Why the Better Together campaign was a shambles

In less than two weeks, the United Kingdom could be irrevocably changed forever. Since 1707, Scotland and England, along with Wales and now Northern Ireland have endured over 300 years of shared history and endeavour. The United Kingdom has proved to be the most successful union of nations the globe has ever known. 

As I'm sure many are aware, the very concept of 'Great Britain' could be over. The campaign designed to stop this: Better Together has made serious errors and poor judgements. The Yes Campaign is consistently climbing in the polls because it has seized the false vision of their own optimism. I hope to allay the errors of the Better Together Campaign below.

1. The people who have fronted the Better Together Campaign have been the Labour Party and many members of Gordon Brown's government including the man himself. Why? Why did Better Together choose the man (Alistair Darling) to front a campaign to keep Scotland in union when he presided over the worst economic crisis since the 1930s and subsequently lost the 2010 general election? The members of the Brown government are toxic beyond belief. 

2. The myth that the Conservative Party is toxic in Scotland. The Tories have been forced to take a secondary role in Better Together somehow because they only have 1/59 Scottish parliamentary seats at Westminster. This is nonsense. The Tory vote in Scotland has become spread out geographically (something First Past the Post penalises) and in the most recent European election for the Scotland constituency, the Conservatives under David Cameron actually INCREASED their share of the vote. Coupling their votes with UKIP in a kind of centre-right alliance would have placed them above Labour and just behind the SNP. The Conservative Party's origins lie in the Scottish Jacobites and ideals of traditional Toryism in the 17th and 18th Centuries. The first Tory Prime Minister was Scottish; the Earl of Bute in the 1760s. Many Scots understand the need for spending cuts, there is a proud British military tradition, two Royal Navy aircraft carriers are to be built on the Clyde and many in Scotland have socially liberal values which the Westminster parties all share. After all, the Coalition has legislated for same-sex marriage but it was the SNP supporting Brian Souter, owner of Stagecoach and major financial donor to the Yes Campaign that fought to repeal Clause 28 (a clause which forbade the 'promotion' of homosexuality in schools). The Conservatives and David Cameron should have played a much more vocal and active role in Better Together.

 

3. If any, it would be the Liberal Democrats who have become poisonous across the United Kingdom. Going back on their tuition fee pledge was a disgrace and lost them their sizeable student vote. However, their embrace of federalism perhaps could be the answer. Federalism alongside localism, a devolution of power to ordinary people. The Conservatives have been historically in favour of this too, as has UKIP (whatever your opinion is on some of their more dubious views). The SNP has a poor record with local devolution and would only seek to centralise power in Edinburgh should an independent Scotland occur. 

The failure of Better Together to offer concrete new powers for Scotland as well as local governments has damaged their legitimacy and has allowed the SNP to trump their anti-Westminster rhetoric. A Cameron-Salmond debate with Cameron fully armed with concrete policies for Scotland would have seen off Salmond and forced the Yes Camp into disarray.

It would be a national tragedy if Scotland voted to leave our union of nations. The world is a dangerous place: an flexing Russia, the rise of the Islamic State and the instability in the global economy repudiate the SNP's fairy world dreams post-Yes. The world would be a less safer place if Scotland left and would severely reduce the UK's global role as an importance economic, humanitarian and military power.