My name is Ernie Macmillan. I am an undecided vote for the Scottish Referendum.
I grew up, for the most part, abroad. My father was and continues to be a dedicated researcher of tropical flora and fauna, and my mother, an adventurous sort, was happy to trek the jungles alongside him with child in tow. Scotland, to me, was the place we returned every winter for the holidays, for the New Year, for my birthday. It held the same sort of fascination and wonder to me that I think Tahiti must have, or Middle Earth, to other people; the way the snow fell on the green hills, the way it smells after a rain storm, the way water crashes against the cliffs - it seemed an extraordinary place, a magical place. My opinions were certainly not dissuaded from that point with my attendance at Hogwarts, nor has it since leaving there.
As such, part of me can see why people are excited to vote yes on the Referendum. There is something about this country that begs, if not independence, then the freedom of its convictions. It's a hard thing to quantify; rather, it's something to be felt. The idea that there would be people in London to act as physical buffers to maintain this sense of home is an easy one to like; it drives deep into our shared history, embedded in our psyches.
But I'm a pureblood wizard that lives in a castle and has a financial stake in a Quidditch team. Money, legacy and opportunity have influenced a lot of my life and opinions, and it's knowing that that makes me hesitate. My version of Scotland isn't everyone's, but it's more likely to be promoted and represented thanks to the lineages I'm attached to. There are very real problems that face all sorts of Scots that I don't even know about and a lot of them continue due to a lack of government representation of the people experiencing them. That, you'd think, would support the idea of the Referendum - but who exactly is going to be doing the representing in the Ministry of Scottish Affairs? What face of Scotland is going to be selected? The one that Mr. Quintin opines about, dropping valorous names from the War? The one that Mr. Wood reminds us of, of those lineages with members rotting away deservedly in prison? Or maybe the one that the Pink movement would choose - straddling the whole of Scotland, Magical and Muggle? Must they be Scottish at all, or is it enough that someone be dedicated to the position?
The Minister gets to choose at his or her discretion. It baffles me though: if the great wheels of London are the ones choosing the representative, isn't that simply abdicating our choice to the same people we are saying can't adequately address the priorities of Scotland? And if we disagree on our representation at the Ministry, do we remain powerless to change them? As much as I think Minister Shacklebolt is the right man at the right time for leading Britain, we have seen enough tumult in the last few years to understand how swiftly and drastically things can change.
So here is what I'd like to know:
What happens after Aye? How will this new department get the many important visions and perspectives of Scotland collected and represented in this path forward, particularly when we have no say in who leads that effort?
For the Nay-sayers, what is our avenue to making sure that the Ministry is broadening their considerations to all of our countrymen? Isn't it worth the money to have proper study and analysis of the needs of all Scots?
Why is all of the debate happening via parchment? Surely the Prophet, perhaps in conjunction with the WWN, would be happy to sponsor a live debate where such questions could be asked by concerned voters and arguments hashed out? With near to a third of the voting population undecided on which course to pursue, I'd think this would be in the benefit of all Scots.