P.T.: Today I’ll be speaking with Jonathan
Robert Waddell, a Student of History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen.
Hello, Mr. Waddell.
J.W.: Hello!
P.T.: First could you tell me a bit about your
background?
J.W.: I'm from the north east of Scotland, studied
at Aberdeen College, now North East Scotland College and moved on to study
History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen. I'm president of the
Aberdeen University Liberal Democrats and I'm campaigning for a Federal Britain
through quite radical constitutional change post-no vote in September.
P.T.: Could you please explain what type of
constitutional changes you would be interested in seeing? And would the
federalization be similar to that in the USA?
J.W.: Starting with a full transfer of domestic
policy to be handled by the devolved parliaments of the UK, the creation of an
English parliament or maybe regional assemblies within England. From there I
believe we can start to consider what we want our union to look like, how it
will function on a constitutional basis and where we want to take it. I believe
the model the Scottish parliament currently has is a great direction to take
the other parliaments in.
P.T.: How does this contrast with the situation as
it is now?
J.W.: As it stands, the current powers the Scottish
and UK parliaments have in relation to each other, are defined by what are
'reserved' powers at Westminster, the Scottish parliament handles everything
else. And then all of this to be embodied in a fully written, codified and
entrenched constitution. I feel a system like this would give the Devolved
parliaments the autonomy they deserve and need to run a success Federal UK.
It's very ambitious and will require a lot of hard work, but I believe it's
achievable if we work hard enough for it.
P.T.: What do you think about the participants in
the movement to bring about Scottish independence?
J.W.: It's hard to say. In all debates I take part
in and campaigns I respect my opponent and in many cases get on very well with
them. Some of my best friends are Labour and Tories when I’m a Liberal
Democrat.
In this debate I feel it's been so polarized that I’ve not
had the opportunity to really make friends with them, and although I don't wish
to make out that there has been no potential guilt on the Unionist side, I do
feel that from my personal experience, the Independence movement has been much
less accepting and much more hostile which has led me to find it hard to
respect them while disagreeing with their campaign.
P.T.: What are your reasons for being a unionist?
R.W.: To me it's how we can use our resources to
the best possible ends. I feel the various countries within the UK all have
their various different strengths and all have very similar problems and very
similar aims. If we work together, pool what resources we have, put all of our
best minds together and work against our common enemies of poverty or
homelessness, then we can do better to reach our common goals and eradicate
these things.
I don't see what I have largely more in common with my
neighbour in Scotland than my family in England or Wales. Ultimately, I feel
the system we have is a good one, it's far from perfect and the policy isn't
always right but the system itself has so much potential to work to the benefit
of 63m people rather than just 5m. I want to make the best of that system for
the benefit of everyone in the UK, including Scotland.
P.T.: What would your consider your personal
identities, national/cultural/religious/or otherwise? What do you think of the
"crisis of identity" in Britain?
R.W.: Well, this is probably the toughest part in
the debate. Nationalists to me seem to be concerned with the Scottish identity
and little else. But I don't really understand what that means. Cultural
identity means so much more than the political boundaries you're parents were
born in. My parents are from the central belt and I have a bit of that in me, but
I was raised in the north east, in a town called Banchory, and then in Aberdeen.
Hence, I’m a 'Taucher' and a 'Toonser' then I guess 'Scottish' and as part of
that 'British' and of course, 'European'.
But all these things have so much to them they can mean
whatever you want them to mean. I think the idea that you can be 'Scottish' is
inherently not Scottish. As Scotland is made up of so many various, extremely
rich cultural identities that to be Scottish could mean any number of things.
As for the identity in Britain, we're in an increasingly internationalist and globalizing
world and I feel clutching onto old ideas of Nationalism of any description is
living in the past and we should start to expand our ideas into the modern
world.
P.T.: Do you believe that there is any place for a
robust British identity, something along the lines of what is shown in America
throughout the individual states?
R.W.: I really hope not. I find both nationalism
and patriotism quite futile ideals, the belief that your nationality is
inherently good and others inferior and the idea that you can be proud of
achievements you had no place in. I love where I live, and as an extension of
that of course I love Scotland.
I want what's best for all the people who live here, but I
want what's best for anyone living anywhere. Why wouldn't I want to extend a
higher standard of living to anyone I can whenever I can? I consider myself an
internationalist in that regard. I want what's best for the greater amount of
people.
P.T.: What is your view on the way history effects
and informs the present? What do you think about the different
"narratives" presented by nationalist and unionist camps in this
debate?
J.W.: Well, I'm a History student, and I would like
to introduce the age old, over used yet under appreciated quote from George
Santayana 'Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it'. I
think we need to understand our past and the context to understand where we are
today, learn from our mistakes and move forward from them.
I must admit whenever I bring history into the debate,
nationalists like to tell me that 'this debate isn't about the past, the
independence movement is about the future' before dropping into some narrative
about some supposedly horrible thing 'Westminster' did way back when,
completely contradicting themselves.
P.T.: Being a student of history, what do you think
of the referendum being held on the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and the
whole connection with the wars of Scottish independence in general?
J.W.: I think in a historical context, it's
completely irrelevant. The wars of independence are not only so far in the past
it can't be compared to modern day events and we can't allow ourselves to judge
events of the past by today’s standards, but even if we could compare them, it
was a very different situation that we were in.
However, I think it's very of the SNP’s outlook and tactics
to make it this year. They are desperate to inspire an idea of Scottishness
over Britishness. But we've already discussed the idea of identity. In short, I
feel the SNP think they can inspire people to vote with their hearts and
distract people from their flimsy arguments on economics and practicalities.
P.T.: What do you feel about the monarchy?
J.W.: Generally passive on the idea. I feel they
don't have any divine right to rule, but they have no real power and exercise
purely ceremonial powers. They contribute more to the treasury than they
receive out of it and are generally favourable in public opinion as well as
being hugely respected diplomats across the world. I see no reason to get rid
of them, but they exist as a formality, if they exercised real power I’d be far
more skeptical.
P.T.: What do you think of them as they apply to
the subject of unity? And what is your opinion on the Jacobite rebellions as
they are being used in Nat propaganda? And with regards to them making the
current Scottish monarchy "illegitimate"?
J.W.: I think this moves us into a much broader
debate that moves us away from the contentious issues that the referendum will
be won and lost on. In general, I don't feel these historical events contribute
to the context that we're debating in the run up to the referendum.
P.T.: Thanks so much for the interview, Jonathan.
J.W.: Sure! It's nice to get different questions
for a change by the way. I've answered the same questions over and over, but
these are bit different and I like that :) I've done so many debates and
interviews. Same issues, same questions, over and over again. This is a nice
change. I’m glad you're getting involved! :)
P.T.: Could you
tell us a little bit about yourself personally?
J.W.: I'm 22! :) I'm afraid I’m a complete nerd. At
university I do a lot of debating and in my free time I like to go hill
walking, rock climbing and cross country mountain biking. I also play guitar
and drums, punk/rock etc.
P.T.: Thank you for taking the time to be
interviewed. I do hope everything works out well in the end for you and all of
us.
J.W.: Thanks; me too.
No comments:
Post a Comment