My genuine fears for Scotland post-referendum

The sun will truly set one way or the other on
September 19th in Scotland.

Four weeks today, Scotland will be at a major crossroad - one direction will lead to independence and another one will lead to remaining within the United Kingdom. Either way, one side of the debate will win and the other will be defeated.

And don't think for a second that this is going to be the first of a series of referenda on Scotland's future. This is a once in a lifetime occasion which will never be repeated. The way the polls are trending at the moment suggests that the result isn't going to be a 70/30 or even a 60/40 split.

For the last few days, the result of people's emotions after the result of the referendum has started to really worry me. Many people have stated their possible intention of quitting Scotland if the result doesn't go the way they want - the results of a recent survey by Panelbase for The Sunday Times and Heart radio station suggested that around 700,000 people in Scotland could emigrate if the referendum ended up with a Yes vote and around 200,000 people in Scotland would quit the country if the result of the referendum was a No. Both figures are not small (link to article from The Scotsman website).

The biggest flaw some people complain about with the upcoming referendum is the fact that there are only two options on the tablet for voters - independence or (arguably) nothing. And the group of voters in particular that will really not appreciate this are those who wanted to vote for a possible third option where it was, for example, "Devolution Plus" or "Devolution Max". What if we end up with a No vote and, after all this long period of time debating, nothing happens? That would go down well with very few people - in June 2012, according to the results of a Ipsos MORI/Reform Scotland survey, only 29% opted for the "status quo" option (link to UK Polling Report website).

Now I know people on the No side insist that more powers will be delivered to the Scottish Parliament under devolution, but how do we really know that is going to definitely happen? The three main pro-union parties at Holyrood have all come up with different ideas and have failed to make a united agreement on what extra powers will be legislated for after the referendum. It could turn out to be their biggest mistake in recent Scottish history and the Better Together side will have nobody but themselves to blame if they lose. However, will it all depend on who wins the 2015 UK General Election? Probably.

On the contrary, it should be asked as to why the Yes side are not leading the polls with just around a month to go. I do not think for a second that anyone within Yes Scotland seem to be panicking at the moment, but time is running out if they want to have enough momentum on their side in order to claim victory. Then again, will they pull off an extraordinary victory? The Scottish National Party certainly did in the 2011 election for the Scottish Parliament, so who knows?

I also felt that the First Minister is still not setting out that unambiguous of a case for Sterling to remain as the main currency of Scotland. When I quizzed Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon on this issue in Kirkcaldy last Tuesday, she gave me a really strong and, frankly, unambiguous case - maybe it should have been her debating Alistair Darling on STV over a fortnight ago.

What also attracted my attention this week was the contrast between many of the polls which illustrate that a No vote was likely and the result of a survey carried out in working class communities by the Radical Independence Campaign. They found that support for a Yes vote stood at 44%, No on 25% and Don't Knows on 31%. Take the latter of the three away and the split would be 63/37 in favour of a Yes vote (link to article from The Scotsman website). 

Now I couldn't source results of another separate survey for those that live in middle class communities, but the possible inequality between those that are well off and those that aren't well off and what both groups of people want for Scotland's future appears very disturbing and divisive to me as far as the future of Scottish society is concerned.

The last thing to consider for now is the fact that this forthcoming referendum is unchartered territory for everybody in Scotland. We have never had a referendum of this kind before and none of us on this earth can really determine what is going to really happen after the result is announced. However, I fear that the political mood of this country will become so toxic that matters could become really unhealthy and it is the responsibility of the politicians to ensure that a sense of calm resumes after the referendum.

The outcome of the vote on September 18th 2014 will go right to the wire. Put it this way, it's like a football cup final - there won't be a draw. And only one side can win this debate.

Scottish First Minister's Questions

A little after 11am last Thursday, I rushed my way down to the Scottish Parliament to witness before my own eyes Scotland's MSP's congregating inside the chamber for First Minister's Questions. 

Unlike previously, this was the first time I watched the event live at Holyrood. I knew what to expect in some ways as I watch the event on the television or online. Yet as I was about to find out, watching First Minister's Questions right there and right then brings a totally different experience.

To secure a seat in the public gallery, a telephone call needs to be made to the Parliament's visitor services line first thing at 9am on the previous Thursday. It might be difficult in securing a ticket if you just turn up before the event as all the tickets may have been allocated in the previous week, but there might be a spare one or two if visitors don't turn up or can't make it. However, this is not guaranteed so it is better to book a ticket the week before at the right time.

