23/07/2014 Scotland 2014

Tonight we are asking what role religion might play in the vote.

The Orange Order have been granted permission to march through

the streets of Edinburgh just five days before the referendum vote.

Will their flutes and drums actually persuade anyone to vote no?

And does religion have any place in the polling booth?

And of course we have to mention the Commonwealth Games opening ceremony.

Up to a billion TV viewers around the world are watching

Did we show them the very best of what we've got?

Religion has always been very political in Scotland.

But is politics religious these days?

The Orange Order think that parading through the streets will persuade

But will they repel more people than they attract?

The site of the Queen in union colours in Celtic Park of all places

may hold no significance of the vast majority of viewers throughout the

Commonwealth, but it is likely to cause a few right smiles in part of

Scotland. The country has worked hard to bridge the sectarian divide

but the differences can still cause tensions. That is why plans for the

Orange Order to hold a rally in Edinburgh day before the referendum

have caused such controversy. Better Together have distanced themselves

from the march, so why are the Orange Order determined to go ahead?

We have been trying to reach our members with a message of

complacency not being something to tolerate, because it is so important

to vote in this referendum, it is such a big issue. The order has not

hitherto reached out to the general public and that is what the march is

about. If it referendum relevant? It is best friend -- relevant to the

referendum. It is a largely working-class organisation. It

strikes a chord with people who the church has lost. It has a much

bigger membership than any party so it cannot really be underestimated.

Less than 1% of the Protestant population are less -- members of

the Orange Order so it is unlikely to swing the vote. But has the

campaign underestimated what the last -- influence will be? The

ministers say they will not be all to influence how we vote. But might

our votes be made up on something tangible? How much is our cultural

heritage and religious background likely to affect the way we vote? A

recent study looking at the political views of modern-day Scots

suggest a lot can be surmised from your surname. What surprised us

particularly with those people with Irish catholic surnames were far

more likely to vote yes than people with Scottish surnames. What we

believe is that even though many Irish catholic descendants would

today consider themselves Scottish, their attitudes towards England and

Westminster in particular are still very much coloured by the experience

of their forebears, going back three or four generations. Tonight's

opening ceremony shows that Scotland has come a long way from the

sectarian divisions of the past. But can we ever really separate religion

and politics? And joining me this evening is

the Church of Scotland Minister, Doug Gay, who teaches theology

at Glasgow University. The leading human rights QC,

Derek Ogg. And the cultural commentator,

Stuart Cosgrove. Thank you for joining us. Let's talk

about the Orange Order first. Do you think they will be helpful in

attracting votes to the no side or will they repel more people than may

attract? I think the Orange Order are very marginal organisation in

contemporary Scotland and they will have very little effect on the

outcome and I cannot imagine them persuading anyone at all to switch

allegiance or even really mobilising their own base particularly. Might

they actually put people off if there is a huge parade through

Edinburgh encouraging people to vote no, it could have the opposite

effect? I doubt it. I do think it will going -- it'll go over most

people's head, it will be reported, and it will be called controversial

because politicians will call it controversial. I think most people

will not care less what the Orange order and the membership thing and I

rather guess the membership made their mind up about the union flag

300 years ago rather than in the last few weeks. I don't think it

will make a difference to the vote. And if the no campaign can't get a

majority without the help of the Orange Order, they do not deserve to

win. It is very easy to dismiss the Orange Order here as irrelevant and

a tiny minority of the publishing but for those people involved with

them, it is a very important and passionate cause. Will they at least

help to get those people out to the polls? He made the point that they

have got the deep roots in micro-communities which are all the

working class communities, and there is still some connection here, and

they will be able to mobilise that small percentage of votes. But like

so much of the referendum, there are all these circuitous convictions

that go on. Ironically, the Orange Order parades that have been allowed

and tolerated by the city of Edinburgh came on the back of a

coherent argument about human rights. The idea of the human rights

legislation that they are referring to is something that the Tory party

in England wants to go back on. The only reason now that the Orange

Order can preserve their human rights to march in future is by

voting yes, therein lies the circuitous logic of this referendum.

