Interview with Lewis Whyte, Resident of Dundee

P.T.:  Today we’ll be speaking with Lewis Whyte, resident of Dundee. Good afternoon, Mr. Whyte.

L.W.:  And to you!

P.T.:  Could you tell me a little bit about your background?

L.W.:  Well, I’m 16 years old and am currently in my last year of high school. I live in Dundee, and I’m both Scottish and British, but British first and Scottish second.

P.T.:  So would you be in "Bonnie Dundee" territory then? As in, the Jacobite leader who was killed at Killiecrankie?

L.W.:  Yes, "Bonnie Dundee" territory, lol! Although I have to say I'm not all that clued up on the Jacobites.

P.T.:  Aw, considering your geographical location, you should make it a point to broaden your knowledge on it!

L.W.:  Ha! I should get clued up on my old, old history at that!

P.T.:  So are you connected with any political party, and do you consider yourself “European” in addition to your other identities?

L.W.:  I’m not a member of any political party, but I do support the Labour Party. I just consider myself to be a British Scot, and have no opinion on the European Union mainly as I'm unsure of a lot of things about it.

P.T.:  Will you be voting in the upcoming Scottish Independence Referendum?

L.W.:  Yes, I will be voting in the referendum, and I will be voting No as I don’t see the point of independence.

P.T.:  What are your main reasons for voting No?

L.W.:  I'm voting No so Scottish shipyards will stay open and to keep Scotland defended properly. I don't want any future prospects that may ruin me and my fellow Scots through independence.

P.T.:  What does being British mean to you, and what would be lost if Scotland were no longer part of Britain, on an emotional level?

L.W.:  Being British to me means being part of something bigger and better than just an individual country on its own. Being British also means we can achieve more and tackle problems a lot better together than separated. I think what would be lost if we weren't part of Britain is taking pride in being British, especially in things such as the Olympics or when it was the queen’s diamond jubilee, where it was a great British feeling.

P.T.:  In general, do you think a general lack of patriotism has a lot to do with the way the referendum was able to be launched with any hope of success at all?

L.W.:  I suppose that a lack of patriotism could be to do with the referendum, but the real reason is due to the rise of nationalism even though it is dying out elsewhere. But as to restoring British pride, I am unsure of how to go about doing that.

P.T.:  What do you think that Alex Salmond and the other high-ranking SNP members hope to gain for themselves in this push for independence?

L.W.:  I think Salmond and the other thigh ranking SNP members hope to gain the reputation as the people who freed Scotland from so-called English rule.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on the contrasts in the way Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling are running their campaigns?

L.W.:  The Yes Campaign is more active than BT (better Together) which is a shame, but it is full of negatives. The yes voters constantly say it isn’t about Alex Salmond, and yet he is constantly seen leading on their behalf. Their campaign is another thing all together. As for Alistair Darling’s campaign, room for improvement, I would say.

P.T.:  What improvements would you suggest?

L.W.:  BT needs to get more active campaign wise, more people out on the streets canvassing, more people talking to the public to let them know the benefits of the UK. Sadly, I haven't seen BT at all where I live. If people got more motivated, that might get more people out there campaigning

P.T.:  What did you think of the recent debate between Salmond and Darling?

L.W.:  It was a complete shambles for Salmond's side; never doubted Darling for a minute on currency, the EU, healthcare and education and the like. Salmond was failing on each one, especially currency. I would say the nationalists are still licking their wounds after the TV debate, and the result has given us the perfect chance to promote the union and for people to become more vocal.

P.T.:  What do you think of Salmond giving 16 year olds such as yourself the right to take part in this referendum, even though you cannot vote in regular elections?

L.W.:  From the perspective of the Yes Camp, I think that it was a mistake for giving 16-17 year olds a vote. I believe most of them have not been take in by the yes/SNP lies, ifs, buts and maybes and have sided with Better Together. At the same time, the ability to participate in the referendum has encouraged more teenagers to take an interest in politics.

P.T.:  What do you think about the importance of history as portrayed by different camps, especially with regards to 700th anniversary of Bannockburn, etc? Do you think voters swayed by the nationalist perspective of history, such as portrayed in films like Braveheart?

L.W.:  In regards to Bannockburn, yes, it is important from a historical point of view, its part of Scottish legend and folklore, but it really shouldn’t be used as a case for independence from a political point of view as it has no relevance in this regard. False history in films such as Braveheart gives many people the wrong view of the past, but I think people are more likely to be swayed by the lies ifs, buts, and maybes that Salmond is promising than history, if I'm honest.

