:00:07. > :00:17.action not words, and consensus is easily a thing from politicians.
:00:17. > :00:25.Good evening. We are talking war around religion. Next year we
:00:25. > :00:27.remember the sacrifices from the great War, but some say we should
:00:27. > :00:33.remember the pacifists and socialists that opposed the
:00:33. > :00:37.conflict. We will be reflecting on the role of organised religion and
:00:37. > :00:40.Scottish public life. 2014, isn't just about how you will
:00:40. > :00:45.vote in the independence referendum, it's also about how you will
:00:45. > :00:48.remember. That is, how you will remember the centenary of the
:00:48. > :00:51.outbreak of the First World War. The Scottish government has its own
:00:51. > :00:56.advisory panel, but an Alternative Commemoration Committee has been set
:00:56. > :00:59.up under the auspices of the left-leaning Jimmy Reid Foundation.
:00:59. > :01:02.It has concerns about the nature of the commemorations and today it
:01:02. > :01:12.called for a plaque to mark pacifists, socialists and others who
:01:12. > :01:15.opposed the war. Andrew Black reports.
:01:15. > :01:22.The human toll of the great War is something we are not ever likely to
:01:22. > :01:32.forget. Total casualties of more than 30 million people made it one
:01:32. > :01:32.
:01:32. > :01:39.of the world's bloodiest conflicts. As the 11th hour of the 11th day of
:01:39. > :01:44.the 11th month approaches, we gather to make our acts of remembrance.
:01:44. > :01:49.Every year, those who died are remembered up and down the country.
:01:49. > :01:55.For many, the event itself was regarded as a victory over an enemy.
:01:55. > :02:02.To others, and unnecessary conflict which laid the foundations for the
:02:02. > :02:07.Second World War. Ahead of the centenary, the first minister
:02:07. > :02:13.announced a series of commemoration events. As well as marking the
:02:13. > :02:20.beginning and end of the war, there is the anniversary of the Battle of
:02:20. > :02:25.Lewes. It was the largest British offensive mounted on a Western front
:02:25. > :02:32.and half the casualties were Scottish. Countless towns and
:02:32. > :02:35.villages paid a heavy price and here in Lanarkshire, it was no different.
:02:35. > :02:43.This memorial stands as a permanent tribute to those who gave their
:02:43. > :02:50.lives for their country. What about those who opposed the outbreak of
:02:50. > :02:53.war? As the centenary approaches, the left-wing think tank Jimmy Reid
:02:53. > :03:00.Foundation has asked Glasgow City Council to elect a plaque to
:03:00. > :03:03.commemorate those who spoke out against it. The government has
:03:03. > :03:07.decided to spend �50 million commemorating an appalling and
:03:07. > :03:13.disastrous war. We want to make sure the true story is told and does not
:03:13. > :03:19.become glamorised. We thought it was important to get a recognition of
:03:19. > :03:23.the people who had the foresight and courage to oppose this war, and the
:03:23. > :03:28.many outstanding figures in Glasgow particularly in the labour movement
:03:28. > :03:36.but also liberals, who fought against the war right through the
:03:36. > :03:41.period. Among the historical Glasgow figures the commemoration says are
:03:41. > :03:49.worthy of recognition are merely barber, one of the city's first
:03:49. > :03:56.female magistrates. John Wheatley, the former miner turned politician
:03:56. > :04:02.who fought against military conscription. Is this in danger of
:04:02. > :04:08.insulting the memory of the war dead? There will be many people
:04:08. > :04:13.expressing genuine compassion for the appalling suffering, but what we
:04:13. > :04:21.have to question as was the war necessary? Was the sacrifice of
:04:21. > :04:23.those millions of young men necessary and what did achieve?
