Scotland is still part of the Union. There are many living within her borders who may want to separate but so far she remains a part of Britain. This does not mean the majority of Scottish people do not feel a distinct national identity and the desire to express it. Recently there have been protests against the restrictions imposed in the ‘Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Bill’, currently under debate in the Scottish Parliament.

The bill aims to crack down on sectarian hooliganism, which is fair enough, but critics worry it will surpress people’s right to free speech. The first assurance the Lord Advocate gave to the outraged masses was that they would still be allowed to sing their national anthem. Why is this such an important proviso? Certainly there is no reason why singing a national anthem should inherently be interpreted as inflammatory: Scots should have the right to harmlessly express their identity this way.  But the problem with the Lord Advocate’s assurance is that Scotland doesn’t actually have an official national anthem to defend.

It seems a glaring omission that Scotland, with its famous musical tradition and distinct culture, should not have an official anthem of its own. Instead, along with the rest of Great Britain, Scots sing ‘God Save the Queen’, though many understandably feel rather uncomfortable about the imperialistic English connotations of the song.

The petition to get Scotland its own official anthem has never made it through parliament- apparently it is not considered a political priority. This seems strange considering the resources spent on promoting other aspects of cultural identity, such as raising the profile of the Scots and Gaelic languages, or installing a poet laureate. Yet the opportunity to assert a national identity in the most powerful patriotic arena of peacetime, the sports field, has been passed over. An official national anthem would be invaluable for this purpose, and would of course serve many other purposes besides.

Perhaps the neglect of the anthem question has more to do with the fact that no currently available candidate seems quite appropriate. According to a 2006 opinion poll, the most popular suggestion  is ‘Flower of Scotland’, the one currently sung at football and rugby matches. Unsurprisingly, those at Holyrood, and probably a great number of the Scottish public, are hesitant to permanantly adopt a song whose sentiment is to rise up against the English and send them all home ‘tae think again’.

During diplomatic occasions, such as the Commonwealth Games, ‘Scotland the Brave’ was preferred until 2010. But ‘Scotland the Brave’, along with another popular contender, ‘Highland Cathedral’, has more than one set of lyrics, and is better known as an instrumental piece. An instrumental anthem, like that adopted by multilingual Spain, would certainly avoid the issue of whether an English, Scots or Gaelic song should be chosen. But can a national anthem that can’t be sung along to be as effective?

After these main contenders come a host of less popular suggestions, including Alex Salmond's proposal of ‘Scotland will Flourish’ by the Corries, an 80s song preaching forgiveness of the English, and praising the nation’s farmers and shopkeepers. It was described by Aberdeen University’s head of music as ‘just a little twee’.

No wonder the Scottish parliament are reluctant to make a final decision, one they may be stuck with for centuries. It will be a matter of balancing tradition with modernity, and diplomatic versatility with popular acceptance. Such are the challenges of a newly autonomous country: challenges a separatist government should take seriously. We have seen from the protests against the Offensive Behaviour Bill that being allowed to sing even an unofficial anthem is important to the people. Trivial as it may seem, giving Scotland a means to unite with a common voice could go some way towards giving Alex Salmond a result he could sing about in the coming separation referendum.