When the cross-party campaign that sought a yes/yes vote in the forthcoming devolution referendum was launched on May 15, 1997, one lesson was uppermost in its mind.
Scotland Forward chairman Nigel Smith declared: “Underlying this campaign
are the lessons of history of 18 years ago which put a deep mark in the psyche of the nation as to how not to do things when you conduct a referendum campaign.
"We need to provide a single, unifying force in Scotland during this campaign.’’
He was, of course, referring to the 1979 devolution referendum, which was won by Yes but on a low turnout.
Scotland Forward was determined that there would be no such heartbreak this time.
Smith spoke of the need for an inclusive campaign that captured the mood of the nation.
A strong anti-devolution message was a feature of the Scottish Conservative conference, in late June.
Former scottish secretary Michael Forsyth compared those who kept up the fight against devolution to the ancient Spartans, and insisted it was still possible to win the war.
Devolution was not cost free, he added, and there would be a “high price to pay for the extra politicians on Calton Hill”.
Looking ahead to the referendum on September 11, Lord James Douglas Hamilton told the conference: ‘"The next test of our mettle will be in two months’ time. We should now be firing a warning shot across the bows of the [Tony Blair] Government saying its plans are regressive, bureaucratic, and a folly in upsetting the level playing field and threatening inward investment.’’
But as Professor Tom Devine records in his book, Independence Or Union, the pro-home rule camp was “united as never before”.
The SNP, Labour and the Liberal Democrats – under, respectively, Alex Salmond, Donald Dewar and Jim Wallace – campaigned vigorously.
The opposing camp, Devine observes, was weak by comparison. “Scottish business, which had vociferously condemned devolution in 1979, was mainly silent ... ‘Think Twice’, the anti-devolution campaign, had few of the financial resources or personalities of the organizations that opposed devolution in 1979.”
The fate of the ‘No’ campaigners was sealed, Mr Devine adds, when Margaret Thatcher gave them her public support.
On Radio 4’s The Reunion programme, Jim Wallace, now Lord Wallace, said: “I remember it being a very positive campaign amongst those of us who supported the Parliament. It’s fair to say it was a fairly lacklustre campaign to start with, and then there was the tragic death of Diana, Princess of Wales, and it was agreed among all the parties that we would suspend the campaign until after the funeral, and in these final three or four days it was very intense.”
The extent of public enthusiasm for a Scottish parliament was reflected in the scale of the vote on September 11: On a turnout of 60.1%, 74.3% of the electorate backed a parliament, with 63.5% in favour of it having tax-raising powers.
When the Queen opened the new Parliament on July 1, 1999, First Minister Donald Dewar gave, to quote Mr Devine’s words, “many consider to be the greatest speech of his life, with its eloquent evocations of the Scottish past and hopes for the future of the nation.”
“This is indeed a moment anchored in our history,” said Mr Dewar. A few lines later, he added: “Today, we look forward to the time when this moment will be seen as a turning point: the day when democracy was renewed in Scotland, when we revitalised our place in this our United Kingdom. This is about more than our politics and our laws. This is about who we are, how we carry ourselves.”
And as the SNP MSP Winnie Ewing took the oath she declared: “The Scottish Parliament, adjourned on the 25th day of March in the year 1707, is hereby reconvened.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here