'The real Gordon'
There has been a slightly surreal atmosphere here at the Labour conference in Manchester.
Indeed, one delegate suggested to me that perhaps the Large Hadron Collider had actually obliterated the planet, tipping the party had into a parallel universe - one in which the economy was fine and Labour was reviving in the polls.
Gordon Brown's speech returned them to earth. This was a serious, sober-minded assessment of the party's problems and challenges.
I sought a response from Scots MPs and MSPs afterwards. All praised the performance warmly. Some seemed relieved.
One called it "the real Gordon". One said the dissenters should now "shut up". One sounded surprised that the conference had passed without more trouble.
One suggested, wryly, that the PM might now care to repeat the message, personally, on the streets of Glenrothes.
From Scottish Labour, formally, an intriguing message: again, I feel sure, a portent of more to come.
Government 'failings'
In a minor blizzard of news releases, sundry Labour MSPs suggested that the SNP might care to match, for Scotland, the PM's announcements in devolved areas for England: including crime, nursery care and the rest.
I suppose the SNP might now respond that the PM should, for example, go further than he did in his speech and offer the objective of entirely free prescriptions.
To be frank, I am not sure this is an entirely productive line of argument. It is reasonable for Labour to point out what they believe to be failings in the Scottish Government's programme.
But demanding the implementation of each and every announcement that affects England rather vitiates the concept of devolved power.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~13~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
You are right Brian these Labour numpties are living in a parallel universe to the rest of us.
Brown's speech was the same old, same old touched with an appeal to 'Middle England'; it, in reality, deserved the ghost town, tumble bush response Ian Gray received from conference.
Will it worry Wee Eck? Doubt it; Labour's only plan in Scotland is to be angry about anything the SNP do whether they agree or not.
Were there any new ideas? Again no just a rehash of stuff that has not happened since last year.
Will it save the loss of Glenrothes - given this speech and Ian Gray's lack lustre performance yesterday - I don't think so.
The failure of Labour to act against Wendy and Marshall still is an open running sore. The HBOS merger could yet turn into a toxic cancer for Labour as more and more institutional investors question the Lloyds tsb share dealings over the last week and the possible use of HBOS shares held by underwriters being loaned to the Hedge Funds to lower HBOS share price further.
Then there is Darling's role in HBOS and the indication he has known about this proposed merger for a while so is this just a done deal hidden in a good time to hide bad news?
Responses to 'Have Your Say' indicate very few posters have bought Gordon's speech as anything more than a pig in a poke.
Complain about this comment
I believe Gordon Brown is not a leader but was an excellent chancellor.
Therefore in this current climate, he would be best suited to returning to Number 11 with his "prudent" attitudes he freely abandoned as prime minister and allowing someone with vision to lead the country.
Oh I forgot that would be putting public service before self interest - how silly of me.
"This is no time for a novice is so true" - think Alistair Darling.
As for another Labour prophecy - "Things can only get better". Yup, I believe that now!
Complain about this comment
I actually think Gordon Brown is a mostly honest, mostly decent and mostly competent man; and - by the standards of the past fifty years - a reasonably good Prime Minister. Unlike Heath, Callaghan and Major, he hasn't completely lost control of parliament and of the country. Unlike Thatcher he hasn't wilfully destroyed our manufacturing industry, or embroiled his family in corrupt arms deals. Unlike Blair he hasn't indulged in unnecessary and irresponsible foreign wars. He seems less cynical and manipulative than Wilson, but perhaps that's only because he's less able.
I think he has suffered from being too arrogant and too persuaded of his own cleverness - the 10p tax issue which bit him was entirely an own goal - and that, while Chancellor, he bet (wrongly as it turned out) that by pumping money into the public sector (much of it borrowed from the private sector under crippling PFI terms) he could boost public service levels so significantly as to produce long-term recognisable benefit. Again, PFI was a piece of attempted cleverness which has come back to bite him - where now is poor Prudence?
But Brown was right when he said that there are only two types of Chancellor of the Exchequer - those who get out in time, and those who don't. He got out of number 11 in time, but by moving next door to number 10 he inherited both the fallout of his own schemes and the fallout from Tony Blair's irresponsible and adventurist foreign policy.
Brown is not a bad man. He's a reasonably good man doing his best. His past year has been unlucky. Some of that bad luck is his own fault - he made a catastrophic mess of the will he, won't he election last autumn - but mostly it's been forces beyond his control.
I don't particularly want Brown back in Scotland - I don't think he has any real loyalty to Scotland. And I'm sure England doesn't particularly want to keep him. But I still think he is more unlucky than incompetent. I don't bear him any ill-will....
Mind you, I'll still be going up to Kirkcaldy to help make sure the dominie of his old school continues being a dominie and doesn't become an MP.
Complain about this comment
From the article Brian links to:
"I am all in favour of apprenticeships, but let me tell you this is no time for a novice," Mr Brown told delegates to loud applause.
Of course, some apprenticeships last 10 years and still produce a novice, eh Gordon!
At the bottom of the linked article there's an interesting snippet on Miliband. Less Tarzan, more Cheetah methinks.
Complain about this comment
Gordon is a thinker through and through - he is not a guy who opens his mouth and pronounces. This is something which the media tend not to understand as they are all desparate for 'soundbites' or whatever. But Gordon can be very dangerous.
But for someone who talks about the United Kingdom ad infinitum, there seemed to be remarkably little on the 'United Powers', but an awful lot on the domestic front of England alone. Then for the MPs to ask the Scottish Government to match it. Are they implying that the Labour MSPs are incapable of working out a policy for themselves to suit Scotland?
Yes London controlled Labour shone out brightly. This is The Policy - apply it formula.
Have they 'forgotten' about Glenrothes? And Motherwell and Wishaw(when JM escapes to Africa)?
Or given up?
Complain about this comment
Much too little, much too late. Labour have steadied their ship somwhat this week, but they shouldn't confuse the illusion of unity with what is happening in the real world. More public service industrial action, increasing home repossessesions and more people in poverty.
This all happened with G Brown in charge. While he can blame the global economic crisis, he cannot justify his actions, either in not enforcing reasonable standards on financial institutions, or in taking early action in alleviating the extreme problems many are having. This is going to get a lot worse and the measures Brown has announced so far will do little to help.
Complain about this comment
If he had sung the Telephone directory, the happy clappies would still have been ecstatic. The man is in total denial, the speech was patronising rubbish full of false claims and promises with a few downright untruths thrown in for good measure. He is surely following the wrong career path if the extracts from the average minister's sermon were anything to go by; he should seriously consider following in his father's footsteps and get himself a pulpit, or better still find a cosy parish as a missionary somewhere deep in the rainforest. As for his " no time for a novice ", when did a degree in Politics become the qualification needed to sort out the world financial crisis? He can't even sort out Britain's financial crisis.
Complain about this comment
Brian
Re the great leaders speech.
How could he be surprised at the reaction to the 10p tax fiasco
Did this great intellect, wonderful chancellor, not have the brains to work out, that 5 million people, mainly pensioners and the low paid, would be penalized for tax reductions for the better off.
Then again maybe he did know that 5 million people would be worse off, but because they were poor he just did not care.
The same numpties who were waving their order papers at the budget were now giving him a standing ovation.
Still maybe the global (Think UK and USA) problems will pass them by.
Malks1967 A great chancellor, I think not.
Complain about this comment
brian,where are these devolved regions of england?brown and his dumb mate prescott were told we DON`T want devolved regions we are a nation and want to be treated as such,come the next election that "back door"will be slammed in his face.
Complain about this comment
Wouldn't it have been more "prudent" of the PM to have announced measures relevant to the country as a whole, rather than jst to the non-devolved regions?:
Complain about this comment
3. Simon_Brooke wrote:
" Unlike Thatcher he hasn't wilfully destroyed our manufacturing industry, or embroiled his family in corrupt arms deals. Unlike Blair he hasn't indulged in unnecessary and irresponsible foreign wars."
Simon, I have some sympathy with your post, it's reasonably considered but I don't think you have it quite right:
- Manufacturing: measure manufacturing levels with 11 years ago, what do we get? A very significant drop. He did nothing to stop that drop.
- corrupt arms deals: well, not his family but he said nothing when the corruption investigation against a Saudi prince was shelved by Blair. He stood by, did and said nothing.
- wars: again, Brown stood by for all the time Blair undertook the illegal and irresponsible wars. Again he did nothing.
So, what did he do? He committed the sin of staying quiet (at the very least) and doing nothing whilst being complicit in others malevolent actions. Does that make him consciously evil? Maybe not, but doesn't exactly win him any cigars either.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown's rhetoric is as usual meaningless.
His empty promise to clean up the City comes after his 11 years of promoting greed in the markets.
His empty promise for fairness for all comes after 11 years in which poverty has increased, social mobilty has stalled, and where the vunerable will bear the brunt of an economic turn-down.
After 11 years all Gordon Brown has done is to rob the poor to make the rich richer.
Complain about this comment
lets not all blame it on brown...he was a great chancellor, Scotland is in danger of seing our thaterist friends comming back to power!
its not all brown's fault.....lets blame all the idiots in his party.....Darling....well apart from forgetting to die he's hair balack (just like he's eyebrows) he has made some policies that could make some bankrupt!
firstly, taxing all vehichles....they say they want to tackle global warming...do they honestly think that will work? its just there way of getting more money, they have done nothing to tackle climate change.....raising fuel prices and electricity bills does not make life easier, make us warm in winter, stop us driving cars to the nearest shop.
stopping subsidies for farmers....come on BIG MISTAKE....farmers cant compete with national or international trade.....without a help from subsidies especially with the high cost on fuels, which will increase food etc.
labour are all the same....talk talk talk....only react at the last minuite when they have only 1 year left next year....labour is for labour...there ideas are stupid, they cant tackle the on-going gun and knife crime in england.....do they honestly think that putting a box on the street with a poster saying "put ur knife here its bad" is going to stop knife crime? do they honestly think giving more to the unemployed lazy people of the society who live life claiming on benefits when they are healthy enough to work is going to make them want to work?
I wonder where Labour spend our tax money apart from that expensive war in Iraq.....saddam was a bad guy....but there was no point going there to make trouble...they could have finished afghanistan first......
THESE london-based governments, why do they only take action when people start complaining!!!!
tory boy david.....he always agrees... nods he's head talking with the public and the armed forces ....the only time he'll start disagreing and agreing with he's thaterist friends is when he gets his hands on Number10
Lib dems......they change there policies....can they actually make there mind up.....
Fishy boy Salmond did a great job saving HBOS jobs in Scotland.....SNP are quite a good team of politicians...not perfect but will do.....
is he the only Scottish leader with common sense?
unlike brown.....is he really scottish? oh no he says he's british....sometimes i would like to ask him What is Brittish?? apart from wales scotland and northern ireland being ruled by some goverment in London.....which is in another country called England....
in the end...labour are just as bad as tories....lib dems...well i cant trust them....
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown promised "as much as it takes" when asked to fund our illegal invasion of Iraq.
Let's not mince words. Let's not rearrange the facts. He stands accused with Blair, Bush and the lunatics that decide American foreign policy.
His speech today was desperate stuff , pressing all the usual red top buttons but almost devoid of any substance. The introduction of his wife into the pantomime quite frankly is another step in the trivialisation of serious politics in Britain.
He will get a short lift (after all the powers- that-be want to keep him in place till the next general election by which time most of the economic sh*t will have floated away) but by the end of the year he'll be dead man walking again.
A warning to nationalists who think Glenrothes is a likely gain. It doesn't really suit the powers-that-be and the unionist cause for Brown to lose Glenrothes. He might well get a fairly good press till then.
Complain about this comment
when gordon brown was chancellor and announced that he was cutting income tax to 20p in the pound, did he say that he was scrapping the 10p rate or did he announce that he was raising the 10p rate to 20p.
its all in how he said it, whether he meant to do it.
but he says that he made a mistake and that he is sorry now, but not as sorry as the poorer members of society who are now taxed another 125 pounds a year.
Complain about this comment
"But demanding the implementation of each and every announcement that affects England rather vitiates the concept of devolved power."
Good point. I thought that myself. Somebody explain it to the Labour Party.
As for a parallel universe, I thought we were already in one. Have we moved from one to another?
Complain about this comment
Not a bad speech and it does what it says on the tin, it maintains the semblance of Labour unity - at least for a while, apart from the awkward squad led by Charles Clarke who has not, as yet, found a realistic candidate to replace Brown. Milliband, by refusing to wield the knife, is slowly morphing into the Labour equivalent of Michael Portillo which means he's probably going to make a good television presenter a few years down the line.
Complain about this comment
There is definitely a parallel universe involved in politics where politicians, either aspiring or defending their position, make speeches with the help of consultants and speechwriters and critics opine whether the speaker has shown the sun how to put its hat on, or taken the first steps in committing Hari Kari, and it is treated as important or crucial.
In all my years not one speech or indeed speaker has changed the world in any way that has changed my material existence other than for the negative.
Complain about this comment
From Brown's speech -
More than a little arrogant for any one party to claim a monopoly on the moral basis of Christianity!
Complain about this comment
The only thing in his speech to benefit the people of Scotland is to abolish prescription charges...
Oh wait? Sorry... the SNP already thought of that.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2007/12/05141211
Complain about this comment
As I pointed out in the last thread, England is without a parliament of its own like Holyrood. There is growing and understandable resentment south of the border about that; the English rightly blame Labour for that situation. Rightly or wrongly they feel marginalised by this government, despite being the largest of the home nations. Devoting so much of his speech to announcing matters that will have no effect on the lives of his own constituents, to whom he is electorally accountable, has only served to highligt that anomoly, and I can tell you that it has not been lost upon a lot of English voters. I suspect that the speech, well-delivered or not, will backfire badly in middle-England, partly because of that fact, and it offered very little to the people of Scotland. Some relaunch.
Complain about this comment
Post #12 from Minuend hits the nail on the head. I seem to remember a very similar
'empty promise to clean up the city' was
given by this same 'novice' then Shadow
Chancellor Gordon Brown to the Scottish Labour Party Conference BACK IN 1995!!
If you check back in your reporter's notebook for Inverness, Brian, you
should be able to verify this quote
from Gordon Brown who called for
the setting of new standards 'both
internationally and nationally to curb
unbridled speculation' - yet it takes
the man THIRTEEN YEARS, the LOSS
OF THE BANK OF SCOTLAND and the
actions of Republicans in the States
before this novitiate Gordon Brown
does something about short selling
and boards his plane to the United
States to attend Bush's seminar on
socialism for the rich of Wall Street?
That Labour conference in 1995 was
also of course the one where Brown
and Blair formally abandoned Clause
4 Part 4 of the Labour Party in order
to appease their new friends in the
City - precisely the same good folks
now praying for the Federal Reserve
to come and bail them out as shares
in the 'commanding heights' of their
'gobal economy' hit slightly less than
commanding depths due to all those
rich socialistic 'spivs and speculators' .
The editor of 'The Red Paper on Scotland' should have seen this one coming - BUT
HE DIDN'T AND HE MUST LOSE HIS JOB!!
Complain about this comment
Och it's just typical Party Conference, back- slapping mince. Brown is dead in the water as is his very silly party.
I simply can't wait for the bye-bye-election to see further humiliation heaped upon him and all his hellish minions.
I have just watched that daft wee wummin, Ruth Kelly give her 'genuine' reason for resigning from the Cabinet. They're all mad I tell you, mad!
Complain about this comment
Entirely agree brian - I watched parts of the speech (unfortunately did not have time to watch it all) and thought it was a very good performance, possibly close to the best he could have done given his situation. It seems to me that Brown has been painted into a corner by the economic situation; he has displayed himself as the dour, uncharismatic one but with the huge intellect and undoubted ability. Unfortunately for him, events (which I don't think he can control, although I agree the 10p fiasco was the equivalent of a shotgun to the foot) have proved extremely difficult, and now his ability and intellect is doubted, leaving him simply dour. So in light of that, I would say it was a good speech.
The content was more rhetoric than substance, but that is what Brown currently needs. He has the substance (I think, anyway) but no presentation, so at least he managed that.
And yes, a foolish move to call for the same things in Scotland. Patronises the system of devolved government, and leaves them open to the laughably simple counter-charge that 'English Labour' (never seen those words before, those seen 'Scottish Labour plenty of times) should implement everything that has been done in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
His friend JK Rowling must have written this speech because it was pure fantasy.
Lets remind ourselves shall we that Brown is responsible for the record trade deficit in goods, the record increase in house prices, the record levels of household debt and as others have mentioned, the collapse in manufacturing and the loss of Scottish HQ and UK companies into foreign ownership.
He supports the Private Equity sector even though they create absolutely nothing new and has tacitly supported the mega bonus system in the City. Only a few months ago he was praising the financial services sector in Scotland.... Bet he wished he'd kept his mouth shut now!!
Complain about this comment
Some really good posts on here from Scottish Patriots and our English cousins.
Browns speech could have been condensed into just a few true words.
"Please please dont take my job from me, give me another chance even if you know its a waste of time and a danger to our countries well being etc etc......
Sorry Gordon your time is up, just do the right thing now and pee off, before you lose anymore credability. You dont have enough left to survive.
There is absolutely no chance of the three nations forgiving your complete stuff up with your mate Tony Bliar over the last 11 years. You have dragged us down to even lower levels, with little or no respect from the other nations that occupy this planet. You have bankrupted the existing UK, with your sychophantic following of the halfwit George Bush.
Go now before we the people have to take matters into our own hands. We cannot take anymore chances with our own Scottish Peoples welfare.
Scotland is moving on, so should you. How about Mars?. Its the only place that will take you in, because Scotland wont.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Re prescription charges:
I think Gordon Brown may actually have a better policy than the SNP on prescription charges.
Surely it is better and fairer to target the health resources towards those in greatest need. Universally free prescriptions is a very blunt instrument giving a little to those with much.
With this money coming out of the exisitng health budget is it really a good use of a scarce resource? Would it be better to target those in need of free prescriptions and then use the remainder of the money to improve some other area of healthcare?
Surely free prescriptions may also lead to increased demand ? Usually universally free provision leads to increased demand.
My question would be if we provide free prescriptions in Scotland what are we not providing?
Complain about this comment
26. I would not advise trying to apply the term 'patriot' to nationalists, as you appear to be doing!
Just because [the majority of] of us are against independence, does not mean we are any less proud of being Scots.
Likewise, just because we don't worship the very ground Your Great Leader walks on, doesn't make us any less proud of being Scots, much as it doesn't make us "anti-Scottish" as you nats repeatedly try to claim.
However, feel absolutely free to prove me wrong in your local pub (if you are old enough to enter, that is).
Complain about this comment
#23 ..... "that daft wee wummin".
Insulting or just plain sexist? I can't make my mind up.
The SNP and their supporters need to think long and hard about how they engage with women.
Complain about this comment
Sometimes you read these blog responses and you have to rub your eyes and blink. Did anyone really say that?
#13, dylanrees88:
Farmers are the richest people in rural Scotland, and they're that almost entirely on public subsidy. The average subsidy to a Scottish farmer is more than twice the average wage.
So who's paying those inflated subsidies? People on average and less than average wages, of course. We really are taxing the poor to pay the rich, just like in pre-revolutionary France.
Yes, our agriculture industry isn't economic. Our shipbuilding industry wasn't economic. Did we prop it up with subsidies? No. Why not? It mainly employed poor people. Our textiles industry wasn't economic. Did we prop it up with subsidies? Our steel industry? Our (Scottish) motor industry? Our mining industry?
What's different about farming? Farmers are rich, that's what's different about farming. Farmers ruinously overgraze our hills into wet deserts, catastrophically degrade our biodiversity, and litter our countryside with huge unsightly sheds... and we pay them to do it.
It's completely indefensible.
Complain about this comment
28. I totally agree.
While few would disagree with giving low-income and the long-term sick free prescriptions, a great many of us can easily afford the occasional prescription.
I would rather pay for the odd pack of pills and let my #7.10 (or whatever it is nowadays) go towards subsidising a service for someone in greater need.
In this age of increasing costs, increasing demand yet limited funding/supply, means-testing should be applied across all public services.
Complain about this comment
28 .
hopefully Tridents replacement.
I found Gordon'd speech meaningless it should have been the English Labour Party Conference.
He's been promising to fix the Old Age Pension and he hasn't, he promised to reduce means testing and he hasn't.
Labour are just depressing! And the media just support them in Scotland whatever they say.
All the old Socialists are walking around under their own personal raincloud
I'm fed up - I'm away tae put the kettle on
Complain about this comment
#30
Quite right. Some SNP supporters treat those who disagree with them with some degree of respect but the majority resort to abuse like their master. The seem to have no insight into how damaging this is for Scotland, a country that we are all prod of. Brown's speech was a mixture of good and bad, like most political speeches. However, to read some of the comments here you would get the impression that it was an act of treachery. This is what really worries me about the SNP, there is an underlying theme of intolerance in much of what their supporters write. To some extent it has become a sort of pseudo-religion where criticism of their policies and ideas is equated with heresy and countered by a torrent of abuse. The SNP hierarchy need to rid themselves of this element otherwise the reputation of Scotland for fairness and toleration will be destroyed forever. Why are you all so angry?
Complain about this comment
#30 ..... "that daft wee wummin".
'Insulting or just plain sexist? I can't make my mind up.
The SNP and their supporters need to think long and hard about how they engage with women.'
Wasn't it the other day that the Harperson said that, 'A rich man can now expect to live longer than a poor woman'?
Harman wants to put that right so that no man can expect to live longer than any woman.
Sexism isn't just the preogative of the male.
As for the SNP. Isn't the Scottish First Minister a woman?
Complain about this comment
#35
Just don't tell his wife!
:-)
Complain about this comment
#29 Reluctant_Expat,
You appear to have made a formal fallacy, namely, denying the antecedent.
Scottishrepublic did not actually state that unionists could not be patriots.
Mine's a G+T, Blackwood's, straight glass, ice and a slice of lime.
Complain about this comment
I am half-reminded of a (paraphrased) statement from one of the Noble Lord Archer's Novels. "First Amongst Equals", talking about a Tory Conference address by The Leaderine which went something along the lines of..."She could read them the first four chapters of Das Kapital, Old Boy, and they'd still give her 13 minutes". Or words to that effect.
Just sat down and read That Speech in Full. Then I printed it out and went through it with a marker pen going "Devolved Mattter....Devloved Matter......Devloved Matter".
What an arrogant man. Mr Brown, when you talk about "our" nation and all of the good things that your namechecked cabinet poodles (I was almost waiting for them to come up and high-five you when their names were called), make sure that it's the RIGHT nation.
I'm sure that the street urchins of,erm, Glenrothes rise up as one and cry thank you to, who was it again, for their computers and broadband access. Oh, Sorry, Viewers in Scotland at this point have their own regional programmes.
We're all delighted that Hazel and Caroline (Who They ? What Post ?) announced a Billion Pound Support package for millions of homeowners. First that I'd heard about it, which strongly suggests that This offer not available in Scotland.
And let's not forget that (Who is Health Secretary these days, I thought that Nicola ran Health in Northern Britain) "over the next few years the NHS generates cash savings in its drugs budget we will plough savings back into abolishing charges for all patients with long-term conditions." Um, I thought that the Scottish Government were going to abolish prescription charges here in our tartan paradise just like those naughty boys in The Principality
(Oops, marker pen out, Devolved Matter)
Has Brown actually realised that the SNP are in Government here and that London NewLabor doesn't call the shots north of the Wall anymore ?
And that, if Brian Suggests, the Northern British Branch then had their puppets pouring out a flurry of press releases "suggesting" that the Parish Council does what he says, then he can kiss Glenrothes ae fond fareweel. For starters.
Does anyone know, or is anyone offering odds, that he may well be the first serving British PM to lose his seat at a General Election ?
If he lasts that long.
Complain about this comment
30#, #34
Complaining about the use of the phrase "daft wee wummin" whilst endorsing persistent and personal character assassinations and demonising of the First Minister?
So many of these unionist posts reek of sheer hypocrisy!
Complain about this comment
#32 darwinsmonkey
An odd post.
I just re-read the posts on this thread, and nowhere could I find a "torrent of abuse" direceted against Unionists. On the contrary most of the pro-Nationalism posters gave some credit to Brown.
If you want to see real torrents of abuse, have a look at the posts on Nick Robinson's blog - mainly Tories living in England, who are the voters who will put Cameron in power.
If your stricture were appropriate, then it applies even more to the Tories!
Complain about this comment
Richard_the_Rogue,
Perhaps not, but a fair number of nationalist supporters on this board imply that you cannot support the union, and be a scottish patriot at the same time. I recall "Dougie_Dubh" using the words "enemies of Scotland" to describe those who supported the union and "Bighullabaloo" concurring with him in a fairly recent blog. See my pots that took exception to this.
In addition, "scottishrepublic" has described Scotland as being under occupation by a foreign power or words to that effect. A truly risable statement, but not uncommon on this and other boards.
Best Wishes,
William1957
Complain about this comment
From the Press Association
Complain about this comment
#41 william1957
I made that comment in specific reference to those who liberally heaped derision on the predicament of the Bank of Scotland, and who sought to represent the prospect of its demise as a boost to the unionist cause.
Sadly, this is far from being a rare example of the thinly-veiled ill-will and self-serving agenda evident in many unionist posts.
Complain about this comment
38. England has no devolved powers, still being run wholly by Westminster. So perhaps he might just have been referring to policies for dahn sarf?
Complain about this comment
Chiefy1724 #38:
Did you, I wonder, complain when Alex Salmond announced in the Scottish parliament benefits that would apply in Scotland but not in England? I somehow doubt it. Yet you compile a long list of announcements made by the PM in his speech that are devolved matters. In some of these matters, like prescription charges, England are only playing catch-up anyway, and even then not fully. You can't have it both ways. England does not have the benefit of its own parliament yet so the PM is their First Minister, and I can assure you, as I have said before, that there is growing resentment here that education, health, law and order and the rest are in the hands of man who is elected by the good people of Scotland who are themselves free of his warped and arrogant views of how things should be. Rather than complain so, you would be wise to give thanks that Scotland is not subject to his whims on such domestic matters.
Complain about this comment
#44 Expat
Of course, you are right.
From a Unionist perspective, can you suggest why UK Labour makes policy announcements for England, as if they applied to the whole UK?
I find it puzzling, and can't think why they do that.
Complain about this comment
Re 40
This is a common theme alluded to by many of the nationalists on many of the prvious blogs.
If you don't support independance then you are either English, stupid, incapable of understanding anything and a traitor to your country. If you don't support independance and ask the why question then look out it gets worse and usully personal.
there is an intolerant edge to much of what is written by the more fervent nationalists, todays is relatively calm aminly due to a couple of noteable absentees. But that is what nationalism breeds.
There is a danger that the necessary and proper debate on independance will become cloaked in a "who is for Scotland and who is against Scotland " type of argument.
there are many not convinced on the need for independance and more government. It doesn't make you anti scottish.
Complain about this comment
I don't know whether Simon Brooke #31 has ever been near a farm, but I do recall during my misspent youth one of the songs we sang under the influence of alcohol had the refrain:
"The Farmer is the man who feeds us all"
Nothing has changed since. Every scrap of feed we eat is either raised by a farmer or caught by a fisherman - and no amount of comparisons with steelworkers can alter that. Ultimately every industry in the country is expendable - but not or farmers or our fisherman and that is something the Labour partyy has never got to grips with
Complain about this comment
#35 and #36
Ooops... left out 'Deputy', didn't I?
Apologies Alex, and especially to the wife!
:)
Complain about this comment
#47 northhighlander
"there is an intolerant edge to much of what is written by the more fervent nationalists"
I wouldn't disagree with that, but it is also true that there is an intolerant edge to much of what is written by the more fervent unionists.