P.T.:  What level of influence do you think pop icons like R.K. Rowling and Sean Connery make when they take sides in the debate?

L.W.:  Hopefully celebrities won't sway many voters for either side, although they are allowed their opinions.

P.T.:  What would you say to an American audience, which, I'm sorry to say, is often under the assumption that the Scots are somehow oppressed by the English and yearning to "breath free", or otherwise connect American independence with Scottish independence?

L.W.:  I would say: "Don’t just look at what is being said to you, look into to it to see for yourself that Scotland is in no way oppressed by our English neighbors". For the so-called Scottish independence movement to be linked to America’s movement in the 18th century is just ridiculous. America was a colony then, while Scotland was a willing partner of the Union and British Empire.

P.T.:  What is a good example showing Scotland as a willing partner in the British Union/Empire historically?

L.W.:  Many to the British Empire’s ships were built in Scotland, mainly on the Clyde, so this shows we were quite willing.

P.T.:  What do you think about the issue of nuclear waste and "the rape of Scottish land" that some nationalists blame on Westminster and use as a reason to advance independence?

L.W.:  If there is nuclear waste, like at Dalgety Bay, then everything should be done to deal with it. But I don't see it as a need to separate from the United Kingdom. As for the so called "rape of the land", I would like to see some solid FACTS from the Yes side about the misuse of Scottish land.

P.T.:  What do you think might be the result if an independent Scotland is unable to use the pound?

L.W.:  I have no clue what the result would be, but I'm guessing it would be for the worst as we need a strong currency.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on “Scotland’s Oil” that is often advanced as a monetary security for a newly independent nation?

L.W.:  As for our oil, the yes voters claim that the largest oil field has been discovered off of Shetland. Now if this is even remotely true, they will be snookered as Shetland doesn't want anything to do with an Indy Scotland but would want to remain with the UK. Therefore Scotland would be short of oil.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on the monarchy, and what is your reaction to some Scottish Nationalists who claim current Scottish monarchy has been “illegitimate” since the time of the Stuarts?

L.W.:  We have always had a monarch. I have no problem with the monarchy, unlike most nationalists. I wouldn’t say our current monarch is illegitimate as the Queen of Scotland since she can trace her ancestors back to Robert the Bruce.

P.T.:  What do you think about security and the armed forces, and the future of Scotland without the British army?

L.W.:  The issue of defense is another one of the main reason I'm voting No! The SNP have no proper defense plans, other than we would have a £2.5 billion defense budget which is pathetically small and would be of no use to us. Salmond also maintains that The UK would give us defense assets, but I really can see this at all. In a word, The SNP plans are laughable.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on Yes supporters insisting that Scotland would be more of a force in the world “going in alone”?

L.W.:  I think it is complete nonsense to say we will not be better off in the union. I have not seen any convincing evidence that we would be stronger, but only the nationalist victim card.

P.T.:  What do you think about the way that the referendum question is phrased, putting “Yes” for independence and “No” for the Union?

L.W.:  I think the question is fine, straightforward and to the point: yes for "independence" and no for unity.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on David Cameron and his encouraging English people to call their Scottish friends and relatives to urge them to stay in the Union?

L.W.:  I think David Cameron is right to rally support from the rest of The UK. After all, it is a United Kingdom versus a separate Scotland, so it’s only right that The UK as a whole speaks up. I think many throughout this country would be saddened by the loss of the union, as it has worked so well for the past 300+ years.

P.T.:  What was the latest public opinion poll ratio with regards to pro-union and pro-independence factions, and when all is said and done, which side do you think will be the victor?

L.W.:  I think the last poll was Yes 37% and No 55%, if I remember correctly, but apparently the No lead has stalled according the STV and that may allow the yes side to gain ground. I never read the article just seen the headline, but I don't see any reason for our side to have stalled. I have a feeling it may be a close race, but I hope it won't be too close. It’s a bit nerve racking, but I have full confidence we will win. Scotland will not be stupid enough to vote for separation.

P.T.:  "Keep calm and vote no", what?

L.W.:  Ha-ha, yeh, lol!

P.T.:  What will you be doing as the referendum heats up?

L.W.:  As the referendum heats up in the next few weeks, I will be trying to get my friends to vote and will continue to debate with the nationalists online.


P.T.:  To wrap things up, could you talk a little about your personal plans for the future, interests, hobbies, and goals in life? What type of career might you be aiming for?

L.W.:  Personal plans for the future are hopefully to go to university and take politics and geography, then try and seek a career in politics and have a family. I don't have many hobbies, but I like to go out with friends, play video games, and build models. And that's all, really!