:04:23. > :04:30.of the commemoration events is likely to be held at Glasgow
:04:30. > :04:36.Cathedral. Both the Scottish and UK governments say these kind of events
:04:36. > :04:43.are in no sense a commemoration -- a celebration but a commemoration of a
:04:43. > :04:46.devastating conflict. Will we eventually see a permanent tribute
:04:46. > :04:48.for those who were against? I'm joined now here in Glasgow by
:04:48. > :04:51.Professor Neil Davidson of Strathclyde University, who's a
:04:51. > :04:54.member of the alternative commemoration committee, who were
:04:54. > :04:57.calling for the Glasgow plaque. And in Edinburgh is Magnus Linklater,
:04:57. > :05:07.who's a member of the Scottish Government's panel for the First
:05:07. > :05:09.
:05:09. > :05:14.World War commemorations. Presumably the main point is that should not be
:05:14. > :05:19.a plaque for those who opposed, but the whole thing should be
:05:19. > :05:27.commemorated in a different way from the official proposals? It is the
:05:27. > :05:34.complexity of the issue. We do not think it will be an open celebration
:05:34. > :05:41.of militarism. The reason why the war was fought in the first place,
:05:41. > :05:49.and it is difficult to do that in an equal weight. The Cameron government
:05:49. > :05:54.is spending a lot of money on this and I would be very surprised they
:05:54. > :05:59.would argue for a certain kind of notion of Britishness, tied up with
:05:59. > :06:06.what appeals. We think that has to be raised. There's the notion of
:06:06. > :06:13.sacrifice. Respecting the sacrifice and the people who died. It can
:06:13. > :06:17.become a way of justifying war. In some ways, the first worldwide as
:06:17. > :06:27.contemporary whoppers and a lot of the shape of the world comes out of
:06:27. > :06:35.
:06:35. > :06:41.it. -- contemporary with us. Do you agree with that? I do not actually
:06:41. > :06:44.disagree with any of that at all. There has been a lot of debate as to
:06:44. > :06:50.whether the outbreak of such a terrible war should be commemorated
:06:50. > :06:58.at all. Should it be marked and if it says how should it be done?
:06:58. > :07:03.Everybody agrees it has an opportunity for looking hard at why
:07:03. > :07:09.the war happened in the first place and what might have been done to
:07:09. > :07:14.prevent it, whether they are lessons to be learned. Is there anything
:07:14. > :07:18.planned for the official celebrations that will do that?
:07:18. > :07:26.whole point of having a panel is to look at the various aspects of the
:07:26. > :07:32.war and the reasons for it and to try to get more people involved in
:07:32. > :07:38.looking at that his study and understanding it. There is nothing
:07:38. > :07:45.triumphalist about it at all. The opposition to the ward is a very
:07:45. > :07:52.important part the story. What did you mean when you said, you are
:07:52. > :07:56.trying to make a point about the politics of the referendum...?
:07:56. > :07:59.Jimmy Reid Foundation does not have a position on independence but we
:07:59. > :08:03.are concerned about presenting notions of Britishness and
:08:03. > :08:13.Scottishness which tie and very much with Britain's militarily and
:08:13. > :08:15.
:08:15. > :08:19.imperial past. I suspect some of this will be used generally by the
:08:19. > :08:26.government as a way of intervening in directly in the referendum. In
:08:26. > :08:36.what way? They are a number of ways you can present Britishness and
:08:36. > :08:36.
