ErsatzThistle Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 I wasn't even alive at this time but am really interested in this chapter in Scottish history. I'm keen to read the boards memories of the 1979 referendum on devolution. Many of you I imagine were kids or teenagers at the time and starting to become interested in politics. A couple of you may have been old enough to vote in it. This was the result of course: 1,230,937 (51.62%) voted "Yes" 1,153,502 (48.38%) voted "No" 3,133 (0.13%) votes were invalid Of the old council areas then in use, the vote was as follows Regions that Voted "Yes": Central Region (54.67%), Fife Region (53.68%), Highland Region (50.96%), Lothian region (50.11%), Strathclyde Region (53.98%), Western Isles (55.76%) Regions that Voted "No": Borders Region (59.74%), Dumfries & Galloway Region (59.70%), Grampian Region (51.66%), Orkney Islands (72.11%), Shetland Islands 73.02%), Tayside Region (50.50%). Have seen an interview from 2009 with that treacherous Tam Dalyell, where he said he said he still feels no guilt or shame regarding the infamous "40% clause" and that it was "the right thing to do". The originator of this anti-democratic farce, George Cunningham, (a Scots MP for an English constituency) is still alive but has drifted into obscurity. North British Labour were of course split in two over the issue. Have read plenty about how Tory MPs from the hard right of their party and Scots Labour MPs from the radical wing of their party happily campaigned together for a "No" vote. Was there anything the "Yes" campaign could have done to have gotten the vote higher ? I realise of course that they were always going to be snookered by the electoral register that was about ten years out of date and had plenty of deid folk or others who had immigrated abroad still on it. Were older folk more likely to back a "No" vote ? Were urban areas more likely to vote "Yes" than rural areas ? What scare tactics did the "No" campaign use ? What was the mood in your family like ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 64 % turnout kinda tells you all you need to know. Everybody knew the 40% target was impossible, so loads of folk didn't bother voting. Also the "powers" being offered were so minimal that a lot of folk thought "why bother?" It was very different to the independence referendum campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 The biggest mistake you can make - and with respect, I think you're making it - is to try and somehow equate the current political landscape in Scotland - and indeed the UK - with what it was in the 1970s, It was a different world back then. One interesting point was made on Pienaar's politics this morning by either David Torrance or John Curtice, forget which one. They were discussing what seems to be being - at least unofficially - the view that the prerequisite for the next referendum is 60% in favour in the polls for at least a year. One of them made the point that in this, a second referendum for independence becomes much more like the 1997 devolution referendum, which really only confirmed what everyone knew - which was there was a real appetite for devolution in the country. The fact that it also seems to be something that is pretty likely to happen also makes the prospect of it happening seem less scary for some of the soft No voters and has a positive effect in that case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErsatzThistle Posted October 18, 2015 Author Share Posted October 18, 2015 The biggest mistake you can make - and with respect, I think you're making it - is to try and somehow equate the current political landscape in Scotland - and indeed the UK - with what it was in the 1970s, It was a different world back then. I'm not. I just simply want to know what people's memories of the 1979 referendum were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Well for a start, the fact there was a 40% threshold meant that there was pretty much an understanding that not voting was almost as good as voting no. On that basis the majority is a bit spurious, IMHO. If there was no threshold, I think turnout would have been higher and more people would have voted No. The only Project Fear stuff I recall was aGordon Brown style intervention from Alec Douglas Home. Pretty sure there was an "independence or nothing" element in the SNP at the time that opposed devolution. Demographics of Scotland was a lot, lot different in those days. More people who had come through the war and post war period, more people working in heavily unionised industrial jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 64 % turnout kinda tells you all you need to know. For comparison - the 1979 general election was 76.84%. On the same voting proportions (ie Yes ~52%; No ~48%) - Yes required a 77.5% turnout (which was exceeded in Feb 1974 election). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) I think that there was an element of fatalism that the vote had been already sort of 'nobbled' in advance by the 40% rule, and was unlikely to win, which could have depressed turnout on both sides Also I think there was word put about that the proposals on the table were not very strong (flawed and/or limited in power), and I am pretty sure the Tories put it about that if we voted no this time, they'd come up with better proposals later. Which of course they never did but in fact fought tooth and ail to prevent any devolution. (Could this be the Alec Douglas Home intervention referred to above? Or was it Teddy Taylor? - about to be kicked out of Cathcart if I recall) In the pre-devolution debates in the early nineties, this 'betrayal' was brought up as a reason not to trust the Tories or anti-devolutionists. The debate was in turn posted on You Tube as a warning to people not to be taken in by promises, in the run up to referendum. But then Gordon Brown came along and said trust me it'll be better if you vote no... and now complains that they are breaking his vow. Not sure if anyone remembers but Scotland had been ejected from the World Cup in '78 and some may have felt a loss of national self confidence as a result (though it's hard to imagine that now - not least because it's hard to imagine anyone basing anything as important as national self confidence on a Scottish sports team performance this century...) Finally, if I recall, there was a cartoonist - Turnbull - in the Glasgow Herald, who depicted the Scottish voter as a timid lion, who was too feart to come out his(?) cage even when the door was opened. I was reminded of this, when Only an Excuse showed the Scottish voter in the polling booth losing nerve (?) and voting no... Lion referred to here http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2015/10/are-george-osborne-s-tax-credit-cuts-really-his-version-gordon-browns-10p "he was perhaps best known for his image of Scotland as a ‘feart’ lion, which came to symbolise the inconclusive referendum result of 1979." http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13031299.Former_Herald_cartoonist___s_artworks_under_the_hammer/ Edited October 18, 2015 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 There's definitely more of a national confidence - if such a thing exists - now than in the 1970s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) the Tories put it about that if we voted no this time, they'd come up with better proposals later. ... In the pre-devolution debates in the early nineties, this 'betrayal' was brought up as a reason not to trust the Tories or anti-devolutionists. The debate was in turn posted on You Tube... Question from audience on this from 41:00 A trip down memory lane to realise the Secretary of State for Scotland was referring to a Conservative A fair bit of heckling Lang from about 54:00, when he speaks up for the union of 300 years... Edited October 18, 2015 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErsatzThistle Posted October 18, 2015 Author Share Posted October 18, 2015 Does anyone remember what side did the papers took ? My Dad recalls that for some reason the thing about that referendum that stays in his mind was the campaign literature that came through the door. The "Yes" leaflets had statements by Jimmy Logan and Sean Connery whilst the No leaflets had statements from Kenneth McKellar and the Alexander Brothers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 I was born in July 1979, so was 21 when Dewar died. The guys a #####, father of the nation my arse. Ive watched that video before, and its the same crap from the Unionists as we had last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 I was born in July 1979, so was 21 when Dewar died. The guys a #####, father of the nation my arse. Ive watched that video before, and its the same crap from the Unionists as we had last year. Although at that time, there were 3 for constitutional change, 1 against (though 2 were for devolution) I am struggling to remember that time (1992) when things were run from The Scottish Office, a sort of 'branch office' of then Tory-run UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Question from audience on this from 41:00 A trip down memory lane to realise the Secretary of State for Scotland was referring to a Conservative A fair bit of heckling Lang from about 54:00, when he speaks up for the union of 300 years... I'd forgotten about Ian Lang, what a he was. Kirsty Wark looking pretty foxy back in the day though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Growing up in Aberdeen in 79 I have zero and I do mean zero memory of this event. It is like it did not happen. We had a vote? Really!? Clear memory of the wave of Thatcher love but. That was palpable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Although at that time, there were 3 for constitutional change, 1 against (though 2 were for devolution) I am struggling to remember that time (1992) when things were run from The Scottish Office, a sort of 'branch office' of then Tory-run UK. The 1987 general election was the start of the Tory decline in Scotland when they went down to 10 seats. I know youngsters, 10 seats was seen as a disaster for them at the time. I think there were 11 ministerial positions at the Scotland Office and having only 