P.T.:  Thank you for doing this interview with me, Mr. Whyte. I know crack-down time is approaching soon for this referendum, and the fact that people like you are still active is of great comfort.

L.W.:  Thanks very much.

  

Interview with Alistair McConnachie, Founder of “A Force for Good”

Pearl of Tyburn:  Coming to us from Glasgow, Scotland, we have Mr. Alistair McConnachie, founder of the pro-UK project "A Force for Good", involving a Unionist website that publishes regular articles and speeches, an online store, video outreach work, pro-UK graphic creation, and street activism. Hello, Mr. McConnachie.

Alistair McConnachie:  Hello. Thanks for the interview.

P.T.:  You're most welcome. Could you please tell me a little something about your background and outline what national/cultural/religious identities you may have?

A.M.:  I'm British. Family background is Church of Scotland. I love the United Kingdom, and have loved it since my childhood. I'm upset at the extent to which separatism has caught on in Scotland, and I'm doing what I can to keep Britain united for the good of all.

P.T.:  When did you start taking an active role in Unionism, and what was the inspiration behind it? Also, have you had any other involvement in politics?

A.M.:  I began taking an active role in the No to Separation campaign when I launched the website, “A Force for Good”, on 21 March, 2012. I was inspired to do something because the No campaign up to that point did not appear to be happening!

I've been involved in UK politics actively since the General Election in 1997. I've stood for election at European, British, Scottish and Council levels. I also published the only monthly, non-party anti-EU newsletter in the UK - and the only one in Scotland of any kind - for 10 years, 120 consecutive monthly issues. It was called "Sovereignty".

P.T.:  What do you think of the comparison between the Yes and No campaigns? What's your opinion on the way things are progressing in both camps thus far?

A.M.:  The official No Campaign, “Better Together”, does a decent job of getting people onto the street to do stalls, leafleting and canvassing. But I am very concerned at the moment that BT and the Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians associated with it are in danger of winning the short-term battle for a No vote on 18 September, but are likely to provide the means for the separatists to bounce back the very next day. This is because Labour, Lib Dems, and their colleagues in the official BT campaign are obsessing far too much with delivering "more powers" for the Scottish Parliament.

That is exactly what the separatists want. So even if they are defeated, the long term path will have been paved for them by the Labour and Lib Dem parties. This would be catastrophic and will almost certainly see the separatists back for another referendum the very next time they win governing control of the Parliament, which could be in 2016. I wrote about this extensively here: http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/devo/dm5

P.T.:  Don't you think the Scottish people as a whole will be pretty sick of "neverendums" by 2016 and not eager to start the process again?

A.M.:  That’s not how it works. Politicians in power do what they want, whether the public wants it or not. The nationalists will not sit about "for a generation". They will always grasp any opportunity, without regard for the public's concerns.

P.T.:  What would be your suggestion as a way to prevent this resurgence of separatism and keep nationalist politicians from trying to launch another referendum?

A.M.:  We must concentrate on winning overwhelming. 70-30 at the bare minimum. However, it could be a lot higher than this. The UK is a wonderful product. There is a hard core of separatists, possibly 1 in 5. Their vote should be driven right down to that level. That can be done easily by concentrating on the greatness of Britain and Britishness and by capturing the public's imagination with great policies for the UK.

However, muddling the debate with more constitutional changes will only confuse the public and lose us votes. So the first thing is to win overwhelmingly and we will not be able to do that if we are confusing the debate with "more powers". Once we have won, we want to have created the circumstances where the nationalists should split, fall out, and consume themselves, politically speaking. However, if we offer them more powers, they will regenerate themselves very quickly.

P.T.:  What's your opinion of Alex Salmond and his campaign?

A.M.:  My own feeling is that Salmond never really expected to be in the position he finds himself in now. He runs a very tight ship. All the SNP MSPs obey him. His followers are almost cult-like in adoration. If they lose in September, they could implode badly, which is what we want to see - although as I say, many in the Labour and Lib Dem parties are doing their best to lay out a nice bouncy bed for the SNP to fall onto.

P.T.:  What do you think SNP politicians stand to gain from all this should they win? And what do you think of the Scottish Parliament in general?

A.M.:  Good questions. Nobody will benefit if Scotland breaks away from the rest of the UK. A lot of the people who vote SNP do not really understand the consequences of so doing. They don't understand that a vote for the SNP is not just a vote to try to make the buses run on time, but it is a vote for a party which has a hard core of strongly anti-British people who make the policies and set the social and cultural agenda. They don't have any points which cannot be addressed by good government at a UK level.

