'A simple proposition'
Intriguing speech by Iain Gray at the Labour conference in Brighton.
Three themes: a sustained personal attack on Alex Salmond; a warning to his own party to remain united and, most intriguing of all, a nod to the prospect of a future referendum on independence.
The Salmond attack was fairly familiar stuff, spiced with the suggestion that the SNP would favour a Conservative victory at the UK general election (because it would add to the strain on the Union.)
The warning to his own party was based upon his depiction of the relative political impotence of opposition: Labour's condition in Scotland. Coming your way at Westminster, he implied, unless you unite and fight.
But to the referendum. This is what Mr Gray said: "The day may well come when the people of Scotland want a referendum to settle their constitutional future once and for all. But not now, in the midst of a recession. And not on a question rigged by the SNP."
Pressed subsequently by the wicked media (self included), Mr Gray indicated there was minimal to zero prospect of these conditions being met before the next Holyrood elections in 2011.
Consider those conditions. There are three. One, that the economic crisis is over. Two, that the question suits Labour. And three, that it settles the question "once and for all".
'Running a mile'
Timing, wording and impact. All three, it appears, would have to be met before Mr Gray would support a plebiscite.
Pressed still further by the w.m., Mr Gray confirmed that he had supported Wendy Alexander in her "bring it on" plea for an early referendum.
However, Alex Salmond had "run a mile", the recession was now in place - and the moment had gone.
Might it return before 2011? Seemingly not. The focus had to be on economic recovery. (Condition one). And Alex Salmond would not sanction suitable wording. (Condition two).
So what is his objection to the Salmond wording? Too conditional, apparently.
The SNP want to ask the people of Scotland whether they agree or disagree "that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state."
According to Mr Gray, that is a "rigged" question. It gives the impression there will be further phases, that the choice is not final.
Implicit conditions
Nationalists say it is a realistic question which also deals with the limited powers of the existing Scottish Parliament: the fact that the constitution is reserved to Westminster.
But consider also Mr Gray's implicit third condition, that the issue would have to be settled "once and for all".
How could he secure that? Mr Salmond has indicated that the question of independence would fade for a generation if defeated in a referendum.
However, presumably Mr Gray concedes Mr Salmond would be entitled to object to the wording of the referendum.
The SNP leader could scarcely be expected to abandon or shelve his party's key aim if he did not trust the wording, if he thought it "rigged".
Pressed once more, Labour's Holyrood leader said he favoured a straight choice. Yes or no to independence. Yes or no to ending the Union.
No multiple options. No Calman versus SNP White Paper. A simple proposition, attracting a yes or no response.
Might he table such a bill if he were to become first minister? Mr Gray declined to specify.
Indeed, he was notably imprecise presumably because he does not envisage an early date for such a referendum.
Intriguing, nonetheless.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~22~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brian
As I was saying on the last blog, if Mr Gray knows we will still be in a recession in 2010, why are we no being told this?
Complain about this comment
who is this man that he presumes to speak for everyone in Scotland ?
How is he so selfish to add conditions to what he thinks will be the right time ?
Give the country the question in an unbiased clear way and see what happens, and that means no nonsense by the press and the tv, no spin, no dodgy ballot machines, can be fairer than that!
Complain about this comment
Brian,
As BBC Scotland is supposed to be impartial, why don't you write and post here a "fair" referendum question or questions?
Any hope that Mr Gray would sign up to that and suggest a year (or perhaps decade) for that to held?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
"According to Mr Gray, that is a "rigged" question."
"...so that Scotland becomes an independent state."
Where's the ambiguity?
Complain about this comment
Yes or No?
I'm comfy with that! Its fair enough. Its easy to be so bold, expecially when his intention is to block the ref anyway.
Waiting for it though? No, that's not fair. I'm not comfy with that.
Tory, labour - 2 sides of the same coin.
Complain about this comment
Afternoon Brian , when I was listening to the chancellors speech this morning did I hear a wee hint when he said that we would get a chance to have our say in the next few months?
as for Mr Gray, "the day may well come when the people of Scotland want a referendum"
sorry Iain the day is here and NOW!
"And not on a question rigged by the SNP "
Of course not Iain ,lets just continue and have the question rigged by the Labour party as usual!
and finally ,
did Mr Gray or even Mr Murphy dare to say anything positive in their 5 minutes of glory?
No didn't think so!!
Sid
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The main excuse by labour is that deciding your country's future in a referendum in 2010 is a distraction during a recession.
This comes from the party that landed us in the recession, no boom or bust, no cuts and little or no guts!
There will be a westminster election during 2010, is this equally not a distraction?
Gray attacks Salmond, poor wee Eck must be shaking in his boots!
There is an acceptance in the air that independence is an inevitability. Much the same as there was an acceptance of devolution. The momentum is with the SNP and those who place Scotland first!
The dead hand of labour is finally being wrenched from Scotland’s throat!
D McN
Complain about this comment
How can someone as vacuous as Grey come up with something tangible, it has no logic.
Complain about this comment
I have to add here that Ian Gray knew damn well that Alex Salmond would be fully booked up for St Andrews day and that it would never happen. I think there must be some truth to the rumors that Ian Grey is being told to start growing a spine. As most of you know on here Alex would wipe the floor with him so this 'challenge' is nothing but posturing. Is there anybody within the Labour party who could be taken seriously anymore ?
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8277362.stm
quality!
Complain about this comment
I'm quite sure that this continual use of the word "rigged" cheapens the debate. However, I can't help wondering whether it might also be potentially libellous?
Complain about this comment
As for the comment by Grey that the SNP would favour a Tory government to enhance the chance of more people voting for independence, does he forget that the SNP have been gaining support whilst on his partys shift ! The torys being in power will just be the icing.
Complain about this comment
The man is an idiot, he has nothing to offer the people of Scotland, any more than his hapless party has. Now he claims, as so many of his ilk do, that he speaks for the people of Scotland; he does not, and if the record of the last Labour, Lib/Dem regime is anything to go by, it will be a long time before he or any of his cronies are trusted enough to do so. Alec Salmond and his party may not be perfect but at least they have Scotland as their prime concern, not the fortunes of the Westminster Labour party.
Complain about this comment
12. gavingreig
"I'm quite sure that this continual use of the word "rigged" cheapens the debate. However, I can't help wondering whether it might also be potentially libellous?"
It's a very good point gavingreig.
Rigged isn't a word normally used in relation to questions - there are other suitablle pejorative terms if you want to be disparaging about the question; ambiguous, leading, loaded.
Rigged is the sort of word used in negatively describing decision making processes - like elections and referendums. I think that the use of an innappropriate pejorative term to describe a referendum questions is is dangerously conflating the question and the referendum.
Perhaps someone in the Scottish media could pick them up on the corrosive effects of using inappropriate language? Unlikely, i know!
Hopefully, at least some Labour voters out there are also noticing this stuff, and are starting to think about what Labour now is.
Complain about this comment
The Gray man continues to run scared from the dominant question in modern Scottish politics.
Time for Labour to put up or shut up.
Incidentally, was Gray allowed on stage by himself, or did Mr Murphy introduce him, walk (I use the term loosely) that young Iain had some macaroni pictures to show them?
Complain about this comment
Brian
Of course, if you look at the converses, then the referendum is on as soon as the recession is over (47+46 = 72% of the pretendy wee), it is impossible for it ever to be final ( either the Crown in Parliament cannot bind it's successors or the will of the Scots is paramount) and so it is just a question of the wording. Words, is that not what politics is for?
Complain about this comment
A good piece by Martin Kettle on the guardian website about Angela Merkel's victory in Germany, mulit-party politics, why the UK would do better to look at Germany than the USA for inspiration, and in the spirit of Gray vs Salmond - the degree of favour shown to charismatic centrist leaders ;)
Complain about this comment
Gray's "non-rigged" question,
"Boys and girls of Scotland: do you agree that the SNP are a bunch of rotters, and that their separatist, ethnic, anti-Catholic/anti-Protestant/anti-Edinburgh/anti-Glasgow bad, nasty, evil scheme to make Scotland just like Albania is a bad idea?"
BOX 1 ("Yes absolutely, I do")
BOX 2 ("Of course")
BOX 3 ("Not Albania, more like Darfur")
BOX 4 ("Not Applicable")
Complain about this comment
#13 ubin
No, no, we want to keep the New Labour. People might hope things would be better under the Torys. At least with Labour you know how bad it will be, so the SNP would have a better chance under Labour. If you are offering hope and salvation you don't want some snake-oil salesman setting up next door peddling his salvation, you want some Old Testament bible thumper preaching gloom and despondency.
Complain about this comment
13. ubinworryinmasheep
"As for the comment by Grey that the SNP would favour a Tory government to enhance the chance of more people voting for independence, does he forget that the SNP have been gaining support whilst on his partys shift ! The torys being in power will just be the icing."
Yes!
SNP gaining support under Labour
+
SNP gaining support under Conservatives
=
Independence support!
This is no Labour safehouse!
Complain about this comment
I have not been on this blog for a while, but coming back to it today I see we still have the same old issue of some people slagging others off simply because their views differ.
On the independence debate I have always favoured independence simply because I fail to see why a neighbouring country should be able to run this one better than we can ourselves.
If we can find a way to retain the cream of our talent within our own borders, there is no reason why we should be any less able than other similar sized countries. The one question the unionist parties should be made to answer is this: If Scotland does well out of the union why have we continually lost our population to the point of hovering around 5 million, while over the border they are almost bursting at the seams?
Failing economy = depopulation, booming economy = increasing population.
Complain about this comment
Interesting to see Murphy's reaction when faced with Andrew Neil at the Labour conference.
In the studio at 'friendly' BBC Scotland, Murphy looks confident, sitting upright, ready, in the knowledge that he will be confronted with 'attack dog' Glenn Campbell's probing, kid glove, questions.
In front of Andrew Neil he looked like a rabbit caught in the headlines. The first few word of his usual mantra are immediately slapped down by no nonsense Neil which sets the tone for the rest of the interview.
We need more of this to see what Murphy is actually made of and we know we are not going to get it either from Campbell or Brewer. They do Scots a disservice and need to be replaced.
Complain about this comment
"Consider those conditions. There are three. One, that the economic crisis is over. Two, that the question suits Labour. And three, that it settles the question "once and for all"."
Gray is a fool. It's a capitalist economy, stupid! There is never a time when we are not in a crisis, struggling to recover from a crisis, or looking at the prospect of a crisis.
The referendum question proposed by the SNP, or something so similar as to make no difference, is the only legitimate wording possible. The Scottish government cannot hold a referendum on something it does not have the power to deliver. It cannot deliver secession. It would be dishonest to ask a question which implied that it could. No great surprise to find a British Labour Party politician with a preference for dishonesty.
And Iain (Two I's, No spine!) evidently does not understand - or refuses to accept - that sovereignty lies with the Scottish people. How can any decision be binding on future generations?
The man is a cretin!
Complain about this comment
#10 ubin, afternoon, never mind growing a spine, Mr Gray could start by growing up. saw a bit of this mornings speech and he was more like a school prefect addressing the school assembly, although the school assembly would probably be better attended !!
you should watch it -a dare you - in fact a double dare you.
And if you don't I'll tell on you!
Sid
Complain about this comment
It will be no surprise that I agree with Iain Gray on this subject a referendum would just be another excuse to faff around and do nothing for a year.
However on a much more positive note I note that our local secondary School Wick High is included on the list of Schools to be rebuilt. Now I await to see that this actually means a new school, but at last the SNP have done something positive for the North.
So I am happy to say well done to them for finally getting round to building some schools and for including the North this time.
Complain about this comment
Referendum timing.
On the Unionist side, only Wee Wendy had the political nous to see that their best hope was an early referendum. Brown turning down the idea was probably more motivated by the fact that he could no longer posture on the world stage if the Scots did vote Yes.
Just as they did with the trams, the Unionists could have got together and forced a Referendum Bill (where they rigged the question) through Parliament. In politics, timing is critical, and if you miss your best chance, it may never re-occur.
2010 is, of course, a bad time for the Unionists to have a referendum since they (especially Labour) rely on some of the SNP vote casting their votes for a UK party at a UK GE. To have the debate on independence conflated with a GE, would mean that the GE here would be effectively fought on Scotland only issues.
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
Does Brian Taylor really believe that a rehash of stale soundites from the last twelve months is "intruguing"?
Attack Alex Salmond, nope, no intrigue there just the same old stuff.
Labour must unite .... blah, blah, blah - also devoid of intrigue.
Such an 'intruiging' speech that Brian has to embelish the Labour fear of a referendum. Not happy with the referendum question, then why did Gray apparently support the self same question under Wendy's 'bring it on' moment?
That's not a difficult question is it, however it is what's termed an awkward question as it exposes duplicity and cannot be answered, therefore it won't be asked.
Why describe this speech as intriguing when it is cearly nothing of the sort? As I have already said, there is nothing new in the speech it is the same mantra that Gray has been saying for the last year.
If a speech is stale, and this one certainly was, then please say so.
Pressed subsequently by the wicked media (self included)
Please don't Brian, it is embarrassing. You have been found out too many times not asking difficult questions and closing your eyes to serious rifts within Labour (Chisholm).
I repeat; Why was Gray happy to accept the wording of the question last year?
Oh, by the way, you might also want to acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of Scots already want a referendum - the day has already come. That's another obvious point you failed to make.
Complain about this comment
Iain Gray's speech to Labour Conference
He doesn't appear to like Alex the Tories or even Scotland.
Complain about this comment
"Mr Gray confirmed that he had supported Wendy Alexander in her "bring it on" plea for an early referendum.
However, Alex Salmond had "run a mile", the recession was now in place - and the moment had gone."
The moment hasn't gone, the SNP clearly stated in their manifesto that they would hold a referendum in 2010, so what's the problem?
Surely Gray's not running scared of what the electorate may decide, is he?
And if he's so confident about the Calman Report, why not include that option on the question paper as has already been offered by the SNP?
Pity he didn't have the "Ed Balls" to stand on the stage by himself, says a lot about his "leadership" qualities ;-)
Complain about this comment
There will, it would appear, never be a "right" time for the unionists regarding the independance question. In the seveties it was "you're too wee, weak and stupid to deal with all this oil money - you'll only make a fool of yourselves. Better to pass it round the brothers" Only Maggie got her hands on it. Now it's, (besides being too wee, weak and stupid) you're also broke - remind me again just how did that happen?
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
hamish24 said
In the studio at 'friendly' BBC Scotland, Murphy looks confident, sitting upright, ready, in the knowledge that he will be confronted with 'attack dog' Glenn Campbell's probing, kid glove, questions.
In front of Andrew Neil he looked like a rabbit caught in the headlines. The first few word of his usual mantra are immediately slapped down by no nonsense Neil which sets the tone for the rest of the interview.
I've said this repeatedly, Murphy is a glorified press officer, he is unused to serious scrutiny and will fall apart under pressure. The BBC in Scotland never, ever scrutinise anything he says.
This means that Murphy effectively has impunity to say what he wants, the media use his title as Secretary of State in order to justify headlining his utterences.
Forget political leanings and look at what is happening - this man has not been elected to weild any constitutional power in Scotland yet he is given free reign to attack the democratically elected Scottish Government.
At the same time, the state broadcaster frequently provides him with a publicly funded forum on which to broadcast basically anything he wants to.
He is never, ever taken to task.
Complain about this comment
There is a very good article that I read in the Scotsman, by Gerry Hassan. He makes the point that the Unionist parties "have long lost their traditional moorings and no longer represent what they used to." It prompted me to think about something that I would like to ask the likes of Gray and Murphy,and others of their persuasion. It is this; why is the Union so important to you?
I don't understand their love for it, I really don't. Can anyone help me out with why they keep promoting it, please. I'd like to understand their world view.
Complain about this comment
I am desperate for the referendum. Grey suggests that it is wrong to have a referendum due to the economic crisis. I see independence as the only salvation for Scotland in the future. More westminster control under unionists who follow neo-liberal or neo-conservative ideologies is what faces us irrespective of who wins the next UK election. Economic shock and awe will be visited upon us again! For my children and grandchildren's sake this must not be allowed to happen. I do not agree with all of the SNP's policies but Independance for Scotland is now an imperative given the clear and present danger that we face from the unionists.
Complain about this comment
From a committed :abour activist in England - an honest assessment, and worth a read.
http://www.davidosler.com/2009/09/labour_has_lost_a_generation.html
"In recent posts I have detailed how New Labour has lost the north, and pointed to analysis that suggests it will be wiped out in Wales. For good measure, let me highlight this Evening Standard poll, which indicates that 17 of its 44 seats in London are set to go."
Complain about this comment
Brian do you really see yourself in relation to Iain Gray as part of the "wicked media"?
How gloriously absurd.
Might have some weight if you were operating in England but in Scotland the media and Labour seem to be like ferrets in a sack.
Or maybe you were being ironic?
Complain about this comment
15. mrbfaethedee
Thanks for expanding so helpfully on my point. I would really like to see this question addressed. Your choice of the word "corrosive" is perfect.
Complain about this comment
#33 Blind Captain
Who wouldn't want to be a Unionist when you can tell the Scots they can't have anyone at Copenhagen to tell the world about our globe saving policies in case it shows up your own pathetic inadequacy.
I hope the SNP get someone in Denmark to ask about the Scots legislation and why the British delegation don't have anyone to speak about it.
Complain about this comment
I thought at the time of West Coast Jack that Labour could not pick a less credible leader and they proved me wrong; Ian Gray will increase the SNP's vote.
Complain about this comment
From Iain Gray's speech earlier today....
"My Scotland would not be a country where two year-old Brandon Muir dies at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend..."
Has he forgotten that at the time this tragic incident occured that the it was his very own Labour party who were at the reins of Dundee City Council?
Really low to make a statement like that to try and score party political points, still, probably an accurate measure of the man, and I use the term "man" very loosely indeed!
Complain about this comment
Iain Gray's speech was a disgrace. In the very opening paragraphs he mentioned the Conservative's European alliance with some very dodgy right wing parties from Eastern Europe. Gray said -
"David Cameron has come a long way. He isn’t hugging hoodies and huskies any more. He is embracing Europe’s extremists. In Scotland we are not surprised at the company Tories keep. We have watched them nuzzling up to the nationalist government from day one."
The new grouping which the Conservatives have created in the European Parliament includes representatives from a far right wing Latvian party Tevzemai un Brivibai (For Fatherland and Freedom) which honours Latvian members of Hitler's SS. In other words Gray is equating the SNP with apologists for the Nazis. The rest of his speech displayed the same - eh- "intellectual rigour".
This speech is not intriguing political analysis, it is a series of insults from a school playground, and a perfect illustration of how Labour have lost the plot and are doomed to many years in the electoral wilderness.
Complain about this comment
33. Blind_Captain
As a Unionist, I do not love the Union. I accept the Union because it has worked quite well (I'll put it no better than that) for 300 years. So far, I have not been offered any alternative that would work better.
I do not accept that an independent Scotland would be better because it would involve rule from Brussels and Strasbourg. I have seen nothing since joining the EU that would induce me to change my 'no' vote when I voted in the EU referendum. SNP policy with regard to Europe is therefore complete anathema to my way of thinking. I am not alone in that view and I would include SNP-supporting friends.
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
Having read through the transcript of Gray's speech I have to say that I am intruiged by Brian Taylors assertion that it had three themes.
The speech was consisted of attacks on Alex Salmond and the SNP. Gray actually used more words when he dragged up the murders a young toddler and a young man from Greenock - a new depth plumbed.
Here are the extracts from the speech that deal with the referendum and the unity theme:
The day may well come when the people of Scotland want a referendum to settle their constitutional future once and for all. But not now, in the midst of a recession. And not on a question rigged by the SNP.
That's all Gray said on the referendum, hardly mentioned at all. Where did Taylor get the idea that Gray had set out any conditions? Yes, subsequent questions may have led to him indicating conditions but the speech didn't hint at such.
Last year conference, I said that Labour MSPs would stand shoulder to shoulder with MP colleagues, and with our Prime Minister in the Glenrothes by election and we would elect Lindsay Roy the new Labour MP. We did.
And together we can do the same in Glasgow North East and make Willie Bain a Labour MP. And then we will make Gordon Brown Prime Minister again. Together we will defeat those whose sole creed is self interest, whose sole purpose is division whose sole principle is expediency. Whether they are Tories, or nationalists.
That's all Gray says on the 'unity' theme, hardly complex rhetoric or even inspiring.
To suggest that the referendum and unity formed central themes of this speech is to indulge in fabtasy journalism.
It was a personal attack on Alex Salmond as well as the SNP, at times using the unfortunate deaths of two people in order to do so.
Inappropriate, negative and lacking in anything positive.
Complain about this comment
29. cynicalHighlander
Thanks for the link to the transcript - i didn't see the actual speech.
I'd like to comment on it, but first: for the record - I support the SNP as a way of getting independence, and if they were to be spouting this disgraceful brand of negative drivel, you would have seen a near identical post with some of the names switched round.
From Iain Gray's speech -
"David Cameron has come a long way. He isn’t hugging hoodies and huskies any more. He is embracing Europe’s extremists.
In Scotland we are not surprised at the company Tories keep. We have watched them nuzzling up to the nationalist government from day one."
Equating extremist european parties with the SNP. Is this really fodder that Labour supporters eat up?!
"My Scotland would not be a country where two year-old Brandon Muir dies at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend and the First Minister says “everyone did all they could.” My Scotland would be a country where we would not give up on the 20,000 children living as Brandon Muir lived."
Using the tragic and sickening killing of wee boy to make out that it is the sort of thing the First Minister of Scotland is blasé about is just cheap and outright disgusting.
I hope the Scottish Labour supporters out there have their eyes and ears open! This is your party talking, are you really going to stick at that - if your still Labour, at least get yourself a leadership with some morals and integrity.
Complain about this comment
34. tinyzeitgeist
I agree with your post, I too support the SNP because independence is their core aim. Independence will give us the freedom to decide how Scotland tackles the economic challenges like the recession.
p.s. love the monicker!
Complain about this comment
LocheeLaddie wrote: "From Iain Gray's speech earlier today....
"My Scotland would not be a country where two year-old Brandon Muir dies at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend..." Has he forgotten that at the time this tragic incident occured that the it was his very own Labour party who were at the reins of Dundee City Council?"
Well said LocheeLaddie, to make politics over a child's death like this is utterly shameful. I would not be surprised if Brandon's family demand an apology from Iain Gray.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#42 MagisterIlluminatus
A reasoned post from a Brit Nat stance.
I have never understood the logic for Scotland , however, of it.
If it is a bad thing to have to follow the rules laid down centrally in a union, why is it better for us to have that twice?
Denmark (similar population to us) has far more powers to determine its own affairs than Scotland. Both are subject to EU laws and trade rules, but Denmark is subject to no other external restraints. Scotland obviously is, as much of its governance is determined at Westminster.
Can you explain what seems to be dichotomy in your thinking?
Complain about this comment
#25 Sid lol .. i will watch it later as i'm to busy at the moment just popped in for a look. At the risk of getting a chinese burn of you i will definately watch it tho !
Complain about this comment
Yesterday we had this:
Schools waste millions - report
Millions of pounds of taxpayers' money is being wasted in the Department for Children, Schools and Families, an internal government report suggests.
Today we have this:
Ed Balls spends £3m on office makeover...
