And now we are all experts on Spain

Of course, that isn't true. In fact, even compared to the average, I know very little about Spain. Even my knowledge of the geography is limited to being able to point to the coast or the interior. I don't speak the language, and have visited possibly 5 times in my entire life - 4 of those to holiday resorts that had been turned into Little Britain with sun. Which makes even me wonder why the heck I would write a blog about the trouble that has notched up a level over the past few weeks. 

Whilst I can't write from an emotional level on this issue, there are some important points that do need to be considered. And they are points that have an impact on parts of the UK too. After all, we have had our own challenges with parts of the country that want away, questions of self-determination and areas that contain people who see themselves as having different ethnicities. So what do we know / understand of the situation? Are there any impacts / lessons for the UK? I would also add - that I am trying to understand the situation and write this from that perspective. The feelings around this are very real and very raw - so I ask you to choose not to take offence. 

As someone who, until very recently, knew nothing about the drive for Catalan Independence (and for most of my life the much more pressing question appeared to be around independence for the Basque country) I have tried to research some of the history and here is my very abridged version. 

Catalonia has a strong identity as a country / region with roots back to the 11th / 12th Century. From the formation of Spain in the 15th Century however it has been part of that country. But throughout it's history it still retained it's own identity within Spain - even retaining many of the trappings of statehood until much more recently. Of course whilst it had enjoyed a lot of autonomy from the 1930s onwards, this was brutally stamped on by the fascist regime of General Franco when he came to power. In fact, so afraid was Franco of Catalan resurgence that he restricted the speaking of the Catalan language.

Of course, when it comes to nationalism (in whatever form) - the more it is suppressed, the angrier its adherents become, and the stronger the feelings. Throughout history it appears that the harder you try to squash nationalism - the more you feed it. Conversely (in many cases) the more you allow it, and give further autonomy, the less the power and its sting. Scotland appears to be an example of this - given autonomy, and allowed to hold a peaceful, supported referendum. They ultimately chose to remain part of the United Kingdom.

So since then Catalan (along with other parts of Spain, and other territories across Europe) has had political will from some people and parties to seek independence - a rise of nationalism at a local level. Interestingly many of those believing that their future lies in nationalism and separatism also believe, at the same time, that their future lies in internationalism. Their own sovereignty back, so they can share that sovereignty with other countries. Perhaps this apparent contradiction goes to the very heart of ideas of self-determination - they believe they have been forced to be part of a nation state, and would prefer to make an active choice. If this is the case this is certainly incorrect in the case of Scotland - they actively chose to become part of a United Kingdom.

But what has driven the latest scenes of violence, civil disobedience and strikes? Images of police officers being held away from using sticks against civilians by fire fighters? The Spanish government attempting to remove the powers of the regionally elected government? Deadlock in the Catalan parliament? Where did it go so wrong? 

The catalyst for this appears to be that Catalan pressed ahead with a disputed referendum on independence. Once the Catalan government chose to go ahead with this, various legal challenges, and ultimately police action followed. This culminated in the horrible scenes most people have seen of firefighters being attacked by police officers because they were trying to protect civilians attempting to vote in the referendum. 

Lots of politicians have come out either in support of the people of Catalan (particularly within the Labour party and the left wing) or in opposition to the EU's handling of a national crisis (Nigel Farage MEP - I don't get it either). Whilst it is easy to lay blame on the basis of gaining short-term political capital, does this hold up?

Well, generally I would always argue that whenever you see images of police, military or paramilitary forces sanctioned by the government to beat civilians it becomes quite clear cut. But in this case, whilst we can deplore those actions there is blame a-plenty on every side. 

We should remember what this is about at it's most basic level - and that is self determination of a nation state. But this itself is difficult. We tend towards the view that nation states are a defined area, with commonality of culture/history/tradition/language and a government. Unfortunately, there are precious few examples of nation states being born through peaceful, democratic means - even in modern Europe, beyond the unification of Germany and the split of Czechoslovakia. So there is always the risk of violence when pursuing this agenda. In fact it was within living memory for many people that Scottish Nationalist terrorists tried to blow up the Edinburgh Tattoo.

Additionally, the proposed referendum was illegal under not only Spanish law, but also under Catalan law. This would require any change in the constitution in Catalan (and there would be no bigger than this) to be supported by 2/3rds of the parliament. However, the Catalan nationalists knew they would not be able to achieve this, and attempted to carry out an illegal referendum to circumvent their own democratic rules.

At the same time, the political desire for a referendum has been growing for a number of years. The Spanish government could have chosen to work with the regional government to allow a legal referendum - and then fought their case. Instead they have actively avoided any engagement on the question - hoping to bottle the pressure. We have seen what happens when you do this. 