:08:36. > :08:43.Scotland's role in it. One way is the Labour movement. I suspect it
:08:43. > :08:49.will be more about the sacrifice and the sheer struggle in Europe. That
:08:49. > :08:56.feeds into a notion of were Scotland fits into Britain which I think is
:08:56. > :09:01.the reactionary and very suspect. They've is very charged debate when
:09:01. > :09:07.people talk about what Scottishness means. I do not think that can be
:09:07. > :09:13.avoided by not talking about it. This has to be brought into the
:09:13. > :09:17.discussion and for many people it has an imperialist war. I am
:09:17. > :09:22.encouraged that he is saying this is part of the debate. Hang on, let's
:09:22. > :09:31.get him another chance. Are you worried that this could become
:09:31. > :09:39.politically charged? I do not think so. We have not in our discussions
:09:39. > :09:44.held any question of that at all. I know Alex Salmond is keen that it is
:09:44. > :09:50.properly commemorated and rewrites tones should be struck. I do not
:09:50. > :09:58.think you can avoid the issue that a huge number of Scots enlisted at the
:09:58. > :10:04.outbreak of war. The total is nearly 700,000 which is enormous. That
:10:04. > :10:10.included my father who enlisted in 1917, and that is after three years
:10:10. > :10:13.of war were presumably the ports of the casualties were getting back.
:10:13. > :10:21.People were still in listing with huge enthusiasm in Scottish
:10:21. > :10:26.battalions, under a British flag. You can make something political of
:10:26. > :10:35.that but I have not heard any of that really in the discussion so
:10:35. > :10:44.far. Are you worrying unnecessarily? Is there a danger of glorifying
:10:44. > :10:48.militarism? I remember when the film O what a lovely War came out and it
:10:48. > :10:58.was about the nature of the way the film was made rather than because
:10:58. > :10:59.
:10:59. > :11:02.anyone objectives to saying the First World War was a disaster.
:11:02. > :11:12.There has been an argument revived recently that it was the fault of
:11:12. > :11:14.
:11:14. > :11:24.Germany. There was an argument that was in the Guardian that essentially
:11:24. > :11:26.
:11:26. > :11:30.said this. It isn't an argument that has gone away. But it is an argument
:11:30. > :11:36.rather than an overwhelming view. It is not the way most people would
:11:36. > :11:39.view it. I hope not that there was an argument about Europe as well.
:11:39. > :11:46.There is a way in which the arguments can be focused and become
:11:46. > :11:48.politics. Thank you both very much indeed. Does sectarianism still
:11:48. > :11:53.dominate Scottish social and political behaviour, and is there
:11:53. > :11:55.reason to believe it's got worse since devolution? A book's just been
:11:55. > :11:57.published on these themes, arguing that Scotland is troubled
:11:57. > :12:00.particularly by the retreat of organised religion, from public
:12:00. > :12:10.life, since there has been no alternative ethical guide to replace
:12:10. > :12:16.
:12:16. > :12:21.it. Professor Tom Gallaher is sceptical about Scottish home rule
:12:21. > :12:26.and criticises the Scottish Parliament for what he sees as a
:12:26. > :12:33.failure in its short life to reflect the ethical views of the people of
:12:33. > :12:38.Scotland. His book explores the history of sectarianism and argues
:12:38. > :12:42.that the Roman Catholic Church has been marginalised and ignored in a
:12:42. > :12:47.view towards a secular society. He reckons that as a bad thing. He
:12:47. > :12:54.examines the way the Scottish Parliament has dealt with some
:12:54. > :12:57.issues, from the section 28 debate to the recent decision to legislate
:12:57. > :13:03.for same-sex marriage. He mentions the case of the Catholic midwives
:13:03. > :13:09.who did not wish to participate professionally in supervising, and
:13:09. > :13:14.the case of the Catholic Fire man who didn't wish to participate in
:13:14. > :13:24.March. He criticises the monolithic nature of Scottish discourse.
:13:24. > :13:25.
:13:25. > :13:31.Basically, the liberal consensus rules in the liberal elite. He says
:13:31. > :13:36.175 MPs opposed the same-sex rule. In Holyrood it was a handful. The
:13:36. > :13:42.professor fears that Catholic education is in danger and lists
:13:42. > :13:48.some significant public figures, including people from Labour and the
:13:48. > :13:52.Liberal Democrats, who have given voice to the idea that education is
:13:52. > :14:00.part of the idea of sectarianism in wider society. Professor Tom
:14:00. > :14:06.Gallagher joins me now from Edinburgh. I read some of your book
:14:06. > :14:10.and I think I understood the problem about liberal democracies and giving
:14:10. > :14:15.people more guidance on how to live. I didn't understand why you think
:14:15. > :14:25.the problem is worse in Scotland than it is in England. England is a
:14:25. > :14:26.
