David Torrance: Why nationalism alone is not enough in the context of a globalised economy.

Years ago I watched the British Film Institute’s recording of the 1974 television version and one of its many strengths was that it challenged political orthodoxy during a period of constitutional and economic flux not dissimilar to that of the past few years.

It also challenged Nationalism at a time when it was on the rise in Scotland. McGrath was a socialist and a Liverpudlian and therefore suspicious of the SNP. Indeed when the party tried to hijack the play by asking for a performance at its annual conference, he protested: “nationalism is not enough. The enemy of the Scottish people is Scottish capital, as much as the foreign exploiter.” McGrath was acutely conscious that independence was not the agent of change many believed it would or could be.

Revealingly, that line – “nationalism alone is not enough” – delivered by actor Bill Paterson in the original, is conspicuous by its absence from the Dundee Rep revival. And although, as I say, it remains a fine piece of agitprop theatre, it’s difficult not to conclude that the second attempted hijacking has been more successful than the first.

For although the first half of the play is relatively faithful to the original (although one character’s exclamation of “I’m still Yes!” obviously was not), the second has been reworked to take account of familiar Nationalist shibboleths: the Norwegian oil fund (which didn’t exist in 1974), the “secret” McCrone “Report” (most of which was already in the public domain) and even the Prime Minister’s Astor in-laws (who own land on Jura).

It could have mentioned (but does not) the British National Oil Corporation (BNOC) formed by the then Energy Secretary Tony Benn in 1975, a nationalised body presumably inconvenient to the Nationalist account of contemporary Scottish history. There’s also no mention of the UK government’s investment in the infrastructure essential for the growth of the North Sea oil industry in the mid-to-late 1970s.

Thus this new production (perhaps purposefully) neutralises the nuanced message of the original, which is all the more curious given that the big themes raised by McGrath – land ownership and the nature of globalised economic power – are no closer to being resolved more than 40 years later it was originally staged, neither by Labour, Tory or SNP governments, nor by Unionism or Nationalism.

Anyone watching today’s Cheviot would leave the theatre with the overwhelming impression that the SNP represents a challenge to the power of corporate vested interests and that independence would somehow resolve the issues McGrath identified. Yet a cursory glance at the SNP’s approach to oil, fracking and renewables shows it to be as much a prisoner of orthodoxy as Labour and the Conservatives, the play’s original targets.

Take North Sea oil. Just last week Energy Minister Fergus Ewing attacked Jeremy Corbyn from the right, warning that the new Labour leader’s previously articulated support for nationalisation of energy companies would have “dire” consequences for the industry. Mr Ewing then renewed his demand for the UK Government to use tax “incentives” (i.e. cuts) to stimulate explorative activity given the on-going decline in oil prices.

The Minister also echoed Alex Salmond’s demand during the referendum that the industry ought to be consulted before any “significant” changes to its fiscal regime, thereby providing an insight into the balance of political and economic power in modern Scotland that I’m sure McGrath would have found interesting.

More to the point, the first anniversary of the referendum last Friday served as a useful reminder of where Scotland might be had it voted Yes. The black stuff, of course, was presented by the Scottish Government as a “bonus”, but as the economist Ronald MacDonald observed a few days ago, given the state of the market “the current [UK] austerity programme…would be seen as a picnic compared to the retrenchment of the state and the loss of tax base facing an independent Scotland”. Better Together’s warnings about the volatility of oil have been completely vindicated.

When it comes to fracking, meanwhile, life also mirrors art. Last week an internal campaign group called “SNP Members Against Unconventional Oil and Gas” (SMAUG) was formed, betraying the obvious tension within the Scottish Government, torn between the potential revenue (as in the United States) and opposition at grassroots level.

And as this newspaper recently reported, the Scottish Government has refused to disclose fully minutes of a meeting between the First Minister and Ineos chief executive Jim Ratcliffe, at which the latter spoke of his belief that “in the long run...the exploitation of unconventional resources in Scotland/UK are vital for both energy supplies and feedstocks”. This is the same Mr Ratcliffe who said elsewhere that Ministers had been “quite clear...they’re not against fracking”.

Conveniently, of course, the current moratorium on fracking will most likely run until after next year’s Holyrood election, ensuring the SNP doesn’t have an internal fight that might distract from securing another overall majority. That, of course, is politics, just not the “principled” or “new” kind of politics we’re constantly told the SNP (and now Jeremy Corbyn) subscribe to.

Finally there are renewables. On this, to its credit, Alex Salmond and the Scottish Government have led from the front, although its commercial approach to wind farm development again speaks to McGrathite themes. Instead of pursuing a community ownership model, back in 2009-11 Ministers divided Scotland into five “lots” which were then allocated to “wind power development partners”, multinational companies like E.ON, Fred Olsen and ScottishPower.

Now I’m not saying that the new production of Cheviot wasn’t entitled to mention McCrone, Norway and the Astors, far from it, but one might have expected contemporary Scottish theatre – especially in a play so full of political themes – to have also addressed the obvious tensions and contradictions listed above. But despite a fairly extensive reworking of the second act there was little that could be interpreted as remotely inconvenient to the Scottish Government.

Had McGrath been alive to revisit his own work it seems likely he’d have taken aim at the SNP as well as the present Conservative government (a Corbyn-led Labour Party might have escaped). As I’ve written in previous columns, various Nationalist MPs and MSPs might make critical noises about “neoliberalism” and “corporate power”, but when it comes to actual policy little separates the Scottish Government from Westminster political orthodoxy.

Recently Nicola Sturgeon et al have started beating the independence drum more loudly than at any point since last September’s referendum, perhaps a reversion to type given that the new Leader of the Opposition has stolen so much of the SNP’s anti-Tory, anti-austerity and anti-Westminster thunder.

But nationalism alone, as Bill Paterson remarked in the original production of the Cheviot, is not enough, particularly in the context of an increasingly globalised economy.