On both sides of the debate there are some who use intemperate language, and adopt extreme positions.
Both our sides of the debate are weakened by the extremists, so they broadly cancel each other out.
Complain about this comment
#48 Caledonian54
Was that the Pete Seeger version, or the rude one?
Complain about this comment
46. I'm sure you can look a little harder for something to complain about, that was weak.
Go on. Try again.
Complain about this comment
OldNat #46:
"From a Unionist perspective, can you suggest why UK Labour makes policy announcements for England, as if they applied to the whole UK?"
I suspect it is because Labour are aware of the growing resentment south of the border over the present devolution arrangements. It was, of course, Labour that introduced them, and Labour which refuses to counternance similar devolution powers to an English parliament to those they gifted to Holyrood. The reason for that is because without their (previously) safe Scottish seats at Westminster, it is unlikely that Labour would ever govern England again. Self-interest pure and simple. That is why he bangs on about Britishness so much of course. The last thing that Labour want to do now is to call attention to the anomalies that devolutution in its present form has created. I can tell you from my wife that every time GB says "this country" or "our country" when talking about devolved matters over which he has no say in Scotland, English teeth grate very hard.
Of course it may well be, though I rather doubt it, that Scotland may reject Labour in those previously safe seats in a general election, in which case the party could well face near total wipe-out. I just wonder if enough Scots care enough about Westminster politics now that they have their own parliament. Is a strong SNP return to Westminster likely do you think? Can the Lib Dems pick up enough of those labour seats? Or will those seats stay in Labour hands? My own money is on a stronger SNP return at Holyrood next time round, but continued Labour returns from Scotland to Westminster. My wife and her family, however, hope that you will all vote SNP at the general election, because that is the only way they think England will ever get her own parliament. It will be interesting to see.
Complain about this comment
352 Expat
I was making no complaint. It was a genuine question.
From a Nationalist perspective, I don't understand why they do that. I thought you might have a view on it.
However, anyone is free to help me understand why Labour make policy announcements for England without being specifif that they are for England onl.
Complain about this comment
Poor blog this. Probably because G Brown said nothing worth blogging about and most peolle realise the problems he is promising to fix are the problems he caused in the first place.
You never never never say in politics " I can do better"It sounds like handwringing and pleading and is, of course, an admission that you have been pretty useless to date.
G Brown's political judgement is exposed as sh*ite yet again.
He climbed a long way on carefully chosen soundbites, hiding from all problems and public scrutiny and ruining public finances in UK for a generation as he climbed, eventually getting out onto the roof while Alistair Darling got trapped in the burning house.
Under public scrutiny trapped in a set of circumstances he cannot spin he is lost.
Complain about this comment
Didn't you think there was something quintessentially out of touch about Gordon Brown's big plan to improve society by...er...connecting children to the internet.
It was a few years ago now that Tony Blair promised that every schoolchild in Britain would have their own email address, prompting me to ask my TV set who was it exactly who wanted to send emails to schoolchildren....and here we are again.
Get all those overweight and inactive deprived kids sitting on Facebook and Bebo, when they are not downloading movies (if you get my drift) or talking to strangers in chatrooms. Obviously their parents will be supervising them closely at all times, har de har. Top policy initiative.
I have the feeling that the internet and computer industries are now entering a new era in which their long-unchallenged claims are no longer believed. That actually ties in well with the Labour party, don't you think?
Complain about this comment
Dougie-Dubh@41,
Point taken. However, what kind of impression does this make on people such as me who frequent the board relatively infrequently, and for those who frequent it out of interest.
Granted the invective on this board is not as bad as that on The Scotsman or The Herald, but I wonder what people at home and abroad think when they see one contributer describing another with whom he disagrees as "an enemy of Scotland". If this is the best we can do when debating such an important issue as our country's future it bodes ill for us whether we are part of a union, or an independent country.
With best wishes as always,
William1957.
Complain about this comment
54. Probably because the conference is in England and the English make up 85% of the electorate.
Pretty big target-demographic that.
Complain about this comment
#53 Malcolm
Thanks for that. Your answer makes sense.
As to Scottish representation at Westminster, the polls suggest
Tories 3 - 4 MPs
Lib-Dems - around 10 MPs
SNP - 20 to 25 MPs
Labour - 20 to 25 MPs
Many Scots (though fewer than before) vote for Labour in Westminster rather than have a Tory Government. The balance of strength between SNP and Labour will depend on how clear it is that a Tory Government is certain due to votes in England, and then which will be better placed to "stand up for Scotland" (to use a very hackneyed phrase).
Complain about this comment
#42 oldnat
"November the 6th" will that work this time, still can't understand why we celebrate the failure of Nov 5th. Oh well!
Brown and his cohorts never realised what devolution really meant as they could never in their worst nightmares believe that they would lose control of the Scots. All he is trying to do by pandering to our southern neighbours is trying to outdo the SNP's popularity.
Complain about this comment
#39....
Can you show me where I have endorsed "persistent and personal character assassinations and demonising of the First Minister?" Mr Salmond barely gets a mention in any of my previous posts.
Unionist hypocrisy.....NO
Nationalist paranoia....???
Complain about this comment
47# northhighlander
Let's agree that BOTH the nationalist and unionist causes have no legitemate place for, and should dissociate themselves completely, from the kind of vitriol you describe.
However, I disagree with the follow-on argument that there are "many" such instances, or that nationalists are uniquely culpable.
That skewed argument, and your blanket assertions are over the top.
Neither is there any shortage of venom generated by the unionist camp - the main difference being that it is often backed by a strong tendency to moralise in such a manner as to indicate that those of that ilk believe they are somehow above reproach!
Complain about this comment
#58 Expat
Wat a strange response! I might have expected something like that from a Nationalist whose politics stemmed from grievance (yes some do still exist).
Your suggestion is that Labour portray English policies as UK wide because the English are 85% of the UK polulation would only make sense if they didn't care about the smaller counties in the UK!
I am not nearly so cynical about the UK parties as you.
My question, however, (as Malcolm realised) was about the politics of presentation.
Complain about this comment
63. Quite possibly the worst attempt at nationalist spin I have ever seen.
Complain about this comment
#47 northhighlander: I would endorse every word of your post, and oldnat's "yah boo, you do it too" just doesn't wash.
I have been happy to engage, I hope constructively and reasonably intelligently, with a number of ultra-bright opponents (eg Eoin, Simon, oldnat himself and a few others). But without naming names, some of the most stupid, paranoid, childish, self-important, illiterate, ill-informed numpty-Nats on the planet inhabit these blogs. I'm told it's worse elsewhere, but that's hard to believe.
What's the point of asking a pointed question of someone who's already pigeon-holed you as an enemy of the nation?
This attitude, which you mentioned, that anyone who opposes the FM is an ignorant traitor, is seen too frequently (albeit in different forms) to be random. It must be officially, or, more realistically, informally sanctioned.
The reason for this is self-evident: the intellectual arguments are being lost, but there is still a dullard majority susceptible to crude emotive appeals, the ultimate "them and us" argument.
I really fear for Scotland (yes, yes - the old unionist scare stories) if they ever hold sway. I really don't want to see "brother against brother" in this country.
Complain about this comment
We'll try to follow the Nordic split then.
Peaceful and easy leaving two good neighbours, one with oil and one without.
Complain about this comment
#65 brigadier
I, always, though you too sensible to construct a conspiracy theory."yah boo, you do it too" - is a complete misrepresentation of what I said.
Are you making the claim that no Unionist blogger uses intemperate language, or uses "crude emotive appeals"? (I distinctly remember one on the Olympics thread).
Complain about this comment
#65 Brigadierjohn,
Could you please define 'numpty-Nat' for me, specifically what differentiates this type of nationalist from another.
Thanks.
Complain about this comment
65. At 5:37pm on 24 Sep 2008, brigadierjohn.
a unionist wolf in sheeps clothing comes to mind.
oh what its like to be so blinkered.
you spot all the nats faults and the unionist faults go un-noticed.
sorry that post does not wash brigaderjohn, as its a unionist rant.
no points for you today.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat #59:
Interesting seeing the projection for possible Scottish Westminster seats come the next election, thankyou.
I wonder if the old "obsessesion" with ensuring that, if possible, the Tories cannot form a government at Westminster will continue to exercise Scots at the polls for much longer? After all, with Holyrood now calling the domestic shots for them, how much can a Tory UK government really impact the day to day lives of the Scottish population? A stronger SNP at Holyrood at the next Scottish election is almost certain unless something goes badly wrong for them beforehand. That can only make Westminster seem even more remote. Given Labour's recent record on foreign policy (war after war), defence policy (merging ancient Scottish regiments), environmental policy (dithering over new power sources) and now economic policy (failing banks and excesive national debt), why should they be trusted anymore by Scots than any other party on non-devolved issues?
I have little doubt that the English will vote overwhelmingly to kick out Labour at the next election. Mostly they will vote Conservative, with Lib Dems and even UKIP gaining votes at Labour's expense, maybe even a sprinkling of Greens gaining a share of the vote. It will be interesting to see how the votes north of the border are cast, and from my position living in England, will be a test of how mature the Scottish electorate are post-devolution. From an English perspective, it may seem as though the Scots have not only their own destiny in their hands at the polls, but also that of their neighbours. That is a serious responsibility.
