Has peace broken out amongst the warring parties? After the Church of
Scotland announced it plans a service of reconciliation immediately after the referendum, this weekend's
buzz words were "healing", "Team Scotland" and "possibility, potential and hope".
Over the weekend,
the incoming moderator of the Church of Scotland's general assembly,
Rev John Chalmers, announced the church would be holding a service three
days after the vote at St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh; all the main
party leaders will be invited.
Chalmers fears the contest will
become a divisive conflict, opening up disputes within families and
amongst friends; the dangers of lasting division would become greater,
he said, if the result on 18 September was a very close one.
Writing in the Sunday Times, Chalmers said (£):
In Scotland, as we stand on the threshold of the most important decision that the Scottish people have faced in peacetime history, we do not need a highly emotive and deeply personalised public rammy.
We need a respectful dialogue about Scotland's future, whether it is as an independent nation or as part of the UK.
Alex Salmond, the first minister, and his counterpart but opponent
Douglas Alexander, Labour's shadow
foreign secretary,
were quick to agree – in terms and in tone, if not in their wildly
contrasting perspectives on the best route to reconciliation.
Two
other anniversaries fell on Monday: the 20th anniversary of the death of
then UK Labourt leader John Smith – a champion of devolution, and the
15th anniversary of the first session of the Scottish parliament in 1999
(by neat symmetry, being held at that stage in the temporary
accommodation of the
General Assembly building which towers over the Mound.)
In
a speech in his Aberdeenshire constituency on Monday, Salmond announced
his government was already assuming a yes vote on 18 September by
working on assembling a multi-disciplinary group of expert negotiators,
from across Scottish politics and beyond, under the "Team Scotland"
sobrique.
His officials have already been canvassing senior
figures – nameless at this stage, many of whom have said 'yes'. And
Salmond cited the 15th anniversary of the Scottish parliament's first
session, attempting to summon its spirit for his own cause:
Part
of the process of politicians rising to the challenge of the people is
to commit to continue the mood of engagement after the result. The Team
Scotland approach is part of that commitment.
Salmond said:
I
understand that people on the other side of the political debate cannot
accept that at the moment, but hope and expect that they will be fully
part of the Team Scotland approach once the votes have been cast.
It is also the case that a number of people outside party politics - but with key expertise - have already been approached and the response has been universally positive.
More
clearly than anything else this demonstrates the wish of those of us on
the yes side to move forward in a consensual way once the people have
spoken.
Alexander, the son of a Church of Scotland
minister and a commissioner to this year's general assembly – where he
will take the leading pro-UK role in an assembly debate on Scotland's
constitutional future, preferred to assume a no vote.
In a speech
in Edinburgh on Monday afternoon to mark the 20th anniversary of the
death of Labour leader John Smith, Alexander marked that date by
asserting Smith believed devolution was the settled will of the Scottish
people, but also treating his opponents with "respect and
understanding", and "not a politics that descends into personal
destruction."
Urging both sides to show empathy and neighbourliness, he repeated his call for an all-party
national convention to advance devolution, Alexander added:
Let
us work to achieve a Scotland comfortable living together in dignity
and healed from division. And let us embrace John's better and bigger
vision – a people united, Scottish and British, and a powerhouse
parliament able to separate Scotland from poverty.
On
BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme, he added:
I
think feelings are running deep and inevitably, whatever the outcome of
this referendum, there will be a minority - but potentially a
significant minority - of the population who will feel disappointed at a
very personal level, both about their sense of who they are, and also
the nation to which they belong.
"In terms of what comes after the
referendum, I do think there will be a very fundamental choice, almost
an existential choice, facing the nationalists. My plea to them would be
to join us in the task of making devolution work, rather than proving
devolution wrong.
Chalmers, a late appointment as
moderator designate after ill-health forced the resignation of the
previous appointee, Rev Dr Angus Morrison was quite clear about the need
to set a peaceful tone: reported incidents of physical violence are few
and rare, but verbal aggression and abuse are now commonplace,
particularly online.
Chalmers said:
Once
the referendum vote has taken place, we shall have neither utopia nor
unity. In the coming months, there is a danger the referendum will set
people against each other, in their own community, their own street,
even their own family.
It will be important for each side of this
campaign to be magnanimous whatever the outcome and the Church of
Scotland, as a national church, is well placed to bring people back
together in a spirit of reconciliation.
Some of the key participants and players in this will likely agree.
Last week the multimilionaire Euro-
lottery winners
Chris and Colin Weir, who have become the most significant funders for
Yes Scotland – supplying nearly 80% of its income, and million-pound
backers of the SNP, appealed for greater dignity and five days before
it emerged they had added another £2.5m to Yes Scotland's accounts.
In a letter to the Scotsman, the Weirs
said politicians, both sides of the independence campaign and the media
had to take responsibility for their "behaviour and language" during
the referendum campaign:
They are the
ones who will steer Scotland through this challenging period – we can't
have the possibility of leaving our country fragmented. So it is time
for all sides to stop the smears and personal attacks before a line is
crossed and attitudes adopted that cannot easily be healed.
No-one
– on any side – should be vilified for the views they hold, lest our
democracy become the victim of the present debate. Differences can and
should be expressed – but decently, with honesty and integrity…
Otherwise, in a race to the bottom of the political barrel, we will all
be the losers.
A day earlier,
the new pro-UK Vote No Borders campaign set
up by the Tory donor and financier Malcolm Offord issued a press
statement protesting at "huge burst" of "vitriolic and nasty" attacks on
it, the four musicians and the voters featured in its online video
statements.
It stated:
What is
wholly unreasonable is the level of venom directed at our young
musicians. They are not politicians and are expressing sincerely held
views, yet the outpouring of online abuse [from] extreme nationalists
says little for those who purport to seek a democratic vote.
We
are seeking to be positive in the face of a nationalist campaign which
brands anything they don't agree with as 'Project Fear'.
Chalmers said:
Once
the referendum vote has taken place, we shall have neither utopia nor
unity. In the coming months, there is a danger the referendum will set
people against each other, in their own community, their own street,
even their own family.
It will be important for each side of this
campaign to be magnanimous whatever the outcome and the Church of
Scotland, as a national church, is well placed to bring people back
together in a spirit of reconciliation.
Chalmer's
tone and language suggests he has some doubts the political rhetoric
will be matched by the politicians who deliver it, or their followers,
particularly once the campaigns jump into fifth gear in early June, and
then sixth gear in the final four weeks.
