To celebrate the sixth anniversary of the first independence referendum, we talk to new recruits to the Yes movement.
Sandra Marrs is a French-born illustrator and one half of Glasgow-based graphic novel duo Metaphrog:
I voted No at the first indyref because it seemed weird to make more boundaries in a modern electronic age, and I don’t believe in nationalism.
I also wanted to continue living in the UK. But now I would vote Yes, because it has become very clear that an independent Scotland is necessary. Not just because of Brexit, if we want Scotland to still be part of the EU, but also because Westminster does not operate in the interests of the people in Britain, but only in the interests of making more money for a small group of very rich people.
Scotland becoming independent would be an amazing opportunity for change, to have a go at being a better, more just and egalitarian society. I’m not being naive and know it would be a challenge, but a challenge worth taking. And change for the better is not something that is going to happen in the UK any time soon otherwise.
When I voted No the first time around, I heard the argument some Yes people had about the possibility of positive change, but my cynical self did not believe it was possible. However, the Scottish Government’s response to the pandemic, their candour and their constant hard work, has shown that there are good politicians out there who can bring this about.
Society in general needs an overhaul. This has become clearer in the past decade especially, with the climate crisis and the lack of action, with the widening gap between the rich and the rest of the people, with the monopoly of corporations and so forth. But there is also change in the air right now.
An independent Scotland would be a chance to try to become a more progressive country.
Gilles Rousseau of Bishopton, Renfrewshire, has lived in the UK for 23 years and works in scientific supplies:
One of my clients is CERN in Geneva, another is ITER in Southern France. These are massive international labs and it’s about relationships, and I always believed we were “better together”.
Ewan McGregor said how he has gone from a No to a Yes last week, and said exactly what I am thinking.
READ MORE: 'Enough’s enough': Ewan McGregor voices support for Scottish independence
I was never at the far end of the spectrum, saying nothing was going to change my mind, I was always in between. In 2014 I was quite happy with the situation we were in, with the UK part of the European Union. I thought David Cameron was going to go ahead with the Brexit referendum, but I didn’t think people would vote to Leave. As soon as the results were announced on June 24, 2016, I thought “this is going to break the Union”. I now see that happening.
I was already there before the pandemic.
The critical factor is going to be the Scottish elections in May. If there is a majority of SNP MSPs, it’s going to be very difficult for Westminster to say no to indyref2, but with Boris Johnson you never know. He already said no to a Section 30 order, but if you keep saying “no” to people, they say “you know what...”
That approach will be unsustainable.
In 2016, three million EU citizens in the UK couldn’t vote in the Brexit referendum. Now for the 2021 election, those of us in Scotland will be able to do so. That’s massively important – we’ll have a say in the future of Scotland.
John Craig, raised in Bothwell, South Lanarkshire, is a musician and student union president at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland:
Every member of my family voted No in 2014. We were hardcore Labour, working class people. Now both my parents are SNP members and have said they will vote Yes if there is a second referendum.
The change of SNP leadership really appealed to them, particularly to my mum, who’s taken a lot of benefit from what Nicola Sturgeon’s been able to explain about the damage Brexit is going to do to our country.
When I voted No in 2014, it was the day I was leaving home to study – I voted, then I drove for seven hours to Wales. I was concerned about being treated as an international student there, about losing EU membership and losing access to programmes like Erasmus. The promise of retaining our EU membership was the greatest factor.
I came back knowing the reality of what my choice meant, having all the things I thought I voted to protect ripped away because I believed the people who’d gone and voted the opposite way in 2016.
READ MORE: 'The Union has failed': Veterans of the indyref on why they're Still Yes
Coming to the Conservatoire, living in Glasgow, being with people who have come from different countries to work and study here, I realised voting Yes is the only way I can keep those lasting relationships, those education opportunities.
I had believed that after a No vote we would move to further devolution, federalism and more powers for Scotland. Those powers never materialised, the promises were taken back and policies were changed without the consent of the Scottish people.
The arts in Scotland have been a massive part of the Yes movement. The Scottish Government and the SNP need to recognise that.
Rod Kelly is a paediatrician, children’s author and Labour Party member:
At the time of indyref I never thought a referendum on the EU would happen or that we would collectively vote to Leave. At the time the EU didn’t seem a major concern for voters, although I was concerned it was being used as a scapegoat by some Tories for the failure of successful governments of different parties to address structural inequality in the UK.
The current Tory Government has made me think about independence more. I think with a moderate and competent Westminster government I’d have taken longer to come round to independence, but the problem is that currently without independence there’s always the risk of a Westminster government that fails to act in Scottish people’s interest and acts to its own English nativist base. I think Scotland’s future would be better in a union of equals such as the EU rather than the often English/South East-centric Westminster Government
I don’t think it’s too difficult to express views on independence as a Labour member. My views aren’t in keeping with Scottish Labour policy, but Labour is a broad church. I feel it’s becoming increasingly difficult to justify opposing giving the Scottish people a democratic say.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel