WHEN academics of the future reflect upon Scotland's constitutional history, they may dwell on the last few days in March 2008. Last week we saw three significant steps along the road to what may prove to be a defining moment in deciding the very shape of this nation.
First, the thus-far fairly vague Scottish Parliament Commission on devolution obtained both a human face, in Sir Kenneth Calman as chairman, and something approaching a remit and timetable. The body has been dubbed 'The Wendy Commission' – and that c
ould be a fatal flaw. Though backed by the Lib Dems and the Tories too, it is most closely identified with Wendy Alexander. While her leadership of the Scottish Labour Party has improved, this remains a questionable association.
Secondly, within 24 hours of Calman's unveiling, Alex Salmond took centre stage to announce the second phase of his National Conversation. This has been a low-key affair so far, consigned largely to messages posted on the Scottish Government website. But now the First Minister is taking the conversation to the nation, especially "Civic Scotland" – the churches, trades unions, business and other opinion formers. By enthusing them, Salmond hopes to widen interest and edge Scotland towards independence. The third major step forward came soon after, when the First Minister revealed his conversion to a multi-option referendum, which would include independence, the status quo and a middle option of more powers for Holyrood. Moreover, he said the Single Transferable Vote could be used to determine the outcome. This, fumed opponents, could lead to independence even if it was the top choice of just a minority of Scots.
These developments represented a welcome flurry of activity. But we suspect that the nation feels no more engaged in a "conversation" today than it did a week ago. And no wonder – the whole process, both the Constitutional Commission and the National Conversation, is just taking too damned long. It will be at least a year before the Scottish Parliament formally discusses either exercise's findings, while Salmond's 2010 target for a referendum may be no more realistic than his "Free by '93" slogan was 15 years ago. Step forward our most successful businessman, Sir Tom Hunter. For some time now, Sir Tom has shown in equal measure a burning ambition for Scotland to do better and a rising impatience at the pace of progress. He has put his own money into the effort, through his eponymous Foundation and last year's New Enlightenment initiative. In this newspaper today, he says he has finally had enough of posturing politicians. Stop the chattering, is his message, and get on with it; put the independence question to Scots and move on. Otherwise, the uncertainty will continue to hold back business and divert attention from education, health, and the battles against drugs and crime.
Having dragged himself from humble origins to a billion-pound fortune, Sir Tom knows what he is talking about when he talks about how to progress. Politicians should listen to his influential voice. We suspect, however, that they will continue to keep the constitution issue in the long grass for some time: Salmond, because the polls tell him he needs much more time to persuade Scots to embrace independence; the Unionists because they have moved into this territory to try to cut him off at the pass – and they do not yet know where they want the journey to end.
They will justify the delay by saying that we cannot rush into a momentous referendum on our constitutional future. Really? Labour was elected on May 1, 1997, and four months later, on September 11, Scots voted overwhelmingly in favour of devolution. Sure, this came after decades of debate on Home Rule, but haven't we had as many years of discussion on the merits and failings of independence? So let's move on now, sharply. Let's mark the 11th anniversary of the devolution referendum with a definitive one on independence, on Thursday, September 11, 2008. As Sir Tom Hunter says, only then can we cast off the uncertainty and get on with national life. This newspaper backs a referendum on independence not out of political expediency but out of a desire to hear the voice of the Scottish people. Let Scotland speak, and then let's get on with the important work required in a modern, competitive 21st-century nation.