Remember, prior to 1999 we did not have a Parliament in Edinburgh. Somehow everybody managed to get on just fine. Houses and new towns were built, trains ran, hospitals worked and education was very good. The whole idea that we even needed "devolution" was actually nonsense - a Labour Party ploy to try to counteract the SNP - yeah, that worked out!

P.T.: How do you think so many people became so "anti-British"? A lot of them claim it's somehow historically based, but Scottish involvement in British history puts paid to that theory. What do you think is the genesis of some of these vitriolic emotions?

A.M.:  I wouldn't say "so many" in the UK are anti-British (can't speak for the USA). Certainly there are quite a few in the SNP who fit that description, though. Historical hang-ups seem to factor heavily if examples on social media are anything to go by. Some of these Scots have also got slightly weird hang-ups about the English too - tied into historical grievance, and classist prejudice.

Some of them cannot make the distinction between "Britain" and "England" either, and they mistakenly conflate England with Britain. I'm on a mission to encourage us all to understand and appreciate our shared British identity - which is a Great identity. I gave a speech about it recently and it already has 1,300 Facebook Likes, which is not insubstantial http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/shared/british1

P.T.:  That's great, congratulations on your work and the response.

A.M.:  Thanks.

P.T.:  What do you think about this referendum trying to connect with the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn, and how would you answer the charge of “corruption” regarding the Act of Union in 1707?

A.M.:  Separatists are more prone, than people like me, to get excited about a war 700 years ago. Hopefully, though, very few people will base their decision on the rights and wrongs of that period. Similarly, the Act of Union in 1707. The charge of "selling out" has been overplayed.

However, even if the political behaviour of some of the people involved included elements of self-interest, then I can certainly overlook that because it set in motion a train of events which would lead to the creation of the wonderful United Kingdom! Separatists have a tendency to live in the past. They get upset at what happened in 1707 without thinking about the 307 years since then. It is as if those 307 years never happened.

P.T.:  So what would your comments be on the Act of Union in general? Also, in brief, what is your reaction to the claim that the current Scottish monarchy is “illegitimate” because of the Jacobite Rebellions? I’m thinking of Hazel Whyte, folk-singer, in particular!

A.M.:  My comments in general on the Act of Union? As the kids would say, "It was the Shiznit". My reaction to the claim of "illegitimacy" would be, *Rolls Eyes*. Hazel Whyte, never heard of her and by the sound of it I don't want to.

P.T.:  What is "Shiznit"?

A.M.:  You're an American. You've never heard of the expression. I don't think it is anything except a funny phrase.

P.T.:  So.....it was funny?

A.M.:  No, it was Most Excellent, Dude!

P.T.:  Okay, like, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

A.M.:  Fandabidozi. By Jove, I think she's got it!

P.T.:  Who do you think are a few important historical characters for Unionists to remember and bring up when the Nationalists claim "Scottishness" and "Britishness" are somehow opposed and always have been?

A.M.:  Admiral Duncan, Nelson's mentor. David Livingstone and Mary Slessor, whose morality found an outlet through the British Empire. David Stirling, the Founder of the SAS. That's four who occur off the top of my head.

P.T.:  With your well-rounded knowledge of British history, do you feel that some motions pictures (such as Braveheart, The Patriot, Rob Roy, The Last of the Mohicans, etc.) have helped bolster the nationalist agenda by vilifying Britain as a whole and creating a false sense of historical identity that some people like to associate themselves with?

A.M.:  I haven't seen any of the films you mention, although I have Braveheart and Rob Roy in my DVD collection and must watch them one day. My impression is that Braveheart has been influential. Certainly, generally speaking, all films are culturally and socially influential in society, and often not in a good way. I am a keen student of film for those reasons. Also, a lot of films are "good" technically but "bad" morally. I'd like to write a lot more on this one day.

P.T.: I completely agree with you about the "good" tech/ "bad" moral elements in films. I would always rather watch a laid-back, heart-felt, middle-to-low budget movie with an excellent plot and full-bodied characters than a glitz-and-glitter epic with cheap stories and characters.

Speaking of films, I've watched quite a few of your own YouTube videos and enjoyed them very much, especially the one about William Wallace and another about the Glasgow RAF pilots.

A.M.:  Thanks, the one on William Wallace has close to 1,400 views now. We wanted to do many more this year, but have not been able to raise the funding so far. Anyone who wants to watch them can go to YouTube/UKaForceForGood.

P.T.:  What inspired you to take up the camcorder and hit the streets? And who do you have helping you with production and filming?