News of the makeover comes as Mr Balls prepares to cut £2billion from the country's schools budget, meaning jobs will be slashed across the education system.
The Grey man says no to referendum because we are in recession. Ed Balls says recession, what recession?
£35,000 for a £1,000 photocopier - So what?
Complain about this comment
Article from the Indy supporting the SNP Alcohol minimum price initiative.
Minimum prices for alcohol would save lives, research finds.
TheSNP's plan to introduce a minimum price for alcohol has won the backing of an academic report, which suggests that the move could save hundred of lives a year.
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
Here's a little anecdote that will raise a smile - it happened as part of Iain Gray's speech was being replayed on Radio Sccotland.
Wife:
Who's that speaking?
Me:
Iain Gray
Wife
Who's he?
Me:
Leader of Labour in Scotand [Yes I know but it simplifies things]
Wife:
Eh? Isn't it Jim Murphy? [Honest !!]
Me:
What makes you say that?
Wife:
Well he's the one that usually is attacking the SNP
So, what is Jim Murphy then?
Me:
The Secretary of State for Scotland
Wife:
Oh, I see
Now, politics isn't the conversation around my house every minute of the day but it is commented on regularly. However, if someone like my wife (not a political anorak but knows what's going on) doesn't know Iain Gray is leader of the Labour MSP's then he really does have a problem.
Incidentaly, did anyone catch wooden Murphy's address to the hall? How bad was that, also his statement that the Conservatives are hated in Scotland sounded a bit extreme to me.
Complain about this comment
I've often wondered whether anyone will be able to consciously vote for Scottish Labour at the next election in the knowledge that Iain Gray could become the next first minister as a consequence.
Of course, that's to assume that he'll still be in his post as party leader in 2011. I suppose that one can only hope.
Complain about this comment
Could it be Brian that the only reason these questions were asked of Mr. Gray was because the Journalists(?) saw the huge gaps of inconsequential political nothingness in his speech(?)? Could it be that the journalists asked those questions because Mr. Gray never had the sense to include them in his speech in the first place? You know, similar to the idiot boards that Bob Hope had to use. The only intriquing moment in his speech was when he finished; intriguing because we would have to ask why did the labour party allow him up there in the first place. The speech was devoid of substance and direction while managing to to alienate those in his own Scottish labour party by attacking moments of recent history which was under the auspices of labour's own watch, in one way or another.
How long are you (the journalists in Scotland) going to carry this political sham of a non entity? We can all see that the main opposition in Holyrood is not the Labour party (because of its inability to mount any form of co-ordinated and balanced attack on the SNP) but the BBC Scotland newsdesk. I suspect that if you (the BBC Scotland journalists) were free from the constraints of the BBC's own political controls then you might be able to form a decent opposition.
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
Anyone else notice that the BBC have decided that the Scottish Futures Trust is to be labelled 'controversial'.
Not so PPP/PFI, it is apparently controversy free.
Complain about this comment
I'm sorry but I am baffled by the contention that a constitution issue that will affect GENERATIONS is less important that a recession that will last a few years at most.
Can someone explain THIS thinking to me? Does no one see anything wrong with these statements besides me?
The constitutional status of Scotland is a MINOR matter?
Complain about this comment
50. Roll_On_2010
"£35,000 for a £1,000 photocopier - So what?"
Do you actually believe somebody paid £35,000 for a £1,000 photocopier? I don't. Not without something better in the way of evidence than a newspaper headline.
Don't be gullible. Ask the awkward questions.
Do so and I suspect that, in this particular case, you will find that the photocopier was actually leased complete with service agreement over a period of some years. Comparing that with the purchase price is surely intended to deceive.
Don't be deceived. Ask the awkward questions.
Complain about this comment
Never underestimate the depths to which campaigning labourites will sink. As a child of 12 I was accused in a public forum by a labour candidate of vandalizing their home. Never near the place, hadn't even known where they lived beforehand but the chance to score cheap propaganda (at the risk of having me investigated, reputation smeared at a young age) was too good to miss given my father was a well known SNP activist.
Still got my own back by dating their daughter (on several occassions).
Complain about this comment
# 42 MagisterIlluminatus
Am I correct in thinking that you are not a Scot and have only come on here to spout your often posted anti EU stance? I believe the question by Blind_Captain was aimed, primarily, at the Scottish Unionists because none of them (Dean excepted but not accepted) have come up with any decent arguments for the Union. Your post, though welcome, falls into the same category. I have not heard anything to convince me that we should stay in the Union. All I have heard from the Unionists is their reasons why we shouldn't have independence. You know, the we are too wee, too poor, too stupid arguments. These are anti independence posts; we want pro Union posts so that we can make an informed decision. Surely there must be someone out there that is willing to stick their head above the parapet?
Complain about this comment
Re 38
Now which policies would these be? The cunning plan for tidal development? That just had its budget cut in the statement from Mr Swinney?
The Saudi Arabia of tidal power says Mr Salmond. We will be world leaders. Oh no says Mr Swinney not an investment priority.
Good joined up government for Scotland, investing in the future. Never mind the Danes are investing we can get them to do it for us, again, like the wind power.
Complain about this comment
# 58 BlooToon
lol
Complain about this comment
52 Online Ed.
Yes, I thought Murphy was a bit strong saying the Tories are hated in Scotland.
In his own constituency, East Renfrewshire, in the 2005 GE, 14,000 of his own constituents voted Tory. What does he think of them?
Freedom
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#60 Never mind the Danes are investing we can get them to do it for us, again, like the wind power.
Clarify that for me please, norhthighlander. Foreign investment is a bad thing? IF the Danes invested that would be terrible?
And any time there are cuts in a program--that means it is not a priority.
So Labour is saying education is not a priority because Ball says there will be education cuts? Well, with him spending millions on office improvements you might have a point there with Labour.
I'm not so sure elsewhere. Sometimes governments are FORCED to make cuts where they would very much prefer not to.
Complain about this comment
Iain Gray is the perfect example of all that's wrong with Scottish Labour - the future is for the future generations, unshackled by old world views of self-preservation and gloating inefficiencies of trade unions in the modern economy. For a party that's enjoyed such a record-breaking term in power they should be compelled to concentrate their UK (& even Scottish) election on their records of achievement instead of returning to the meaningless attacks on other parties. Gray's strategy clearly suggests that would be a limited campaign. For me, let local people make local decisions - the SNP offer the first way to break the strangle-hold then we can build a new political order based on all the main issues of the day. I'm a Republican (non-Unionist) Conservative voting SNP til that day! Politics is more than just the party.
Complain about this comment
46. minuend
"...to make politics over a child's death like this is utterly shameful."
My comment on Gray's behaviour was removed. And I tried so hard not to cross the lie, too.
Complain about this comment
60. northhighlander
The SNP could reduce the No of new schools proposed to then divert there shrinking pocket money towards the tidal project, seems a fair exchange from my end.
Complain about this comment
63. ScotInNotts
"1. Tories in questionable alliance with decidedly dodgy parties in EU"
Is this a reference to their collusion with the British Labour Party in the Calman fiasco?
Complain about this comment
59. Gedguy2
You are quite wrong. I am Scottish living in Scotland. My anti-EU stance, as you describe it, is actually quite commonplace in Scotland if voter numbers in the recent European Election are anything to go by.
As for explaining my support for the Union, it is entirely self-interested. It has been suggested by actuarial calculation that the welfare and pension system would take years to unravel and would cost huge amounts of money. I would assume that whilst this was going on, the poor, elderly and vulnerable would experience appreciable turbulence in the benefits which would have to be made up by substantial tax rises amongst the wealthier section of society. That's where I come in. Clearly, I have no wish to bankroll an independent country that I didn't want in the first place - so I will leave, because I can afford to. I won't be alone.
I have never thought that Scotland was too wee, stupid or incompetent. Why would I think that about myself? I am none of these things.
Complain about this comment
Gray by name and grey by nature.
after the next election (or hopefully before it)he could get a consultant's job in a garden centre selling manure because he certainly talks a lot of it
Complain about this comment
#66. Ah Electric Hermit, perhaps the moderators have added Iain Gray to Glenn Campbell on their list of "he who must not be criticized".
Mustn't say bad things about them. No matter how true. ;-)
Complain about this comment
#42 MagisterIlluminatus wrote:
"As a Unionist, I do not love the Union. I accept the Union because it has worked quite well (I'll put it no better than that) for 300 years. So far, I have not been offered any alternative that would work better."
What are the alternatives on offer:
1. Independence outwith the EU
2. Independence in the EU
3. Full Fiscal autonomy within a Federal UK
4. The unsatisfactory status quo
What benefit is there in staying in the union? Is it:
1. an based economic arguement
2. a defence based arguement
3. a 'world stage influence' based arguement?
4. or a mixture of all three?
1. It would seem that the economic arguement is increasingly hard to make stick from a unionist point of view, there simply is no reason why Scotland could not be self-sufficient.
2. There is no reason why we could not follow a model based on similar sized countries policies, whilst also having mutual cooperation with England in defence of our shared land mass.
3. Unless your a fan of an interventionist policy and have pretensions on maintaining some archaic and preceived imperial importance in the world then influence on world affairs through both the EU and the UN is more than enough for my tastes. Britain as it presently stands can no longer afford, or is able to maintain, its perceived role as a major player in interfering in world affairs as it currently attempts to do so. Quite frankly I'd be prefectly happy to have the same influence on world affairs as Holland, Denmark or Ireland. Lets face it, we can have a much more positive effect on world affairs in other ways such as our contribution to the world through research and innovation than statesmanship and brinkmanship.
"I do not accept that an independent Scotland would be better because it would involve rule from Brussels and Strasbourg. I have seen nothing since joining the EU that would induce me to change my 'no' vote when I voted in the EU referendum. SNP policy with regard to Europe is therefore complete anathema to my way of thinking. I am not alone in that view and I would include SNP-supporting friends."
Being ruled from Westminster is better than being 'ruled' from Brussels or Strasbourg? I would agree if both situations meant we had full status as an independent nation with all the powers and benefits that that entails, but it doesn't.
It is interesting that Brits advocate an isolationist policy with regards to the EU. It's Ok for trade, as per the EEC, but closer cooperation on any other issue is not an option.
What is the future Brits envisage in maintaining this policy? Could it be you'd prefer there to be a resurgent Russia, the US, the EU, India, China, then the isolated land mass on the West of the European continent stubbornly holding onto visions of the past and delusions of grandeur?
I'd much rather be able to chart our own course in the future, to run our own affairs in cooperation with the EU, and to be able to negotiate our position within that body, not have it dictated to us by others claiming to represent our best interests when they're doing nothing of the sort.
Complain about this comment
#57 Electric Hermit
Yep, thought I would ask Ed but he is rather busy at the moment - Apparently his turn to stick the finger in the dyke.
By the way what evidence have you got that contradicts the internal report, by former WH Smith chief executive Richard Handover and commissioned by NuLabour.
By the way I did not any of this guff from you during the Telegraphs ‘expenses claims’ or were they wrong to.
By the way you are also wrong about TAG…. many bloggers, including myself know it is his real name!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Question ,
Do you want independence from Westminster and England? Yes
No
Circle either Yes or No.
Now that 'll do me and it looks non rigged!
Complain about this comment
It was only a matter of time before the SNP and their affiliation with the conservative party was fully exposed.
3years later and the SNP release a statement saying they are about to start their first school building, Jeez! for the breathe of me.
Giggle and the riddle?.
Complain about this comment
#69. Funny that you say that Scotland is NOT too wee, too poor and too stupid but base this on Scotland being incompetent to run a welfare and pension system.
In fact, doesn't Scotland already run their own welfare system? Ah. But still too wee, too poor and too stupid to do it without UK supervision. Gotcha!
That's where I come in. Clearly, I have no wish to bankroll an independent country that I didn't want in the first place - so I will leave, because I can afford to. I won't be alone.
I know several people who feel that way. I suspect you're right that you wouldn't be alone.
I also know a number of people who say quite openly that they will go the other way and would be EAGER to move to an independent Scotland. I realize such a concept is a shock to a unionist but there are more than a few people in the world who despise the union.
I have never thought that Scotland was too wee, stupid or incompetent. Why would I think that about myself? I am none of these things.
Which explains why you would immediately flee an independent Scotland. Very logical. =)
Complain about this comment
#68 Electric Hermit
It was a reference to their collusion with unsavoury political parties from Poland and Latvia to name two within the EU parliament.
It remains to be seen just what will come from the policy of ecxlusion that was the Calman commission.
While I was there I hadn't realised just how pro-union the hierarchy at Glasgow University was (didn't really take such a close interest in politics at the time). And I was hoping of gaining future employment at the institution! Hopefully things will change in the meantime, but i doubt it somehow.
Complain about this comment
# 69 MagisterIlluminatus
My apologies on casting aspertions on your nationality. However, you still haven't answered the question; what are the benefits of staying in the Union? You still bring up, like most Unionist posters, only anti independence statements. Give us some pro union statements.
As to the (anti independence) pensions statements, what makes you think that a deal cannot be done straight away? Do you believe that there is a pot of money sitting in a bank somewhere with all our pensions contributions in it, or are you aware, which I am sure that you are, that all those contributions have always gone into the black hole of the Treasury's pocket. There is no money to sort out as there has never been a bank deposit where this money has been kept. This is why we were told in the 90s (under Brown's wonderful handling of the economy): 'Oops, sorry, we have spent your pension money now you will have to start getting a private pension instead!'. Doling out a bank balance of zero is very easy and won't cost a penny.
However it's nice to see that you can jump ship when it suits you because you have the money to do so, as opposed to those people whom you highlighted in your post, the poor, elderly and vulnerable who can't. Of course, that is assuming that Scotland will be in a financial deficit as opposed to the UK who are just rolling in spare money?
Complain about this comment
#63ScotInNotts
". SNP=bad due to association with Tories in this way?"
Good stuff Notts, pray continue. giggle..giggle...giggle.
Complain about this comment
Simple Grayman met a Murphman
Going to the nuLab fair;
Says Simple Grayman to the Murphman,
Can I say we are a pair.
Back to serious issues.
North Sea oil gave Scotland 'massive' budget surplus, say Government records
"They calculated that Scots’ average income would increase by up to 30 per cent per head and it could be “credibly argued” that repealing the Act of Union was to Scotland’s advantage."
Complain about this comment
# 71 JRMacClure
Surely you are not insinuating that the wonderful BBC Scotland newsdesk reporters would stoop so low as to be biased in favour of one particular party in Scotland?
Complain about this comment
73. Roll_On_2010
"By the way what evidence have you got that contradicts the internal report, by former WH Smith chief executive Richard Handover and commissioned by NuLabour."
None. I wasn't contradicting it. Merely asking awkward questions about the manner in which some parts of the report were presented in the media. Doubtless there are people who actually believe somebody wrote a £35,000 cheque for a £1,000 copier. I am less credulous. I would need to see some evidence of this.
"By the way I did not any of this guff from you during the Telegraphs ‘expenses claims’ or were they wrong to."
I had plenty to say about the way The Telegraph manipulated its "revelations". It ended up looking less like an exposé of corrupt politicians and more like the kind of anti-parliamentarian propaganda the Nazis engaged in on the road to taking power.
"By the way you are also wrong about TAG…. many bloggers, including myself know it is his real name!"
You miss the point. There is no way of confirming any individual's identity. If I posted as John Smith you would know no more about who I am than if I post as Electric Hermit. As far as the blog is concerned, we are all anonymous.
It is actually quite an interesting psychological phenomenon. Some people simply cannot grasp the concept of the username. Others have no problem. And there seems to be no intermediate state. All linked to ideas of personal identity, I suspect.
Complain about this comment
#78 giggleloneranger
"It was only a matter of time before the SNP and their affiliation with the conservative party was fully exposed."
Were you the master spy that gave Gray this gem of misinformation then?
Come on giggle, admit it, confess.
Enjoying Brighton?
Complain about this comment
78. giggletheloneranger
"
Giggle and the riddle?."
more like 'wriggle on the griddle'!
Quick unionists! out of the frying pan!
Complain about this comment
77. At 6:45pm on 28 Sep 2009, Diabloandco wrote:
Question ,
Do you want independence from Westminster and England? Yes
No
Circle either Yes or No.
Now that 'll do me and it looks non rigged!
question looks fine. but the question is not the problem; the problem lies with dealing with a negative campaign. post no 69 actually has a valid point - benefits. if we are still in a recession people will want to know what safety nets are out there. tax credits, child benefit, various allowances, maternity benefits etc. i think that may be a sticky point. labour will push the benefit argument, something the tories find hard to do.
but it looks like labour are going to risk brown after all. good for everyone else, disasterous for labour. still, a few days to go and anything can happen.
Complain about this comment
#83 cynicalhighlander
Definitely the best 'union dividend' yet. To think that they still insist on telling Scots we can't survive economically on our own in the future. So much for the theory of the subsidy junkie!
Complain about this comment
#71. I would NEVER insinuate such a thing--because I know darn well it would be moderated. ;-)
#83. The last paragraphs of that article are well worth quoting. Although I see people claim that because ONLY HALF of the oil is left that should be an argument against independence. The "they took half the money which means we should give them the rest" argument baffles me a bit--but you know me. Just an American who doesn't understand these things. Anyway those final paragraphs from the article:
A senior special adviser to Alex Salmond, the First Minister, said successive Labour and Tory governments had hidden the truth about the case for independence in the 1970s.
He said more than half of the revenues from the North Sea had yet to be realised, and Scotland could still benefit by establishing an oil fund now.
An argument that unionists tend to want to avoid. What is a valid argument AGAINST an oil fund? I have yet to hear one--other than that a certain person would decide he didn't want to live in an independent Scotland.
Complain about this comment
@78
Oh so the Grey man says it therefore it must be true.
Giggles sometimes you really out do yourself.
Complain about this comment
ScotInNotts
Well, I have hope that there's more than just the SNP , who duly treat people like pebbles on a beach, kicked around, displaced by feet.
The giggler and the riggler.
Complain about this comment
Some Scottish double act.
Murphy made Gray sound interesting !!!
Yawn !!!
Complain about this comment
77. Diabloandco
"Do you want independence from Westminster and England?"
But the Scottish government does not have the power to deliver this. It only has the power to negotiate the terms of secession with Westminster.
Complain about this comment
#82 giggleloneranger
you wouldn't be trying to selectively misconstrue my posts again now would you giggle/Derek? :)
What happened to the despondency with Labour of the past few weeks, the new found confidence for an independent Scotland, or is the conference atmosphere just that intoxicating?
Complain about this comment
#69 Magister illuminatus, Evening , if you are not a banker you should seriously think about it , you would fit in well.
if you are not prepared to stick around and help people less fortunate than yourself you would be no great loss!you would fit in better down south.
Sid
Complain about this comment
#94. At 7:18pm on 28 Sep 2009, Electric Hermit wrote:
77. Diabloandco
"Do you want independence from Westminster and England?"
But the Scottish government does not have the power to deliver this. It only has the power to negotiate the terms of secession with Westminster.
Exactly. And exactly why the opposition oppose the perfectly sensible SNP wording. They CAN negotiate. They cannot promise something that is not within their power.
By trying to force the SNP to offer something they don't have the power to deliver the opposition is clearly trying to undermine a referendum without having to do so openly.
Complain about this comment
Talking to a number of folk from south of the border the general notion is that Scotland "cannot be allowed"( direct quote) to be independent because we have all the remaining natural resources, and without us England would be bankrupt.All the so caled major parties are in a panic because they believe (as opposed to what they say publicly) that in the current climate it is highly likely that a referendum would give a vote for independence, since we could hardly make a bigger mess of our own affairs that previous Westminster governments have done.
Complain about this comment
71. JRMacClure
Seems you're right. Even my totally innocent and light-hearted response to this has been censored. No matter. I don't think anyone needs me to tell them what you-know-who is.
Complain about this comment
# 94 Electric Hermit
Scotland has the right to declare UDI if it so wishes. We came together with the English parliament all those years ago and now that the Scottish parliament has reconvened then we have the right of self-determination, just like any other nation.
Complain about this comment
for anyone who wants to see the two ronnies here it is
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00n4mw3/Labour_Party_Conference_2009_Economy/
from about 7 mins onwards
go on I dare you, double dare you
I am all for fair debate , the Scottish Labour members are a disgrace to Politics for stooping so low with their comments
wonder when we will see a square go in Edinburgh, because that is the only way Labour could win but then Jim Murphy would likely run away shouting "keys keys"
sounds like the language you hear in a playground
Complain about this comment
83. cynicalHighlander
The report highlighted in the Telegraph article that you linked to is available online. Just search for the Gavin McCrone report:
"The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner."
Complain about this comment
77. Diabloandco
"Do you want independence from Westminster and England?"
Eh!. Since when was Scotland ever a part of England?
Complain about this comment
97. JRMacClure
"By trying to force the SNP to offer something they don't have the power to deliver the opposition is clearly trying to undermine a referendum without having to do so openly."
Precisely.
Ideally an referendum should be answerable with a simple "YES" or "NO". But sometimes the issues do not lend themselves to such simplification. Which is why referendums tend to be a bad idea. Even where a simple dichotomy can be defined, it is never possible to be sure that people are voting on the question being asked. Referendums are not the epitome of democracy in action that some suppose them to be.
Complain about this comment
100. gedguy2
"Scotland has the right to declare UDI if it so wishes. We came together with the English parliament all those years ago and now that the Scottish parliament has reconvened then we have the right of self-determination, just like any other nation."
I would be wary of using the term "right" in this regard. There would always be questions about the legitimacy of independence acquired by this route. Remember Rhodesia.
Besides, it is neither SNP policy, nor is it necessary. We live in a democracy and there are well-established procedures by which our right to self-determination can be expressed and exercised.
Complain about this comment
Still, we've got our dear leader to look forward to tomorrow.
Does anybody notice his hand movements? very unnatural. He must spend hours with his style guru practicing that.
I reminds me of the puppets on Thunderbirds. I keep wondering if there's somebody up in the rafters pulling the strings.
Complain about this comment
81. Gedguy2
Benefits of staying in the Union - firstly, the marriage may be going through sticky moments, as you would kind of expect after 300 years. But, even at that, it's a whole lot cheaper than a divorce - ask any divorcee if you don't believe me.
Secondly, the view that you can still maintain friendly relations with England after the divorce isn't remotely realistic - again, ask any divorcee.
Thirdly, in any divorce the weaker economic partner always gets shafted - again, ask any divorcee.
Fourthly, and this one is arguable, from reading these postings I get the distinct impression that you really don't get the fundamental difference between a nation and a state. Independence is not about forming a nation - the nation already exists. It is about creating a state, that takes time, it takes money and the fact that the SNP is noticably reticent and how they intend to state-build is concerning.
96. sidthesceptic
I'm always impressed by people such as yourself adopting the moral high ground on someone else's buck. I wonder if you'd be quite as morally high-minded paying 50 per cent tax and 14 per cent National Insurance to help the needy, in the sure knowledge that when the hat gets past round you're supposed to cough even more of your salary whilst being looked down on by morally superior people who'll down tools at the drop of hat if they don't get their exact pay rise entitlement.
Complain about this comment
If you want to balance others against the loss of the Magister--I own a home in Scotland. If it were not a part of the union, it would probably become my main residence and I'd look for citizenship. Why not while it's in the UK? Because I see no superiority in a country that runs around doing the BIDDING of the US to living IN the US--a country with whose policies, I freely admit, I rarely agree.