10 MPs meant they couldn't staff it with MPs for Scottish constituencies. I remember saying "this is it, they have no mandate to govern Scotland". Then we got the Poll Tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Same old shit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Orkney and Shetland are really not on our side. Remember that snide visit by Dave in the lead up to the vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Same old shit? The highest three council area votes for devolution in 1997 were three of the four that voted for independence [Glasgow, North Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire]; while the four lowest for devolution were the four lowest for independence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 The highest three council area votes for devolution in 1997 were three of the four that voted for independence [Glasgow, North Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire]; while the four lowest for devolution were the four lowest for independence. I think that graphic is from 1979, not 1997. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 I think that graphic is from 1979, not 1997. They are, but the same pattern followed in 1997 and 2014. The 1979 data isn't localised enough - excluding in the islands - to compare with the 2014 results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErsatzThistle Posted October 18, 2015 Author Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) Orkney and Shetland are really not on our side. Remember that snide visit by Dave in the lead up to the vote. Funnily enough during the succession of bills that went through parliament which allowed for the 1979 referendum to happen, Orkney & Shetland's then MP, Jo Grimond, tried to pull off a really dirty, sneaky trick. He very nearly got his way too, it was only narrowly defeated in parliament. Grimond, who up until then appeared to be a strong supporter of Scottish devolution, suddenly at the eleventh hour, tried to get a new clause inserted. It specified that if Orkney & Shetland voted "No" and the rest of Scotland voted "Yes", then Orkney & Shetland would not be subject to administration from Edinburgh. What a kuntish thing to do. Edited October 18, 2015 by ErsatzThistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Funnily enough during the succession of bills that went through parliament which allowed for the 1979 referendum to happen, Orkney & Shetland's then MP, Jo Grimond, tried to pull off a really dirty, sneaky trick. He very nearly got his way too, it was only narrowly defeated in parliament. Grimond, who up until then appeared to be a strong supporter of Scottish devolution, suddenly at the eleventh hour, tried to get a new clause inserted. It specified that if Orkney & Shetland voted "No" and the rest of Scotland voted "Yes", then Orkney & Shetland would not be subject to administration from Edinburgh. What a kuntish thing to do. Isn't that essentially the same as saying if the rest of the U.K. votes to leave the EU but Scotland doesn't then Scotland should stay in the EU? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErsatzThistle Posted October 18, 2015 Author Share Posted October 18, 2015 Isn't that essentially the same as saying if the rest of the U.K. votes to leave the EU but Scotland doesn't then Scotland should stay in the EU? In a sense yes. But the issue here was that Grimond had been a long standing supporter of Scottish devolution only to suddenly throw an anti-devolution spanner in the works at the last minute. It's been suggested that he was put up to it by influential anti-devolution Labour and Tory MP's who promised him a future cabinet position. It happened in mid 1978 when at that stage neither Labour or the Tories were entirely certain of winning a majority at the next election and wanted to sweeten up the obvious coalition partners. Ultimately of course that situation never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stapes Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) I'd forgotten about Ian Lang, what a he was. Kirsty Wark looking pretty foxy back in the day though.Didn't Bono phone him at work from a concert in Edinburgh?Also remember him being roundly booed at a Scottish Cup Final (Dundee Utd?), and the players not looking too happy at having to shake his hand. Hated him with a passion, more than any other unionist before or since (and there have been bawbags aplenty). Edited October 18, 2015 by Stapes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Does anyone remember what side did the papers took ? My Dad recalls that for some reason the thing about that referendum that stays in his mind was the campaign literature that came through the door. The "Yes" leaflets had statements by Jimmy Logan and Sean Connery whilst the No leaflets had statements from Kenneth McKellar and the Alexander Brothers Never trust a kiltie I think the Herald was pro-Yes. I do remember this Turnbull cartoon... I also recall being confused why Yes won but actually didn't, took a while to work that one out as a 9 year old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.