A.M.:  It was a friend of mine who suggested it. I'm very glad he did because it is a great medium. Once I decided to do it, though, it was a big commitment. It required considerable expense to get the (near to) top of the range equipment, as well as to dedicate time to learning the skill, which includes editing the film. The next video is going to be me doing a straight to camera piece. We've acquired the indoor lights and reflectors and are ready to go. I've got so many ideas for short films, I'm glad to say. I won't run out of inspiration.

P.T.:  You mentioned to me previously that you actually shot a film today. What was it about?

A.M.:  A colleague and I took a fabulous Union Jack up a hill outside Glasgow which overlooks Loch Lomond and Ben Lomond. We have made a stand which we peg into the ground. I filmed it - I have a very good prosumer camera - fluttering in the breeze with such beautiful scenery behind it. It looked awesome. Look out for various cuts of the film making an appearance in my YouTube videos. Video work is something I want to get into a lot more, but have been limited to date through lack of funds.

P.T.: Switching topic, what do you think about security and the armed forces, and the future of Scotland without the British army?

A.M.:  The British Armed Forces are one of the ways in which a sense of Britishness is transmitted throughout the United Kingdom. This was especially the case about 35 years ago when there were still many local regiments throughout the United Kingdom, recruited locally. Unfortunately, both Conservative and Labour parties have run down the Armed Forces and much of the local regimental structure has been destroyed. All this has a negative impact upon Britishness.

I believe in spending more on the Armed Forces. I'm especially pleased to see the building of two new aircraft carriers - both of which are being built in Scotland. We need more of this if the UK is to continue to be militarily strong. Relatively speaking, the British Armed Forces, depleted though they are, are still among the world's finest and have the furthest "reach" of any military forces in the world, with the exception of the USA. We have very far-reaching diplomatic links, and bases throughout the world as a consequence of our former Empire. All the remaining "British Overseas Territories" are all very strategically located. A separated Scotland would lose all of this, and for no gain.

P.T.:  Do you have any personal or family connections to the military yourself? My grandfather was an army man, American of course!

A.M.:  I was born to an Army family in Hong Kong, and my father remained in the Army for the first 5 or so years of my life. My grandfather on my father's side was a Captain in the Royal Marines during WW2.

P.T.:  What's your opinion on the monarchy and its relationship with the union? Also, I watched a speech from her Silver Jubilee in which she spoke out in favor of preserving the union. Even though she is officially "apolitical", do you think she might speak out again leading up to September?

A.M.:  I'm a supporter of the British Monarchy. The speech at the Silver Jubilee was only a very subtle mention, and it is arguable if it was deliberate. No, I don't think she will speak out prior to September. I would like to see the next Royal Baby, God Willing, born in Scotland. That would be a wonderful apolitical statement for the United Kingdom. The last Royal to be born in Scotland was Princess Margaret. I have always advocated that Royal Babies should be born in a rota fashion in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on David Cameron and his encouraging English people to call their Scottish friends and relatives to urge them to stay in the Union?

A.M.:  I'm all for that. Anyone who is British has a stake in this and their voices should and need to be heard, although only people resident and registered to vote in Scotland will be able to vote on the day.

P.T.:  But do you think it might look a bit "forced" or have an opposite effect on people north of the border?

A.M.:  No, not if it is done as just part of their normal activity, whether on Facebook, or friends at work, or speaking to the family on the telephone and so on. What he is saying really, is "This is important. It affects us all. Make sure you get involved." People in the rest of the UK who want to help can also donate money. I would urge them to help my efforts at aForceForGood.org.uk (details on the site).

P.T.:  I think Cameron was also taking the example of Canadians in the last Quebec independence referendum, and their basic “plea” that Quebec would stick it out and stay in the country. What do you think about the continuing strain in Quebec over separation, and what parallels can be drawn with Scotland?

A.M.:  The parallel is not particularly close since British Canada is culturally (and ethnically) distinct from French Canada in a way that Scotland and England is not. I do note, though, that British Canada has not benefited in any way by appeasing them and their language laws. That is a lesson when dealing with these people in Scotland. For separatists "too much is never enough", and is always "too little too late".

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on “Scotland’s Oil”, as well as the Nationalist complaints about the “rape” of Scottish land?

A.M.:  The people who are "raping" Scottish land right now are the so-called SNP government, its supporters, and the people who voted for it, who promote and who have facilitated the mass desecration of the Scottish landscape with wind turbines. That is truly a crime against the environment. As for “Scotland’s Oil”, well, it is Britain's Oil. The idea of hoarding it for "Scotland" is ridiculous and selfish.

