How I learned to stop worrying and love the Welsh referendum

Pigs might fly? The one thing you can't accuse True Wales of is a lack of boldness.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Well, fear and a large inflatable pig that is.

If the opening skirmishes of the Welsh referendum campaigns were characterised by the kind of chaos that can only come from pitting such unequal opponents against one another, the latter stages have been defined by something much less fun, but no less interesting – fear.

There is fear over low-turnout, fear about people not understanding the referendum question, fear about the lack of media coverage, fear about too much media coverage of the wrong things, fear about a slippery slope to devolution, fear about taxes, and fear about more politicians (this one is particularly scary). The fear is everywhere.

While the Yes camp attempt to give voters a vision of Wales that is youthful, bold and confident they can sometimes come across like a drunk in a pub spoiling for a fight whilst desperately hoping his friends hold him back.

That is to say, they have a kind of dubious and changeable confidence. This is evident most clearly in their responses to True Wales. Often disproportionate, angry, and quite frankly too serious, they’ve sometimes looked frightened when in all honesty they had no reason to be.

They had no reason to be; but do they have reason now?

Those of us who two weeks ago would have gladly pledged to run through Cardiff Bay naked if there was a No vote have gone a bit quiet. After all it’s chilly in the bay in March.

Despite their fear, the efficiency, professionalism and youthfulness of Yes for Wales must be applauded. They have chalked up many victories, the most notable recent one being the Shane Williams leaflets which explain the need for a Yes vote in a clear and persuasive manner, although the accompanying broadcasts appealing to Welsh nationalism through rugby are a little embarrassing and frankly patronising, (imagine Wayne Rooney fronting the Yes to AV videos and you get the idea). However, they have been, in general, a class act – inhibited only by a singular lack of boldness, and an obsession with their opposition.

It is a testament to the lack of fear that True Wales have that they’ve managed to wrong-foot such a strong campaign. They operate with the silly confidence and bluster of an organisation thrust into the limelight, but not too bothered about having to leave it. Of course, it’s easy to be fearless when you’ve got little to lose. Whereas the Yes camp have been, to an extent at least, limited by fear; the No camp are utilising it. They are attempting to frighten voters into putting their crosses in the No box with tales of separation, more taxes and more politicians – when in truth none of those things look even remotely near the agenda.

The fact that True Wales are currently touring the country with a large inflatable pig proclaiming, ‘vote no to more taxes and politicians’ proves the truth of that well worn adage, ‘don’t trust anything written on the side of a pig’.

Regardless, no one could accuse True Wales of not being bold. But being so bold does have its risks. Anyone who has ever been involved in a grass-roots-rag-tag campaign with little money or support will know how easily things can go wrong, and true to form things have gone wrong. One of the saddest incidents of the whole campaign was the use, accidentally, of a homophobic phrase by the person who runs the True Wales Twitter account. The official True Wales stream contained the line:

“How did LA get league tables passed [sic] his PC bum chums. The thought of any competition must have PC AMs choking on their cornflakes?!?!”

This resulted in Jonathan Wilson, the True Wales campaigner and independent member of Caerphilly council who runs the Twitter feed, having to defend himself, apologise, and tell the world he is gay. Sometimes there is indeed something lost in the cut and thrust of political debate, and sometimes it’s just personal. In this case it was privacy. The extent to which this was jumped on by some opportunistic Yes politicians and columnists was unedifying and felt grubby and beneath them. The official public response from the Yes camp was in contrast spot-on; and more importantly, perhaps, it demonstrated how they should have treated True Wales all along. They told Wales Online, “We don’t want to get involved in that. We’ve got our own campaign.”

It was a too rare sign of confidence from a Yes camp that has seemed overly concerned with their slightly odd, but nevertheless compelling opponents. The remarkable achievement of True Wales (and it is an achievement both intentional, and at times profoundly not so) has been to make themselves relevant and visible in a political environment where they have no collateral and little influence. The equally remarkable failing of the Yes camp is that they’ve allowed them to do it. And worse at times have been complicit in raising their profile for them.

Fear has been a key factor in this. Too often the Yes camp have jumped at shadows, when if they’d simply have switched on the lights it would have been clear there was nothing to worry about. They’ve rarely been truly threatened on the hard core of the debate.

The fear within the Yes camp seems to have come from the cross party political unity. What many considered the Yes group’s greatest asset has in fact been its biggest problem. Cross party unity has inhibited the way in which the individual parties would have liked to have made the case for a Yes vote. They’ve had to be so controlled in order to prevent political fall-out that they’ve ended up being inflexible, and sometimes boring. They’ve lacked the boldness to take on the big issues that this referendum was always going to throw up.

Whether they like it or not, this referendum is not, and never was going to be simply about the question on the ballot paper. Indeed, there is a good argument to be made that if the debate had remained squarely about the matter on the ballot, then it would have been an awful waste of time and money.

Despite the expected low turnout and the likely narrow Yes vote that will be delivered on March 3rd there will be much to be pleased about and reflect upon post-referendum. Granted there have been many problems with the process – the lack of media coverage, the restrictive electoral commission rules, and the failure of either campaign to truly engage the public. We also have the post-referendum recriminations between the currently unified Yes parties to come, though some would argue that positioning for blame began with Peter Hain’s comments last week.

But if blame is attributed to one party or another for a No vote, or a low turnout on a Yes vote, those involved will have spectacularly missed the point. This referendum has not been, and should not be considered a failure, or an embarrassment, or a disaster of any kind. It has already given us a glimpse of a country fascinatingly divided over the big questions of devolution and still wrestling with issues of The Union and separation. A nation poised to confidently seize that which is to come, but still clinging, suspiciously, to those old comforting insecurities. It has brought into sharp relief some of the political issues that still surround devolution, remain unresolved and are too rarely debated. What we must celebrate is that a public discussion is taking place over something wider than the move to part four of the 2006 Government of Wales Act. Despite the attempts by some to prevent this discussion taking place, it is abundantly clear there is a public appetite for it, and this referendum should signal the start of a long and thorough public debate on where Wales should be heading.

The campaigners on both sides of the March 3rd argument have shown admirable stubbornness and passion in equal measure and it bodes well for future debate. Yes or No, come March 4th we will know more about Wales and its future thanks to this referendum. And that is nothing to be afraid of. On the contrary it’s something to embrace.

Recent Posts on Notebook - A selection of Independent views -

• The Debate: Should Amazon be selling Nazi flags?
• Ched Evans conviction: The internet is not the place to dispute rape
• Scotland's 50p alcohol tax: Battling health with money
• 'Videocracy' and 'Videology': Argentina's latest Falkland Islands / Malvinas stunt
• Let's talk about Death