The arguments for and against independence for Scotland have reached a crucial stage.
Both sides have asserted their belief that their relative positions – remaining a constituent part of the UK or becoming a separate nation – will be the most advantageous economically, socially, politically or strategically. But the absence of chapter and verse, facts and figures has reduced debate largely to claim and counter-claim.
For months, most opinion polls have found about one-third of voters undecided but the latest this week shows a move towards a No vote with the number still to make up their minds falling to 10%. Among them is Sir Tom Hunter, the entrepreneur who made £290 million from the sale of his Sports Division retail chain and, by any measure, a big beast in the business community. Both camps would be delighted to name him among their supporters but yesterday he allied himself with a significant strand of public opinion by saying he remained to be convinced by either side and criticising both campaigns. He challenged the Yes campaign to produce "hard facts to hard questions" and the Better Together campaign to produce more positive arguments and specify what additional powers would be transferred to Holyrood in the event of a No vote.
It is clear from all the public forums, including The Herald's Letters Pages, that this plea for clarity will resonate widely. Both sides have to produce convincing arguments but the onus is on the Yes campaign because, in the absence of a decisive case for change, the safer option of sticking with what you know becomes more attractive.
The increase in those saying they will vote No is an indication that this is already happening.
That is almost certainly due to confusion and increasing frustration over specific questions, such as whether an independent Scotland would retain the pound as currency; would remain a member of the EU without having to negotiate new terms of membership; and could be a member of Nato. In some cases there is, as yet, no definitive answer but the charge of failing to explore the most authoritative opinion and engage in detailed analysis can be levelled at both camps.
In addition to the questions surrounding international relations, there is increasing concern about economic issues at the UK, Scottish and personal levels.
Conflicting forecasts about future oil revenues are inevitable but the focus is increasingly on how they will add up and, more pertinently, be divided. Policy issues such as how to fund the sort of social welfare provision most Scots appear to want are the province of a future Scottish Parliament but the recent focus on how pension entitlement, whether through state, private or public sector schemes, would be funded following independence is evidence of a growing demand to address the consequences of independence at a personal as well as a political level.
With just under 500 days to go before Scots are required to make up their minds on the most significant vote in the country's history, Sir Tom is far from alone in calling for politicians to abandon the skirmishing and get into the substantive fight. His impatience for answers to so many crucial questions is shared by all who are anxious to weigh up the arguments and mark their ballot with confidence that they are making the right choice. They deserve a genuine, honest and informed debate.
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 hereComments are closed on this article