P.T.:  How do you think a “Yes” vote might be emotionally affecting for the Scottish people, especially those with familial and business ties that transcend the border? (Sounds a little bit like the plot of Passport to Pimlico!)

A.M.:  Emotionally, separation would be very upsetting for all the people in Scotland who have a British identity, and catastrophic for a few. Here is the thing. Right now, everyone who wants to be as "Scottish" as they want, can be as "Scottish" as they want within the Union. But will those of us who are British be able to be British outside of the Union. In time it would become very hard and eventually almost impossible. We have an historical precedent. It is virtually impossible to express a British identity in the Republic of Ireland today.

Transcending the border is a good point, but mentally and spiritually - not just physically - all British people "transcend the border". Indeed, why is there even a "border" separating Scotland from England? It all goes back to the Romans dividing the country in two with Hadrian's Wall. Without that, we might have been spared this "Scotland" v "England" carry on. There is a good programme on BBC about this right now, with Rory Stewart MP pointing out some of this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0404r3t/Border_Country_The_Story_of_Britains_Lost_Middleland_Episode_1/  

P.T.:  Although it must be very hard to make a prediction at this point, which side do you think is likely to win come September? Should the “No” campaign win, do you think more people might come to see themselves as having dual identities? And what do you think will happen to the SNP?

A.M.:  The No side must win, or Scotland will regress. Scotland's destiny is to be part of Britain. Yes, more people will eventually come to see themselves as British. It is inevitable. That is one good thing which is coming out of this campaign. The Britishness of Scots is getting a much-needed airing. The work that I am doing is contributing to that too.

As for the SNP - it depends the extent to which the other Unionist parties attempt to appease them. Appeasement will only make the SNP stronger. Unionist parties should strategise to marginalise the SNP. I've written about that here http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/devo/dm5

P.T.:  To wrap things up, could you tell us what you plan for your future, personally and politically, especially as the referendum heats up? Also, could you tell us a little about your personal interests, hobbies, and goals in life?

A.M.:  Right now it is all about the Referendum. Politics is what I do, full time. At the same time, I want to develop my efforts at pro-UK film-making. I really enjoy that, I'm good at it, and I want people to come forward and join me in that effort. My contact details are on my website. I need people who will help fund the operation too. Right now, those are the things I'm concentrating upon. Pearl, it has been a pleasure and I've really enjoyed this interview. Thank you.

P.T.:  And thank you for taking out the time to do this. Your country should be proud of you for your efforts.

A.M.:  Thank you, Pearl. Good night and God Bless.

Interview with “Bonnie Lass”, Resident of the Edinburgh Area

Pearl of Tyburn:  This evening we have with us “Bonnie Lass” from the Edinburgh area of Scotland. Thanks so much for taking the time out to do this.

Bonnie Lass:  My pleasure!

P.T.:  First, could you give me a brief overview of your background and what national/cultural/religious identities you might see yourself as having?

B.L.:  I was born in Scotland and have lived in Scotland all my life. I think of myself as Scottish and not British - if I'm filling up forms, for instance, and am asked for nationality, I always put Scottish. I'm a member of the Church of Scotland, but prefer to call myself a Christian.

P.T.:  Do you belong to any particular political party?

B.L.:  I am not a member of any political party, but I have voted Labour for many years now (including today at the European elections).

P.T.:  What was your first impression when the Scottish Independence Referendum was announced?

B.L.:  I wasn't entirely surprised, as I thought it had been on the cards for a while. But when it was announced, I realised this would be a big step, whichever way it went.

P.T.:  As a person who sees herself as primarily Scottish as opposed to British, how will you vote in the referendum come September, and what are your reasons? 

B.L.: Well, although I think of myself as Scottish in all things, I will NOT be voting for independence when the time comes.

It seems to me that the UK is a small enough country as it is without being fragmented further. And there are SO MANY imponderables when it comes to independence. Do we get to keep the pound sterling? What about EU membership, and maybe even the need for passports to cross the border into England?

P.T.: What do you think the result will be now that an independent Scotland may be unable to keep the pound? Also, what’s your opinion on Scotland’s overall financial well-being should she become independent?

B.L.:  Many big companies are talking about relocating in England if we became independent because we may no longer have the pound.

I don't know if we have enough financial resources to 'go it alone'. The big cry has always been (since drilling started in the North Sea) "It's Scotland's oil" - but how long before the oil runs out?

P.T.:  What do you think of the Scottish Parliament and other home rule bodies within the UK? And what’s your answer to the claim that complete independence would make Scotland more of a force to be reckoned with on the world stage?