So a Catalan independence movement pushing ahead with an illegal referendum and a federal government unwilling to listen to it's people. Neither of those are particularly positive images. Of course, Spain may have been concerned that once a referendum was allowed it would be re-run ad infinitum until Catalan nationalists got the "right" answer. Certainly that looked a risk after the Scottish Referendum - although Nicola Sturgeon, much to her credit, has delayed any future vote ( a-heartfelt-letter-to-nicola-sturgeon.html ) even if temporarily.

Putting aside the fact that it was illegal - can we take the outcome of the referendum in Catalan as being a legitimate expression of the wish of the people of that area? After all, irrespective of vagaries of governmental rules and regulations this must be the most important test. This has to be the most important question when it comes to self-determination. What do the people want?

Again, the immediate response from the nationalist Catalan government was that the vote was overwhelmingly in support of independence. 90% of those who voted, voted for independence. But this was based upon votes from less than 50% of voters (the turnout was 43%). In context, this means that approximately 39% of the people of the region were able to vote for independence. Does this seem a clear message of support for forming a new nation state? Of course there appear to be several reasons for this. Not least that the spanish government did their best to disrupt the vote by closing polling stations, stopping people from voting and intimidation and violence. But it must also be noted anti-cessationist parties refused to take part in the referendum and advised their supporters not to vote. Do we believe if all points of view had taken part, the vote would be for a separate government?

At the last Catalan elections in 2015, 75% of the electorate turned out to vote. At that election strongly pro-independence parties took 45% of the vote. Based on this vote - in which all sides took part - there is appetite for independence from some voters, but not overwhelmingly. As we are currently seeing in the UK, nationalist tendencies amongst even a small majority can be enough to sway a vote - with disastrous effects. But there is no evidence of this being the case here. Indeed, even within the Catalan parliament there is no full-blooded majority push for complete independence (at the time of writing).

So we have a disputed, unfought, purposefully sabotaged, illegal referendum where we can not take a clear answer that the determination of the people would be for independence. We have clear evidence from the parliamentary elections and machinations that it is anything but a clear cut case. There is obvious evidence of the Spanish state behaving in a heavy-handed and appalling manner. But this in itself is not evidence that the people of Catalonia desire independence - it is evidence that Spain don't want it to happen. Of course we should berate the behaviour of the Spanish state. But this should not equate to support for independence.

Some Leave voters have every right to be angry. They just need to work out who with.

So quite an extraordinary act took place last week. 3 judges from the High Court in London made a decision on a technical point of law and sent the news and the political sphere into overdrive. This doesn't happen very often, but given the topic they were ruling on this was hardly surprising. They were passing judgement on a case brought by a group of private citizens against the UK Government on the specific legal steps the government must take to invoke Article 50 of the EU - that is to start the formal process of Brexit.

This has been jumped on, by members of the public and experienced politicians alike as an attempt to derail the democratic will of the UK - that we want to leave the EU. The majority have spoken, and here are a bunch of bremoaners trying to stop that from happening. Is that the case though? Our democracy that has been hard won and hard protected now under attack? Certainly during the Leave campaign much was made of our governance, rights and democracy tying back to the Magna Carta and being uninterrupted since then. Is someone trying to run roughshod over that?
I believe the answer is an unequivocal yes. Should Leavers be angry? For some of them, I think they have every right to be.

Lots of leavers voted that way for lots of different reasons. I think it is a real shame that so many have wanted to tar them all as racists. Some Leavers had decided, long before any cases were put forward that they wanted to Vote Leave. That is absolutely fine. It is a democracy. We don't get a right to limit the vote to only people who consider issues in the way that we do. It is the system we have. But over the course of the referendum campaign, there were really 4 key issues that were used to push the Leave vote. Firstly, to take back control of unchecked immigration. Secondly, to take back control of our laws and rulings. Third, that we would be able to create new and better trading relationships with a wider range of partners. Finally, that we could save money paid in to the EU and use this, for example, to give the NHS an extra £350 million a week. 

These 4 issues, when combined and brought together, spoke to the very heart of the issues a large group of people care about. It spoke to our national pride and national strength. Anyone arguing against this could easily be derided as not patriotic (I know this, because I took this claim fairly regularly). But I can see the emotional flow of that argument. These claims were pushed very strongly, not just by the official campaign, but by UKIP and the majority of the British press too. 

It's quite easy to see, when someone is faced with this level of emotional argument, and see a set of factors that are so clearly wrong and unjust, that they expect everyone else to see it too. I actually wonder why there wasn't more aggression and violence. But also, if you have been given this story, you would assume that once through the referendum, this horrible situation would be remedied quickly. No more EU, no more money paid, no more immigration, control back in your hands.