Complain about this comment
#65 brigadierjohn
"What's the point of asking a pointed question of someone who's already pigeon-holed you as an enemy of the nation?"
Not sure which nation you're referring to, but would you not concede that (at least since the demise of Bendy Wendy) both NuLab and Tory unionists have effectively declared themselves as enemies of democracy? The wish to deny the Scottish people a referendum to determine their future national status and the determination of both those parties to continue to share Buggins' turn at Westmidden by retaining the 1872 plurality voting system is at least strong evidence to that.
"This attitude, which you mentioned, that anyone who opposes the FM is an ignorant traitor, is seen too frequently (albeit in different forms) to be random."
From your previous posts, I always understood you to be a traditionalist and thought you would rather approve of the robust traditions of the hustings of the eighteenth century, preferably enlivened further with rotten eggs and fruit.
"I really don't want to see "brother against brother" in this country."
There's the rub. A "strong" Belgrade government tried but failed to hold together a Yugoslavia long past its use-by date a couple of decades ago without taking into account the wishes of the minorities in "Greater Serbia", when a Swiss-style confederation might still have been possible. I certainly hope that the UK won't end in the same way, and suggest you note that it was Serbia that resorted to arms in that conflict.
Complain about this comment
#69 vote_nat
I think the brigadier may simply want his pal to come out to play, and is throwing stones at his window.
Complain about this comment
oldnat
i think the brigadiers gout is playing up today.
or he got out of the wrong side of the bed.
you could also say that his post livened up the blog a little as well.
Complain about this comment
#72 oldnat
LOL - you've not lost your wicked streak, I see.
Complain about this comment
#67 oldnat: I have re-read what you wrote, and took the clear impression that you were saying the intemperate "yah boo" tendencies cancelled each other out. If I have missed something in the semantics, I'm sorry.
I am too sensible to construct a conspiracy theory. I was suggesting that someone with over-active PR instincts was, let's say, failing to discourage the wilder elements in their divisive tactics. Perhaps "not discouraged" would have been better than "sanctioned."
#68 Richard: Certainly. A numpty-Nat, or any other kind of numpty, is essentially a rather stupid, unthinking clown, who will parrot any old slogan that comes along, or accept anything that seems to fit his case.
As opposed to "normal" Nats, who can argue the case, see the opponent@s viewpoint, and attempt to rationalise the differences.
#69 vote_nat: I have never once knowingly argued for the Union. I have nothing good to say about the Union, except (in my humble, misguided opinion) that it is not markedly much worse than what's on offer from the SNP. And therefore Independence, as currently offered, is not worth the upheaval and turmoil that such a change would engender.
It's always a good idea to address the points put to you, and avoid falling into the trap of saying: "Ah yes, but you lot are just as bad." I do not represent, or support, any "lot." I speak for myself and have no need to justify myself to anyone. Feel free to criticise, however. I won't cry.
I don't run away either, but I am going off to watch the football. A few more minutes.
Complain about this comment
#75 Brigadier
Sorry, I though you were putting "yah boo" in my mouth rather than referring to the type of posts that northhighlander, dougie, you. me and many others were all disparaging.
(Still think you're trying to tempt bighullaballoo into replying though)
;-)
#74 Brownedov
Welcome back. I presume you've seen the Politics Home polling in the marginals?
Complain about this comment
#71 Brownedov: Obviously, I'm an enemy of Scotland. Referendum? Democracy? I can foresee mayhem whatever the outcome. Perhaps "denying" us a vote is an act of kindness.
By all means, let's throw rotten fruit. I was talking, as you well know, about something slightly more potent.
Serbia etc: You seem concerned with: Who started it?" The cry of the street urchin. I really don't think Scotland-England have the same ethnic hatred of FYR factions. Except when stirred by fanatics, of course.
Complain about this comment
MalcolmW2 #45
I did try and reply earlier at about #60 but it seems to have disappeared into cyberspace - not even the ignominy of being moderated out !
Sorry, Old Boy, you seem to completely missed the not-too-subtle point that I was attempting to get across.
I am frankly delighted that Broon And Co down in the Westmunster Bunker have little control over our devolved matters. In fact, the longer that he clings on, every tick of the clock brings the Glorious Day closer.
What Nation was Broon talking to ? His pronouncements and distribution of largesse from the UK Treasury, (which I am obliged to contribute to for things that an Independent Scotland wants little of, like, erm, War in Iraq, Trident, etc) to our cousins in The Sarf got right up my nostrils.
Have an English Parliament. In fact, have several. Wasn't that the whole Raison d'etre of Prescott and his super-ministry ? Until the poll numbers started to wobble and Bliar realised that, much like The Parish Council, The worms would turn and that the Tories, Libs, Greens and the (several pages of very very naughty words deleted) BNP would have "power-bases" from which to attack him from.
NuLab or whatever succeeds it will be out of power for a generation. That's the way that the electoral maths works. A 146 seat majority will take three electoral cycles to overturn. IMHO, the next Labour PM hasn't even taken his or her seat in the Commons as yet.
Labour has essentially relied since the 60s on the seats from Scotland and Wales to form a government. Remove them from the equation and England will be perpetually Tory.
We don't want the return of those days.
I was young and daft enough to be a Tory during the worst years of Thatcherism. And then I went out in the real world and saw my students skipping lectures to try and pay for the education that I had had for nothing. I lost count of the times that I frogmarched one or two of them down to the canteen for a meal on me. That was in London. And when I came back to Scotland, I said, Not in My Nation.
My Nation is not Gordon Brown's Nation. Not the Nation that he was on about. Not the "computers for kids", not the "help for homeowners", not his "justice reforms". Not Trident, not Bush's lapdog. Not a nation where squaddies come home and are sequestered in squalid hospitals out of public view.
That's not my nation.
Guess what my Nation is.
Complain about this comment
More on the Miliband-Heseltine story which seems to have grown since I mentioned it in #4: Miliband rejects speech 'hearsay'. I love Miliband's defence - basically, "No, no, you didn't hear me say that".
PS For those fulminating biliously at one another...
"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause." Victor Hugo
"When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff." Cicero
Complain about this comment
We really should get the regulars on Brian's blog onto Question Time, then we can all make fools of ourselves on tv!
Seriously, the debates on the political blogs - give or take a few - are quite refreshing. At the very least it shows that there are people out there passionate about politics, even if their views are at times extreme to others or occasionally without factual basis (mine included).
But what's with the "boo yah"? It'll soon be "my dad's bigger than yours" :)
pffft...
Complain about this comment
We skip the lights fandango, did cart-wheels across the floor...........
when the re-turning officer called out the score........
Come on the labour.....get into them.....
Hi John
Complain about this comment
#80 Neil
Considering the age of many bloggers here it's more likely to be "my grandson's bigger than your's"
:-)
Complain about this comment
#76 oldnat
Thanks - just got back to relative sanity in the Jura after 3 weeks with little in the way of a politics "fix". Doesn't seem I missed much in the LibDem conference, and no real surprises in the NuLab one.
I have just downloaded the Politics Home PDF and the - probably more useful - XLS, but note that they're based on late July and early August voting intenions, so possibly a little out of date. Presumably someone is going to do a proper Glenrothes poll as soon as the date is formally announced, which should be a lot more useful, as will be the post-conference polls we can expect in 10 days or so.
Could NuLab be planning to "bury" their 3 bits of bad news together on 6 November? Good news for the Tories, if they do, I suspect. For NuLab it might just minimise their misery over a loss to the SNP in Glenrothes as it would be the unionist Tories who get the "national" headlines.
Complain about this comment
#77 brigadierjohn
Sorry that you don't trust the people to make up their own minds.
Not sure what you mean by "slightly more potent". Prescott assaulting voters, perhaps?
I agree that "Scotland-England [don't yet] have the same ethnic hatred of FYR factions". My point was that the whole thing in Yugoslavia escalated when their unionist succession became infatuated with their equivalent of "Britishness". In the UK, I can't quite see the English fighting to save the union, but then I knew Serbs and Croats who rubbed along pretty well together before their non-velvet divorce.
Complain about this comment
I thought id post something a numpty would say but i see Derek beat me to it !!
Complain about this comment
#48, Caledonian
I well remember that song. It was on a Ry Cooder tape we used to keep in the wheelhouse on the trawler I worked on in my misspent youth, and often on a night watch I'd sit up there singing along to it and watching the stars and the sea...
My grandfather was a farmer, and all his ancestors way back into history. All my uncles and most of my cousins are or were farmers. I grew up on a farm; and, given where I live, it's no surprise that many of my friends are farmers. So yes, I know fine what I'm talking about, thank you very much.
No, Scotland's farmers do not 'feed us all'. They provide a very small percentage of the food we eat, and at a simply staggering cost, whether you evaluate it in financial terms, in fuel cost, or in terms of damage to our environment.
It's true that rural economies are badly hit by an economic system geared to urban centres. But the solution to that is not to subsidise the rural elite at the expense of the rural poor.
(Oh, and, if you think I'm unkind to farmers, don't get me started on fishermen!)
Complain about this comment
#86 ... Simon ... poor farmers and fishermen .... at least they work hard for their money .... you should be shaking your fist at the likes of Tescos hell bent on shutting down all the competition and screwing the farmers with poor prices for theyre produce ... shame on you !!!
Complain about this comment
#65, 'brigadier'john
(you'll doubtless one day tell us in whose army that rank was earned) I'm be the first to agree that this blog is riddled with, and the nationalist argument undermined by, a large number of soi-disant pro-nationalists whose enthusiasm exceeds their wit.