You are speaking on a personal capacity not for the church, but

personally, do you find the Orange Order a bit embarrassing? Do I find

them embarrassing? I disagree very strongly with the position that they

take in relation to religion. In some ways, I don't think they are

particularly a religious organisation any more, based down

for a certain kind of cultural identity. -- they stand for. I think

an organisation like them that defines themselves largely about

what they are against as much as by what they are for is not something

that the Church of Scotland, I think they have distanced themselves very

strongly for many decades from the values and positions of the Orange

Order. If we had been having this conversation 20 years ago it would

be very different, and we would not be writing of the Orange Order is a

tiny minority organisation. Has Scotland moved past sectarianism,

are we in a post-sectarian Scotland? I don't think we should

take this on to sectarianism, rather we should be talking about the

individual religious organisations and their influence. It is a too big

situation to mix up. 20 or 30 years ago, every church in Scotland would

have had a say on this, every church in Scotland would be seeking

political influence in politics, much more directly and effectively

than they have now. I remember the Church of Scotland's role, the

Catholic Church's role in making sure the 1967 act which legalised

homosexuality in England and Wales did not happen in Scotland because

they said they had a much different cultural identity. The church used

to directly lead in politics, all of them peddling their particularly

line and take on human rights. And they do not have that influence,

thank goodness, nowadays. I think that no more does the Acra one has

that insolence, no more -- no more does the Orange order have that

influence, no model any influences from the church. I think the Church

of Scotland is divided down the middle on this, there are very

strong opinions on both sides of the argument. What we have tried to do

within the Church of Scotland, we have tried to ensure there is a good

conversation at the National conversation has been one of the

really positive features of this referendum debate. People have

turned out in unprecedented numbers at town hall meetings, many

organised by churches, as many hustings are at general elections.

People have come out and had powerful conversations about the

kind of society that they want to live in. To many people in

Scotland, despite what Derek says, that vision of the good society is

not informed by their religious beliefs and convictions. Do you seek

religion playing a different role in Scotland than it did a generation

ago? Vary much so, we now know we are in end increasingly secular

society, and the secularisation of our society has meant that some of

the kind of codes of behaviour that once tied us to religion... A good

example would be in the catholic faith, where there was a

presumption, and it was well held until 20 years ago, that the Labour

Party constituted a party that was to some extent protective of the

Catholics as a minority in Scotland, and many people had come

in from Italy or Poland or particularly Ireland, and there was

a presumption somehow that the Catholic Church was coherent around

a policy of protection. A lot of that has died away now. I think the

secularisation of Scottish life means the referendum has barely been

touched by religion in that way. I do not disagree that religion can

have conversations, but many of the conversations I witnessed in public

events and online are things to do with compassion and tolerance, they

are to do with how Scotland will be organised as a more equal society.

All of which, of course, religion cares about, but they are also

issues that people who are not religious care about as well. That

question about the Catholic vote is fascinating, because that is what

Paul Intel up -- polling tells us, years ago many more did not want to

vote for independence. There was it was assumed a fear that an

independent Scotland would be governed by some kind of Protestant

majority that would be unkind orders grew military about a Catholic

minority. Now we see Catholics in positions across public life in

Scotland, that they have gone. That is a positive statement about modern

Scotland that there is nothing to fear about being Catholics. Some

organisations have led without dividing on morality and so on. They

have taken a strong line on women's rights, on all forms of bigotry in

Scotland and intolerance. I think the presence of secularisation does

not mean the absence of morality. The history of socialism in Scotland

tells you that, it is all about that. Good people can still be good

people, good Scots, irrespective of which if any church you go to. And I

go to none but I still hope I am a decent contributing member of

society. The governments of this country we have had, Labour and

SNP, can take a Crescent -- credit for that. The church does not want

to claim any man -- monopoly on people's thinking on morality. We

have had also 20 years of churches working together more closely. The

fight against sectarianism has been led off by the churches and the

ecumenical movement, and people working together and building

relationships at grassroots. Talking about the Catholic vote, is there

such a thing? Is it that there is now is limp, Jewish and Hindi vote?

-- eight Muslim? We know from significant people within the no

camp, I think there is a battle for the soul of the Asian population of

Scotland going on as we speak. Those things will matter. I think people

test it, I cannot speak for people within the south side of Glasgow

Asian communities, but certainly within my own life, I noticed that

people are more likely to believe a politician that is close to them,

that shares lifestyles with them, lives in the same community with

them. That is not unique to multiculturalism, that is something

people have wanted throughout, they want politicians to be closer to

them. If that means closer to a multicultural community, so be it.

The Church of Scotland are staying out of the referendum debate but

they have said that come September 19, they will step in if there is a

role to soothe people 's feelings. How will that work? It is wrong to

say that they are staying out of the debate, there was a high profile

event where myself and Douglas Alexander put opposite feelings

across. They are actively involved and they have done a lot of events

across Scotland. They also recognise that it is a divisive debate and one

of the things that the church cares about is reconciliation across

society, people having a respectful dialogue and going forward in a

spirit of reconciliation. Because this is a divisive process, we know

that, within our families and friendship groups, people are on

opposite sides. The church wants to play a positive role. We have to

leave it there. Now, thanks very much for watching

us whilst the Commonwealth Games opening ceremony is coming to

a close on the other side. We appreciate your loyalty to

the programme, or possibly your determination to

avoid coverage of the extravaganza. So we are going to reward you with

a quick look at all the best bits Come on in and meet the people of

Glasgow. Some of the highlights of the

opening of the Commonwealth Games tonight. Our very own Jonathan

Sutherland is outside Celtic Park for us right now. Tell us how people

have been reacting to for us right now. Tell us how people

Appleman bulging out of a giant Celt, tonight was your lucky night.