I know others--many of Scottish descent and others not--who have expressed the same opinion. However, I don't think that some would leave and others would consider coming should be of the least interest in those who are deciding the constitutional future of their own country.
And I am appalled at people accepting Iain Gray's (and others) comments that one's constitutional status is a minor matter.
I can't think of anything MORE important. He should be told so in no uncertain terms as should Annabel Goldie. It is SHAMEFUL for Scottish MSPs to say that the future of their own country doesn't matter.
Complain about this comment
#69 MagisterIlluminatus
Wow! What a set of assumptions in one post. I'd like to see a link to those actuarial calculations please?
I've always assumed that disentangling would take some time. There is no necessity for trying to do it in a matter of months.
Complain about this comment
#107. Thirdly, in any divorce the weaker economic partner always gets shafted - again, ask any divorcee.
You're right, as shown in previously quoted articles, that England would go through a hard time without the support of Scotland and Scotland's natural resources, but I hardly think that should be a deciding factor for the people of Scotland, who have to be concerned about their OWN future.
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
romeplebian 101:
Thanks for the link to both speeches.
Jim Murphy was dire, really dire. Gray's delivery was pretty decent, however hearing it simply highlights the extent of the man's bitterness and anger. How Brian Taylor can for one moment suggest that this was anything other than a personal attack on the SNP and Salmond is beyond me, intriguing it wasn't - he bludgeoned his way through a rather basic speech.
It contained little else but a collection of bitter asides and clumsy jokes that only die hard Labour delegates would find amusing [what was the curry joke about?]. The language used by both Gray and Murphy called into question their suitability for positions of power. Hate, division, negativity and smears [including conflating the SNP with European extremist parties] were the bedrock of both speeches.
However, I have to say once again that the use of two tragic deaths was beyond the pale - another 'Chisholm' moment for BT I'm afraid.
Murphy:
Focusing on Scotland's reluctance to vote Conservative was a strange tactic to employ. Murphy unwittingly strengthened the arguments for independence by highlighting the damage a Conservative Government has done in the past and may yet do in the future.
Labour cannot be in power for ever, so how does Murphy suggest Scotland insulates itself from what looks like being a decade of Tory rule?
No mention of Calman!! Which Scottish journalist will pick up on this glaring ommission?
Dinwoodie might, as might Iain MacWhirter ..... but sadly I don't think any of the very well paid political 'journalists' at the BBC will, although Brewer might be a decent each way bet.
Oh, I wonder if Gray was instructed not to mention the Megrahi decision?
Complain about this comment
Can someone point me to just when the Labour Party (and movement) lost belief in its own abilities? As a child I remember being engaged by my grandfather's talk of socialism - justice and equality and the struggle for workers' rights. He had been a trade union activist in Fife and was black listed by employers to the extent he had to move the family to Shetland to secure employment.
Today's Labour party seek votes on the back of not being Tories, (and a vote for any other party is a vote for the Tories)? And yet it seems so long since I remember it being any other way. As a child the Labour Party seemed almost romantic through my grandfather's eyes. What a disgrace to his generation the current crop are!
On topic and it seems Iain may just be an arch nationalist in disguise. No referendum, not what the people want or need... So to take his and Tavish Scotts argument if after 2011 Scottish elections a majority coalition can be formed by SNP, Greens and any Indy supporting socialists can we then skip a referendum and go straight to suing for independence? Clearly Iain is keen to take the risk of a referendum out of the equation.
Complain about this comment
Thirdly, in any divorce the weaker economic partner always gets shafted
I think that England will be treated fairly in any negotiations.
Complain about this comment
Secondly, the view that you can still maintain friendly relations with England after the divorce isn't remotely realistic
To suggest that the English will turn on Scots is insulting to the English in the extreme. Of course it is realistic to expect friendly relations, why would the English show anything other than relief and perhaps a wish of good luck to the nation ofr described as living of English largesse?
Unionist arguments are indeed poor when they are reduced to inventing intolerance on the part of our neighbours, many of whom have deep seated family ties and friendships.
Complain about this comment
@107
Cheaper than a divorce?
Maybe in the short run but speaking as a divorcée far better out of that marriage and as a result long term savings outstrip costs of patching up the holes I'm the marriage. Always strikes me as odd that in a country where 30% or so marriages end in divorce unionists use this as a derogatory term. I'm sure in the good old days of Victorian values a man had ways of keeping an errant wife in check - I guess like many of those poor wretched I'm fed ip
of the abuse.
Complain about this comment
Gray's arrogance is mindblowing. It's almost as if he hasn't actually realised that Labour lost the Scottish election and he sure as eggs is eggs hasn't understood that his party's wholesale destruction of the economy is going to lose it the next general election as well.
A little humility would have gone down well perhaps.
Complain about this comment
Again, Magister, every one of that list now that I look at it is some kind scare about what horrible things might happen upon a divorce. The question is: what good would come of staying in the (admittedly shotgun) marriage?
Not disadvantages of leaving: 1. A divorce might be expensive. 2. people who are divorced don't like each other 3. the woman always gets shafted 4. state-building takes work.
Well, other than that fact that 2. pre-supposes that someone who is headed for a divorce will start liking each other by not getting a divorce which is highly unlikely and ignoring the blatant sexism in 3. none of those give a single advantage to staying in the marriage. And state-building is a good thing not a bad one.
What would Scotland get out of it? Could you mention a single benefit (to Scotland, not to England) for Scotland's staying within the union? Just one?
Complain about this comment
107. MagisterIlluminatus
"Benefits of staying in the Union - firstly, the marriage may be going through sticky moments, as you would kind of expect after 300 years. But, even at that, it's a whole lot cheaper than a divorce - ask any divorcee if you don't believe me."
We are not talking about a divorce, with all that implies about the bitterness and recriminations which tend to accompany the breakdown of interpersonal relationships. We are talking about a negotiated secession from a archaic and redundant political union.
Rather than offering an argument in favour of the union, you have resorted to an emotive argument presenting the secession process as something totally other than what it is.
Complain about this comment
#109Oldnat
In one of your earlier posts you may just have been right to suggest it's now or never for Independence.
The problem the SNP have, is do they hold the confidence of the Scottish people after three years in power and a litany of broken promises.
Did the SNP miss a chance of a life time, when Wendy Alexander, offered the referendum under her leadership of the opposition?
All the polls tells us that Independence and youth interest have deserted the nats and their very short lived honeymoon period is well and truly over.
Mike Russell, the constitutional chief of the SNP just cant cut the mustard when he needs to.
Complain about this comment
#108 JRMacClure
Sounds more than a fair swap to me!
Complain about this comment
60. northhighlander
We've got bigger priorities! Do you think trams grow on trees? ;)
How could we possiby invest in the future while we're busy tending the collective egos of our big cities.
In all seriousness northhighlander, have you though about using the parliament's petition mechanism. Maybe you could get the ball rolling on here and see if we can find wording among ourselves for a petition to the Scottish Parliament asking that they put aside politicking in order to make a plan towards strategic investment at the nearest opportunity to ramp up our renewables sector as quickly as possible, giving it priority over some other classes of spending?
Complain about this comment
# 107 MagisterIlluminatus
firstly, the marriage may be going through sticky moments, as you would kind of expect after 300 years. But, even at that, it's a whole lot cheaper than a divorce - ask any divorcee if you don't believe me.
I don't need to ask a divorcee; I am one. Let me tell you that since my divorce I have been able to spend the money that I earn solely on me. After 22 years of subsidising her wants it was a pleasure to spend my money on the way that I wanted to.
Secondly, the view that you can still maintain friendly relations with England after the divorce isn't remotely realistic - again, ask any divorcee.
I get on very well with my ex-wife. We speak at least once per week and I go up to her house to help her when she needs repairs done. Not all divorces end in the two parties not speaking to each other.
Thirdly, in any divorce the weaker economic partner always gets shafted - again, ask any divorcee.
It makes a change from me getting shafted.
Fourthly, and this one is arguable, from reading these postings I get the distinct impression that you really don't get the fundamental difference between a nation and a state. Independence is not about forming a nation - the nation already exists. It is about creating a state, that takes time, it takes money and the fact that the SNP is noticably reticent and how they intend to state-build is concerning.
You get that impression because the SNP is not going to tell the people of Scotland what the state should be like. That will have to be decided. It's called democracy. However, you still haven't told us the benefits of living in the Union. It is a simple question now let's see if you can answer that. If you can't then don't pretend that there is a benefit to the Scottish people for staying in the Union. Tell us the benefits, please!
Complain about this comment
107. Eyes down for another game of Unionist Bingo.
The Union has served Scotland "well enough"? Hmm, you must have started with really low expectations.
The divorce analogy is only an analogy you know, and like all analogies can only be pushed so far. But you've taken the elasticated waistband of that analogy and stretched it so far breaking point it's now resting round your ankles.
Why do you imagine that Scotland and England would be condemned to poor relations? Does the Czech Republic takes every opportunity it can to damage Slovakian interests? Does Sweden secretly plan to destroy the Norwegian economy? Other countries manage to act like grown-ups post-independence. You appear to be saying that the English are uniquely bitter and unmatched in their capacity to bear grudges. I thought you were a Unionist, and here you are harbouring dark thoughts about our Anglosaxon neighbours. Frankly you're being paranoid. We seem to see a lot of that kind of thing in lieu of a pro-Union argument.
Yes indeed it costs money to create the apparatus of a state. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and many other East European countries were forced to create apparatus of state whilst at the same time suffering from a ruined economy bequeathed to them by Soviet rule. Yet none of them were bankrupted in the process. Estonia with its post-Soviet basketcase economy could afford it, but Scotland is apparently too poor.
Complain about this comment
# 105 Electric Hermit
What do you suggest we do if, after we have a referendum and the people vote for independence, the UK government does not want to let us go?
This is why that I say that we have a right to declare UDI.
Complain about this comment
#124. I think you have a strong point about post-referendum, gedguy2. In that case, a UDI would be perfectly reasonable. And remember the argument AGAINST Rhodesia in the UN--that it was a racist state. (There are a lot of those but let's not go into that)
The same argument could not be made against Scottish independence especially if the UK government chose to deny implementation of a referendum. I'm a long way from an expert (ha! a LONG way) on EU law but wouldn't that put the UK in a very equivocal position?
But if it came down to it, certainly Scotland would have the right to declare UDI if the UK refused to negotiate an independence settlement in the face of a positive referendum.
Complain about this comment
We have heard much mention over the years of the "West Lothian Question".
Today I would like to pose the "East Lothian Question". Considering the mesmerisingly angry and spiteful performance of Mr Gray, and the even greter restraint, taste and charm shown by the Labour MP for the same constituency (remember her?) perhaps we should ask the following: why do members of the East Lothian Labour party despise the electorate so much?
It could be summarised as "How dare they vote for someone else! How dare they!" I imagine the coming general election may raise this bitter fury to even greater heights....
Complain about this comment
@123 infrequentallele
"stretched it so far ...it is now resting around your ankles" LOL
Perhaps this explains the messy divorce!
Complain about this comment
#112. At 8:30pm on 28 Sep 2009, BlooToon wrote:
"Today's Labour party seek votes on the back of not being Tories, (and a vote for any other party is a vote for the Tories)? And yet it seems so long since I remember it being any other way. As a child the Labour Party seemed almost romantic through my grandfather's eyes. What a disgrace to his generation the current crop are!"
It really is pathetic, isn't it. "We know you hate and despise us, but even though you don't love us, you must vote for us to stop the Tories getting in" Whatever happened to vision and hope?
Complain about this comment
107. MagisterIlluminatus
Just to switch the analogy -
"Benefits of staying in the Union - firstly, the marriage may be going through sticky moments, as you would kind of expect after 300 years. But, even at that, it's a whole lot cheaper than a divorce - ask any divorcee if you don't believe me.
Imagine that it's not a marriage but a family with one of the kids in their late teens - their house their rules, room for growth limited. The relationship gets more fractious as you would expect as need for mutual independece takes it's toll. It's not costly like a divorce, mum & dad are likely to be better off, while for the one leaving the family home. It'll be less cushy to start but they'll get to make their own way in the world, and the opportunities are far greater - who knows what they'll make of themselves, the world is their oyster! Ask most people who have left home and/or had kids who have.
"Secondly, the view that you can still maintain friendly relations with England after the divorce isn't remotely realistic - again, ask any divorcee."
After separating from their family and going it alone - tthe relationship improves greatly as the leaver learns the lessons of the real world, the parents realise how much they are missing - yet everyone is glad it's this way since they now free to pursue their own paths without worrying or being worried unduly by the other party. Again - ask almost any family ever.
"Thirdly, in any divorce the weaker economic partner always gets shafted - again, ask any divorcee."
The weaker party gets stronger - the leaver stand as a full peer in the adult world, with all the responsibilites and opportunities that entails. Neither are the parents diminished, they usually end up with a very close relationship with another independent adult.
Complain about this comment
#127. Maybe he thinks we'll be impressed with his "dangly bits". Pardon my skepticism. ;-)
Complain about this comment
# 125 JRMacClure
At the end of the day if Scotland has to declare UDI what are the UK government going to do; send in the tanks? I hardly think so. Imagine the fuss in the UN if the UK government decided on such a stupid action. I can think of more subtle ways than that. The UK government is no saint but neither is it the USSR who rolled their tanks into Hungary in 1956 or Czecheslovakia in 1968.
Complain about this comment
#107 magister illuminatus - so you chose not answer the question but I will answer your post.
I have never been on strike in my life, and was a manager in two private organisations. I am not working at present as the type of cancer I am living with doesn't allow me to. If you feel like swapping places just let me know! your earlier posts tell me what the answer will be!
Sid
Complain about this comment
Re:119 - Giggle...
"….Wendy Alexander, offered the referendum under her leadership of the opposition?
….their very short lived honeymoon period is well and truly over."
That'll be Ms Wendy (of hungry caterpillar bedtime stories, "bring it on", and of course, "no intentional wrongdoing" fame) Alexander you're describing as a "leader" of the "opposition"...you're having a laugh surely?
Since when was either she or her party worthy of such notable descriptions?
And talking of a "short lived honeymoon"...you're the one that mentions it immediately after stating the SNP have been in power for three years...must be some definition of "short" you have there ;-)
roflmao
lol
Complain about this comment
119. giggletheloneranger
"The problem the SNP have, is do they hold the confidence of the Scottish people after three years in power and a litany of broken promises."
Yes, that's why the unionist pack are looking more and more desperate with each passing day. Ah, the litany of broken promises - is that record not scratched to death by now? All the parties know the electorate will decide - I know which party looks most assured at the moment.
Do you think more of the wishy-washy liblab stitch up would have us in better nick?
"All the polls tells us that Independence and youth interest have deserted the nats and their very short lived honeymoon period is well and truly over."
God bless the polls, when it finally hits the unionist parties - they'll not suffer so much, having not seen it coming.
Complain about this comment
#131. No argument. I have a hard time seeing the UK sending in tanks and I have a hard time seeing the soldiers who have fought for so long beside the Scots (and many of them Scots themselves) following such orders.
No, I don't imagine such a thing happening. And even in Rhodesia wasn't most of the action against them diplomatic and economic (which would be more difficult against Scotland since I seem to recall that OIL goes THROUGH Scotland)? My memory on Rhodesia is a bit vague admittedly. The US chose to keep at least some relations with Rhodesia throughout for that matter.
No, I wouldn't envision tanks and I think in the face of a referendum there would be negotiations. My worry might be if they would be "good faith" negotiations and how much trouble the UK would have with actually turning loose of those natural resources. It could get sticky in negotiation but--I think it would work out in the end.
I think a UDI would be just about their worst nightmare and would be avoided.
Complain about this comment
#125
The idea that Westminster has some sort of veto over our independence is one of the unionists favourite deceptions, designed to suggest independence just isn't possible, it just really isn't. It is a bit like their refusal to even discuss independence serriously in years past. The SNP however has dragged the unionists along, kicking and screaming. The unionists live in denial but at the end of the day:
1) Scotland's sovereignty is vested in the people.
2) It would be internationally recognised, Scotland is not in a uniquely different or difficult position from other (re)emergent nations. It just seems that way when you see everything through a UK prism.
3) Westminster telling us what to do just makes us even more mad.
3) The English just couldn't care less.
Complain about this comment
You mean the polls that show the highest demand for independence among the youth? THOSE polls? Yep. That's what the polls say. The same polls that show the SNP well ahead of Labour? THOSE polls? =)
Complain about this comment
@131
Just who would have the authority to send in the tanks seeing as how it's Her Majesty's Armed Forces?
Another assumption that the unionists seem to make is that the right of use of and decisions on apportioning state properties will lie in the hands of the remnants of the UK.
Perhaps we could point the Tridents stationed on the Clyde at their tanks. Might be a case for renewal!
Complain about this comment
In the case of a UDI, I can imagine what the Scots would say about taking on a part of the UK national debt. *ahem* I can't post it though.
Complain about this comment
131. gedguy2
More likely send in the tankers ;)
Complain about this comment
@119 giggles
Three years???
May 2007 - Sept 2009
Three years???
You could yet go far in the Liebour camp with math that good. Are they fast tracking you for the Treasury?
Complain about this comment
131. At 9:15pm on 28 Sep 2009, gedguy2 wrote:
"At the end of the day if Scotland has to declare UDI what are the UK government going to do; send in the tanks?"
Might have a hard time doing that given Westminster's persistent refusal to dual the A1 north of Newcastle - using the excuse that it doesn't qualify as it doesn't link two major ENGLISH cities ;-)
Complain about this comment
What supporters of the union dont seem to get is that people like myself who support the SNP and independence quite simply do not feel British, I am a Scot who feels that Scotland should have the same standing in the world as other countries. No amount of arguement for staying in the union will change that, and even worse news for the unionist camp is that since i changed to voting SNP in about oh 1990 and indeed since the SNP were voted into power I feel more Scottish than ever and that my friends is something that will never be reversed, so yes independence is now inevitable, maybe not in the next election but its certainly going to happen.
Complain about this comment
124. gedguy2
"What do you suggest we do if, after we have a referendum and the people vote for independence, the UK government does not want to let us go?"
That's just not going to happen. Denying Scotland's right to self-determination would leave RUK totally isolated in the world community.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
What I want to know is who is paying for your little trip to Brighton?
Who paid for "the idiot" to go to America?
Do you get expenses?
Is there a limit as to what you can claim for?
Now if it is the licence payer who is paying for these little sortees then I want to know why?
There is absolutely no need for you to attend the Labour Party Conference in Brighton unless you are a member of the labour party and want to associate yourself with the likes of the comeback man Mandleson.
As for Labour Scotland, with Murphy and Grey in charge they have little chance of remaining a political force.
But back to my question Brian----Who is paying??
Complain about this comment
Mandelson getting a standing ovation at the Labour conference - awesome!
Keep the red flag flying eh? I'm sure it'll work for some target demographic south of the border, if I was in charge of SNP media i'd be finding as many different ways of replaying videos of it :)
Were you clapping Giggles? OR not?
Complain about this comment
#101 Rome.
Thanks for the link. Gray was incredible. I am biased but how could any sane person watch that and not be embarrased. Labour voters must be aghast. He is so bitter that he thinks it is ok to blame the tragic death of a child on the SNP. A disgrace.
Hr did not draw breath to explain Labour's vision or policies for Scotland. Except once; he would send knifemen to jail. Iain, Why did you not legilisate for this when you were in power?
There was one hilarious moment; Murphy introduced Gray as the next First Minister!
A bunch of Zombies!
Freedom
Complain about this comment
#143. Interestingly enough, that is the argument the unionists avoid at all costs.
I keep expecting the "But we have been British for 302 years and should remain British" argument to be put forward. The fact that it isn't surely must be a telling statement.
Not once on this forum have I seen a unionist actually argue for a Scottish attachment to the union itself. Now, I personally know a few Scots who have made that argument to me. I know that at least some feel that way.
So maybe unionists would do better to stand up and make the real arguments for the union. Isn't there a better one than that it might cost money to break it up?!!
Seriously, how about raising the level of debate off the basement floor.
Complain about this comment
143. peteraberdeenshire
"I am a Scot who feels that Scotland should have the same standing in the world as other countries. No amount of arguement for staying in the union will change that"
Very well said!
Complain about this comment
@124 and 125
The UK would not reject a Scottish referendum 'yes' vote unless they were able to 'massage' or rig a referendum British Labour 1979 style.
They would not because as the UK state as a member of certain EU bodies and have now signed and ratified certain treaties. One of which is the European council treaty or Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. This does not have much 'teeth' but this imo would be a flagrant violation or contravention(s) of the principles the UK has ratified.
See: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/157.htm
Especially: (imo)
articles 2,3,4,5, and 7 no less, all in one go.
Please read this it is at least least useful to know what the UK pretends to support in principle.
Actually I feel that the UK STATE and its acolytes (eg BBC) are already pushing the credible limits of certain areas eg article 4. However tragedies of democracy such as Calman can be argued as representing the will of the Scottish parliament. Though true, it excludes a sizeable minority view and so clearly, in any reasonable interpretation of the spirit of article 4, Calman is already in contravention.
Complain about this comment
@143
Great post and something the "patriotic" Scots unionists don't get. Their patriotism being based on what being "a scot" can do for them within the union as opposed to their fellow Scots. It's why none of them can expand on good reasons to retain the union only the things they see as being disadvantageous to their own position.
The anti-Glasgow thing was just an expansion of this mindset. I look forward to an independent nation where the quality of discussion is about the best for all our peoples and not the retention of power bases by unionist parties desperate for power at Westmidden.
Complain about this comment
139 JRMacClure
It is indeed telling that in any independence negociation Scotland will not be be negotiating its share of the UK largesse. At least in a psitive sense.
Instead Scotland will be negociating how little of the UK (failed sorld power) dept it must take on. Break up bitain, end up less broke. Scotland can no longer afford to support itself + a state 10 times its population.
Complain about this comment
I have been reading this blog for years, but this is my first post.
So first, a little about me. I work in the video games industry and currently live in Hamburg, Germany.
I thought some of you might be interested in this article http://www.develop-online.net/news/32926/Realtime-Worlds-threatens-tax-escape-to-Ireland .
Now, about Iain Gray. This man makes me quite depressed. I remember very well the euphoric feeling in my parents' home when the Tories were kicked out in 1997. For all his failings, Blair was at least capable of communicating a positive vision for the future.
Iain Gray completely lacks this skill, to an embarrassing degree. I simply cannot believe the depths that he and his ilk are willing to stoop in scoring political points (looking at you Murphy); and that someone like Chisholm seems to be on the sidelines of his party (the Scottish part at least) rather than leading it.
I would be lying if I said that Gray and Co didn't make me angry, of course they do, but pity and sympathy are the strongest feelings I have for them. This is probably because they look like lost children who are scared like hell of having their pocket money stolen.
On the other hand, pity and sympathy does not come into the equation for how I feel about the "free press" of Scotland and "Great" Britain. Only boiling anger for them I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
posted this in the wrong section here again
I can't help thinking Jim Murphy is descended of the Anunnaki
And Ian Gray is the supremrockerfeller or he would have us believe
Complain about this comment
Interesting to hear Ed Milliband at the Labour conference talking up the environment meeting in Denmark whilst behind the scenes he has denied Scottish ministers a place at the discussions.