:14:26. > :14:29.big country and you have different perspectives vying for influence.
:14:29. > :14:36.The position, unfortunate, is different in Scotland. It is a small
:14:36. > :14:41.and managed country. You have a series of ideologies that have
:14:41. > :14:50.prevailed. You have a Presbyterian one after the Scottish Reformation,
:14:50. > :15:00.and you have a hard-nosed Catholic one. You do have a moralising
:15:00. > :15:02.
:15:02. > :15:06.liberal agenda where a lot of people believe that they are improving the
:15:06. > :15:15.quality of life for everyone in Scotland is, and that anyone who
:15:15. > :15:24.disagrees with this is a bit flaky, maybe like me! To give you an
:15:24. > :15:31.example, you have a debate on the same-sex marriage. There was a large
:15:31. > :15:38.number of MPs in Westminster, in the House of Commons, who voted against
:15:38. > :15:45.it but hardly any did in Scotland, is that the sort of thing? That is
:15:45. > :15:55.the perfect analogy. The idea that you have to do assemble behind the
:15:55. > :15:55.
:15:55. > :16:05.orthodoxy of the moment, rather than having a really deep... Alex Salmond
:16:05. > :16:11.would say, hang on, I would have two fend off a campaign led by one of my
:16:11. > :16:15.predecessors, so I did have problems and I did have to take on the
:16:15. > :16:23.opposition to get this through. Okay, it might be because Labour and
:16:23. > :16:30.the SNP have similar views on this. I don't think Alex Salmond had any
:16:31. > :16:40.sleepless nights over this. Very few are troubled by the arrival of
:16:41. > :16:46.
:16:46. > :16:52.same-sex marriage. I mean, it is remarkable because the call when
:16:52. > :17:02.devolution came was not to be like the stuffy Parliament. You had a
:17:02. > :17:04.
:17:04. > :17:12.thousand voices expressing themselves. When these major issues,
:17:12. > :17:17.along then there is nobody breaking the party line. What is the other
:17:17. > :17:21.side of this? Incidentally, just on this, are you saying that you are
:17:21. > :17:27.against same-sex marriage? Or are you saying that you regret the fact
:17:27. > :17:31.that there is not a broad-based debate on it? I am a gay man myself
:17:31. > :17:37.and I have been in a long-term relationship. It does not do
:17:37. > :17:41.anything for me. Gay people regard this as a quango driven... I am
:17:41. > :17:47.sorry to jump in, but I want to hear the other side of this. Are you
:17:47. > :17:54.suggesting that we have to find some way of bringing religion back into
:17:54. > :18:02.public life? That is the bit I did not understand. The obvious remark
:18:02. > :18:07.on reading it is that Scotland is a secular society. You can like or
:18:07. > :18:17.dislike that but that is the way it is. I would like to see in achieving
:18:17. > :18:21.
:18:21. > :18:27.a Deas is moving into the community -- at atheism. Christianity did this
:18:27. > :18:30.over a long period and made Scotland a more humane place. They also went
:18:30. > :18:38.out into the place with the missionary efforts, particularly
:18:38. > :18:41.with the Church of Scotland. So far, I don't think the humanist and
:18:41. > :18:47.secular people, who are in the driving seat, have equalled or
:18:47. > :18:57.surpassed what Christianity did in cleaning up some of the suffering or
:18:57. > :18:57.
:18:57. > :19:07.abuses in society. Thank you for coming in. The Scotsman leads with
:19:07. > :19:10.
:19:10. > :19:20.the comments of Mark Carney. The Daily Mail talks about drinkers'
:19:20. > :19:25.