As always with these things, always a huge twitter explosion.

As always with these things, always or what? I do not think that will go

down well for those performers behind the camera. Some irony. The

fireworks now just going off overhead. The opening ceremony going

on for another 15 minutes or so. The talking point will be happy got the

tone right. And Jonathan will be live on the programme every night of

the Commonwealth Games. Now, let's take a look at what is making

headlines around the rest of the world tonight. The South China

morning Post reports a plane has crashed after an emergency landing

in Taiwan's killing 40 people. Explosions have ripped through the

northern Nigeria city. A human rights official condemned Israel in

the Gaza Strip saying war crimes may have been committed. Back again, is

Stuart Cosgrove the cultural critic, and the film critic from the Herald,

Alison Rowat. Did you like it? I did, it had to appeal to a lot of

audiences, national, international, most importantly Glasgow as well.

The start was quite shaky, a lot of people would not have

Unicef element, and Ewan McGregor came on at the start. That was very

interesting, no one has ever used an opening ceremony for a fundraising

effort. I think it also kept reminding you of how diverse and

socially diverse the Commonwealth remains, they have profound social

problems in parts of the Commonwealth, Scotland has as well.

Sachin Tendulkar was there, he is a God in India, and they kept talking

about a billion audience around the world, most of those were in India,

they had the biggest star in India, and we are talking about John Baron

Mark -- John -- John Barrowman? Get a life! We have an incredible chance

and an historic opportunity to show the world was huge difference we can

all make when we act as one to put children first. A genuine sporting

superstar who would have been recognised by people watching

overseas. It reminds us that a lot of this was aimed at people who were

watching overseas. We get the jokes about the teacakes and the Scottie

dogs, will anybody have understood it anywhere else? No! On that level

it failed. Then again, look at the international reaction to London

2012. People all over the world were puzzled about, people jumping in and

out of beds and stovepipe hats, what on earth is all that about. They are

trying to set a general picture, I think the teacakes, at least people

would have laughed at it. What London 2012 did do, even though it

may not have been appreciated that well, it told the story of what

Britain is for British itself. What story was Scotland telling to its

after night? I thought the Danny Boyle Olympics, I was less convinced

by that as well. I have to confess that I was not one of those people

that thought it was the most godlike thing in the world. I thought it

told of very highly partial and selective story of Britain. In that

sense I felt it was quite thin as well. It held a story though. It

did, but the cohesion was, I think it kicked in after in the 1940s,

with the rise of the NHS. The modern story of Britain. But it did not

talk about the fractured Britain, it did not talk about the riots, there

was a lot of things we did not talk about, it was highly selective. I

think this is highly selective as well. It was selecting imagery. It

was a thing about the images that you may know all trade in Scotland,

hence the tartan and the Timex teacakes and those things. I think

the bits of Scotland that I care less about, and some of the

imaginative things that Scotland can be, there was a little bit of me

saying, when are they going to blow up the flats? That is a good idea! A

lot of people on Twitter said suddenly blowing up the flats did

not look like such a bad idea after all if you have got to watch John

Barrowman instead! It was not a very modern Scotland. It was containing a

gay kiss, but it did not feel very forward-looking, multicultural,

technological, it was very pretty cool. -- body doing. -- Brigadoon.

The Scottie dogs, people were doing and dying. I think if you are a

breeder now, you are going to say, people are going to want to Scottie

dog tomorrow! You are rubbing your hands! Everybody says, we will not

talk about politics, during the referendum, the First Minister has a

self-denying ordinance. We cannot resist talking about politics. Here

we are, weeks away from a referendum and we have a billion people

watching the story of Scotland describing itself to the world. Was

it a nationalist or Unionist vision, or neither? I think it was a modern

compromise. I felt the ceremony was hugely comprised. I don't think

there was any great gusto for the God save the Queen, there was a lot

of embarrassment, not just the Monica herself, but actually in the

stadium. I do not it was a great version of it. You felt as if it was

there because it has to be there rather than anyone had any great

wheel. It is not Scotland's National anthem so why it was there I don't

know, I suppose it is because the Queen is the head of the

Commonwealth. You got the feeling that this was an event in Scotland

shaped by compromises. We scored with Scotland team come on in the

end, get a huge team -- cheer from the crowd, what did you think of the

tartan in the end? It did not seem as bad as it did in the cold light

of day when it was first unrevealed. Excited about the games

now you are over the opening ceremony? I thought it struck quite

a lot international tone, the Unicef thing helped. We are welcoming

visitors. It set a nice friendly atmosphere. Thank you both very much

for coming in. That is it from us tonight. Thank you for watching,

we'll be back again same time tomorrow night, join then. -- join

me then.