Yet you cannot say on that basis that 'the intellectual argument has been won', by implication by the unionist side. All the weight of the intellectual evidence is on the nationalist side. Scotland is, as a nation, exactly - exactly - middle sized. There are one hundred and eleven independent nations with populations larger than Scotland, and one hundred and ten with populations smaller. Bang goes the 'too small' argument. Scotland is within the top 10% of nations in the world for GNP per capita - ignoring oil, which is a sideqhow. Bang goes the 'too poor' argument.
So what are you left with? What single argument remains standing on the Unionist side of the table? Are we too weak? There are more Scottish soldiers serving today in America's wars today than Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, and Finns put together, and they aren't too weak be independent.
Are we too stupid? Edinburgh University is ranked 47th in the world on academic ranking. We may trade a little on our grandfather's reputation when it comes to education - Scottish education certainly isn't as good as it once was - but we're no slouches.
So come on. We're not too small, not too poor, not too weak, not too stupid. What's left? What single argument can you, as a unionist, advance that Scotland should not take her place as a European nation among European nations, with a positive role to play in the world and in the affairs of our continent?
If Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus can have their own seats at Europe's top table, why can't we?
Complain about this comment
#86 Simon Brooke
Like you I don't agree with subsidy carte blanche especially with food production and especially with nuclear energy.
If we have to subsidise a basic need such as food then society has gone down the wrong path and has created a lot of very rich farmers intent on increasing that wealth to the detriment of the small scale enterprise. Just as a postscript the UK does not have enough agricultural land to sustain (about 10 million tops without oil inputs) with an ever expanding population no amount of subsidy will fill the growing void. This all creates a negative on the GDP. "
Send me a fiver it will only cost you a stamp"
Complain about this comment
Ex Pat #32 - I totally disagree.
I take medication to control high blood pressure. I will probably need to take these tablets for the rest of my days. I'm on a modest wage (less then £20) so I'm one of those that suffered for Gordie's boast that he had cut income tax (to the well off at the expence of those of less means).
However, my income is just about that level where I need to pay for my prescriptions. Every other month. And, if I need additional medication for whatever reason (I recently needed antibiotics for an ear infection), I need to pay for that on top of my regular pills. So on a recent trip to the chemist, I was £15 (and would have been more if Jack-the-lad was still in power at Holyrood.
Now, £15 might not be much to you, probably pee that against a wall most days judging by your posts, but to others that's substantial.
Complain about this comment
At last Labour MSPs have shown:
1 They do not believe in devolution
2 They are incapable of thinking for themselves
3 One day they want rid of Brown the next day they want to implement his English agenda in Scotland.
Add to this their new leader?s attack on the First Minister for having a better education than himself do we need to even ask the question, who is fit to govern in Scotland?
Complain about this comment
Just read this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7633982.stm
I am puzzled.
Salmond said our economy was robust and will ride out this credit crunch. Yet we have already lost one of our 'big two' banks and now there's this report on plummeting confidence throughout the economy.
Salmond said that our economy is now detached from that of the rest of the UK, yet we seem to be suffering the same downturn as them.
Salmond also said the prices of our houses were still rising while the rest of the UK was falling, yet we all see evidence of falling house prices everywhere.
How can Salmond be so wrong, so ill-informed and so very often on such strategic matters, yet he expects us to believe him when he says he could do better?
Most puzzling.
Complain about this comment
#65 - Ah brigadier, it always amazes me how some can sit on such a high horse and criticise those with a nationalist bend whilst predicting that there would inevitably be open conflict and civil war in Scotland if it weren't for Unionist control.
News for you - you Unionists aren't that special and I, for one, don't need your "guiding hand" to stop me attacking my neighbours.
Complain about this comment
#78 Chiefy1724 :
I didn't miss the irony of your posrt (subtle or otherwise) but I was trying to explain that you are probably looking at this from the wrong angle.
I am the proud product of an English father and a Scottish mother. I love the Western Highlands. I now live in England, with by coincidence, an English wife who had a Scottish mother and and English father. I love the gentle English countryside too. I don't put one over the other, but appreciate both. I try to see both sides of the streses caused to harmony in the UK by the flawed system of devolution introduced by Labour. That is all. No point-scoring intended.
In that vein, your example of impoverished students in London was a poor choice with which to vilify Tories. Thanks to Labour student funding reforms (only pushed through Westminster by using Scottish Labour MPs incidentally) English students now find themselves saddled with unprecednted debt when they start their working lives. That has caused major resentment in England. Don't blame the Tories for it.
The largesse you saw showered upon the English from the UK Treasury is part of the problem; the English don't have their own parliament, and hence don't have their own Treasury. That isn't their fault - the blame lies squarely with the flawed devolution arangements set up by, guess who? Labour. My English family, friends and neighbours are just as annoyed when similar pronouncements are made at Holyrood which can't and don't apply to them.
One last thing. Many Scots seem to confuse the fact that the UK government sits in England with it being an English government. Those things you want no part of, wars, trident etc etc are not the fault exclusiveley of the English - the Scots and Welsh also voted to put this government in place; in fact I sem to recall that the Labour vote in England alone wouldn't have seen Blair in power last time round. A Tory governement at Westminster (as I pointed out in my earlier post) would have little impact now domestically on Scotland, but it may help to restore some parity in the constitutional settlement. Railing against England may give you a warm glow, but if you put yourself in their position, they have come off far worse than Scotland under devolution. That position will never change as long as Labour remain in power. To restore harmony to our neigbourly relationship between Scotland and England, on whichever side of Hadrian's wall you feel at home, choose your next general election vote carefully. The Scots really do hold the key.
Complain about this comment
88. How deftly you attempt to ignore the issue of the oil, downgrading it to a mere "sideshow", when the black stuff is 25-30% of our economy and a similar % of our total tax revenues.
Is it because Salmond's economic masterplan is so heavily reliant on oil, while everyone with any wits can see its inherent flaws, that you are now trying to divert the argument elsewhere?
If Scotland is in the top 10% by GNP per capita; where is the source for the ever-present nat complaint that Scotland is underperforming due to UK interference?
Feel free to provide a source that shows how many Scots are in the British Army. (In fact, would any of the nats who like to peddle this claim?) Are you seriously trying to claim that there are more Scots in the British military than in all the Scandinavian forces combined? Or are you just applying another irrelevant and pointless statistical subset?
And I'm sure Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus throughly enjoy being at EU summits. Hopefully the grandeur of the events is sufficient substitute for their lack of influence in the actual decision-making.
Complain about this comment
Re 88 Simon Brooke
Simon I agree wholeheartedly with the facts you raised. No-one can argue.
However none of this is an argument to me for independance. My question is simple: What can we do with independance that we can't do now?
All of the countries mentioned do go to European summits, but as observers more than decision makers.
I know this is not a popular point amongst nats but Britain is a decision maker, policy former in the EU, England and Scotland sperately would be much weakened in this area.
We already have control over our education system and if anything it has deteriorated under the devolved system so what would be different if we were independant?
I feel we need to see our politicians work harder at making devolution work before we look at any further changes. There is a lot they could do if they got the correct focus.
Complain about this comment
96
"However none of this is an argument to me for independance. My question is simple: What can we do with independance that we can't do now?"
I could start writing now and continue till the sun goes down!
Complain about this comment
#97 Rather more to the point (sorry); what is the Point of the union?
Why do we need England to hold our hand?
Complain about this comment
#88 Simon: You disappoint me. You have attributed to me, at least by implication, opinions that I have never held or defended. I have nothing negative to say about Scotland's potential. I have never in my lifetime talked Scotland down, and I never will.
All I have ever done here is to ask Nationalists to explain how my life, my family's wellbeing, my nation's stature would be improved by Independence. In return, I have received some disputed (at best) statistics, advice to read some Nationalist tracts, and loads of abuse. But not a convincing word. Plenty of opinions, and I defend a man's right to argue for what he believes, but most seem based on a loose grasp of facts and heavy reliance on emotion.
Yes, Cyprus, Malta, etc., are at the "top table." They achieve nothing, except the reward of handouts for being pro-Western. "Oil rich" Scotland would be a net contributor, big-time, to their coffers - and to those of Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, etc.
And did you know that Poland actually has more cash reserves than the UK. And Brazil has more than the USA. Check it out.
Why the little jibe about my rank? I have explained repeatedly that a dozen usernames were rejected before I say the word "brigadier" on a newspaper on my desk. I have no pretensions about superiority to anyone. Well, a few here :-).
Complain about this comment
98. What a ridiculous nat comment!
Just how is "England holding our hand"?
Grow up.
Complain about this comment
#95, Reluctant Expat
Oil is an irrelevance because Scotland is a rich nation even without it. Yes, we're richer with it, of that there's no doubt; but we'd still rich by even European standards, let alone world standards, if we didn't have a drop of it.
It's clearly obvious that any economy is damaged by being managed in the interests of an entirely different economy. It's natural that the UK economy is managed for the interests of the City of London, because that's the biggest economic engine in the UK economy. And it's inevitable that, given that management, the Scottish economy (which is different) performs less well than if it were managed independently. This isn't an 'evil conspiracy', it's just how things work.
There are seven battalions of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, and more Soldiers of the Royal Regiment of Scotland are serving in Afghanistan and Iraq (which is what I said) than Scandinavians. If you want to quibble about whether soldiers of the Royal Regiment of Scotland are Scots, feel free.