First Minister's Question starts at 12noon on a Thursday so it's best to make your way to the public gallery half an hour before the event starts. But before you do that, ensure that you obtain a copy of the details of business taking place in the Parliament for that day. You will normally be able to get a copy from the reception desk. When it comes to selecting a seat, I would strongly recommend that you take the seat closest to the chamber. Beware, however, as some of the front row seats may be reserved so seek advice from the staff on duty who will be more than happy to help. 

Before the big event, another event commences at 11:40am called General Questions. This is where MSP's ask questions to members of the Scottish Government cabinet on a range of matters. During this time, many of the representatives will make their way into the chamber. What fascinated me (and to be fair didn't surprise me either) is the fact that this exaggerated idea that some form of "tribalism" that some claim exists within the Parliament wasn't really present. MSP's from different parties do talk to each other. You have to remember that most serve alongside each other in committees (where a lot of the work at Holyrood takes place). Although the MSP's position themselves in the areas where their own political parties are present during proceedings inside the chamber, in other instances, they generally don't avoid one another. 

When midday strikes, it's the big event of the week at Holyrood. Each of the opposition leaders quiz the First Minister for much of the half hour session with the backbench MSP's also able to put questions forward too. What I loved especially about the experience last Thursday was the fact that you had, literally, all of the MSP's within your sights. You can examine their body language and their reactions to things said in the chamber. For me, the viewing experience had been dramatically enhanced. 

I can assure you that last Thursday was pretty eventful and I would predict that every First Minister's Questions will be similar in the build up to the referendum on Scottish independence this September. If you know who the politicians are, then that will engage you further with the proceedings. If not, then don't despair. You will pick something up from your experience and hopefully increase your appreciation for the centre of Scottish public life at Holyrood.

Would an independent Scotland benefit pharmacy?

Today the Scottish Government agreed with the Electoral Commission's findings over the proposed wording of next year's question in the forthcoming Scottish independence referendum, due to be held in the autumn of 2014. Pharmacy in Scotland isn't exactly immune from the effects of the recession with pharmacies having to take on the effects of category M cutbacks and pharmacists, particularly newly qualified ones, struggling desperately trying to get their foot on the pharmacy employment ladder.

Would an independent Scotland pave the way for a creative new way to deal with the current issues that are overshadowing the pharmacy profession north of the border?

None of us know what an independent Scotland will really look like. But nobody can also doubt either the opportunity it may bring as well.

Frankly, nobody has the right to assert that Scotland is incapable of running its own affairs effectively. To suggest so would be petulant. Many newly formed independent nations have managed just fine since embracing their own independence and nobody can really deny that whether they support the union or independence.

But the choice next year will be really down to what is in Scotland's best interests. Whether Scotland is better staying together with the rest of the United Kingdom, hoping that the coalition's austerity measures will result in future economic prosperity. Or whether Scotland's position in the union is untenable and therefore being independent is the only way forward.

Scotland already runs its health service very differently from England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The major difference can be seen between the coalition government's proposal to radically reform the way the NHS is administered by allowing GP's more of a say in the way services are commissioned in England. Scotland, under the Scottish National Party run government at Holyrood, has ruled out the private sector from running any aspect of the National Health Service.

A lot of the arguments for independence are based on the way the economy should be run. Many people north of the border do not approve of the austerity measures being brought about by Westminster and want to go down an alternative route by administering their own affairs and economic decisions.

As pharmacy are concerned, I can imagine nearly every contractor up and down Scotland do not necessarily welcome the category M cuts with glee. Although health policy is different in Scotland, could general economic policy from Westminster be holding the profession back?

Or could even a lack of creative thinking be holding back the profession? Some people argue that we already have enough powers north of the border to take an alternative route when it comes to administering and satisfying the needs of the pharmacy profession, pharmacy contractors and pharmacists.

But some others argue that because the Scottish Government has to resort to only a grant from Westminster for funding of public services in Scotland, it doesn't hold enough power to raise the necessary capital to adopt a different economic policy, despite the fact that the Scottish Parliament has the power to vary income tax by three percent over or under the current levels of income tax.

I would quite like to see some sort of a national debate set up and run, for example by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in Scotland, to see what everyone in the pharmacy profession in Scotland thinks about what Scottish independence could mean for the future of pharmacy in Scotland.

Please let me know what you think: anas@officialanashassan.com

Appearing on the STV News at Six commenting on graduate unemployment

Last night on the STV News at Six, across most of Scotland, I made a brief appearance in a report complied together by political editor Claire Stewart where I commented about graduate unemployment. If you weren't able to catch the news last night or didn't see it online then the report features in the programme through this link, approximately nine minutes into the programme. 

Claire interviewing me

So far, I've had quite a strong response from friends and family about my appearance last night. And thanks to the bulletin last night, its no secret now that I have struggled in recent months to find any work as a pharmacist and I'm now opening the doors to many other options. You cannot blame me really. Even as little as two years ago nobody in pharmacy really thought such a scenario would play out for many pharmacists, particularly the newly qualified ones. But how things have radically changed now and its unfortunate that such an employment crisis now exists. But its really important that nobody specifically should be blamed and that a way forward should be sought to fix this situation and prevent it from happening again.

The last thing any unemployed individual wants to do is to become inactive. That will lead to the unemployed individual falling behind everyone else in the jobs market and will damage their chances of achieving employment again.

I certainly don't regret taking part in the report. It is a major issue for pharmacists across the UK as well as Scotland and I'm definitely not the only one who is struggling. The jobs supply is running dry everywhere, regardless of where you are located.

Myself and STV cameraman Matt

I'm delighted that for the first time in a long time that this particular issue was highlighted on a major national news bulletin, because it will raise awareness of the problem in the public domain and, hopefully, lead to positive solutions in the not too distant future which will end the scandalous occurrence of unemployment for a profession which up to now has recorded impressive levels of employment statistics for pharmacists across these islands. I have no doubt that politicians, stakeholders within the profession and healthcare in general will have been watching last night's bulletin.

And don't forget that its not even just unemployed pharmacists who are affected. There are pharmacists out there who have found work but are not getting enough hours - they are underemployed. But for other pharmacists, they are very lucky people. And by all means have earned their success.

But I'm afraid ladies and gentlemen leads to one more strong point from me. And some of you won't like to hear it but if anything really irritates me then its when I hear someone, who is employed and in work, posting a status or tweet on social media showing feelings of negativity about the fact that they are working. Frankly, its offensive because whilst there are many talented, motivated and keen individuals out there really pushing to find work, it makes me sick to my stomach when I hear someone casually say how they aren't looking forward to going to work. Being grateful for what you have is key in life and remember that there are people out there who would love to be in the employed position like those who are lucky enough to be in work. Having said that though, I do understand that work isn't stress-free. Nobody likes stress and that's totally understandable. And not every place of work is a pleasant place either - there may be many underlying issues that exist which cause the feelings of negativity. I do understand such issues exist, so don't think I'm being unreasonable when I've made the points in this last paragraph.

The Scottish and UK governments have taken measures which have demonstrated that they are aware pharmacy graduate unemployment exists and needs to be tackled urgently. Later on this year the Holyrood government will hear a review carried out by Dr Hamish Wilson, with assistance from Professor Nicolas Barber of the University of London, about aiming to enhance the role pharmacists role in healthcare provision. I will be anxiously awaiting the results of this review and no doubt I'll report on it when it gets published, God willing.

Meanwhile, it was an absolute pleasure to be interviewed by a top class journalist who undoubtedly I'm a big fan of. I remember Claire Stewart from my university days as she was originally based at STV in Aberdeen. But now she's moved on to being political editor at STV in the central belt and no doubt will flourish in her career.

Matt, Claire and I

I also want to mention brilliant STV cameraman Matt who it was a pleasure in meeting as well for filming the images for the report. I don't think people behind the scenes get enough credit for the work they do in producing those programmes for the viewing public. Their job is much harder than people think. They've got to get the camerawork done perfectly and also ensure that it is done at a high quality to ensure any content created for broadcast is suitable to be broadcast.

And finally, Claire's final words in the report may well have struck a chord with many out of work. But lets just hope that, with time and action, we will see many people, undeservedly out of work, back into work and being successful once again.

No status quo for Scotland

Scotland, if it chooses to vote 'No' in the forthcoming 2014 independence referendum, will still see some sort of substantial change in the amount of devolution that it will possess as a nation. 

I read a very fascinating article on The Guardian website earlier this week written by Mark Sneddon. A former Conservative MEP, John Stevens,  suggested that David Cameron could still offer maximum devolution to Scotland, yet save the union from breaking up AND finally address the West Lothian question.

It really got me thinking and last night I was asked why I came to the assertion I made in my first paragraph of this article. After all, why wouldn't the current Prime Minister want to make a piece of substantial British history? It may even define his premiership for his own benefit for his legacy. 

And as for Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond, it would mean he could claim to have brought Scotland just one step closer to independence. Or he could claim to have brought "home rule with independence" as quoted from his March 2012 address during the Scottish National Party conference. That would be independence in terms of fiscal autonomy if some commentators prefer to interpret that phrase that way.

What Scotland can't, and shouldn't end up with, is absolutely no change from the current status quo. Because it would mean the last few years of hard and passionate debate will have all gone in vain.