B.L.:  Well, I was delighted when we got the Scottish Parliament as it meant we were able to concentrate on purely Scottish issues, some of which Westminster doesn't know or doesn't care about. But I don't think that independence would make us more a force to be reckoned with.

Having “home rule” doesn’t necessitate independence from the Union. One alternative which is spoken about is 'devo-max', which seems to mean we would keep the status quo but, that the Scottish Parliament would also be given more powers, perhaps in taxes etc. That could be a good alternative in my opinion.

P.T.:  What are you thoughts on Alex Salmond and his independence campaign?

B.L.:  A lot of us wonder if Alex Salmond has some self-interest at heart. Perhaps if someone different was in charge, I would feel differently about it all, but such is the case. The question is how much are people swayed by personalities?

P.T.:  Do you think that celebrities who outspoken on the issue of Scottish independence are affecting are affecting the opinions of the Scottish people at all?

B.L.:  Is it really supposed to sway us? It doesn't alter my views. It annoys me the way that this host of ‘famous’ people - from film stars to comedians to personalities – are stating their views, for or against. For example, Sean Connery is all for Scottish independence, which, of course, is countered by the fact that he doesn't even live here!

P.T.: Now I hear that his Agent 007 counterpart, Roger Moore, is vouching for the preservation of the UK. The War of the Bonds seems to have begun!

B.L.: Oh, dear!

P.T.: Do you think there is something of a different tone in the Scottish nationalist movement of today and nationalists in past generations?

B.L.:  There was a difference in the nationalist cause back when they 'liberated' the Stone of Scone, and now. Somehow they seemed quite different but can't identify quite exactly how. It was more historically based than politically back then, I think.

P.T.:  What do you think about the way that the referendum question is phrased, putting “Yes” for independence and “No” for the Union?

B.L.:  I think it's quite confusing. Even now, when people ask if I'm going to vote yes or no, I sometimes have to say, er....what's the question again?! It's quite loaded making the positive answer the one for independence, isn't it?

P.T.:  Indeed. In fact, I would think it would be more natural for "yes" to be in favor of the status quo.

B.L.:  You're right! Perhaps that's why I get confused. Also....it's such a long time since it was brought up. Is the question do you want Scotland to be a separate STATE or a separate COUNTRY?

P.T.:  Good point. Or, going further, what's the difference between a "country" and a "nation", as it seems that a lot of people identify Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland as "nations" within the "country" of the UK!

B.L.:  I think they did try out several wordings before they decided. There were also all sorts of 'joke' replacement questions circulating, such as "Do you want these mealy-mouthed, penny pinching Sassenachs to take over the education of our wee bairns?"

P.T.:  In the midst of all this red tape and wild gags, how would you have liked to have seen the referendum question worded?

B.L.:  I think something along the lines of "Do you agree that Scotland would flourish as an independent nation?" or "Do you agree that Scotland would flourish keeping in the union?" Although I suppose that would be two questions instead of one.

P.T.:  Well, it could have been linked thusly: "Do you believe that Scotland would flourish more staying in the union, or becoming an independent nation?"

B.L.:  Yes, that sounds good, although then people couldn't answer just yes or no. Of course, I’m not sure if that’s mandatory.  I’ve never been in a referendum like this before.

P.T.:  What do you think of Salmond giving 16 years olds to right to vote in the referendum?

B.L.:  Many of us are also annoyed (and incredulous) that Salmond has given 16 year olds the vote! I mean, they are not eligible to vote in general elections. I feel that many of them will be influenced by 'Braveheart' and Freeeedommm!

However, I did watch an interview on TV with a group of 16 year olds, and I must say they spoke very sensibly and seemed very clued up about it all. They also had a mix of opinions.

P.T.:  Have you watched any referendum debates, live or on TV? If so, what are you thoughts about them?

B.L.:  There was a televised referendum debate on this week in our area. They are holding them round Scotland. I really only put it on to see if I recognized anyone in the audience, and I didn't know a single soul! I think a lot of folk must have been out-of-towners. It went on for an hour, and it was so BORING, I don't think it would make anyone change their mind.

P.T.:  From you interaction with people in your area, how high is the percentage of undecided voters you encounter now?

B.L.:  I don't know the percentages, but a lot of people I speak to still haven't decided. The 'letters' columns in all the papers are full of people giving their perspectives, but again I don't think people would change their mind because of what other people say (famous or 'ordinary'). Actually a lot of us think we will be heartily fed up with the whole thing by September!

P.T.:  How do you think people might be affected emotionally, since Scotland and England are very much intertwined at this point? What about those with families and jobs that transcend the border?

B.L.:  I don't know. As I said before, there are so many imponderables. Of course, there must be people very close to folk from across the border. You know David Cameron appealed to people in England to phone up their Scottish friends and say "We want you to stay with us!"

P.T.:  What do you think of that method he suggested? Have you or anyone you know received said "calls"?

B.L.:  Well, no one in England has phoned me! I thought it was a bit silly really and counterproductive, trying to force an outpouring of “love” that no one has brought up before now!

P.T.:  I think Mr. C. was trying to imitate something that went on during the Quebec Independence Referendum, when the people of Canada basically pleaded with the people within Quebec to remain a part of the country.

B.L.:  Oh, yes, I think someone else told me that.

P.T.:  I'm not sure if it helped directly, but the result did turn out favorable for them, and Quebec is still part of Canada to everyone's benefit, as time has revealed. But it was quite a close vote!

B.L:  I do wonder what the general English reaction is. I wouldn't be surprised if they think we should just get on and make up our own minds. Or maybe a lot of them would be happy to 'get rid' of us. Have there been any polls in England to ask that?

P.T.: Yes, there have been. Generally, 60% in favor of the union, 20% against it, and the rest not caring either way. Personally, everyone I know in England would be heartily depressed to lose you! So you are "loved" by some “southies”!

B.L:  Well, that's nice!

P.T.:  What do you think about the system allowing only those currently living in Scotland to vote?

B.L.:  It seems a bit odd. After all, I have several friends who were born in Scotland and now live in England, so they can't vote; but people born in England who live and work in Scotland can!

P.T.:  It does sound strange, especially since the "trans-border" commuters have the most to gain from the union in concept and reality. Lots of them have relatives north or south of the “dividing line”, as well job commitments.

They feel very much connected with the place as a part of their "country" and see their Scottish friends and relatives as "compatriots" But this is just one of the many complications in trying to "segregate" people who have been so intermixed by being considered one people for so long!

B.L.:  Yes, I agree. I think there are a whole lot of complications raising their heads now, which originally weren't thought of. The really worrying thing is that, whatever the outcome of the vote, it will (presumably) be irreversible.

P.T.:  Actually, some are predicting that if the pro-independence party loses by a slight margin, they may try to launch another independence referendum in as soon as two years!

On the other hand, should the pro-union party lose by a slight margin, the "Yes" people are insisting that we better shut up and sit down or else be branded as enemies of democracy!

B.L.:  I’ve often thought the worst result would be almost a dead-heat, but I hadn't heard that about another go in two years time...aargh!

P.T.:  The suggested “Round 2” for independence is speculative, mind, but some of the "Yes" people are definitely pushing for it, and the “No” people worrying about it, and most average people just dreading having to go through another neverendum in their lifetimes!

B.L.:  Yes, I don't think I could bear to go through it all again! I think it's important to emphasize that 'we' (I mean my friends and acquaintances) are NOT talking about it all the time! Perhaps come September we will, but at the moment we are just getting on with our lives.

I don't know how strongly people think about it just now. For instance, I know my sister is going to vote yes for independence and has a badge saying so, but she didn't ask me how I’m going to vote, so I didn't say!

P.T.:  What's your random prediction of the outcome in September? My guess, at this point, is that the union will win, but only by a slight margin.

B.L.:  I think marginally that the status quo is the one most people seem to think will win, but that’s just my (uninformed) opinion!

P.T.:  To wrap things up, could you tell us a little about your personal interests, hobbies, and goals in life?

B.L.:  I am passionately interested in local history and in collecting oral history from older people, and have written several books on this and hope to do some more. I would like other people to look back at their own local history roots. One of my immediate goals is to get the book I'm working on (people's memories of their working lives and daily living) finished and out in the public domain. It is SO important all these memories don't get lost when the folk go.

P.T.: I agree. History and heritage is so important to development of culture and all the good things in life.

B.L.:  Yes, that's it. It's very encouraging to me that you (at your age) think like that because more often it's when folk get older that they get interested in their heritage.

P.T.: Thank you for that! In addition to being a preserver of local heritage, do you have any other interests or goals in addition?

B.L.:  Well, I also have a passionate love of cats! In the area of goals, as a great granny, I am grateful to find I am still alive the next morning! My goals SHOULD be to exercise more and leave the car at home but never seem to manage this very well (blame the Scottish weather)!

P.T.:  You have a good enough excuse! Scottish weather blamed, lol! Thank you again for agreeing to let me interview you, “Bonnie Lass”, and I look forward to catching up again in the near future.

B.L.:  Speak again soon!