I caught bits of the Scottish Independence televised debate. It looked to me that Alistair Darling edged the contest.
I like Alistair, he's a good labour man. He's an honest man and it's easy to see why he was chosen to lead the together campaign. I just happen to believe he's wrong. The whole focus of the debate seems to be about the first few months of an independent Scotland under the SNP. My problem is that this is one of those huge decisions that can't be judged over months or even a few years. I have absolutely no doubts that over time an independent Scotland can sort out any teething difficulties over currency or EU membership.
What seems certain to me is that in one hundred years the quality of the decision will not be judged upon the inevitable uncertainty that will exist whichever way Scotland votes. We have almost come to terms with the fact that as a nation we'll often have periods of uncertainty whilst coalitions form yet Alistair was clearly making a period of uncertainty the absolute clincher in deciding that Scotland would have to remain ruled by London. Yes there would be days of the nation been swept along in a stormy sea but the prize being offered to an independent Scotland free from London rule is far too valuable and long lasting for it simply to be judged against a period of turbulence. It's almost a crime against future generations to allow it to be determined on a week of two of discomfort.
My party supports the better together campaign. I think it's wrong.