Unfortunately, they have been both badly let down, and badly lied to. Firstly, David Cameron has let down not only Leavers but everybody in the country. This referendum was only ever meant to kill off UKIP. There was never any intention within government that Remain would actually lose. For this reason, there was never any clarity or honesty as to what would happen if they did. The government didn't even make contingency plans for that outcome. Just imagine that, a government not planning for a possible outcome of a binary referendum. Leave was never on the cards. Why else do you think the PM immediately resigned?

The other effect of this is that there was never any clarity given on how we would or could leave and what leaving would free us from. Had government departments been allowed to work on both outcomes then a clear option would have been given. Stay, and you get A. Leave and you get B. Unfortunately, this was taken away from the electorate. Instead, the Vote Leave campaign, UKIP and press barons were allowed to fill the void where official government guidance should have been. 

A really good example of this is shown by the reaction to the court case last week. The legislation which allowed the referendum was quite clear that it was advisory. Any decision was always going to be subject to British laws and British government - in the shape of the houses of parliament. But if you have been told for three months - you, personally - that you were taking back control, wouldn't you be shocked to now hear that? I would be. 

But this belief that people were given, came quite clearly from UKIP, Vote Leave and the press. It is therefore not at all surprising that all of those bodies have immediately come out and attacked the judges and the law of this country. Not because they ever believed it. But because the alternative is that this raw emotion they have unleashed turns on them to hold them to account for selling them a fairytale. 

Indeed, the judges had not made any ruling on whether we could or couldn't or even should or shouldn't leave the EU. They were purely ruling to say that British Law must be followed. However, social media and the mainstream media were awash with this attempt to stop Brexit by these judges. Never mind the fact that reading of it is completely untrue - UKIP, The Daily Mail, The Express all presented it as an attempt BY THE JUDGES to stop Brexit. In fact, in ever more dangerous behaviour Nigel Farage has called on people to march on the Supreme Court. Because nothing says respect for the rule of law like attempting to intimidate judges. 

Of course, this is just one example where a lack of planning and honesty is going to cause problems. There was never any decision or agreement on whether we would have any future relationship with Europe at all. This was not covered in the referendum. We were given a binary choice between the status quo and whatever the Leave campaign wanted to sell us. So it is far from certain whether our final leaving deal will include: Trade tariffs, freedom of movement, single market access, accepting some European rules. But the Leave camp have already sold all of these things. Given the level of emotion they have plumbed and brought to the surface, this could lead to even greater anger in the future. 

If you voted or now want to Leave, I would not expect any other outcome. But it is time to look at what you have been sold, and whether you actually want it. And if you do, what should it look like? The problem is that other Leavers might have a different view from you. There is no way you can all be kept happy. So, you have every right to be angry. But be angry with David Cameron for making a mess of such an important democratic process. Be angry with those who have lied to you. But don't be angry with the courts. Once this is all over, it is likely they will be the only ones left to us. Do you really want to damage them to the point that they can no longer hold the government to account?

A heartfelt letter to Nicola Sturgeon

               It’s a funny old thing when you start writing a politics blog. I chose to do it entirely for my own interest and to get myself writing regularly. My original aim was to write semi-amusing articles that some people would like and some wouldn’t – and to deliver something every couple of weeks. I hadn’t realised that politics in the country would be turned on its head by a vote to leave the EU. I sat down last night and counted 15 separate topics I wanted to cover in separate blogs. It’s a funny old world sometimes. We now have a smirking Nigel Farage trying to destroy any goodwill remaining in the European Parliament, racism and xenophobia rampant on the streets, David Cameron resigning, looking less likely that we will actually Brexit every day, Boris Johnson not standing for PM (right now) and a thoroughly horrible coup in the Labour party threatening to rip the party apart. But there has remained one constant – Nicola Sturgeon would like to take Scotland out of the United Kingdom.

                

Dear Nicola Sturgeon MSP

             

               Firstly, well done to Scotland for voting to remain within the EU. This would have been my preferred outcome for the whole of the UK. Many people across the country are still reeling from that vote. The only thing that we can say with clarity because of that vote is that we are heading for a great deal of uncertainty. This uncertainty affects all of us – whether we are in Scotland, England, Northern Ireland or Gibraltar.

                The numbers in the vote were quite stark – and the differences between the countries marked. 1.6 million people voted to Remain across Scotland compared to 1 million people who wanted to Leave. That is a 62% remain vote within a turnout of about 67% (http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and-referendums/upcoming-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/electorate-and-count-information) . A huge push for Remain. Whilst this was across the UK the biggest democratic exercise that has ever been performed (in terms of turnout) it wasn’t in Scotland. Many more Scots voted in the Independence referendum in 2014. Then you have another 1 million people voting.

