). For the first time ever they will be able to pick up a selection of manifestos provided by the party candidates where every idea represented will be an idea aimed directly at Scotland and its residents. Scotland will be a democracy again. If you don’t want Salmond you can vote for someone else. The choice will be yours. A vote for independence is not a vote for SNP and does not mean you are voting for Alex Salmond to become Western Europe’s first dictator since Spain’s Franco. There’s every chance Alex Salmond won’t be even be the premier politician in the country should we decide to go it alone. That decision lies with the people of Scotland. A successful referendum would mean independence on 24March 2016 and an election of government on 5May 2016. At this point the people of Scotland will be given a variety of options on how they want their country to be run for the next 4 years (assuming that’s the agreed constitutional term). For the first time ever they will be able to pick up a selection of manifestos provided by the party candidates where every idea represented will be an idea aimed directly at Scotland and its residents. Scotland will be a democracy again. If you don’t want Salmond you can vote for someone else. The choice will be yours.





The Tax factor





Prior to the 2010 UK General Election, the Conservative party manifesto failed to include the full details of their plans for public spending and had very few pledges on tax. The only promises made were that the party would cut the budget deficit and that they would “likely need to announce further tax raising measures”. They, of course, went on to win that election, yet I don’t remember there being many outcries back then from Scotland demanding a detailed balance sheet approach to how the finances would be managed over the party’s 5 year term. Interestingly though, there seems to be an obsession at present amongst Pro-Union voters to debate whether or not the tax rate in Scotland will rise as a result of independence as well as a demand for transparency and detail on how the government’s accounts will be managed.





Or maybe they’ll reduce taxes and aim to increase public consumption to stimulate growth. Who knows. The point is, the decision will lie with the people of Scotland. If you care about it that much then vote for independence because that’s the only way you’ll have a say. Truth be told, taxes might be raised. They might also be lowered. The decision to alter the tax rate will fall with the incoming government who, as discussed, have yet to be elected. That government might choose to increase taxes and reduce debts.Or maybe they’ll reduce taxes and aim to increase public consumption to stimulate growth. Who knows. The point is, the decision will lie with the people of Scotland. If you care about it that much then vote for independence because that’s the only way you’ll have a say.





Ultimately, it all comes down to the strength of the current account which the SNP have consistently attempted to show is stronger than the UK one. If you are waiting on Alex Salmond or Nicola Sturgeon to announce Scotland’s tax rates for 2016 onwards then I wouldn’t hold your breath. Their job is to provide you with enough information to make you feel comfortable that the Scottish economy is established enough that it can flexible in its approach to fiscal policy and steer the country through various economic cycles. If you feel they haven’t done that then you have every right to question the authenticity of such a claim. Perhaps they haven’t. I believe they have. I think the other political parties in the UK believe they have too. None of them are behind the independence movement, and it's not because they like us so much. It's because they need us.





Oil be damned





It’s evident in my eyes that Scotland’s current account can remain positive for many years to come. Yes this includes oil and yes oil plays a very important role in our economy. Sure, if it was to run out then this would have an adverse affect on Scottish society, but why would this be any different if we were part of the UK? When the oil runs out, will there be sufficient reserves in the UK to ensure that we have developed new sources of income in Scotland? Will the UK continue to distribute as much money north of the border when we stop contributing it south? We could wait and find out. Although by that time we might have used up all of our most valuable natural resource, bolstered London’s coffers and left ourselves with no bargaining chip for future budgets. This is all very hypothetical, I agree, but so is the notion that the oil will run out in 25 years leaving Scotland to rot.





Over time these developments will materialize and be a strategic fit between what we can provide and what the world needs. Any loss of oil to the economy would mean that Scotland would have to develop another source of income to fill the gap. There are plenty of areas that they could look to develop here and the good news is that they will have the money to do it. Do the SNP have a development plan in place for this? Probably not. Do Apple know what type of product they’ll need to develop 25 years from now to make themselves competitive? Of course not.Over time these developments will materialize and be a strategic fit between what we can provide and what the world needs.





The world is an unpredictable place that throws a number of curve balls through time. 50 years ago, the South Bay portion of San Fransisco was a large student base for Stanford University. Now it is known as Silicon Valley and produces revenues that most countries would be envious of. I’m not saying that Scotland can replicate this kind of environment but they will have the money, and most importantly, the opportunity to cultivate areas of commerce that would normally require a base in London, the investment capital of the UK. If you want to bring the investment to Scotland then there’s really only one choice. The people of Scotland are intelligent enough to implement the changes needed.