Malta and Luxembourg have actual seats on the Council of Ministers. They are represented at the top table and influence policy directly. Scotland is not, and, except where our interests coincide with English interests (which, given the disparity between our countries and economies is not often) are never represented at all.
Independent, we could form tactical alliances with other European countries with similar interests and argue our corner. We'd get what we wanted quite a lot of the time, rather than none of the time as now.
#96, northhighlander, I agree with you that Great Britain still has delusions of grandeur, still sees itself as a World Power, which is why we get dragged into all America's illegal foreign wars. And that's precisely the point. These delusions of grandeur are not in Britain's, or Scotland's, or even England's interests. We can't afford an independent nuclear deterrant, but Britain wants to still pretend to be a nuclear power, so we pay money we can't afford to buy American missiles which remain under American control.
We make ourselves the enemies of people all over the world with whom we urgently need strong friendships, because America (wrongly) in my opinion) still believes it can take the resources it wants by force.
I can't see any reason why Scotland should be any different from any other Northern European nation of our size, standing sturdily on our own feet and making our own strategic friendships in our own interests.
But I can see a very good reason not to remain in the United Kingdom, and it is this: the United Kingdom is (deservedly) the second most hated nation on earth, the second highest target on every terrorists list. We do not need Jihadis crashing jeeps full of incendiaries into Glasgow Airport. Scotland has no animosity towards Islam. Scotland has no need to control Iraq's oil reserves. Why are we doing this?
Complain about this comment
Brian, your blog comments were interesting. However, you are far too lenient on Broon.
He says he will build a "fair" society - after 11 years of "Labour" government!! So an acknowledgement by Broon that the rich have got richer and the poor poorer under "Labour".
He says "Labour" are "pro-market", ie a capitalist party like the Tories.
It all sounded like one of Blair's relaunches with empty sounding soundbites such as "fairness" and "fair rules" for all. He is a political conman like Blair, in my opinion. How many times did he mention Iraq, Afghanistan, Trident, cuts to working class peoples' wages because of high inflation. Broon is truly the bankers' friends, giving them billions, while the rest of us are expected to pay for the capitalist economic crisis. It is all very Blairite, Brownite is just the same.
Complain about this comment
#99, John
I have a personal dislike for the practice of anyone hiding behind pseudonyms. And claiming rank you haven't earned seems to me a less than honourable practice. However, leaving that aside...
'Oil rich Scotland' already is a net contributor (via the UK treasury) to Europe. Independence wouldn't change that, nor should it. We are richer, we should be net contributors. But, in the spirit of 'no taxation without representation', we pay the tax but we do not have the representation. Independence would change that.
As to whether independence would make you and your family richer or poorer, no-one can honestly answer that - there are too many variables. In all probability it would not make a great deal of difference either way. But, in reference to your claimed rank, it would make them safer - we'd move from a state which has worked very hard to make itself hated thoughout the world, to a state which has no enemies.
Complain about this comment
#84 Brownedov: You're right, I don't trust people to make up their own minds... when they've been fed on emotive fantasies and denied simple facts. And please don't refer me to the nonsensical National Conversation, the biggest list of ifs, buts and maybes ever compiled.
So, what did I mean by "slightly more potent" (as if you didn't know). You spoke of "throwing rotten fruit" in hustings debates. I was speaking of the slow, corrosive effects of constantly undermining people with sly suggestions of anti-Scottishness, British Nationalism, conspiracies, Unionist dupes, etc., all slipped into Nationalist posts with their subliminal messages. Too obvious to be called a conspiracy, but just the stuff to infect the simplistic minds of the gullible. Nasty, underhand politics. I'd rather be hit by a rotten egg than debate with these weasels.
Complain about this comment
#98 Expat - are you seriously claiming that there are no unionists (even just those on these boards) who believe Scotland couldn't make it on her own without England? That there are no unionists who believe Scotland needs England far more than England needs Scotland?
Interesting. Your apparently new found faith in Scotland is refreshing.
Complain about this comment
101. Well, where to begin.
-- The oil is not "irrelevant"! How can a revenue stream that would account for 25-30% of our economy and public services, more than any other sector, be possibly irrelevant? How can you expect to have any credibility with comments like that?
-- "It's clearly obvious that any economy is damaged by being managed in the interests of an entirely different economy."
Yet Salmond believes we would be better off in the Euro (at the immediate expense of our banknotes) where our economy would be managed in the interests of Germany, France, Italy and the rest of central Europe - economies with which we have far, far less in common than the UK's.
So how is that better?
-- How is comparing the number of Scottish soldiers in Afghanistan/Iraq to the number of Scandinavian soldiers relevant....to anything?
-- Malta, Luxembourg et al have very little influence in EU decision-making. As is known to everyone outside Scottish nationalism, the 'Big Four' of the EU (UK, Germany, France and Italy) are the true power-brokers of Europe. Denying this does not mean it's not true.
And then you revert to nat-type with the inevitable and entirely predictable "Britain's delusion of grandeur" and "pretending to be a nuclear power" ("pretending"??).....you missed out "imperialistic", by the way. The UK is one of the UN Security Council's P5, a major player in NATO, in the EU, it's on the G8 etc. so there is clearly little 'delusion'. The UK is front and centre of both the world and European stage. Again, seeing nationalists denying this doesn't mean it's not true.
In this age of globalism and internationalism, a strong political and economic voice is vital.
But what does Salmond think we should do?...
Complain about this comment
Just Nationalists posts eh?
Get real!
Complain about this comment
103. "I have a personal dislike for the practice of anyone hiding behind pseudonyms. And claiming rank you haven't earned seems to me a less than honourable practice. "
Ah, that settles it. Yet more ridiculous and childish comments from "Simon_Brooke".
Complain about this comment
#103 Simon: I've given up writing to The Herald in my own name, because of the nutters who reply via the post. I have a slightly unusual name, and would - terrible comment on our society - fear for my family if identified. I salute your bravery. But it's not a military gesture!
Yes, Scotland is a net contributor via the UK. But if Salmond did manage to grab all the oil our contribution would be a far greater proportion of our income than at present. (I don't actually mind that - I'm broadly pro-European).
I am delighted that a Nationalist, undoubtedly a lot smarter than I am, has said Independence would probably not make a great deal of difference to my family. My view exactly.
As regards enemies, could it be that we have none because we are not a separate state with a national interest to promote and defend? I'm quite happy to enjoy my status as the acceptable face of Britishness.
Mind you, a few British Consuls, especially in footballing countries, might be glad to be shot of us.
Complain about this comment
#104.
Lordy lord John. If I didn't know better I would be inclined to think you're becoming paranoid.
#101.
Excellent post with plenty of pro-independence arguments. And for that reason don't expect very many responses from the liked of the "Brigadier" and expat. You see, if they pretend not to have seen your post they can carry on convincing themselves that nats are merely conspiring crackpots who deal in emotive arguments rather than facts.
Complain about this comment
106 Reluctant ex-pat
I would agree that Malta etc probably have little influence in Europe. Which is a reason for Scotland to aspire to become an independent democratic republic outwith the EU. This would certainly be more logical than the Euro-Unionist position of the SNP, who in the past have railed against British Unionists!
Why leave one London-centred Union and then suspend all critical faculties when it comes to the even more remote and undemocratic European Union?
Complain about this comment
Relucatant_expat #100
Ah...well it's because I am "grown up" that I tend to look sideways at all the unionist arguments on this blog which offer nothing dire warnings that everything will go down the pan if we take our place in Europe as an independent country.
Why do we and England need to stick together when we belong to a Europe with no internal frontiers?
Complain about this comment
On the theme of "Simon_Brooke"'s aversion to anonymous contributors, I think everyone should give their real age.
I strongly suspect many of the nationalists on this board aren't even eligible to vote.
Certainly they won't be able to buy booze down the shop if their Leader gets his way.
Complain about this comment
I'm 33, 1 month and 10 days old. I hope that has satisfied your curiosity.
Complain about this comment
#110 dmacaulay: You think I need CONVINCING about the crackpot, emotive arguments of some Nats?
I think the replies to Simon might indicate to you (if you have temporarily removed the blinkers) that despite the delusion of influence in Europe, he is actually peddling some sort of isolationism, in which we are detached from all the bad things in the world and loved for being our sweet wee selves.
Complain about this comment
It's not "isolationism" it's realism. We don't have the moral obligation or authority to go around solving the worlds problems by...errr...blowing stuff up. The vast majority of other countrys in the world realise this. Why don't we?
Complain about this comment
116. By suggesting that our only engagement with the rest of the world is via military means is symptomatic of the lack of awareness among nationalists in general.
You may remember that we played a lead role in cancelling the national debt of the world's poorest countries. We have invested many billions in infrastructure projects, including taking large shareholdings in African/Asian/Caribbean energy, transport and construction companies (just two examples that I personally know of: There are many residential/commercial developments underway in Rwanda thanks to UK funds and the Nile Hydro Dam in Uganda that powers a large part of E Africa, is being improved by UK funds). We offer a vast number of scholarships to UK universities for promising children from these regions. Many schools, hospitals, railways and roads throughout these regions are being built/rebuilt/extended with UK funds.....
Complain about this comment
I note the Brigofdoom has done the very thing he claims not to do with his invective anti SNP / Independence bile.
