David Maddox: Independence referendum will leave emotional scars

'So far, the Better Together side has only made brief forays into emotional argument for Scotland staying in the UK' Picture: Phil Wilkinson

WITH the latest UK government paper out yesterday saying why Scottish independence really is not a good idea, it is easy to forget the emotional side in the trading and counter-trading of facts and non-facts across the two sides of the debate.

A timely reminder of that came last week from the former Canadian prime minister Jean Chretien when he delivered a talk at Dover House, the Scotland Office’s Whitehall headquarters. Chretien was Prime minister in 1995 when Quebec had its last referendum and the No campaign almost lost, despite initially holding a 62/38 per cent lead. Only a late comeback saw independence defeated by less than a percentage point.

A Quebecer and a Canadian unionist, Chretien was not keen to comment on Scotland, noting that it was none of his business. But his experiences did provide much insight for the No campaign in Scotland, which is currently enjoying the same sort of healthy lead that the unionists in Canada almost lost.

He wryly noted how the federal party in Quebec had wanted him and the central government to stay out of the campaign, and it was only at the end when defeat seemed possible that he stepped in and made speeches. It has echoes of the recent angst between MPs and MSPs in Scottish Labour.

But Chretien’s major point was on the emotional argument. This cannot be ignored, not least when considering that Alex Salmond has chosen 2014 as the year of the referendum: the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and when Scots athletes will compete as Scots not Brits in the Commonwealth Games. “It is much easier to make the emotional argument for the smaller entity,” Chretien told his audience. He noted how the protection of the French Canadian language had been a major factor in the independence movement.

So far, the Better Together side has made only brief forays into the emotional argument for Scotland staying in the UK, although Scottish Secretary Michael Moore’s best speech on the issue did make the emotional case. But there is another side to the emotion. Chretien also warned of the bitter divides ahead, which will not go away whatever side wins in the referendum.

“A referendum is very emotional. It is dividing families, dividing cities and villages, especially among those who believe so strongly it is almost a religion,” he said. “You are breaking the dreams of some people. Breaking the dream of a kid is tough, but breaking the dream of an adult is more difficult.”

The passion of the mob that followed Ukip leader Nigel Farage last week underlines that emotions are particularly raw and unchecked on the pro-independence side. Chretien’s comments made many wonder whether there will be a need for some sort of national reconciliation after the referendum, whichever way it goes. Somehow, agreeing to accept the result in the Edinburgh Agreement only feels like a clause for the politicians.