Double vision blog: The In – Out Hokey Cokey

When a country like the UK with a long history of independence and strength debates whether it should change its national anthem, it indicates something more complex than a new tune and some fresh lyrics brewing in our tea cups.

Our current national anthem was first sung in September 1745 at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane as a patriotic and rallying symbol to support the King George II when his army had been defeated at Prestonpans near Edinburgh by the 'Young Pretender' to the British Throne, a Jacobite known as Bonnie Prince Charlie.

Since then it hasn't been altered for substituting “God save our gracious 'King or Queen” where appropriate and dropping some tactless anti Scottish sentiment in the second verse. It's tune has been adopted by several other countries and used by around 140 composers including Beethoven and Hayden.

Recent suggestions for a new anthem included Morrissey's, lead singer of The Smiths song “Heaven Knows I'm miserable now” and Monty Python's “Always look on the bright side of life” which I suppose indicates that the British sense of humour is alive and well.

The rumblings about the UK national anthem in early January were linked to sporting events; England v Scotland or v Wales who both have regional anthems. Northern Ireland does not have its own and England chooses from a couple of songs; Jerusalem and England, land of hope and glory.

This small but emotive debate has expanded to become a bugle alarm entwined with the In or Out Question of Britain's membership of the EU. As Spring advances the debate, like the weather, is warming up.

What it all boils down to is that we are feeling insecure about our identity and our borders. We are concerned about fragmenting from Europe and yet we wish to make our own democratic decisions without interference.

Those of us born in the 1950' s and 60's have lived with the result of the last referendum on Europe in the 1970's by our parents vote. Our vote this year will affect the future lives of the children of my generation far more than it will ourselves over time.

With this thought in mind I asked my friend's 12 year old daughter Lulu to tell me what she thought the E.U debate was about and what did she know about The Commonwealth.

Her responses surprised me a little as I expected her to represent the modern 'Global Village' view of the world, as opposed to my weary, tainted view of an oppressive bunch of unelected bureaucrats inflicting diktats on us.

Lulu feels English first and British rather than European and thinks the main purpose of the EU is so that we can trade with each other and travel about easily. She worries that we won't be able to do this if we leave and although she knows the Commonwealth is connected with countries that Britain used to own, she doesn't have much knowledge of what it's purpose is other than the Commonwealth Games.

Lulu is smart and asks lots of thoughtful questions and the reason she doesn't know much about the Commonwealth is because sadly it is hardly ever mentioned outside sporting events. In fact the Commonwealth comprises 53 countries, across all six inhabited continents. With a combined population of 2.1 billion people it is almost a third of the world population, of which 1.26 billion live in India and 94% live in Asia and Africa combined. It's is a much bigger and more diverse market than the EU and we aren't making the most of it.

Overall she would prefer that Britain's identity remains individual as a Sovereign nation and does not merge to become a state in a European version of the USA in 'ever closer union'.

I think the human scale still applies to all our identities in the world and we are not inclined to be part of one enormous ant heap all working with a common purpose; we still prefer to be identified as individual nations with our own national anthems and flags. Hip hip, hooray!

The opinion of the author may not coincide with the position of BBC Ukrainian.

Українська версія блогу - тут.