Complain about this comment
148. JRMacClure
"So maybe unionists would do better to stand up and make the real arguments for the union."
Um! We're stronger together and we're stronger together and.....zzzz
Complain about this comment
#150. Thank you for posting that link and information.
Complain about this comment
Thought I would return partly coz I'm bored being off sick, and that things appear to have settled down somewhat.
Still stuck on the fence, although falling into independence territory simply because I think at the next GE there is going to be a hung parliament. Don't know why, just a feeling. And a hung parliament is bad for Scotland.
Watched Gray's riveting speech - it had all the motivational qualities of a rivet. How on earth did this man ever because leader of the opposition up here? At least Andy Kerr is well known.
As for the subject matter, why bring in the death of a child? If you want to make a substantive attack you select policies and actions that can be substantiated.
I see udi has been mentioned again. One, I don't think if a referendum vote is successful Westminister could or even would stop it, especially conservatives. If we do go independent I want to see an orderly transition, not a mad dash. If we declared udi, what is to stop Westminster going "ok, stuff you lot, off you go!"? Or am I being too cynical again.
As to the referendum, my own opinion is for questions in plain English, on the lines of:
1. Do you wish Scotland to be totally independent of the UK?
2. Do you wish for Scotland to remain part of a federal UK, with certain matters such as defence and foreign affairs handled centrally?
3. Do you wish for Scotland to remain part of the UK?
Straightforward questions. No leading or indirect questions and therefore no possibility of them being "rigged". The last thing we need is a repeat of the fiasco of the last elections.
For each question, the implications of such a move must be given in a format agreed by all parties, thus ensuring that the electorate are fully aware of what they are voting for.
Independence is not about party politics, but a major change on the nation as a whole.
Complain about this comment
Downgrading the British Army’s presence in Scotland plays into the nationalists’ hands
"Jack McConnell, when he was Labour first minister, did try to stave off the regiments’ merger. While his successor, Mr Gray, is now in opposition, it is surely time for Mr Murphy to be banging on the door of Bob Ainsworth, the Defence Secretary, to ask him what is going on."
Complain about this comment
#156. At 10:20pm on 28 Sep 2009, cynicalHighlander wrote:
148. JRMacClure
"So maybe unionists would do better to stand up and make the real arguments for the union."
Um! We're stronger together and we're stronger together and.....zzzz
Ok. You made me giggle. Eek!
I think, if true and it would need to be shown in what way since bigger isn't necessarily stronger, it would be a legitimate argument. Is that IT though?
The only argument for the union is that it's bigger?
And incidentally although someone has accused me of it, I'm not anti-union. (I am blatantly pro-Scottish but I'll leave it to Scots to define what Scottish means)
I am a bit anti-UK in that I don't like many of their policies in world politics. The habit since WWII of the UK following along behind the US like a pet poodle is a BIT disconcerting. (This comment got deleted from Nick Robinson's blog--they don't like the mention of it. Not too sure about mentioning that embarrassing truth here) I think I offended someone by suggesting that a PM with a backbone would be a GOOD thing. My admiration for the SNP stems from their ability to show off THAT bit of anatomy that so many politicians seem to find themselves lacking.
Complain about this comment
158. Neil_Small147
Nice to see you back and get well soon.
Complain about this comment
#159. I think that article is missing one rather important factor as has been pointed out on this blog before. If no army is commanded from Scotland... WHAT defense does Scotland have?
A question well worth asking. Is there a REASON Mr. Murphy doesn't want to look into it too closely? Just asking.
Complain about this comment
Did anyone else notice the rows and rows of empty seats in the conference hall while Iain Gray and Jim Murphy were speaking today?
How embarrassing for "Scottish" Labour, I think this clearly shows how much they've given up on Scotland.
Complain about this comment
Since my friend Neil Small has made a come back, then I too must follow in his foot steps.
A hung parliament! very likely but who will Clegg do the business with?
I really think Clegg favours the conservatives notion of bigger cuts and that would indeed be a very bad thing for Scotland.
I tend to take the position that the proposed referendum has become thee political football, that's being stretched, punched and booted all over the place just to dilute it's potential. Independence or the status quo aka Union, it isn't a very difficult question.
Why he wants to debate anything on St, Andrews day is numbing.When will St, Andrews day be a national holiday?.
Complain about this comment
158. Neil_Small147
"Still stuck on the fence, although falling into independence territory simply because I think at the next GE there is going to be a hung parliament. Don't know why, just a feeling. And a hung parliament is bad for Scotland."
I have a nagging notion that it's going to be a hung parliament too. It shouldn't be really - Labour look like they're ready to be swept up and put in the bin. Still...
I haven't given the consequences for Scotland much thought though, care to elaborate on why the hung parliament in particular might be bad for Scotland?
Complain about this comment
As an Englishman I have been amazed that no one has thrown the 800lb gorilla into this discussion.
There is a lot of SNP and Labour bile being vented against each other but let me suggest another interested party in all this i.e David Cameron.
If I was David Cameron I would want Scottish independence or English liberation, however he wanted to sell it to people on ether side of the border to be sorted sooner rather than later.
I'm sure someone could work out how much less of a swing the Tories would require to have a majority in England and Wales only compared to Britain including Scotland. I will exclude Northern Ireland not out of any malice but in acknowledgement that in Ulster politics is more local hence the SDLP, DUP, UUP, Sinn Feinn et al rtaher than Labour or Conservative MP's.
Without Scottish MP's it would be much more difficult for Labour ever to get back in power.
Perhaps Cameron should put in his manifesto the following.
"If the SNP is elected at the next Scottish Parliamentary election the Conservative Party would support a referendum on Scottish cessession from the Union. If that vote was to be in favour of cessession a conservative UK government would work with a Scottish SNP government on an agreement for financial and political separation which would then be put to the vote as follows.
Do you agree that Scotland should withdraw from the United Kingdom on the basis of the agreement made between the UK and Scottish governments?
However if the original vote was against independence the SNP would agree to not raise an independence ballot for at least ten years."
Many of the biggest issued facing the UK as a whole in the near future such as Trident, Nuclear power renewal or not?, armed forces make up and defence policy such as the new aircraft carriers and NHS reforms all require long term plans that can oly be made with a degree of finality one way or another once the question of Scottish independence or not is resolved in the short to medium term.
Complain about this comment
Listened to Gray on Scotland at ten where he was asked what his policies for Scotland were, still waiting.
After his ranting speech this morning and this evening's waffle I will be reporting to the WWF that we have a new species in Scotland and would like to have it called the "Ranting Waffler" and needs caged before it harms itself.
Complain about this comment
New Ipsos Mori poll: Con 36%, Lab 24%, L-D 25%. Not sure who commissioned it yet. See this website's PM 'agrees to Cameron TV debate'. Electoral Calculus predict a single-digit Con majority if SNP and PC retain latest YouGov shares.
Murphy/Gray disunion dividend, perhaps?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
158 Neill_Small
Interesting post, tend to agree, but yes too cynical ;)
However I really do not understand that it is the concept of a hung parliament that 'tilts' your balance. Is there nothing more pressing?
EG. Scotlands position in the treaty of union otself? EG. That is to say: civic Scotland, The Scottish parliament (cross party), and Scottish MPs in Westminster all oppose trident renewal in majority ie an entire country and treaty partner.
Now given that we are a (ahem) 'treaty partner' doesnt our opinion count for anything? Arent we in fact the closest of allies to our English neighbours due to this self same treaty?
The truth is Scottish opinion is inferior in the UK state. We are last among equals. This is a travesty of the treaties of union. There is no 'union' when one 'partner' dictates policy to another. Unless we are prepared to accept our inferior position as a vassal entity/region. ie British Labour default position.
I suppose that Scots, overall, do not see themselves solely as a 'region'. We are a country and a treaty partner, at least on paper? Agreed?
Except, contemporary actions prove otherwise.
Thatcher stepped on Scotland with the somewhat personal insult of the Poll tax of impunity.
Blair and Brown repeats the process with Trident renewal in the face of National opposition with a treaty partner.
Strange that this does not motivate you at all. Even if you support trident it means that democratic inferiority of Scotland is OK in principal? discuss...
Complain about this comment
166. Economicallyliterate
It's certainly a very thorough and plausible analysis.
I don't see what any of the parties really have to lose any more by making the manifesto commitment you suggest.
I still harbour doubts that Cameron will be his own master to the same degree if the Conservatives gain power.
Complain about this comment
with a side order of humble pie for Mr Murphy.
"Do note that in 2014 Norway will have a PPP of $58,610.092
Ireland $42,947.457
Iceland $43,127.063
and poor old Blighty including us ungrateful Scots, will have attained a grand total of $38,807.832"
Complain about this comment
#166. Even discounting whether Mr. Cameron is a fervent unionist or not, there would seem to be pros and cons to his trying to sell a referendum down south though, surely. Many English seem to deeply resent Scots but are they willing to give up Scottish assets? It might be a harder sell than you mention.
I'm not sure what NHS reforms have to do with it though. I believe the systems are separate, are they not? But you make some good points on settling this issue for long-term planning. It makes the argument that it shouldn't be voted on in the near future even more absurd.
Complain about this comment
#158 - "Thought I would return "
Neil, welcome back. I see your return appears to have excorcised the giggler and resurrected the (semi) sensible Mr Barking instead.
#166 - "If I was David Cameron I would want Scottish independence or English liberation,"
CMD has already came out against that option, stating he wants to cement Scotland within the Union. The real question is why? What does CMD see as the advantage (to the tories) of keeping Scotland as part of the Union?
Complain about this comment
153. LachsNDeineHose:
Thanks for the link and welcome to the forum.
Glenn Campbell on Newsnight Scotland was actually quite balanced for a change - he can do it. Gerry Hassan as usual offered some interesting thoughts on Murphy and Gray.
The new Ipso Mori poll showing Labour in third is sensational.
Complain about this comment
IMF
Complain about this comment
166. Economicallyliterate
"Perhaps Cameron should put in his manifesto the following."
Let me remind you that it is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Defence of the union is one of the pillars of Tory policy. Cameron himself is totally and unequivocally committed to preserving the union (link). Whatever party might make the kind of manifesto promise you refer to, it sure as hell ain't the Tories.
Independence will not be given to us by any of the unionist parties. It is not in their gift even supposing they were so inclined. We get independence by taking it. There is no other way.
Complain about this comment
On the debates, does anyone know if there is any automatic right to reply should one political party not present at the debate come under attack from those present?
I'm just a little concerned that these debates will offer significant television coverage to the two main London parties. OK if they're going to batter lumps out of one another but I wouldn't be surprised if there's an 'understanding' that each will occassionally attack Scottish independence or similar.
Complain about this comment
109. oldnat
I cannot remember where I saw the calculations, so I cannot provide with a link. I do remember that the calculation suggested that disentanglement would take between 20 and 25 years. In my view that was an unecessarily bleak assessment which is why I merely said 'years'. I take it you would agree that it will take rather more than months, the re-programming and separation of the various computer systems alone will take some time. In the meantime, I would assume that there would still be free movement between the various parts of the British archipelago which would, presumably, mean the systems would require constant updating.
122. gedguy2
So you get on well with your ex-wife. Yet, there seems to be a distinct edge of bitterness in your posting. Now, extend that bitterness to two countries and lots of people who are perhaps not as tactful as you at hiding it. That doesn't sound to me like a recipe for good relations between countries.
123. Infrequent etc.
So your unique selling point for getting independence is that we might be like Slovakia, or one of the Baltic Republics or indeed like Norway (independence 1905). Norway's independence was so wonderful that they produced Ibsen, a man who gives manic depression a bad name.
129. MrB etc.
I'm very glad you've got such a happy family. However, statistically you more likely to be murdered by a member of your family than anyone else. So, I wouldn't stretch that analogy too far when you're talking about 2 countries joined to each other.
132. sidthesceptic
I'm sorry you've got cancer and suggesting I swop places with you is not an option. Having cancer gives you the right to the best treatment money can buy. It does not give you the right to look down your nose at one of the people paying for it.
Finally, why should we argue for the Union. It exists. In Scotland, the SNP are a minority administration, the Unionist parties are in the majority, the very big majority and will continue to be so.
As for a hung Parliament - so what. The SNP will still be facing a Unionist majority, a very large Unionist majority.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
169. At 11:05pm on 28 Sep 2009, EphemeralDeception wrote:
There is more that motivates me, such as better control of our resources, and perhaps more focus from Holyrood rather than the head bashing that goes on constantly at present. I've also seen how health policy up here is more effective than previously.
Re Trident: I'm in favour of the UK holding nuclear weapons although I'd rather see a cheaper alternative. Although I accept that under an independent Scotland we would only have conventional weapons, which is fair enough.
I think there will be a hung parliament at westminster as I still think Labour are about to depose Brown - and at the party conference. Labour's only chance is to replace Brown and Darling and pray the resulting bounce claims them sufficient votes.
I think a hung parliament is bad for Scotland because decisions will be delayed. The SNP will hold some balance but only for issues which affect Scotland, since they (rightly) do not vote on English only issues.
But I only think there will be a hung parliament if Brown is replaced, otherwise the Conservatives will win.
Complain about this comment
177. U14094468
"I'm just a little concerned that these debates will offer significant television coverage to the two main London parties. OK if they're going to batter lumps out of one another but I wouldn't be surprised if there's an 'understanding' that each will occassionally attack Scottish independence or similar."
The SNP has already promised legal action to prevent such debates being broadcast in Scotland unless they are allowed to participate. It seems the unionist parties never even considered the legal implications.
Complain about this comment
178. MagisterIlluminatus
"
I'm very glad you've got such a happy family. However, statistically you more likely to be murdered by a member of your family than anyone else. So, I wouldn't stretch that analogy too far when you're talking about 2 countries joined to each other."
I'm also statistically more likely - by astronomical odds - to be loved by my family :)
But you now decide to make the point I sought to highlight in response to your threadbare divorce analogy - the human capacity for metaphor and analogy is huge, making an analogy to in place of an actual argument is trivial and inadequate.
Why not just give your opinion instead, backed by facts if you have them to hand.
Complain about this comment
153 -Good post - though I am biased as a graduate and studied alongside employees of DMA design and co developers of Lemmings.
However this pales into insignificance of what we have lost and are lodin in oil/gas related employment. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Scotland with 95% of OIL has one third of UK Oil gas jobs overall and very low percentage of onshore. Union dividend...If only it were true...
Complain about this comment
178. MagisterIlluminatus
"Finally, why should we argue for the Union. It exists. In Scotland, the SNP are a minority administration, the Unionist parties are in the majority, the very big majority and will continue to be so."
You should argue for the union because the momentum is moving towards independence and if you want to keep the union you better start convincing people there is reason to stay. Making out that presenting a case for staying is beneath you is looking a weaker and weaker excuse.
Complain about this comment
180. Neil_Small147
"...I still think Labour are about to depose Brown - and at the party conference."
This is not a Hollywood movie. It is a tightly stage-managed party love-in. Brown will be greeted as a conquering hero. Instead of fantasising about him being deposed you'd do better to run a sweep on the length of the standing ovation.
Complain about this comment
Finally, why should we argue for the Union. It exists.
Lots of things have existed that later CEASED to exist. So if you're going to have it continue, you might want to come up with SOMETHING good it has done or is doing.
Complain about this comment
#42
Right on cue Magister Illuminatus arrives with a red herring. What, pray, can Scotland do about leaving the EU if we are not independent. You are are surely aware that SNP policy is to have referendum on staying in or negotiating leaving the EU when we are independent.
Not that any sensible person would vote to cut ourselves off from our biggest market.
Complain about this comment
#178 I'm very glad you've got such a happy family. However, statistically you more likely to be murdered by a member of your family than anyone else. So, I wouldn't stretch that analogy too far when you're talking about 2 countries joined to each other....
The person you're most likely to be murdered by is that SPOUSE you refused to divorce... So you might want to watch pushing your own argument. =)
In fact, I think both Scotland AND England would manage to behave with civility if they decide to cease being part of a union.
Complain about this comment
#58
What exactly do you mean by "dating their daughter"
Complain about this comment
153. LachsNDeineHose
"I thought some of you might be interested in this article http://www.develop-online.net/news/32926/Realtime-Worlds-threatens-tax-escape-to-Ireland ."
I think this is symptomatic of the UK's policies (such as tax) on support for R&D.
Another thing we could tailor according to Scottish needs under independence.
Complain about this comment
178. MagisterIlluminatus
"Finally, why should we argue for the Union. It exists."
Sounds like an admission of defeat. There is an ongoing debate about the future governance of Scotland. And you just announced that you have nothing to contribute on the pro-union side of that debate.
Complain about this comment
182. MrB etc.
Ah Yes! My divorce analogy was so threadbare that the response by those of a nationalist persuasion was just a little desperate. I strongly suspect that to the uncommitted voter, or those who've voted SNP as a way of getting Labour out will have great difficulty removing the divorce analogy from their heads in the heat of the hustings at a General Election.
You might be advised to muster a stronger argument to dispel it. The older generation who tend to vote in large numbers also tend not to get divorced. Although their children and grandchildren do get divorced and tend not to vote. The divorce analogy will be killer of Nationalist hopes in that company.
Complain about this comment
# 178 MagisterIlluminatus
Answer my question instead of trying to cover your lack of ability to answer the question. I'm not asking you to give me a detailed analysis of Einstein's theory of relativity, all I'm asking you to do is to give us the reason's why Scotland should stay within the Union without you mentioning the anti independence side of it. Give us the pro Union arguments. Simple.
Complain about this comment
Just watched the Labour conference speech by both Jim Murphy and Iain (2 i's no spine) Gray and i have to agree that they were pretty pathetic. Murphy must have had a hard time learning his speech as he practiced it on the politics Scotland show in front of Glen Cambell. Grey surely cant be taken serious with all the bitterness that he has ..it certainly looks like sour grapes to me.... incidently how did they manage to get Deirdrie from Corry to do the compering ?
Complain about this comment
# 140 mrbfaethedee
lol
Complain about this comment
187. sneckedagain
"Right on cue Magister Illuminatus arrives with a red herring. What, pray, can Scotland do about leaving the EU if we are not independent. You are are surely aware that SNP policy is to have referendum on staying in or negotiating leaving the EU when we are independent. "
First I've heard of any such policy.
But Magister Illuminatus is full of... red herrings. He will bang on about the "costs" (never quite specified) of Scotland's secession, while blithely ignoring the costs of the UK/Scotland seceding from the EU.
Complain about this comment
#176 Electric Hermit
'Let me remind you that it is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Defence of the union is one of the pillars of Tory policy.'
It has nothing to do with the union. The Unionist bit refers to the Ulster Unionists.
BTW If the tories are so concerned about the union why was Edwina Curry on telly a while back commentating about these greedy freeloading selfish ungrateful Scots having to be subsidised by the poor English taxpayers?
Not very nice people them tories.
Complain about this comment
69. MagisterIlluminatus
"As for explaining my support for the Union, it is entirely self-interested. It has been suggested by actuarial calculation that the welfare and pension system would take years to unravel and would cost huge amounts of money. I would assume that whilst this was going on, the poor, elderly and vulnerable would experience appreciable turbulence in the benefits which would have to be made up by substantial tax rises amongst the wealthier section of society."
Who could have guessed your motivation was self-interest?!
You assume a great deal, the 'unravelling' you allude to would take place at the same time as the construction of the new mechanisms required for welfare and (what remains of) pensions, the 'unravelling' is housekeeping and can take as long or as short as required, the important factors would simply be the migration of individuals from one system to another. Requiring care? yes! Involving many agencies? yes! Years of tax multiplying chaos? Only if planned and implemented poorly.
"That's where I come in. Clearly, I have no wish to bankroll an independent country that I didn't want in the first place - so I will leave, because I can afford to. I won't be alone."
You don't 'bankroll' anything (much as the thought may stroke your ego), you contribute through taxation in the same way as your fellow citizens - we collectively bankroll things.
Don't like contributing to bankrolling a self-determining, independent Scotland free to pursue it's own agenda in the world, fine run for the border and help bankroll the remains of a post-imperial Britain whose aspirations are predicated on a deluded sense of inflated worth. I will refrain from observing any symmetries.
Complain about this comment
192. MagisterIlluminatus
"You might be advised to muster a stronger argument to dispel it."
As numerous contributors have pointed out, your divorce analogy was so flimsy as to be reduced to dust at the first hint of critical examination. If this is the best you can do by way of and argument, and defence of that argument, then the pro-union case is dead in the water.
Complain about this comment
#176
The Conservatives are not constitutionally a "unionist " party in regards to Scotland's constitutional choice. The "Unionist" bit was added in a the time of attempted Irish seccession to encourage anti Irish free state Liberals to defect from the Liberal party into the Tories - which they did destroying the Liberal party in the process.
Complain about this comment
#192. The Roman Empire existed too. It doesn't any more. That it exists is hardly an argument. Surely you can come up with something besides (rather lame) scare tactics and negatives. Are you seriously telling me that you can't come up with even ONE reason why Scotland should stay in the union? ONE positive that Scotland would get from staying in?
Surely you can some up with something.
You'll be up against people talking about self-determination and the ability to build an oil fund. You need something a bit positive here.
Complain about this comment
197. Lord_George
"It has nothing to do with the union."
If you believe that then it is easier to understand your absurd fantasy about Cameron leading the entire Conservative and Unionist Party in what would be one of the biggest political U-turns in history.
Complain about this comment
Magister Illuminatus recent post are long winded but particularly poor and not worth answering. Every point in he could be disputed by a 12 year old so I wont be replying.
Gray's speech today was absolutely crass and actually genuinely unacceptable. I am really surprised tha this is the best Labour can do. They just don't get it. They've had a free ride in Scotand for 50 years of holding power by doing exactly as they are told and never having had to think. How it shows. Only the press is holding them up at all.
Murphy is as bad and incoherent under any slightest pressure.
Why he was thought to be an improvement on the intelligent and thoughtful David Cairns I don't know.
But then again why Cathie Jamieson was overlooked for leader in the Scottish Parliament I can't imagine. Maybe she thinks for herself.
The fact hat a guy straight out of University and into Parliament as a Labour MP without ever having had a real job is Secretary of State for Scotland tells you all you need to know about the calibre of the rest of them.
Complain about this comment
200. sneckedagain
"The Conservatives are not constitutionally a "unionist " party in regards to Scotland's constitutional choice."
Try telling that to David Cameron.
Complain about this comment
#200. I understand your point about the "unionist" label but is that how the Tories read it? Consider Cameron's comment such as, "If elected, I will do everything in my power to ensure that the SNP will not be able to split up the UK."
He has stated pretty repeatedly that he is a unionist. Maybe he's just saying that, but I'm not so sure of it.
Complain about this comment
Allow me to correct an error. At #202 I attributed the absurd fantasy of Cameron abandoning unionisim to Lord_George. The author of this fantasy was, in fact, Economicallyliterate. My apologies to Lord_George.
Complain about this comment
192. MagisterIlluminatus
"Ah Yes! My divorce analogy was so threadbare that the response by those of a nationalist persuasion was just a little desperate."
I'm sure you're surprised to get a response sometimes, but people do try to engage with others on this forum, that you see any engagement as constituting victory for you is frankly bizzarre.
Desperate, hmmm... That'll explain your wonderful analogy was readily rebutted in the psce of a few posts in many ways - in it's own terms with alternative prespectives using divorce as the analogy, by a different analogy, by pointing out that analogies are no substitute for someone with bottle to actually put up some opinions and facts. Just because you say the word 'desperate' doesn't make it so.
"I strongly suspect that to the uncommitted voter, or those who've voted SNP as a way of getting Labour out will have great difficulty removing the divorce analogy from their heads in the heat of the hustings at a General Election."
Yes, your mighty divorce analogy will save the Union. Such feverish dreams of personal glory. I thought you said you were a shark? Are the dreams of sharks really quite so, well, small and tame?
"You might be advised to muster a stronger argument to dispel it. The older generation who tend to vote in large numbers also tend not to get divorced. Although their children and grandchildren do get divorced and tend not to vote. The divorce analogy will be killer of Nationalist hopes in that company."
It's not a spell you've cast Harry Potter! We don't need to dispel anything, we point out its numerous failings instead.
Divorcees don't vote, but old people do eh? And with that demographic analysis in hand, the constitutional atom bomb that is your Divorce Analogy (see I capitalized it to make it look really important for you) will save the union.
Huzzah!
Complain about this comment
203. sneckedagain
"Every point in he could be disputed by a 12 year old so I wont be replying"
Just as well i'm here to be the forum's stunt 12 year old eh?
Oops, past my bedtime...
Complain about this comment
#208. hun unhhh It's my job to be the stunt 12 year old.
Complain about this comment
196
Was adopted as policy at the 1997 Conference I think and hasn't been changed since.
I don't however believe there will ever be enough support in Scotland for withdrawing from EU to force such a referendum to take place.
Complain about this comment
205. JRMacClure
"I understand your point about the "unionist" label but is that how the Tories read it?"
That stuff about the Tories not being a "unionist party in regards to Scotland's constitutional choice" is complete nonsense. Listen to Annabel Goldie,
"Ladies and gentlemen there’s only one party which can be trusted with the Union. One party which won’t run down Scotland. One party which won’t break up Britain. One party. The Scottish Conservative Party. We are the only trustworthy Unionists. We are the only true Unionists." (Source)
Anyone who imagines the Tories are about to do a U-turn on this is living in the place where the people of Cloud Cuckoo Land send their fantasists.
Complain about this comment
#153 LachsNDeineHose
Welcome. And as a non-German speaker what does your monicker mean. I presume it's not "bless my cotton socks"?
#158 Neil
Welcome back. Sorry to hear you're on the sick.
#166 Economicallyliterate
Ithink the flaw in your argument is shown up by
#175 cynicalHighlander
Bless you my son! For those who didn't follow his link, these are the IMF projections for GDP based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita.
Country, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
Norway, $52797, $52855, $53761, $55140, $56830, $58610
Iceland, $35758, $35485, $36799, $38626, $40752, $43127
Ireland, $39383, $38253, $38746, $39926, $41404, $42947
UK, $35286, $34881, $35402, $36541, $37838, $38808
Arc of prosperity anyone?
Complain about this comment
# 197 Lord_George wrote
"The Unionist bit is about the Ulster Unionists"
You are incorrect. It is only about the Union !
Are you the real,"for real" Lord George, who has
the knack of drawing SNP bluster !!!
If you are still in a Brighton bar,
did you cringe this morning at those speeches
from the Scottish Labour Leadership duo ???
Dull wee rants from Grayman and Murphman .
see author # 83
Complain about this comment
212. oldnat
"Arc of prosperity anyone?"
Funny you should mention that. While looking for examples of Cameron's commitment to the union, I came across this little gem,
"You will not be surprised to hear that I reject the view that overall Conservative rule was bad for Scotland. Look at how financial services are thriving in Edinburgh."
That was in December 2007.
Complain about this comment
Country, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
Norway, $52797, $52855, $53761, $55140, $56830, $58610
Iceland, $35758, $35485, $36799, $38626, $40752, $43127
Ireland, $39383, $38253, $38746, $39926, $41404, $42947
UK, $35286, $34881, $35402, $36541, $37838, $38808
Good lord! Can I suggest giving some SERIOUS thought to independence rather than going down with the sinking ship?
I mean, I know it's really none of my business but... Yikes!
Complain about this comment
The reason the data from #175 cynicalHighlander is so important is that the comparative economic data for the UK and Scotland largely predates the recession. That showed that in the boom times, Scotland's per capita GDP was in line with Germany's. What wasn't clear was how our economic performance would be affected by the recession.
What we do know is that the financial sector was a much higher percentage of the UK GDP, than Scotland's (although it is/was important to us, Ireland and Iceland as well). The IMF projections suggest that England/UK's reliance on the City of London through the boom years was an error of massive proportions.
the UK Government has already abandoned its 2009 Autumn Spending Review, and the reason for that now seems obvious. There has already been speculation that we might have a March GE, to avoid Labour having to produce a budget which would demonstrate the depths to which UK PLC has sunk.
GERS probably won't be able to give us the real Scottish data till June 2010 (after the UK GE), but it would be available for an Autumn 2010 referendum campaign, so nix chance of the Unionists allowing that to happen.
By the time of the Scottish GE in May 2011, however, the real economic data will be in the public domain. That'll be fun!
Complain about this comment
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/29/peter-mandelson-labour-conference
Interesting article on Mandelson's speech.
Complain about this comment
#215 JRMacClure
btw We will have to take our share of the UK debt (as well as assets) on independence (though perhaps not if the UK ignores a positive referndum, and we have to declare UDI!). Thanks Unionist voters!
That's one of the many reasons I think the UK will use every dirty trick in the book to keep us in, but will let us go at the end of the day.
Of course, it's not having a large National Debt that bankrupts a country. It's having a large National Debt, imperial spending on aggression, and not having the GDP to pay the interest that does that.
I love the idea of MagisterIncompentatis moving to England to preserve his pension and welfare benefits just as they nhave to cut them to the bone!
Complain about this comment
217. JRMacClure
"Interesting article on Mandelson's speech."
A pitch for the leadership, perhaps?
Complain about this comment
#218 Yes, I realize you'd have to take a share of the UK debt which is fair enough assuming you receive an equal share of the assets. On the other hand, for example, why should you pay for a share of the Tridents which you won't be taking and never wanted?
It seems to me there should be some negotiations on points like that. I don't think just a straight per capita split is necessarily equitable and that also assumes that they DO negotiate in good faith.
Complain about this comment
220. JRMacClure
"It seems to me there should be some negotiations on points like that."
I think you can safely assume there will be negotiations. Especially if, as seems certain, Scotland is represented by the likes of Alex Salmond and John Swinney. I almost feel sorry for the other side.
Complain about this comment
#213 Spinspanspun
'Are you the real,"for real" Lord George'
It's 'The Baron' to you, boy. I'll have some respect on here if you don't mind.
Complain about this comment
222. Lord_George
"I'll have some respect on here if you don't mind."
Respect!? George Foulkes!? That's a cracker!
Complain about this comment
219. More like "Second Savior of the World after the Prime Minister (but I'm willing to take over if you ditch him)" ;)
Complain about this comment
OK then, let's take this divorce analogy with the snapped knicker elastic, remove it from our ankles and wear it proudly on our heads
Dear United Kingdom,
I want a divorce. Once upon a time you promised me the world. But all you do these days is play cowboys with America. You never fix anything around the House of Parliament. I don't know how many times I complained that the place was falling apart. But you just sit on the sofa and hog the remote control for the TV. You just don't listen to a word I say, and I'm fed up yelling at you.
The kids are all grown up now. I worried so much about Canada when he moved out. I thought those neighbours would be such a bad influence, but he's such a sensible and level headed boy. I think he gets it from me. Canada and Australia are doing so well for themselves. They don't need us anymore.
And I don't need you anymore either. I can't live with someone who doesn't respect me. All I ever hear from you is how I'm useless and ugly and no one wants me. You keep telling me I'm totally dependent on you and would be lost without you. But I know that's not true and I'm sick of your negativity. I've seen how well Norway is looking these days, and I knew her when she worked in the fish factory and didn't have two kroner to rub together. She's no better than me, and if she can do it so can I. I have faith in myself even if you don't.
You forget that the money you're spending is my inheritance. Well I'm taking it with me. I'm not going to let you waste it on your macho toys and gifts for your city chums any more. I've indulged your adolescent fantasies long enough. It's time you grew up and realised that you're not king of the world any more. You can keep the House in London. I've got a nice modern place in Edinburgh.
It's time we went our own ways. We'll both be happier for it.
Now I'm going off to Europe to find myself.
xx
Scotland
Complain about this comment
#225 InfrequentAllele
Fabulous post1 Can't stop chuckling! That post would make a great campaign leaflet!
Complain about this comment
@189 Sneckedagain
"what exactly do you mean "dating their daughter"
Um... Have to tread carefully here this is a respectable blog. Should point out that the daughter was a very lovely girl indeed and any "dating" was not motivated by revenge on the parents.
Using magister's ever more convoluted analogy of the union as a personal relationship then Senga (name changed) and I proved you didn't have to be in a committed, monogamous relationship to retain a degree of passion for one another.
So roll on independence and perhaps our neighbours across the Southern border will have greater allure for us.
Complain about this comment
#225. I spit a perfect good glass of wine all over my monitor.
Complain about this comment
#212 oldnat
Just one small word of caution, the figures are from a database of April 2009. Almost 6 months old.
I cannot find anywhere it tells you when and how frequently they update their data.
Complain about this comment
You know THIS does not seem to me to be the best possible theme for the PM's world shaking speech:
PM to fight anti-social behaviour
Gordon Brown is under pressure to make the speech of his life
Prime Minister Gordon Brown is expected to announce a crackdown on anti-social behaviour in his keynote speech to the Labour party conference.
Maybe it's just me though. Does that seem a little lame to you?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8279701.stm
He's going to save Britain by fighting anti-social behavior??!
Complain about this comment
The Scotsman has a story about the expected UK GE date being May 6th (English local elections day) based on a leaked Labour timetable.
That isn't clever reporting on their part. It's entirely based on a US report - way to go JR!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aqRvUqkYV8ao.
Complain about this comment
#229. That was still near the depths of the recession if they were current as of 6 months ago... In that case they shouldn't be unrealistic and IMF is certainly a neutral source.
Complain about this comment
#227 BlooToon
To contort the analogy even further, i thought "they" had done "that" to "us" already!
#229 Roll_On_2010
Thanks for the advisory.
Complain about this comment
#233 oldnat
By the way have you seen this ‘Ipsos Mori’ poll from the Herald?
Poll puts Labour third for first time since 1982,
Gordon Brown’s “Operation Fightback” suffers another blow today with a poll that for the first time in a generation pushes Labour into third place behind the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
Complain about this comment
I should find out what the odds are on the SNP beating their goal of 20 MPs in the GE.
Complain about this comment
Anyone else seen this?
http://www.24dash.com/news/Local_Government/2009-09-28-Brent-Labour-councillor-defects-to-the-Tories
Complain about this comment
#234 Roll_On_2010
Yes I saw that. On the basis of looking at polls during the party conference season, and the series of party "bounces" for many years. I tend to ignore the variations until it's over.
The SNP has the last of the Autumn conferences (16-19 Oct), so I'll wait for a Scottish poll in November, before I think any polling is significant.
Complain about this comment
#236 JRMacClure
Sorry JR. That's as as significant as the councillor for the one marginal area in Midway NC changing his party label in order to hang onto his seat when his party is in the dump.
Complain about this comment
#238 No need to apologize. I have no idea how significant these things are. That's why I asked.
Complain about this comment
#237. In the US we tend to refer to it as "the silly season" and polls are meaningless until it's over. There's already one out showing a huge Labour bounce.
Complain about this comment
Despite my doubts about political parties, I've finally rejoined the SNP - damn good value at 12 pounds per year! I may never be a party loyalist, but I can't stay out of the "official" fight any longer.
Complain about this comment
#241. Can't say I blame you, Oldnat, and that's the thing about parties. If you're not in one it's hard to be part of the fight.
Let's see the Conservative conference is next week? And the SNP the week after that right?
Complain about this comment
My comment 74, on Gray's behaviour regards two dreadful events was removed.
I never mentioned the events, I merely stated there have been similar and more publicised events that have happened in England, why has Mr Gray not chosen to highlight these?
BBC censorship, will the Mr Campbell allude to this inconsitency next time he interviews Mr gray?
D McN
Complain about this comment
what is intriguing is the link gray made to the tories and the snp and some nasty nazis from the estern bloc.
the rest of it was waffle for ean english audience who clearly ahd no idea who he was.
when will labour say what they have achieved in the last 15 years and will achieve instead of scaremongering.
labour has a cre vote of 24% in england, and 29% core vote in scotland, which with benefits, the daily record and the beeb being their source of sanitised news means that people will vote for a red rosette and it will take another generation to change.
the headline should say, labour scared to have a referendum in case result goes the wrong way, fotr that is the reason.
to say a vote for the snp is a vote for the tories is more silly stuff and may not work as well as it did on the great unwashed 20 odd years ago.
tongue in cheek, i think, if cameron said he was giving a 500 quid bonus to all disabled people with bad backs in scotland when he got in, the tories would win glasgow east and north east nae bother.
labour supporters may come out more for a GE than a local election, as long as eastenders is not on, so to avoid total annihilation linking the two elections on the same day will hide those catastrophic losses.
it may mean that people vote for labour the local election party and lend brown their vote as well, as subliminally they are tempted to vote labour in both. having the local elections first and labour getting thrashed with big liberal and tory votes across pomgolia would not be good for brown or whoever follows him.
as soon as ainsworth announces that the carriers are not being built on the clyde and are being cancelled brown and murphy are toast in glasgow, so that needs to be clarified by brian, not just trident spending.
the decision has i understand already been made at whitehall based on cost cutting, but is being delayed as an announcement until after bain gets elected. can you confirm brian, and get a straight answer from those labour chappies that a rveersal on that has not taken place?
Complain about this comment
I honestly can't believe that this man, really believes the Scottish voter is so un educated, that he cannot see that Labour is hopping that by suggesting they would have a vote on independece themselves, at some unspecified point in the future,would be enough to buy enough time to get them through the next election. Come on Mr Gray! we are a bit brighter than that! Also just in case he is not aware, the voters also know that Labour is only desparate on holding on to Scotland to bolster its Westminster MP count. P.S. I'm so fed up of Labour and liberal M.P.s and MSPs telling me what I should be thinking. I thought this was a democracy!
Complain about this comment
I am quite critical of the idea of a basic Yes/No question over independence. This debate is more important than deciding to become independent or not, it's about deciding how we want to govern ourselves.
I want it to be proven that Scotland does not want Calman and would prefer a different method of governing ourselves.
By the way I see little point of discussing our future with MagisterIlluminatus. I have seen nothing apart of assumptions without evidence to back up their assumptions. Do we honestly believe that England would be so upset of the idea that the Scots became independence that they would damage the relations we have?
I do find it more insulting than constructive, because MagisterIlluminatus appears to be resorting to blackmail rather than debate the situation at present.
Complain about this comment
203. sneckedagain
So every point can be disputed by a 12 year old, but you're just going to go in the huff. Hmmm.
226. oldnat
And whilst InfrequentAllele is having us all falling off our seats laughing, he can explain why he loves Scotland so much that he just had to go and live in Spain. Maybe he could ask the world's greatest living Scotsman as well, the next time they meet in a bar.
246. Thomas Porter
So you're not going to talk to me because I can't be patronised, sneered it, listen to 40 year old fantasist rubbish or be swayed by raw data or emotional blackmail. Do I believe that England would be upset? Yes. Do I believe they'd send in tanks? No. Do I believe that Scotland is richer than England? No. Do I believe that threatening England's right to defend itself is going to improve relations with Scotland? No. Do I think there would be an economic backlash? Yes. Do I believe there would be large migration of the best and the brightest from Scotland following independence? Yes. For all of the above see Ireland for details.
Complain about this comment
MagisterIlluminatus:
#247.
If you believe England would be upset, why? I can understand that English unionists shall be disappointed but I do consider the rise and increasingly popular groups which support the idea of an English Parliament or independence will welcome Scottish independence.
I am quite disturbed, why would England send the tanks in? That's a silly suggestion.
I don't believe Scotland is richer than England either, what's your point?
Economic backlash, could you expand your assumption?
I also expect a migration of the best and the brightest to leave Scotland after independence. I don't know what planet your on but many of our best and brightest already end up at the City of London, even now!
I also have an assumption. Consider that the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are members of the European Union that supports the freedom of movement and right to employment between member states, is it suprising that some Irish individuals come to the United Kingdom since both are English speaking country's?
Your quite selective with your use of information. It's quite normal for migration to take place please look at USA, Spain etc and see many of Britain's best and brightest leave for a new life.
I am also considering leaving for a while, perhaps to England to learn more about my neighbours? Perhaps even to Asia to learn about the completely different culture and attitudes. I have not quite decided but it's not a problem or even an issue, unless you choose to kick up a fuss for no reason.
Complain about this comment
A referendum is fine so long as, prior to the referendum, there is a published resume of the pluses and minuses of devolution, including the long-term likely economic consequences.
The SNP was trumpeting about the successes of Ireland and Iceland, as small member countries of the EU..... that was until both countries were bankrupted by the global recession.
Imagine, for a moment, that Scotland had been an independent country at the time of the collapse of its 2 principal banks. Do we really believe that Scotland, by itself, could have bailed them out with relative economic impunity ??
From an economic standpoint, the whole SNP argument is rubbish, and such arrogant posturing without full explanation of ALL the facts could impoverish the Scots nation for generations if a referendum in favour of devolution was carried and actually led to the process being implemented.
The Union has served Scotland relatively well.
I don't see many impoverished scots walking around in the country in rags.
The idea of devolution is a giant confidence-trick, playing upon emotions as opposed to reality.
The perpetrators of such activity should be ashamed of themselves.
Complain about this comment
#248. Thomas_Porter, you might want to take a look at the Mc Crone Report before you assume that the PPP of England (the standard measure of wealth) would be greater than that of Scotland when you calculate in oil wealth. After all around 50% of the north sea oil is still extractable--possibly much yet to be discovered in addition to new gas discoveries.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html
Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, made it clear that the 31-year-old McClone papers were not just a dusty history lesson, but would form a central part of their campaigning for the future.
He said: "The impact of this would have been dynamite. It would have had great influence.
"I was astonished by how direct the paper was, and appalled at the extent of what has been hidden from the people. McCrone was saying that an independent Scotland would be Europe's
Switzerland. The Labour party were saying that it would be like Bangladesh.
"This is hugely important. But it was not just important then. It is important now. Gordon Brown's black hole is being filled by black oil."
But Labour and their ilk is STILL selling the "Scotland is Bangladesh" line and people some are still buying it--for no reason. IS England really richer than Scotland? Don't bet your life on it.
http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccrone_oil_reports.html
And the UK government has been quite willing to use lies, deception and black ops tricks in the past to hang onto Scotland. If you think not, do a little checking.
Complain about this comment
Imagine, for a moment, that Scotland had been an independent country at the time of the collapse of its 2 principal banks. Do we really believe that Scotland, by itself, could have bailed them out with relative economic impunity ??
Yes, and excellent question. Poor little Scotland would have only had one of the LARGEST oil funds, possibly the largest oil fund, in Europe. Possibly in the world--had it been independent.
Which way would Scotland have done better? An excellent question. Well worth giving some serious thought. But real thought not just blindly accepting lies or what you're fed.
Complain about this comment
DerekaFarmer:
#249.
This comment shows ignornace. Iceland was not a member of the European Union and remains outside of the European Union, however since the victory by the centre left party at the last Icelandic elections, they have submitted an application.
The rest of your comment is based of ignorant claims which assumes everything went one way, the negative way. If we can assume that under an independent Scotland, the Parlaiment would have followed the same attitude as the USA/British Governments at their relaxed atttiudes to banking then surely we can assume that our two banks might have avoided collapse if Scottish polititions representing us at Edinburgh enforced regulations?
Besides Iceland and Ireland both followed poor choices over their financial services. The USA also followed poor choices, over 100 banks have collapsed so far, I believe. The United Kingdom also followed poor policies, we don't need to go to far with that.
However look at Norway and China. Perfect examples that large and small country's can survive this 'global problem'.
Complain about this comment
249. Poor, wee, stupid Scotland needs England to lead it by the hand and keep the stupid Scots from starving to death. They can't manage on their own, everyone knows that. Never could.
That they ever were is a myth perpetrated by Mel Gibson, right. That they have universities, oil, gas, agriculture, industries, fishing and strong, intelligent people is a giant confidence trick perpetrated by the evil SNP.
Yep.
Complain about this comment
Nobody mentioned the threat to unemployment and sickness benefit if the SNP get in.
We in the Labour party spent many years creating unemployment for the people because unemployed people tend to vote for us.
The SNP are threatening to get people back into work in the guise of bettering peoples lives. This must be stopped.
Alex Salmond is living in a fantasy world when he says that Scotland once led the world in engineering, medicine, philosophy, politics, science and inventions and could do so once again.
This is the New World Order where under our party Scotland leads the world in falling life expectancy, growing levels of poverty, anti social behaviour, teenage pregnancies, sub standard housing, child poverty.. the list goes on and on.
It's sour grapes from the SNP when they see the us benefiting personally with huge amounts of taxpayers money for keeping Scotland on top of so many league tables.
The Baron
Complain about this comment
JRMacClure:
I am aware of the Mc Crone Report, however the London Government do not publish accurate financial papers concerning Scotland's wealth, so I do not believe it to be responsible to use a 30-odd year old report as a sound platform to argue Scotlands financially capable.
I am not suggesting Scotland is financially incapable but that for the moment it's better and more logical to underestimate your potential, it's harder to prove Scotland is financially capable as people, want more than one report.
Personally I love being told Scotland can not afford to be a successful independent country, despite 300 years of a 'successful' political union, Scotland can not afford the basics without resorting to sky high taxes. That's a major failure to what has been a long-term commitment.
Complain about this comment
#255. Well, I agree with you in principle, Thomas, but the problem is that there really ARE no better financial reports available. The supposed PPP of Scotland (if you do a little research) OMITS oil revenues. That means that it is totally inaccurate for knowing what Scotland's wealth actually is.
Of course, people would like more than one report and one that isn't 30 years old, but if such exist you can BET the UK government isn't releasing them any more than they did McCrone.
I actually assumed you knew about McCrone, but wanted to point out the serious fallacy in what was being said. While McCrone is out of date there is still a lot of what is in it that is true even today I believe. It is at least a factor that can't be ignored--nor the fact that the UK government hid the truth.
Complain about this comment
Had Scotland been independent at the time of the credit crunch the real question is whether the two main banks would have actually been in as poor a condition as they were with Scotland as part of the union.
I think not because firstly, a Scotland independent not under the influence of Westminster but also the Treasury and the City would have been far less likely to allowed things such as the idiotic increase in house prices, the selling off of many important Scottish companies such as Scottish Power, the lack of investment in start-ups and so on and so forth.
Things would have been very different..
Complain about this comment
254. Lord George, sir, Thank you for pointing that out. Why imagine all the innocent bureaucrats who might be put out of jobs as well!
What horror! We bow to your wisdom, Baron.
Complain about this comment
219. At 02:28am on 29 Sep 2009, Electric Hermit wrote:
217. JRMacClure
"Interesting article on Mandelson's speech."
A pitch for the leadership, perhaps?
I think you'll find he is effectively running things as it is.
#252 thomas
Norway is a good example, but China certainly is not. A lot of Chinese people are suffering from extreme poverty. Also, the country is still tightly controlled and the quality of manufacturing at times is appalling. India is much the same when you consider the levels of poverty there.
Just a thought here. Why is Salmond wanting to hold the referendum in 2010, rather than 2011 when he is likely to be holding a majority in Holyrood?
Complain about this comment
# 247 MagisterIlluminatus
Do I believe that England would be upset?
I'm sure that the majority of English people would be quite happy to see Scotland go. Not because they want rid of Scotland but because they would be happy for us. Most of the English people I meet have no thoughts on the matter, one way or the other. However, if you are talking about 'England' as the establishment then that is a different matter. The 'establishment' don't want to see Scotland leave the Union for various reasons.
1. They will lose the right to gain the taxes from our oil.
2. They may be worried about the implications of having their security seat removed from the UN.
3. They may even be worried that Her Majesty might not be amused.
Do I believe they'd send in tanks?
I don't believe that they'd dare send in the tanks. What I do believe is that they will make sure that the Royal Regiment of Scotland is out of the country at the time and that there may be non-Scottish troops stationed near Scottish cities while on 'exercise'. I also believe that before a referendum they will 're-position' the nuclear subs and ensure that all nuclear weapons are stationed somewhere else. While this is going on there will be a massive media led 'black propaganda' assault in force. (It is already cranking up.) However, when it comes down to it they won't use the troops. I can't see the USA standing by and letting that happen; there are too many voters in the USA who are proud of their Scottish heritage.I can't see the EU condoning that type of action either, even if some of those countries might be looking to their own regions who might take an interest in Scotland's play for independence.
Do I believe that Scotland is richer than England?
Even without the oil I believe that England is far wealthier than Scotland. England will suffer for a while from the lack of taxes from the oil but, as history has shown, the English are good financiers and will quickly bounce back. I am confident that the English will still forge ahead financially, in many ways, after the recession is over.
Do I believe that threatening England's right to defend itself is going to improve relations with Scotland?
I'm not too sure what you mean there. Maybe you can explain that statement a little further.
Do I think there would be an economic backlash?
I'm sure that will happen but it won't last for too long as England will need our oil and we would be happy to sell it to them. However, you can be sure that if the English Establishment think that they will lose Scotland to a referendum then they will try to destroy what manufacturing is left and what financial institutions we have. Oops, I forgot, they've already done that one.
Do I believe there would be large migration of the best and the brightest from Scotland following independence?
As pointed out by Thomas_Porter in # 248 it has been happening for decades. This is the reason why the population of Scotland has remained, roughly, at 5 million since the 1930s. Our greatest export is the people.
Still no word from you on the reasons why Scotland should remain in the Union. I wonder why?
Complain about this comment
Thomas, since the UK government is capable of hiding or refusing all such reports if you wait for reports you'll wait forever for any change. People may want more reports but I don't think it will be reports that will precipitate change (if anything does).
Complain about this comment
Neil_Small147:
#259.
"Norway is a good example, but China certainly is not. A lot of Chinese people are suffering from extreme poverty. Also, the country is still tightly controlled and the quality of manufacturing at times is appalling. India is much the same when you consider the levels of poverty there."
I disagree, although I can and will agree that China and India both suffer extreme poverty, despite the recession the Chinese economy (I can't speak for India, I don't know how they are coping) has continued to grow and I have yet to see their banks fail or collapse due to the crunch.
I am also unwilling to enter internal discussions concerning China. The bottom line is that this economic giant has survived the global recession in comparison to other country's.
Just a thought here. Why is Salmond wanting to hold the referendum in 2010, rather than 2011 when he is likely to be holding a majority in Holyrood?
Complain about this comment
Gedguy2, I read something about a coming military reorganization in relation to Maj Gen Mackay's resignation. Have you read anything about that?
Complain about this comment
Re various posts "sending in tanks" - that just wouldn't happen - both sides have too much to lose by a hot war - witness the establishmnet coming to the negotiationg table with the IRA (with what? - 200 active members?) when they started their City of London campaign.
Complain about this comment
#262 I always thought it was political--that he would put the opposition parties into the position of opposing a referendum as they are sure to do. That will help get the majority they need to actually get the referendum through after they get that majority in the following year.
Of course, that's political second guessing but it would make sense, I suspect.
Complain about this comment
248. Thomas Porter
Had you read earlier posting on this thread you would understand my reference to tanks and Scotland being richer than England. My reference to Ireland was about the Irish migration from 1914 up to independence and vastly increased Irish migration during the civil war up to 1924. The Irish economy was ruined and remained ruined until accession to the EU. I might point that the Irish economy remains in a parlous state despite the IMF references which mean nothing.
Comparing Norway, average tax rate 43 per cent, Iceland, population less than Aberdeen and Ireland, member and bound with the Euro to Britain, world's fifth largest economy is an exercise in absurdity. Just to indicate how absurd - if Britain were to slash pension, social security and NHS spending by 50 per cent or alternatively raise the tax level to the same as Norway, the figures I assure you would be very different. As I said earlier raw data is meaningless.
253. JR Mac etc.
Yes, and your'e perpetuating another myth. First up, Scotland's universities are, even now, unable to compete with English universities in research because they don't have the money. Even a cursory glance at Scotland's newspapers would tell you that.
Secondly, industries- Scotland's industrial base disappeared long ago due to no one wanting to buy our products. People blame Mrs Thatcher thereby conveniently ignoring the facts that our products were too expensive, shoddily made, unreliable, poor delivery times, worn-out technology, demarcation disputes, Spanish practices, poor management and endemic strikes.
Which leaves us with oil, gas, fishing and agriculture or primary production, that which can be extracted from the soil and the sea. You may be an historian, but you're clearly not an economic one. Here's the news - Primary production economies are Third World economies. Effectively, what you are saying is that Scotland becomes a member of the Third World on achieving independence. Well, haud me back.
Complain about this comment
#257 - Yip we would all have been worse off. You forget the Goodwin factor and the fact that the banks were the greedy barstewards who got us into this mess.
Complain about this comment
#260 gedguy2 - "still no word from you on the reasons why Scotland should stay in the union. I wonder why."
morning gedguy , sadly you won't get any reasons because Magister doesn't do answers he only does questions. It is called "UNIONISTITUS" (unionist-itus) with the other common symptom being arrogance. it is very unusual to find one without the other!
you commonly get "UNIONISTITUS" when you run out of ideas and have nothing positive to say about anything.
you can also come across it when the patient knows they are losing the debate or the argument and they don't know what to do next.
hope this helps.
Sid
Complain about this comment
#265 JRMacClure
It has been policy since the 60's to let the Scots see that they can govern themselves and then ask the question. 11/30 will be 3.5 years into a 4 year term so will give a pretty good idea of whether Scots are capable of looking after themselves.
On a purely personal note, the sooner the better as you never know whether you will live to see the day.
Complain about this comment
262. Thomas_Porter
"Just a thought here. Why is Salmond wanting to hold the referendum in 2010, rather than 2011 when he is likely to be holding a majority in Holyrood?"
Several reasons, I've no doubt. One is that having a declared timetable for the referendum prevents the opposition from seizing control of the agenda as the hapless Wendy Alexander tried to do with her "bring it on" gaffe. In politics you should never do anything without being aware of your opponent's likely response. In her dumb arrogance, Alexander failed to realise that what she hoped would be a discomfiting challenge could be easily shrugged off by Salmond simply by referring her to the SNP's manifesto commitment.
Complain about this comment
# 264 Aikenheed
Heaven forbid that the Scots will ever go the way of the Irish, in that respect. I, for one, would NEVER back any anti-democratic process! If I ever found any Scot seriously thinking about that then I would happily report them to the police/MI5 or whomever. I have family in England, my daughter and grandchildren are English so how could I possibly condone anyone who could possibly harm my family. I am confident that the vast majority of posters on this site feel the same way.
Complain about this comment
# 263 JRMacClure
Not yet, but I am keeping my eyes open for any troop movements in that direction. If anyone has any information on that I would be happy to have it.
Complain about this comment
#266. Yep, we all know how poor and third world oil and gas producing countries are. And that oil and gas money couldn't be used in for the universities, for IT industries or to keep those gaming industries that are currently threatening to leave.
And we know that Scotland is incapable of growing new industries--after all, they're SCOTS and we all know how inferior Scots are.
That is invariably your bottom line argument. *shrug*
Complain about this comment
I see my previous comment has been removed. Brian - Could you explain why ?
I also note with delight that glencampell has become a word ! A friend noted that a referee's decision was very glencampbell; meaning unfair or biased.( I can't comment on the decision as I didn't see the game). I think this new word will catch on.
Complain about this comment
LOL According to our dear Magister all the former "British Empire" is begging to be taken over and run again because we KNOW how good England is at running the world. Poor, poor Ireland became independent. HOW sad.
Complain about this comment
# 268 sidthesceptic
Sad, but true. However, he seems an intelligent chap and I am confident that he may be forced, if only for his own pride, to come up with the pros for being in the Union.
Complain about this comment
It never ceases to amaze me how history repeats itself and politicians promise democracy and then deny it to their people on key decisions (EU Treaty's). Previous Independence votes were rigged to give Westminster the "right answer". Clearly the majority of Scots want a vote on Independence so the questions posed are extremely important assuming our elected politicians allow us the people to have a vote? Labour has effectively controlled Scotland for the past 50 odd years so people of Scotland look to your history and ask yourself what has happened during their time in office? If the people of Scotland gain Independence there is absolutely no reason why Scotland cannot be an economic success. There are many independent countries 10 times smaller and 10 times larger than Scotland making their way in the world. As historical documents have subsequently proved, successive Labour & Tory politicians at Westminster lied over the Scots oil revenues in the past so they have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. Look to your history as power is vested in the people for the people
"Yet if he (Bruce) should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.’
Extract from the Declaration of Arbroath
Complain about this comment
MagisterIlluminatus:
#266.
I still stand corrected, I see no evidence to support your assumptions or reason why the United Kingdom is important for Scotlands economic success. I still believe migration will and always will continue and I support migration between country's. I see no answers to the questions I asked and therefore little reason to continue a discussion.
I still have to ask, what's the benefit of the political union shared between England and Scotland? You have gave no reason as why it's important especially considering that the European Union is a modern version of the Acts of Union, if the union between England and Scotland was as successful should we not be strengthening and spreading the European Union?
Complain about this comment
# 274 astonishedII
I think you are being too 'glenncampbell' over Glenn Campbell.
Complain about this comment
#266 MI
An alternative view of the Irish economy is that it remained in thrall to the UK up until EU entry and only when it started to trade away it's economy boomed. 80% of Scotland's trade is with the rest of the UK. Is there perhaps something to learn from this?
Complain about this comment
#263
Earlier in this blog someone linked to an article in the Telegraph which claimed that the Scottish regiment (what's left) would no longer be commanded from Scotland, but controlled from an English base.
I have always thought in reality that was the case anyway. There are a few token commanding officers with Scottish surnames but with upper class English accents and I am sure that the Scots in the army are well watched by layer over layer of people 'trusted' by the establishment. Look at all these years of experience the British establishment has in running the empire! They couldn't trust ordinary colonial Scots to have any real power within the military. The best way towards independence is by peaceful and lawful means. With the rest of the world watching, I don't think London could get away with denying Scotland its freedom and retaining any credibility on the world stage.
There was a story, which I have never heard sustantiated fully, that it was the EEC which forced Westminster into giving Scotland devolution becuse the Eastern European contries were about to join the EEC/EU. Not granting devolution would have created a difficult precedent for the Europeans and a sticking point for these countries. The Labour party now claim it was due to their benevolence that we have a parliament in Holyrood.
Complain about this comment
266. MagisterIlluminatus
"Secondly, industries- Scotland's industrial base disappeared long ago due to no one wanting to buy our products. People blame Mrs Thatcher thereby conveniently ignoring the facts that our products were too expensive, shoddily made, unreliable, poor delivery times, worn-out technology, demarcation disputes, Spanish practices, poor management and endemic strikes.
Which leaves us with oil, gas, fishing and agriculture or primary production, that which can be extracted from the soil and the sea. You may be an historian, but you're clearly not an economic one. Here's the news - Primary production economies are Third World economies. Effectively, what you are saying is that Scotland becomes a member of the Third World on achieving independence. Well, haud me back."
Even if you were correct - which i would strongly dispute - the arguments you put forward here are true of the UK too. It isn't just Scotland's manufacturing base that is trashed, it's the entire UK's.
The UK staying together would paint exactly the same picture as your second para, if Scotland becomes independent - then the remains of the UK is left in almost the same state, but without most of the oil (hey that's the third world, primary product that counts!). Oops.
Haud me back!
Please tell me you're working on your list of positive reasons for staying in the union and that they'll appear in this site soon with due fanfare. Otherwise we'll be left with the clear impression, that while you may be unionist you're not a very persuasive one.
Complain about this comment
274. astonishedII
"I also note with delight that glencampell has become a word ! A friend noted that a referee's decision was very glencampbell; meaning unfair or biased.( I can't comment on the decision as I didn't see the game). I think this new word will catch on."
If it does catch on it will inevitably become a verb. You'll know when you've been "glencampbelled".
Complain about this comment
271. gedguy2
Here, here!
I also think that your confidence in your fellow posters is well founded.
Complain about this comment
268. sidthesceptic
"It is called "UNIONISTITUS" (unionist-itus)"
Is it infectious or genetic?
Complain about this comment
# 283 Electric Hermit
Then again, one might say that the BBC are being too 'glencampbelly'.
Complain about this comment
# 282, mrbfaethedee
Please tell me you're working on your list of positive reasons for staying in the union and that they'll appear in this site soon with due fanfare. Otherwise we'll be left with the clear impression, that while you may be unionist you're not a very persuasive one.
It might take him some time because I've been trying to come up with a list and still my page is blank.
Complain about this comment
281. hamish42
"Earlier in this blog someone linked to an article in the Telegraph which claimed that the Scottish regiment (what's left) would no longer be commanded from Scotland, but controlled from an English base."
159. cynicalHighlander
"There was a story, which I have never heard sustantiated fully, that it was the EEC which forced Westminster into giving Scotland devolution becuse the Eastern European contries were about to join the EEC/EU. Not granting devolution would have created a difficult precedent for the Europeans and a sticking point for these countries. The Labour party now claim it was due to their benevolence that we have a parliament in Holyrood."
The Path to Devolution (It's not what you thought)
Complain about this comment
Here is a post I put on Betsan's blog (the BBC Welsh English speaking version of Blether with Brian).
This may be a little off topic but I was reading the article concerning Defence academy plan is approved. It reminds me of the aircraft carriers that are supposed to be built in the Scottish shipyards. This was just political claptrap put about by Labour to try and garner support for the ailing Labour party in Scotland. They forgot to mention that the UK economy couldn't afford to supply the planes for those carriers which led one to think that there never was going to be any jobs for the people of Scotland in the first place. Do you really think that the UK government, of whichever colour, is going to spend 12 billion pounds to build and furnish this place when they can't even supply our troops with the proper equipment they need to fight in Afghanistan?
I hope I am wrong and you do get this place but I suspect that it was never going to happen and was just Labour giving promises that it had no intention of keeping as it is frightened of losing all those seats in Wales.
It isn't only Scotland that is getting this pack of untruths. It looks like the Welsh are being fed this too.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I have listened to every Labour presentation so far. I have heard little other than sycophantic and xenophobic ramblings.
Should this conference be renamed the 'knock the Conservative Party' conference?
Complain about this comment
I reckon the Feeble Fifty will be reduced to the Feeble Fifteen.
Complain about this comment
212. oldnat
"Bless you my son! For those who didn't follow his link, these are the IMF projections for GDP based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita.
Country, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
Norway, $52797, $52855, $53761, $55140, $56830, $58610
Iceland, $35758, $35485, $36799, $38626, $40752, $43127
Ireland, $39383, $38253, $38746, $39926, $41404, $42947
UK, $35286, $34881, $35402, $36541, $37838, $38808
Arc of prosperity anyone?"
Ha I can still see and touch my toes. My first link to this (removed by mods) was from U of Cheese with the figures.
Complain about this comment
Recorded crime is down, so why for once can Labour not accept that progress has been made? They could have been more constructive with their criticism, but instead we have this total negativity, something all parties need to get away from. OK, so the drop is not as great as England but it is still overall a drop.
And as for the Conservatives claiming it was their idea.........
Is the opposition scared to praise the government? Crime is not what people consider an independence issue, so why this fear?
Complain about this comment
#288
It was the Labour administration that delivered.
The Labour Party manifesto in May 1997 promised several actions to "modernise" the constitution.
Of these, the most constitutionally significant pledge was for devolution in Scotland and Wales.
Labour delivered on this promise and legislation has since been passed setting up devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales.
Link...http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/bbc_parliament/2296177.stm
Complain about this comment
#249
Allow me to pick derekafarmer's uninformed post to pieces section by section.
Ireland and Iceland have serious financial problems at the moment. They are getting on with fixing them as their independent status allows them. Their economies, though seriously damaged, are in better shape than the UK economy. Ireland entered this recession 40% per head better off than the average Brit. It will come out of this recession long before the UK and still 40% (at least) better off per head than the average Brit.
Check the IMF projections.
The Royal Bank of Scotland is a major Scottish institution but in fact a major global bank (it is Nat West, Ulster Bank and a large number of other banks in Europe, US and across the world). It better described in those terms and its massive failure has been paradoxically a result of its previous massive success which resulted in Labour knighting Sir Fred and using him as a special adviser. It has paid over the last decade much more in tax to the exchequer than has been extended to it in aid recently. This tax bounty to the successive chancellors was the main reason why the government encouraged it in its risk taking.
HBOS on the other hand is a very large English company which absorbed the much smaller Bank of Scotland a number of years ago and is in no sense a Scottish bank though it has a cosmetic HQ in Edinburgh.
Those who describe HBOS (called "the Halifax" south of the border) as a "Scottish " bank are indulging in political spin and they well know it.
A Scottish Government would have been as well able as any other country to save those bits of its banking industry that were actually Scottish.
And of course the UK didn't bail out huge sections of the UK banking industry with "impunity". They borrowed the money to do so. Vast sums of it. Basically from China. Our national debt will be unservicable by mid 2011 as a result of this unless there is an unlikely economic miracle. I'm not arguing that this was not one solution to the banking crisis. Only that it was not done with "impunity" and, as a result of a totally false economic "boom" which Brown revelled in but which was built on accelerating levels of personal and national debt, the UK is worse placed than any of the world's nations in relation to this economic crisis
Actually I'd have followed the US example and let the speculators in our banks go bust. The money used to shore them up could have been much more usefully deployed in direct aid to other areas of our economies.
I don't see that many impoverished Scots going about but I do see at lot fewer impoverished Swedes, Irish, Danes, Finns, New Zealanders etc etc etc. If your trying to make a point here I don't see what it is.
Do you understand that Norway's Oil Fund now stands at £2,950,000,000,000 ie more than enough to pay off UK's whole national debt?
Complain about this comment
#285 Cynical Highlander- Afternoon, Early reports say that "unionistitus" (unionist-itus) in it's severest form is mostly genetic. An example being ma faither voted for it ,my faither's faither voted for it etc,etc . unfortunately it can also be caught by people who change their minds regularly or just sit on the fence with no opinion at all,hoping someone will pick them as their friend or give them some powerful job's, but leaving everyone totally confused as to what they really believe in.
hope this helps.
Sid
Complain about this comment
260 gedguy
"However, when it comes down to it they won't use the troops. I can't see the USA standing by and letting that happen"
Dont' think I would standby either. But well held back, I'd have reminded him that scots make up a third of the entire UK army. But I try not to entertain such notions. It will be an amacable divorce.
Lord-Geordie - Magic ;)
Complain about this comment
Gray and Murphy duet via AMW
Complain about this comment
295. deducted3points
"It was the Labour administration that delivered."
Only because they were forced to do so by the SNP.
Complain about this comment
Positive reasons for staying in the Union.
1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement.
2. The Scottish Enlightenment could never have happened without the Union. Economics, scientific rationalism, women rights, the American Constitution, both the American and the Russian navies and a host of other intellectual innovations would never have seen the light of day in a divided, tribalist society prior to the Union.
3. Britain is a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world. Yet you would throw that away and for what a utopian dream that can never exist.
4. You are led by Prime Ministers who has been described as 'elective dictators'. Why? Because the power of the Prime Minister is so phenomenal that no other politician on Earth even comes close to them. Yet, they are almost never used. Why? Because the law prevents it? No, it is because of a self-denying ordinance called being civilised.
And this is the country you would wish to see destroyed for a pipedream. God help us all!
Complain about this comment
Mr Porter.
Thank you for your condescension.
The point that I was making, is that Scotland is too small to go it alone in a world that will be increasingly dominated by large (in terms of mass, GDP and population)countries.
What would Scotland do as an Independent Country in the EU ??
It would be ignored in the power-broking game.
And:
Who would you rather be ruled by ??
A UK Union Government where at least rules. laws and policies may be influenced, or by Brussels/Strasbourg which will set economic policy to benefit the majors not the minors, as has been seen in the case of the Irish economy and the fact reported today that France ripped off the EU budget giving illegal support to its Agri sector.
Do not please assume that brevity of comment equates to idiocy !
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
295. deducted3points
"
It was the Labour administration that delivered."
UK was forced to show a some democracy. any idea what those sanctions would of been, exclusion from UN.
The Council of Europe was thereby forced to abide by its own rules, whether it liked it or not. The Vienna Declaration subsequently issued by the 1993 Summit - quite obviously influenced by the Scotland-UN submission, which had proposed certain international sanctions against the United Kingdom in the event of non-compliance – expressed the Council of Europe’s determination to ensure that all of its member states adhere without reservation to the commitments they have undertaken under its auspices.
Complain about this comment
297. sidthesceptic
Then its time for a public enquiry before it gets out of control. write to ones MSP.
Complain about this comment
301. MagisterIlluminatus
"1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement."
Memorandum To the Heads of State and Government
of the Council of Europe
Complain about this comment
# 300 Electric Hermit "Only because they were forced to by the SNP"
What utter rubbish! The SNP withdrew from the Scottish Constitutional Convention as they didn't want any part in it. Scotland gaining devolution owes absolutely no thanks to the SNP.
"The Scottish National Party, although involved in the initial preparatory work, was ultimately unable to accept the principles of consensus underlying the Convention's aims, and therefore did not join its deliberations."
Complain about this comment
derekafarmer:
#302.
I have an opportunity of being represented by the British Government, by all means is quite capable of backing Scotland, but I see little evidence besides from the Scottish MEP's backing Scotland (Scotland could double her representation as an independent nation apart of the European Union). During certain Fishing negociations it has been noted by fellow European neighbours that it appears certain polititions who are suppose to look after our interests appeared uninterested.
Your type of discussion lacks hard evidence which does show strong support by the British Government in Scotlands favour. Again, it's based on assumptions and possibilities but in reality it's not the case.
I remain open minded but I would suggest providing hard evidence or I will simply bat away whatever you have to say.
Complain about this comment
cynicalHighlander #305
I doubt that will do it, best to go straight to Lord Foulkes, he's an expert on public enquiries.
Complain about this comment
#266
Ravenscraig had the highest production levels of all of Europe when it was taken down during Thatcher’s reign and Gartcosh had a full order book over two years in advance as the "preferred" producer of the whole automotive manufacturing industry of Europe.
Your "industry" remarks are offensive like many of your posts. This sort of attitude - Scotland is too wee, too poor and absolute rubbish at everything was much believed by the Scottish Tory cringe brigade who strutted about secure in the knowledge that they were a cut above most of us Scots, while regretting that only an accident in geography had prevented them from being superior and English.
Your comments, which reflect these attitudes that saw the demise of Toryism in Scotland, mean that you can disabuse yourself of any hope that there is way back for you and the rest of your Tory chums in Scotland
Complain about this comment
One of the curiosities about this “benefits of the union” question is the lack of any substance from its supporters. Rather like the Labour party at large all the arguments for retaining the union are based on an almost visceral terror of the possible consequences of pulling out and manifested in attacking the policies of the SNP rather than actually talking up the benefits of the alternative to separation.
As our unionist contributors are a touch coy on this I’ll offer a concrete example. I currently live and work on Tyneside but still regard Scotland as home and get back up whenever I can. Normally this means the A1 and crossing the border at Berwick is always a moment for great joy, not just because I’m back in Scotland but because the road suddenly improves. Since devolution the A1 between Edinburgh and Berwick has changed out of all recognition, but south of Berwick time has pretty well stood still apart from the odd junction here and there. If you’re lucky enough to be unfamiliar with it, just think of the A9 with more traffic and twice the tractors, in fact by comparison the A9 is a pretty good road which I’m a lot happier driving on.
The A1 is, in short a disgrace and the subject of fervent complaints along its length from Newcastle to Berwick.
However the response, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is that it doesn’t meet the necessary criteria for releasing central government funds to upgrade it – because it doesn’t link two major English cities. Now much as I like the place I’ll cheerfully concede Berwick isn’t a major city – and all the better for it – but the fact of the matter is that Berwick is not the end of the road literally or metaphorically. It is, without prejudice, a pleasant little town halfway along the road between Edinburgh and Newcastle.
Edinburgh of course is not an English city, but surely if our Glorious Union means as much to Westminster as it claims the money could be found to sort out one of the two major roads linking the two countries and so physically strengthen the Union.
Seemingly however it isn’t a priority, but they still don’t want us to go…
Complain about this comment
MagisterIlluminatus:
#301.
"1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement."
This is desperation, I do not see why this statement is important to the independence or union debate. Scotland may become independent but she shall always have the shared history which includes your claim that Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law...
I also fail to see why ancient history is considered important to these debates. If thats the case, we should become independent because Robert the Bruce fought for independence hundreds of years ago...
I am amused you attempt to promote Britain as a democracy. Pleas explain what happened in Scotland when the masses discovered the Acts of Union act has been past? Democratic? Ha, even thesedays Britain remains the most undemoncratic countrys in Europe.
"2. The Scottish Enlightenment could never have happened without the Union. Economics, scientific rationalism, women rights, the American Constitution, both the American and the Russian navies and a host of other intellectual innovations would never have seen the light of day in a divided, tribalist society prior to the Union."
Again ancient history but you also included assumptions that Scotland can not achieve without being apart of the United Kingdom. I can also assume that Scotland can have been as successful or perhaps, dare I say even more successful if she remained independent.
"3. Britain is a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world. Yet you would throw that away and for what a utopian dream that can never exist."
This is the biggest peice of nonesense I have ever witnessed. I suggest that you travel the world because you will find that in the old colonial country's, we are very much disliked to some extent for the actions we took (Groups in India want to ban the English language). You will also find the Iraq and Afganistan war has damaged our reputation etc Your claim is baseless.
"4. You are led by Prime Ministers who has been described as 'elective dictators'. Why? Because the power of the Prime Minister is so phenomenal that no other politician on Earth even comes close to them. Yet, they are almost never used. Why? Because the law prevents it? No, it is because of a self-denying ordinance called being civilised."
This is also nonesense. I have never heard the expression that our Prime Minister as elective dictators, I have even studied the powers of our Prime Minister in comparison with other leaders, you will find the United States of Americans President unmatched to some extent.
"And this is the country you would wish to see destroyed for a pipedream. God help us all!"
Your entire pro-union comment is nonesense. Even if it were all true it's all ancient history. There is nothing about today, tomorro or in the decade as to why the union is important.
I invite you to join us in 2009.
Complain about this comment
#301 MagisterIlluminatus
"1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement."
Even so, I fail to see why this has any bearing on the future of Scotland, or for that matter count as a positive reason for remaining in the union? Simultaneously you've also highlighted one of the problems with Westtminster, it still views the unwashed masses like it was the 17th century. Parliament should not be sovereign, the people should.
"2. The Scottish Enlightenment could never have happened without the Union. Economics, scientific rationalism, women rights, the American Constitution, both the American and the Russian navies and a host of other intellectual innovations would never have seen the light of day in a divided, tribalist society prior to the Union."
Not true, try reading: The Scottish Nation 1700-2000 by T.M. Devine instead of your own revistionist history.
"3. Britain is a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world. Yet you would throw that away and for what a utopian dream that can never exist."
Are you implying that somehow an independent Scotland could not and would not be "a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world"? No one expects an indpendent Scotland to be a utopia, but they do expect to exist as a nation just like any other in the world.
"4. You are led by Prime Ministers who has been described as 'elective dictators'. Why? Because the power of the Prime Minister is so phenomenal that no other politician on Earth even comes close to them. Yet, they are almost never used. Why? Because the law prevents it? No, it is because of a self-denying ordinance called being civilised."
Parliament is sovereign, not the people. You may be comfortable with that state of affairs, I am not. The PM is selected by the delegates of the controlling party at Westinster and not by the people directly. Also, you seem remarkably nonchalant on having to rely on a persons good character in order to display this "self-denying ordinance" of yours so as not to abuse the position. After all it's not likely that politicians abuse their power and position is it?
"And this is the country you would wish to see destroyed for a pipedream. God help us all!"
The things you list are not positive reasons for remaining in an antiquated union no longer fit for purpose. Hopefully you can come to terms with the reality of shaping our own future.
Complain about this comment
#247 MagisterIlluminatus wrote:
"Do I believe there would be large migration of the best and the brightest from Scotland following independence"
Pray tell, where are most of these people presently while we're part of the union?
That would be part of the reason to obtain independence, to retain more of just these type of people that too often have to leave.
Complain about this comment
To all unionist posters, if as you say Scoltand is such a basket case what on Earth is the benefit to England in maintaining the union? Could it be that they are just that darn benevolent, or is there more to it than that?
Complain about this comment
#301
More arrant and uninformed nonsense.
1. Britain may well have been the "mother of Parliamentary democracy" but that was over three centuries ago. Basic rights have to be defended on a continuous basis as, unlike most progressive democracies, we have no written constitution and all these rights are established by precedence which can be are amended regularly. Nearly every advanced democracy in the world now has far more extensive, enshrined in law and constitution, rights and protections for its citizens.
2 There is no evidence whatsover that the Scottish Enlightemment had anything much to do with the Union except that the threat of violent invasion of England was removed by it. The Scottish Enlightenment was largely the product of the very enlightened institution of schools in every parish and an obligation of all citizens to send all their children to school. This put Scotland centuries ahead of much of Europe and in fact universal school attendance was not legally enforced in England until the early years of the 20th century - about three hundred years behind Scotland.
Your obvious ignorance about Scotland in the 18th century as indicated in your remarks about "tribalised society" tells me clearly that you are in fact not Scottish.
Britain human rights are admirable but continually under threat from governments seeking more control over all of us but they are in no way superior to the human rights in most European countries, particularly the small Nordic societies. You are living in some kind of fantasy.
Your fourth point makes no sense whatsoever
Complain about this comment
#289 gedguy2
Yes, the aircraft carriers are being built, and yes, the MOD are that incompotent that they knew we'd have no aircraft for them after they sidelined the Harrier.
The penalites that would be incurred in the event of cancellation are such that the government can't afford to cancel the contract.
Complain about this comment
#295 deducted3points
"The Labour Party manifesto in May 1997 promised several actions to "modernise" the constitution.
Of these, the most constitutionally significant pledge was for devolution in Scotland and Wales.
Labour delivered on this promise and legislation has since been passed setting up devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales."
While also forgetting to make accommodations towards the English electorate, thus creating the West Lothian question. I'm sure many in England would call it something other that constitutional 'modernising' because of this.
NuLab have managed to alienate part of the electorate in England by doing so, whilst also creating the environment for unsubstantiated bile to be directed at Scotland by some of those that feel agrieved.
Complain about this comment
310. sneckedagain
My thanks to you for revealing to us all the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism - nasty, spiteful, hate-filled, anti-English xenophobia.
Complain about this comment
#302
I note that all the countries in Europe which are smaller than or about the same size as Scotland are clamouring to become parts of bigger countries - not.
They are all happily gettting on with running their own affairs and providing societies in most instances which are better than the one we are trapped in.
I don't understand your question.
I would most happily be ruled by a parliament in Edinburgh elected by the people of Scotland. This would probably include a voluntary sharing of sovereignty as a member of the EU though I would have to see a renegotiation of the CFP by which inadequate UK representation in the EU has seen Scotland's interests sold down the river. This we can get but only as an independent Scotland.
I find the insinuation in your posts and those of Magister Confusiatis that human rights and civic rights would somehow be under threat in a Scottish state deeply offensive. Scotland has a much superior record in these areas to England and a system of law in which individual rights are more fiercely protected. The enlightened Scots had a system of free legal aid to the poor three hundred years before England had.
To echo the appeal of another poster - I still have heard no serious or compelling reason for the continuation of the union and all the union supporting posts on this blog owe virtually everything to bigotry, snobbery, Scottish cringe, intolerance or basic ignorance.
Complain about this comment
#302 derekafarmer
"is that Scotland is too small to go it alone in a world "
"Who would you rather be ruled by ??"
There's the reason for staying in the union, apparently we're too small to go it alone, and if we did it's a simple choice of being ruled by another.
Who knew.
Do I have to bow, kneel or kow tow?
Complain about this comment
#273: JRMacClure -
"Yep, we all know how poor and third world oil and gas producing countries are. And that oil and gas money couldn't be used in for the universities, for IT industries or to keep those gaming industries that are currently threatening to leave."
Universities like this one, you mean?
Pity we're too poor, too pretendy and too wee to ever be able to afford anything like that.
Complain about this comment
Independence Convention
Recommend a reading of two young gentlemen on Bebo.
Complain about this comment
#301 MagisterIlluminatus
Thank you for at least trying. Even if no-one else does I appreciate that you made a defence of what you hold.
However
1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement.
The Icelandic Althing was established in 930
2. The Scottish Enlightenment could never have happened without the Union. Economics, scientific rationalism, women rights, the American Constitution, both the American and the Russian navies and a host of other intellectual innovations would never have seen the light of day in a divided, tribalist society prior to the Union.
Pure supposition; Yes there was an "Enlightenment" and it occurred while there was a Union but there is no causal link. Adam Smith might have been born even in an independent Scotland.
3. Britain is a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world. Yet you would throw that away and for what a utopian dream that can never exist.
A conversation with an inhabitant of Basra, a Palestinian or the President of the United States might give the lie to that particular illusion.
4. You are led by Prime Ministers who has been described as 'elective dictators'. Why? Because the power of the Prime Minister is so phenomenal that no other politician on Earth even comes close to them. Yet, they are almost never used. Why? Because the law prevents it? No, it is because of a self-denying ordinance called being civilised.
And the glorious entry of the British contingent into the battle to overthrow Saddam was not, of course?
And this is the country you would wish to see destroyed for a pipedream. God help us all!
Given your limited analysis of British history, a Scottish future might seem a pipedream to you. You are entitled to your beliefs.
Complain about this comment
301. MagisterIlluminatus
"Positive reasons for staying in the Union.
1. Britain is the mother of Parliamentary democracy with basic rights enshrined in law since the 17th Century. No other country even comes close to achievement."
What basic rights? Anyway - taken at face value - this particular 'positive reason for staying in the union' is basically because several centuries ago we were first to do X? That may be taken as a reason to look back with pride on an aspect of history, but nothing more - certainly not a positive reason for staying in the union. It also quickly turns to a reason to leave the union when you see that some of these precious rights are being attacked and eroded constantly now by the British state.
"2. The Scottish Enlightenment could never have happened without the Union. Economics, scientific rationalism, women rights, the American Constitution, both the American and the Russian navies and a host of other intellectual innovations would never have seen the light of day in a divided, tribalist society prior to the Union."
The very fact that you describe the promulgation of innovation and new thinking around the world from Britain to other nations demonstrates the falsehood that no such process as the enlightenment could have taken place without the union. The ideas and imperatives which drove the enlightenment would travel across borders just as readily as within.
And again even if you were right, it's just another historical anchor to fond reminiscence of the union a long time ago. Not a reason to stay.
"3. Britain is a beacon of freedom, liberty and human rights to the world. Yet you would throw that away and for what a utopian dream that can never exist."
In what way is it more of a beacon for freedom, liberty and human rights than most other industrialised western nations? You'll have to do considerably better than naked, unsupported assertion to pull this one off. Even if you are correct, unless the people of Scotland seek to implement a state with less in the way of freedom, liberty and human rights - this is still no positive reason to stay; the same or better will be true of an independent Scotland.
"4. You are led by Prime Ministers who has been described as 'elective dictators'. Why? Because the power of the Prime Minister is so phenomenal that no other politician on Earth even comes close to them. Yet, they are almost never used. Why? Because the law prevents it? No, it is because of a self-denying ordinance called being civilised."
If you are correct, and the PM of the UK has (legal/political) superpowers, unchecked by the mother of all parliaments you so recently lauded, and misuse of these powers is restricted only by the character of the politician who happens to possess them - this is surely a reason to leave the union, not stay in it!
At least it was made to look like an effort at positives from the union, but still 0 out of 4!
Complain about this comment
307. deducted3points
"What utter rubbish! The SNP withdrew from the Scottish Constitutional Convention as they didn't want any part in it. Scotland gaining devolution owes absolutely no thanks to the SNP."
The only reason devolution exists was to seek to block support for the SNP by giving the Scots a constutional settlement in an attempt to kill support for the SNP.
If the SNP (or some equivalent) hadn't existed - there would be no devolution.
Complain about this comment
Afternoon, I knew I had seen the double act from yesterday somewhere else and cynical Highlanders #299 has confirmed it. don't miss it. yesterdays was just as coherent as the original - (he he.)
I Would also remind you that predictions made at Brighton don't usually happen, I remember watching Mr Kinnock falling in the sea as others introduced him as the next prime minister - it never happened just the same as Iain(I dare you) Gray will never be the next First minister as promised yesterday by Mr Murphy who should be more concerned about hanging on to the only job he has ever had! (being an MP)
Sid
Complain about this comment
Once again I come on here and look at the Nationalist Ranters posting their usual drivel.
1.
It's a fair point about the question. Salmond has ITENTIONALLY set a question that will garner more support than a straight question. This is sensible politics, I don't criticise him for this. He doesn't NEED to phrase it that way. It doesn't matter what the wording is it's not binding. Even if the Scottish people voted yes in his referendum it wouldn't be legally binding on him to follow on it (although obviously he would). Salmonds referendum wouldn't legally be a referendum but an organised poll. As such the question should be straight and to the point.
"Do you agree or disagree that Scotland should cease to be a member of the United Kingdom and take sole control over all its affairs as an Independent Nation? Yes or No"
Surely even if you support Independence then you want it to be clear that that is what the people wanted before you get it? As such ask a clear question like the one above, not a "we should negotiate about negotiations about negotiations" question.
Can one of the nationalist posters on here please explain what your opposition to a straight question would be, bearing in mind my point above about legal requirements.
2. It's a sensible point about the recession. It's a source of serious anger amongst Scottish people, outside of the group of pitiful nationalist ranters on here, that the Scottish government is spending time dealing with an issue (that to most isn't really very important) instead of dealing with serious issues. Even talk about this referendum is resulting in our politicians spending most of the time debating it, rather than the issues which really matter. Moreover regions in other countries that have independence referenda in the past have seen short term economic instability around the time. Why? Because if you were a company thinking about where to invest, would you pick a place where you have no idea what the situation of governance will be in 6 months time? No you wouldn't, because that would be very stupid financial planning. Again, during a recession this will happen even more, and the effect will be felt even more.
The SNP are so proud of quoting their claim that the majority of Scots want a referendum (presumably from polling evidence) yet pay no attention to the fact that there has NEVER been polling evidence supporting their little cause.
3. Why is it many Nationalists try to portray their single-issue agenda as not being about Independence but about being anti-labour. Becoming independent is nothing to do with whether or not the labour party have the right policies. If they don't then you shouldn't vote for them. The way people try to turn attacks on Iain Gray into Support Independence arguments just highlights the fact that Nats know they don't have popular support for their agenda.
Complain about this comment
At risk of repeating what I have said a number of times over the past 12 months on this and other blogs, I think that the whole independence debate is far too narrow. The data on projected GDP over the next 5 years as compared with other countries is interesting but there is a much bigger picture. We should be looking at what the world will be like in 20 to 30 years time. I bet it will be significantly different. See for example the latest climate change model produced by the Met Office. I'm fairly certain that climate change and resource shortages will make the world a very different place; I believe there will be water shortages (which will affect parts of Europe), problems with food production due to top soil erosion and water shorages, energy shortages, large scale coastal erosion, large population movements, etc . Bearing this in mind, questions such as whether or not Scottish GDP per head is a bit less than English GDP per head frankly are not material.
There are obvious problems in trying to predict the future but surely these are issues that must be considered in the context of the independence debate.
PS - I hope that I don't come accross as some "armegedion" lunatic; even the MoD recognise that these are all real probabilities and take these into account in their defence reviews.
Complain about this comment
#288
I have read this document several times in the past and again now. I find it quite difficult to absorb in its entirety but the bottom line is quite clear. There were dirty tricks at play against Scotland by Thatcher's government and when Blair's government came to power they were not best pleased that they had to implement devolution against their will. So Labour implemented the policy, not because they wanted to, but because they were forced into it by European law. The natural consequence, which is clear, is that Labour have used devious means to ensure that the Scotland Act provided for the minimum of real power being transferred to Edinburgh (more dirty tricks against Scotland). In my book Labour cannot take any credit for devolution.
This whole saga has never been mentioned in the media as far as I know,
and it would be interesting to see what effect it would have. Why hasn't the SNP raised it I wonder?
I wonder if Brian has an opinion?
Complain about this comment
#317 ScotinNotts
Ah but, what you don't know is that the really cunning plan is that they are designed to be joined up in Southhampton to make the worlds first cat aircraft carrier and with a flight deck big enough to take Vulcans.
Complain about this comment
I don't know about all of you guys and girls, but I don't myself, wish to live in a Scotland whose profile in world affairs is of the same level as lesser-Mesopotamia, Transniester or any of the other irrelevancies that generally produce strutting dictatorial regimes and impoverished populations.
History records many such examples.
So can I say it again, in larger print for the short-sighted posters :
SCOTLAND, THAT I DEARLY LOVE, IS TOO SMALL TO CONSIDER GOING IT ALONE IN AN INCREASINGLY RAPACIOUS WORLD.
We don't have the economic platform to do so. Maybe this is the fault of many past Whitehall governments (of which Scottish M.P.'s constituted a fair proprtion) but it is today's fact.
And forget about Scottish Oil. Whatever may be left to exploit would be long gone before any international legal tribunal finished deliberating the sovereign rights issue.
So where is the inward investment to come from ?
Taxes ? Do me a favour!
Un-compensated land grabs from absentee landlords of uninhabited grouse-moors ?
Perhaps we might offer honorary citizenship to Russian oligarchs so long as they brought their billions with them.
All in all, the pro-separatist league presents the statistics that best support its own point of view and in that respect, is no better than the much-derided spin-doctors of the current Labour Government.
Complain about this comment
........ and what's more, if the Capital City of Scotland cannot even be relied upon to set up a proper legal contract to ensure the implementation of its quite daft re-introduction of tramcars,
What hope do we have of a Scottish Government looking after us in this wild world.
I think it might be a good idea to return to the subject after our MSP's and Municipal Administrators returned from enforced enlightenment courses in other parts of the world (and I don't mean the oft-seen all expenses paid boondoggle at the taxpayers' expense.)
Complain about this comment
NCA999:
#328.
"He doesn't NEED to phrase it that way. It doesn't matter what the wording is it's not binding."
I suggest you look into the powers of the Scottish Parliament. The constituation is a reserved matter, like Foreign Affairs. It's a reserved matter that the Scottish Parliament can not act upon.
"Surely even if you support Independence then you want it to be clear that that is what the people wanted before you get it? As such ask a clear question like the one above, not a "we should negotiate about negotiations about negotiations" question."
Your question is wrong as it does not state who will be trusted to ensure that Scotland leaves the United Kingdom in a fair fashion. The SNP question is asking the people to allow the Scottish Government the ability the power to do this. Please check, as the Scottish Government can not legally preform such since she was not elected for that purpose.
"2. It's a sensible point about the recession. It's a source of serious anger amongst Scottish people, outside of the group of pitiful nationalist ranters on here, that the Scottish government is spending time dealing with an issue (that to most isn't really very important) instead of dealing with serious issues. Even talk about this referendum is resulting in our politicians spending most of the time debating it, rather than the issues which really matter."
The main powers over the economy is a reserved matter, the Scottish Government has little else to do besides from spend the money which is handed to her, unless you have something else in mind that the Parliament can look into?
The referendum was also policy, so are you suggesting that the SNP should ignore their policies? Isn't that cheeky as I am pretty sure you complained about the SNP failing on police numbers after one month in office?
"Moreover regions in other countries that have independence referenda in the past have seen short term economic instability around the time."
Then you will support the SNP proposal.
"Again, during a recession this will happen even more, and the effect will be felt even more."
It's speculation and because of unionists and the media, you are attempting to scare the people about the uncertainty. The SNP have not decided upon a time for their referendum bill. That's fact. Will we be in recession by then? Who knows?
"The SNP are so proud of quoting their claim that the majority of Scots want a referendum (presumably from polling evidence) yet pay no attention to the fact that there has NEVER been polling evidence supporting their little cause."
Unionists are also quick to show polls that indicate that less then 50 percent support the union while slightly less support independence, but quick to deny the people the right to show this in a referendeum, so why the double standards? If you want the SNP to recognise your poll showing support for the union over independence then should you not recognise that more people want the referendum then are against it?
I feel light headed with the amount of spin you have shown.
Have you anything else to add or do you feel like repeated the same slogans like you usually do before going away for a week or two?
3. Why is it many Nationalists try to portray their single-issue agenda as not being about Independence but about being anti-labour. Becoming independent is nothing to do with whether or not the labour party have the right policies. If they don't then you shouldn't vote for them. The way people try to turn attacks on Iain Gray into Support Independence arguments just highlights the fact that Nats know they don't have popular support for their agenda.
Complain about this comment
#328 NCA999
On the question sure a direct question would be better but the Constitution is a reserved power so, as I understand it, they couldn't.
Given the "huge" array of powers and money avilable to the pretendy wee, just what could they be waffling on about that would ease the recession?
Labour used to be the Home Rule party but sold out to trough it with their banker pals at Westminster. I'm for independence now because I've been sold down the river by a bunch of self-serving, lying cheats who had the gall to call themselves the New Labour party
Complain about this comment
'I will never allow the Nationalists to break up the UK'
So, even if the people vote for independence in a democratic process the uk government will not allow it to happen.
I read on previous posts about tanks on the streets and took it in a jocular vein but it appears that it could become a reality.
Time to get out of this so called union of equals sooner rather than later.
Complain about this comment
247. At least you're beginning to understand the difference between "desperation" and "ridicule". That's progress of sorts. Long may your emotional education continue.
For your information, I reluctantly left Scotland in 1990 to live in London because there were no jobs in my chosen profession in Scotland. The scorched earth policies of your beloved Conservatives forced me to leave Scotland, and I became an expensively educated Scottish resource exported to benefit the London economy. 12 years ago I moved again to more congenial climes. Now you've got the audacity to insinuate that I should have no further interest in the land of my birth. Have you the slightest idea how petty and small minded your attitude appears? Probably not. Judging from your previous posts self-awareness isn't your stong point.
I was going to comment on your wee list of reasons why the Union is the bee's knees, but as others have pointed out it's just the usual pick-n-mix assortment of romantic and misty eyed nostalgia trips. We live in 2009 not the 17th century, you may not have noticed.
By the way, I strongly object to the racist overtones of your use of the term "Spanish practices" at 266. Spain outranks the UK on many indices of quality of life, democratic openness and freedom of information, public health and social wellbeing. But then you're so insular and out of touch that you probably believe Spain's new high speed transport network consists of a team of highly trained donkeys on steroids.
Complain about this comment
#328 NCA99
1. "Salmond has ITENTIONALLY set a question that will garner more support than a straight question."
What question would that be again? Hadn't realised they'd published the wording of the referendum.
2. You must be closing your eyes and ears to the rest of the work being done at Holyrood. Regarding the economy, it's one of the main reasons that many wish to be independent. Just to ask, how much investment have we seen under the umbrella of union in recent times?
3. Westminster in general doesn't have the right policies hence the drive for independence, however NuLab are in power at the moment implementing their policies there and the unhappiness of many with those policies is what you see expressed on these threads.
Thanks for the tip on how to affect chagne by voting, but it looks like we did that already at Holyrood.
Complain about this comment
#329 nedafo
I suspect Scotland, with regard to water, energy and food supplies would look to be reasonably well placed, now and in the future.
Are you suggesting new economies based on this resource wealth?
Complain about this comment
I don't see how Iain Gray can call for an independence referendum when his master says that if it's a yes result the wishes of the electorate will be ignored.
Complain about this comment
#332 derekafarmer
Easy there superior empire builder. I think we should warn the other "irrelevant" countries in your world to be on their guard. Do you envisage all of the scandinavian and lowland countries being invaded pell mell in the future by some external 'force'.
Perhaps you should move to a country like the USA or Russia so you can pursue your dream of intervention and power games.
Still living under the illusion that the UK is somehow a major player on the world stage. Its exactly that attitude thats put us in our current situation fighting two prolonged and costly wars.
Do you not think we'd be better 'protected' as a part of the EU, like all of the other self-determining nations you insist on deriding?
One other point: "And forget about Scottish Oil. Whatever may be left to exploit would be long gone before any international legal tribunal finished deliberating the sovereign rights issue."
What tribunal? Even though there are UK territorial waters (no separate Scttish or English as yet) there are areas under either Scots or English law. I think that would settle the matter as a long standing precedent.
Complain about this comment
#333 derekafarmer
tell me derek, what party/parties instigated the reintroduction of the trams to Edinburgh? I think your worried about the wrong side.
Complain about this comment
Just watched the tail end of GBs speech at the labour conference.
If I was Cameron the following will be a bit worrying:
Free home care.
Abolishment of hereditary peers.
Change to PR voting (ie best chance Labour have!) which might pull the Lib Dem votes.
ID cards shelved until next parliament (likely for ever)
It's not going to stop the problems Labour have, but the Tories have a few loose cannons who still do not understand they need to keep their mouths shut.
Definitely a lot of reaching out for the Lib Dem vote, who frankly under Clegg are rudderless and will pay at the next election.
I'll need to watch the first part of the speech but the election campaign has now started in earnest.
And I liked how when discussing MPs abusing expenses the camera zoomed onto Keith Vaz!
Complain about this comment
derekafarmer:
#336.
"So can I say it again, in larger print for the short-sighted posters :
SCOTLAND, THAT I DEARLY LOVE, IS TOO SMALL TO CONSIDER GOING IT ALONE IN AN INCREASINGLY RAPACIOUS WORLD."
Are you for real? Or are you simply here to cause trouble?
I also do find it misleading. Scotland would be apart of the European Union and at this moment of time Scotland is currently a member of the European Union through default, so why can't Scotland continue to work with Europe to help take on the world?
"We don't have the economic platform to do so."
Either does the United Kingdom, nor United States of America. The G8 is now the G20 for that reason, the power within the world is starting to slip away from the West.
"And forget about Scottish Oil. Whatever may be left to exploit would be long gone before any international legal tribunal finished deliberating the sovereign rights issue."
There is no English claim to the oil within the North Sea. The UN decides this, it's also been proven which and how much oil would go to Scotland.
"All in all, the pro-separatist league presents the statistics that best support its own point of view and in that respect, is no better than the much-derided spin-doctors of the current Labour Government."
Yes, supporters of indepedence do provide figures and statistics to back up their arguments. It's clear you don't, also considering that you believe Iceland to be a member of the European Union (which of course there not), it appears you simply do not have a clue about anything, you should leave before you loose what little credibility you have left.
Complain about this comment
# 319 MagisterIlluminatus
Oh dear, is your slip showing? I had to re-read # 310 sneckedagain's post to see why you had the little 'teddybear in the corner' tantrum and couldn't find anything in his posting that related in anyway to your posting. Sneckedagain's post was informative based upon a fact that happened. It can be checked up upon if you feel that you want to do so. Somehow I suspect that you won't.
Oh, by the way, thanks for your # 301 posting it most enlightening. However, I'm still waiting for your reasons why Scotland should stay in the Union. I hope I don't have to wait too long.
Complain about this comment
#332 derekafarmer
I don't know about all of you guys and girls, but I don't myself, wish to live in a Scotland whose profile in world affairs is of the same level as lesser-Mesopotamia
And thus spake the real Brit. The real comparison is with a country like Denmark. You think it's too poor?, But that's not what you are about. You want to be a little part of a bigger unit with clout in the world.
Fair enough, so why stop at being part of one of the bigger states in Europe? The EU has far more clout economically than the UK.
But that's not it either is it? You actually want to invade lesser-Mesopotamia. Oh! You did.
Complain about this comment
#331 handclapping
"Ah but, what you don't know is that the really cunning plan is that they are designed to be joined up in Southhampton to make the worlds first cat aircraft carrier and with a flight deck big enough to take Vulcans."
Nice! Honestly though, you really shouldn't give the MOD any ideas.
Complain about this comment
# 332 derekafarmer
Sorry you feel that way about Scotland. Have a nice journey.
Complain about this comment
Interesting that Labour harp on about the SNP wanting the Tories to win. It may well be true, but it is equally true Labour would prefer the Tories to win above the SNP in Scotland.
Labour are dead men walking in UK terms, but if their hitherto rock solid Scottish vote melts down in 2010 - and it might - then the gathering momentum for independence may become unstoppable.
Complain about this comment
NCA999:
I forgot to reply to the last paragraph.
"3. Why is it many Nationalists try to portray their single-issue agenda as not being about Independence but about being anti-labour. Becoming independent is nothing to do with whether or not the labour party have the right policies. If they don't then you shouldn't vote for them. The way people try to turn attacks on Iain Gray into Support Independence arguments just highlights the fact that Nats know they don't have popular support for their agenda."
Your quite capable of reading. Have the Scottish National Party got other policies besides from independence? It clearly does, so why call it a one issue party? I guess because it reflects upon the party in a negative way, is the sole reason as why you use it!
Do the nationalists not have the right to hold the current London Government to account over their policies? Do we not have a right to express our displeasure of a system that we dislike, and promote our own ideas as is the purpose of democracy? You dislike the nationalists because we support independence. If you dislike the idea of independence, then do not vote 'Yes' in a referendum, apart from that you do not have to turn everything into an anti-SNP/independence/nationalist rant, as you do.
Complain about this comment
329. nedafo
There are certainly many global challenges facing us, and I'm sure most contributers to these comment pages would agree with you that they exist and are very serious.
What I am not clear about from your post is how you feel the independence discussion ought to be widened to accomodate these issues?
Complain about this comment
#329 Nedafo
Regarding water shortages a recent article in the hootsman told of potato farmers in Yorkshire unable to grow because of the drought.
Climatologists say that England along with most of continental Europe are going to suffer extreme drought conditions in coming years but God is going to continue to endow his favourite country with ample rain.
Food parcels for our English cousins. Another great export opportunity.
Complain about this comment
UK Labour Manifesto 1997
"We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system."
Gordon Brown 2009
"I can announce today that in Labour’s next manifesto there will be a commitment for a referendum to be held early in the next Parliament it will be for the people to decide whether they want to move to the Alternative Vote"
Anyone else notice something odd?
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown speech contained that he will not allow the SNP to break up the union, on your bike dictator.
Complain about this comment
And while I have the 1997 Labour Manifesto open -
"Subsidiarity is as sound a principle in Britain as it is in Europe. Our proposal is for devolution not federation. A sovereign Westminster Parliament will devolve power to Scotland and Wales. The Union will be strengthened and the threat of separatism removed"
Complain about this comment
Online Ed Here
A Unionist wrote:
My thanks to you for revealing to us all the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism - nasty, spiteful, hate-filled, anti-English xenophobia.
I suggest other posters simply ignore this sort of stuff, why the mods allow it to be published is anyone's guess.
Intollerant and insulting language was prevalent throughout Murphy and Gray's speeches yesterday. A sure sign that the arguments are being won by those on the independence side are the responses from hard line Unionists.
Complain about this comment
#353 oldnat
Please, sir! Please! Wasn't there a Labour Government between the one and the other? Or is it that the Blair/Brown Governments were/are n't Labour? Can I have a green star for trying?
Complain about this comment
329. nedafo
"I hope that I don't come accross as some "armegedion" lunatic; even the MoD recognise that these are all real probabilities and take these into account in their defence reviews."
Coming to SE counties sooner than people think.
Complain about this comment
#353 oldnat
There's 12 years passed and nothings's been done?
The next Labour manifesto will not have been democratically determined?
Labour believe manifesto commitments do not have to be fulfilled?
Sorry, sir, I don't know. 8-(
Complain about this comment
#354 cynical
Gordon Brown ... will not allow the SNP to break up the union
That's an easy promise; the SNP won't break up the Union, the Scots will.
Complain about this comment
356. At 4:49pm on 29 Sep 2009, U14094468 wrote:
Online Ed Here
A Unionist wrote:
My thanks to you for revealing to us all the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism - nasty, spiteful, hate-filled, anti-English xenophobia.
I suggest other posters simply ignore this sort of stuff, why the mods allow it to be published is anyone's guess.
I will ignore it except to point out that the original comment MI condemns contains no reference whatsoever to the English, either pro or anti, but only to the type of self-loathing Scot who is a victim of the cringe and wishes he was English.
I note this as an English-born long term resident of Scotland who never never encountered any anti-English sentiment in Scotland in twenty years residence here.
Mi must pay more attention to what he reads; it would prevent his making comments that expose him to ridicule.
Complain about this comment
I read Guido and snp.org for light relief. The latter is banging on about how millipede and manglebum have no idealogical differences from the Torys. Now we know what, apart from excess curry, keeps Wee Eck awake at night ... Auntie Annabel + 15 + 46 !
Complain about this comment
#359 handclapping
Well done! If we had a top of the class these days, I'd send you to it!
Complain about this comment
Oldnat 343 - He's moved from andindependent commission to holding a referendum - which they won't let Scotland have?
Complain about this comment
#272. geguy2, I know I saw a reference to it and I've seen some other posters refer to it but haven't been able to locate the article again. I don't think it's something that is widely know about changing the command.
I am generally not a conspiracist but the past actions of the UK government to prevent possible Scottish independence are a bit too well-known to totally ignore this issue.
Complain about this comment
353 OldNat
Gordon Brown 2009
"I can announce today that in Labour’s next manifesto there will be a commitment for a referendum to be held early in the next Parliament it will be for the people to decide whether they want to move to the Alternative Vote"
Has Brown dropped the Gray man in it again. Gray said that it is wrong to have a referendum during a recession yet here we have brown committing the labour party to exactly that!!
Complain about this comment
Off topic here but you just couldn`t make this up!
It says crime is downto the lowest level in 30 years (which is good to hear) AH but wait for it the BBC have to put another spin on it .
(Recorded crime is down - but do statistics tell the whole story?)
would they say the same if it was Lib/lab goverment, would they heckers like.
Complain about this comment
#310. sneckedagain wrote:
#266
Ravenscraig had the highest production levels of all of Europe when it was taken down during Thatcher’s reign and Gartcosh had a full order book over two years in advance as the "preferred" producer of the whole automotive manufacturing industry of Europe.
Your "industry" remarks are offensive like many of your posts. This sort of attitude - Scotland is too wee, too poor and absolute rubbish at everything was much believed by the Scottish Tory cringe brigade who strutted about secure in the knowledge that they were a cut above most of us Scots, while regretting that only an accident in geography had prevented them from being superior and English.
Your comments, which reflect these attitudes that saw the demise of Toryism in Scotland, mean that you can disabuse yourself of any hope that there is way back for you and the rest of your Tory chums in Scotland
Well put. Our friend Magister's reaction showed exactly HOW well-put.
Complain about this comment
I raised the point that the argument of "It's all that we have the power to do" with regards a referendum was a nonsense argument. I gave a justification for this and invited responses. Instead I had several of that Nats on here just repeat the above statement ad nauseum, because none of them seem to understand how to do anything other than repeat the party line.
I'll make the point again just in case there is any nationalists with half a brain cell on here.
NO REFERENDUM would be legally binding. If the national government held a referendum asking "do you want Scotland to be independent" it would not automatically happen, as the referendum is just asking the peoples opinions. Equally Salmonds referendum wouldn't be legally binding on him. As such it doesn't matter what he has the power to do himself as his referendum is asking peoples opinions and not legally obliging any action on his or anyone elses part. Salmond hopes to use this referendum as justification that the Scottish people want independence. Surely it should therefore ask the people if they want independence, rather than if they want him to "negotiate about negotiations". No??
By the argument used the referendum on Devolution should have read "Do you agree that the government should appoint civil servants to begin making plans to devolve power to Scotland" rather than "Do you want devolution" (or whatever it was).
As to the response to my second point about the economy. The Scottish government could be doing several things to help the economy. Not stopping the school building programme as they pretty much did on coming to office might have helped the building industry for example. Regardless of that it would just be nice to see them at least trying, instead they, and many of our politicians from all parties, are bogged down in this irrelevant debate about independence that the people of Scotland don't care about. EVERY SINGLE POLL EVER has shown that we don't want it. EVERY SINGLE ELECTION EVER has shown that we don't want it. There's no evidence of overwhelming demand. There are however ACTUAL problems with jobs, health, education and many other things that could be focused upon now.
Complain about this comment
# 351 - the issues I mentioned may not be relevant at all to some; these are the people for whom independence or the continued union is essentially an emotional argument (and by the way, I'm not offering any opinion on whether that is a good or bad thing). But for those who weigh up all of the factors including economic and security implications, then surely some thought needs to be given to global warming, resource shortages etc. Perhaps I take a more pessimistic view of the future than most. Many people talk of the challenges which lie ahead as though there is some inevitability that they will be overcome by technological or other solutions and that the status will prevail, more or less. I disagree. I anticipate massive changes in the world and widescale disruption while we transit form the way things are today to what they will become. Try reading the likes of Jim Kunstler, etc. for a view on what might lie ahead for the world. Then consider what the implications are for an independent Scotland. I don't have the answers, but there is a much larger picture than analysing projected GDP for the next few years.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown's conference speech was all about undoing previous Labour policies.
"Markets do indeed need morals, but so do politicians. Gordon Brown said that politicians who don't behave properly should be subject to recall by their constituents. Absolutely - it's time for the compulsory recall of Gordon Brown."
Complain about this comment
370. nedafo
"Perhaps I take a more pessimistic view of the future than most."
Your not alone in that view but it is slowly getting through to the general public. There are still those that think that economics are the most important thing for a country and its getting them to change that perspective is the hard part as they think that the basics of life just happen to be available if they have money to buy them. The World is changing fast but Westminster is stuck in a deep rut so that is why Scotland has to take a different route other than the one way trip to the midden.
Complain about this comment
#369 NCA999
Westminster can do whatever it likes under it's unwritten constitution. It matters not a hoot if the referendum question is, is the moon made of green cheese Yes or No; if they decide that the answer means we stay in Europe, that's it. The Scottish Parliament does not have that power, in fact constitutional matters are expressly withheld, so the Scottish Parliament cannot run a referendum on ... do you want to break the Union. If the SNP were to run a "referendum" it would have no validity, Westminster could ignore it as it would not be recognised by the EU or the UN. Only if a referendum is run by the Scots Parliament would it have the weight to force Westminster to consider it. Hence the "tricky" question.
Jobs are down to the economy, part of Westminster's preserve. What more do you want done in health and education for the money we've got and what are these many other things that we should be attending to now?
Complain about this comment
NCA999:
#369.
In responce to your nonesense that a referendum is not legally binding. It would be difficult for a Government to ignore the will of the people, or would you dare ignore what the people want?
Alex Salmond also proposed a multi-option for the referendum which may have seen a different question being asked, so is the type of question the issue or is it simply petty actions of kicking up a fuss since the Scottish Government suggested it first?
I also gave you an honest opinion that the question offered by the SNP also allows responsibility of the negociations to be handled by the Scottish Government. Therefore, despite the power being a reserved matter the Scottish Government will be allowed to act on our behalf instead of the matter being left to the British Government, or do believe the British Government should handle the siutation and leave the Scottish Government, Parliament and people in the dark?
I asked you quite simply what more can the Scottish Government do, yet I fail to see constructive suggestions being offered? The Scottish Government has served their country well but stopping the use of PPP/PFI projects being used, unless your prepared to pay more for less? The timing of the new schools is quite good. I'd rather see new opportunites being made near the end of the recession (if we do not double dip into another recession) rather then at the start of the recession. Let us also not pretend that the thousands of new homes being created under the Scottish Government has not provided many opportunutes for the industry, perhaps you can remind us how many homes the Lab/LibDems made during their eight years compared to the SNP administration?
It's not the Scottish National Party who have focused on the independence debate. The media, the supporters of both camps and the opposition at Holyrood have hyped up the entire situation.
You also do not speak for the people of Scotland, so please do not pretend that you do. In fact did you not mention earlier that polls indicate that most Scots want a referendum? So, were you lying when you claimed to speak for Scotland and that Scots do not want this entire independence issue?
Would you like a spade to help dig that hole your digging yourself in?
If the people do not want independence, then why continue to post against it? Why continue to even take notice? If supporters were honestly a small minority why waste the time to even acknowledge we even exist?
Are you even Scottish? I thought you are from England?
Complain about this comment
307. deducted3points
"Scotland gaining devolution owes absolutely no thanks to the SNP."
Keep telling yourself that. The SNP has long recognised the efforts of the unionist cabal to usurp the movement towards secession. Criticising the SNP for not being duped by the unionists is a bit like criticising firemen for not putting out fires.
Relity check! The BRITISH Labour Party had long since dropped its commitment to Scottish home rule. Only the rise of the SNP forced it to do what it had been lying about for 50 years.
The terms "honour" and " BLP" should never appear in the same sentence. That is a basic rule of grammar.
Complain about this comment
369. NCA999
"I raised the point that the argument of "It's all that we have the power to do" with regards a referendum was a nonsense argument."
Would you rather that the Scottish government pretends to have powers that it does not? Are we not trying to escape the deceit and dishonesty of fifty years of British Labour Party hegemony?
Complain about this comment
369. NCA999
"EVERY SINGLE ELECTION EVER has shown that we don't want it"
Tell me the elections we have had on the subject of independence?
Complain about this comment
# 369 NCA999
" Not stopping the school building programme as they pretty much did on coming to office might have helped the building industry for example."
If the UK government would put the final costs of PFI building projects on the balance sheet we might not be so suspicious of them, but the government reneged on that commitment in May. You might have missed the anouncement, it was buried under the expenses scandal. End result is we still do not know how much any of these building projects will cost in the long run. I'm all for new schools but not at any price, in the present climate value for money is paramount.
Complain about this comment
369. NCA999
"EVERY SINGLE ELECTION EVER has shown that we don't want it."
The Scottish people have never been asked if they want independence.
They closest they have come to being asked the question is being asked if they want devolution of (some) powers.
They have been asked twice.
They have said yes twice.
Complain about this comment
370. nedafo
I've read some of Kunslter and various others, in case you are in any doubt - i agree that pessemism is not an inappropriate reaction. Many of our man-made systems are currently failing, some are just not up to the job, some harmful, others are being gamed. A consequence is that we are in the process of making natural systems 'fail'.
So - i agree, all these issues must form the groundstate of any policymaking. I do not see this as being inconsistent with a desire for the independence of Scotland. I think that separating ourselves from a state which is still playing the global games of previous centuries would, all by itself, have a positive impact on the issues you highlight.
Finally though, I'm still not clear how you think your opinions on these matters should widen the debat on independence, and given the opinions you hold on these global issues - what do you think of the independence issue?
It's a genuine question, you seem to not want to say where you stand.
Complain about this comment
#374Porter
" You also do not speak for the people of Scotland, so please do not pretend that you do. In fact did you not mention earlier that polls indicate that most Scots want a referendum? So, were you lying when you claimed to speak for Scotland and that Scots do not want this entire independence issue?"
And niether do you young Porter. You just keep spouting out your nonsense
dont you Sparticus, pitty you couldn't gather up some of your superior strength to pass-out.look kid! what do you know about what the Scots want or not.
Complain about this comment
379. mrbfaethedee
"They have said yes twice."
Despite the best efforts of the British Labour Party to rig the referendum.
Complain about this comment
381. giggletheloneranger
How to decide what to do then? No-one can speak for everyone!!!
What will we do!?!?
If only a we had a party who had presented a referendum on independence as a manifesto commitment voted into government by the electorate of Scotland!
Complain about this comment
#341
As a matter of interest Scottish territorial waters are already defined as a consequence of Scotland having a separate legal system, though I would imagine the 6000sq miles recently nicked by England (with the connivance of the non SNP previous Scottish administration)will be contested on independence.
Complain about this comment
Magister Illuminatus and derekafarmer and their deeply stupid posts are doing wonders for the independence cause.
It was once pointed out to me that a clever person was a person who fully understood how little he knew.
A stupid person is a person who doesn't recognise how little he knows or understands.(Though everybody else sees it clearly)
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS