Somebody else’s problem

Here we go again, another day, another scare, each one dumber than the last.  It’s safe to say that Project Fear is now bricking itself.  The anti-independence campaign which began with the intent of progressing as calmly and gracefully as a swan gliding across the glassy smooth waters of the garden pond of Scotland’s media is now more like the famous Norwegian Blue parrot sketch.

The latest impossibility to occur in the increasingly improbable list of implausibilities from Project Fear is that even if we do vote Yes, we can’t become independent until Westminster is jolly well good and ready.  The Guardian has reported some anonymous Westminster insiders, otherwise known as the Project Fear Press Office, who warn that the Scottish Government’s timetable for independence negotiations is a non-starter.  It cannae be done, because there’s going to be a UK general election in 2015.  We can’t possibly expect one UK government to be bound by decisions of a UK previous government because it breaches one of those unwritten rules of the British constitution that they’ve made up to suit themselves.

It’s interesting that Project Fear is now acknowledging that a Yes vote is a real possibility.  Couldn’t be anything to do with tomorrow’s publication of the long awaited White Paper which will set out a roadmap to a better Scotland, could it.  Hope they tell us, always trumps fear.  More on that soon, no doubt.

It’s equally interesting that they also acknowledge that Westminster is incapable of medium, never mind long, term planning.  It certainly explains a lot about the UK, every four or five years everything gets ripped up and we have to start all over again.  What was that about volatility and uncertainty for business?  Oh right, that only applies to oil and independence referendums …

It also explains the dearth of answers from Project Fear so far on what we can expect in the event of a No vote.

If we vote no will we remain in the EU?  Dunno.  Nigel Farage might be very influential amongst sections of the Tory party if UKIP do well in next year’s European elections.  Will an independent Scotland be in the EU?  We don’t know, because Westminster refuses to ask the EU for a ruling.  Which may not be unrelated to the fact that the ruling would most likely be along the lines of “We can work something out, like we did with German reunification.” Currency union?  Well they’re rubbishing it but steadfastly refuse to rule it out.  Let’s call that one a mibbie.  Extra powers for Holyrood?  Depends on what you mean by “extra”, “powers”, “for”, and “Holyrood”, and on who it is you’re asking.  Which given the track record of the Westminster parties on this issue means “bugger all”.  Keeping the Barnet Formula?  Looking less and less likely by the day.  Keeping the UK’s AAA credit rating? Oh, right …

Still the news that a UK government doesn’t have to abide by international agreements entered into by its predecessors does seem to clash with another of those unwritten rules that make up the British constitution.  That’s the one that says an incoming government is bound by the treaties, contracts and obligations entered into by its predecessor.  Otherwise they’d have had to cancel the London Olympics in 2010 when the Labour government which was awarded the games by the IOC was replaced by Coalition.  I don’t recall many calls for tearing up all the Olympic negotiations and starting all over again at the time.  Funny that.

This latest scare story must fall into the “making things up as you go along” sections of Britain’s glorious unwritten constitution.  You can appreciate why our political masters find it such a useful tool of governance.

The latest problem to confront Scottish self-determination has all the hallmarks of one of those problems that can be solved by self help manuals with titles like Feel the Fear and Do it Anyway, which promises to help the reader “move from a place of pain, paralysis and depression to one of power, energy and enthusiasm.”  Which not coincidentally is also a good description of the Yes campaign.

Project Fear’s newest problem is dealt with in the popular psychology manual Somebody Else’s Problem, a single sheet of paper bearing the words: “It’s somebody else’s problem.”

The late great Douglas Adams described a security device based on somebody else’s problem in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.  The Somebody Else’s Problem Field worked just like the cloaking or invisibility devices in more traditional sci-fi, the difference being that the “cloaked” object remained very much in view.  It was just that everyone ignored it as it appeared to be a trivial little piece of fluff of no importance or substance, and it was somebody else’s problem.  There’s a similar device in the Scottish Parliament, where it’s known as Wullie Rennie.