From Watt to what?





th Century and birthplace of some of the greatest ever scientists, philosophers, architects and inventors, stop believing in itself? Why is it that we consider ourselves on par with third world countries in the sense that we are unable to govern our own country? When did the culture of our nation resort to looking for someone else to solve our problems? This lack of ambition and determination stems from a lifetime of just taking what is given to us. It’s almost embedded in our way of thinking. This brings me to my final point; the lack of faith we have as a nation in our ability to follow through on the entire project. At which point in time did Scotland, the home of enlightenment in the 18Century and birthplace of some of the greatest ever scientists, philosophers, architects and inventors, stop believing in itself? Why is it that we consider ourselves on par with third world countries in the sense that we are unable to govern our own country? When did the culture of our nation resort to looking for someone else to solve our problems? This lack of ambition and determination stems from a lifetime of just taking what is given to us. It’s almost embedded in our way of thinking.



In the U.S., almost 60% of 7 to12 year old kids would like to be President when they grow up. Not once when I grew up did I want to be Prime Minister. That was a job for someone else. I don’t remember that being the ambition of anyone else in my class either (I’m sure I’ll be corrected on this). Perhaps this is because being a footballer or movie star is far more appealing but I also believe it is because we grow up with a sense that even if we were Prime Minister we wouldn't really have much power to change things anyway. Maybe if it was Scottish Prime Minister I’d have felt different. Rest assured, I am not thinking about turning to a career in politics. I am in no way qualified and certainly lack a number of the desired qualities for such a job. That being said, I am at ease with the fact that, even within my small social circle, I know one or two people that I would put my faith in to run the country effectively. And if I know 1 or 2 then there are thousands out there that could.



A country doesn't just need a strong leader though. Life is not about handouts. As John F Kennedy famously said, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". His inaugural speech in 1961 could very well be recycled and used in Glasgow and Edinburgh this year. He demanded that Americans become "active citizens" which is exactly what we need to aspire to be. There are a lot of areas that the U.S. get wrong in my book, but at least they grow up knowing that if they work hard then they can be whatever they like. That entrepreneurial attitude isn't common where I'm from. Everybody has a role to play in making the country a better place to live but we need to have the responsibility and control to make it happen. We are no different to the successful men and women in other countries. We just need to be given a chance In the U.S., almost 60% of 7 to12 year old kids would like to be President when they grow up. Not once when I grew up did I want to be Prime Minister. That was a job for someone else. I don’t remember that being the ambition of anyone else in my class either (I’m sure I’ll be corrected on this). Perhaps this is because being a footballer or movie star is far more appealing but I also believe it is because we grow up with a sense that even if we were Prime Minister we wouldn't really have much power to change things anyway. Maybe if it was Scottish Prime Minister I’d have felt different. Rest assured, I am not thinking about turning to a career in politics. I am in no way qualified and certainly lack a number of the desired qualities for such a job. That being said, I am at ease with the fact that, even within my small social circle, I know one or two people that I would put my faith in to run the country effectively. And if I know 1 or 2 then there are thousands out there that could.A country doesn't just need a strong leader though. Life is not about handouts. As John F Kennedy famously said, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". His inaugural speech in 1961 could very well be recycled and used in Glasgow and Edinburgh this year. He demanded that Americans become "active citizens" which is exactly what we need to aspire to be. There are a lot of areas that the U.S. get wrong in my book, but at least they grow up knowing that if they work hard then they can be whatever they like. That entrepreneurial attitude isn't common where I'm from. Everybody has a role to play in making the country a better place to live but we need to have the responsibility and control to make it happen. We are no different to the successful men and women in other countries. We just need to be given a chance



So....



As I mentioned to begin with, none of the above should determine which way you vote. The detail for that decision should be found elsewhere. This article is merely trying to remove some of the background noise that is getting in the way of what really matters. The real issues lie with topics such as Currency, EU membership, debt distribution etc. With no certainties in place as yet for any of these then I can understand the hesitancy in some voter's attitudes. There is a lot more than meets the eye on these matters though and maybe I'll come back to them in the month's to come.



The result of the referendum in September is far from clear just now. There are pros and cons for each side. If we manage to secure independence then I don't deny that there will be challenging times. I don't doubt that the transition period will be far from flawless. Change is never easy. What I do know is that we can continue to live our lives as we have always done, accepting that we have pulled the short straw and that at least if things go bad our big brother will look out for us. Or we can realise that we are more than capable enough to look after oursleves, take control of our destinies, responsibility for our actions, and rewards for our endeavour. We won't always get it right, but that's part of growing up. At least we will have had the opportunity to make it better.