                Obviously, we can’t know which way people voted in each referendum – whether people who wanted to stay in the UK wanted to also stay in the EU for example. I am not sure the data is readily available for that. But it is a desperate shame that we couldn’t get more EU remainers out to vote in Scotland. It could have had a big impact on the overall result. As it is such a low turnout in Scotland may have helped the Leave side – and forced you into considering a second referendum yourself.

                Although I say forced, I am not sure that is quite the correct word. You are after all the leader of the SNP. Your entire raison d’etre as a party is to take Scotland out of the UK. The party line following the defeat in the last independence referendum was that something would have to materially change to hold another one. This certainly seems to count. I can understand to some degree how you must have felt after that result – I am sure it was similar to how I felt this week. But here’s the thing – given the uncertainty can you be sure that is the right thing for Scotland?

                My often repeated views during the original referendum were quite simple – the case put forward for independence was pie in the sky and didn’t add up, and that we are all better being part of something bigger. That co-operation with others was always the best way to go. To not follow arguments that were purely nationalistic rather than actually good for the country. I would have argued until I was blue in the face that the people of Britain believed that. I would have argued that leaving to go it alone was an inherently more risky proposition for Scotland. I can see how some of those arguments have absolutely been holed below the waterline now.

                Of course at the time we had no idea what the Scotland Out campaign would really deliver. A manifesto that promised a government to be all things to all peoples was never going to wash. The fact that the manifesto was predicated on receipts from oil money that has largely dried up also now shows the wisdom of the Scottish voters in rejecting it (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/12052565/Independent-Scotland-would-be-bankrupt-and-appealing-to-IMF.html) . There seems to be an interesting learning from both referendums best summed up by Jamie Vardy – “Chat shit. Get Banged.”. If you try to sell the voters a clearly unreal picture they will rally against you. Of course in your case that was a picture of Scotland that could never come to pass. In the EU case that was a serious of threats to do horrible things to pensioners and the working class that no-one believed by George Osborne.

                I would imagine you have learned from that. I am sure there are some very clever election strategists working out how to avoid that pitfall. Maybe that would help in any future campaign to deliver the result that your party has been seeking for its entire life. Certainly it must be really tempting, whilst the rest of the UK and our politicians are looking the other way to try and push ahead with your agenda. Knowing they are out of the game whilst fighting within their party or negotiating with the EU would certainly make me go for an early referendum.

                But would that, right now, be in the best interests of Scotland or Scottish people? Or is your desire for independence at any cost clouding your judgement a little bit? Because to win a referendum you would have to change the minds of about half a million Scots – and if I may generalise for a moment – it is hard enough getting one Scot to change their minds once they have decided on something. Would using the fact that Scots want to be part of the EU be enough to change how voters would vote?

                Firstly, you would need a clear, realistic plan of what would happen if you left the UK. That needs to be clear from 2 points of view to win people over. One of those is that you would have to be clear what you are going to. If you ceded from the UK, what would that plan be – to immediately rejoin the EU? If so, you would need to be really clear the terms that would be on and get assurances from the EU on that. Do you think that is going to be, right now, a top priority for EU politicians? Never mind the fact that you would have Spain standing in your way at every step (because of their own Catalan separatists) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36656980)? So how quickly would you be able to do that? Also, given that the oil price has fallen off a cliff and doesn’t look like recovering the economic case this time round would be much weaker that isn’t helping your case.

                The other point of view is showing people what they are voting away from. As you have shown once simply answering “The English” to this question really isn’t enough. Whilst the Leave EU campaign managed to tap into people’s anger, you have failed to do that once. So what would you be taking people away from? The answer is that you simply can’t know. I get that neither would any Stay campaign – and from a political point of view that would possibly help you massively. But look inside yourself and be honest  - would that really be doing your best for the Scottish people as a whole? There still remains a possibility that a UK outside of the EU would be a good thing for Scotland. There also remains an increasing possibility that nobody will be brave enough to pull the trigger on Brexit – or as Leavers hoped – we end up with all the benefits and none of the costs.

                You simply can’t know. And so you would be asking the Scottish people to vote blind-folded, with one hand tied behind their backs on what would be right for them. Purely to achieve a vote for independence from something unknown and unknowable on the basis of nationalism. If you think you can live with that on your conscience, perhaps go and talk to David Cameron.

                I understand that the SNP will re-run this referendum time and again until it gets the right result. But please, do what is right for Scotland first and foremost, and wait until people can honestly know what they are voting for and against. Because voting in the absence of knowledge can often get you the wrong result.