In this case the Field Generator is only functioning partially.  We can see it’s somebody else’s problem, but we can also see that it’s Westminster’s problem.  Holyrood will be responsible for who represents Scotland during these negotiations, Westminster will be responsible for the Westminster side.  Are they really admitting that they’re incapable of forming a negotiating team?  If that’s true why exactly would we want to stay in a Union with such a spectacularly incompetent government?

However the selfsame “insiders” who tipped off the ever willing Severin No Fear Story Too Wee Carrell also revealed that in the event of a Yes vote in Scotland, it would be Westminster which had the problem, and had better resolve it pretty sharpish.  As the article said:

A political crisis over the fate of institutions like the Bank of England, the UK’s national debt and its defences at the same time as a political battle over a referendum on Britain’s EU membership would be likely to cause a damaging backlash from the financial markets, investors and international lenders.

A Westminster Government upsetting the financial markets just to punish Scotland?  That’s too implausible a scare story even for Project Fear.

8 comments on “Somebody else’s problem

  1. Boorach says:

    Does this mean that, given a no vote, the Act of Union will be null and void and will have to be renegotiated with the incoming government in Westminster?

    How stupid have we been down through the ages to miss this most obvious opportunity? No referendum required simply renegotiate every 5 or so years!!

  2. innerbearsdenurchin says:

    I posted this on another blog so I am not plagiarizing (us Englisg spellchecker).

    Ed Milliband yesterday accused the Tories of running a “fear and smear” campaign against Labour. I though Ed didn’t do irony?

    Anyway, it looks as though all that hole digging has finally paid off for Labour and they have broke through into a land with people and animals and stuff. Hello, is that a big White Rabbit bounding up to meet him?

    Ps the UK lost its AAA rating just after France did some months ago and just a day after our project fear mob in John Smith House menaced an Independent Scotland with a loss of a AAA credit rating. Maybe labour really does a sense of irony neuron; they just don’ t know it exists. We see it in action every day.

  3. Scaraben says:

    The lack of a proper UK constitution is a potential worry in the event of a ‘Yes’ vote in the referendum. It is not entirely true that the UK has an unwritten constitution; there are a number of Acts of Parliament (plus the Treaties of Union) which can be considered as being part of the constitution, but they have no special status, and can be changed by Parliament as easily as any other legislation. The UK Parliament is not really bound by any rules (other than international laws and treaties) when it can change those rules whenever it decides to do so.

    The Edinburgh Agreement is not an international treaty, since Scotland is still part of the UK, and I am not sure that it could be considered to be a legally binding contract. An incoming UK Government could argue that they are not bound by it. My concern is that if Labour win by a narrow margin in 2015, and are perhaps faced with losing power in 2016 when Scottish MPs leave the Commons, they will be tempted to declare that the referendum result is not a mandate for independence. Remember 1979 and the ‘40% of the electorate’ criterion.

  4. “Remember 1979 and the ’40% of the electorate’ criterion.” Scaraben, ah wis there in ’79, an trust me that’s naw going tie happen again.

    • Scaraben says:

      Tree of Liberty, I certainly hope so, but I just do not trust Labour not to try something underhand if they get the chance. I hate the Tories, but if there is a ‘Yes’ vote in the referendum, I will be hoping that they win the 2015 election, as long as they do not enter a coalition with UKIP.

  5. Papadocx says:

    There is a wee club somewhere in lundinium full of right honourable grovellers called the privy council.
    They control the unwritten constitution so what is needed gets the nod and that’s that. It’s called make the rules up as you go along.

  6. Ronnie says:

    ‘This latest scare story must fall into the “making things up as you go along” sections of Britain’s glorious unwritten constitution.’

    Didn’t you know that-

    ‘Britannia waives the Rules’?

  7. Eilean says:

    Ah the UKs unwritten Constitution is that something like Public International Law? AKA spouting a load of pish when you run out of argument!
    Im sure that the coalition koala will let us know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s