Nothern Rock £30 billion plus, Scottish Government £27 Billion pocket money to run Scotland. £20 billion the actual cost of PFI / PPP to Scotland over the amount Labour said it would cost (NAO figures)
Now it does not take too bright an individual to ask why when Labour in Scotland held power at Holyrood was the block grant elevated by an average of 11% per year where as now the same grant had inflation only addition of 3.5% which given the extra unbudgeted costs of PFI / PPP on the Scottish Grant is actually a cut in grant.
How is that, given the Scottish Block Grant for the next four years is in fact an annual cut, the current incumbents are doing a fairly good job at doing what is best for the majority of Scots no matter whether they are for or against Independence?
The bottom line for Brigofdoom is why should we be happy with pocket money doled out from Westminster when with a bit of self confidence we could do far better for ourselves?
As for the impact of the Scottish Office's colonial approach, a quick read of Michael Forsyth or Rifkind's comments on the issue supports the Westminster attitude of Scotland as a colony as does Carol Craig's separate research in her book 'The Scottish Crisis of Confidence.'
Historical research shows no economic benefit accruing to Scotland from the Union and some historians argue that the Union destroyed the Scottish economy and its has never really recovered.
Then we have Brown's parallel universe speech to conference that lives in a world where the vast population either side of the border cares about what he says yet he says nothing that engages people either side of the border.
Current poll surveys put the Conservatives nationally on 52% but ignore the anomaly that in Scotland the SNP are also on 50% vote share. Given the Tories in Scotland are on around 18% that makes the English Tory vote share far higher. Given the Tories stated aim of sorting out the Scottish Block Grant and Barnet, Labour will be further squeezed both sides of the border with the Scots wanting it made very clear what we think of a Tory Government in Westminster by voting SNP.
The tipping point has been reached, the Union as presently agreed is dead but not one of the Unionist Parties has come up with any idea of a replacement so the default position can only be Scottish Independence.
The SNP are the Black Swan in UK politics that the commentators, Westminster Politicians and others can not see.
Complain about this comment
#104. At 11:49am on 25 Sep 2008, brigadierjohn wrote:
"You're right, I don't trust people to make up their own minds..."
In that case, it must be a hard struggle with your own conscience whether to trust yourself to be able to vote at all.
If you do vote, we must now presume you could not vote for any of the "major" parties as, despite the ambivalence of some re rights of the Scottish people, they all support the UN Charter with its buit-in affirmation that all peoples have the right of self-determination. Both the Tories and NuLab have recently confirmed this by their support for Kosovo's UDI from Serbia - a decision which may yet come to haunt them in Great Britain.
"I was speaking of the slow, corrosive effects of constantly undermining people with sly suggestions of anti-Scottishness, British Nationalism, conspiracies, Unionist dupes, etc., all slipped into Nationalist posts with their subliminal messages."
I take your point, although I tend to find most Nationalist posts less sly and subliminal that most of the NuLab ones. However, I do take the point often made by oldnat that although there is no basis for conflict between English, Scots and Welsh, there is an inherent conflict between all of them and those who believe in a unitary British state. It is for that reason I find it so sad that the LibDems with their federalist aims choose to make common cause with the unionist hardliners rather than the SNP.
Complain about this comment
103. At 11:43am on 25 Sep 2008, Simon_Brooke.
the fact that the brigadierjohn has that user name is irrelevent to these posts and as he says, if his given name is unusual and because of that, he could be identified and targated by exteremists from the unionist parties, then he is right to use a pseudonym, as you yourself have if you so wish.
there is a wee joke in there somewhere.
Complain about this comment
#117 Reluctant-expat, I understand your concern regarding Scotlands significant contribution to the world and how welcoming we are to the world when it comes to us. However many are under the opinion that Scotland itself needs improvement and we need a strategy which best allows that to occur.
The better we are, the more we can contribute!
Complain about this comment
#117 Reluctant-Expat
"You may remember that we played a lead role in cancelling the national debt of the world's poorest countries."
Wow - what a success that's been. As someone who spends a lot of time in Switzerland, I can confirm that's made a lot of difference to the Swiss economy, especially around Lake Geneva.
Trouble is that the "great democracies" were too concerned with their own internal corruption to enforce the "good governance" strings that were supposed to go with it.
Complain about this comment
#118 slaintemha: I think you may misrepresent me, but I honestly don't know what I said to induce that massive outpouring of grievances, statistics, and assertions.
All I ever asked for was a simple explanation of how the SNP plans to make things better in an Independent Scotland.
Your post is very well written, and I gather you believe that with a bit of self-confidence we could do better than receive pocket money from colonial governors or something. Great! Tell me how. If it seems reasonable and practicable I'll sign up.
I see on the lunchtime news (albeit on the biased BBC) that Scotland's economy is grinding to a halt. The Scottish Government response seems to be something about doing well, but we cannot be immune from
world events.
Stolen from Mr Brown, perhaps? How long before someone here posts that it's the City of London to blame, and jist wait 'til we get our ain wee hand-knitted bank?
Complain about this comment
#113, Reluctant-Expat wrote:
"I strongly suspect many of the nationalists on this board aren't even eligible to vote."
I hope you're not suggesting that support for nationalism renders one ineligible by dint of mental incapacity...
That said, recent governments' 'Care in the Community' policies (largely in pursuit of nonsensical targets) probably mean that a not insignificant number who ARE able to vote shouldn't be so.
Complain about this comment
118. 20 billion the actual cost of PFI / PPP to Scotland over the amount Labour said it would cost (NAO figures)
Slaintemha, please could you provide a link to this as I can't find it anywhere.
All I could find was this:
Scottish PFI/PPP contracts could be costing around £2.1 billion more than conventional funding. That is nearly 10% of the total cost of all Scottish PFI/PPP contracts.
Note the amounts.
Also from the same report:
These figures do not take account of higher financing costs in the private sector which Audit Scotland said in the case of first generation PFI schools could be as much as 10% of total costs.
Oh, and this was from a UNISON report, not one from the 'independent' NAO.
Oops!
Complain about this comment
#119 Brownedov: Right again! I do struggle with my conscience at voting time. My solution has always been to vote for a person, never a party. Get decent people in Parliament, regardless of label, that's my belief.
Please persevere with your Liberal-Federal ideas. It may be best in the long run.
Complain about this comment
126. People shouldn't knock Brownedov's federalist ideas.
The more I look into federalism, the more I like it. However, I'm not arguing just for four equal national parliaments and one UK federal parliament, I want to see as many responsibilities as possible handed down to council level, including fiscal autonomy (separated totally from Holyrood as well as Westminster) and full, unfettered responsibility for local services, planning, development, licensing and law. EARL and the trams, for example, should be the concern of Edinburgh city council and its people. No-one else. It will be the communities that set their own priorities, strategies and direction, not someone in Edinburgh or London.
Holyrood should be trimmed right down to only managing inter-council services such as major roads and rail, environment, higher education and some public health matters (councils could quite easily take over running their respective NHS Trusts). Holyrood to have fiscal autonomy but with a far smaller budget, my guesstimate would be about #10-12bn instead of today's #30bn.
Westminster would also be trimmed right down to only manage UK-wide matters such as foreign affairs, defence and the macro-economy. Overall budget down to #200bn compared to #550bn today.
Complain about this comment
#126 brigadierjohn
"Please persevere with your Liberal-Federal ideas. It may be best in the long run."
#127 Reluctant-Expat
"The more I look into federalism, the more I like it... I want to see as many responsibilities as possible handed down to council level"
Now I'm beginning to wonder who's putting out subliminal messages!
Seriously though, I couldn't agree more that devolution and financial responsibility shouldn't stop at four "national" assemblies but be at as local a level as possible. The $64,000 question, though, is how to get there from here.
Until there is electoral reform for Westmidden it seems highly unlikely that whoever "wins" under the old plurality system will ever "finish" devolution. But if they don't, then Scotland may well feel it has to go it alone, especially if the unionist parties at Holyrood combine to prevent the 2010 referendum. Blair could have carried out his '97 promises for electoral reform but with large majorities he had no need to. Labour are inherently the most centralising of the unionist parties, but they could still perhaps save themselves from electoral meltdown by replacing Brown with a new leader who actually carried out those '97 policies.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
128. Unitary councils already exist. Just start giving them more of their own tax-raising powers and end this system where all is collected in the centre, and then distributed to national level and then distributed to local level.
Imagine the community spirit that would arise from giving locals their own right to decide if they build a new school, a tram network, a by-pass or even their own airport.
All this heated debate about giving more powers to Holyrood so 'Scots will make their own decisions'.
It should be give powers to councils and the people of Glasgow/Edinburgh/Shetlands etc. so they can make their own decisions.
Result: No more Glasgow/Edinburgh resentment, no more Highlands/Central Belt resentment and no more Scotland/England resentment.
Complain about this comment
#130 Reluctant-Expat
Not dissimilar to the Swiss model of commune, canton and confederation. The key to making it work is determining who should calculate, collect and distribute the proceeds. In Switzerland, it's the canton as being reasonably local yet large enough to have economies of scale.
Put that into a confederal UK and you'd have the 4 "nations" collecting the taxes, handling the calculation and collection for the unitary authorities based on their locally set taxation rates and paying a single bill to the UK federal government for border control, etc. based on some agreed formula.
But it works in Switzerland because of the genuinely democratic nature of decision making at all levels.
Complain about this comment
That is the real Gordon Brown; when, he was talking at the conference in Manchester...
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS